Absurdity! Church Authority over State

[gr8fuldaniel]

OMG, I remember when I was young and fearless. Those days are long gone, now:

Daily Kos I'm talking about "The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004"...the [Bushies] in Washington are pushing a law through Congress that would "acknowledge God as the sovereign source of law, liberty [and] government" in the United States. What's more, it would forbid all legal challenges to government officials who use the power of the state to enforce their own view of "God's sovereign authority." Any judge who dared even hear such a challenge could be removed from office. The "Constitution Restoration Act of 2004" is no joke; it was introduced last month by some of the Bush Regime's most powerful Congressional sycophants. If enacted, it will effectively transform the American republic into a theocracy, where the arbitrary dictates of a "higher power" -- as interpreted by a judge, policeman, bureaucrat or president -- can override the rule of law.

Have you guys known about this? How come nobody told me?

(Edit to fix quote)

[Starboy]

Since when has this govenment given a shit about the rule of law or the Constitution. All the faith based initiative stuff is also ilegal. It's backhanded endorsement of creationism, its disregard of gays as citizens the same as everyone else. We are becoming the Taliban that we think we defeated in Afghanistan.

Starboy

PS - What people do not understand is that this is not the first time that religion has tried to make a grab for the reigns of power. The country figured out how to get around it and adopted the phrase, god and country. Apparently that was not enough. Now it will be god over country.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Why do we have to find out this stuff from Moscow?

The Moscow Times Pin Heads If enacted, the Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States into a theocracy, where the arbitrary dictates of a "higher power" can override law. By Chris Floyd Published: March 12, 2004 One of the sticking points in crafting the just-signed "interim constitution" of the Pentagon cash cow formerly known as Iraq was the question of acknowledging Islam as the fundamental source of law. After much wrangling, a fudge was worked out that cites the Koran as a fundamental source of legal authority, with the proviso that no law can be passed that conflicts with Islam. We in the enlightened West smile at such theocratic quibbling, of course: Imagine, national leaders insisting that a modern state be governed solely by divine authority! Governments guaranteeing the right of religious extremists to impose their views on society! What next -- debates about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Oh, those poor, ignorant barbarians in Babylon! Well, wipe that smile off your face. For even now, the ignorant barbarians in Washington are pushing a law through Congress that would "acknowledge God as the sovereign source of law, liberty [and] government" in the United States. What's more, it would forbid all legal challenges to government officials who use the power of the state to enforce their own view of "God's sovereign authority." Any judge who dared even hear such a challenge could be removed from office.

Read the rest of the article to find out about The Dominionists who want to bring back public stonings of offenders of Gods Law. Nice. Building a bridge to the 1st century.
Here is a link to the actual bill: "The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004"

[gr8fuldaniel]

What scares me is not that God would actually be in charge..........But that it would be mass murderers interpretation of God that would claim sovereign rule.

I should have included this part (The Moscow Times article above):

The Act ("The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004") -- drafted by a minion of television evangelist Pat Robertson -- is the fruit of decades of work by a group of extremists known broadly as "Dominionists." Their openly expressed aim is to establish "biblical rule" over every aspect of society -- placing "the state, the school, the arts and sciences, law, economics, and every other sphere under Christ the King." Or as Attorney General John Ashcroft -- the nation's chief law enforcement officer -- has often proclaimed: "America has no king but Jesus!" According to Dominionist literature, "biblical rule" means execution -- preferably by stoning -- of homosexuals and other "revelers in licentiousness"; massive tax cuts for the rich (because "wealth is a mark of God's favor"); the elimination of government programs to alleviate poverty and sickness (because these depend on "confiscation of wealth"); and enslavement for debtors. No legal challenges to "God's order" will be allowed. And because this order is divinely ordained, the "elect" can use any means necessary to establish it, including deception, subversion, even violence. As Robertson himself adjures the faithful: "Zealous men force their way in." Again, this is no tiny band of cranks meeting in some basement in Alabama, as recent reports by investigators Karen Yurica and David Neiwert make clear. The Dominionists are bankrolled and directed by deep-pocketed, well-connected business moguls and political operatives who have engineered a takeover of the Republican Party and are now at the heart of the U.S. government. They've made common cause with the "American Empire" faction -- Cheney, Rumsfeld, the neo-conservatives -- who seek "full-spectrum dominance" over the globe. The Dominionists provide money and domestic political muscle for the Dominators' imperial ambitions; in return, the Dominators provide a practical vehicle -- overwhelming military might and state power -- for making the Dominionists' dreams a reality.

I did a google on Dominionists, to find this: The American Global Inquisition on The Axis of Logic website. Its a good read.

[argonak]

looks to me to be some strange idea posed by some extremists rather than any "Bush Regime" idea.

rather like the proposals by some democrats last year to start up the draft and specifically target college graduates.

both sides have some pretty crazy extremists. and i don't see why businessmen would desire a theocracy. they're ussuallly the some of the first guys on the hit list.

