User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:51:16 PM EDT
[#1]
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:53:57 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered. In a thread that mysteriously disappeared... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:54:23 PM EDT
[#3]
The U.S. Constitution does not mention a separation of Church and State.
It does prohibit the Government from establishing an official religion. (They can't make everyone be a Baptist or a Catholic or a Methodist) It does guarantee freedom of religion. (not freedom from religion) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:55:44 PM EDT
[#4]
She was correct..there is no separation of Church and State in the constitution. I like her.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:55:50 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: The U.S. Constitution does not mention a separation of Church and State. It does prohibit the Government from establishing an official religion. (They can't make everyone be a Baptist or a Catholic or a Methodist) It does guarantee freedom of religion. (not freedom from religion) we have a winner the left, that discounts every single writing on the second amendment, loves to tout a SINGLE reference in a letter by jefferson to defend "separation of church and state", out of context as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:56:22 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
The U.S. Constitution does not mention a separation of Church and State. It does prohibit the Government from establishing an official religion. (They can't make everyone be a Baptist or a Catholic or a Methodist) It does guarantee freedom of religion. (not freedom from religion) This times a million. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:57:42 PM EDT
[#7]
fine vote for the democrat instead. thats for costing us a seat.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:59:27 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
fine vote for the democrat instead. thats for costing us a seat. The folks who voted for O'Donnell in the primary cost us the seat already. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 12:59:49 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered. And just why is that trolling? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:02:39 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered. And just why is that trolling? It seems lately you cannot disagree or question Tea Party candidates. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:03:15 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Fixed. Quoted: The U.S. Constitution does not mention a separation of Church and State. It does prohibit the Government from establishing an official religion. (They can't make everyone be a Baptist or a Catholic or a Methodist) It does guarantee freedom of religion. (not freedom from religion) This times a 87 million.  This thread is going much better than the other one.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:05:21 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Quoted: fine vote for the democrat instead. thats for costing us a seat. The folks who voted for O'Donnell in the primary cost us the seat already. Wrong answer..Castle voting like a democrat but running as a Republican cost him his seat. We either vote conservative or nothing will change. It ain't over until November 3rd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:06:00 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:06:19 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered. And just why is that trolling? It seems lately you cannot disagree or question Tea Party candidates. Isn't there a TeaParty.com where they can hang out and circle jerk with DU style moderation where such posts WOULD be considered trolling? I just want people to be happy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:09:01 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered. And just why is that trolling? It seems lately you cannot disagree or question Tea Party candidates. Really? I see a lot of folks disagreeing with and questioning Tea Party candidates on here. Then again, what I think you mean is "you cannot disagree or question Tea Party candidates without being challenged"...which is what you apparently want. You don't want a conversation, you just want to lecture. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:09:31 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered. And just why is that trolling? It seems lately you cannot disagree or question Tea Party candidates. Isn't there a TeaParty.com where they can hang out and circle jerk with DU style moderation where such posts WOULD be considered trolling? I just want people to be happy. Hey you got me man, I dunno. I love opposition and different viewpoints. ....Something about groupthink being very bad.... 
And I think people are really sensitive lately 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:09:48 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered. And just why is that trolling? It seems lately you cannot disagree or question Tea Party candidates. Isn't there a TeaParty.com where they can hang out and circle jerk with DU style moderation where such posts WOULD be considered trolling? I just want people to be happy. You would think you'd be happier over at DU yourself, then everyone would agree with your Tea Party candidate bashing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:12:04 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. "She seemed genuinely surprised that the principle of separation of church and state derives from the First Amendment, and I think to many of us in the law school that was a surprise," Daly said. "It's one thing to not know the 17th Amendment or some of the others, but most Americans do know the basics of the First Amendment." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:13:04 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:15:02 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? Being "just peachy" about something, and contending that it's forbidden in the Constitution are two different things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:17:04 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. I think it is quite clear she is well versed in the rhetorical nonsense of a certain crowd, and was woefully outclassed by a debate opponent who saw exactly where here argument was going (because it is hardly original, and quite nonsensical) and made a point of using precisely the words in the 1st Amendment. She walked right into that trap, as if she did not recognize those words. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:18:33 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
Really? I see a lot of folks disagreeing with and questioning Tea Party candidates on here. Then again, what I think you mean is "you cannot disagree or question Tea Party candidates without being challenged"...which is what you apparently want. You don't want a conversation, you just want to lecture. Well, that's news to me 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:19:15 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? Being "just peachy" about something, and contending that it's forbidden in the Constitution are two different things. So then Muslim teachers should be able to force feed kids in public schools Islamic theory on creation or other academic subjects? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:21:32 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:21:42 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? Being "just peachy" about something, and contending that it's forbidden in the Constitution are two different things. So then Muslim teachers should be able to force feed kids in public schools Islamic theory on creation or other academic subjects? If voters in the district approve the curriculum, and they don't violate state or Federal laws, then sure. Less competition for my kids. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:22:14 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. "She seemed genuinely surprised that the principle of separation of church and state derives from the First Amendment, and I think to many of us in the law school that was a surprise," Daly said. "It's one thing to not know the 17th Amendment or some of the others, but most Americans do know the basics of the First Amendment." That is horse shit. She was pointing out to that moron that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the First Amendment. ETA- Does anyone have the video? It's pretty clear. ETAII- I don't know anything about this woman, so I don't really have a dog in this fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:23:04 PM EDT
[#27]
There is a big difference between proselytizing and allowing discussion of religion in the classroom. Obviously liberals and some here cant differentiate between the two.
