Zone1 Do you claim to be an "Atheist?"

[ding]

Congress shall pass no laws pertaining to establishment of religion

Requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments establishes a religion

Not exactly. If you want to know what that looked like go back to when the constitution was ratified because half of the states had established religions and that was perfectly OK according to the establishment clause.

 

[rightwinger]

Not exactly. If you want to know what that looked like go back to when the constitution was ratified because half of the states had established religions and that was perfectly OK according to the establishment clause.

US Constitution has precedence by Superiority Clause

 

[rightwinger]

Because your claim is that posting the Ten Commandments is promoting a religion. So...I asked what religion do you think it is promoting?

Judeo Christian

 

[Meriweather]

Judeo Christian

And, as I pointed out, the Commandments existed long before either.

 

[rightwinger]

And, as I pointed out, the Commandments existed long before either.

Moses lied?

 

[Hafar1014]

Not exactly. If you want to know what that looked like go back to when the constitution was ratified because half of the states had established religions and that was perfectly OK according to the establishment clause.

Then the constitution ended that

 

[Meriweather]

Moses lied?

You're really reaching. Different people in different cultures often arrive at similarities--even when it comes to dolls. Experiences of God are not limited to one person or even one nation.

 

[rightwinger]

You're really reaching. Different people in different cultures often arrive at similarities--even when it comes to dolls. Experiences of God are not limited to one person or even one nation.

We are talking the 10 Commandments

 

[Hafar1014]

We are talking the 10 Commandments

The 10 commandments was historic as it created a single god and universal moral values when polytheism was dominating religion. There was a god for whatever you wanted which was no morals at all.

 

[Meriweather]

We are talking the 10 Commandments

That's right. And they scare you so much you don't want them posted.

 

[ding]

US Constitution has precedence by Superiority Clause

You aren't getting it. As written the establishment clause allowed for state religions. Google it. But that wasn't the point I was making. If you want to see what an established religion looks like, there is ample evidence of such because half of the states had established state religions AFTER the constitution was ratified. Displaying the ten commandments in a classroom wasn't what an established religion was. It required oaths to be taken to hold state office.

 

[ding]

Then the constitution ended that

Incorrect. The improper application of the 14th amendment did.

While the Establishment Clause originally applied only to the federal government—allowing states to maintain their own established churches at the time of adoption—it was intended to prevent a federal, national religion. Today, through the 14th Amendment, it prohibits both state and federal governments from establishing religion, mandating neutrality.

• Original Intent: The First Amendment's Establishment Clause ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion") was interpreted early on as a prohibition on the federal government establishing a national church, leaving state-level religious matters largely untouched.
• Historical Context: In 1791, several states still had state-sanctioned churches or religious taxes.
• Incorporation and Change: In the 1940s, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause applies the Establishment Clause to state governments, meaning states are now forbidden from setting up a church or preferring one religion over another.
• Modern Application: The Supreme Court now holds that neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church, aid all religions, or force adherence to a specific faith, effectively ensuring no state religions exist under modern constitutional law.

 

[Hafar1014]

Incorrect. The improper application of the 14th amendment did.

While the Establishment Clause originally applied only to the federal government—allowing states to maintain their own established churches at the time of adoption—it was intended to prevent a federal, national religion. Today, through the 14th Amendment, it prohibits both state and federal governments from establishing religion, mandating neutrality.

• Original Intent: The First Amendment's Establishment Clause ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion") was interpreted early on as a prohibition on the federal government establishing a national church, leaving state-level religious matters largely untouched.
• Historical Context: In 1791, several states still had state-sanctioned churches or religious taxes.
• Incorporation and Change: In the 1940s, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause applies the Establishment Clause to state governments, meaning states are now forbidden from setting up a church or preferring one religion over another.
• Modern Application: The Supreme Court now holds that neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church, aid all religions, or force adherence to a specific faith, effectively ensuring no state religions exist under modern constitutional law.

The Supremacy Clause, found in Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution, establishes that the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties constitute the "supreme Law of the Land". It mandates that federal law takes precedence over conflicting state laws and binds state judges to uphold federal authority, serving as a cornerstone of American federalism.
LII | Legal Information Institute +3
Youre what is known as a stage one thinker. Concrete simple never thinks ahead or questions your own beiefs

 

[ding]

The Supremacy Clause, found in Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution, establishes that the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties constitute the "supreme Law of the Land". It mandates that federal law takes precedence over conflicting state laws and binds state judges to uphold federal authority, serving as a cornerstone of American federalism.
LII | Legal Information Institute +3
Youre what is known as a stage one thinker. Concrete simple never thinks ahead or questions your own beiefs

The constitution has a process to write amendments and it isn't through court interpretation. Amendments are constitutional and can't be found to be unconstitutional. If you want to change an amendment, you have to go through the constitutional process.

