Okay, so what did Judge Roy Moore do wrong...

[KenH]

Yeah, you know, like Virginia.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

So, if the State of New York does not want to outlaw abortion, would that be up to them?

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by KenH:
Yeah, you know, like Virginia.

Actually, Virginia is a Commonwealth, not a state.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Baptist in Richmond:
So, if the State of New York does not want to outlaw abortion, would that be up to them?

Yes.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by KenH:
The United States of America was indeed founded on Christian principles, and all of the foot stomping and whining and historical revisionism by liberals will never, ever change that fact.

To call someone a liberal just because they recognize the FACT that Christianity is not constitutionally codified is a false statement. Actually, the person who insists that the country was founded as a Christian nation is the one who is being a liberal.

 

[JamesBell]

You are correct, Christianity is not Constitutionally codified. However, neither is secular humanism (which is, in fact, a religion) yet it is taught to our children and presented as fact.

The Supreme Court lost their minds and failed to properly use the Constitution in their decisions. There is no way that a person can get the notion that religion must be banned from appearing in any way connected to religion from the First Amendment Establishment Clause which reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." To come to such a conclusion, one must use a personal bias or belief, which (much to the dismay of liberals) is not law. The current attitude of seperation between church and state is not a Constitutional principle. It appears nowhere in our founding documents. It is nothing more than a lie that has been forced on American's for the last half century.

Maybe that's OK with you, but it isn't OK with me. Think of the possible ramifications (or slippery slope as some like to say) of this attitude. If they can change the meaning of a simple statement, and have it become thought of as fact, they can do it again. Their next decision could be something as stupid as claiming you don't have the right to own property if someone else wants it. Oh wait, THEY DID THAT! What's next? Is the Supreme Court going to decide to tell America that it is illegal to be a Christian? Is the death penalty going to be expanded from murderers over the age of 18 to include Christians? You think that is a stupid comment, but it is not one iota more off base that someone would have thought of a comment saying the court would ban the display of the 10 Commandments if you lived 100 years ago. Simply put, the Court is the sole source of power in America today. It is no longer possible to turn to the Constitution to defend your points. It is insignificant as a law making document.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by JamesBell:
You are correct, Christianity is not Constitutionally codified. However, neither is secular humanism (which is, in fact, a religion) yet it is taught to our children and presented as fact.

While a lucid point, the problem with that arguement is that some have adopted the incorrect notion that if it's secular, then it's secular humanism. Or, worse, or it's not Christian, then it's secular humanism. I myself have been guilty of that from time to time. We Christians have become the boys who cry wolf in that arena, through no fault but our own.

 

[Daisy]

How is secular humanism a religion? Can a person belong to several religions at the same time?

 

[mioque]

"Can a person belong to several religions at the same time? "
"
Sure happens all the time in many Asian countries

 

[dianetavegia]

"Can a person belong to several religions at the same time? "

Have you seen the Heinz 57 listing on some liberal baptist churches (small b intended)? United C of C, ABC, CBF, etc..... Adds up to not much of anything!

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Originally posted by JamesBell:
You are correct, Christianity is not Constitutionally codified. However, neither is secular humanism (which is, in fact, a religion) yet it is taught to our children and presented as fact.

By definition, a religion deals with gods. Secular Humanism cannot be a religion, as it doesn't claim an existence of a deity. It is more of a philosophy.

Also, this is from 10 Myths About Secular Humanism at http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/cherry_18_1.01.html

3. The Supreme Court ruled that secular humanism is a religion.

This myth is based on a misunderstanding about how Supreme Court decisions are written, and was finally laid to rest by a Federal Circuit Court ruling issued in 1994.

In the 1961 Torcaso v. Watkins decision, Justice Hugo Black commented in a footnote, "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others." Such footnotes, known as "dicta," are written to provide factual background to the legal principles in a decision. These dicta never have the force of law. They are merely comments.

The claim that secular humanism can be considered a religion for legal purposes was finally considered by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Peloza v. Capistrano School District. In this 1994 case, a science teacher argued that, by requiring him to teach evolution, his school district was forcing him to teach the "religion" of secular humanism. The Court responded, "We reject this claim because neither the Supreme Court, nor this circuit, has ever held that evolutionism or secular humanism are `religions' for Establishment Clause purposes." The Supreme Court refused to review the case; they refused to reverse a ruling that secular humanism is not a religion.

"But," you might ask, "even if secular humanism isn't a religion for legal purposes, isn't it really a religion in practical terms?" No. Look at it this way: Suppose Justice Black had been writing about an issue of interstate commerce in agricultural products, and in a footnote he included "apples" in a list of root crops. He would be wrong. It wouldn't matter what laws were involved-apples are fruits, not roots! As a factual matter, he was partly wrong about Buddhism because some branches of Buddhism do worship the Buddha as a deity. And he was wrong about secular humanism.

Secular humanism is not a religion by any definition: There are no supernatural beliefs, no creeds that all humanists are required to accept, no sacred texts or required rituals. Humanists are not expected or required to have "faith" in what is said by any authority, living or dead, human or "supernatural."

People may find values and meaning in life through either humanistic or religious worldviews. But religions claim that meaning is based on a god or the supernatural, while humanists derive their meaning and values from the natural world. Secular humanism is a naturalistic, nonreligious worldview.

 

[fromtheright]

I agree with C4K and CMG on this one. Though I agree with him on the constitutionality of the monument, I have always suspected his motives to be political. His book did little to change that, BTW (all it really changed was to make me think him a little flaky). LE, I'm not sure of the point that the Supreme Court refused to hear his case. It seems outrageous to me that the same judge who would throw the book at someone for not recognizing his authority as a state Supreme Court judge is quite willing to snub his nose at a federal judge.

I'm sure that, as Ken said, a Justice Moore would give a correct decision on 10C cases, but (1) as I said, I don't trust him, and (2) I don't think he has the intellectual horsepower to be a U.S. Supreme Court justice. There are plenty of other good candidates.


"If appointed to the Supreme Court, would you expect other people to have a higher regard for the federal courts than you showed when you chose to ignore the federal court system?"

Excellent question for Moore, C4K!

Will have to read the rest of the thread later. 'Sorry.