Any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government. (Emphasis added. Full text here)So what does that mean? It means (deep breath) that someone’s interpretation of the Bible will trump the US constitution and federal law. Always wanted to burn witches? Kill homosexuals? Sell your children into slavery? Well, thanks to this bill, you can, and the US justice system can’t do anything about it. They’d be dismissed for even considering it! In fact, you can break any law you care to, so long as you can find a justification for it in Leviticus.
Goodbye, American Republic. Goodbye, Bill of Rights. We’ll miss you. I am completely serious about this, by the way. This bill is death to all our naive secular notions of freedom and the law.
And chances are looking pretty good that this monstrosity to pass. The CRA already has 28 sponsors in the House and Senate, and Sen. Shelby’s office claims ‘we have the votes’. And why not? The Religious Right owns the Republican Party lock, stock, and barrel. 45 senators and 186 representatives get 80-100 ratings from the Christian Coalition. There’s no democracy in the Bible; so far as they’re concerned this whole sham of ‘elections’ has just been a prelude to the re-establishment of Christendom.
When I’m getting dragged off to the Re-education Camp for Socialist Heathens, I’ll know who to blame.
6 comments:
I agree that this bill is ill-conceived and that it doesn't hold up to the standard of a secular American republic that was the ideal of our Founding Fathers. But I wouldn't be so paranoid about the potential of it actually passing in Congress - most members probably realize that, despite the influence of the religious right, Americans do not want their personal liberties curtailed or morality defined for them.
And PLEASE do not lump the entire Republican Party into one Bible-thumping, gay-bashing mold. There are many who are secular but believe in other party tenets; there are those who maintain personal religious beliefs but do not want to impose them on America. I'm sure many Republican advocates of individual rights are as troubled by this bill as you are. Don't cast every member of or sympathizer with the Republican Party as overjoyed at the potential Christianization of American public life.
I'm sure there are secular elements in the Republican party; they just have no voice and no power and don't seem to have any representatives in Congress.
Well I like this part...
'In interpreting and applying the Constitution of the United States, a court of the United States may not rely upon any constitution, law, administrative rule, Executive order, directive, policy, judicial decision, or any other action of any foreign state or international organization or agency, other than English constitutional and common law up to the time of the adoption of the Constitution of the United States.'
This is obviously something most of us don't want. Nothing scares the left more than when the religious right tries to legislate by pushing their morals on all of us. Yet the courts have done the same for the left for years, without any such legislative act.
It is just as egregious for the court to allow something carte blanche because of a religious standing as it is for them to disallow something for a non-religious standing, and vice versa.
In other words, consistency demands that we are as scornful of the courts legalization of sodomy, as if they would have went the other way. Sodomy, or any other social issue for that matter, is not the item here. On a personal note, I am against sodomy laws because they are absurd and cannot be enforced. I am still appalled that the court decided to rule on this matter, because the Constitution gives them no such privelege.
When it comes down to it, the people should be allowed to decide for themselves what laws they wish to govern them. Judges should determine the Constitutionality of the case, and that is all. A personal belief in God will influence a person's moral structure, but to give a belief in God a higher hand, is while perhaps noble, not something our Constition considers.
As an aside, I do not think this law will pass, and if it does, the Court will either strike it down or ignore it.
I've always said we cannot legislate morality, but it's evident some factions will persist in trying.
I wish I had Smiling Neocon's optimism about the sense and sensibilities of members of Congress. *sigh*
The first part of this bill is troubling to me, because I'd rather see culture change and then laws change instead of laws that try to change culture. As good as laws are (not that I'm saying this bill is good), people's hearts are the most important aspect of culture.
On another note, hasn't the Democratic party been taken over by the pro-abortion folks? the Dems wouldn't even let "Democrats for Life" have any access to the national convention, and there are few pro-life democrat representatives in D.C. that I know of. At least the Republicans have Arnold. :)
Post a Comment