07f2f160
XPost: alt.america, alt.politics.religion, alt.politics.usa.constitution
XPost: misc.education
From: Then-Destroy-Everything@Blackhole.NebulaX.com
On 10/21/2010 1:07 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
> On Oct 21, 1:03 pm, Beam Me Up Scotty Everyth...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote:
>> On 10/21/2010 12:25 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 21, 11:49 am, Beam Me Up Scotty >> Everyth...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote:
>>>> On 10/21/2010 11:11 AM, cpt banjo wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Oct 21, 9:05 am, Beam Me Up Scotty >>>> Everyth...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Doesn't it read that way?
>>
>>>>>> Or do you simply interpret what ever you want.... The fear was of an
>>>>>> all powerful Federal Government like a KING. States still had "rights"
>>
>>>>> That's the way it was in the beginning, but the 14th Amendment changed
>>>>> things. States no longer have the right to deny due process or equal
>>>>> protection of the laws.
>>
>>>> Equal under the law, doesn't mean we all have to have the same laws in
>>>> every State.... Once the State passes a law.... it must be "enforced
>>>> equally"
>>
>>>> [Section 1.
>>>> 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.]
>>
>>>> So Federal citizens can't have their "right" under Federal law abridged
>>>> by State laws.
>>
>>>> That is redundant of the supremacy clause......
>>
>>>> The State can NOT pass laws to remove "rights" that are given to the
>>>> people or given to the United States(Federal Government).
>>
>>> Doesn't the First Amendment specify such rights (freedom of religion,
>>> speech, press, assembly, petition), so the states cannot pass laws
>>> (such as criminalizing Judaism, or shutting down a newspaper, or
>>> putting Tea Party protesters in prison) that abridge them?
>>
>> It is a right that the people have in the sense that the Federal
>> government is NOT given that power.... We can then abdicate that right
>> to the State government since NOWHERE in the constitution does it deny
>> that power to the States. That's in Amendment #10.
>>
>> One State can have a law on religion different from the State next to
>> it, the Congress has no power to pass any law to ban States or people
>> from any religious activity that doesn't infringe on others "rights".
>>
>> A State may not force you to pray
>
> According to your theory (the First Amendment applies only to the
> federal government), why not?
What would be the States legal power... to force you to pray?
They have no basis to write the law. It would infringe on my rights,
like my right to happiness, my right to NOT be held without a warrant.
Due process....
NO cruel Punishment inflicted....
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Neither slavery nor *involuntary servitude* , except as a punishment for
crime whereof the party *shall have been duly convicted* , shall exist
within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Due process and the equal protection of the laws.
>> But they can hold a voluntary prayer in the State buildings.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
