Comment Loc: California

It's Atheism appealing to their brethren on the Supreme Court who believe the Constitution is a living document and they must apple modern legal thought to this living document. The supreme Court has leaned to the left for the past 50 yrs. The founders thought it would be politically neutral but we see that that is not the case when just last year Justice Roberts double crossed his conservative colleagues on the court by calling a FINE at tax. Here is one man who made law. He did not have that power. He committed a impeachable offense but , there is no one in Washington who has enough nerve to challenge him. This is a justice for life, perhaps another 30 years, who will continue to make law as he sees fit. He has no boundaries, or limits. He is the Chief Justice. The most powerful person in government. The Supreme Court was supposed to be the weakest of the three branches of gov.

My conclusion after 71 yrs of gleaning info about humans is that people want more power. Power equals greed. People are greedy. By the jerry rigging of laws, rules and regulations congress, the president and bureaucrats have usurped much more power over the citizens than was ever granted in the constitution. The Constitution has enumerated powers in the Constitution and the remaining powers are reserved for the states. That clause is upside down today. How and why did it get this way? The power grab is not over.

VladimirPee

Well said. Let me add that the founders provided a method of change for the Constitution called the Amendment process NOT activist judges.

Comment Loc: California

My grammar,, it ant so good. Teacher, wanta give me a lesson?

Lovable Curmudgeon

Honestly Lou, it seems to me that Christians and Christianity are under attack in this country like never before, so I don't know how you can even think that we are grumbling, other than about the egregious attacks on our faith. You know the majority of Evangelical Christians were made very uncomfortable by and would not support Pat Robertson, and his attempt at theocratic government, because our instructions are to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God that which is His, and to not mingle our faith and government.

I think your whole case is built around the fallacious talking points trumped up by the nonsense coming from the phony separation of church and state crowd about Christians and theocracy. Because the facts and history support the FACT that this country was founded as a Bible believing, Christian nation does not mean that Christians want to establish a theocracy! Do we want to have laws and actions by government that reflect and maintain that Bible believing, Christian heritage? Of course we do, and that how it was done for more than 100 years without a theocracy, and could be forever, if people like you would take off your blinders, quit listening to the separation of church and state crowd, that has it all backwards, and pay attention to the T***H! By the way t***h is neither just and idea or an ideal, it is a person, and that person is Jesus Christ! He said it Himself, "I am the way, the T***H, and the life, no man comes unto the Father except through me!" The Bible, the greatest history book in all of history, says it, and I believe it, and that is that!

Lovable Curmudgeon

Boy, you are so right, Bill! It is ALL about power in the halls of government and justice in Washington, DC! We have both seen, over the years, people that we have v**ed for because they convinced us that their real concern was for their constituents, only to have them to go to Washington where they too very quickly fell under that Jezebellian Power Spirit. They soon forgot about their constituents and began maneuvering to gain more power and prestige, and they became more concerned about being re-elected than ANYTHING else, in order to hang onto wh**ever power they had gained.

Greed is certainly a HUGE part of the power trip, most people in government increase their net worth by much, much more than what their income from their office should provide for. They justify it in large measure by talking about how much it costs to get re-elected each term.

If our government was run by the Constitution which is NOT a "living document," but rather a document for eternity, because of its Biblical inspiration, we would not have most of the problems we have today. The Founders never intended the Federal government to usurp the powers from the states that it has. One thing we must do to help restore the power of the states is to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution, which permits the direct e******n of Senators. Now Senators represent their political party (it gives them power) more than their state; before when the states chose their Senators, they represented the interests of their state.

Then we need to enforce the rules of the Tenth Amendment and remove from the over grown Federal government EVERYTHING that rightfully belongs to the states. That would do away with many bloated Federal agencies, like the Department of Education, and it would immediately stop Obamacare, and many other things that would benefit all Americans!

