Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I sure as shit ain't getting into this chestnut with you- why don't you go back to old threads and argue this with Fluffy or not me or whoever engaged you back- you're a mod- you can still edit to make snappy new comebacks!
|
If only I were snappier.
Quote:
|
Meanwhile, I don't see how "In God We Trust" or "God save this Court" is okay but a dumb statute is different. Hell you might walk into court not knowing what the statute is, in Court you will hear "God save." Throw it all out or relax. I don't care.
|
Maybe the difference is that putting "In God We Trust" on money is almost devoid of meaning at this point. Certainly, I doubt we would be doing it if not for tradition and/or the desire of religious people to get the government to endorse their views.
Quote:
|
I posit that if Scalia was a scientist, and constitutional analysis a science, your ilk would not question "the government derives its authority from God." That you do question what he said takes it out of the range of what I complained about.
|
(1) Huh?
(2) I have no ilk, though I have eaten elk, and it is tasty.
(3) Constitutional analysis is not and never will be a science.
(4) I find the idea that government derives its authority from God bordering on bizarre. It derives its authority from the consent of the governed and -- in our case -- the Constitution.
Threaded Mode