http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/15/politics/15judges.html I must have missed the memo, since I'm Catholic and I vote Democrat. I'm such a horrible "person of faith"
So Frist wants to cast this, literally, as a war between the believers and the unbelievers. I guess this is part of toning down the rhetoric. (How much do we have to endure so that this guy can run for president?) Also on hand for the event will be arch-wingnut and SpongeBob persecutor James Dobson, a man with hands about as clean as Torquemada's, Chuck Colson and various others. I don't know which is more amusing -- the wingnut jihad against a federal judiciary that is already predominantly Republican or the fact that the intellectual and often literal descendents of the upholders of Jim Crow now seek to enlist the dark legacy of segregation as some sort of arrow in their rhetorical quiver. Actually, perhaps it's even more amusing that the same folks spent the 1990s using the same methods to thwart numerous Clinton judicial appointments. At the confab I assume we're likely to hear more like this from the likes of the Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, whose Traditional Values Coalition warns us that "Atheist billionaire George Soros is funding a number of the organizations that are attacking DeLay. Soros is a one-world socialist who hates Christians and seeks a one-world government and legalized drugs. DeLay is a solid Christian and conservative legislator who is an important player in the culture war. He understands the issues and the battles we’re fighting against homosexuality, abortion, p*rnography, judicial tyranny, and other issues of concern to traditional values activists." Alas, more of the fantasies of victimization that are now the defining motif of such much conservative politics. As Jonathan Edwards might have put it, helpless wingnuts in the hands of angry liberal judges. -- Josh Marshall
Actions like Frist, and those that speak this kind of rhetoric demean Christianity far more than any athiest could possibly hope.
The fact that the democrats are holding up these nominees is disgusting. I saw on tv this morning that these nominees would score the aboslute highest marks on the grading system the democrats themselves used to use to confirm nominees. I applaud Senator Frist for standing up for what is right.
Texxx don't you think there is a better way for Frist to get his point across without such demagoguery? To me, it seems to be sort of where we're going in America (see giddy's post). I know he was kidding, but more and more it seems like America is developing an "us against them" mentality. Pitting Americans against Americans. Whatever happened to "I don't agree with you, but I'll defend your right to say it to the death"?
I don't really know if Schumer or Delay or many others in Congress are Christians. Take away the labels- Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative, even Christian and look at the life, the message and the laws they champion and compare it to the Bible; at least the fruit of a Christian life is clearly given in the Bible. It is good that congressmen are in conflict over issues that define our nation. Not everything in America is good or right or just today. As far as religion our own Constitution prohibit Congress from passing laws that prohibit the free exercise of religion and from passing laws that establish a religion. Many religious leaders (many claim to be Christian) are troubled because federal judges all the way up to the Supreme Court exceed Constitutional restraints by deciding issues that have no connection to federal law. This has been labelled judicial activism. It should not be considered wrong based upon which side wins or loses but judicial activism is wrong when it creates law. This is a violation of the Constitution. Congress alone has the Constitutional authority to pass a federal law. If Congress passes a law and it is considered unconstitutional it can be challenged in court. If a federal law is considered unconstitutional it is struct down and the law loses legal effect. The conflict today with the judiciary is that they are not striking federal laws as unconstitutional, judges are establishing laws by writing 'interpretations' based upon precedents not the Constitution. Interpretations today may rest on a former courts ruling without being allowed to pass Constitutional muster. Every law in the U.S. should be in accordance with the Constitution. The courts have the responsibility to provide this protection. Again congress should pass the laws not the courts- for instance if Congress should pass a law that the Ten Commandments should not be displayed in a public place then it may be tested in court for Constitutionality. But if Congress has not acted with legislation then the courts have no powers to address the issue. It remains an issue for Congress (that is why they make the laws they are the elected officals). So courts shouldn't be involved with an issue of religious expression unless Congress has passed legislation prohibiting the free expression thereof. What has happened today concerning just the Ten Commandment issue in courts is in direct violation of the First Admendment to the Constitution and also is in direct violation of the history of religious freedom in the U.S. Democrats or Republicans shouldn't be stereotyped as anti this or that. Issues should be examined as the powers of the Constitution have enumerated those powers to the branches of government. Federal judges should defend the Constitution and have authority to examine each law Congress passes in light of the Bill of Rights. Read the Bill of Rights the powers granted are granted to those laws passed by Congress, I quote (top of my head) the First Admendment-" Congress shall pass no laws..." Now that judges are exceeding their limits of power congressmen should be upset. I don't no why they should make it a religious issue. It is a constitutional issue. BTW- The Ten Commandments have been integrated into the government of the U.S. from the beginning of this nation- DID YOU KNOW? As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U.S. Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view - it is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments! DID YOU KNOW? As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door. DID YOU KNOW? As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments! DID YOU KNOW? There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington, D.C. DID YOU KNOW? James Madison, the fourth president, known as "The Father of Our Constitution" made the following statement "We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." DID YOU KNOW? Patrick Henry, that patriot and Founding Father of our country said, "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ". DID YOU KNOW? Every session of Congress begins with a prayer by a paid preacher, whose salary has been paid by the taxpayer since 1777. DID YOU KNOW? Fifty-two of the 55 founders of the Constitution were members of the established orthodox churches in the colonies. DID YOU KNOW? Thomas Jefferson worried that the Courts would overstep their authority and instead of interpreting the law would begin making law....an oligarchy....the rule of few over many. DID YOU KNOW? The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said, "Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers." How, then, have we gotten to the point that everything we have done for 220 years in this country is now suddenly wrong and unconstitutional? “You shall have no other gods before Me. “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. “Honor your father and your mother... “You shall not murder. “You shall not commit adultery. “You shall not steal. “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. “You shall not covet... anything that is your neighbor’s.”
