Submitted by mickeywhite on Mon, 2012-06-04 11:07.
States can establish Churches, and some did before and AFTER the constituiton was ratified.The only mention, is CONGRESS shall pass NO Law. (it doesn't mention the states). Also we can have State libel and slander laws via 10th amenment.
Submitted by Mark Rogers on Thu, 2012-05-31 14:14.
Matt,
"Is it any wonder the People are upset?"
One suspects that the 'People' would be more upset to discover that you are presuming to speak for them.
What does Senator Overby say that isn't true? Nothing.
You cannot go around making the argument that the Courts are wrong just because they disagree with you. That is why we have a process for amending the Constitution and not 'rule by Matt.'
Submitted by Matt Collins on Fri, 2012-06-01 09:31.
Just because a judge (or group of judges) proclaims something doesn't in fact make it true; especially if it's obviously counter to the plain-English words in a constitution.
Submitted by Matt Collins on Fri, 2012-06-01 17:18.
Actually the Constitution as written is the law superceding both the Courts and the Legislature. And in this case, lawyers claiming the Constittion says one thing when it actually doesn't is inconsequential; not to mention an outright lie.
Submitted by Mark Rogers on Sun, 2012-06-03 12:01.
Despite what is commonly said to the contrary, we are a nation of men, not laws. The tradition, custom and ideas that shape both men and laws matter more because even the best laws are meaningess without men who will execute them justly.
States can establish
States can establish Churches, and some did before and AFTER the constituiton was ratified.The only mention, is CONGRESS shall pass NO Law. (it doesn't mention the states).
Also we can have State libel and slander laws via 10th amenment.
Matt, "Is it any wonder the
Matt,
"Is it any wonder the People are upset?"
One suspects that the 'People' would be more upset to discover that you are presuming to speak for them.
What does Senator Overby say that isn't true? Nothing.
You cannot go around making the argument that the Courts are wrong just because they disagree with you. That is why we have a process for amending the Constitution and not 'rule by Matt.'
Just because a judge (or
Just because a judge (or group of judges) proclaims something doesn't in fact make it true; especially if it's obviously counter to the plain-English words in a constitution.
Matt, But it does make it the
Matt,
But it does make it the law. So Senator Overby is correct.
Actually the Constitution as
Actually the Constitution as written is the law superceding both the Courts and the Legislature. And in this case, lawyers claiming the Constittion says one thing when it actually doesn't is inconsequential; not to mention an outright lie.
Fine Matt. You want to have
Fine Matt. You want to have everyone running around living by their reading of the Constitution.
There can be no libel or slander laws as those would represent infingements of freedom of speech.
Individual states could restrict the vote from women or from non-property owners.
States could have Established Churches. For example, Maryland could favor Catholics. Massachusetts could favor Puritans {or these days Paganism}.
States could have debtors' prisons.
Wow, would we be better off.
Rule of law is paramount.
Rule of law is paramount.
Despite what is commonly said
Despite what is commonly said to the contrary, we are a nation of men, not laws. The tradition, custom and ideas that shape both men and laws matter more because even the best laws are meaningess without men who will execute them justly.
Strange, I always thought
Strange, I always thought that the Legislature Made the Laws...
Video of Sen Overbey telling
Video of Sen Overbey telling legislators to ignore the Constitution:
http://tncampaignforliberty.org/wordpress/2011/09/tn-republican-senator-...
Is it any wonder the People are upset?