Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
In a recent thread, one member of our community, affectionately- but correctly- referred to as a 'certifiable idiot,' posted this:
"Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness ... The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do...". http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/364886-reason-vs-morality-10.html#post9437302
Then, there is this:
1. "What is the most emphatic prohibition in the entire Constitution?
2. [All the various limits] are weak beer compared to the clause that says: No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
3. No . . . ever . . . any. Its not only the most emphatic statement in the entire Constitution but probably in all of American law.
4. ....cannot make religion, or the lack of it, a condition of holding public office in our country. Many who fled to America knew all about religious tests. So this is not in the Bill of Rights or any other amendment to the main document. Its in the main body of the Constitution. It is American bedrock.
5. .... The New York Times ought to be ashamed of itself for running an advertisement attacking the religion of the five Catholic justices of the Supreme Court. It did this last week in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision.
a. The ad actually contained the phrase Roman Catholic majority. It named Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
6. .... went on to accuse the Catholic justices in the majority in the Hobby Lobby case of siding with zealous fundamentalists who equate contraception with abortion, a statement that combines bigotry with factual inaccuracy.
a. Hobby Lobby actually already happily covers most contraceptives. It objects only to drugs that, rather than preventing an egg from being fertilized, stop a fertilized egg from developing into a baby.
7. The ad calls for the repeal of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which curbs the federal government from overly burdening religion with laws and regulations. The Times ad suggests the government should to be able to burden religion.
8. President George Washington in his farewell address..... called religion one of the indispensible supports to political prosperity. He warned that reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.... The ban on religious tests was a contrast with England, where one had to be a Protestant Christian to be in Parliament.
9. .... not enough for the Democratic Party intelligentsia. It has been railing about Hobby Lobby for months. Joy Reid on MSNBC complained about the six Catholic justices, adding: The question is do you trust this court to make those decisions?
a. The American people are not dumb. They are increasingly seeing this kind of thing for what it is, a bigotry all its own.
10. One legal blog, the Volokh Conspiracy, this week ran a ...Its no coincidence that three of the four dissenters in Hobby Lobby were Jews with limited attachment to their religious heritage, ... to mock the anti-Christian comments he was reading.... attacking a fully secular Supreme Court opinion on the grounds that its authors happen to be Catholic should be well-out-of-bounds.
11. Democrats in Congress are already scrambling to find a way to overturn the Hobby Lobby decision via legislation. If they fail, what will they do next campaign against allowing Catholics on the Supreme Court in the first place? It wouldnt be surprising were they cheered on by The New York Times."
Attack on Catholic Judges Breaches the Bedrock Of U.S. Constitution - The New York Sun
Vote Democrat and you are lending your support to bigotry.
I like to think the Supreme Court's decision wasn't based on religious beliefs or laws. I don't agree with their decision, but at the same time I don't like to entertain the possibility their religions effected their ruling. If it did, they should resign because they're no longer impartial.
But trying to circumvent their ruling because of the mere possibility their religon was in play isn't right either. If that were the case, it should be obvious in their other rulings when compared to Catholic doctrines. I think instead this is just the latest salvo in America's religious war within itself.
Since people with pronounced religious beliefs have been marginalized and in decline of political power since Reagan, they've been desperate to get that power back. And with the recent bans on banning homosexual marriage being a body blow to the religious types, they need a victory anywhere they can get it. And the Hobby Lobby ruling was that victory. But the forces opposite them naturally wanna take it away from them and keep the religious majority marginalized and silent.
Oh, I read the "information".
LOL.
You start your OP with an insult toward another member, namely, Derideo_Te, and you expect us to take you seriously? Really?
And then you mix the juristicl with religion?
Really?
Back to Civics Class with you!
And then, when you get frustrated, you call me an idiot.
Delish.
I graciously accept your concession. Your inability to debate is becoming legendary!!!
Becoming?
When she isn't cutting and pasting, she's insulting and declaring victory.
Yes, same procedure as every day with her.
okay is 666 still available ?I love it,this may be my epiphany.From know on PC I shall worship you from afar.
Take a number.
Becoming?
When she isn't cutting and pasting, she's insulting and declaring victory.
Yes, same procedure as every day with her.
