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

Skip to comments.

Constitutional Apologetics on Prayer in School
Self | 20-October-2001 | Michael Miessen

Posted on 10/20/2001 11:46:14 AM PDT by Khepera

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 next last
To: He Rides A White Horse
When you ask such a ridiculous question you ought to expect its ridiculousness will be pointed out.

I inivte you to suggest several options and the one you prefer. In an abortion discussion, a 'pro-lifer' is generally going to be defined as someone who does not support most or any legal abortions. That is so obvious. Of course precise definitions exist, such a precise definition adds to understanding the post to which you replied with this non-sequitur of a question.

81 posted on 10/20/2001 9:08:24 PM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
CORRECTION: "...adds NOTHING to understanding the post to which you replied with this non-sequitur of a question."
82 posted on 10/20/2001 9:10:06 PM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
When you ask such a ridiculous question you ought to expect its ridiculousness will be pointed out.

You won't be setting the tone of this with meaningless rhetoric................I want you to put your nihilistic way of thinking up on the table.

83 posted on 10/20/2001 9:10:12 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
When you ask such a ridiculous question you ought to expect its ridiculousness will be pointed out.

So start pointing it out...you seem to think you have plenty of ammunition.

84 posted on 10/20/2001 9:11:29 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: JMJ333
 free speech isn't only oral

The why doesn't it say freedom of expression?  It
doesn't, but that's what it means.  Hmm.
So if someone buys a flag and burns it,
we interpret that as expressing themselves.
And we simultaneously interpret 'speech'
to mean expression.  Hence, it is a protected act. See what I mean?
 

85 posted on 10/20/2001 9:13:48 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Nope.

Why not?

86 posted on 10/20/2001 9:15:29 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding; gcruse
Should we allow the posting of the Ten Commandments and or other “Religious” statements or expressions in our public places? Should we allow school officials, students, Parents or, any other people to stand up and publicly lead others in prayer?

Why should other doctrines take precedence over this? Think carefully.

87 posted on 10/20/2001 9:18:19 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: He Rides A White Horse
Why not?

Because I am more interested, for now,
in the dynamics of Supreme Court
interaction between the Constitution
and legislation.  Hot button issues per se are
inflammatory to the discussion.

Maybe one day when I feel like getting banned,
we can venture your way.  :)
 

88 posted on 10/20/2001 9:21:16 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: He Rides A White Horse
You don't have any of the sheet music, do you?
89 posted on 10/20/2001 9:22:43 PM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Khepera
Great article BUMP!
90 posted on 10/20/2001 9:23:16 PM PDT by Libertina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
I believe there is no majority of prolifers.

You brought it up, not me.

I want to hear from any self proclaimed "pro-choicer" what a pro-lifer is.....it's a very simple question.

91 posted on 10/20/2001 9:24:22 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
A Supreme Court decision cannot be unconstitutional since the Supreme Court is tasked with interpreting the meaning of the Constitution.

So if the Supreme Court rules that those who post to Free Republic are no longer eligible to vote, that would be Constitutional?

Or if your neighbor forces you at gunpoint to work in his cotton field, and the Supreme Court says that's fine, that would be Constitutional?

The court has overstepped its bounds. Its moral authority is diminishing and moral authority is the only kind of authority it has.

May God grant that Bush put honorable people on the bench.

92 posted on 10/20/2001 9:25:21 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
It is a fair observation the gcruse makes that there not enough pro-lifers to make a damn difference in the law. Many think abortion is wrong - but not enough to take any legal action to prevent it.
93 posted on 10/20/2001 9:25:44 PM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Many think abortion is wrong - but not enough to take any legal action to prevent it.

I think you are wrong. I think the argument has always be careful couched in a bed of lies and misinformation, which always has the possibility of being counteracted by real information.

94 posted on 10/20/2001 9:32:09 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
I think events eventually catch up to lies...what say you?............
95 posted on 10/20/2001 9:35:20 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: He Rides A White Horse
Since the post (mine) gcruse was responding to contained a reference to the misinformation campaign you mention, your whole "define pro-lifer" response doesn't add much to the dialogue.
96 posted on 10/20/2001 9:37:46 PM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: He Rides A White Horse
I am counting on it and praying for it.
97 posted on 10/20/2001 9:40:18 PM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
I like the song "Duck and Run"..sounds like you do too...........
98 posted on 10/20/2001 9:41:20 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
May God grant that Bush put honorable people on the bench.

You raise a very good point....the shadowy dealings of the USSC............

99 posted on 10/20/2001 9:43:23 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: He Rides A White Horse
The basic point about a court's authority being a moral one applies to all benches.

Especially those in Florida. :)

100 posted on 10/20/2001 9:53:44 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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