Maher on Christmas & Republicans Recanting the Separation of Church and State.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Can you site the part of the constitution that restricts the concept of "religion" to specific churches?  You underestimate the wisdom of the founders.  They didn't think in the same picayune manner that you apparently do.

Address what "inquiry"?

 

 

I can scroll up to the question I presented, the part where you interjected, and are now flailing about with irrelevance.

[Aufan59 62]

22 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

You mean the words that protect religion (and no other manner of belief)? 

I find this point interesting, especially in the context about the Satanic Temple.

 

There are thousands of religions, and we can agree between 0 and 1 of them are true.  The rest, 99.9+% are made up, only limited by human imagination.

All beliefs are protected, what manner of belief is not protected?

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 hours ago, Aufan59 said:

I find this point interesting, especially in the context about the Satanic Temple.

 

There are thousands of religions, and we can agree between 0 and 1 of them are true.  The rest, 99.9+% are made up, only limited by human imagination.

All beliefs are protected, what manner of belief is not protected?

 

What was the understanding of “religion” at the time the Constitution was ratified? Did it include Satanism?

But of course, if you think we should just look to the ether when deciding what the Constitution means, my questions won’t amount to a hill of beans for you. 

[Aufan59 62]

6 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

What was the understanding of “religion” at the time the Constitution was ratified? Did it include Satanism?

But of course, if you think we should just look to the ether when deciding what the Constitution means, my questions won’t amount to a hill of beans for you. 

Freedom of religion is not bound by the founders understanding of religion.  It is only bound by human imagination, by definition.  Mormonism hadn’t even been invented at the time of the founding, for example.  

If by Satanism you mean The Satanic Temple, it certainly is within the scope of what the founders would have considered a religion.  It relies on logical reasoning rather than the supernatural, which is not a long walk away from deism.

 

But I’m curious, what manners of belief  are not protected by the first amendment?

 

 

Edited December 21, 2023 by Aufan59

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

4 hours ago, Aufan59 said:

Freedom of religion is not bound by the founders understanding of religion.  It is only bound by human imagination, by definition.

Then there you have it. You want a constitutional right to worship satan? Just “imagine” it into the constitution and there you go! What a reliable interpretive method. This is akin to virtually every “new right” the Warren Court declared under the guise of “substantive due process,” ie, sodomy, gay marriage, abortion, etc. 

 

4 hours ago, Aufan59 said:

Mormonism hadn’t even been invented at the time of the founding, for example.

Okay? You either didn’t understand my comment or you’re giving a tortured spin on it. This is like saying the first amendment doesn’t protect private letters on parchment paper (which isn’t “speech” and isn’t “press”). I’m sure you’re a fan of the Carpenter case. 
 

4 hours ago, Aufan59 said:

If by Satanism you mean The Satanic Temple, it certainly is within the scope of what the founders would have considered a religion.  It relies on logical reasoning rather than the supernatural, which is not a long walk away from deism.

 

But I’m curious, what manners of belief  are not protected by the first amendment?

Again, you’re putting your own tortured spin on what I said. My point was not that the first amendment does not protect other manners of belief. Rather, religion - and only religion - is the only manner of belief it expressly mentions. Again, the whole point goes back to my initial contention at the start of this thread. Read it.

Edited December 21, 2023 by NolaAuTiger

[Aufan59 62]

33 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Then there you have it. You want a constitutional right to worship satan? Just “imagine” it into the constitution and there you go! What a reliable interpretive method. This is akin to virtually every “new right” the Warren Court declared under the guise of “substantive due process,” ie, sodomy, gay marriage, abortion, etc. 

There already is a right to worship Satan.  No imagination necessary.  To cut through the fluff, do you not agree that we have a constitutional right to worship Satan?  

[homersapien 11,373]

On 12/20/2023 at 2:45 PM, NolaAuTiger said:

Undermining basic founding principles by contending the Framers didn’t maintain a separationist view and citing facts supporting my position? 
😂😂😂😂

If so, why did they approve the first amendment as written?

[homersapien 11,373]

On 12/20/2023 at 10:31 PM, NolaAuTiger said:

What was the understanding of “religion” at the time the Constitution was ratified? Did it include Satanism?

But of course, if you think we should just look to the ether when deciding what the Constitution means, my questions won’t amount to a hill of beans for you. 

So, presumably you'd be OK with re-interpreting the intentions of the 2nd amendment strictly within the perspective of what the founders understood at the time regarding "arms" and their perceived need for a "well regulated militia"?

 

[homersapien 11,373]

On 12/21/2023 at 9:48 AM, Aufan59 said:

There already is a right to worship Satan.  No imagination necessary.  To cut through the fluff, do you not agree that we have a constitutional right to worship Satan?  

Clearly, he believes there is no constitutional right do so, otherwise, he presumably wouldn't be arguing against it.

[Aufan59 62]

9 hours ago, homersapien said:

Clearly, he believes there is no constitutional right do so, otherwise, he presumably wouldn't be arguing against it.

I presumed a misunderstanding, I had no idea such people existed.

[homersapien 11,373]

On 12/22/2023 at 11:14 PM, Aufan59 said:

I presumed a misunderstanding, I had no idea such people existed.

Stick around.