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

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: p[adre29

Some trap:

Senator: "Ms. Miers, how do you interpret Article VI, clause 3 of the Constitution?"


All they have to do is cite the constitution and ask a professed originalist what her opinion is on religious tests. Either she's against her own nomination (with W's words in quotes), or she's proven to be a phony originalist. They don't have to utter the word "religion" to back her into a corner.


67 posted on 10/12/2005 10:31:10 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Stuck on Genius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | 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