Particularily the 'freedom of religion' section. For those too stupid to know exactly what it says, I give you the whole relevant section;
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
2006-11-12 11:13:25 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
okay, sorry for being vague. By 'screwed up', I mean the fact that visible christianity of any sort is banned in public schools, ten commandments are banned from courthouses, and similar.
2006-11-12 11:32:28 · update #1
it got screwed up by activist judges that think they can do whatever they want
2006-11-12 11:15:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I gave your question a "thumbs down" because you did not explain what you mean by "screwed up." I think many of us do not really know what the lack of this freedom looks like, we've had this freedom so very long.
This Sunday (or any day) I can go to any religious organization, church, synogogue, or mosque or other place, if I so decide. This does not happen naturally, but by the First Amendment meaning something. I do not immediately see how it has become "screwed up."
Sorry if, for some reason, you are not able to practice your religion where you are. I am in New York, and we have absolutely no problem with religious practice here.
2006-11-12 11:23:07 · answer #2 · answered by voltaire 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree with both hanumaster's and voltaire's answers. I don't like activist judges but I don't know what you are implying with this question.
The First Amendment is no where near as badly screwed up as is the Fourteenth Amendment.
~~~~
Ah! Now I understand!
But there is still no easy answer to your question, valid as it is. "How" did the two religion clauses end up becoming contradictory toward one another (in terms of the practical effect)? The only answer I can think to give is to say that certain Supreme Court Justices, while writing some opinions that purportedly expound on the Establishment Clause, were trying to use some impressively sweeping rhetoric but weren't thinking about the practical effect of what they were writing.
2006-11-12 11:30:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
People have ways of taking a sentence or phrase and "twisting" it around to their own benefit. They do the same thing when reading the Bible. People "word" things to make it look good for them.
2006-11-12 12:55:32 · answer #4 · answered by Nancy D 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People do not realise that their right to various freedoms end when they infringe upon other's rights.
2006-11-12 11:16:35 · answer #5 · answered by Rat 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