Ooooo.....look whose widdle toes I've stepped on!
You have a problem, not with the way I present material, but with the undeniable rectitude thereof.
Yes, same procedure as every day with her.
Ooooo.....look whose widdle toes I've stepped on!
You have a problem, not with the way I present material, but with the undeniable rectitude thereof.
Actually, you are not important enough to me for me to have any kind of problem at all with you.
But you are indeed quite entertaining.
Carry on. I do love a good show!
In a recent thread, one member of our community, affectionately- but correctly- referred to as a 'certifiable idiot,' posted this:
"Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness ... The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do...". http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/364886-reason-vs-morality-10.html#post9437302
Then, there is this:
1. "What is the most emphatic prohibition in the entire Constitution?
2. [All the various limits] are weak beer compared to the clause that says: No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
3. No . . . ever . . . any. Its not only the most emphatic statement in the entire Constitution but probably in all of American law.
4. ....cannot make religion, or the lack of it, a condition of holding public office in our country. Many who fled to America knew all about religious tests. So this is not in the Bill of Rights or any other amendment to the main document. Its in the main body of the Constitution. It is American bedrock.
5. .... The New York Times ought to be ashamed of itself for running an advertisement attacking the religion of the five Catholic justices of the Supreme Court. It did this last week in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision.
a. The ad actually contained the phrase Roman Catholic majority. It named Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
6. .... went on to accuse the Catholic justices in the majority in the Hobby Lobby case of siding with zealous fundamentalists who equate contraception with abortion, a statement that combines bigotry with factual inaccuracy.
a. Hobby Lobby actually already happily covers most contraceptives. It objects only to drugs that, rather than preventing an egg from being fertilized, stop a fertilized egg from developing into a baby.
7. The ad calls for the repeal of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which curbs the federal government from overly burdening religion with laws and regulations. The Times ad suggests the government should to be able to burden religion.
8. President George Washington in his farewell address..... called religion one of the indispensible supports to political prosperity. He warned that reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.... The ban on religious tests was a contrast with England, where one had to be a Protestant Christian to be in Parliament.
9. .... not enough for the Democratic Party intelligentsia. It has been railing about Hobby Lobby for months. Joy Reid on MSNBC complained about the six Catholic justices, adding: The question is do you trust this court to make those decisions?
a. The American people are not dumb. They are increasingly seeing this kind of thing for what it is, a bigotry all its own.
10. One legal blog, the Volokh Conspiracy, this week ran a ...Its no coincidence that three of the four dissenters in Hobby Lobby were Jews with limited attachment to their religious heritage, ... to mock the anti-Christian comments he was reading.... attacking a fully secular Supreme Court opinion on the grounds that its authors happen to be Catholic should be well-out-of-bounds.
11. Democrats in Congress are already scrambling to find a way to overturn the Hobby Lobby decision via legislation. If they fail, what will they do next campaign against allowing Catholics on the Supreme Court in the first place? It wouldnt be surprising were they cheered on by The New York Times."
Attack on Catholic Judges Breaches the Bedrock Of U.S. Constitution - The New York Sun
Vote Democrat and you are lending your support to bigotry.
God put us down here to DO the pulling!you religious nutters should stop puling after all you have god on your side
Careful PC! StinkFist has the Ultimate Weapon: Colorful Slideshows!"Actually, you are not important enough to me for me to have any kind of problem at all with you."Actually, you are not important enough to me for me to have any kind of problem at all with you.Ooooo.....look whose widdle toes I've stepped on!
You have a problem, not with the way I present material, but with the undeniable rectitude thereof.
But you are indeed quite entertaining.
Carry on. I do love a good show!
Really?
So....how do you explain the roses and box of chocolates?
In a recent thread, one member of our community, affectionately- but correctly- referred to as a 'certifiable idiot,' posted this:
"Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness ... The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do...". http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/364886-reason-vs-morality-10.html#post9437302
Then, there is this:
1. "What is the most emphatic prohibition in the entire Constitution?
2. [All the various limits] are weak beer compared to the clause that says: No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
3. No . . . ever . . . any. Its not only the most emphatic statement in the entire Constitution but probably in all of American law.
