RE: [DMCForum] Bush
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [DMCForum] Bush
- From: "Katon, Robert" <robert.katon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 21:54:27 -0400
unless, Robert, his faith interferes with my beliefs. That would
mean that my government is imposing its religious values on
me.................LP
Not so. Legislators can only legislate within the confines of the Constitution which protect you from state sponsored religion. Your argument is that every vote has the impact to create a state sponsored religion??? When debate arises over issues like say...partial birth abortion, it ok for a legislator to consider his religious values to determine his position. Of course in doing so, they risk alienating his constituency they are supposed to represent. This is the conundrum of politicians. Do they stand for their beliefs or represent a simple majority of their constituency. I believe that the framers had a balance in mind with the knowledge that a representative that failed to regularly reflect the will of their constituency would be replaced by someone who did. In your case, with someone that reflected your values (or lack therof, whichever the case may be) But if a legislator votes no on something like partial birth abortion because of their religious beliefs, keep in mind that their religion is not imposed on you and chances are pretty darn good that he is representing half of his constituency.
The notion of seperation of church and state was meant only to prohibit government from establishing a religion. It wasn't written to protect everybody's delicate religious sensibilities. It's perfectly Constitutional for legislators to pass legislation that completely offends you.....just as it is to pass it that offends your opponents. It works both ways.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor |
ADVERTISEMENT
| |
|
Yahoo! Groups Links
Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN