Comments on: Washington Extra – A belief in tea, and the Constitution

By: fbcx

fbcx — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:39:38 +0000

It’s the “prohibiting the free exercise thereof” part of the 1st amendment that gets trampled all over in the agruments against acknowledging the place religion has in the fabric of this nation. The government is not supposed to “establish” a religion, but neither is it supposed to force religions and religious practice to be banished from public places. If the Congress of the United States and the Supreme Court of the United States can start their assemblies with a prayer, then why shouldn’t schools?

By: pauleewhiting

pauleewhiting — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 19:45:18 +0000

“Yes, Virginia, there is a separation clause!”

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 First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

By: Yellow105

Yellow105 — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 05:05:54 +0000

They aren’t laughing with you, Christine, they are laughing AT you…

By: releggneh6

releggneh6 — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 23:04:27 +0000

Why don’t you people try reporting the truth? O’Donnell is right. It should make you concerned when law students laugh thinking she don’t know what she is talking about! Coons couldn’t even name the freedoms that is in the constitution!!! The story was written in such a way they had Christine O’Donnell saying, “You’re telling me that’s in the First Amendment?” What she was talking about was this idiot Coons talking about “the separation of church and state.” She was saying, “Are you telling me separation of church and state’s in the Constitution?” because it isn’t.

There’s nothing in the Constitution about separation of which you need and state. It was Coons who couldn’t figure out what’s in the Constitution. It’s Coons who didn’t know what he was talking about. And so the panic in the State-Controlled Media, they write a story making it look like O’Donnell doesn’t know what she’s talking about. They had to misquote her and take her out of context in order to make this point. “Are you telling me that that’s in the First Amendment?” meaning, the government cannot officially sponsor a religion. That’s not what she was expressing incredulity over. She was incredulous that somebody was saying that the Constitution said, “There must be separation between church and state.” Those words are not in the Constitution.