http://www.sunnetworks.net/~ggarman/breyer.html
[excerpts]
AN ILLUSTRATION OF JUDICIAL INCOMPETENCE--JUSTICE STEPHEN BREYERıS
CONCURRING OPINION IN VAN ORDEN V. PERRY (545 U.S. ___, 2005)
by Gene Garman
Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States are committed by oath or
affirmation to uphold the written words of the Constitution, the supreme
law of the land. They are not authorized to change the words of the
Constitution.
[snip'
The Constitution's religion commandments could not be more clearly or
precisely worded: "religion" is not to be required or established by law,
by Congress, or (thanks to the Fourteenth Amendment) by government at any
level, whether state, county, township, city, or school board. What part of
"religion" does Justice Breyer not understand?
The Jewish Ten Commandments express a religion concept which declares there
is a supernatural God and that that God spoke directly to Moses, a Jew. The
Jewish Ten Commandments monument, as authorized by the state of Texas,
established upon government property which, in this case, includes the
Texas state capitol building, is a religion monument. The wording on the
monument is extracted directly from the Jewish Pentateuch. Even radical
revisionist Justice Rehnquist admitted the obvious in Van Orden: "Of
course, the Ten Commandments are religious" (545 U.S. ). Just as "of
course," Justice Rehnquist rejects the wording of the Constitution's
religion commandments as written. In his mind he conveniently and
fraudulently rewrites the Establishment Clause word "religion" into "a
national religion" (Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 98) and thereby
ignores the actual original and intentional "religion" wording of the
Constitution. See my rebuttal of Justice Rehnquistıs incompetence and
revisionism in Liberty magazine at the following link:
http://www.libertymagazine.org/article/articleview/162/1/41
Justice Breyer is dishonest when he denies the constitutional word
"religion" does not include the Jewish Ten Commandments within the
Establishment Clause prohibition, as any honest Jew, Christian, Muslim,
Buddhist, Hindu, or person of common sense would confirm. The Texas
monument is clearly within the realm and meaning of the word "religion,"
regardless of inclusion of laws relating to social conduct rules common to
many major religions or civil governments in the world. The Constitution
makes no exception to the word "religion," not even if the monument has
been on government property for 40 years without a complaint being filed or
if similar stone engravings appear on the walls of the Supreme Court's
current courtroom in a building which was constructed in 1935, not by or
during the time of the Founding Fathers--what a ridiculous argument for a
Justice of the Supreme Court to make.
The Jewish Ten Commandments monument is within the definition of
"religion," and is related to a specific religion (Judaism). In America,
the Constitution says "religion," which includes all kinds, shall not be
established by law or government. The Constitution of the United States
established a nation wherein citizens of all religions and of none are
welcome, and Texas established religion through government authority, via a
religion monument, in direct violation of the plainly stated wording of the
Constitution. In direct contrast to the common sense of the Texas
plaintiff, Thomas Van Orden, the flaming liberal revisionists, who composed
the majority of Justices in Van Orden, were not strict constructionist
enough to accept the Constitution's wording as written and refused to
recognize the viewable violation.
Justice Breyer established his concurrence upon the false proposition that
"there is no simple and clear measure" by which to determine exactly what
is permissible or not permissible under the Establishment Clause. He also
explained his personal understanding of the First Amendment's religion
commandments by another quote from the concurring opinion of Justices
Goldberg and Harlan, that is, the First Amendmentıs religion clauses "seek
to 'assure the fullest possible scope of religious liberty and tolerance
for all'" (Abington v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 305). These two erroneous
understandings provide the foundation for Justice Breyerıs concurring
opinion.
[smip]
[end excerpts]
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the US and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
