Constitutional Sanity

“The (6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals) was compelled to state the self-evident: The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state. …However, the ACLU and its apologists over the decades have managed to convince a majority of Americans otherwise, according to the American Family Association of Michigan.”

———————————-

THE TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
December 27, 2005
(Editorial)

Constitutional sanity

Christmas came wrapped in a big red bow thanks to the unanimous ruling of a panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit of Appeals.
In a decision that only could be described as groundbreaking in this day and age, the judges ruled that the First Amendment means what it says.

The panel — rejecting the “tiresome” and “extra-constitutional” sophistry of the American Civil Liberties Union — upheld a Kentucky county’s right to display the Ten Commandments.

The court panel was compelled to state the self-evident: The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state.

It surely is tempting for those in this republic familiar with this contract with America to add “well duh.” However, the ACLU and its apologists over the decades have managed to convince a majority of Americans otherwise, according to the American Family Association of Michigan.

And for good measure, the panel offered a tutorial for those ignorant of American history and for those wanting to ignore it:

“Our nation’s history is replete with governmental acknowledgment, and in some cases accommodation of religion.”

If this astounding reasoning catches on, the entire Constitution eventually will be judged as meaning exactly what it says. Until then, enjoy this precious gift.

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/archive/s_407086.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *