LOL! ...delusions are false beliefs that do not go away with logical or accurate information. Incoherent speech, confused thinking and strange behavior.
States Rights, front and center. The Supreme Court should not even be concerning itself with this Non-Federalissue. But then, they stick their nose into everything we do, right Jethro?
They most certainly do. But it is a federal issue as it is a federal law that is being contested.
Well, how may other areas of our life has the FED stuck their nose into our affairs, and made some law restricting the rights of the states to decide those things which are notin the constitution...?
But you are FOR prayer in the schools, and the only way that will come about(more than it is already) is IFThe SC makes it a Legal, Constitutional-Right.
It is constitutional. The plain language of the first amendment says only that CONGRESSshall make no law etc. The states at the time of the adoption of the constitution could and did make laws reagrding religion. Anyone with an elementary knowledge of US history knows this to be true. Just because a few people in black robes say it isn't so just means there is an element of depotism and dishonesty on the court and in our system of government.
AND the only way Abortion will become illegal , is if the SC makes it so.
And they just might. But more likely, if it is changed, they will saystates can make that determination. Some states would make it illegal others would not. But, hey, that is democracy. I know you don't like it but it is, or at one time was, the American way.
Two decisions that you would
love ...but BOTH Legislative Commandments from 9 right-wing saints on the Court I am sorry that you do not know your history and that you don't understand the constitution and how it has been subverted. Or maybe you do you just support that sort of thing.
OK... tell me whoallows any official prayer for anyparticular religion, in ANY
state?
No one becuase the Supreme Court has told them they can't. They DO have the right to do that, don't they?
What do you mean? Â Also, the SC MUST have decided this issue before, in several cases over time, haven't they?
If theyt did what difference does that make?
WHICH? If none, then why
haven't some of them? I mean, you are the expert in History and the Law...as you have said so many times,
so tell me .
I have no idea what you are talking about. Maybe you should be a little more coherent.
It is nonsense, because it is a fundamental right of ALL of us to be free from the imposition of ANYONE'S prayers.
No it isn't. You can't find it in the Cosntitution. It only says Congress does not have the power. Why does it say that? Becuase the states didn't want the federal goverment to interfere with their perogative. ALL the people realize that...except for the few cranks that are never going to do anything but talk about it, that is.
You need to examine history. The Cosntituion did not ban the states froim establishing a religion. Some states did so well into the 19th century.
And by the way Jethro... That Cross, is insulting.  But then, thatis why you use it.
Hey it is a free country. Maybe you should be a little more tolerant.  You cannot help yourself. All you are doing is reassuring everyone that YOURS is the only "true" belief system, and in doing so you insult the intelligence of all those who really understand the statement, ascribed to Jesus...Â
"And now about prayer. When you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites who love to pray publiclyon street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I assure you, that is all the reward they will everget."  Sure the
motivation of those praying publicly should be considered. Just becuase someone prays publicly does not mean they are insincere.
Hey it is a free country. Maybe you should be a little more tolerant.
You feel this way when someone burns a flag?
Just becuase someone prays publicly does not mean they are insincere.
If they are Christians, it also means they are hypocrites since their Bible tells them that this isn't how they should pray.
It only says Congress does not have the power. Why does it say that?
Because it's a document dealing with the federal government. But why does ti say that? It doesn't say that because we have a country of government religions, it says that because we have a country free from government religions. A State Religion is one of the things we started this country to be free from. If you think we prevented our Congress from making laws concerning a State Religion in order for the states to be able to establish their own State Religions, you are wrong.
what I don't understand is why a religious person would even WANT the government involved in religion. I mean, when a government sets up a State Religion, they don't go after non-believers because non-believers aren't setting up their own churches or out preaching their non-belief and therefor aren't a threat to a State Church. It's the OTHER religions that the State Religion has historically cracked down on. It's why the Puritans came to this continent in the first place, because the C of E was throwing Puritans in jail for preaching their religion. The C of E wouldn't let them have their own church. They came here to be able to practice their religion free from a GOVERNMENT RELIGION. Why on earth they would want to live in a country where the government had a State Religion is beyond me. Freedom of Religion and the separation of Church and State benifits the Religious as much if not more than it benefits the non-religious.
You mean UNTIL the Supreme Court told them, by interpreting the constitution (as it is spelled) as is their JOB, that the states could NOT establish anyform of "State" sponsored religious-affirmations, right?
