It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
"Separation of Church and State" is not in the Constitution
Sigh.
That's your argument?
Really?
Right out of the Texas GOP playbook.
Next, I suppose you'll tell us that separation of church and state is a "myth"
Originally posted by WolfofWar
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
But you would be prohibiting him from participating in a legal event that he chooses to express himself in. That is a violation of his first amendment rights.
Originally posted by amaster
In that case, please show where "Seperation of Church and State" is mandated by law.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
"Separation of Church and State" is not in the Constitution
Sigh.
That's your argument?
Really?
Right out of the Texas GOP playbook.
Next, I suppose you'll tell us that separation of church and state is a "myth"
The modern concept of a wholly secular government is sometimes credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke, but the phrase "separation of church and state" in this context is generally traced to an 1 January 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury, Connecticut, Baptist Association, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams—who had written in 1644 of "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world"— Jefferson wrote, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State".
Originally posted by WolfofWar
He, as a human being, is organizing and promoting it. Unless you can definitively prove he reallocated federal resources to his support of this "prayer rally," then the action has not violated the establishment clause. Its really as simple as that.
If you can prove he reallocated funds or manpower from his office for it, then I'm with you. Otherwise its just straw grasping at its pinnacle.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by amaster
In that case, please show where "Seperation of Church and State" is mandated by law.
I'm sorry, but I do not have the time to teach you U.S. civics 101. Get a high school textbook or use Google to clear up this mystery for you.
Originally posted by SaturnFX
If he is attending the rally as a citizen, no issues
If he is attending the rally as a governor, no problems
If he is promoting it as governor, then there is a problem...he can go to as many rallys, retreats, cermonies, etc as he wants to, it only crosses the line when he uses his office to promote it.
Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
If so, then they might have a chance at trampling on Gov. Perry's rights like they are attempting to.
Originally posted by The Old American
Originally posted by SaturnFX
If he is attending the rally as a citizen, no issues
If he is attending the rally as a governor, no problems
If he is promoting it as governor, then there is a problem...he can go to as many rallys, retreats, cermonies, etc as he wants to, it only crosses the line when he uses his office to promote it.
Actually it only crosses the line if he tries to make it a law or force/coerce citizens or officials to attend. Otherwise he is not infringing on anything and not breaking any laws. This atheist group needs to know their rights and they're not being infringed upon.
/TOA
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
If so, then they might have a chance at trampling on Gov. Perry's rights like they are attempting to.
Really?
What right is there to use a position of political power to promote one religion over another?
Originally posted by WolfofWar
That is not illegal.
Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
If so, then they might have a chance at trampling on Gov. Perry's rights like they are attempting to.
Really?
What right is there to use a position of political power to promote one religion over another?
I don't know. What does it say in the Texas Constitution?
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by WolfofWar
That is not illegal.
There's an extensive list of organizations that disagree with you and feel they have a strong enough case to take to court. We can hash it out here but ultimately the courts must settle this.
You bring up some excellent points. Perry's actions are not clearly legal nor clearly illegal and I believe he's landed in a gray area.
To me, whether this is legal is not as relevant as whether this is appropriate. This is treading dangerously close to violating the important principle of separation of church and state.
Originally posted by WolfofWar
I'd be happy to see it go to court. Amendments need to be further defined because of arguments like these.
But be careful with trying to justify the legitimacy of a side by the amount of organizations backing it. As (presumably) an atheist and (by your own declarative statements) a skeptic you should know better then to assume that just because there are a lot of people that say so, doesn't mean its true.