Comments on: Connecticut cancels Catholic Church control

By: The Lioness

The Lioness — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:14:20 +0000

[...] Ed Morrissey writes that Connecticut lawmakers “finally got around to reading the founding documents” 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. [...]

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 02:40:36 +0000

If I were to read the written Constitution in a vacuum, ignoring all case law and relying entirely on original intent, I'd have to agree with the commenters who said that the federal Constitution does not apply here. As others have noted already, the First Amendment applies by its terms only to Congress, not the states. The Fourteenth Amendment does apply to the states, of course, but does not say what the "privileges or immunities" are that it protects. The most intuitive reading is that any individual right secured by the Constitution is a protected "privilege or immunity," while any structural limitation on government itself is not. This would mean that the free speech, the free assembly and the free exercise of religion clauses would all be incorporated, but the Establishment Clause would not be. As a practical matter, though, that train left the station a long time ago, and only one of today's nine Supreme Court Justices (Thomas) takes it seriously. [OK, possibly three; Roberts and Alito weren't on the court yet the last time Justice Thomas opined that the Establishment Clause "resists incorporation," so for all we know either or both of them might have joined his decision if they were.]

By: manwithblackhat

manwithblackhat — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:43:55 +0000

man with black hat: A Bridgeport Too Far

By: mankai

mankai — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:22:42 +0000

“[The Roman Catholic Church should be] the religion of the state to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.” -Pope Pius IX

By: The Right Side of Life » Wednesday’s Headlines

The Right Side of Life » Wednesday’s Headlines — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:52:12 +0000

[...] Connecticut cancels Catholic Church control [...]

By: Bishops, Unity, Church,and Vigilance « The Lioness

Bishops, Unity, Church,and Vigilance « The Lioness — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:31:49 +0000

[...] (H/T Ace) That’s good. But it’s still on the way – next year, year after that, because as Ed Morrissey writes: They’re embarrassed, but they still haven’t learned why.” “This battle is [...]

By: Maxx

Maxx — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:10:14 +0000

it’s kinda simple: rescind the privileged tax status of religion.

eh on March 10, 2009 at 10:34 PM

Ah, another person that doesn’t know the difference between a “right” and a “privilege.” The church has no “privileged” tax status. Concerning the right, read your constitution.

By: Eyvonne

Eyvonne — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:41:41 +0000

They want all religions/beliefs to go by the way side. There is not be total control in the government if that doesn’t happen. I do not depend on the government take care of me!

By: Have Dems Declared War Against The Catholic Church? « Nice Deb

Have Dems Declared War Against The Catholic Church? « Nice Deb — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:55:33 +0000

[...] Anchoress: That’s good. But it’s still on the way – next year, year after that, because as Ed Morrissey writes: They’re embarrassed, but they still haven’t learned why. This battle is going to [...]

By: Maxx

Maxx — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:15:22 +0000

I’m pretty sure state Constitutions can’t violate the US Constitution.

ladyingray on March 10, 2009 at 4:22 PM

That would be correct. State constitutions can give you MORE rights and immunities than the federal constitution but they cannot give you less.

By: Fascism alert in Connecticut, UPDATED « Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right

Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:03:01 +0000

[...] Due to a huge outcry, Connecticut cancels Catholic Church control. It seems the two lawmakers trying to pass this bill finally got around to reading the First [...]

By: herself

herself — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:30:36 +0000

While we’re on religion and the Constitution note these words from the grand number 1, “or the right of the people peaceably to assemble.”

Why do Muslims get the right to riot, invade synagogues, intimidate non-Muslims during their “peaceful assemblies” which are anything but peaceful?

Here is a restriction to apply to these public assemblies right off.

I also note that the defacements of the military recruiting facilities on Oakland are another unpeaceful assembly action.

It surely would be nice if the Constitution were to be taken seriously for a change.

{^_^}

By: freelyspeak

freelyspeak — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:18:47 +0000

Let’s hope it stays dead in the water. Some one needs to remind those guys what they are there for…not self serving but to serve their constituents.

By: SKYFOX

SKYFOX — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:55:09 +0000

rightwingprof

You’re probably right, but assuming they are just idiots is kinda like comfort food for the soul.

By: Right Wing Nation » Blog Archive » “Beclowned” Really Isn’t Sufficient

Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:34:19 +0000

[...] The Henry VIII bill I mentioned several days ago has been shelved after the huge outcry, but the real news here is what idiots the legislators who proposed this are. Ed covers it here. [...]

By: The LLama Butchers

The LLama Butchers — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:33:16 +0000

WTF is going on in Connecticut?…

Some bright light apparently introduced a bill to strip Catholic bishops of control over parish property. It has since been withdrawn after the electorate when batshit. Via Hot Air…….

By: rightwingprof

rightwingprof — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:29:01 +0000

What in world was their motivation for attempting this?

I doubt there was a single motivation, but I suspect part of it was to prevent the Church from closing hospitals, should FOCA pass.

By: SKYFOX

SKYFOX — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 09:38:11 +0000

They should blame Ogabe. He emboldened them by pursuing his socialist agenda and thus far getting away with it.
They must have thought, “Why not dive in. The water looks warm”. Warmer, perhaps, than they imagined.

By: UPDATE: Connecticut to Control Catholics… « The Harrington Report

UPDATE: Connecticut to Control Catholics… « The Harrington Report — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 05:52:13 +0000

[...] Read Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Report: Catholic hospitals may be forced to do abortionsLegislative Attack on Catholic Church in ConnecticutVisiting Pope, Pelosi Hears a Call to Protect Life – NYTimes.comWill the Pope and Obama Clash Over Abortion? [...]

By: eh

eh — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 02:34:53 +0000

it’s kinda simple: rescind the privileged tax status of religion.

By: Romeo13

Romeo13 — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 02:04:13 +0000

On a State idiocy note…

Theres a report on Fox about a couple of California legislators who are starting a petition drive to get the Term Marriage in all Calif. Laws replaced with Domestic Partnership.

Hate to say it, but I like the solution… get the Government out of the marriage business and allow those who wish to be Married, in the eyes of God, to have a religious ceremony….

By: Romeo13

Romeo13 — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 02:01:23 +0000

How about Kelo, which eliminated private property rights in this country?

Phildorex on March 10, 2009 at 6:19 PM

LOL… saw a report on Kelo a couple of weeks ago…

Did you all know that the property sits empty? The project for which it was seized was never built… but they won’t return or sell the property either.

By: lamaestra57

lamaestra57 — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:46:08 +0000

The two guys behind this bill are both raging anti-Catholics. The reason is that the they hold the Catholic Church for the “suppression” of gay rights.

This is big time payback from them. Don’t think this is over. The irony is that one guy…Lawlor represents an overwhelmingly Catholic Italian area. Go figure.

By: HYTEAndy

HYTEAndy — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:21:30 +0000

While incredibly stupid, this bill doesn’t violate the US Constitution. The 1st Amendment says that Congress (Federal) cannot make those laws.

If the people (legislatures) of individual states feel like being stupid, so be it.

By: Tim Burton

Tim Burton — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 00:52:44 +0000

That said, the proposed bill was politically very stupid, even in the ultra-liberal northeast. It deserved to die a fiery death. But the rationale for its death should not be yet another misinterpretation of the Constitution.

Phildorex on March 10, 2009 at 4:39 PM

Well said. Glad someone knows their Constitution besides Mark Levin and me. ;-)