quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

The legislation was filed in response to a lawsuit to stop county commissioners in Rowan County from opening meetings with a Christian prayer, wral.com reported.

Don't let that minor detail of reality stop you from slandering the whole state, sweetie.

Such inconvenience has never stopped bigots before, nor will it likely ever.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

So how soon before they try to re-invoke slavery ? How soon before we see police beating confessions, ALL minorities denied the vote ?

This isn't just about establishing religion. This is about tearing up the bill of rights and the rest of the amends.

A sort of constitutional secession.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

The legislation was filed in response to a lawsuit to stop county commissioners in Rowan County from opening meetings with a Christian prayer, wral.com reported.

Don't let that minor detail of reality stop you from slandering the whole state, sweetie.

Such inconvenience has never stopped bigots before, nor will it likely ever.

Im sorry dearie......That wasnt my opinion, that was in the article.... do you know the difference??? take it up with wral.com ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280

And this is why NC will flip to a Blue state in the near future. The voters have been wavering swing for awhile. With this totalitarian religious crap, it will flip the electorate for good. sure they believe being armed fights tyranny, maybe the people will use them ov

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

then those readers would be wrong now wouldnt they. Im not aware of any rule anywhere that states that every part of a news article had to be checked for validity before posting as a thread?????
Would you show me * in your infinite wisdom* said rule or even inference?
The fact that those pols want to declare a state religion, was the point... not what it was in response to.
Write the editor, or someone who gives a shit what you believe I should verify

quote:

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States... and it goes on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: muhly22222

quote:

The bill says the First Amendment only applies to the federal government and does not stop state governments, local governments and school districts from adopting measures that defy the Constitution. The legislation also says that the Tenth Amendment, which says powers not reserved for the federal government belong to the states, prohibits court rulings that would seek to apply the First Amendment to state and local officials.

This is true. Provided that we're in 1865.

Oh, it's 2013? The 14th Amendment applied most of the provisions in the Bill of Rights to the states (the only ones that haven't been are the quartering of soldiers, the grand jury requirement, and the right to a jury in a civil trial).

Additionally, there's a very old Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review of state laws and court decisions (when they fell within the federal purview). I believe it's Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, and it's a case that came out of Virginia. A very important case, too...can you imagine what the United States would look like if each state was free to disregard whichever laws it felt like? My first instinct is to say...not very united.

And the 10th Amendment? Under current law, it's utterly meaningless. I do have some problem with that...it's a Constitutional Amendment, for fuck's sake. We shouldn't simply ignore it. There are a number of powers that are nowhere in the Constitution that should be left to the individual states to take the solution that they feel best fits their needs (regulating health care, for one), and the state can deal with the consequences of their decisions in those areas.

As for this proposal...without knowing very much about North Carolina politics, I'd imagine that it was just done for posturing. Those 9 legislators can go home in 2014 or 2016 (or whenever their next election is) and tell their constituents "We tried. The atheists stopped us from protecting your religious rights." And they'll probably be re-elected. I know that if my local state representative tried something like that, they'd get re-elected (though not with my vote).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

then those readers would be wrong now wouldnt they. Im not aware of any rule anywhere that states that every part of a news article had to be checked for validity before posting as a thread?????
Would you show me * in your infinite wisdom* said rule or even inference?
The fact that those pols want to declare a state religion, was the point... not what it was in response to.
Write the editor, or someone who gives a shit what you believe I should verify

I never questioned the validity of your particular assertion, nor that of those who wrote the article.

Perhaps I'm being too 'sensitive' here, but NC is the best state I've lived in, even knowing there are better places to inhabit. The people of the NE or MW are the most intolerable on earth, and I cannot thank the gods enough for that avoidance in my upbringing.

You are right to call out the religionists, and religionism wherever it may pop up.

But look again at the title of the OP.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

LOL, the fuckin teabaggers are inept and hilarious at the same instant.  Thats why we are never gonna let these people run this country.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

On the 10th, we don't simply ignore it... Where in the Constitution does the authority to create a police department appear? It doesn't, they didn't exist at that time, and are among those things reserved to the states.

