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: neo96
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
You talk about politics as if it were a religion.
Cause it is.
Deification of the state.
COMPLETE with legislating MORALITY.
COMPLETE with preachers called politicians trying to proselytize the masses in the everlasting life, and faith of the all powerful, almighty 'benevolent' lord and savior called the STATE.
COMPLETE with the collective plate by FORCE called taxes.
COMPLETE with righteous WARS. Ya know like the war on drugs,the war on the rich, the war on poverty. The war on terror. The war on Wall Street.
Politics is a dichotmy.
One side is 'good' the other is 'bad'.
ISSUES are created to get the masses fight between themselves. That I liken to weapons of mass destruction.
We have identity politics.
Black,white,rich,poor, christian, muslim, and the list goes on.
For a group of people that love to shout 'separation of church' and state.
Americans are the most religious folks around. They just don't see it.
They do say politics is the art of the possible, when the choice is limited, so is the possible.
Your interpretation of the First Amendment is understandable, but case law in the US clearly shows that you're in error.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Gryphon66
Your interpretation of the First Amendment is understandable, but case law in the US clearly shows that you're in error.
Nope.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
www.law.cornell.edu...
Try again there eh.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Gryphon66
it breaks down like this:
The Establishment Clause prevents the formation of a state religion, or the support of a religion by the state
The Free Exercise Clause allows the populace the freedom to express their religion without the undue burden of another party (be it government or anyone else).
The SCOTUS has recognized limitations to the notion, but the concept of "wall of separation" was more an opinion mentioned by Jefferson, and referenced in a couple of SCOTUS rulings. The Constitution is actually would support someone being guided by faith while executing the duties of office, per the Free Exercise Clause, so long as they did not violate the Establishment Clause.
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: smurfy
They do say politics is the art of the possible, when the choice is limited, so is the possible.
And I say politics is the most dangerous, and destructive thing man has ever created.
And since it's inception has ever been used wisely or sparingly.
originally posted by: NthOther
I don't understand how some Muslims can be statists. God's law is supreme--to the will of Allah you must submit, and to none other.
Yet statists elevate the government to god-like status, and demand that we submit to it.
It's almost like a shared supremacy.
Which would be shirk.
originally posted by: visitedbythem
Mr Obama is a christian too. he said so a reply to: olaru12