As far as I'm concerned, the day we stopped letting God in schools is the day we lost our sense of being American. The liberals won that one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:23:08 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? Fuck if I know what Muslims believe with regard to creation; I'm a Catholic and went to both Catholic and Jewish schools. Its a theoretical question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:23:20 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. I think it is quite clear she is well versed in the rhetorical nonsense of a certain crowd, and was woefully outclassed by a debate opponent who saw exactly where here argument was going (because it is hardly original, and quite nonsensical) and made a point of using precisely the words in the 1st Amendment. She walked right into that trap, as if she did not recognize those words. If you can divine all that from a text devoid of inflection, body language, and overall context you should be making millions as an analyst. In reality, you're just seeing what you want to see. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:23:41 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? Being "just peachy" about something, and contending that it's forbidden in the Constitution are two different things. So then Muslim teachers should be able to force feed kids in public schools Islamic theory on creation or other academic subjects? If voters in the district approve the curriculum, and they don't violate state or Federal laws, then sure. Less competition for my kids. I think Arfcom would Fo if Islam was taught in school. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:24:00 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your Troll-Fu is weak on this one, it's already been covered. And just why is that trolling? Like it can't be added to one of the current O'Donnell Threads already active? Everyone of them I've seen have ended up devolving into a pissing match over her religious beliefs (which I don't agree with, BTW - I'm Catholic and consider Biblical literalism incredibly misguided). |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:24:34 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? Fuck if I know what Muslims believe; I'm a Catholic and went to both Catholic and Jewish schools. Its a theoretical question. You might want to pick a different red herring then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:24:39 PM EDT
[#33]
The phrase "separation of church and state" does in fact, not appear in the constitution. Totally taken out of context
of the dialogue. Like when Obama uttered the phrase "my muslim faith"... context context context.. I saw a Hogan's Heroes episode where the prisoners dubbed Col. Klink's words together (on a makeshift tape recorder) to make him say things he didn't say. That was also fun. 
Next. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:25:16 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Really? I see a lot of folks disagreeing with and questioning Tea Party candidates on here. Then again, what I think you mean is "you cannot disagree or question Tea Party candidates without being challenged"...which is what you apparently want. You don't want a conversation, you just want to lecture. Well, that's news to me If you wouldn't quote him, I wouldn't have to read his nonsense. FWIW, I have never seen anybody here who agrees with me that O'Donnell is a poor representation of conservative politics calling anyone else trolls just for believing otherwise. She is the Cynthia Mckinney of the right, but at least McKinney stayed in the House. For some reason the sniping posts insinuating that certain posts are trolling, or that certain people do not: "belong" here always seem to come from people holding very particular and consistent sets of views. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:25:26 PM EDT
[#35]
She has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election. I just don't see why this woman is news.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:26:31 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. I think it is quite clear she is well versed in the rhetorical nonsense of a certain crowd, and was woefully outclassed by a debate opponent who saw exactly where here argument was going (because it is hardly original, and quite nonsensical) and made a point of using precisely the words in the 1st Amendment. She walked right into that trap, as if she did not recognize those words. If you can divine all that from a text devoid of inflection, body language, and overall context you should be making millions as an analyst. In reality, you're just seeing what you want to see. I'm going by the text - others are adding words that are not there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:26:34 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. "She seemed genuinely surprised that the principle of separation of church and state derives from the First Amendment, and I think to many of us in the law school that was a surprise," Daly said. "It's one thing to not know the 17th Amendment or some of the others, but most Americans do know the basics of the First Amendment." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:26:41 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? Fuck if I know what Muslims believe; I'm a Catholic and went to both Catholic and Jewish schools. Its a theoretical question. You might want to pick a different red herring then. Not a red herring - its a real question. Certain parts of this country have high populations of Muslims. Should the Catholics, Christians, Jews, etc. be subjected to education with an Islamic slant in those areas? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:26:58 PM EDT
[#39]
I think it is absurd to think that because someone does not believe in God that they are then 'left wing.'
