|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:14 PM Original message |
Separation of church and state, tell me I'm wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lyric (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:17 PM Response to Original message |
1. Maybe my brain is fried ATM, but I have no idea what your post was about. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:18 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. respecting an establishment, means a wholly nuther thing than |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
billh58 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-27-10 10:17 AM Response to Reply #2 |
78. Actually, the SCOTUS has |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Commie Pinko Dirtbag (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:31 PM Response to Reply #1 |
19. It's about RW trolling. To wit: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:36 PM Response to Reply #19 |
24. While I have ZERO embarrassment on that thread, you will get in trouble by calling out a locked thre |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Commie Pinko Dirtbag (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:38 PM Response to Reply #24 |
25. Oooo, I'll have a deleted message. I'm shaking in my boots. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:39 PM Response to Reply #25 |
26. What exactly is your problem with diversity of opinion? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Commie Pinko Dirtbag (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:40 PM Response to Reply #26 |
29. Don't you see? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:41 PM Response to Reply #29 |
31. And I'm a liberal, and about to agree with you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Commie Pinko Dirtbag (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:54 PM Response to Reply #31 |
33. It's been fun but now you'l have to excuse me. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Donnachaidh (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 06:08 PM Response to Reply #19 |
72. somehow, I heard the voice of Andy Rooney in that posting |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
COLGATE4 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:19 PM Response to Original message |
3. OK - you're wrong. The word "respecting" in this context is a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FSogol (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:21 PM Response to Reply #3 |
5. Exactly "respecting" means "concerning" or "regarding". n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:58 PM Response to Reply #5 |
34. That still doesnt preclude my interpretation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:09 PM Response to Reply #34 |
39. Yes it does |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:12 PM Response to Reply #39 |
41. I add the commas, to make it obvious my intent. Not necessary. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:17 PM Response to Reply #41 |
44. Well then, you're not reading the clause correctly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:18 PM Response to Reply #44 |
45. That really doesn't change it. It is still a sentence. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:22 PM Response to Reply #45 |
49. There's always the dictionary |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:27 PM Response to Reply #49 |
52. Definition of establishment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:31 PM Response to Reply #52 |
57. That is why we have courts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:32 PM Response to Reply #57 |
58. You are still only using the verb form. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:37 PM Response to Reply #58 |
59. Like I said |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:43 PM Response to Reply #59 |
60. We are here today, to respect this establishment, in deed and with donations. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:43 PM Response to Reply #60 |
62. I can see what you're trying to say now. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:55 PM Response to Reply #62 |
63. You are saying I CHANGED it from a verb to noun. That is unclear. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 05:13 PM Response to Reply #63 |
65. No, it's pretty clear |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #65 |
66. But it is unclear that it was not also intended. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:43 PM Response to Reply #58 |
61. dup |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:19 PM Response to Reply #41 |
46. I could also do this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:22 PM Response to Reply #46 |
50. Exactly the opposite intent. How can ebody here not get that? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:25 PM Response to Reply #50 |
51. That was an example of what you are doing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
the redcoat (510 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:22 PM Response to Reply #3 |
6. You beat me too it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elleng (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:24 PM Response to Reply #6 |
11. Not an argument; its a question, a request for help understanding. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
the redcoat (510 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 05:18 PM Response to Reply #11 |
68. The only questions I saw were: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:22 PM Response to Reply #3 |
8. OK, then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Obamanaut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:25 PM Response to Reply #8 |
12. But there is no comma there. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:27 PM Response to Reply #12 |
14. Nor does it say that of religion is a runon. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
geardaddy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:23 PM Response to Reply #3 |
10. Yep. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dr Fate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:00 PM Response to Reply #3 |
35. Yup- I was going to say "having to do with" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:01 PM Response to Reply #35 |
36. That STILL doesn't preclude my interpretation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dr Fate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:07 PM Response to Reply #36 |
38. Frankly, I do not understand your interpretation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:13 PM Response to Reply #38 |
42. I am saying that the Con includes a separation of church and state. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:15 PM Response to Reply #42 |
