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

To: Poohbah
See #190. the writer is a lawyer. He disagrees and says that that no ruling can conflict with the preamble SINCE it states the purpose of the document.

As such, it is the mission statement of the document.

196 posted on 08/29/2003 9:21:36 PM PDT by xzins (In the Beginning was the Word)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]


To: xzins; P-Marlowe
See #190. the writer is a lawyer. He disagrees and says that that no ruling can conflict with the preamble SINCE it states the purpose of the document.

In extremely broad generalities. Specific clauses of the document are legally binding, not a questionable interpretation of the Preamble.

In order for Moore's claim that he is REQUIRED to acknowledge God, he has to ignore Article VI, paragraph 3--he is saying that there is a religious test for holding office or public trust under the United States.

198 posted on 08/29/2003 9:27:17 PM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | 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