I am conservative but I don't for a minute believe her silliness about religion. Bill |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:27:17 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: She was correct..there is no separation of Church and State in the constitution. I like her. yes ^^^ some people have to jump on the Hate O'Donnel bandwagon If I lived in Delaware, I'd take her over Coons anytime. She is a real person wanting to set some things right, not a career tax and spend piece of garbage like Coons |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:27:50 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
She has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election. I just don't see why this woman is news. Because the Democrats are trying to nationalize a marginal Tea Party candidate and say "this is what the Tea Party is about". That's why they keep bringing her up. There's quite a few on this board as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:28:56 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
So if some teacher in your child's school started teaching the Islamic version of creationism to your kid you'd be just peachy? "In the time before time, God was. And when God wants to create something, all he needs to say is "Be", and it becomes. So it was that God created the world and the heavens. He made all the creatures, which walk, swim. Crawl and fly on the face of the earth. He made the angels, and the sun, moon and the stars to dwell in the universe. And consider, as the Qur'an says, how God poured down the rain in torrents, and broke up the soil to bring forth the corm, the grapes and other vegetation; the olive and the palm, the fruit trees and the grass. Then it was that God ordered the angels to go to the earth, and to bring seven handfuls of soil, all of different colours, from which he could model man. God took the seven kinds of earth and moulded them into a model of a man. He breathed life and power into it, and it immediately sprang to life. And this first man was called Adam. God took Adam to live in Paradise. In Paradise, God created Eve, the first woman, from out of Adam's side. God taught Adam the names of all the creatures, and then commanded the angel to bow down before Adam. But Iblis, one amongst the angels, refused to do this, and thus began to disobey God's will. God place the couple in a beautiful garden in Paradise, telling them that they could eat whatever they wanted except the fruit of on forbidden tree, But the evil one tempted them to disobey God, and eat the fruit. When God knew that Adam and Eve had disobeyed him, he cast them out of Paradise and sent them to earth. But God is merciful. The earth was created to give food, drink and shelter to the human race. The sun, moon and stars give light. It is a good world, where everything has been created to serve people. And people, the Qur'an teaches, should serve God and obey his will. For those who submit to the will of God will be saved, and taken to live for ever in Paradise." Sound vaguely familiar? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:28:56 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. I think it is quite clear she is well versed in the rhetorical nonsense of a certain crowd, and was woefully outclassed by a debate opponent who saw exactly where here argument was going (because it is hardly original, and quite nonsensical) and made a point of using precisely the words in the 1st Amendment. She walked right into that trap, as if she did not recognize those words. wrong 
ETA: furthermore, coons couldn't even list the freedoms in the 1st amendment when she asked him to during the debate |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:29:10 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
She has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election. I just don't see why this woman is news. Because she is the best thing to happen to the left since David Duke ran for office. The press is having a field day very successfully making us all look like fools for having let a fringe element of people who embrace ignorance in the name of conservatism gain so much power. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:29:21 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: Yep. She's right.Quoted: The U.S. Constitution does not mention a separation of Church and State. It does prohibit the Government from establishing an official religion. (They can't make everyone be a Baptist or a Catholic or a Methodist) It does guarantee freedom of religion. (not freedom from religion) This times a million. She also did great in her debate.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:29:37 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
For some reason the sniping posts insinuating that certain posts are trolling, or that certain people do not: "belong" here always seem to come from people holding very particular and consistent sets of views. Someone may have to quote this for Adam to read it .
I don't think you guys are trolls, I just think you are left of center and are closer to belief to Democrats than you are to Republicans or the Tea Party or conservatives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:30:03 PM EDT
[#47]
And she is 100% correct. The words "separation of church and state" are not in the Constitution.
This is not news. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:30:19 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/10/separation-of-church-and-state.htmlQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him. 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?" The question is obviously what was she referring to when she said "that", separation of church and state or Coon's reply. Further, teaching creationism in public school does not equal establishing a religion, regardless of whatever sleight of hand past or present SCOTUS panels wish to employ. "She seemed genuinely surprised that the principle of separation of church and state derives from the First Amendment, and I think to many of us in the law school that was a surprise," Daly said. "It's one thing to not know the 17th Amendment or some of the others, but most Americans do know the basics of the First Amendment." That is horse shit. She was pointing out to that moron that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the First Amendment. ETA- Does anyone have the video? It's pretty clear. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:30:37 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
She has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election. I just don't see why this woman is news. +1 She's gonna get her ass kicked...why should we care? WAY too many idiotic statements have emanated from her pie-hole. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2010 1:33:09 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
Quoted:
She has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election. I just don't see why this woman is news. Because she is the best thing to happen to the left since David Duke ran for office. The press is having a field day very successfully making us all look like fools for having let a fringe element of people who embrace ignorance in the name of conservatism gain so much power. Comparing her to David Duke is reprehensible. Considering how much you go on about how unfair some of the allegations made against Obama are, to insinuate something like that is just wrong. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
