“…God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.”
This is one of the things that wakes me up in the middle of the night, screaming and in a cold sweat. The image that I have in my head is of someone clear cutting their way through the bill of rights, one at a time.
Seems that the Neo-Cons have decided that not only is the freedom of religion a bad idea but that people should have it rammed down their throat. So a year ago some of our representatives offered up H.R.3799 (pdf), euphemistically called the “Constitution Restoration Act of 2004.” It was introduced in the 108th congress (2003-2004). It’s sibling bills in the Senate were S.2082 and S.2323. All of this seemed to die in committee. But wait, it’s come back from the grave to haunt us. Now it’s H.R.1070 and S.520.
Here’s my version of what the bill says, if anyone who is part of the government (local, state or federal) decides that they want to highlight, support, push or establish a particular religion above others we, the people, have no grounds for redress. Am I crazy? Isn’t this exactly the kind of thing that folks fled from Europe to get away from? I don’t want to have to walk into any government building and pray to or pretend to worship someone else’s idea of a deity. That’s just not right. This should violate at least two different parts of the first amendment (emphasis mine):
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.
So, find your representative and senator(s) and let them know that this is one of the most dangerous ideas that they have been asked to discuss in a very long time.
Here’s the summary from the Library of Congress:
SUMMARY AS OF:
3/3/2005–Introduced.
Constitution Restoration Act of 2005 - Amends the Federal judicial code to prohibit the U.S. Supreme Court and the Federal district courts from exercising jurisdiction over any matter in which relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government or an officer or agent of such government concerning that entity’s, officer’s, or agent’s acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.
Prohibits a court of the United States from relying upon any law, policy, or other action of a foreign state or international organization in interpreting and applying the Constitution, other than English constitutional and common law up to the time of adoption of the U.S. Constitution.
Provides that any Federal court decision relating to an issue removed from Federal jurisdiction by this Act is not binding precedent on State courts.
Provides that any Supreme Court justice or Federal court judge who exceeds the jurisdictional limitations of this Act shall be deemed to have committed an offense for which the justice or judge may be removed, and to have violated the standard of good behavior required of Article III judges by the Constitution.
Much thanks to my friend Pat and his site Synaptic Junction that reminded me about this.
The re-introduction of this bill on March 3rd seemed to have been hardly noticed. It was first brought up last year by Senator Richard Shelby, Rep. Robert Aderholt, and Roy “Ten Commandments” Moore. I wonder if section 201 of the CRA will affect Article VI, Sect. 2. (born of, the 2004 thread (s)) [from MetaFilter.com]
Some useful links:
[composed and posted with ecto]
posted by Colin J. at 8:44 am