Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 106

Thread: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

  1. #71
    Sage
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    East Coast - USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:15 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    15,561

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    What exactly does declaring an official state religion mean?

    The state vegetable is the sweet potato. So? As far as I know you can eat sweet potatoes in North Carolina.

    What would a state religion mean? Besides a whole bunch of nothing.

  2. #72
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    Because a state has need to define how its government will function like any other government and if they want to include rights of citizens that's their choice, but just because they exist doesn't mean they override the Federal Constitution. The Constitution is a hard document to read and to know exactly what it means, the Supreme Court says busy for a reason, I provided an exactly of the 4th amendment and why for that amendment to mean anything you need a court to rule on it.
    well i stated BOR, not its operating constitution, governments dont, grant, include, dispense rights at all, they exist only to affirm what is self evident.

    the court stays busy, because the federal government is far outside the constitution, and doing things never intended for them to do, that is why they are so busy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    All law requires a ruling body to determine when and how it has been violated, the Constitution is law and describes itself as such when it says its the Supreme Law of the Land, and therefore the Constitution like all other laws falls under the purview of the courts and the courts have their own hierarchy that ends at the SCOTUS. If there was no court that could say when the Constitution had been violated it would be a worthless document.
    the constitution of the founders gave no authority to the federal government over the people or the states, its directly only at them, people have rights under their state constitution which mimics with the federal one, and if rights are violated, the person takes it to the courts of a state, if justice cannot be had because of the bias of a state which is also trying the case, then you can see justice in a federal court.

    one thing to remember, a constitution is written for governments... not the people, ...people cannot violate the u.s. constitution...its not possible......any action a person would take would be criminal law
    Last edited by Master PO; 04-03-13 at 05:43 PM.

  3. #73
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    This isn't in contradiction to the Constitution. As much as I would oppose such a measure (it's bad for religion), it is within the State Powers to declare a State Church. At the time of the Signing of the Constitution, for example, several states had their own respective state churches, and kept them for years.
    Incorporation of the Bill of Rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Quote Originally Posted by From the article
    The incorporation of the Bill of Rights (or incorporation for short) is the process by which American courts have applied portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights to the states. Prior to the 1890s, the Bill of Rights was held only to apply to the federal government. Under the incorporation doctrine, most provisions of the Bill of Rights now also apply to the state and local governments, by virtue of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  4. #74
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    I'm not advocating their proliferation, merely pointing out that it is legal to pass laws based on "religious doctrine alone" - but where needed, it's quite easy to come up with some sort of secular rationalization to help make the case - things like "respecting tradition" or "acknowledging the history of our nation" etc.
    I'm not saying that they can't pass these laws, merely that these laws are unjust.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #75
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    I'm just saying the founding fathers had different opinions on the matter, personally I like Hamilton's because its a much more piratical perspective. Thomas Jefferson may sound nice but to implement what he's proposing wouldn't be practical and wouldn't turn out well.
    Scholars have had conflicting views on the matter since Marbury vs. Madison. Although the overwhelming majority supports the idea of judicial review, I think that saying a view to the contrary is "just flat out wrong and clearly unconstitutional" goes a bit too far. Although it's highly unlikely that something like Marbury vs. Madison would be significantly altered (much less overturned) - it's important to understand that judicial review is not an explicit power granted by the Constitution.

    And, when you really think about it, this power that the Supreme Court has granted itself continues only because the executive branch allows it to continue. They are the only one to enforce the law, and it's not that difficult to argue against a decision that essentially says "we have interpreted the Constitution to say that we are the ones who interpret what the Constitution says."

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    If there was no court that could say when the Constitution had been violated it would be a worthless document.
    That's not what's being argued - the alternative would be that the courts in each State would decide for themselves - i.e. a much more democratic form of governance.

  6. #76
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    well i stated BOR, not its operating constitution, governments dont, grant, include, dispense rights at all, they exist only to affirm what is self evident.

    the court stays busy, because the federal government is far outside the constitution, and doing things never intended for them to do, that is why they are so busy.

    the constitution of the founders gave no authority to the federal government over the people or the states, its directly only at them, people are supposed to have rights under their state constitution which mimics with the federal one, and if rights are violated, the person takes it to the courts of a state, if justice cannot be had because of the bias of a state which is also trying the case, then you can see justice in a federal court.

    one thing to remember, a constitution is written for governments... not the people, ...people cannot violate the u.s. constitution...its not possible......any action a person would take would be criminal law
    I'm not really sure what you're getting at, but back to the original topic. North Carolina has no right to establish a state religion, regardless of what its own laws or state Constitution says, its been ruled that way in Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court has every legal authority to determine what the Constitution means.

