Argentbear
Well-Known Member
Article 1 section 2Slavery isn’t in the Constitution. Where are you going with this?
Article 1 section 8
Article 1 section 9
Article IV, section2
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Article 1 section 2Slavery isn’t in the Constitution. Where are you going with this?
It’s historicalReally?
A secular government prohibits free exercise of your religion
simply because you cannot post your commandments in
public schools to the exclusion of all other beliefs?
It seems that your idea of liberty is the freedom to impose
your religion upon others. **** that ****!
are you outraged by that?Are you seriously comparing lynching with posting words in a classroom right now?
What should we expect from Scholars that think Article one of the Constitution is about freedom of religion.rotflmao
the due process clause applies Deal with itAgain… look at the State Constitutions and their preamble and see if it matches your position.
No, Kentucky tried it back in 1980 and it was shot down then.It’s historical
Louisiana becomes first state to require that Ten Commandments be displayed in public classrooms
Because they don't take "be ye not of this world" seriously at all. I notice that biblical scripture is much like a Chinese restaurant menu. Pick one from column A, one from column B, & so on. Whatever anyone wants to believe, the Bible offers justification.www.religiousforums.com
So is the Treaty Of Tripoli.It’s historical
Are you sure you want to stand by that statement?Slavery isn’t in the Constitution.
That was very good and I thank you.Article 1 section 2
Article 1 section 8
Article 1 section 9
Article IV, section2
Which whole nation? It would make sense to me to at least consider the implications and potential consequence associated with coveting. Theft typically (as you stated) ensues, which then leads to your specific point, I think. Which was about laws and disagreements with the laws themselves...coveting specifically. I regard it as a general rule of thumb and good advice, but that's beside the point.Yes -- for example "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his 2 cattle, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."
And then the whole nation coveted everything that their native neighbors had, and not only coveted it, but took it. Way to obey God's Big Ten!
So is slavery. That history doesn't make slavery today legal or morally acceptableIt’s historical
Louisiana becomes first state to require that Ten Commandments be displayed in public classrooms
Because they don't take "be ye not of this world" seriously at all. I notice that biblical scripture is much like a Chinese restaurant menu. Pick one from column A, one from column B, & so on. Whatever anyone wants to believe, the Bible offers justification.www.religiousforums.com
I’m talking about referring to it in the annals of Jurisprudence not to mention it is on the outside walls of the Supreme Court and in the House of Congress.No, Kentucky tried it back in 1980 and it was shot down then.
Article 13 - there is no article to abridge the right of religion - rather to prevent itSo is slavery. That history doesn't make slavery today legal or morally acceptable
There is no "Article 13", it was the 13th amendment which came long after the 1st amendment which corrected the oversight of not excluding religion to protect against religious misinterpretation by those who think that everyone should follow their religion.That was very good and I thank you.
That being said, let us not forget Article 13 that corrected it.
What do you mean "annals of Jurisprudence" Read the article this time.I’m talking about referring to it in the annals of Jurisprudence not to mention it is on the outside walls of the Supreme Court and in the House of Congress.
13th AmendmentThat was very good and I thank you.
That being said, let us not forget Article 13 that corrected it.
It is in the Constitution, but they avoided the word "slave". For example Article I Section 1 Clause 1 protected the international slave trade until 1808:Slavery isn’t in the Constitution. Where are you going with this?
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons [italics added].[2]
No, it does quite the opposite. You are conflating "secular" and "atheistic". The two are not the same. Most people participate in secular activities every day. There may be some very odd exceptions, but going to the grocery store is a secular activity. No religion is involved. Secular only means "non-religious". Our government is supposed to be nonreligious.Because it violates Article 1 in freedom of religion and the prohibiting the free exercise thereof