4. ....cannot make religion, or the lack of it, a condition of holding public office in our country. Many who fled to America knew all about religious tests. So this is not in the Bill of Rights or any other amendment to the main document. Its in the main body of the Constitution. It is American bedrock.
5. .... The New York Times ought to be ashamed of itself for running an advertisement attacking the religion of the five Catholic justices of the Supreme Court. It did this last week in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision.
a. The ad actually contained the phrase Roman Catholic majority. It named Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
6. .... went on to accuse the Catholic justices in the majority in the Hobby Lobby case of siding with zealous fundamentalists who equate contraception with abortion, a statement that combines bigotry with factual inaccuracy.
a. Hobby Lobby actually already happily covers most contraceptives. It objects only to drugs that, rather than preventing an egg from being fertilized, stop a fertilized egg from developing into a baby.
7. The ad calls for the repeal of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which curbs the federal government from overly burdening religion with laws and regulations. The Times ad suggests the government should to be able to burden religion.
8. President George Washington in his farewell address..... called religion one of the indispensible supports to political prosperity. He warned that reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.... The ban on religious tests was a contrast with England, where one had to be a Protestant Christian to be in Parliament.
9. .... not enough for the Democratic Party intelligentsia. It has been railing about Hobby Lobby for months. Joy Reid on MSNBC complained about the six Catholic justices, adding: The question is do you trust this court to make those decisions?
a. The American people are not dumb. They are increasingly seeing this kind of thing for what it is, a bigotry all its own.
10. One legal blog, the Volokh Conspiracy, this week ran a ...Its no coincidence that three of the four dissenters in Hobby Lobby were Jews with limited attachment to their religious heritage, ... to mock the anti-Christian comments he was reading.... attacking a fully secular Supreme Court opinion on the grounds that its authors happen to be Catholic should be well-out-of-bounds.
11. Democrats in Congress are already scrambling to find a way to overturn the Hobby Lobby decision via legislation. If they fail, what will they do next campaign against allowing Catholics on the Supreme Court in the first place? It wouldnt be surprising were they cheered on by The New York Times."
Attack on Catholic Judges Breaches the Bedrock Of U.S. Constitution - The New York Sun
Vote Democrat and you are lending your support to bigotry.
We just understand the separation of church and state.
any suggestions from a spongy tickle-brained harpy like you will be gratefully received.you religious nutters should stop puling after all you have god on your side
This post is the ineluctable result of government schooling, the denial of the Constitution and the basis on which this once great nation was founded.
The poster could find a home in any totalitarian regime.
In a recent thread, one member of our community, affectionately- but correctly- referred to as a 'certifiable idiot,' posted this:
"Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness ... The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do...". http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/364886-reason-vs-morality-10.html#post9437302
Then, there is this:
1. "What is the most emphatic prohibition in the entire Constitution?
2. [All the various limits] are weak beer compared to the clause that says: “No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
3. “No . . . ever . . . any.” It’s not only the most emphatic statement in the entire Constitution but probably in all of American law.
4. ....cannot make religion, or the lack of it, a condition of holding public office in our country. Many who fled to America knew all about religious tests. So this is not in the Bill of Rights or any other amendment to the main document. It’s in the main body of the Constitution. It is American bedrock.
5. .... The New York Times ought to be ashamed of itself for running an advertisement attacking the religion of the five Catholic justices of the Supreme Court. It did this last week in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision.
a. The ad actually contained the phrase “Roman Catholic majority.” It named Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
6. .... went on to accuse the Catholic justices in the majority in the Hobby Lobby case of siding with “zealous fundamentalists who equate contraception with abortion,” a statement that combines bigotry with factual inaccuracy.
a. Hobby Lobby actually already happily covers most contraceptives. It objects only to drugs that, rather than preventing an egg from being fertilized, stop a fertilized egg from developing into a baby.
7. The ad calls for the repeal of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which curbs the federal government from overly burdening religion with laws and regulations. The Times ad suggests the government should to be able to burden religion.
8. President George Washington in his farewell address..... called religion one of the “indispensible supports” to “political prosperity.” He warned that “reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”... The ban on religious tests was a contrast with England, where one had to be a Protestant Christian to be in Parliament.