That was not interpreting that was drafting new law.
Man, you are sure one bright "bulb". There was nothing in the constitution that changed regarding the issue of religion.
The justices made it up or ignored history not because it was supported by the constitution but because it was the result they personally wanted. It is easy to find out if you try. But you won't because you are dim bulb, fold.
Hey dummy... You take BOTH sides of any issue, and argue with your own thoughts. Don't you read your own pedanticposts in here?
Both sides? No. Pedantic? No. What do you think Constitutional law is about?
 Webb was found Friday morning at his home in Sacramento County, dead of an apparent suicide. Moving-company workers called authorities after discovering a note posted on his front door that read, "Please do not enter. Call 911 and ask for an ambulance." Webb died of a gunshot wound to the head, according to the Sacramento County coroner's office. He is survived by two sons and a daughter.
Â
**hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I wonder maybe he dug a little too much.
"Schapelle Corby has been found guilty by a Bali court of importing a narcotic into Indonesia, sentenced to 20 years in jail and fined $13,875."
and...
"Her case has generated fanatical support in Australia, where polls show most people were convinced of her innocence. Her trial, which could have resulted in a death sentence, has been front page news for months."
maybe bodine needs NA
maybe bodine needs Big Brother Government to protect him from all his addictions by means of law
"anything is possible"?...Like Bill-Fool becoming a conservative?
That's the day I join the Socialist Workers.
Dennis would be proud of you.
I miss Dennis.
I searched him online just about a week ago, just to make sure he's still alive & kicking.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Nov 7, 2004 at 04:57pm.]
He's still around. A letter to the editor pops up once a while in the Duluth News-Tribune.
Watch it Bill Fold, or I'll report you, and they'll put you on "The List".
:-)
LOL
It was a joke for God's sake.
::ho hum::
Smoking Pot Raises Psychosis Risk in Youths
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,140154,00.html
uh... that's the whole point.
LOL! ...delusions are false beliefs that do not go away with logical or accurate information. Incoherent speech, confused thinking and strange behavior.
Oh-my-God! They nailed it!!
That's crabhole!!!
"shut the fuck up" - Torpedo-8
some people take drugs to feel and act stupid, but for Torpedo-8 it just comes naturally.
[Edited by molegrass on Dec 1, 2004 at 03:58pm.]
States Rights, front and center. The Supreme Court should not even be concerning itself with this Non-Federalissue.Â
But then, they stick their nose into everything we do, right Jethro?
They most certainly do. But it is a federal issue as it is a federal law that is being contested.
Well, how may other areas of our life has the FED stuck their nose into our affairs, and made some law restricting the rights of the states to decide those things which are notin the constitution...?
But you are FOR prayer in the schools, and the only way that will come about(more than it is already) is IFThe SC makes it a Legal, Constitutional-Right.
It is constitutional. The plain language of the first amendment says only that CONGRESSshall make no law etc. The states at the time of the adoption of the constitution could and did make laws reagrding religion. Anyone with an elementary knowledge of US history knows this to be true. Just because a few people in black robes say it isn't so just means there is an element of depotism and dishonesty on the court and in our system of government.
AND the
only
way Abortion will become
illegal
, is if the SC makes it so.
And they just might. But more likely, if it is changed, they will saystates can make that determination. Some states would make it illegal others would not. But, hey, that is democracy. I know you don't like it but it is, or at one time was, the American way.
Two decisions that you would
love
...but BOTH Legislative Commandments from 9 right-wing saints on the Court I am sorry that you do not know your history and that you don't understand the constitution and how it has been subverted. Or maybe you do you just support that sort of thing.
OK... tell me whoallows any
official prayer
for anyparticular religion, in
ANY
state?
No one becuase the Supreme Court has told them they can't.
They DO have the right to do that, don't they?
What do you mean?
 Also, the SC MUST have decided this issue before, in several cases over time, haven't they?
If theyt did what difference does that make?
WHICH? If none, then
why
haven't
some of them? I mean, you are the expert in History and the Law...as you have said so many times,
so tell me
.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Maybe you should be a little more coherent.
It is nonsense, because it is a fundamental right of ALL of us to be free from the imposition of ANYONE'S prayers.
No it isn't. You can't find it in the Cosntitution. It only says Congress does not have the power. Why does it say that? Becuase the states didn't want the federal goverment to interfere with their perogative.Â
ALL the people realize that...except for the few
cranks
that are never going to do anything but talk about it, that is.
You need to examine history. The Cosntituion did not ban the states froim establishing a religion. Some states did so well into the 19th century.
And by the way Jethro... That Cross, is insulting.
 But then, thatis why you use it.
Hey it is a free country. Maybe you should be a little more tolerant.
 You cannot help yourself.
All you are doing is reassuring everyone that YOURS is the only "true" belief system, and in doing so you insult the intelligence of all those who really understand the statement, ascribed to Jesus...Â
"And now about prayer. When you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites who love to pray publiclyon street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see
them. I assure you, that is all the reward they will everget."Â
 Sure the
motivation of those praying publicly should be considered. Just becuase someone prays publicly does not mean they are insincere.
You feel this way when someone burns a flag?
If they are Christians, it also means they are hypocrites since their Bible tells them that this isn't how they should pray.
Because it's a document dealing with the federal government. But why does ti say that? It doesn't say that because we have a country of government religions, it says that because we have a country free from government religions. A State Religion is one of the things we started this country to be free from. If you think we prevented our Congress from making laws concerning a State Religion in order for the states to be able to establish their own State Religions, you are wrong.
what I don't understand is why a religious person would even WANT the government involved in religion. I mean, when a government sets up a State Religion, they don't go after non-believers because non-believers aren't setting up their own churches or out preaching their non-belief and therefor aren't a threat to a State Church. It's the OTHER religions that the State Religion has historically cracked down on. It's why the Puritans came to this continent in the first place, because the C of E was throwing Puritans in jail for preaching their religion. The C of E wouldn't let them have their own church. They came here to be able to practice their religion free from a GOVERNMENT RELIGION. Why on earth they would want to live in a country where the government had a State Religion is beyond me. Freedom of Religion and the separation of Church and State benifits the Religious as much if not more than it benefits the non-religious.
You mean UNTIL the Supreme Court told them, by interpreting the constitution
(as it is spelled) as is their JOB, that the states could NOT establish anyform of "State" sponsored religious-affirmations, right?
That was not interpreting that was drafting new law.
Man, you are sure one bright "bulb". There was nothing in the constitution that changed regarding the issue of religion.
The justices made it up or ignored history not because it was supported by the constitution but because it was the result they personally wanted. It is easy to find out if you try. But you won't because you are dim bulb, fold.
Just not easy for you yourself to provide... uh huh.
Hey dummy... You take BOTH sides of any issue, and argue with your own thoughts. Don't you read your own pedanticposts in here?
Both sides? No. Pedantic? No. What do you think Constitutional law is about?
But since you say you are a Lawyer, you should be expaining the intricacies of the Law...
shouldn't you
?
If you pay me.
Geez Jethro, you mean you have the nerve to get paid for your services?
Â
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/13/1457240
Â
 Webb was found Friday morning at his home in Sacramento County, dead of an apparent suicide. Moving-company workers called authorities after discovering a note posted on his front door that read, "Please do not enter. Call 911 and ask for an ambulance." Webb died of a gunshot wound to the head, according to the Sacramento County coroner's office. He is survived by two sons and a daughter.
Â
**hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I wonder maybe he dug a little too much.
Assassination is the ultimate form of censorship for those who cant help but tell the truth.
Is it me or does the word '
Apparent
' stand out in that article a little too much?
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Dec 14, 2004 at 12:24pm.]
that's true.. in choosing a drug for it's safeness, alcohol is a really bad choice.
And we can see what dope has done to you two.
Sounds like Fold got a bad batch.
Austrialian surfer Sheila to do hard time
"Schapelle Corby has been found guilty by a Bali court of importing a narcotic into Indonesia, sentenced to 20 years in jail and fined $13,875."
and...
"Her case has generated fanatical support in Australia, where polls show most people were convinced of her innocence. Her trial, which could have resulted in a death sentence, has been front page news for months."
Yeah, interesting terror bombers get 2 years and she gets 20.
Drug crimes draw harsh penalties in that part of the world. She could have ended up in front of a firing squad.
That's right. The lesson here is don't screw around in other countries.
The dope found in HER bag wasn't hers? Gee, that's a new one.
Â