What is REALLY meant by the commonly used phrase, "wall of separation?" Likely, its not what you think.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. First Amendment - The Bill of Rights…
Article comments
26 - Joe
MD- I've always been intrigued by the sources of your expertise in so many areas, would you care to share your credentials with the rest of us?
27 - Mac Diva
Joe, would you care to write a blog item that is longer than three sentences?
For the record, I worked as a print journalist for several years. Then I went to law school, mainly because of interest in communications law. There, I developed a strong interest in constitutional law in general. I did the billable hours shuffle at law firms for a time, then returned to journalism as a legal correspondent. I now write and teach full-time.
28 - Joe
Hey, I really don't want to get into any size issues you may have, I was just asking a question. Good answer, though, believable, yet not provable.
29 - Mac Diva
Oh, so you're small. According to the emails I'm bombarded with, there are . . . remedies.
Actually, I wanted to add a comment after watching tonight's news. It reminded me that the David Flanagans of the world are not the only people who do sloppy research. There was an episode about home owners who have dogs deemed dangerous being charged more for insurance. The reporter and anchor went out of their way to tout the alleged unfairness of the practice, calling it canine racism. They pointed out that all dogs are capable of biting people. That is true. But, half of fatal dogbites each year are by Rottweilers or pit bulls, a proportion that may be mirrored in serious, non-fatal bites. So, it makes sense to charge more to insure families that own them. I actually find poor reasoning in a news story more aggravating than nonsense blathered in the blogosphere because it reaches more people. The notion I am just critical of Right Wing zealots who try to blog is inaccurate.
30 - BB
And the notion that I am foolish and blind is also inaccurate (at least to a point according to my wife). Sorry for the short exegesis but I am also a man of few (but poignant) words.
31 - Mark Saleski
MD- I've always been intrigued by the sources of your expertise in so many areas, would you care to share your credentials with the rest of us?
i'll let you all in on a little secret...shhhhh...
MD is actually GOD.
that should clear things up.
;-)
32 - David Flanagan
Flanagan straight (though he doesn't realize it) I haven't had to go into my usual establishment of religion spiel.
I'm sorry Mac, did I say something that bothered you? I'm asking you to please go ahead and go into your usual establishment speal. I'd love to hear it. That was my point before and I'll ask again; if you have something to add, please do so. Ad hominem attacks do nothing to show your knowledge of a topic so, if you have some knowledge, share it.
Thanks.
David Flanagan
33 - David Flanagan
Mac,
You are priceless. :-) And the love you show me makes me feel very special. :-) I teach at the college level as well, though my primary job is in the corporate world.
The fact is, everyone in this country should be debating the constitution. I respect anyone who is willing to come back at me and show me where I'm wrong, because, in the end, if I am wrong, then I learn from it.
I'm sorry that you haven't really taken any time to try and educate me, you are too busy trying to desperately elevate yourself above me for some reason that I have yet to fathom. If that is your need, then more power to you.
As for my points above, you haven't answered a single one, though, you have disparaged most everyone who has posted comments... Oh, and Thomas Jefferson as well. Quite a record.
What can I say... Another friend made. ;-)
David Flanagan