15 Jul '11 16:04>
This post is unavailable.
Please refer to our posting guidelines.
Originally posted by wolfgang59My ancestors arrived her in America before it became a nation. I have
You have repeatedly shown yourself to be a complete ignoramus and to tell someone they do not know enough about a subject to debate it is hilarious.
I'd put good money on FMF knowing more about your constitution than you.
In fact I'd give evens on [b]anyone knowing more about your constitution than you.
In fact I'd give odds on that any rando ...[text shortened]... y drift?)
No? you dont get my drift! ... because you are STUPID beyond belief.[/b]
Originally posted by ZahlanziHerman Cain is not proposing to do any such thing. He is only claiming
i would be curious as to what law or constitution allows the president to discriminate based on religion. sure he is allowed to bring his own team in the white house on the off chance he might actually get elected. but i doubt he can appoint judges as he wants. or fire the pentagon's muslim janitors.
Originally posted by RJHindsIf Cain doesn't understand the U.S. Constitution as it pertains to his conduct as president, such as his inability to understand Article VI - as it seems quite clearly you don't either - then it's only right that he gets eliminated from the race at an early stage. That's not a partisan observation. If one of his opponents had made the same comment, it would've deserved the same verdict. The U.S. needs a president who respects and upholds its constitution. Apparently, Herman Cain cannot offer even that.
[Herman Cain's] political enemies are trying to get him eliminated as a candidate by these protests.
Originally posted by RJHindsOf course nobody would have protested if he had kept his plans secret. But if he'd said what he said about not wanting to appoint Muslims to his administration AFTER he was elected then he could potentially be impeached for contravening Article VI of the US Constitution.
If he had not been upfront about how he intended to make his
appointments there would not be any protests now.
Originally posted by FMFNo he could not.
Of course nobody would have protested if he had kept his plans secret. But if he'd said what he said about not wanting to appoint Muslims to his administration AFTER he was elected then he could potentially be impeached for contravening Article VI of the US Constitution.
Originally posted by RJHindsThis thread belongs in Debates, but anyway...
No he could not.
Originally posted by JS357Herman Cain has never said he would require appointees to state their religion
This thread belongs in Debates, but anyway...
This may provide some information:
http://www.loveallpeople.org/oathsofoffice.html
Quote:
And the outline for the oaths of other Public Officials is shown here:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned,
and the Members of the several State Legislatures,
a ...[text shortened]... eing unaware of it. Which, based on certain people on this forum, may be a correct assessment.
Originally posted by RJHindsI didn't say he said that. But you, for one, seem to vest him with having that capability:
Herman Cain has never said he would require appointees to state their religion
and then to require any additional oath to be taken depending on their answer.
You and others are attempting to put word in his mouth that he did not say.
You are all unaware of the real truth or you are being deliberately dishonest.
Originally posted by RJHindsHe indicated that he would not be comfortable appointing people if they are Muslims. He was very specific. The realities of the U.S. constitution aside, as a Christian can you in all conscience endorse someone like Cain who - in a secular state - advocates discriminating against fellow citizens on account of their spiritual beliefs?
Herman Cain has never said he would require appointees to state their religion and then to require any additional oath to be taken depending on their answer.
Originally posted by RJHindsBECK: So wait a minute, are you saying that Muslims have to prove, there has to be a loyalty proof?
Herman Cain has never said he would require appointees to state their religion
and then to require any additional oath to be taken depending on their answer.
You and others are attempting to put word in his mouth that he did not say.
You are all unaware of the real truth or you are being deliberately dishonest.
Originally posted by JS357You wrote it on your post. If you deny it, then you are not only being
I didn't say he said that. But you, for one, seem to vest him with having that capability:
FMF: "Of course nobody would have protested if he had kept his plans secret. But if he'd said what he said about not wanting to appoint Muslims to his administration AFTER he was elected then he could potentially be impeached for contravening Article VI of the US Cons ...[text shortened]... u: "No he could not."
So you have bought the original message even though he hedged it.
Originally posted by JS357I think that is being smart. Muslims are the ones saying, "Death to America."
BECK: So wait a minute, are you saying that Muslims have to prove, there has to be a loyalty proof?
CAIN: Yes, to the Constitution of the United States of America.
BECK: Well, would you do that to a Catholic or a Mormon?
CAIN: No, I wouldn’t, I wouldn’t because there is a greater dangerous part of the Muslim faith than there is in these other religions. I k ...[text shortened]... holic or a Mormon? How would he find out if they were Muslim? Profiling? How ignorant is that?
Originally posted by RJHindsSo what is your interpretation of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution and why do you think Herman Cain is exempt?
I think that is being smart. Muslims are the ones saying, "Death to America."
Muslims are the ones blowing themselves up to kill Jews and Christians.
Muslims are the ones that want their own law in every country that they
are in. Muslims are the ones that blew up the buildings in New York City and
damaged the Pentagon by piloting airplanes into them. ...[text shortened]... killers, not the Christians or the Mormans.
I think you are ignorant not to understand that.
Originally posted by FMFI did not say Herman Cain was exempt from the Constitution. You guys
So what is your interpretation of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution and why do you think Herman Cain is exempt?