I should know better than to get into an online discussion with anyone, involving the Constitution, and particularly with someone whose views are somewhat to the right of crypto-conservative. It’s like arguing Revelation with an atheist.
The discussion was spurred when I was “tagged” (against my wishes, of course, and quickly removed) in a post from the Conservative Veterans of America. These are folks who take their God seriously, who are worried about the “European-style Socialism” that President Obama (“HE’S NOT MY PRESIDENT!”) is foisting upon the nation, and the kind of folks who allow obviously racist comments and cartoons to be posted to their site, and never remove them.
The essence of the post I was tagged in was “Separation of Powers is in the Constitution; Separation of Church and State is Not”, and the message was one of those hackneyed rants about how we’d be better off if we paid more attention to “In God We Trust” than the European Socialist Agenda the President is following. Sorta like “we need a whole lot more of Jesus and lot less rock ‘n roll”.
I don’t usually take the bait on these things; I just un-tag myself from the post and move on. But this time I had apparently had more than my daily quota of racist Obama-bashing, and I sent a note to the person who’d tagged me in the post “So….separation of Church and State is not in the Constitution, huh? Where do you suppose that phrase came from?”, expecting to get a response like “Communism” or “Atheism” or something along those lines.
To shorten the story, I will say that when I told this person that it came from the First Amendment to the Constitution, what we call “The Bill of Rights”, I was told that I was completely full of crap because everyone knows the First Amendment is about Free Speech and not religion.
“Have you ever actually read the First Amendment? If not, please do so, and then respond.”
A few minutes later (and presumably after this person Googled “First Amendment” and read it) the response was that the Bill of Rights isn’t really a part of the Constitution, so it doesn’t carry that much weight; the amendments are just sort of suggestions but aren’t really law. “Not part of the Constitution, eh? So those gun rights you like to talk about aren’t really rights, they’re just sort of a suggestion?”
I’m not sure if this person then discovered that his gun rights are in that Bill of Rights thingy, and not in his sacred Constitution, but the “conversation” ended there.
I should know better. But sometimes it’s just too much fun to tweak these people.
No doubt today he’s on a mission to keep the Government’s hands off his Medicare.