First they stole the flag from democrats, now they're stealing God. Jeez. Way to support bi-partisanship, fellas.
The ten commandments is an example of laws being handed to man. It shows like the declaration of indepence says, that the rights we believe in don't come from man, but from somewhere larger. That's pretty much where the ten commandments stop playing a role in our legal system. of the 10 commandments only 'not stealing' and 'not killing' are really laws. They also were laws before the 10 commandments, and exist outside of the judeo/christian tradition. It is wrong to take isolated quotes and to try and justify imposing the 10 commandments or any religion into our government. To claim that our nation's laws come from the 10 commandments just doesn't make any sense.
BTW- the Constitution protects the rights of all religious expression. If someone wanted to put a Buddha on the steps of City Hall or the Federal Courthouse it wouldn't bother me in the least and is certainly a religious expression protected by the Constitution. In fact if someone put a Buddha statue in the entry to a public school no one can say that is unconstitutional any more than a Bible displayed in a public school is unconstitutional. In fact until Congress passes a law the courts need to stay out of it. It becomes a local issue or a state issue. And people in cities and towns all over America know how to pass local laws. All we ask in America is what the constitution has given us with regard to freedom of religion- Congress don't make a law that keeps us from freely expressing our religions. And don't make a law that establishes one federal religion over us all. Let us have our freedom to choose our religion and express it freely. The Koran, the Bible, the teachings of Buddha should all be in public schools if that is what local schools want to teach. Let the government of the people by the people and for the people leave the people alone. We can decide on our own without a Court telling us. If Congress tries to impose their religion on us we will be the first to run to the courts and hopefully the courts will honor the First Admendment. Time for the federal government to let religions freely express themselves. Let us put up our statues and teach our doctrines freely.
How is putting a statue of Buddha in front of a public school freely expressing one's religion? How is putting a statue of the ten commandments in front of a public school freely expressing one's religion? I can see where putting those things in front of a public school might prevent others from freely expressing their religion though.
It's only a matter of time before Christianity is declared the official religion of the United States and all non-Christians are relocated to re-indoctrination camps. Devo was right. We are witnessing de-evolution in progress.
Preachers just can't shut up... One more thing, as a pastor I have been asked, "well do you want the Koran taught in public schools?" (whoooo like it is something devious) Why not? This is America. As long as you don't ban the Bible and give each religion the decency to respect one another and not force one religion to convert to another I wouldn't care what other book is taught. Local schools are smart enought o work that out locally. Let all who want Koran class during religion period go to Koran class. Let all who want Bible go to Bible, let all who don't want to go to religion class go to study hall or playground. And any school that doesn't want a religion period, don't have one. I wish the judges would understand we have Constitutional protection for our religious freedom and we don't need their help. Also- I think these people who are going to church to name call and paint other people as anti-Christian should settle down. If they are Christians they can present their views without slandering others. If this is what is happening. I have not heard about all this except what I have read here.
rhester I respectfully submit that religion doesn't belong in school. That's what sunday school is for.
Easy- some student or teachers or parents ask to do it and the school gives permission. Religious people like to put those statues up for religious reasons. When I go out to eat I often see these statues and I have never felt they prevented me from anything. If a school wants to express religion and it isn't forced upon someone else what is wrong with that. I think parents can resolve issues locally. If I had a Bible class I wouldn't force everyone to attend. I don't think a Buddhist or Muslim should either. But I would be for settling those issues locally. In Saudi Arabia they do not have free religious expression for all religions. But our Constitution is different and our form of government is different. I'm willing to let the chips fall. Turn these issues over to the local schools, the local governments and the states. If Congress gets involved the courts will be their to protect us.
I think we should eliminate the filibuster completely. The American people elect congress, and congress then votes to reflect the will of the people. If the minority, be it Republican or Democrat, in congress filibusters, that is disenfranchising the American people. Just vote.
