FishingBanter - View Single Post

rw · March 12th, 2006, 07:59 PM posted to rec.outdoors.fishing.fly

Fiddleaway wrote:
wrote

And just what do you think they meant, on that Fifteenth Day of December
in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety one, when
they said, right out of the starting gate, "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof..."

I think it's pretty clear there is a disagreement about what they meant.
I'm also pretty sure that after all the arguments are in and the dust
settles the disagreement won't be resolved. That's why we have a Supreme
Court. And they've made an interpretation about what was meant, which is
what they've been charged to do. It could be overturned ... or not. It
won't stop the losing side from ****ing and moaning about how badly the SC
misinterpreted language whose intent is obvious to all but the severly
obtuse.

The First Amendment, and in particular the Establishment Clause,
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,"
is very clear and unambiguous. Compared to the Second Amendment, with
its "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free
state, ...", the Establishment Clause is a model of clarity.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.