Liberal Decision?
 

The court ruling about the phrase "under God" is being called a liberal decision made by the court.

The ususal conservative position is a strict adherence to the Constitution.

Our fore fathers, apparently, intentionally left the word God out of the constitution and went one step further.

The First Admendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

It seems to me that a strict adherence to the constitution would not allow the phrase "under God", or the word God to be used in the making of any law in congress. The words were added in 1954 by an act of congress. Which seems to me to be in violation of the 1st Admendment.

Some argue that because Creator/God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence this would allow the use of the word God.

The Delcaration of Independence is a separate document, independent of the constitution, was written prior to the writing of the constitution, and is not the law of the land as is the constitution.


Question:

How can this be called a liberal decision when the decision seems to be in strict adherence to the Constitution?

Which judge said it was a liberal decision?

i think it's interpreted as a liberal decision because traditionally the republicans are the bible toting bunch whereas the democrats have less of a religious motive.

the more religious conservatives will willingly sacrafice the constitution to appease their religious followers/voters.

A Judge did not say it is a liberal decision. All of the conservatives in congress are calling it a liberal decision. The media is calling it a liberal decision. The Christian Right leaders are calling it a liberal decision.

Conservatives usually demand a strict adherence to the constitution, which is one of the reasons they are called conservatives.

Don't even bother, Pathfinder.

The Religious nuts are also trying to blame the Democrats in the senate for this because they won't push through Bush's extremist activist judge nominees. First, the Republicans blocked many of Clinton's judges for 8 years. Second, the Senate is not supposed to just approve judges, they are supposed to reject judges that they don't like, that's the whole point of checks and balances in government. Third, the judge who wrote the decision was appointed by conservative Republican President Richard Nixon.

Right wingers are always the victims. Victims of Bill Clinton, victims of liberals, victims of minorities, victims of judges, victims of this, victims of that. Light a candle for a right wing extremists tonight. They've been victimized yet again. :)

I just can't believe how much the justice system is influenced by the religious groups. Its fucking sad.

it could be worse. you could live in michigan.

Wow, thats bad.

"Land of the free"....not anymore.

The Christian Right is blaming liberalism as a scapegoat because they aren't getting what they want. For anyone to not understand why people don't want God in the Pledge would have to be pretty damn well ignorant.

It was my understanding that conservatives are called conservatives because they like to conserve, imagine that. They don't like or want change. Everything should stay the same.

The liberals are just the opposite. They like and want change, working towards the better good. Which obviously doesn't always happen.

Personally, I like a happy medium. It doesn't really matter to me whether or not I see God on money or in the Pledge, but I do understand the viewpoints of each party.

Almost unbelievable.

Both parties suck. Just admit it. Everyone needs to stop clinging to their party lifeline and accept that their party sucks just as much as the other one.

*pisses on both main parties*

amen.

I am waiting for the Rahowa.

Why am I not surprised? :)

Funny.

Damn straight brotha FAT.

You had to know somethin' like this was gonna happen. Just usin' the terrorism thing to take away yet more of our rights.

It's hard for me to understand how you can get enough
state congress men/women to agree on something like this.

Surely they don't think this will fly with the Supreme Court.
I hope the shit it doesn't...

I was under the impression, most of these people were college
educated... congress men/women

Ok I got it... that's the problem... Educated..... because a dam moron wouldn't sign that in to law.. Man this stupid shit just keeps on keeping on happening.

Just about as bad... our good X-Governer of California... when he was still in office..

Well not really even close... but an example of stupidity at one of the higher level's and this guy ran for president of the United States. Pete Wilson

The Temp.. forfeiture law was coming up... to make it permanent... the Mercury News
San Jose found out there was all kinds of BIG time abuse going on with the police Dept.'s across the whole state.... The TEMP law was not doing what it was suppose to do
catch the BIG drug dealers... Instead they printed one horror story after another of poor people loosing the stuff going to jail and not able to file the papers with the 10 days.... They were in jail and poor....

There was no accountability with the police Dept.'s..... Even after all these horror stories in the paper..... Our Good Governor of California said BUT WE NEED THAT MONEY... When I read
that I almost fell out of my chair...

Cops abusing their privilages? C'mon! That just can't be.