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

To: Old Teufel Hunden
The rights protected within the Constitution are meaningless if the States can arbitrarily restrict them. No state can pass a law restricting your freedom of speech or worship; so your distinction between the Federal government and the State government and your idea that the State is not obligated to recognize our God given rights is in error.
135 posted on 07/27/2010 6:41:21 AM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed. So how could it be re-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]


To: allmendream
"No state can pass a law restricting your freedom of speech or worship"

Again, you put words into my mouth that I never said. Where do I say that the state can pass laws restricting freedom of speech or worship? Please show me. Where you are in error is your definition of the first amendment in regards to freedom of worship. The first amendment protects your rights (in regards to worship) in two ways:

1. Congress will not establish a religion
2. You have a right to worship freely (this is the individual right)

How is putting a manger or christmas tree in front of a communities municipal building violating either of these things? You can't answer that because it doesn't violate it.

You probably did not even know that the states of Conneticut and Massachusettes had state mandated religions even after the constitution was ratified. Thomas Jefferson as governor of Virginia abolished the church of virginia while governor. I agree with his views, I don't want to live in a state that has a state mandated religion. However, he did not find it unconstitutional because that prohibition was on Congress. It's called federalism. When he spoke about the wall of separation between Church and State he was speaking of his own opinions and the position of the Federal government. While he personally felt that the Baptists in Conneticut had religious rights and not just priviledges he would in no way interfere with what the people of Conneticut had determined was best for them. As long as the state of Conneticut did not violate their right to freely worship, their rights were not violated. He was President at the time and did not act to strike down Conneticut's state mandated religion. The same principle applies here.
136 posted on 07/27/2010 7:07:06 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies ]

To: allmendream

“The rights protected within the Constitution are meaningless if the States can arbitrarily restrict them. No state can pass a law restricting your freedom of speech or worship; so your distinction between the Federal government and the State government and your idea that the State is not obligated to recognize our God given rights is in error.

________________ ___

States and Municipalities can and do pass laws they KNOW contravene the constitution. They do it with impunity because they just live by the “legal until a judge says otherwise” rule. Top it off with, municipal lawyers that are borderline incompetent and you end up with bad law infestation.


140 posted on 07/27/2010 4:16:17 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | 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