Falasin2005-06-15 16:34:48
QUOTE(Silvanus @ Jun 15 2005, 04:53 AM)
slave trade was illegal ever since America was founded (it didn't have the power to stop smuggling yet, that was UK's job, which it failed at... stupid Abeerden Act not working). What they did allow was whoever was a slave is still a slave (that wasn't an amendment either).
138736
Funny, I didn't realize America was founded in 1808.
Erion2005-06-15 18:12:11
QUOTE(Falasin @ Jun 15 2005, 12:34 PM)
Funny, I didn't realize America was founded in 1808.
138847
Slave trade was illegal - however, the law was not enforced until a pre-determined date. And even then, slavery was legal, and the buying of selling of slaves was legal, only the transportation of slaves to this country from another was illegal.
Erion2005-06-15 18:16:59
QUOTE(Silvanus @ Jun 14 2005, 07:27 PM)
State and religion - You've obviously never read the Bill of Rights. It says, nowhere, anywhere in the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, or the Declaration of Independence that there is a separation between Church and State. It does say, that there is a freedom of religion, to take an exact quote where it does mention religion: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," (Amendment I). Anyone see where it says "Separation between Church and State"?
138647
I don't know if anyone pointed this out, but, as you just quoted, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" has been interpreted by very reservist judges to mean, very bluntly, if a law was created based on religious morals (RE: Gay Marriage, Abortion), without having some form of proof beyond "This book, written several hundred years after this guy died who we think is the son of some diety, information passed by word-of-mouth, says it's wrong" would be considered "respecting an establishment of religion".
There's quite a few court cases involved in this, as well - I can dig 'em up for you, if you honestly care that much. And, activist, reservist, it doesn't matter. Supreme and Federal Court rulings are essentially law - if the S.C. says in a majority rule that Church and State are seperate, as such was the INTENT of the law, then it is such. It doesn't need to be in the Constitution itself, as it is very bad judicial ethics to go against previous rulings - and actually wrong to go against S.C. rulings.
Erion2005-06-15 18:19:47
QUOTE(Silvanus @ Jun 14 2005, 04:15 PM)
If I was ever President, my first act would be too remove the "Freedom of the Press" in the Bill of Rights.
138561
Pity it would never be passed - the Republicans know one of their greatest assets is the conservative media. And one of their overwhelming opponents is the liberal media, on that token.
At any rate, Congress would never, ever back it. And it's pretty rare for an extreme right-wing president to have a likewise extreme right-wing Congress majority - and it would just be fillibustered in the Senate anyway. By fatcat reactionaries and radicals.
