Bible Party of the USA

One example of the falacy of your statement: The Judicial branch makes laws every day.

you, conveniently, misunderstood me...

I'll try again

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

means that congressmen can't make any laws respecting an establishment of religion. The only people who would attempt to make such laws are lawmakers with a religious agenda, hence my saying "tell the church to stay out of the government" remark

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA

the judicial branch doesn't make any laws, they set legal precedents and determine the validity of laws made by the Legislative Branch, which is the only government body who can radify bills which are then signed into law.

The Executive branch can submit bills to be considered and veto ratified bills. Other then a Veto overturn the Executive branch is the only power which can sign a bill into law.

The Judicial branch can consider current laws against the Constitution and overturn any law which violates the higher law (the constitution). But it cannot submit bills for consideration nor veto a ratified bill, nor sign it into law. Only consider ,overturn, or uphold...

you may want to educate yourself on how checks and balances work, I would suggest that "The Bible Party of the USA" is by it's name, a concept which violates the Constitution.

We are perpetuating the same argument that's been going on since before the document's ink began to dry. This line was to preclude government from establishing a state religion.

The Bible Party is not designed to create a state religion. To say so is quite a leap.

The judicial branch has a type of line item veto. They change laws by eliminating portions of laws as unconstitutional. They do not always throw out the whole law. This process creates a law different from those passed by the leg branch and signed into law by the exec. If they say something like evangelizing is unconstitutional, they are making a law that prohibits evangelizing. To me, that means they make laws.

wait but just a second ago you said they made laws? are you back peddling?

So what, no state religion, just laws passed ...any anything and everything the Bible is against because it is wrong by biblical standards?

how is that not a state religion?

nice attempt

it's different because it's legally a law when the court does it

sort of a government buyers remorse

in some cases laws are on the books for years before they're stricken down, and people are punished for not obeying them during that time period.

in the event of a veto it never becomes law, there is no "legal exposure" to the public

it's actually very different

it's not making a law it's removing one and that is different

let me brake it down for you in elementary speak

-=+ ?

no

Originally stated by Silverchild79 "Congress shall make no law with respect to Religion"

that equals no religious laws and no laws based on religion by the Constitution.

how exactly is that not separation of church and state?

Thomas Jefferson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While the debate over Jefferson's understanding over the separation of Church and state is far from being settled, as are his particular religious tenets, his dependence on divine Providence is not nearly as ambiguous. As he stated, in his second inaugural address:

“ I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their native land and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life; who has covered our infancy with His providence and our riper years with His wisdom and power, and to whose goodness I ask you to join in supplications with me that He will so enlighten the minds of your servants, guide their councils, and prosper their measures that whatsoever they do shall result in your good, and shall secure to you the peace, friendship, and approbation of all nations ”