Which law was that?
Is it that hard for people to express their opinions with qualifiers like “I think”, “I believe”, or simply IMO?
Flat-out declarations of “facts” without cites are ridiculous in a debate forum.
Anyone who is capable of reading simple text can see that Congress did exactly what the constitution says they can’t. The contradiction between the Establishment Clause and the 1955 law putting religious text on the currency is what backs me up.
You obviously do not agree, but you aren’t actually arguing against me, just making noises.
To add: I’ve never denied that this is “my opinion.” The Supreme Court has issued “their opinion” and that’s the one that has weight in force of law.
(Except when a clerk in Georgia says it doesn’t…)
A clerk in Georgia? What are you talking about?
Kentucky, too.
Oops, you failed to add one of the magic phrases. Your last sentence should have been:
- I think flat-out declarations of “facts” without cites are ridiculous in a debate forum;
- I beleive flat-out declarations of “facts” without cites are ridiculous in a debate forum; or
- IMO, flat-out declarations of “facts” without cites are ridiculous in a debate forum.
Please be considerate of all the people in this forum who, according to you and Bricker, are just plain too stupid to be able to tell the difference between a fact and an opinion.
Of course if it’s a factual statement…cite?
By your cite, 8% of the U.S. population, apparently, so 25 million? What’s the threshold for “a great many” ?
It can be both an establishment of religion and constitutional as a matter of law, since law is an arbitrary construct not undone by internal contradiction.
Of course the real problem is the U.S. Constitution is a “broad stroke” document, laying out guidelines in text that occasionally border on the poetic. If “judicial activism” is a serious concern, the solution is to deny the judiciary the necessary wiggle room by rewriting the clauses in far greater detail. Take the lead from Alabama on this one: their state constitution is about 40 times longer than the federal one, and really gets into the nitty-gritty of governance. Plus it gets amended, like, a lot so you know it’s heavily responsive to the will of the people and must be super democratic as a result.
Yes, Alabama… beacon of freedom since [del]1819[/del] [del]1861[/del] [del]1865[/del] [del]1868[/del] [del]1875[/del] 1901.
I didn’t ask you, I asked Triponus, who has so far failed to respond.
I was adding to Trinopus’s statement, not answering your question.
Post 143.
ETA: Also post 144.
Which clerk in Georgia?
Yes, Trinopus, answer the IMPORTANT question! Eyes on the prize!
Opinions trump facts, right?
They do? News to me.
You tell me. What is he on about a clerk in Georgia?
I don’t know what specific case he is referencing but it wouldn’t shock me to hear a clerk in Georgia defied a SCOTUS ruling.
Or, he’s completely wrong, which is more likely than not.
I don’t have enough data to predict a probability, nor enough personal bias against Trinopus to want him to be wrong.
He’s wrong, but let’s see if he answers, or if he runs away.