| |
|
What statements of Bush are you refering to specifically? In an effort to keep my sanity, I've avoided his speeches like the plague over the last six months.
Thanks to the fact that states as well as the federal government set their own individual laws, there's tons of grey area in interpretation.
Some are calling this a great victory for separation of church and state. I'm not convinced.
I think that the conservatively slanted Supreme Court is abdicating their responsibility to uphold the Constitution, i.e. let's pass the buck back to the individual states and make it their problem. Remember how the 2000 Presidential election was decided? Same thing.
The greatest threat to the separation of church and state can be summed up in one name.
John Ashcroft.
Check this out.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a brief in the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati earlier this week supporting the state's effort to ban a controversial but rarely performed abortion procedure, technically known as intact dilation and extraction, or intact D and E.
In their brief, Justice Department attorneys noted that the federal government is getting involved because President Bush supports such bans.
That's right. The Justice Department, an arm of the federal government, is now enforcing religious doctrine.
Given that Ashcroft is a militant anti-abortionist, alarm sirens should be sounding everywhere.
Too bad he lost his Senate seat to a dead man. He couldn't have done nearly as much damage there as he can now.
I'm very nervous. If the Democrats get pasted this November, (and there's a fair chance of that due to war fever and the fact that they have zero leadership now) than theocracy might not be far behind.
Be afraid.
[ 26-02-2002: Message edited by: gentleman loser ] |
|
|
