Religion and the Constitution

The Washington Times ^ | July 1, 2002 | Thomas Sowell

[robowombat]

Now that the decision of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to ban "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance has been protested all over the landscape, perhaps we might step back and consider the broader implications of the fact that such a decision could have been made in the first place.

[Tourist Guy]

...We could elect a Senate...that has a spine.

[G.Mason]

"Contrary to what some may think, there is no mention of "separation of church and state" in the Constitution, much less any "wall of separation" that keeps getting mentioned, even in Supreme Court decisions."

What the First Amendment to the Constitution says is that Congress shall make no law "respecting an establishment of religion."

Rather plain and straight forward language, don't you think?

[aardvark1]

This is Senator Lubner...he was born without a spine.

[Congressman Billybob]

I agree with every word that Thomas Sowell has written in the article above. However, I add to that a remedy that he was apparently unaware of. Congress has the power by simple statutory changes to withdraw the jurisdiction of federal courts to even touch categories of cases, as decided by Congress.

Congress could cut off at the knees ALL of the bad "God" decisions, in the Ninth Circuit or anywhere else. Click below for details.

Congressman Billybob

Click for: "Supid is as Stupid Does, Even Among Federal Judges."