[Sir Gawain]

The link was on another thread, but this definitely deserves its own thread.

[Sir Gawain]

Great link.

[Sir Gawain]

-

[The Man]

You are right. The now Chief Justice nailed it.

Simply put, the Supreme Court needs an enema.

There is way too much unconstitutional crap in its caselaw, this being only one of the areas it has completely distorted.

[big gray tabby]

Post of the Month, IMO.

[Zavien Doombringer]

Excellent Post!!!

[bedolido]

great post. Thanks for the info

[tpaine]

North Carolina flatly refused to ratify the Constitution in the absence of amendments in the nature of a Bill of Rights. Virginia and North Carolina proposed identical guarantees of religious freedom:

"[A]ll men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, and . .
. no particular religious sect or society ought to be favored or established, by law, in preference to others.
-from the dissent-


The lines above totally destroy William Rehnquist's contention that "Separation of Church and State" was an unwanted 'myth'.

[Havoc]

Bump for later

[upchuck]

Thanks so much for expanding the link. Yes, this needed to be posted.

Used to be it was all about politics. Now, it's all about judges.

Actually, it's about frustration. If you're a RAT and you're trying to get some legislation passed and the right is fighting you tooth and nail, it's a lot easier to just find a friendly judge to rule (read, make law) in your favor.

This trend started some time ago. The SCUMBAG's use of Executive Order to make law just encouraged the trend ("Stroke of the pen, law of the land, kinda cool").

Today, the RAT's battle cry is "Why legislate when we can just adjudicate." Sad...

Now, we're on the edge of the judiciary taking over. Obviously, we can't let this happen. We need to resist, protest, make loud noises and, most of all, elect conservatives who will appoint and approve conservative judges.

IMHO, this is the most critical issue facing this country right now. Unfortunately, the average guy on the street doesn't have a clue.

[TomServo]

Bookmarked - thanks SG...

[wardaddy]

Well done!

[TheDon]

Bump for later.

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP - 10 Cs - [print]

[aruanan]

"In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State.' Reynolds v. United States, [98 U.S. 145, 164, 25 L.Ed. 244 (1879)]."

It's sad to see that even here the misquoting of the First Amendment has been taken for granted. There is no clause in the First Amendment against "establishment of religion". The clause is against a law passed respecting "an establishment of religion", that is, against a law giving preferential treatment to "an establishment of religion," commonly known as a church.

[LiteKeeper]

The source web site is a gold mine of information. Recommend you go there and explore! Highly recommend!!!

[CGVet58]

excellent link

[aruanan]

An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.

Excellent! Thanks for posting this dissent.

[Republic]

...The State surely has a secular interest in regulating the manner in which public schools are conducted. Nothing in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, properly understood, prohibits any such generalized "endorsement" of prayer. I would therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

and

The Establishment Clause did not require government neutrality between religion and irreligion nor did it prohibit the Federal Government from providing nondiscriminatory aid to religion. There is simply no historical foundation for the proposition that the Framers intended to build the "wall of separation" that was constitutionalized in Everson.

This good judge got it right! And so has President Bush in his advancement of governmental aid to religious groups serving our nation thru food, shelter, counseling, love and provision of job skill training.

This is one long read...full of historical reasoning as our Bill of Rights and 1st Amendment were authored.

This should be required reading in EVERY government class. It breaths intelligence and common sense.

Thanks for posting this.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Bump to the top (thanks, Sir G).

[MrConfettiMan]

Bump for a later read.