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

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked

Hamas Torture Bodycam Footage: "These Monsters Filmed it All" | IDF Warfighter Doron Keidar, Ep. 225

EXPOSED: The Dark Truth About the Hostages in Gaza

New Task Force Ready To Expose Dark Secrets

Egypt Amasses Forces on Israel’s Southern Border | World War 3 About to Start?

"Trump wants to dismantle the Education Department. Here’s how it would work"

test

"Federal Workers Concerned That Returning To Office Will Interfere With Them Not Working"

"Yes, the Democrats Have a Governing Problem – They Blame America First, Then Govern Accordingly"

"Trump and His New Frenemies, Abroad and at Home"

"The Left’s Sin Is of Omission and Lost Opportunity"

"How Trump’s team will break down the woke bureaucracy"

Pete Hegseth will be confirmed in a few minutes

"Greg Gutfeld Cooks Jessica Tarlov and Liberal Media in Brilliant Take on Trump's First Day"

"They Gave Trump the Center, and He Took It"

French doors

America THEN and NOW in 65 FASCINATING Photos

"CNN pundit Scott Jennings goes absolutely nuclear on Biden’s ‘farce’ of a farewell speech — and he’s not alone"


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: This Dogma Won't Hunt
Source: Christianity Today Magazine
URL Source: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ed ... ban-sanders-and-new-relig.html
Published: Sep 10, 2017
Author: Ed Stetzer
Post Date: 2017-09-10 15:04:59 by redleghunter
Ping List: *Bible Study Ping*     Subscribe to *Bible Study Ping*
Keywords: None
Views: 5633
Comments: 36

This Dogma Won't Hunt: Feinstein, Durbin, Sanders, and the New Religious Test for Office So much for Article VI of the U.S. Constitution | ED STETZER

Excerpt :

Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is the most recent, joined by Dick Durbin, and preceded (most famously) by Bernie Sanders. In all cases, their comments are catching notice on the right and left, and appropriately so. Furthermore, the frequency with which we are seeing it occur is beginning to cause concern for those who hold to religious beliefs today.

Feinstein admonished Amy Barrett, a Trump nominee for a judgeship on the 7th Circuit, saying that Barrett’s Roman Catholic “dogma lives loudly” within her. Lest her words be out of context, here is the context of her statement:

Why is it that so many of us on this side have this very uncomfortable feeling that— you know, dogma and law are two different things. And I think whatever a religion is, it has its own dogma. The law is totally different. And I think in your case, professor, when you read your speeches, 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.

Dogma is defined by Merriam Webster as, “a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church.” In other words, these are things that people of faith have settled upon in terms of doctrines or beliefs.

This, perhaps, might remind us that dogma lived loudly in many of the nations founders. And it might also remind us of Article VI of the United States Constitution that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Officer or public Trust under the United States.”

More:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ed...t-feinstein-durban-sanders-and-new- relig.html

Click for Full Text!Subscribe to *Bible Study Ping*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 27.

#12. To: redleghunter (#0)

Feinstein admonished Amy Barrett, a Trump nominee for a judgeship on the 7th Circuit, saying that Barrett’s Roman Catholic “dogma lives loudly” within her.

I wonder (not really) if Feinstein approves of whatever lives loudly within, and comes out in opinions of, Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, and Kagan?

nolu chan  posted on  2017-09-14   4:03:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: nolu chan (#12)

I wonder (not really) if Feinstein approves of whatever lives loudly within, and comes out in opinions of, Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, and Kagan?

That's a good point. However, the counter argument will always be that political ideology is not a 'religion' and is accepted in secular society.

Our elected and appointed officials have a very infantile understanding of what Jefferson meant by 'separation of church and state." We have some who actually believe such a statement exists in our Constitution.

redleghunter  posted on  2017-09-14   14:03:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: redleghunter (#14)

However, the counter argument will always be that political ideology is not a 'religion' and is accepted in secular society.

One's religious belief should not be dispositive. The Judge should answer the question of what the Government has been delegated power to do lawfully, or what it cannot do. For example, deciding whether the power to decide the issue of abortion has been delegated to the Federal government is a legal question. It is not a moral question of whether abortion should be legal or criminal, but a question of who has the power to decide the issue, the States or the Federal government.

nolu chan  posted on  2017-09-14   18:30:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: nolu chan, redleghunter (#16)

It is not a moral question of whether abortion should be legal or criminal, but a question of who has the power to decide the issue, the States or the Federal government

The entire issue has been mucked up by design.

Q: Why isn't the act of abortion BOTH a moral AND legal question??

Square ONE: The REAL question is with respect to defining when "LIFE" begins. IF it begins (at which most sane people believe -- when the heart beats), then "abortion" thereafter is clearly MURDER.

Who shall be the arbiter for this issue? Science? Common Sense? A single Judge? Nine SCOTUS Judges? Or We The People?

Ergo, with respect to "authority," does the State OR fedgoob have the moral or legal right to sentence a fetus to death?

Liberator  posted on  2017-09-15   14:59:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Liberator, redleghunter (#24)

It is not a moral question of whether abortion should be legal or criminal, but a question of who has the power to decide the issue, the States or the Federal government.

Q: Why isn't the act of abortion BOTH a moral AND legal question??

It is both depending on context, but in a court it is not a moral question. We have courts of law, not courts of morality.

When taken to Federal court, the first question to address is whether the Federal government possesses the power, delegated from the people, to decide the matter, or whether said power has not been given and is reserved to the states, or to the people.

If the Federal court lacks jurisdiction to decide an issue, the case muswt be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Square ONE: The REAL question is with respect to defining when "LIFE" begins. IF it begins (at which most sane people believe -- when the heart beats), then "abortion" thereafter is clearly MURDER.

If the government has not determined that some act satisfies all the elements of what it defines as the crime of murder, it ain't murder.

If left to the States to decide, it could, and likely would, be murder in some states and perfectly legal in others.

When the Federal government is elevated to impose someone's morality on everybody, you may not always be satisfied with the version of morality they choose to impose. If SCOTUS decides on constitutional grounds, then the only available legal pathways to change are (1) an amendment to the Constitution, or (2) another SCOTUS opinion overturning the previous one.

In deciding whether abortion is legal or criminal, the court should look to the law. If the law says abortion is legal, the court has no authority to say it is a crime. The court may strike down a law as unconstitutional, but it has no legislative power to enact a criminal statute.

Who shall be the arbiter for this issue? Science? Common Sense? A single Judge? Nine SCOTUS Judges? Or We The People?

The Courts are delegated the authority to be the arbiter of legal issues.

Individuals do not get to impose their morality on others.

If you feel is wrong under any circumstances, you are free to choose not to get an abortion. You are not free to prevent someone else from getting a lawful abortion. You are free to work to get the laws changed.

The people of the United States do not decide to do anything in a collective, consolidated sense. The members of the union are the States, not the people. In a presidential election, the popular vote does not elect the President.

nolu chan  posted on  2017-09-16   1:20:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: nolu chan (#26)

I realize you post as what the courts actually do. I do have one small point though. I don't know of you agree or not. But morality is just morality there isn't different versions of it. Also the law should be moral.

A K A Stone  posted on  2017-09-16   1:39:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 27.

        There are no replies to Comment # 27.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 27.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/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