[bishop]

god cannot be a legitimate source of law unless we were to ammend the constitution.

i don't see that happening any time soon. and this law clearly violates the constitution - so i'd expect it to be overturned by the supreme court.

[Starboy]

Sure, sure. It is just a bunch of cranks. And our president is just kidding and in the past election all those voters saying that moral values were their top priority, that didn't mean a thing. Thanks for pointing that out to me. I can relax now.

Starboy

[ericsp23]

Originally posted by bishop, god cannot be a legitimate source of law unless we were to ammend the constitution. i don't see that happening any time soon. and this law clearly violates the constitution - so i'd expect it to be overturned by the supreme court.

I agree Bishop, but that is assuming that the SC does its job. As it stands now, I think they would, but I don't know if we can count on that in the future, after Bush stacks the court with more partisans like Scalia and Thomas as he is sure to do.

[Starboy]

Originally posted by bishop, god cannot be a legitimate source of law unless we were to ammend the constitution. i don't see that happening any time soon. and this law clearly violates the constitution - so i'd expect it to be overturned by the supreme court.

Assuming the SC stays as it is. But with three or four new Bush judges who can say? In any case when that happens the fun will really begin because it is not as if there is actually one god. Not as far as all the so called Christians see it.

Starboy

[bishop]

i dunno... anything's possible, but it's hard to say how acknowledging god as a sovereign source of law doesn't violate the constitution..

the republicans have a majority, but democrats still have the power to filibuster.. plus, i would think that there are a lot of republicans, particularly those from blue states, who wouldn't support such legislation..

all guesses, but i'm hoping that we don't travel down this dark path.

[Starboy]

Originally posted by bishop, i dunno... anything's possible, but it's hard to say how acknowledging god as a sovereign source of law doesn't violate the constitution.. the republicans have a majority, but democrats still have the power to filibuster.. plus, i would think that there are a lot of republicans, particularly those from blue states, who wouldn't support such legislation.. all guesses, but i'm hoping that we don't travel down this dark path.

Are you kidding. Have you listened to the Christian rights interpretation of the first amendmant:

Teaching the First Amendment - There is nothing in the Constitution about separation of church and state. It doesn't exist. This is a fiction that has been created by courts over the last few years, and, as Jefferson said, by allowing them to interpret the Constitution we have become under the tyranny of an oligarchy. That's why we're praying that three of those judges will be led by God to step down, those liberals, so we can have three conservatives who will interpret the Constitution, not try to rewrite it.

The game is afoot.

Starboy

[bishop]

what i'm saying is that not all republicans side with the christian right.. true, it's an increasingly growing influence, but i'm holding out hope (what else can i do at this point) that moderates will grow some backbone.

[Starboy]

As far as I can tell the Christian right owns the republican party.

Starboy

[PatrickHenry]

There is another side to this story: http://www.morallaw.org/Text/Q&A.htm

In 1952, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Zorach v. Clauson that, “We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a belief in a Supreme Being.” During the last fifty years, federal courts have excluded prayers in public schools, Ten Commandments in public buildings, manger scenes at Christmas, and even the Pledge of Allegiance in school classrooms. Even as late as 1984, the United States Supreme Court struck down a state statute in Alabama which allowed a moment of silence “or voluntary prayer.” These examples have one thing in common: “the acknowledgment of God.” The CRA would restore our right to acknowledge God and stop the ACLU and other liberal groups from bringing frivolous suits simply because they are “offended” because there is a God and a higher law. Our children would be free to pray before eating lunch in their schools, public officials would be free to acknowledge the God upon Whom they take their oath, and the moral basis of our law regarding marriage could not be altered by judicial activism.

[Starboy]

Our kids can already pray in school. They just can't make everyone else pray while they are doing it.

Starboy

[bullshitdetector]

The source of this information is a conspiracy theorist website, official news analysis? Just another nugget of hyper conspiracy that will never come to fruition that will be debunked simply by it never evolving into reality that gr8 will challenge everyone to prove doesn't exist despite the obvious.

[Rainbow]

"The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004...the [Bushies] in Washington are pushing a law through Congress that would "acknowledge God as the sovereign source of law, liberty [and] government" in the United States.

I want to remind all interested that this (or very similar) quote was the Court's decision on New York's blackout, in 1976 (correct me if I wrong with this date, please).
Otherwise, billion of dollars was about to be paid for upcoming (and expected) lawsuits.

[Starboy]

So what lawsuits was this act supposed to address?

Starboy

[Rainbow]

Starboy

No lawsuits.

[Technosoul]

Fine and dandy.

But each judge would have to attend four years at some bible collage and get certified, and they must prove that God is acting through them by performing at least one miricle.

Otherwise they must turn in their judges "robe". That goes for all them political lawmakers also.

Then we can follow Moses to the Promised Land ... with the same results.

Technosoul.