[Vision2020] Intoleristas

[Glenn Schwaller]

I will submit that your definition of what is applicable or not is
pretty narrow and inflexible (not to mention plain wrong in my humble
opinion).  Let's hope I don't get in some kind of legal jam and need
you as an attorney to argue Constitutional law to the judge on my
behalf.

GS

On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Sunil Ramalingam
<sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:
> No, Glenns, this just means that your 'interpretation' is different from
> that which is applicable.
>
> Sunil
>
>> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:50:49 -0800
>> From: vpschwaller at gmail.com
>> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Intoleristas
>>
>> Tem Moffett refers to "a basic US Constitutional principle, the
>> separation of church and state." Hmmm . . . I wasn't aware this was
>> a basic US Constitutional principle. This idea is nothing more than
>> complete metaphorical misrepresentation of the basic premise of the
>> establishment clause, "Congress shall make no law respecting an
>> establishment of religion. . ."
>>
>> This has become a major distortion thanks to the "interpretation" of
>> laws (and in many instance the out and out making of laws) by the
>> liberal side of the Supreme Court. The establishment clause was
>> designed to prevent the establishment of a "state religion", not
>> Christian Theism. As a result of the Supreme Court's work, we are
>> witnessing the gradual obliteration of Christian Theism and the
>> establishment of laws promoting humanism as a "state religion".
>>
>> Is this not exactly what the establishment clause in our constitution
>> was intended to prevent? The Constitution is now allowing the
>> government to force "nonconformists" to accept and live by "humanism".
>> A definite turnabout of the true nature of our First Amendment
>> rights.
>>
>> GS
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> Paul wrote:
>> >> I thought Doug and Dale had
>> >> libertarian tendencies. I would have thought they would be as much
>> >> against gaming the system as I am, because it props up those who are by
>> >> definition unworthy of being at the top.
>> >>
>> >
>> > This could spark a long debate and likely one that has been played out
>> > time
>> > and again on the viz as well as both Dale's and Doug's sites especially
>> > on
>> > the topic of 501c3 non-profits and downtown parking where Doug claims
>> > 'religious persecution by Interolistas' if anyone delves into the
>> > validity
>> > of these entities - specifically that they are not operating in manner
>> > that
>> > is 'gaming the system'.
>> >
>> > Doug and Dale do have libertarian leanings and want less to no
>> > government
>> > except for the most personal of personal issues (abortion, birth
>> > control,
>> > premarital sex, homosexuality, etc.) where they want a police state to
>> > intervene and prevent whatever they deem as 'sinful'.
>> >
>> > BTW, I consider you a middle of the roader like me who is probably just
>> > as
>> > critical of the extreme left as you are of the extreme right. Your
>> > writings
>> > typically make logical sense to me.
>> >
>> > -Scott
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > Windows Live Hotmail now works up to 70% faster. Sign up today.
>> > =======================================================
>> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> > http://www.fsr.net
>> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> > =======================================================
>> >
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>