Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mlc9852

Essentially, they will accuse the President of using a religious test, which is strictly against the constitution. Whether or not this holds water, the words are coming from W's own mouth, so they will be free to raise a firestorm.


22 posted on 10/12/2005 9:56:43 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Stuck on Genius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Rutles4Ever

Would you expect Bush to nominate an atheist?


28 posted on 10/12/2005 9:59:38 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Rutles4Ever
and that is a trap for the Crat's. If they try and use the
"no religious test" clause they will appear to be anti faith
but if they don't mention it, the left wing will hammer them
with "why are you letting a religious fantatic on the Court"

and i think the clause more has to do with barring from any
office due to religious conscience or oaths. and I can agree
with that.
59 posted on 10/12/2005 10:23:08 AM PDT by p[adre29 (Arma in armatos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Rutles4Ever

The clause does NOT mean you can't use religion at all in your consideration.

But, you can't bar somebody from serving because of religious issues.


272 posted on 10/12/2005 3:28:50 PM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson