Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
So when the ACLU fights to have the Ten Commandments removed from a public building, which law did Congress pass respecting an establishment of religion that allowed the display, which would be a "strict" interpretation of the Constitution?Doctrine1st said:From atheists to the religious to heck, Rush Limbaugh, that is in fact their charter.
Kind of hard to follow your question. Congress passed an amendment. Congress passed no law allowing the display, that's why it was removed. In fact, that's why it was placed there in the middle of the night.MachZer0 said:So when the ACLU fights to have the Ten Commandments removed from a public building, which law did Congress pass respecting an establishment of religion that allowed the display, which would be a "strict" interpretation of the Constitution?
MachZer0 said:So when the ACLU fights to have the Ten Commandments removed from a public building, which law did Congress pass respecting an establishment of religion that allowed the display, which would be a "strict" interpretation of the Constitution?
What amendment?Doctrine1st said:Kind of hard to follow your question. Congress passed an amendment.
So, by a strict interpretation of the Constitution, there was no violation, since Congress passed no lawCongress passed no law allowing the display, that's why it was removed.
I did not refer to any specific caseIn fact, that's why it was placed there in the middle of the night.
Which law is that. specifically, since in may cases these are state judges, put in office by state laws and state elections?notto said:The law that put the judge there to make the personal decision to push his religious views in a public courthouse.
Amendment IMachZer0 said:What amendment?
See above.So, by a strict interpretation of the Constitution, there was no violation, since Congress passed no law
You didn't have to.I did not refer to any specific case
So which law did Congress pass that respected an establishment of religion and allowed a judge to display the Ten commandments?Doctrine1st said:Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
See above.
Yeah, they got the silly idea at some point that case law must also be considered.MachZer0 said:The ACLU does not uphold rights based on a strict interpretation of the Constitution. that is clear
By that, are you agreeing with me that the ACLU does not follow a strict interpretation of the Constitution?TeddyKGB said:Yeah, they got the silly idea at some point that case law must also be considered.
The same admendment, except, he needs to display the commandments other than within Government buildings. Churches are usually good places.MachZer0 said:So which law did Congress pass that respected an establishment of religion and allowed a judge to display the Ten commandments?
I don't know to which amendment you refer. Can you be specific, rather than vague?Doctrine1st said:The same admendment, except, he needs to display the commandments other than within Government buildings. Churches are usually good places.
The same one I provided and you quoted in post #110.MachZer0 said:I don't know to which amendment you refer. Can you be specific, rather than vague?
Then I'll ask again, which law did Congress pass that respects the establishment of religion thus allowing judges to display the Ten Commandments, and that the ACLU claims to be unconstitutional, using, of course, a strict interpretation of the ConstitutionDoctrine1st said:The same one I provided and you quoted in post #110.
It's part of the rattified constitution by the early states, no congressional law needs to be passed only approval.MachZer0 said:Then I'll ask again, which law did Congress pass that respects the establishment of religion thus allowing judges to display the Ten Commandments, and that the ACLU claims to be unconstitutional, using, of course, a strict interpretation of the Constitution
Your argument is very confusing. Are you saying that the 1st Amendment allows judges to display the Ten Commandments. If not, then what law has Congress passed violating the 1st Amendment which does allow them to do so giving the ACLU, using a strict interpretation of the 1st Amendment, ammunition for its lawsuits?Doctrine1st said:It's part of the rattified constitution by the early states, no congressional law needs to be passed only approval.
One last time.MachZer0 said:Your argument is very confusing. Are you saying that the 1st Amendment allows judges to display the Ten Commandments.
You seem to be stuck on something that never transpired. Congress hasn't passed anything, it's the first amendment and the issue is Government officials endorsing religon as a Goverment official on Government property.If not, then what law has Congress passed violating the 1st Amendment which does allow them to do so giving the ACLU, using a strict interpretation of the 1st Amendment, ammunition for its lawsuits?
Does the 1st Amendment exist is a vacuum?MachZer0 said:So which law did Congress pass that respected an establishment of religion and allowed a judge to display the Ten commandments?
Oh, it's clear alright. The courts uphold rights, not the ACLU.MachZer0 said:The ACLU does not uphold rights based on a strict interpretation of the Constitution. that is clear
Man, I really hate these legalistic word games.MachZer0 said:By that, are you agreeing with me that the ACLU does not follow a strict interpretation of the Constitution?
MachZer0 said:So when the ACLU fights to have the Ten Commandments removed from a public building, which law did Congress pass respecting an establishment of religion that allowed the display, which would be a "strict" interpretation of the Constitution?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?