[MD] Tea Bagging

[118]

Ditto Rushbo.

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Platt Holden <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:

> Here is the text of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
>
> "Congress shall make no law respecting and establishment of religion, or
> prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
> or of the press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
> petition the Government for redress of grievances."
>
> Note that "separation of church and state" is not in the First Amendment.
> O'Donnell was correct. Further, when she asked her opponent for the senate
> to name the other rights listed in the First Amendment, he could not. By
> DMB's criterion, that should disqualify him as a senator.
>
> The fact that O'Donnell's correct statement elicited mocking laughter from
> the audience of law students illustrates their group ignorance. Not
> surprising since the academy these days is under the direction of the
> political left whose bigoted views of religion are amply revealed in DMB's
> post.
>
> Platt .
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "david buchanan" <
> dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Tea Bagging
>
>
>
>>
>> Mark said to dmb:
>> ... From my following of recent talking heads, there is nothing in the
>> constitution which demands the separation of church and state (in fact the
>> houses start each day with a prayer).
>>
>>
>> dmb says:
>>
>> Yea, that's what Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell said on TV recently.
>> As Steve pointed out, O'Donnell revealed "her fundamental misunderstanding
>> of what our Constitution is" when she said that. "That's in the First
>> Amendment?" O'Donnell asked again, eliciting further laughter from the room.
>> Any Senate candidate who doesn't understand that certainly deserves to be
>> laughed at. As Obama said in a speech recently, this is the essence of who
>> we are as a nation. If O'Donnell wins she'll be taking an oath to preserve,
>> protect and defend a constitution that she does not understand. In that same
>> debate, in fact, she staked out positions that violate that particular
>> constitutional principle - the teaching of creationism in public schools.
>>
>> I can't imagine that any talking head would deny the separation clause of
>> the first amendment, except on FOX. The idea is well established in law and
>> history and the law school audience that laughed at O'Donnell knows that all
>> too well. And every American really should understand that. The first
>> amendment is arguably the central pillar of our democracy. It's central in
>> the list of principles that Pirsig uses to describe intellectual values, the
>> values that should be used to guide society and to protect the process of
>> intellectual evolution from social level interference.
>>
>> I've noticed that religious people sometimes have trouble grasping this
>> concept. That's not just a co-incidence, I suppose. There's plain old
>> ignorance of course but there are ideological static filters at work too.
>> They correlate so strongly that it ALMOST seems like religiosity itself
>> CAUSES confusion about the First Amendment. Almost. It almost seems like
>> one's understanding and appreciation of the separation principle is in
>> direct REVERSE proportion to one's wish for the establishment of religion.
>> In other words, it is misread to the extent that it undermines one's wishes.
>> Psychologically speaking, this is a fascinating phenomenon.
>>
>> Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas interprets the first amendment is
>> the weakest possible way. He thinks it only prohibits the establishment of a
>> federal church by the national Congress and that the 50 State legislatures
>> should each be allowed to impose a State religion on its citizens. Does that
>> sound like freedom of religion to you? Not me. I think that's morally
>> outrageous and wildly unAmerican.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>