9. .... not enough for the Democratic Party intelligentsia. It has been railing about Hobby Lobby for months. Joy Reid on MSNBC complained about the “six Catholic justices,” adding: “The question is do you trust this court to make those decisions?”
a. The American people are not dumb. They are increasingly seeing this kind of thing for what it is, a bigotry all its own.
10. One legal blog, the Volokh Conspiracy, this week ran a ...“It’s no coincidence that three of the four dissenters in Hobby Lobby were Jews with limited attachment to their religious heritage,” ... to mock the anti-Christian comments he was reading.... “attacking a fully secular Supreme Court opinion on the grounds that its authors happen to be Catholic should be well-out-of-bounds.”
11. Democrats in Congress are already scrambling to find a way to overturn the Hobby Lobby decision via legislation. If they fail, what will they do next — campaign against allowing Catholics on the Supreme Court in the first place? It wouldn’t be surprising were they cheered on by The New York Times."
Attack on Catholic Judges Breaches the Bedrock Of U.S. Constitution - The New York Sun
Vote Democrat and you are lending your support to bigotry.
In a recent thread, one member of our community, affectionately- but correctly- referred to as a 'certifiable idiot,' posted this:
"Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness ... The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do...". http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/364886-reason-vs-morality-10.html#post9437302
Then, there is this:
1. "What is the most emphatic prohibition in the entire Constitution?
2. [All the various limits] are weak beer compared to the clause that says: No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
3. No . . . ever . . . any. Its not only the most emphatic statement in the entire Constitution but probably in all of American law.
4. ....cannot make religion, or the lack of it, a condition of holding public office in our country. Many who fled to America knew all about religious tests. So this is not in the Bill of Rights or any other amendment to the main document. Its in the main body of the Constitution. It is American bedrock.
5. .... The New York Times ought to be ashamed of itself for running an advertisement attacking the religion of the five Catholic justices of the Supreme Court. It did this last week in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision.
a. The ad actually contained the phrase Roman Catholic majority. It named Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
6. .... went on to accuse the Catholic justices in the majority in the Hobby Lobby case of siding with zealous fundamentalists who equate contraception with abortion, a statement that combines bigotry with factual inaccuracy.
a. Hobby Lobby actually already happily covers most contraceptives. It objects only to drugs that, rather than preventing an egg from being fertilized, stop a fertilized egg from developing into a baby.
7. The ad calls for the repeal of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which curbs the federal government from overly burdening religion with laws and regulations. The Times ad suggests the government should to be able to burden religion.
8. President George Washington in his farewell address..... called religion one of the indispensible supports to political prosperity. He warned that reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.... The ban on religious tests was a contrast with England, where one had to be a Protestant Christian to be in Parliament.
9. .... not enough for the Democratic Party intelligentsia. It has been railing about Hobby Lobby for months. Joy Reid on MSNBC complained about the six Catholic justices, adding: The question is do you trust this court to make those decisions?
a. The American people are not dumb. They are increasingly seeing this kind of thing for what it is, a bigotry all its own.
10. One legal blog, the Volokh Conspiracy, this week ran a ...Its no coincidence that three of the four dissenters in Hobby Lobby were Jews with limited attachment to their religious heritage, ... to mock the anti-Christian comments he was reading.... attacking a fully secular Supreme Court opinion on the grounds that its authors happen to be Catholic should be well-out-of-bounds.
11. Democrats in Congress are already scrambling to find a way to overturn the Hobby Lobby decision via legislation. If they fail, what will they do next campaign against allowing Catholics on the Supreme Court in the first place? It wouldnt be surprising were they cheered on by The New York Times."
Attack on Catholic Judges Breaches the Bedrock Of U.S. Constitution - The New York Sun
Vote Democrat and you are lending your support to bigotry.
Why would the Justices' Catholicism be irrelevant? The religion of the Hobby Lobby owners was not irrelevant;
it was the core principle in the case.
If the religion of the Hobby Lobby owners can be considered so important to how they conduct their lives that it can earn them special exemptions from the law of the land,
what's wrong with discussing the speculation that the religion of the justices might be important enough in their lives that it might compel them to make rulings more in accordance with their particular religious beliefs than in adherence to the Constitution?