43. Or more correctly, righties claim that it is separation of church from state, not state from church. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dr Fate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:28 PM Response to Reply #43 |
55. Then they incorrectly ignore the establishment clause in favor of the free exercise clause. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dr Fate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:19 PM Response to Reply #42 |
47. In that case, I have no issue with you. The Constitution certainly does contain that concept. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 08:18 PM Response to Reply #47 |
73. Another effect of the difference with verb and noun is tense. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-27-10 02:50 PM Response to Reply #73 |
81. Establishment is a noun. In no way can it be construed as a verb |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Obamanaut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:21 PM Response to Original message |
4. Could "...no law respecting an establishment..." mean making no |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:23 PM Response to Reply #4 |
9. Could it not be a crafty way of including both? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Obamanaut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:26 PM Response to Reply #9 |
13. Maybe it's part of a long-standing conspiracy, and you have ferreted |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:39 PM Response to Reply #9 |
28. No. They weren't writing a sonnet. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elleng (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:22 PM Response to Original message |
7. 2 sections, 'concerning' establishment, and free exercise. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Obamanaut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:29 PM Response to Original message |
15. To sum up, going back to OP subject line. You are wrong. You asked |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Commie Pinko Dirtbag (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:29 PM Response to Original message |
16. No, wait, let me guess. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:30 PM Response to Reply #16 |
18. Why must you go for the troll insult? I am serious. And those churchy types say that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Commie Pinko Dirtbag (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:33 PM Response to Reply #18 |
22. I call 'em as I see 'em. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:34 PM Response to Reply #22 |
23. Nor could you satisfactorily answer that one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Commie Pinko Dirtbag (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:42 PM Response to Reply #23 |
32. It had all the answer it merited. -nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:30 PM Response to Original message |
17. Deleted message |
Motown_Johnny (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:31 PM Response to Original message |
20. it is clearly being used as a verb |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:32 PM Response to Reply #20 |
21. Explain how that is clear. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:39 PM Response to Original message |
27. Means "with respect to". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 03:40 PM Response to Reply #27 |
30. OK then, same thing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SanchoPanza (410 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:03 PM Response to Original message |
37. Establishment Clause jurisprudence is pretty clear on these issues. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:11 PM Response to Reply #37 |
40. While I obviously agree with all that, I fail to see why it cannot also |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-27-10 02:14 PM Response to Reply #40 |
80. Who's 'we'? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Subdivisions (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:19 PM Response to Original message |
48. The authors of the U.S. Constitution were very effective with language. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:28 PM Response to Reply #48 |
53. That is what I am trying to ESTABLISH |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xithras (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:28 PM Response to Original message |
54. To understand the intent, you actually need to look at the other writings of the founders. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 04:31 PM Response to Reply #54 |
56. Yes, it becomes clear in the federalist papers, I am trying to make it clear before then. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 05:05 PM Response to Original message |
64. You know what antidisestablishmentarianism is (besides a very long word)? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 05:15 PM Response to Reply #64 |
67. yes, the OF RELIGION qualifier makes it pertain to churches. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-27-10 09:49 AM Response to Reply #67 |
75. This is what is known as the separation of church and state. That's the clause right there. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NoGOPZone (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 05:20 PM Response to Original message |
69. Yes, you're wrong. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WingDinger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 08:20 PM Response to Reply #69 |
74. Another effect of the difference with verb and noun is tense. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Drale (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 05:24 PM Response to Original message |
70. I dont think the tea baggers who want a religious state |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hekate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Oct-26-10 05:55 PM Response to Original message |
71. "Am I all wet?" Well, since you ask... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
McCamy Taylor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-27-10 09:53 AM Response to Original message |
76. Founders definitely wanted no Church of England equivalent here, since state religion |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
warrior1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-27-10 10:05 AM Response to Reply #76 |
77. I wish |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-27-10 12:59 PM Response to Original message |
79. Language fail. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Wed May 01st 2024, 10:23 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC