Oddball
Unobtanium Member
Not according to either Madison or Jefferson.MARBURY v. MADISON is from 1803! It explains the power of judicial review. STILL good law.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not according to either Madison or Jefferson.MARBURY v. MADISON is from 1803! It explains the power of judicial review. STILL good law.
See U.S. v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683.Not according to either Madison or Jefferson.MARBURY v. MADISON is from 1803! It explains the power of judicial review. STILL good law.
Santorum's radical religious statements may help him win evangelical voters on Super Tuesday, and even the GOP nomination, but they would destroy him in the General Election - and you can bet that GOP leaders know that. Also, I can't imagine a devout Mormon like Romney selecting a radical Christian like Santorum for the VP slot. There are just too many differences between Mormonism and Christianity to allow such a ticket. Here are just a few of those differences:
A Comparison Between Christian Doctrine and Mormon Doctrine|Mormonism Does Not Agree with the Bible | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
Santorum's radical religious statements may help him win evangelical voters on Super Tuesday, and even the GOP nomination, but they would destroy him in the General Election - and you can bet that GOP leaders know that. Also, I can't imagine a devout Mormon like Romney selecting a radical Christian like Santorum for the VP slot. There are just too many differences between Mormonism and Christianity to allow such a ticket. Here are just a few of those differences:
A Comparison Between Christian Doctrine and Mormon Doctrine|Mormonism Does Not Agree with the Bible | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
look it's obvious your end game is "Christians shut up" , but unfortunately for you, the COTUS doesn't allow you to do that. You're free to vote against him, you are NOT free to prevent him from running.
[That's correct, It's vague when it comes to many constitutional questions, it's why the supreme court defined it further to mean that there is a wall that the founders were too negligent to build.
The Supreme Court doesn't have that authority.
Sure they do, it's what they are there for
Once again, you have no thoughts of your own.Santorum's radical religious statements may help him win evangelical voters on Super Tuesday, and even the GOP nomination, but they would destroy him in the General Election - and you can bet that GOP leaders know that. Also, I can't imagine a devout Mormon like Romney selecting a radical Christian like Santorum for the VP slot. There are just too many differences between Mormonism and Christianity to allow such a ticket. Here are just a few of those differences:
A Comparison Between Christian Doctrine and Mormon Doctrine|Mormonism Does Not Agree with the Bible | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
Once again, you have no thoughts of your own.Santorum's radical religious statements may help him win evangelical voters on Super Tuesday, and even the GOP nomination, but they would destroy him in the General Election - and you can bet that GOP leaders know that. Also, I can't imagine a devout Mormon like Romney selecting a radical Christian like Santorum for the VP slot. There are just too many differences between Mormonism and Christianity to allow such a ticket. Here are just a few of those differences:
A Comparison Between Christian Doctrine and Mormon Doctrine|Mormonism Does Not Agree with the Bible | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
What does that case have to do with Madison's and Jefferson's outrage over the Marbury v. Madison decision?...I mean besides nothing.See U.S. v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683.Not according to either Madison or Jefferson.MARBURY v. MADISON is from 1803! It explains the power of judicial review. STILL good law.
What does that case have to do with Madison's and Jefferson's outrage over the Marbury v. Madison decision?...I mean besides nothing.See U.S. v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683.Not according to either Madison or Jefferson.
Huh... impressed. Normally you just cut and paste from a link.Santorum's radical religious statements may help him win evangelical voters on Super Tuesday, and even the GOP nomination, but they would destroy him in the General Election - and you can bet that GOP leaders know that. Also, I can't imagine a devout Mormon like Romney selecting a radical Christian like Santorum for the VP slot. There are just too many differences between Mormonism and Christianity to allow such a ticket. Here are just a few of those differences:
A Comparison Between Christian Doctrine and Mormon Doctrine|Mormonism Does Not Agree with the Bible | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
Santorum, and many other people, don't realize that if we don't have a separation of church and state then that church could be the Islamic church. Or the any other church. They know not what they ask.
Santorum, and many other people, don't realize that if we don't have a separation of church and state then that church could be the Islamic church. Or the any other church. They know not what they ask.
Do you really not understand the difference being allowing religion to be part of government and not having one single official religion? NO ONE is calling for the latter.
