[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

South Africa warns US could be liable for ICC prosecution for supporting Israel Today I turned 50! San Diego Police officer resigns after getting locked in the backseat with female detainee Gazan Refugee Warns the World about Hamas Iranian stabbed for sharing his faith, miraculously made it across the border without a passport! Protest and Clashes outside Trump's Bronx Rally in Crotona Park Netanyahu Issues Warning To US Leaders Over ICC Arrest Warrants: 'You're Next' Will it ever end? Did Pope Francis Just Call Jesus a Liar? Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) Updated 4K version There can never be peace on Earth for as long as Islamic Sharia exists The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception. Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam Terrorists shut down Park Avenue. Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala. The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear? France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England. George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed. Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus. In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past? Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues [FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests) What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic? War in Ukraine Turns on Russia what happened during total solar eclipse Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage Earth is Scorched with Heat Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman Vibe Shift A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound. Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks Status: Not Logged In; Sign In U.S. Constitution See other U.S. Constitution Articles Title: Christine O'Donnell Asks Where Constitution Calls For Separation Of Church, State Source: Associated Press URL Source: http://www.bnd.com/2010/10/19/14432 ... nell-questions-separation.html Published: Oct 19, 2010 Author: Associated Press Post Date: 2010-10-19 11:29:00 by Brian S Keywords: None Views: 194829 Comments: 236 WASHINGTON -- Republican Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell of Delaware is questioning whether the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from establishing religion. In a debate at Widener University Law School, O'Donnell criticized Democratic nominee Chris Coons' position that teaching creationism in public school would violate the First Amendment by promoting religious doctrine. O'Donnell asked where the Constitution calls for the separation of church and state. When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?" Delaware Senate The exchange Tuesday aired on radio station WDEL generated a buzz among law professors and students in the audience. Subscribe to *Tea Party On Parade* Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Comments (1-155) not displayed.       .       .       . #156. To: meguro (#154) I wonder about that. Again you use the homosexuals hate homosexuals argument. That will not go over will at the White Swallow. ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:18:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #157. To: meguro (#154) I'm also younger, healthier, stronger, and more mentally cogent than you, loser. Why does Canada discriminate against gays? ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:18:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #158. To: WhiteSands (#157) Why does Canada discriminate against gays? Careful Whitey, if you continue to post to me, you might catch syphilis! meguro  posted on  2010-10-20   18:22:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #159. To: Rhino (#153) where does the Constitution give the government power to influence the church? They already influence churches. Can Churches tell folks how to vote with out losing tax status? Why is the US fuding an Imams speaking tour? ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:22:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #160. To: WhiteSands (#156) Again you use the homosexuals hate homosexuals argument. Sometimes quite true. That will not go over will at the White Swallow. Where? Is this some place you frequent? The name of the mental hospital you're institutionalized at? meguro  posted on  2010-10-20   18:23:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #161. To: WhiteSands, rhino (#159) Careful, rhino, Whitey's off his meds big time today. meguro  posted on  2010-10-20   18:24:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #162. To: meguro (#158) Careful Whitey, if you continue to post to me, you might catch syphilis! Meg your statement supports the need to regulate homosexuals. You don't know how Syphilis is spread. ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:26:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #163. To: Rhino (#153) Saying there is no separation of church and state, If there is separation of church and state, then the Federal governmemt should have no say so in what religion is or is not taught in local schools. Of course, we know that is notxthe case. Idiots like Coons don't realize they are not arguing for separation; they are arguing against it. no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-10-20   18:26:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #164. To: meguro (#161) Meg continues his hetrophobia. ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:27:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #165. To: WhiteSands (#162) Meg your statement supports the need to regulate homosexuals. You don't know how Syphilis is spread. So regulate me, Whitey. Go for it. meguro  posted on  2010-10-20   18:27:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #166. To: WhiteSands (#159) They already influence churches. Can Churches tell folks how to vote with out losing tax status? Why is the US fuding an Imams speaking tour? Can I start a political party and not pay taxes on my property? No. So Churches aren't being treated any different from anyone else. The same revocation would happen to any non for profit group. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:27:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #167. To: no gnu taxes (#163) (Edited) I know you know this. But there is no separation of church and state. There is a prohibition against CONGRESS ONLY from prohibiting people from practicing their religion or from the CONGRESS from interfering with peoples free exercise of their religion. The godless liberals just like to say separation of church and state because it is easier to spin then the words in the constitution. A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:30:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #168. To: no gnu taxes (#163) If there is separation of church and state, How can the Fed grant tax exemptions to "Churches"? How can the Fed pay for Imams to tour the ME? They will never move to challenge tax exemptions for "Churches". ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:30:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #169. To: no gnu taxes (#163) If there is separation of church and state, then the Federal governmemt should have no say so in what religion is or is not taught in local schools. Of course, we know that is notxthe case. Idiots like Coons don't realize they are not arguing for separation; they are arguing against it. The 14th amendment now forces all levels of government to follow the Bill of Rights. This means the State governments have to have a separation of church and state as well. Of course most states have a separation built into their constitution as well. The Federal government doesn't tell the states they can't teach religion, the US Constitution does. You are effectively arguing that the right to bears arms, means the Fed's can't tell you whether your state can tell you have guns or not have guns. That is really twisted logic. Furthermore why do Conservatives want godless commie schools teaching their kids religion anyway? Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:33:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #170. To: A K A Stone (#167) I know you know this. But there is no separation of church and state. There is a prohibition against CONGRESS ONLY from prohibiting people from practicing their religion or from the CONGRESS from interfering with peoples free exercise of their religion. The godless liberals just like to say separation of church and state because it is easier to spin then the words in the constitution. Godless Liberals like Thomas Jefferson. What an anti American piece of shit that guy was huh? Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:34:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #171. To: A K A Stone (#167) The founders were wise they knew that writing no establishment clause would stop them form ever establishing a national religion. If one religion can do so , all could. ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:34:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #172. To: A K A Stone (#167) I know you know this. But there is no separation of church and state. There is a prohibition against CONGRESS ONLY from prohibiting people from practicing their religion or from the CONGRESS from interfering with peoples free exercise of their religion. The godless liberals just like to say separation of church and state because it is easier to spin then the words in the constitution. Also how is teaching one religion in a school not infringing on your right to practice your religion? How would you like it if you had to move to Boston, MA and the teachers taught Catholic Dogma as fact, in school? Your religious American forefathers moved to the United States to be free of government interference in their religion. This isn't even a controversial part of American history. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:37:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #173. To: Rhino (#170) Thomas Jefferson was a great President. Maybe the best. He wasn't godless either. Do you know that the creator in the Declaration is God? He was a creationist. A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:37:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #174. To: A K A Stone (#173) Thomas Jefferson was a great President. Maybe the best. He wasn't godless either. Do you know that the creator in the Declaration is God? He was a creationist. Yea no shit, I was being facetious. To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut. Gentlemen The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem. (signed) Thomas Jefferson Jan.1.1802. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:39:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #175. To: Rhino (#172) Also how is teaching one religion in a school not infringing on your right to practice your religion? How would you like it if you had to move to Boston, MA and the teachers taught Catholic Dogma as fact, in school? I don't send my kids to govt school. Everyone should be to send their kids to the school of their choice if they qualify. If we are to have govt education. The money should follow the student and not the district. A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:39:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #176. To: All (#174) If anyone wants to know what that sound is, it's AKAStone realizing he in fact doesn't know everything. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:40:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #177. To: A K A Stone (#175) I don't send my kids to govt school. Everyone should be to send their kids to the school of their choice if they qualify. If we are to have govt education. The money should follow the student and not the district. I think a voucher system is a better system than what we have now. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:41:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #178. To: Rhino (#170) Godless Liberals like Thomas Jefferson. What an anti American piece of shit that guy was huh? He was Godless? Source that one please. He didn't believe in religion. =============== Jefferson says he was a "Materialist" (letter to Short, Apr. 13, 1820) and a "Unitarian" (letter to Waterhouse, Jan. 8, 1825). Jefferson rejected the Christian doctrine of the "Trinity" (letter to Derieux, Jul. 25, 1788), as well as the doctrine of an eternal Hell (letter to Van der Kemp, May 1, 1817). Further, Jefferson specifically named Joseph Priestly (English Unitarian who moved to America) and Conyers Middleton (English Deist) and said: "I rest on them ... as the basis of my own faith" (letter to Adams, Aug. 22, 1813). Therefore, without using the actual words, Jefferson issued an authentic statement claiming Deism as his faith. http://www.sullivan-county.com/id3/jefferson_deist.htm ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:41:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #179. To: Rhino (#174) A letter not a law. If you argue Constitutional Law based on Jefferson's personal life, then you could argue slavery is good. ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:44:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #180. To: Rhino (#169) The 14th amendment now forces all levels of government to follow the Bill of Rights. The 14th Amendment did not repeal the 10th Amendment. The Federal government doesn't tell the states they can't teach religion, the US Constitution does. Feel free to point the words that do so. You are effectively arguing that the right to bears arms, means the Fed's can't tell you whether your state can tell you have guns or not have guns. Actually, that's what YOU are arguing. What is taught in local schools is none of the Feds business. no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-10-20   18:45:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #181. To: Rhino (#174) Jefferson was actually defending the interests of the Church, meaning that the Federal Govt shouldn't be butting in. no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-10-20   18:46:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #182. To: WhiteSands (#178) He was Godless? Source that one please. He didn't believe in religion. =============== Jefferson says he was a "Materialist" (letter to Short, Apr. 13, 1820) and a "Unitarian" (letter to Waterhouse, Jan. 8, 1825). Jefferson rejected the Christian doctrine of the "Trinity" (letter to Derieux, Jul. 25, 1788), as well as the doctrine of an eternal Hell (letter to Van der Kemp, May 1, 1817). Further, Jefferson specifically named Joseph Priestly (English Unitarian who moved to America) and Conyers Middleton (English Deist) and said: "I rest on them ... as the basis of my own faith" (letter to Adams, Aug. 22, 1813). Therefore, without using the actual words, Jefferson issued an authentic statement claiming Deism as his faith. http://www.sullivan-county.com/id3/jefferson_deist.htm No I was being facetious because Stone claimed it was godless liberals who use Separation of Church and State, when in fact the term was created by Thomas Jefferson, specifically to describe the first amendment. Anyone claiming that the Separation and Church and State doesn't exist that hasn't read Jeffferson's letter to the Marbary Baptists, is talking about a subject they are purposely ignorant about. For fucks sake, you find this shit out if you just bother to google the term. This is what happens when people rely on Conservative talking points to educate themselves on constitutional law and American history. