politicartoons | (no subject)

(no subject)

According to Bryan Fischer, head of the American Family Association, Andy McCarthy and Thomas Jefferson agree that "states can regulate religious expression". Like, say, banning mosques. Or making Evangelist Christianity the only branch that can have legal churches in a state. Y'kn, like the song says - Anything Goes!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I think that is true. Jefferson was not a Federalist and would not have seen the 1st amendment as binding on the states. Now, Jefferson would not have wanted states to establish religions or ban mosques, and he probably would have wanted to see 1st amendment-like clauses in the state constitutions. But I don't think Jefferson would have felt the 1st amendment to the federal constitution had anything to do with what states could do.

That's debatable, good old TJ isn't the only authority on these matters. Either way though, we have two centuries of supreme court decisions and precedent which will hopefully protect us from this madness.

So Jefferson also would not have had any problem with states passing confiscatory gun control laws? Torturing accused criminals without a trial? Searching people's homes at random?

Be careful there, buddy. After Mr Fischer, Angry Zombie Jefferson could come looking for you.

No, that's not what I said. I think Jefferson would not have wanted to see any of that in any states -- he just wouldn't have thought that the Constitution of the federal government prevented them from doing it.

In other words, as I said in the post, he would have wanted the states to make their constitutions prevent those things, and I imagine he would have hoped the Bill of Rights was a model for the states. He just wouldn't have seen the federal constitution itself as binding on the states.

I take the point about Jefferson's first inclination limiting the power of Federal government over the states, which would extend to making Bill of Rights protections non-binding over them. But I think it's also clear that by the time of his presidency, Jefferson believed that uncompromising strict construction of the Constitution just didn't work. Having opened that door, it's easy to imagine Jefferson agreeing with Gitlow that limitations on the Feds also cascade to the states.

Jefferson was not a Federalist and would not have seen the 1st amendment as binding on the states.

Yes, he was a Confederate at heart. And the greatest hypocrite amongst the FF.

Now, Jefferson would not have wanted states to establish religions or ban mosques, and he probably would have wanted to see 1st amendment-like clauses in the state constitutions.

But it's never about what you would like or wanted to see. It's always about the practical effects of your ideals.

While Jefferson himself may not have written the Fourteenth Amendment, he did help enshrine the notion of Amendments in the Constitution. He had to know that would entail updating and revising the Constitution. I doubt he'd be all that broken up about applying the same rules to the states that he applied to the federal government.

Do these right-wing religious nutjobs not realize that the broad brush they apply to Muslims could just as easily be applied to them and their coreligionists? Christian ideology (both derived from the Bible and from other teachings) can be just as violent as Muslim ideology. Christian terrorists derive justification from the Bible just as much as Muslim terrorists do from the Quran. Should we ban Christians from immigration because they might blow up a mosque or torch an abortion clinic? Should we ban Christians from serving in the military because they might use their weapon to forceably convert civilians in the occupied land? Or do those rules just apply to those Fisher hates?

These are the same people who 70 years ago would be complaining about the Jews. The same people who would join the Klan. The same maddeningly stupid people who can't conceive of a world which doesn't fix their paranoia at the center of all that is right and holy. Human garbage.

The "ground zero mosque" has become a key part of the debate in the election to replace Congressman Weiner here in Queens. The Republican is running a campaign of all-out fearmongering.

If you know anyone who is registered in NY's 9th, tell them to vote David Weprin on September 13th.

Gay marriage is the other wedge issue.

Anyone else more scared of megachurches then mosques?

The people in one will attempt to force their beliefs on everyone through use of law based on their religious beliefs. The other is a mosque.

So, yes.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only