A couple of weeks ago I told you about the inherent differences between the Carolinas by looking at their respective license plates. I may have spoke (or blogged) to soon. Our southern neighbors legislative wishes have been challenged by the usual atheist and non-christian litigants, who have found a sympathetic ear with federal judge Cameron Currie.
SC's premier political newspaper, the State, has the details.
Now, let's see. A federal judge has gotten involved so there must be a constitutional question. So, let's pull out our copy of the Constitution and have a look at Amendment number 1:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…(Fortunately for the the plaintiffs, the South Carolina legislature is the initiator here, not Congress.)
Now, I seem to recall a little rowdydow down in South Carolina some years back over the limits of federal power. More to come from the Palmetto State.
Porter Jennings says
Should have checked the South Carolina Constitution.
Here is its Article Two
SECTION 2. Religious freedom; freedom of speech; right of assembly and petition.
The General Assembly 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 or any department thereof for a redress of grievances.
country founded on Christian beliefs and they try to take that from us. That’s why this country is so corrupt and disfunctional.