- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 66,330
- Reaction score
- 47,309
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
halfheimersGood grief. Are you senile?
the government makes loans and guarantees loans to third parties. when it does so, it stipulates that the borrower must comply with all federal laws, such as AA and EEO. note that the private borrower is not directly bound by the provisions of the Constitution/Bill of Rights but has agreed to be bound as provided by the government as a condition for the loan/guarantyYOU CLAIMED that 'third parties' contracted by the Federal government were bound by the Constitution. I informed you that only the government is bound by the Constitution.
would the subsidy to the care facility not bear a similar obligation to be compliant with federal expectations?
do you want your words in my signature back then?Of course the Constitution "applies to individuals",
the federal government is not able to bypass its Constitutional obligations by funding third party activities that violate the Constitution/Bill of Rights. that would be a transparent circumvention of the Constitutional provisionsBUT only insofar as it restricts what the government may do to them, but that's NOT what you said; you said 'third parties' contracted by the government are bound by the Constitution; that is NOT true; the Constitution does not place restrictions on private parties, only government.
nope. a prayer was invoked before the group simultaneous with the seating for the meal. that public prayer constituted a preference for a particular religion at that federally subsidized meal. such preference defies the provisions of the first amendmentThey were FORCED to sit through a prayer, really!? You mean to say that Senior Citizens Inc. kidnapped these old people from their homes and chained them to a chair whilst a group prayer was said?
i am responding to the original articleThat's funny, since no one materially involved with this subsidy actually agrees with your position.
Not Senior Citizens Inc., not the Port Wentworth municipal government, not the Georgia state government, and not the Federal government.
It's almost like you have some information that no one else in the United States of America is privy to; would you care to share this information with the rest of us? I'm dying to see what it is.
do you know that the care facility has not agreed to amend its invocation such that it is no longer out of federal compliance? when i managed a federal portfolio of clients who benefitted from federal funds, when they were found to be out of compliance we revised the manner in which they operated to assure compliance. and if they were unable or unwilling, then they were made to return the federal funds
tell me what your experience has been