The Briefing Room
General Category => Immigration/Border => Topic started by: rangerrebew on November 19, 2017, 01:39:57 pm
-
Atheist seeking US citizenship sues to remove 'So Help Me God' from oath
The French national claims the words breaches the Bill of Rights
Tuesday 14 November 2017 15:02 GMT
Ms Perrier-Bilbo claims what is being asked of her is against the US Constitution
A French woman seeking to become a US citizen, has filed a lawsuit to remove the phrase “So help me God” from the oath of citizenship because she is an atheist.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8054241.html
-
Or you could just not become a citizen. Au revoir.
-
Or you could just not become a citizen. Au revoir.
She'd probably feel more at home in Quebec anyway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIH-J3uLN3E
-
Or you could just not become a citizen. Au revoir.
:thumbsup2:
-
Or you could just not become a citizen. Au revoir.
Well said.
Nothing like trying to get citizenship and making demands at the same time.
-
Or the U.S. could respect the separation between Church and State and remove the reference to God from the oath of citizenship.
-
Or the U.S. could respect the separation between Church and State and remove the reference to God from the oath of citizenship.
Perhaps you might care to expound?
Because I can't find 'God' in the 1st Amendment.
Which is because Original Intent separated God from the Official Recognition - by Govt - of God from a State sponsored Religion.
Jefferson is generally credited with the often deliberately misinterpreted position that Govt. may not recognize God.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States
Separation of church and state in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Separation of church and state" is paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson and used by others in expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
The phrase "separation between church & state" is generally traced to a January 1, 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Jefferson wrote,
“ "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."[1] ”
Jefferson was echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams who had written in 1644,
“ "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world." ”
Article Six of the United States Constitution also specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
Jefferson's metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Reynolds v. United States (1879) the Court wrote that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment." In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."[2]
In contrast to separationism, the Supreme Court of the United States in Zorach v. Clauson upheld accommodationism, holding that the nation's "institutions presuppose a Supreme Being" and that government recognition of God does not constitute the establishment of a state church as the Constitution's authors intended to prohibit.[3][4] As such, the Court has not always interpreted the constitutional principle as absolute, and the proper extent of separation between government and religion in the U.S. remains an ongoing subject of impassioned debate.[5][6][7][8]
Religion is a codified set of beliefs and practice of worship, either by individuals, churches, or Govt.
God is not.
-
Atheist seeking US citizenship sues to remove 'So Help Me God' from oath
The French national claims the words breaches the Bill of Rights
Tuesday 14 November 2017 15:02 GMT
Ms Perrier-Bilbo claims what is being asked of her is against the US Constitution
A French woman seeking to become a US citizen, has filed a lawsuit to remove the phrase “So help me God” from the oath of citizenship because she is an atheist.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8054241.html
Where?
Which Amendment?
Has this person ever even Read our Bill of Rights?
-
Too bad. Accept it or go back home idiot!
-
Or you could just not become a citizen. Au revoir.
I'm cool with, "Bye, Felicia!"
-
Perhaps you might care to expound?
Because I can't find 'God' in the 1st Amendment.
Which is because Original Intent separated God from the Official Recognition - by Govt - of God from a State sponsored Religion.
Jefferson is generally credited with the often deliberately misinterpreted position that Govt. may not recognize God.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States
Separation of church and state in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Separation of church and state" is paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson and used by others in expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
The phrase "separation between church & state" is generally traced to a January 1, 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Jefferson wrote,
“ "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."[1] ”
Jefferson was echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams who had written in 1644,
“ "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world." ”
Article Six of the United States Constitution also specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
Jefferson's metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Reynolds v. United States (1879) the Court wrote that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment." In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."[2]
In contrast to separationism, the Supreme Court of the United States in Zorach v. Clauson upheld accommodationism, holding that the nation's "institutions presuppose a Supreme Being" and that government recognition of God does not constitute the establishment of a state church as the Constitution's authors intended to prohibit.[3][4] As such, the Court has not always interpreted the constitutional principle as absolute, and the proper extent of separation between government and religion in the U.S. remains an ongoing subject of impassioned debate.[5][6][7][8]
Religion is a codified set of beliefs and practice of worship, either by individuals, churches, or Govt.
God is not.
/snicker
If its not such a big deal, then lets change it to Allah in the oath.
-
/snicker
If its not such a big deal, then lets change it to Allah in the oath.
Glad to see you can find the quote button.
(https://g1.dcdn.lt/images/pix/watch-out-for-trolls-67583514.jpg)
But you'd be better served by having read it instead of just quoting it.
Suppose it serves me right. For feeding a troll.
-
Glad to see you can find the quote button.
(https://g1.dcdn.lt/images/pix/watch-out-for-trolls-67583514.jpg)
But you'd be better served by having read it instead of just quoting it.
Suppose it serves me right. For feeding a troll.
You didn't have anything to say that didn't boil down to a desire to have your particular religion made federal law. Trolling a religious bigot is fine with me.
-
You didn't have anything to say that didn't boil down to a desire to have your particular religion made federal law. Trolling a religious bigot is fine with me.
With over 42,000 posts here you've had plenty of opportunity to understand Original Intent and you persist in dropping one liners that completely ignore it.
I could continue to explain it to you but as you've already demonstrated, amply, you either Can't read it, or can't condescend to read it.
It's gotta be tough for you, I mean, with the Trump/Putin Bromance backfiring and now the kerosene on the torches the Roy Moore Lynch Mob is carrying turning out to be water, . . .
And calling me a Religious Bigot, . . . that's the icing on the cake after I gave the Never Trump Bible Thumpers Hell for citing the Commandments of the The Lord, (as written down and rewritten by I don't know How many Interpreters over the Millennia) as their justification for going 3rd Party or sitting out the election, Because, the ME, MYSELF, and I of their Immortal Soul meant more to their Lofty Moralizing than the Living Hell on earth an HRC Presidency would leave the kids coming down the road after I'm dead and gone.
Thanks for making my point for me. A Religious Bigot. Ah HAH, HAH, HAH!
I'm screen capturing this and bookmarking this. It's that good.
So the next time you pee on my leg, out of turn and out of place,
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/01/20/15/27F0CAA600000578-0-image-a-4_1453304513554.jpg)
-
You didn't have anything to say that didn't boil down to a desire to have your particular religion made federal law. Trolling a religious bigot is fine with me.
Since I'm a 'Religious Bigot', would you mind terribly, telling me just What Religion It Is I desire to have Made Federal Law?