The second part of my look at the recent decision that declared the federal law establishing the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional. Links: 1. Freedom from Religion Foundation, et al. v. Obama and Gibbs www.wiwd.uscourts.gov 2. Lemon v. Kurtzman scholar.google.com 3. Christian activist Tony Perkins talking about the National Day of Prayer (from JesusSavesAtCitibanks channel here on YouTube) www.youtube.com 4. Engel v. Vitale scholar.google.com 5. Marsh v. Chambers scholar.google.com 6. Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York scholar.google.com 7. Part 1 of this video www.youtube.com 8. For a classic example of the ignorance of constitutional law that “informs” opposition to this ruling, have a look at the following video by a YouTuber who calls himself TheMoralNation: www.youtube.com
Employee Time Clock HP Support IP Address Lookup Coralgables Roofing Company Speed Test PMP Training Body Bands Pinecrest Roofing Company
@Radetzky19 Thanks! And welcome to the channel.
This video was awesome! Good Work! I am going to subscribe to your channel.
@dcjhrj “you make a great argument to stop funding israel.”
Nothing I’ve said here applies to U.S. aid to Israel.
you make a great argument to stop funding israel. israel is a state funded religion. seperation of temple and state is a good start. seperation of secularism and state would be a good idea too..
@ihateirony Aetheismo does not require prayer like other Gods. He has the self confidence that other Gods lack, and so doesn’t need the reassurance of the masses.
@disrxt “Brilliant exposition, thanks.”
Thank *you*.
“Please reconsider your position on this! Join us God haters, we meet on Thursdays behind the SCOTUS.”
LOL. I appreciate the invitation.
Despite the obvious unconstitutional nature of the Nat’l Day of Prayer I fear that it will remain in effect as will the ‘Under God’ in the pledge and the rest . I do not have confidence that our courts will be courageous enough to invalidate it. Brilliant exposition, thanks.
From the comments to the first part was dismayed to learn you do not detest religion. Please reconsider your position on this! Join us God haters, we meet on Thursdays behind the SCOTUS.
@spiminator Thanks a lot!
Brilliant video!!!
What if we get them to pray to Aetheismo?
@ProfMTH Thank you! ummm forgive my typo…
“…act of learning more about this.”
@thedeeliciousplum I’m glad you found it helpful.
Wow! Wonderful. Your video not only provides us with a much needed overview of the issue, yet it provides us with names, references and such for each one of us to do the honourable act of leaning more about this important issue.
@ProfMTH I am sorry about that. Every time I hit Post, YouTube gave me an error message. Seriously, I didn’t mean for that to happen.
@furtim1 “Sorry if this posts twice….”
Twice? It and several other of your comments posted about six times each. Come on. Give it a bit of a rest.
Calling it the Establishment Clause gives bases to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that people understand the law to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”.
Calling it the Establishment Clause gives bases to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that people understand the law to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”.
@ProfMTH The application of this term to the 1st Amendment gives bases to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it is a coincidence that most people understand the amendment to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”.
@furtim1 The application of this term to the 1st Amendment gives basis to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it is a coincidence that most people understand the amendment to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”. Sorry if this posts twice, seem to have upload errors on my end.
@furtim1 The application of this term to the 1st Amendment gives basis to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it is a coincidence that most people understand the amendment to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”. Sorry if this posts twice, seem to have upload errors on my end.
@furtim1 The application of this term to the 1st Amendment gives basis to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it is a coincidence that most people understand the amendment to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”. Sorry if this posts twice, seem to have upload errors on my end.
@ProfMTH With this in mind, you suggest we accept the term, without so much as comment, even though it directly contributes to the gross misunderstanding of the Amendment because it does not do us well to point out widespread fundamental flaws? I disagree wholeheartedly and am surprised, given your other videos, that you would accept such a misconception because it has a history.
@ProfMTH Thanks. The application of this term to the 1st Amendment gives bases to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it is a coincidence that most people understand the amendment to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”.
@ProfMTH Thanks. The application of this term to the 1st Amendment gives bases to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it is a coincidence that most people understand the amendment to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”.
@ProfMTH Thanks. The application of this term to the 1st Amendment gives bases to those who seek to do everything just short of establishing a state religion. Like I said, it makes it seem as though establishment was the prohibition instead of laws respecting any religion. I don’t think it is a coincidence that most people understand the amendment to prohibit establishment and we refer to it as the “establishment clause”.