Thanks to the 'states rights' extremists though, the 10th does have a pretty shabby reputation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: muhly22222

quote:

The bill says the First Amendment only applies to the federal government and does not stop state governments, local governments and school districts from adopting measures that defy the Constitution. The legislation also says that the Tenth Amendment, which says powers not reserved for the federal government belong to the states, prohibits court rulings that would seek to apply the First Amendment to state and local officials.

This is true. Provided that we're in 1865.

Oh, it's 2013? The 14th Amendment applied most of the provisions in the Bill of Rights to the states (the only ones that haven't been are the quartering of soldiers, the grand jury requirement, and the right to a jury in a civil trial).

Additionally, there's a very old Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review of state laws and court decisions (when they fell within the federal purview). I believe it's Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, and it's a case that came out of Virginia. A very important case, too...can you imagine what the United States would look like if each state was free to disregard whichever laws it felt like? My first instinct is to say...not very united.

And the 10th Amendment? Under current law, it's utterly meaningless. I do have some problem with that...it's a Constitutional Amendment, for fuck's sake. We shouldn't simply ignore it. There are a number of powers that are nowhere in the Constitution that should be left to the individual states to take the solution that they feel best fits their needs (regulating health care, for one), and the state can deal with the consequences of their decisions in those areas.

As for this proposal...without knowing very much about North Carolina politics, I'd imagine that it was just done for posturing. Those 9 legislators can go home in 2014 or 2016 (or whenever their next election is) and tell their constituents "We tried. The atheists stopped us from protecting your religious rights." And they'll probably be re-elected. I know that if my local state representative tried something like that, they'd get re-elected (though not with my vote).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
The bill says the First Amendment only applies to the federal government and does not stop state governments, local governments and school districts from adopting measures that defy the Constitution. The legislation also says that the Tenth Amendment, which says powers not reserved for the federal government belong to the states, prohibits court rulings that would seek to apply the First Amendment to state and local officials.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
The bill says the First Amendment only applies to the federal government and does not stop state governments, local governments and school districts from adopting measures that defy the Constitution. The legislation also says that the Tenth Amendment, which says powers not reserved for the federal government belong to the states, prohibits court rulings that would seek to apply the First Amendment to state and local officials.

The first amendment does clearly say "Congress" - it doesn't mention the states. The tenth amendment is pretty straight forward. While I strongly disagree with this legislation and feel it defies the spirit of the first amendment it does not appear to violate it. Whether that holds up in court remains to be seen. I find it ironic that the first amendment would bar state and local governments from violating it while the second amendment is not afforded the same protections. If you are going to disallow this new law in NC you must also declare all of the gun control laws (like the new one in Connecticut) invalid, as well... unless double standard is one of your fetishes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280

And this is why NC will flip to a Blue state in the near future. The voters have been wavering swing for awhile. With this totalitarian religious crap, it will flip the electorate for good. sure they believe being armed fights tyranny, maybe the people will use them ov

NC has voted for D governors more often than R governors in this generation, last election aside. NC was an electoral vote for Obama the first time around, 1% shy of the mark in the latest. Jesse Helms was repeatedly elected by an incessant flood of money from residents from 'blue' states

Bubba Democrats are all over the place in NC.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280

And this is why NC will flip to a Blue state in the near future. The voters have been wavering swing for awhile. With this totalitarian religious crap, it will flip the electorate for good. sure they believe being armed fights tyranny, maybe the people will use them ov

NC has voted for D governors more often than R governors in this generation, last election aside. NC was an electoral vote for Obama the first time around, 1% shy of the mark in the latest. Jesse Helms was repeatedly elected by an incessant flood of money from residents from 'blue' states

Bubba Democrats are all over the place in NC.

Sure was funny seeing Helms' home draped with a huge condom.

As for why he was repeatedly re-elected.... moral majority. The bible thumpers from all over the south kept him in office.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

When the elected official government of the state introduces official documentation to accomplish something, it is standard grammar to use the name of the state followed by a verb.

quote:

It is understood as matter of common sense that not every single person in the state is doing (or even supporting) the action.