People are being killed all over the world in the name of one religion. Are we going to keep pretending this religion's beliefs isn't at odds with our own written law?
If I owned a newspaper it's headline Saturday morning would have read 'Freedom of Religion' with a large picture of all the dead French in the road.
They are not allowing us freedom from their religion, and thus, do not belong in our countries that share this ideal.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] iamjanesleftnipple 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Right, and Everson affirmed that both protections exist and apply to all levels going forward.
Right, and Everson made sure to abolish those that were still there, prevent and future ones and refined what the Constitution says about religion, IE you can practice what you want to practice (freedom of) and any form of government (fed->local) cannot establish a state religion (freedom from). What you're trying to prove here is that, at one point the Constitution said one thing and then we changed it, but you'd be wrong. The founders knew what they meant, it just took a SC ruling to refine our understanding (because we didn't need another amendment to fix the language, just a ruling for what was already there)
Not saying that.
Absolutely saying that. Just because the case hadn't been brought to the SC doesn't mean it wasn't legally in doubt.
You're not exactly arguing apples to oranges with this. The 13th amendment had to be added to the Constitution after slavery, which was an act of congress, meaning that it was legal until it was made illegal. The Supreme Court ruling was a refinement of our understanding of an existing law, meaning that the law always meant that, we just needed the proper legal proceeding to force us to review it and come to a new understanding. So, in effect, the law always had that meaning, we just needed to catch up our interpretation of it.
Again, to recap:
Yes, yes and you can keep arguing with me until you rage quit, but you're either admitting that neither freedom of and freedom from exist (because the Constitution explicitly states neither) or you admit that the founders knew what they were doing and it just took the rest of us a period of time to understand it too.
[–] fuck_communism ago
Every time I think I've read the stupidest thing ever posted on the internet, someone outdoes themselves. Now you're just being willfully stupid.
[–] iamjanesleftnipple ago
Not an argument