Huh... impressed. Normally you just cut and paste from a link.Santorum's radical religious statements may help him win evangelical voters on Super Tuesday, and even the GOP nomination, but they would destroy him in the General Election - and you can bet that GOP leaders know that. Also, I can't imagine a devout Mormon like Romney selecting a radical Christian like Santorum for the VP slot. There are just too many differences between Mormonism and Christianity to allow such a ticket. Here are just a few of those differences:
A Comparison Between Christian Doctrine and Mormon Doctrine|Mormonism Does Not Agree with the Bible | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
Of course, it totally ignored the question about if Santorum was president how his beliefs would be a threat to those of different faiths.
Atheism is a religious faith. I do believe it should not be allowed to impact our government either.Huh... impressed. Normally you just cut and paste from a link.Santorum's radical religious statements may help him win evangelical voters on Super Tuesday, and even the GOP nomination, but they would destroy him in the General Election - and you can bet that GOP leaders know that. Also, I can't imagine a devout Mormon like Romney selecting a radical Christian like Santorum for the VP slot. There are just too many differences between Mormonism and Christianity to allow such a ticket. Here are just a few of those differences:
A Comparison Between Christian Doctrine and Mormon Doctrine|Mormonism Does Not Agree with the Bible | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
Of course, it totally ignored the question about if Santorum was president how his beliefs would be a threat to those of different faiths.
If I "copy" and paste, I put it in a quote box. I'm not concerned with "how his beliefs would be a threat to those of different faiths" - I'm concerned with how any religious faith impacts our government and my personal life. According to our Constitution, no religious faith should be impacting our government and my personal life.
If I "copy" and paste, I put it in a quote box. I'm not concerned with "how his beliefs would be a threat to those of different faiths" - I'm concerned with how any religious faith impacts our government and my personal life. According to our Constitution, no religious faith should be impacting our government and my personal life.
MR. GREGORY: Senator, I want to ask you a final area about your faith...
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: Yeah.
MR. GREGORY: ...which you talk about week in and week out and is so important to you. And I want to play a very famous clip from JFK, President Kennedy's--where he's--a speech in 1960 where he talked about his views of religion influencing him. And this is a portion of what he said.
(Videotape, September 13, 1960)
SEN. JOHN F. KENNEDY (D-MA): I believe in a president whose views on religion are his own private affair, neither imposed upon him by the nation nor imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office. I do not speak for my church on public matters and the church does not speak for me.
(End videotape)
MR. GREGORY: Senator, you called that in the past a, quote, "horrible speech" in part because you felt that he was too rigid about the separation of church and state. There's a concern within the party, and certainly to a lot of other voters, where your faith ends and your presidency would begin.
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: Yeah. The original line that you didn't play that got--that President Kennedy said is, "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute." That is not the founders' vision, that is not the America that, that made the greatest country in the history of the world. The idea that people of faith should not be permitted in the public square to, to, to influence public policy is antithetical to the First Amendment which says the free exercise of religion--James Madison called people of faith, and by the way, no faith, and different faith, the ability to come in the public square with diverse opinions motivated by a variety of different ideas and passions the perfect remedy. Why? Because everybody's allowed in. And the idea that people of faith have to keep it a private affair, my goodness, what does that mean, that the only place that--the only thing you're allowed to bring to the public square is secular ideas or, or not, or things that are not motivated by faith? Look at all of the great movements in this country that led to great just--you know, to, to righting wrongs that exist in this country, the slavery movement, the, the, the civil rights movement, all led by people of faith bringing their faith into the public square that all men are created equal...
MR. GREGORY: Fair enough. OK, but....
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: ...and they have God-given rights. So this idea that we need to segregate faith is, is, is a dangerous idea. And, and we're seeing the Obama administration not only segregating faith but imposing the states' values now on churches, which is even a bigger affront to the First Amendment.
Atheism is a religious faith. I do believe it should not be allowed to impact our government either.Huh... impressed. Normally you just cut and paste from a link.
Of course, it totally ignored the question about if Santorum was president how his beliefs would be a threat to those of different faiths.
If I "copy" and paste, I put it in a quote box. I'm not concerned with "how his beliefs would be a threat to those of different faiths" - I'm concerned with how any religious faith impacts our government and my personal life. According to our Constitution, no religious faith should be impacting our government and my personal life.
How do you resolve this hypocrisy?