Go to What Country Am I In?
- Add a comment
- Go to Fundamentalist Extremists Challenging Kentucky Law's Constitutionality
Which is a testament to the brilliance of the framers. And, kooka you are
correct, there is no restriction against amending the Constitution to reflect current needs. You are also right in that it is an amusing evasion the conservatives pull on the ACLU vs. religion schtick.
posted by
saul_relative
on May 14, 2006 at 8:56 PM
| link to this | reply
What is really amusing
Is that this is the ACLU defending a conservative Christian religious group's rights and you will not hear a single conservative talk about it because they still want to pretend the ACLU is anti-Christian.
As for the initial intent B.S. Has nay of them actually talked to the founding fathers to learn this? My guess is they are making it all up as they go along to pretend they are doing what is right. And even if that had been the 'initial intent' two hundred years ago, that does not mean it is what is best for the country now. We have aged some since then and are not the same people with the same needs we were when the country was founded. That is why the constitution was set up to be changed as needed to make sure we keep up with the times.
posted by
kooka_lives
on May 14, 2006 at 12:05 PM
| link to this | reply
redwood brings up the ever troublesome phrase that has the
conservatives so bent out of shape when it comes to the judiciary and the Constitution: "original intent." Conservatives like DeLay and Frist and others want to rewrite history and cast the founding fathers in their own images. Jefferson and the founding fathers' "original intent" with regards to the separation of church and state was that religion would not influence the workings of the government, nor would the government participate in anything regarding religion. The current administration and conservatives in Congress are hellbent on rewriting history and establishing a government by, of, and for Christians, which is in no way what the founding fathers intended. Don't think so? Then what the hell is all this "faith-based initiative" funding? And for those historically challenged morons to use as one of their arguments that the founding fathers were Christians is completely assinine. Quite a few of the framers were Deists. Look it up and read all about it.
posted by
saul_relative
on May 3, 2006 at 1:47 PM
| link to this | reply
Thanks, Jason.
posted by
saul_relative
on May 3, 2006 at 1:38 PM
| link to this | reply
Well spoken!
posted by
JasonScyte
on May 3, 2006 at 1:37 PM
| link to this | reply
Yes, they are, but a burden we must endure. Of course, they do help us
out with prime examples of what extremism looks like, acts like, is...
posted by
saul_relative
on May 3, 2006 at 1:27 PM
| link to this | reply
original intent
Please read "original intent" in the nonfiction category
posted by
redwood
on May 3, 2006 at 12:06 PM
| link to this | reply
what a bunch of wackos ...
posted by
fwmystic
on May 3, 2006 at 10:09 AM
| link to this | reply