Replies

What's astonishing is that you read plain words and somehow get a completely different meaning that that conveyed by the black type on the paper.
Article I, Section 1: "All [how much is all] legislative powers granted herein shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Show me in the Constitution (which is the Supreme Law of the Land) where it says anyone else can legislate (make law). I can't wait to see it...

Your powers of misapprehension are truly supernatural.

I didn't say anyone else can legislate anything. I said the first amendment specifically prohibits Congress from establishing a religion.

This started with your post 197 in which you stated, "Read the first amendment -- only Congress can establish a national religion."

Shall we go 'round again? You seem to think that because Congress is authorized to pass legislation, it is not limited by the explicit words in the first amendment, which starts with, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." These are words that rational people interpret as meaning "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Remember that little dust-up about the time the Constitution was being ratified about whether we needed a "Bill of Rights" to keep the power of the government somewhat limited? You seem to be working awfully hard to miss the point of both the Bill of Rights and the first amendment itself.

The sentence in question is is a simple declarative sentence. Your problems with this make it obvious why you're not grasping some of the science that Ichneumon has presented.

Here is what I said: "Now, do you see any room in there for anyone but Congress with the authority to establish a national religion? Couple that with the fact that ONLY Congress can establish law (Article I, U. S. Constitution). So, tell me again: HOw does a "school district" become "Congress" and how does "scrutinizing evolution more closely" in a school become the same as "establishing a religion?" I can't wait to hear this...

Which simply means that Congress is the only branch that can make law and therefore the only branch that could establish a religion if it were not prohibited by the 1st amendment.

The questions remain: 1. How does a teacher or school district publishing a disclaimer about evolution (or passing on basic tenets of ID theory) constitute a violation of the 1st amendment? 2. Is the teacher in a position to establish a religion as is required to violate the 1st Amendment (i.e. is the teacher a lawmaking entity?) 3. Does teaching about ID theory constitute "establishment of religion" as is required to violate the 1st amendment? Now, answer the questions directly and stop twisting what I say.