Government, religion, and "secular" vs. "religious"

[Swordsmyth]

The Establishment Clause does. Take it up with SCOTUS. Incidentally, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment in particular are supposed to limit the authority of federal and state governments. Instead of asking whether the Constitution prohibits posting the Ten you should ask whether it permits it.

You need to read the 10thA.
Only the feds are limited to the powers specified in the Constitution, ALL others belong to the states and the people.
And Dredd Scott was also SCOTUS precedent along with many other false, unconstitutional, and evil things.

The old SCOTUS ruling was false and evil.

Promoting values is one thing. Promoting them in a religious context (e.g., that there is a God who doesn't want people to worship other gods) is something else.

It's not establishing a religion.
That's all that matters.

 

[Swordsmyth]

So does this:

A false flag operation.

 

[PAF]

One can oppose the display of something, that doesn't make it unconstitutional to display it, but there are laws against corrupting minors already which need to be enforced.
And if one opposes the display of evil things that is good.
If one opposes the display of virtuous things that is evil.

You can oppose it all you want. There is a reason for "separation of church and state". Government indoctrination camps are NOT Sunday School.

Project 2025

- It adopts a maximalist version of the unitary executive theory, a disputed interpretation of Article II of the Constitution of the United States, which asserts that the president has absolute power over the executive branch upon inauguration.

- Jeffrey Clark, a contributor to the project and a former official within the DOJ, would advise the future president to immediately deploy the military for domestic law enforcement by invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807.

- It promotes capital punishment and the speedy "finality" of those sentences.

- Critics of Project 2025 have described it as an authoritarian, Christian nationalist movement that seeks to reform the United States into an autocracy. Several experts in law have indicated that it would undermine the rule of law and the separation of powers. Some conservatives and Republicans also criticized the plan, for example in the contexts of centralizing power, individual rights and freedoms.

- Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar of fascism and authoritarian leaders at New York University, wrote in May 2024 that Project 2025 "is a plan for an authoritarian takeover of the United States that goes by a deceptively neutral name."

- Doing away with the separation of church and state is the goal of many architects of Trumpism, from Project 2025 contributor Russ Vought to far-right proselytizer Michael Flynn, who uses the idea of "spiritual war" as counterrevolutionary fuel ...
​

This explains Trump's call for Federally-Funded Nationwide "Stop and Frisk" and complete Local LEO Immunity, among other anti-liberty agenda.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

Marxism is a religion.

That wasn't the point. The point was whether the mere failure to promote a particular faith (e.g., Christianity) violates the freedom of people to practice their particular faith (e.g., Christianity). Unless you're going to argue that a particular faith (e.g., Christianity) has a preferred position (an idea nowhere to be found in the Constitution), then the failure to promote all other faiths violates the free exercise rights of believers in such faiths.

 

[Swordsmyth]

You can oppose it all you want. There is a reason for "separation of church and state". Government indoctrination camps are NOT Sunday School.

Project 2025

- It adopts a maximalist version of the unitary executive theory, a disputed interpretation of Article II of the Constitution of the United States, which asserts that the president has absolute power over the executive branch upon inauguration.

- Jeffrey Clark, a contributor to the project and a former official within the DOJ, would advise the future president to immediately deploy the military for domestic law enforcement by invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807.

- It promotes capital punishment and the speedy "finality" of those sentences.

- Critics of Project 2025 have described it as an authoritarian, Christian nationalist movement that seeks to reform the United States into an autocracy. Several experts in law have indicated that it would undermine the rule of law and the separation of powers. Some conservatives and Republicans also criticized the plan, for example in the contexts of centralizing power, individual rights and freedoms.

- Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar of fascism and authoritarian leaders at New York University, wrote in May 2024 that Project 2025 "is a plan for an authoritarian takeover of the United States that goes by a deceptively neutral name."

- Doing away with the separation of church and state is the goal of many architects of Trumpism, from Project 2025 contributor Russ Vought to far-right proselytizer Michael Flynn, who uses the idea of "spiritual war" as counterrevolutionary fuel ...
​

This explains Trump's call for Federally-Funded Nationwide "Stop and Frisk" and complete Local LEO Immunity, among other anti-liberty agenda.[/INDENT]

P2025 is a false flag operation with no connection to Trump.

Posting the cultural foundation of our laws and liberty is not turning government schools (which shouldn't exist, but that's a different question) into seminaries.
The 10 commandments are a part of history and should be taught as history, particularly as part of American history, that doesn't require anyone to believe or follow them any more than teaching about the NAZIs requires people to hate Jews or be socialist.

 

[Swordsmyth]

That wasn't the point. The point was whether the mere failure to promote a particular faith (e.g., Christianity) violates the freedom of people to practice their particular faith (e.g., Christianity). Unless you're going to argue that a particular faith (e.g., Christianity) has a preferred position (an idea nowhere to be found in the Constitution), then the failure to promote all other faiths violates the free exercise rights of believers in such faiths.

Nobody said we have a positive right to have it promoted, we don't, and neither does any other religion.
The right we have is to promote it if we so choose, and to do so through our representatives in government.
Particularly since we are only discussing displaying the foundation of our culture and laws.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

You need to read the 10thA.
Only the feds are limited to the powers specified in the Constitution, ALL others belong to the states and the people.

I suggest you read the 14th Amendment, which applies most of the Bill of Rights to the States, including the Establishment Clause.

