actually, that's not true as the separation of church and states emits from a letter from an SC judge and not the founders. In fact, the founders are clear in their beliefs on religion and country as it's governed. Religion is ok but no state endorsed religion should be permitted. hell, the founders started many conventions with prayers.
No.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" are literally the first words of the first amendment. Seems like it was important to the Founding Fathers.
Yet many justices over 50 years did not see it that way until just a few months ago. It didn't happen by accident.
lol, one of your funnier comments. So now the SC is packed with evagelicals? Neve mind we've got on the SC that thinks it's ok to use race and not law to decide outcomes (or is it two now since one can't tell us what a woman is). it was overturned because the states should have the power to decide absent a Federal law (which of course no politican tried to do)
and prior to that, the precedent it overturned was a 78yr old case. forget that one too?
The Chinese government and Dr. Fauci in conjuction with the Rand Corporation and reverse vampires.
That's the case with lots of rulings that expanded rights because rights were overly restricted by overreaching government. Say no to big government in your bedroom.
You saw it with your point of view. But justices over 50 years did not agree until a select group put in through efforts spearheaded by evangelicals saw it that way.
Should the guy in drag be shot or maybe burned like some were during the Salem Witch Trial era when just being accused of witchcraft got the fire stated.
Now you’re just being silly.
Go back and read the comment twice. It is filled with Supreme Court justices as a result of efforts spearheaded by evangelicals. You must feel really dumb trying to insult MY intelligence now lol. But that's your MO.
Any other examples of current Right Wing Evangelical Power, Dominance and Influence in modern day America other than Roe?
Yes it's always "common sense" when the SC rules in a way you agree with. I'll repeat: many justices appointed over 50 years by many different presidents and appointed by many politicians did not see it that way. This decision did not come about by accident. You know that. Everyone knows it. Republicans stated openly they wanted to pack courts with anti-abortion justices.
Are you joking? You think these people, who have electorally dominated the GOP for decades don't have influence? They stop the teaching of evolution and sex education in schools. They influence foreign policy because they think Revelations tells us we must support Israel. They have gotten laws passed that allow professionals and businesses to refuse service to gay people like blacks were refused service during Jim Crow. They've blocked vaccine mandates. Most of what the GOP does is for them.
Not in the way you suggest. She believed women had a right to an abortion. I do, too, certainly in the case when their health is at stake. No government or church has the right to tell you you can't make medical decisions to save your own life. If a government can't tell you to take a vaccine it can't tell you you can't save your life with an abortion. If I was pregnant and needed an abortion to not die I'd tell the governor of Texas and the SC to go **** themselves and I'd get one.
Wow what a great rebuttal. It means you have nothing. Thanks for playing. You can go now.
The prayer ruling for the coach.
I guess I struck a nerve huh? Sounds like you are the deluded one who has drunk the kool-aid. As far as society lets look at the choice of Supreme Court justices based on their social and religious beliefs and nothing more no matter how you try and disguise it. There are numerous media outlets dedicated to right wing points of view who keep pushing that political agenda and many musicians, especially in country music.
Not to mention the call to revisit a whole slew of other issues as put forth by Clarence Thomas though shockingly not interracial marriage. A prime case of do as I say not as I do if ever there was one. Then we also have Desantis as another prime example of banning books, and attacking people and corporations who dare openly disagree with his ideology in the name of putting down “wokeness”. As I said in another thread that was deleted he is pushing the same type of agenda that started in Germany in the early 30s.
Politicians (such as presidents) don't make the determination of whom to designate terror organizations. Our intelligence agencies do. Preferably without interference of influence by politicians.
Jefferson did state that the Constitution provided for separation of church and state which was later (late 1800s) affirmed by the SC.
You have an arm of 4 staunchly conservative and religious justices who believe strongly in the same social agenda as the evangelical Christians. They don’t necessarily have to identify as evangelical Christians I order to subscribe to their beliefs.
So you trust Biden to give you 100% accurate information do you? I don't trust ANY president or ANY politician to do that. They have political agendas and that colors everything they say (all of them, not just Biden).
More to the point: evangelicals helped get them onto the court knowing their positions on abortion, which they lied to the Senate about. Catholic justices have been supported by Republicans for years in an attempt to get Catholic votes and because they see them as similarly socially conservative without the same baggage as evangelicals, which mightve stopped appointment. It's no coincidence 6 justices are Catholic in a country that's one quarter Catholic.
I agree that the red scare tactic is continually replayed. But to be fair, both Dems and Reps cynically use that sort of over-the-top fear mongering to drive voting behavior. Neither side has a corner on that market.
Who is preventing free and open discussion here? Sure seems like everybody is freely and openly discussing stuff.
glad you liked it.
No one.