    And the Constitution does give the Federal government authority over the people and the states, that's the very purpose of government to begin with. Just read the Supremacy Clause
    This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
    It quite clearly says the Laws of the United States are the Supreme Law of the land, that means that when a state and Federal law is in conflict the Federal law wins, every time, all the time, unless the court rules that the Federal law in question violates the Constitution in some way.

    Let me ask you, without the courts to rule on the Constitution who would determine when it was violated? Or if as an individual if I thought my constitutional rights had been violated what recourse would I have if I couldnt go to a court?

  7. #77
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by ReformCollege View Post
    Let's make Buddhism the national religion
    I think we should all abide by the Necronomicon.

    ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

    CTHULHU FHTAGN!
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  8. #78
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I'm not saying that they can't pass these laws, merely that these laws are unjust.
    To me it's a bit potato-potahto - why should secular laws be any more just? It matters not where the law came from, it only matters whether or not the law makes sense. Are laws that come from "religious doctrine" inherently more dangerous than those that come from liberal doctrine, conservative doctrine, fascist doctrine, libertarian doctrine, socialist doctrine...

    Not being able to buy beer on Sundays annoys me far less than the 30-40% of my income I give away to support all sorts of social doctrine that I think is utterly idiotic.

  9. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Scholars have had conflicting views on the matter since Marbury vs. Madison. Although the overwhelming majority supports the idea of judicial review, I think that saying a view to the contrary is "just flat out wrong and clearly unconstitutional" goes a bit too far. Although it's highly unlikely that something like Marbury vs. Madison would be significantly altered (much less overturned) - it's important to understand that judicial review is not an explicit power granted by the Constitution.

    And, when you really think about it, this power that the Supreme Court has granted itself continues only because the executive branch allows it to continue. They are the only one to enforce the law, and it's not that difficult to argue against a decision that essentially says "we have interpreted the Constitution to say that we are the ones who interpret what the Constitution says."


    That's not what's being argued - the alternative would be that the courts in each State would decide for themselves - i.e. a much more democratic form of governance.
    Personally I think its quite clearly granted in the Constitution, but I agree its not spelled out word for word, and not only is it granted but it would be impractical for the system of laws in this country to work without a supreme body of some kind.

    Your idea of each state determining what is and is not constitutional for example wouldn't work at all, it would leave the Federal Government with no authority of its own and thus no ability to keep the country together. How could a country exist when the states would determine which Federal Laws to follow and which to not follow? It would be like a society where individuals could decide which laws to follow and which to not follow. A powerless Federal Government was attempted under the Articles of Confederation and it failed. And it failed because it couldn't even fund itself through taxes, the states each individually had to decided if they wanted to give money to support the government and as a result the government could hardly function because unsurprisingly most states and their legislators didn't want to pay taxes. Did each state have more authority? Yes. Did the system as a whole work? No.

    And you would remove the ability of the Supreme Court to have made some of the greatest examples of civil rights achievements in this country's history, things from desegregation to allow inter racial marriages would not exist for everyone equally in this country if it weren't for the ability of the SCOTUS to force the states into line with the Federal Government.

  10. #80
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: North Carolina May Declare Official State Religion Under New Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    I'm not really sure what you're getting at, but back to the original topic. North Carolina has no right to establish a state religion, regardless of what its own laws or state Constitution says, its been ruled that way in Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court has every legal authority to determine what the Constitution means.

    And the Constitution does give the Federal government authority over the people and the states, that's the very purpose of government to begin with. Just read the Supremacy Clause
    your not reading my statements thoroughly enough, the founders never gave the federal government ANY authority over the people or the states, the purpose of the government is to fulfill it 18 duties, and secure the rights of the people only. the supremacy clause is were there is a conflict of law, meaning if the state and the federal laws collide then the federal one is supreme, its grants no added authority to government.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    Let me ask you, without the courts to rule on the Constitution who would determine when it was violated? Or if as an individual if I thought my constitutional rights had been violated what recourse would I have if I couldnt go to a court?
    the USSC is to make it decisions based on what the words of the constitution says, and its says "congress shall make no law concerning religion"...a state is not congress, that is self evident.

    if your rights are violated then it has to be by a government, a person or business, cannot violate RIGHTS...BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE CRIMINAL LAW.....by a state violation, you would go through the state court system, if you believe you not getting justice, because you fighting the state in the case, and the state is also trying the case, ...you can take it to federal ,so their is no bias in the case..........the founders state it wrong for an arbitrator to try his own case...

    you dont have constitutional rights, the constitution does not grant the people any rights, they just affirm the natural rights you have, which are self- evident......thus rights are not granted by the constitution...they are just again affirmed, the BOR cannot be repealed ...as stated by the founders, and rights are unalienable.

    this is why people get confused, the some think government grants rights, and some think the constitution grants rights, and both are wrong.........the founders just stated people have these rights which are theirs by birth, and government do not infringe on them.
    Last edited by Master PO; 04-03-13 at 06:20 PM.

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •