Where in the Constitution...

[ck4829]

does it say that Representatives and Senators should be serving Corporations, Pharmaceutical Companies, etc.?

Where in the Constitution does it say that things like Bush's Faith Based Initiatives are allowed?

Where in the Constitution does it say that groups like the Christian Coalition are allowed to influence politics?

[dolo amber]

1. It's in the *new and improved* Constitution

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

:(

[liberal N proud]

3. AHHHHHH!

That scared the hell out of me.
Those creeps are frightening.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. In the part where it gives judges the power to determine the

constitutionality of laws.
The Vallejo case resulted in money for political contributions equating to free speech

[slackmaster]

4. Where does it say those things are NOT allowed?

Sorry to have to play Devil's Advocate on this one, but the whole structure of the Constitution is to grant government certain broad powers and then to put limits on what it can do.

If it does not specifically say that Representatives and Senators cannot serve on corporate boards, then they are within their civil rights to do so.

If it doesn't say that government is not allowed to encourage Faith-based initiatives, then it is within its scope of power to do so as long as it does not violate the establishment clause.

And last but not least, the Christian Coalition as much as I despise what they stand for, is a lawfully assembled group exercising Constitutionally protected political speech.

(Taking cover and ducking.)

[ck4829]

5. It's OK. I was angry when I made that post.

It irritates me not because they have influence but because they are getting more influence than the People. And, to me that is frightening.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

6. Check the House and Senate Rules

There are rules, you know. Codes of conduct and ethical guidelines, mandates, and so forth. They have their origins, believe it or not, in the Constitution, going back a long way. Check the history. It's a wonderful story.

There is, though, in the Constitution a little phrase known as "the Establishment Clause," and, through that, things like the so-called "faith-based initiatives" are prohibited from being entwined with government, and that includes receiving funding. Strictly prohibited.

Thomas Jefferson envisioned a wall between government and religion, and this current (bogus) mal-administration has effectively ignored that.

While groups such as Christian Coalition are, of course, legal, they are not allowed to receive government funding. That would be illegal. This applies to their tax-exempt status, if they are claiming such.

And people like Ratzinger are not allowed to tell their parish priests to condemn a political candidate because he supports something the Roman Catholic Church finds unacceptable. For this, the RCC should lose its tax-exempt status.

But, of course, it won't.

[slackmaster]

10. Constitution says Senate and House set their own rules

There is, though, in the Constitution a little phrase known as "the Establishment Clause," and, through that, things like the so-called "faith-based initiatives" are prohibited from being entwined with government, and that includes receiving funding. Strictly prohibited.


All it actually does is prohibit establishment of a state religion. Anything beyond that is interpretation.

Frankly I think all churches have abused their tax-exempt status and deserve to lose it.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

11. No, that's not what "establishment" means

If you were to read up on the history of the Constitution, you'd learn what that word really meant in that context, and you'd see the genius behind the choice of that word.

Whoever told you that it means "prohibit(ion) of a state religion" did you a serious disservice, because that's absolutely incorrect.

I think the tax exempt status for religious groups is essential, but I do agree that fundamentalist Roman Catholics and other so-called "Christian" groups have certainly overstepped. This alleged administration has been very happy to help them do that, and that gives me cause for despair.

This country, as it is right now, is going so far away from what our Founding Fathers had in mind, I despair.

But, go find out about the "establishment clause," and put that incredibly wrong definition out of your mind. You're about to discover an absolutely amazing story, and see, up close, the brilliance of the Constitution.

[firefox]

7. The Constitution is a "living document"

This is the bullshit we get from the fascists that have destroyed the Constitution. We get that it is modified as legislation happens and federal hedgemony progresses.

[stellanoir]

8. I'm not sure about the details right now

because I'm somewhat distracted, but many have theorized that this trend began when the SCOTUS granted corporations the same rites as individuals in the late 1800's. It was moderated somewhat after the Depression and with the New Deal. Then it got worse under Reagan and Bush 1. The thanks to the dot com boom, better in the 90's.

Now it's worse than ever before.

[forgethell]

9. Representatives and

Senators are supposed to serve their constituents. That would include people running corporations, wouldn't it.

I think the Faith-based initiatives are a bad idea, constitutionally and practically.

But I would say the the same articles, etc., that allow groups like the ACLU, the SCLC, and George Soros to try to influence politics also allows the Christian Coalition to, wouldn't you?

Just a thought.:)

[Toots]

12. Not and keep Tax Exempt Status if they indeed have such exemption

If they are involved in Politics and not their stated purpose, religion, then pay taxes just like any other organization.

[forgethell]

13. Well, if they are

endorsing, or opposing, individual candidates, or a party, I would agree with you. If they are supporting their own morals, ideas, etc. No, I disagree with you.

But if we are going to make the argument, perhaps we should get the beam out of our own eye first and look seriously at some of the black churches that have been engaging in politics for a very long time???

[ScreamingMeemie]

14. Constitution Schmonstitution...They don't need no stinking Constitution.

Freedom's on the march man. :sarcasm:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. It used to be called graft. Now it's called fundraising.

Because of our politics of celebrity, politicians can't get elected without money. The corporations have a lot of money which they distribute to the politicians most favorable to them.

The system is about as "democratic" as the mafia.