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:47:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #183. To: Rhino (#176) If anyone wants to know what that sound is, it's AKAStone realizing he in fact doesn't know everything. What you quoted from was a letter. It isn't the constitution for starters. If we are adding letters of Thomas Jefferson to the constitution how about this one "Then I say, the earth belongs to each of these generations during its course, fully and in its own right. The second generation receives it clear of the debts and incumbrances of the first, the third of the second, and so on. For if the first could charge it with a debt, then the earth would belong to the dead and not to the living generation. Then, no generation can contract debts greater than may be paid during the course of its own existence." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:455, Papers 15:393 That is part of the constitution too because Jefferson was great and all his writings are part of the constitution right? A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:48:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #184. To: WhiteSands (#179) A letter not a law. If you argue Constitutional Law based on Jefferson's personal life, then you could argue slavery is good. The first amendment is law however. And it does separate church and state. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:49:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #185. To: Rhino (#182) There is no separation of church and state. Go back and read the constitution. The FACT is that there is only a prohibition on CONGRESS!!!! A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:50:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #186. To: Rhino (#182) No I was being facetious No problem. Got it. I rarely use the sarc tag too. ----------------------------------------------------------- Liberals: -Pro nuclear proliferation. -Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays. -Have no issues with inmate abuse. -In discussions to release J.Pollard. WhiteSands  posted on  2010-10-20   18:50:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #187. To: Rhino (#184) The first amendment is law however. And it does separate church and state. No it doesn't. Quote the constitution accurately and I will agree with you. A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:50:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #188. To: A K A Stone (#183) What you quoted from was a letter. It isn't the constitution for starters. If we are adding letters of Thomas Jefferson to the constitution how about this one "Then I say, the earth belongs to each of these generations during its course, fully and in its own right. The second generation receives it clear of the debts and incumbrances of the first, the third of the second, and so on. For if the first could charge it with a debt, then the earth would belong to the dead and not to the living generation. Then, no generation can contract debts greater than may be paid during the course of its own existence." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:455, Papers 15:393 That is part of the constitution too because Jefferson was great and all his writings are part of the constitution right? Did you read what I wrote? Obviously not. I was showing you that letter to show that the Separation of Church and State is just a term to describe the first amendment. Not some godless liberal conspiracy you cooked up. Thomas Jefferson's own words. Jefferson, the Supreme Court, and an objective reading of the Constitution aren't trumped by Christine O'Donnell. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:51:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #189. To: A K A Stone (#187) No it doesn't. Quote the constitution accurately and I will agree with you. Jefferson says it better than I. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:51:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #190. To: Rhino (#184) The first amendment essentially guarantees the right to religious freedom without any interference from the federal govt. Its purpose is to protect the churches, not the govt. no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-10-20   18:52:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #191. To: A K A Stone (#185) There is no separation of church and state. Go back and read the constitution. The FACT is that there is only a prohibition on CONGRESS!!!! See the fourteenth amendment and related case law. The Bill of Rights applies to the states. Which is why gun bans are now illegal Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:52:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #192. To: no gnu taxes (#190) The first amendment essentially guarantees the right to religious freedom without any interference from the federal govt. Its purpose is to protect the churches, not the govt. It also prevents the establishment of a religion. And yes the point is to protect all religions. Which is why the government can't teach any. Because teaching one is teaching against all the rest. Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:53:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #193. To: Rhino (#188) Did you read what I wrote? Obviously not. I was showing you that letter to show that the Separation of Church and State is just a term to describe the first amendment. Yawn that is old news. Jefferson meant well. But liberals try to use those words to change the meaning of the constitution. There is no constitutional separation of church and state. A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:54:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #194. To: Rhino (#192) And yes the point is to protect all religions. Which is why the government can't teach any. Because teaching one is teaching against all the rest. Incorrect. The prohibition is on Congress only. Not state or local govts. That is the true meaning of the words in the first amendment. Come on be honest and admit it and quit spinning. You will be ok. A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:55:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #195. To: no gnu taxes (#180) The 14th Amendment did not repeal the 10th Amendment. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The 14th amendment makes the Bill of Rights apply to the states by the Constitution. That is perfectly in line with the bolded part of the tenth. The states are now prohibited from infringing our rights. Those powers are prohibited by the Constitution (14th amendment). Rhino  posted on  2010-10-20   18:56:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #196. To: Rhino (#191) The 14th wasn't ratified properly and is not really part of the constitution. If it was real it would be more like the 15th amendment as the evil government got rid of the real 13th amendment. A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-20   18:57:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply         .       .       . Comments (197 - 236) not displayed. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com