Amending an existing amendment, such as to the U.S. Constitution, requires initiating the formal Article V process again, involving a new amendment proposal passed by a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress (or a convention) and ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures. This acts as a subsequent amendment that modifies or repeals the prior one.
National Archives (.gov) +3

Key Aspects and Synonyms

• Process: The new amendment proposal must pass through Congress or a convention, then be ratified by state legislatures or conventions.
• Synonyms/Related Actions: Modifying an amendment can involve a "perfecting amendment" (changing specific language) or an "amendment in the nature of a substitute" (replacing the entire previous text), according to Congress.gov.
• Examples: The 21st Amendment, which repealed the 18th Amendment (Prohibition), is the primary example of a later amendment rendering a previous one null.
• Authority: Under Article V, the process for amending an amendment is identical to the original amendment process.

 

[ding]

Youre what is known as a stage one thinker. Concrete simple never thinks ahead or questions your own beiefs

^^^^A textbook example of what an insecure person would say to someone who disagreed with them.

Psychology suggests that people who insult those with differing views often act out of insecurity, a need for dominance, or an inability to manage anger, frequently relying on insults as a defense mechanism to mask personal vulnerabilities. It is often a tactic to avoid engaging with the substance of an argument, protecting their own self-esteem by devaluing others.

Key psychological drivers for this behavior include:

• Insecurity and Self-Worth: Insults can be used to make the person feel superior, taking attention off their own shortcomings or protecting a fragile ego.
• Identity Protection: When people equate their opinions with their personal identity, they view disagreement as a personal attack, leading to defensive anger and verbal aggression.
• Cognitive Dissonance: When confronted with conflicting views, people may lash out to reduce the uncomfortable tension caused by seeing their beliefs challenged.
• Low Emotional Regulation: Some individuals lack the tools to handle frustration or differing viewpoints constructively, choosing to initiate conflict or create a hostile, competitive environment.
• Tribalism and "Echo Chambers": Social media and echo chambers can encourage a "tribe" mentality, where opposing views are viewed as enemy actions, justifying hostility and name-calling.

In some cases, this behavior can indicate higher-conflict personalities, such as narcissistic traits, where they believe they are superior and look down on others, or lower levels of self-validation, where they are overly dependent on others agreeing with them to feel secure.

 

[Hafar1014]

The constitution has a process to write amendments and it isn't through court interpretation. Amendments are constitutional and can't be found to be unconstitutional. If you want to change an amendment, you have to go through the constitutional process.

Amending an existing amendment, such as to the U.S. Constitution, requires initiating the formal Article V process again, involving a new amendment proposal passed by a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress (or a convention) and ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures. This acts as a subsequent amendment that modifies or repeals the prior one.
National Archives (.gov) +3

Key Aspects and Synonyms

• Process: The new amendment proposal must pass through Congress or a convention, then be ratified by state legislatures or conventions.
• Synonyms/Related Actions: Modifying an amendment can involve a "perfecting amendment" (changing specific language) or an "amendment in the nature of a substitute" (replacing the entire previous text), according to Congress.gov.
• Examples: The 21st Amendment, which repealed the 18th Amendment (Prohibition), is the primary example of a later amendment rendering a previous one null.
• Authority: Under Article V, the process for amending an amendment is identical to the original amendment process.

Your response is irrelevant. I proved you wrong now go clean something

 

[Hafar1014]

^^^^A textbook example of what an insecure person would say to someone who disagreed with them.

Psychology suggests that people who insult those with differing views often act out of insecurity, a need for dominance, or an inability to manage anger, frequently relying on insults as a defense mechanism to mask personal vulnerabilities. It is often a tactic to avoid engaging with the substance of an argument, protecting their own self-esteem by devaluing others.

Key psychological drivers for this behavior include:

• Insecurity and Self-Worth: Insults can be used to make the person feel superior, taking attention off their own shortcomings or protecting a fragile ego.
• Identity Protection: When people equate their opinions with their personal identity, they view disagreement as a personal attack, leading to defensive anger and verbal aggression.
• Cognitive Dissonance: When confronted with conflicting views, people may lash out to reduce the uncomfortable tension caused by seeing their beliefs challenged.
• Low Emotional Regulation: Some individuals lack the tools to handle frustration or differing viewpoints constructively, choosing to initiate conflict or create a hostile, competitive environment.
• Tribalism and "Echo Chambers": Social media and echo chambers can encourage a "tribe" mentality, where opposing views are viewed as enemy actions, justifying hostility and name-calling.

In some cases, this behavior can indicate higher-conflict personalities, such as narcissistic traits, where they believe they are superior and look down on others, or lower levels of self-validation, where they are overly dependent on others agreeing with them to feel secure.

How many times did you call me a piece of shit. My observation of you is not an insult.

 

[ding]

Your response is irrelevant. I proved you wrong now go clean something

 

[ding]

How many times did you call me a piece of shit. My observation of you is not an insult.

You should have called it out then because this is what you can expect from now on. Keep the insults coming. It works to my benefit.

 

[Hafar1014]

You should have called it out then because this is what you can expect from now on. Keep the insults coming. It works to my benefit.

Hypocrite