Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Amy J who wrote (278235)	3/4/2006 10:58:39 AM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571949

where is it in the Constitution that it says 'separation of church and state' I can't find it. Please link me your copy of the US Constitution.

To: Amy J who wrote (278235)	3/4/2006 10:59:07 AM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571949

I found the 'freedom of religion'

To: Amy J who wrote (278235)	3/4/2006 12:11:37 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571949

At some point, people are going to realize that Bushism is a direct threat to the US Constitution's separation of church and state. Don't pay attention to the morons on the thread who would take you statement literally...the establishment clause in the Bill of Rights says...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion... The Kentucky proposal blatantly violates this principle, which is why it's proposers are running away from it. Here's what Jefferson wrote on the first amendment Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State (Letter to the Danbury Baptists, 1802). Don't you wish that today's political minds thought so highly and spoke so nobly? These men were genius well before their time. Our modern politicians, like bush for example, have degraded to unintelligible stutter of non sense. . Al

To: Amy J who wrote (278235)	3/5/2006 8:48:28 PM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571949

Published: 03/06/2006 12:00 AM (UAE) Guardianship of women 'needs to be challenged' By Barbara Bibbo', Correspondent Doha: The guardianship of women in the Arab world remains unchallenged in most countries, hindering them from becoming full legal subjects, participants at a women's forum said here on Sunday. Women's rights activists attending a regional conference said the male-dominated judiciary still considered women not worthy of full legal rights and submitted them to the custody of a male guardian. They also challenged personal status laws, also known as family law, which they said were issued by governmental male-dominated committees. "Today the figure of the family guardian in the Arab world remains unchallenged. There are still strong reservations in the judicial systems on women's capabilities to act as full legal subjects. There is practically no legal debate on guardianship and women still remain subject to the control of the family in most countries," said Judith Tucker, professor of history at Georgetown University and editor of the Journal of Middle East Studies. Tradition Speaking to Gulf News, Amira Sonbol, a professor of Islamic history and the conference organiser, said personal status laws imposed on women were derived from tradition and not from Sharia. They are based on a gender philosophy, she said. She also accused the judiciary of preventing women from entering the judicial field, in particular family courts, where the majority of judges rule against women on issues like divorce, inheritance and child custody. "They do not want women judges, especially in family courts," she said. However, Shaikha Al Mufta, manager of the Qatar Charity, said she did not agree with the views expressed. "We should not strive to cover roles that are not natural for a woman, both in the family and the working sphere."