Aside from the incorporation of the Establishment Clause, a good argument can be made that a state's making legal distinctions based on religious believes violates the Equal Protection Clause. To date, this argument hasn't been necessary.
And Dredd Scott was also SCOTUS precedent along with many other false, unconstitutional, and evil things.

The old SCOTUS ruling was false and evil.



It's not establishing a religion.
That's all that matters.[/QUOTE]

 

[PAF]

P2025 is a false flag operation with no connection to Trump.

Posting the cultural foundation of our laws and liberty is not turning government schools (which shouldn't exist, but that's a different question) into seminaries.
The 10 commandments are a part of history and should be taught as history, particularly as part of American history, that doesn't require anyone to believe or follow them any more than teaching about the NAZIs requires people to hate Jews or be socialist.

Copyright © The Heritage Foundation 2023-2024

Practice it in Sunday School. Politicians/Government Has No Business In HealthCare Establishing Religion

 

[Swordsmyth]

I suggest you read the 14th Amendment, which applies most of the Bill of Rights to the States, including the Establishment Clause.

Aside from the incorporation of the Establishment Clause, a good argument can be made that a state's making legal distinctions based on religious believes violates the Equal Protection Clause. To date, this argument hasn't been necessary.

The state is not establishing a religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise of one.
Nor is that state making legal distinctions based on religious beliefs.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Copyright © The Heritage Foundation 2023-2024

Practice it in Sunday School. Politicians/Government Has No Business In HealthCare Establishing Religion

Them putting together a list they want to promote to Trump doesn't make anything they want something Trump is behind.
Some of it may appeal to him, but other parts may not.
There is no connection, and the people behind this are just like Graham pushing for a nationwide abortion ban after Trump said leave it to the states, they are trying to make real conservatives look bad.

And La is not establishing a religion.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

The 10 commandments are a part of history and should be taught as history, particularly as part of American history

Mandating that they be displayed in every public school isn't teaching them as history.

 

[PAF]

The state is not establishing a religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise of one.
Nor is that state making legal distinctions based on religious beliefs.

Reading isn't your strong suit. Neither is standing on principle.

Louisiana public schools will now be required to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom, following a new law signed on Wednesday by Republican Gov. Jeff Landry.

establish /ĭ-stăb′lĭsh/
transitive verb

To cause (an institution, for example) to come into existence or begin operating; found; set up.

To bring about; generate or effect.
"establish goodwill in the neighborhood."
​

require /rĭ-kwīr′/
transitive verb

To have as a requisite or necessity; need or depend on.

To stipulate as obligatory by authority.

To demand as obligatory or appropriate.
​

Louisiana Constitution
Article I: Declaration of Rights

Section 8. No law shall be enacted respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion


Referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."

 

[Anti Federalist]

The same can be said about "displaying" q%eers in miniskirts in K-12. Would you want a law "promoting" that?

It's already being promoted.

The FBI investigates and local cops arrest parents who question it, in many places.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Mandating that they be displayed in every public school isn't teaching them as history.

I know, I want them taught as history too.
That wasn't a defense for posting them, I already did that.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Reading isn't your strong suit. Neither is standing on principle.

establish /ĭ-stăb′lĭsh/
transitive verb

To cause (an institution, for example) to come into existence or begin operating; found; set up.

To bring about; generate or effect.
"establish goodwill in the neighborhood."
​

require /rĭ-kwīr′/
transitive verb

To have as a requisite or necessity; need or depend on.

To stipulate as obligatory by authority.

To demand as obligatory or appropriate.
​

Reading isn't your strong suit.
Requiring government entities to post something is not requiring the public to do anything.
No religion is being established.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

The state is not establishing a religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise of one.
Nor is that state making legal distinctions based on religious beliefs.

Oh, get real. By posting a religious message based on monotheism the state is favoring monotheism over atheism, agnosticism, and polytheism. When it starts mandating messages from those faiths let me know. Better yet, let me know when a state even permits such a message.

 

[PAF]

Reading isn't your strong suit.
Requiring government entities to post something is not requiring the public to do anything.
No religion is being established.

Arguing with you is like arguing with Trump that spending is bad according to conservatives. Yet he outspent every president in history, including Obummer.

Believe what you want. This will be litigated. I'm sure the attorney's, good bad or indifferent know far more than you.


PS: No way in he|| you of people are going to change my mind.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Oh, get real. By posting a religious message based on monotheism the state is favoring monotheism over atheism, agnosticism, and polytheism. When it starts mandating messages from those faiths let me know. Better yet, let me know when a state even permits such a message.

Cry more.
There is nothing prohibiting it and it is the will of the people to defend their culture and values.
Nobody is being forced to believe.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Arguing with you is like arguing with Trump that spending is bad according to conservatives. Yet he outspent every president in history, including Obummer.

Believe what you want. This will be litigated. I'm sure the attorney's, good bad or indifferent know far more than you.

Trump didn't spend, Congress did.
And there is no comparison even if you were right, nothing I do is in contradiction with what I say.

You are joining the atheists, satanists, and communists in twisting words beyond their modern dictionary meaning, and far beyond their historical and contextual meaning in the Constitution in order to attack GOD's law and public virtue.

 

[PAF]

Cry more.
There is nothing prohibiting it and it is the will of the people to defend their culture and values.
Nobody is being forced to believe.

Spend spend spend. Who's going to pay for all of those "required" commandments to be mandatorily displayed in every school? Oh, the tax payer.