Supreme Court

[neurosis]

I have noticed on social media, literally everyone has become a constitutional scholar and expert in constitutional law over night.  

[YoDoug]

Clearly you do not understand Chevron deference. Having been a firearms owner for decades, alphabet soup has been pointing THAT gun at us since inception. Making up rules and regulations that were NEVER supposed to be part of their jobs, but since when has that stopped them.

The abomination that was Chevron deference is the big gov abuse. SCOTUS killing it was a win for making congress do their fuckin' job instead of forcing agencies and the idiots they hire that are accountable to no one and judges legislating from the bench doing it. 

A broken clock is right twice a day. One good ruling does not make up for all the times Barret and Kavanaugh have sided with the libs and protected big gov. 

[CNCAppsJames]

I have noticed on social media, literally everyone has become a constitutional scholar and expert in constitutional law over night.  

One does not have to be a "Constitutional Scholar" to be able to read and understand. The founding fathers made things simple.

The 1st Amendment has no "wall of separation" between church and state, it merely means there will be no "Church of the USA" unlike England Church of England. SCOTUS took an out of context passage from a Thomas Jefferson letter to a friend and legislated that shit ruling from the bench. It says "freedom OF religion" not freedom FROM religion. It doesn't take a scholar to figure that out.

The 2nd Amendment, illiterate types like to point to the "regulation" part of the Amendment to try to shove gun control down our throats. The problem with that is "regulation" did not mean like rules and regulations in the 1700's. It meant something COMPLETELY unrelated to that, but it takes getting hold of a "fringe document" like a Websters 1st Edition Dictionary to know that. That's not constitutional scholarship, that's just learning how to read.

Are there times where constitutional scholarship are necessary? Yes. We live in a complicated world today and not every situation is precisely covered by an amendment like firearms and the right to decorate a cake in a way that honors his God, or not.

States Rights SHOULD be a thing. New Yorkers the VAST MAJORITY of whom will never step foot in other places should NOT  be telling Utahans or Texans how to live their life or what to do with their public lands. It says so right in the 10th Amendment.  But the Fed and other more populous states have been trampling on other states for over 100 years now so the majority are just used to it and are OK with it. I am not. It doesn't take constitutional scholarship to believe the founders got it right.

SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia once wrote "... the Constitution says what it says, and doesn't say what it doesn't say...". That says it all. It doesn't take constitutional scholarship to understand that, it just takes a 4th grade reading level to understand that.

Son, I first read the US Constitution in the summer between my 3rd grade and 4th grade year. I spent that summer with my grandparents in a camper traveling all across the USA. We hit 32 states plus Washington DC. My Grandfather was a huge history Buff. It was then I was introduced to the Constitution, The Federalist Papers, and Common Sense by Thomas Paine. Hardly overnight. Been reading that stuff ever since. Could I be a lawyer? Hell no. A man's got to know his limitations. Can I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that gun control laws like the NFA are an abomination to the Constitution? Yes. It says so right in the Amendment, in plain English... "shall not be infringed". Even a 3rd grader can understand that.

[neurosis]

One does not have to be a "Constitutional Scholar" to be able to read and understand. The founding fathers made things simple. 

I'm responding before reading the rest of your post but I'll explain why I said that. Nearly every lawmaker I've seen interviewed in the last 24 hours said that they're going to have to pick apart the recent ruling to determine the implications of it moving forward, yet on social media, everyone seems to think they already know. I find that a little odd.

[neurosis]

The 1st Amendment has no "wall of separation" between church and state, it merely means there will be no "Church of the USA" unlike England Church of England. SCOTUS took an out of context passage from a Thomas Jefferson letter to a friend and legislated that shit ruling from the bench. It says "freedom OF religion" not freedom FROM religion. It doesn't take a scholar to figure that out. 

I do have one question but keep in mind that I'm not sure what the implication is here? Is it that it is constitutional to force religious beliefs on to US citizens, regardless of their own religion? I see that quote being used a lot lately and it's typically from the religious right.

[CNCAppsJames]

The lawmakers job is TO make things difficult. It takes the common man to set the legislator straight whe he or she tells the Alphabet soup to fuck right off with your unconstitutional bullshit.