In a recent thread, one member of our community, affectionately- but correctly- referred to as a 'certifiable idiot,' posted this:
"Liberals are not a monolithic bloc like the TPers. They range across the spectrum of religions and degrees of devoutness ... The individual right to believe (or not) is what is respected amongst liberals. They all have their own moral codes but they don't go around condemning others who don't believe as they do...". http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/364886-reason-vs-morality-10.html#post9437302
Then, there is this:
1. "What is the most emphatic prohibition in the entire Constitution?
2. [All the various limits] are weak beer compared to the clause that says: No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
3. No . . . ever . . . any. Its not only the most emphatic statement in the entire Constitution but probably in all of American law.
4. ....cannot make religion, or the lack of it, a condition of holding public office in our country. Many who fled to America knew all about religious tests. So this is not in the Bill of Rights or any other amendment to the main document. Its in the main body of the Constitution. It is American bedrock.
5. .... The New York Times ought to be ashamed of itself for running an advertisement attacking the religion of the five Catholic justices of the Supreme Court. It did this last week in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision.
a. The ad actually contained the phrase Roman Catholic majority. It named Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
6. .... went on to accuse the Catholic justices in the majority in the Hobby Lobby case of siding with zealous fundamentalists who equate contraception with abortion, a statement that combines bigotry with factual inaccuracy.
a. Hobby Lobby actually already happily covers most contraceptives. It objects only to drugs that, rather than preventing an egg from being fertilized, stop a fertilized egg from developing into a baby.
7. The ad calls for the repeal of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which curbs the federal government from overly burdening religion with laws and regulations. The Times ad suggests the government should to be able to burden religion.
8. President George Washington in his farewell address..... called religion one of the indispensible supports to political prosperity. He warned that reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.... The ban on religious tests was a contrast with England, where one had to be a Protestant Christian to be in Parliament.
9. .... not enough for the Democratic Party intelligentsia. It has been railing about Hobby Lobby for months. Joy Reid on MSNBC complained about the six Catholic justices, adding: The question is do you trust this court to make those decisions?
a. The American people are not dumb. They are increasingly seeing this kind of thing for what it is, a bigotry all its own.
10. One legal blog, the Volokh Conspiracy, this week ran a ...Its no coincidence that three of the four dissenters in Hobby Lobby were Jews with limited attachment to their religious heritage, ... to mock the anti-Christian comments he was reading.... attacking a fully secular Supreme Court opinion on the grounds that its authors happen to be Catholic should be well-out-of-bounds.
11. Democrats in Congress are already scrambling to find a way to overturn the Hobby Lobby decision via legislation. If they fail, what will they do next campaign against allowing Catholics on the Supreme Court in the first place? It wouldnt be surprising were they cheered on by The New York Times."
Attack on Catholic Judges Breaches the Bedrock Of U.S. Constitution - The New York Sun
Vote Democrat and you are lending your support to bigotry.
Why would the Justices' Catholicism be irrelevant? The religion of the Hobby Lobby owners was not irrelevant;
it was the core principle in the case.
If the religion of the Hobby Lobby owners can be considered so important to how they conduct their lives that it can earn them special exemptions from the law of the land,
what's wrong with discussing the speculation that the religion of the justices might be important enough in their lives that it might compel them to make rulings more in accordance with their particular religious beliefs than in adherence to the Constitution?
The religion of Leftism, Liberalism, is all consuming for it's acolytes....and certainly not irrelevant: grow government, take control of every aspect of people's lives, mandate and ban.
For normal folks, they see clearly and can focus on the founding pillars of America: individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
Their philosophies, consistent with American values, are their own concern.
[
For normal folks, they see clearly and can focus on the founding pillars of America: individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
Their philosophies, consistent with American values, are their own concern.
"In a confirmation hearing for Prof. Amy Barrett's nomination to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., ripped into Barrett for her Roman Catholic beliefs.
"When you read your speeches," Feinstein said, "the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that's of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for years in this country."
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/civi...ial-nominee-amy-barrett-on-her-catholic-faith
Have Democrats ever read the Constitution???
"The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Section 3. "
No Religious Test Clause - Wikipedia