Lou Loc: Florida

I'm a Christian curmudgeon , and I believe in the Everlasting Gospel [good news ] of Jesus Christ .I do not feel threatened or persecuted. We make an issue out of school prayer , when we have already been instructed not to be like the hypocrites who sit in the front rows and pray loudly so men can hear , we are to pray in private where no one hears except the Father ,and when we fast we are to tell no one and keep our appearance accordingly .
It is not the position of the state to advise or instruct as to when and where and how our children should pray ....THAT is our job . I taught my sons to pray according to that instruction . I never prayed in school in any conforming , or orchestrated manner , yet I prayed throughout the day in school , so too were my children taught . I understand where you're coming from and I respect it as I believe you are being honest . My friend , a Christian Heritage is an individual 's responsibility , and ONLY that individual knows for sure if he is truly saved , we can only hope for another .
I believe the constitution was written with Christian Judaic principles in mind , which are reflected in the Ten Commandments , I have no issue with that . Not only are the Commandments a guide for a moral life , they are a guide for a civilized Society . The Exclusion Clause handles this matter quite wisely , for the men of old , the founders were indeed quite wise and they covered the many possibilities that might arise . I believe the addition of " under God " in the Pledge of Allegiance IS Constitutional as well as "In God we Trust " on our currency . However to use the word Christian and yes , Jesus [ Who's Name I hold as Holy and above all other names in the Universe] is not Constitutional , and I believe the Founders in spite of being Christians [and Deists ] themselves , saw by their own words , that this would not withstand Constitutional Challenge .
So as not to offend anyone's sensibilities [ as odd as that sounds coming from me ] I will qualify all that I have said thus far as MY OPINION . Unfortunately people like Pat Robertson are given to fool hearty utterances which resound across the media and nation , and IN MY OPINION gives Christianity a bad name .
There was good reason the writers used the word Creator . We can STILL call ourselves a Christian Nation founded on Christian Principles and chances are that the status quo will not change ....but what if it does ? Strictly in a hypothetical sense , what if Buddhists or Hindus or Universalists or even Freemasons comprised the majority religion practiced in the US > ? Would they then be of the notion that the Constitution be Amended ? Could they re-interpret the Exclusion Clause ? Justice Scalia is already leaning towards that , but he has been very careful with his words , but he has indicated that he would infact do just that . Now he is a Roman Catholic . Would school worship then include praying to Mary as Co-Redemptress of the Universe ? Would divorce be abolished ? Birth Control ? Would Papal Dictates be incorporated into Constitutional accepted legislation ? Just my thoughts and I DO hold your thoughts in the same esteem as mine in this matter .

Lovable Curmudgeon

Like I have said, LOU, YOU ARE A FOOL!

VladimirPee

I guess even cretins can call themselves Christian. Nothing we can do to prevent it. Major Hasan called himself an American.

Comment Loc: California

The inability of the v**ers to foresee the consequences of any change to the Constitution is the root cause of the demise of it. The founder debated the Constitutional document for several years and it was sold to the states where it was again debated in the states' houses before it was ratified. Most all the reps in congress are lawyers and they know how to gain power by amending the Constitution while convincing the citizens that they will be better represented if the reps were elected by direct v**e as they did with the passage of the 17th amendment. The 17th amendment allowed for the senate to be elected by direct v**e. As it were before the passage, the senate was chosen by the state representatives; not elected. Through this process the states could control the senators by removing them from office next term if the senators did not follow the state reps instruction. The people consolidated their power in the state reps who made senators more responsive to the states they represented. Big campaign funds were not needed because the senators were chosen by the state reps. The 17th amd. diluted the power of the people to control their senator and the senators sold their v**e to big money and it is that way today. The 17th amendment was a major mistake for the country. V**ers had no idea what they were doing. Our gov was severely damaged. A senate committee v**ed to go to war with Syria when they knew that the people didn't it. That the arrogance they have for the people they do not represent.

Lou Loc: Florida

So says you curmudgeon . However you are not my judge .
History has proved that Constitutional Challenges to the Pledge and the Currency have not been successful , however as far as I know challenges regarding the things you would like to see have been struck down , not only in this Supreme Court but those of the last two decades .

Lovable Curmudgeon

Lou, you don't think Christians are being discriminated against and persecuted, then you have your head in the sand! Here are just examples of what I meant!

America's Christian S***es

If you are a Christian in today’s America you are steadily losing the freedom to control where and how and for whom you will labor. And when that happens you are no longer free – you are a mere subject, a virtual s***e whose work day is directed by government officials who have the power of economic life or death over you.

Think we are exaggerating?

You must not have heard about Sweet Cakes By Melissa, the Gresham, Oregon family run bakery that, after months of vile threats and intimidation, and an investigation by Oregon’s Bureau of Labor and Industries, announced that their store would be shut down due to the continuing harassment from pro-same-sex “marriage” advocates.

