• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is the Declaration of Independence Unconstitutional?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I want to know what you all think of Bush regarding all this.

I mean, he believes in God. He believes the decision was rediculous.

Is President Bush unconstitutional?
rolleye.gif
 
Seperation of Church and state is not the total abscence of all religious ideas or references in government. It is that the government can not dictate to the population what to believe or what religion to practice.


I completely agree...
 
Originally posted by: Eli
I want to know what you all think of Bush regarding all this.

I mean, he believes in God. He believes the decision was rediculous.

Is President Bush unconstitutional?
rolleye.gif

if not for that....then for the reason that he stole the presidency....I voted republican....but the fool that Iam..I realized after he became the president that he is a moron.

 
Originally posted by: JoeBaD
Ah, you said it yourself: separation of CHURCH and State.

Not separation of Faith and Government.

They strongly believed in the gov't not establishing an official religion not that gov't should be faithless.

It has only been though the succession of misguided court decisions that that intent has been corrupted.

Finally, someone I can agree with in this thread.
 
Originally posted by: JoeBaD
Ah, you said it yourself: separation of CHURCH and State.

Not separation of Faith and Government.

They strongly believed in the gov't not establishing an official religion not that gov't should be faithless.

It has only been though the succession of misguided court decisions that that intent has been corrupted.

Uh oh, you'd better be careful. That sort of common sense reasoning doesn't agree with the resident expert's "only logical conclusion". Lucky will be along to administer 40 lashes with a wet noodle shortly.

 
Constitutional, but not politically correct, then.

Just like the pledge of allegiance.

I think the "under God" part of the pledge of allegiance can be modified to include whatever you want. If you substituted, "one nation under the sovereign power of our serene, illustrious, excellent, and so forth president, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" I don't think anyone's going to stop you. Yes, I took part of that from Dickens. It was an example.

Ayn Rand=objectivist. Fred N was not.

And the issue with the pledge of allegiance is exactly what people's interpretations are regarding "the government can not dictate to the population what to believe or what religion to practice." If you have as a pledge of allegiance the inclusion of the idea of God, the government is dictating to the population to believe in God. Because only people who believe that such a God exists can sincerely make this pledge. That's the issue.

And yes, I do believe that such a God exists, but I'm not going to twist people's arms to get them to have the same beliefs so that they can honestly pledge allegiance to their country. Constantine?

In the declaration of independence, not all the founders had the same perspective of who this God was, but they still threw it in anyway. Probably for political reasons. Was it unconstitutional? Well... was the 19th amendment unconstitutional?

 
Back
Top