They've (congress) become so conditioned to giving deference to these agencies that they don't even think any more. This was a HUGE pimp slap to them and they are reeling. 

Me, I'm like fuck yeah! Bout time you lazy bastards actually did your fuckin jobs.

[CNCAppsJames]

I do have one question but keep in mind that I'm not sure what the implication is here? Is it that it is constitutional to force religious beliefs on to US citizens, regardless of their own religion? I see that quote being used a lot lately and it's typically from the religious right.

No, that's the thing. Practice a religion or don't.  But NEVER trample upon someone else's right to do so. 

The problem comes when one has deeply held beliefs, you don't share those beliefs, then you want me to do something counter to my beliefs. 

That said, just because a belief was derived from a religious source, does not make it inherently religious nor is it forcing you to worship. 

[neurosis]

No, that's the thing. Practice a religion or don't.  But NEVER trample upon someone else's right to do so.

The problem comes when one has deeply held beliefs, you don't share those beliefs, then you want me to do something counter to my beliefs.

That said, just because a belief was derived from a religious source, does not make it inherently religious nor is it forcing you to worship.

So an example, the case of forcing a christian to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple? Or firing the high school foot ball coach for praying before or after the games.     Those are things that, even as an atheist, I would agree with you on.

[CNCAppsJames]

So an example, the case of forcing a christian to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple? Or firing the high school foot ball coach for praying before or after the games.    Those are things that, even as an atheist, I would agree with you on.

Exactly. The most extreme freedom "from" religion campers are against any and all religious references in the public square, then the polar opposite are the religious zealots like Westboro Baptists. I personally find BOTH camps abhorrent.

[CNCAppsJames]

Took a little longer for the resident illiterate to show up than I thought. Welcome to the party Smit For Brains. You learn how to read a dictionary yet? Asking for a friend.



You cannot view this attachment.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Jim at Gentex]

Exactly. The most extreme freedom "from" religion campers are against any and all religious references in the public square, then the polar opposite are the religious zealots like Westboro Baptists. I personally find BOTH camps abhorrent.

Couldn't agree more.
I will give you a great example...

Around 20 years ago, a couple of guys who graduated from a Christian bible college in our area decided to start a local church plant.  As the core group began to grow, they needed a place to call home.  There was plenty of unused space available in a county-owned former school building that was in a perfect location for them, so they approached the County Commissioners for approval to rent part of the building.  The request was approved and they moved in, with a month-to-month rental agreement rather than a lease. They proved to be great tenants, paying their rent on time and in full every single month they were there, and also taking care of things like minor plumbing and electrical repairs themselves, rather that billing the county, and they gladly accepted periodic rent increases over the years without complaint.

Fast forward to 2023, the church received a terse letter from the County Commissioners informing them they had 60 days to vacate the premises, with no explanation.  Apparently someone had heartburn about the county renting space to a religious group, so they summarily kicked them out.  At the time they received the letter, they were faithfully paying $1600 per month rent and keeping the place in great condition, but that didn't matter.

Since they had to scramble to find a new location, they asked for an extension and were given an additional 30 days.  Thankfully, the leadership and members of my church offered to share our building with them until such time as they can find a more permanent home, so they have been with us since January.  Their previous space in the county building sits empty, and the county apparently has no plans to fill it in the near future.

All that to say that our county is missing out on a guaranteed $1600 / mo rent for space they aren't even using because religion. 

[gcode]

All that to say that our county is missing out on a guaranteed $1600 / mo rent for space they aren't even using because religion  hate .

fixed that for you

[Smit]

Welcome to the party Smit For Brains.

Thanks Nutboy.

I wouldn't miss your nutty rants for anything! They're always the high point to my day.

[gcode]

I wouldn't miss your nutty rants for anything! They're always the high point to my day.

simple pleasures for simple minds
don't forget your weekly donation to the Biden campaign... he's running low on Depends

[Incogneeto]

Thanks Nutboy.

I wouldn't miss your nutty rants for anything! They're always the high point to my day.

I thought it was Nutboi?