As Todd Starnes of FOX reminds us, last January, Aaron and Melissa Klein made national headlines when they refused to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple.

“I believe marriage is between a man and a woman,” said Mr. Klein. “I don’t want to help somebody celebrate a commitment to a lifetime of sin.”

The lesbian couple filed a discrimination complaint with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries and Starnes reports that within days militant homosexuals groups launched protests and boycotts. Klein told me he received messages threatening to k**l his family. They hoped his children would die.

Ultimately, Oregon’s Bureau of Labor and Industries announced they had launched a formal discrimination investigation against the Christian family.

Commissioner Brad Avakian told The Oregonian that he was committed to a fair and thorough investigation to determine whether the bakery discriminated against the lesbians.

“Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, but that doesn’t mean that folks have the right to discriminate,” he told the newspaper. “The goal is to ‘rehabilitate.’ For those who do violate the law, we want them to learn from that experience…” (Emphasis ours)

In other words, give up their religious beliefs.

Or take the case of Elane Photography v. Willock in which the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that a photographic artist could not refuse to photograph a lesbian couple’s commitment ceremony, even though New Mexico does not currently permit same-sex marriage.

You can read the truly astonishing ruling through this link [19].

In this case the homosexuals who were demanding that Christians violate their beliefs to participate in their “commitment ceremony” argued that Elane Photography violated New Mexico’s Human Rights Act (NMHRA).

As Tamara Tabo reported in the “Above the Law” blog, “Elane Photography argued that it did not violate the NMHRA but, if it did, this application of the law violated the photography business’s Free Speech and Free Exercise rights under the First Amendment. “

The court disagreed, as Tabo noted, writing that “when Elane Photography refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, it violated the NMHRA in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races.”

In a stunning concurrence to the ruling, New Mexico Supreme Court Justice Richard C. Bosson made it clear that people of faith must now choose between conscience and commerce. “At some point in our lives,” he said, “all of us must compromise, if only a little, to accommodate the contrasting values of others.” Elaine and her husband, Jonathan, he said, “are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives,” as “the price of citizenship.”

Such a finding is stunning not only because it raises homosexual conduct to the same protected status as race, but because it requires the participation of those whose religious convictions forbid homosexual conduct.

This is far beyond the requirement that everyone be treated with e******y and humanity in such things as food service and other “public accommodation.”

It means the government can actually compel you to participate in something that is against your religion.

And if you are compelled to work against your will or to provide your talent or artistry against your will you are truly a s***e.

To those who say “s***e” is a word too charged in American history to be used in this context, I say perhaps “bondsman,” the word Lincoln used in his Second Inaugural Address, will fit even better.

For how else do you describe the situation of a person who has no choice and is forced to labor to the benefit of others, whose situation can be changed at the whim of his oppressor and who is punished if he objects or tries to leave?

Bondage is exactly the situation that those believers who oppose same-sex “marriage” and who refuse to participate in what their faith tells them is wrong find themselves in in today’s America.

Fortunately, the Alliance Defending Freedom [20] has taken up the cause of Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin of Elane Photography. You can learn more about this case through this link [21] and about the Alliance’s work to, as Alan Sears put it, “defend the right of all Americans to hear and speak – and simply live out – God’s t***h.”

Lou Loc: Florida

Indeed , you call yourself a holder of an mba , when you've already proven your self dumbas a rock , and poorly lacking in reading comprehension . Go figure huh ?
The only MBA you have dennis dinga-ling is the one you printed up at the Office Max Zerox machine .

Bet you hung it on the wall too , to fool your kids eh ?

Lou Loc: Florida

What do you care of what others are doing ? Who died and left you judge ? Who are you to condemn someone else as a sinner when you are one yourself .
Thank you for displaying EXACTLY what I was talking about .

Comment Loc: California

More cars on the road of tyranny. The tyrannical gov has made us healthy people buy health insurance when we don't want it. What's next? Are they going to tell us that we have buy a house and pay more that it is worth so that the gov can use the surplus to subsidize housing bought by the poor. Is there no limit to what this gov will do? C*******t intent to make a government that has only one class of citizens. Cross into the country and become a citizen and never work another day in a life. Just be nine months pregnant and your anchor baby entitles you to welfare and about $5,000 to cover the costs of delivery.

VladimirPee

Bill these liberals love their ideology and party more than their country.