# Constitution Restoration Act of 2005

1. Apr 5, 2005

### cronxeh

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.520:

Sec. 1260. Matters not reviewable
SEC. 101. APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

(a) Amendment to Title 28- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

(b) Table of Sections- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

1260. Matters not reviewable.'.

-------------
Essentilly Congress wants to put a limit on what Supreme Courts can have power over, and this in essence opens the doors for public display of ten commandments, praying in schools, etc -- on local, state, and federal levels!!

Last edited: Apr 5, 2005
2. Apr 5, 2005

### Rev Prez

Lions, tigers, bears, oh my! Who cares? Congress has the Constitutional authority to establish jurisdiction of the courts. Few if any people genuinely care whether prayer in school or displays of the ten commandments are permitted. Get the matter out of the courts and the only people who'll give a damn are the village atheists. Quite frankly, I'm looking forward to this issue being relegated to the Internet forums where it belongs.

Rev Prez

Last edited: Apr 5, 2005
3. Apr 5, 2005

### cronxeh

This is the exact reason why I care - so that nut jobs like you dont get their way.

4. Apr 5, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

[edit:misread] Funny, funny bill: Unconstitutional at face value. It may as well say it in the body text: 'The purpose of this bill is unConstitutional...'
Well, all courts except the USSC, and within the limits of the Constitution. The USSC's jurisdiction is enumerated in the Constitution.

Last edited: Apr 5, 2005
5. Apr 5, 2005

### SOS2008

Really? I’d like to see some “math" on this too.
From the thread on separation of church and state, per Wikipedia:
You seem to be of this "school of thought." (Do you have a “God Bless America” bumper sticker, or similar gear? I do informal surveys--just wondering…)

6. Apr 5, 2005

### loseyourname

Staff Emeritus
Take out "entity's" and I really don't have any problem with this bill. In that case, it only says that any individual is granted the right to believe that God is the authority from which our laws are derived without the fear of restitution from the Supreme Court. Adding in "entities," however, does seem to leave open the possibility of government agencies officially recognizing a theistic basis of law. Even then, I don't know if the Ten Commandments plaques would be allowable, as they still violate the establishment clause in that they claim a Christian basis of US law, which this bill says nothing about.

Last edited: Apr 5, 2005
7. Apr 5, 2005

### kat

you really need to stop attacking people who post here. Just because they don't agree with your line of thought does not give you the right to make personal attacks. I'm quite sure it's against forum rules.
I wouldn't normally say anything, but you seem to be making it a bit of a habit lately.
Where's Evo?

8. Apr 5, 2005

### Rev Prez

If you really feel threatened because some guy in an alligator T wants his kid to say the Pledge of Allegiance and pray in school, then you can afford to toughen up a bit.

Rev Prez

9. Apr 5, 2005

### Rev Prez

Why is that, russ? What exactly about it is unconstitutional? Also, read the language of the bill very carefully. "Appellatte Jurisdiction" should give you a hint.

Rev Prez

Last edited: Apr 5, 2005
10. Apr 5, 2005

### SOS2008

Kat, you're right--I should have left that out. But are you sure you're not being a "pot that calls the kettle black?"

11. Apr 5, 2005

### Rev Prez

Sure.

You'd think so, but then you'd be wrong.

Rev Prez

12. Apr 5, 2005

### Rev Prez

Who is he attacking? He's asking for evidence to back up a claim I've made. Why worry about anything else said?

Rev Prez

13. Apr 5, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

I've been very busy lately, but I can see weve gotten out of control here.

From the Guidelines:

"Insults and negative attitudes are not allowed. It is better to walk away from a possible confontation and come back with constructive arguments."

14. Apr 5, 2005

### cronxeh

Pollin 1000-1500 people at a time is not real data.

According to real statistics (US Census: http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/04statab/pop.pdf )

in 2001: 902 thousand Atheists, 991 thousand Agnostics, 49 thousand Humanists, 53 thousand Secular, and 27.4 million people said they have No Religion. In addition to that, 11.2 million refused to answer the question

15. Apr 5, 2005

### Rev Prez

I think we can discuss the validity of statistical methods elsewhere. This site sure has a forum for it.

Hmm...159.5 million Christians. What's your point again?

Rev Prez

16. Apr 5, 2005

### loseyourname

Staff Emeritus
That information is not from the census. As a census enumerator, I feel compelled to point out that the questionairre asks nothing about religious identification. In fact, according to your source, those numbers come from the American Religious Identification Survey, a telephone survey conducted that polled 50,281 people. More than 1500, but still not close to the census.

17. Apr 5, 2005

### cronxeh

A pretty big village of Atheists and those with No Religion, dont you think

Dug this up
"Changes in the educational levels of the general population in recent years
appear to account for much of the variance in biblical beliefs over time.
The current proportion of biblical literalists is 32%, only half of what it
was in 1963, when 65% of Americans said they believed in the absolute truth
of all words in the Bible and that it represented the actual word of God.
Belief in inerrancy is most likely to be found among people who did not
complete high school (58%), and least likely among college graduates (29%)." [One Nation Under God, (1993) Barry A. Kosmin & Seymour P. Lachman. pg. 268]

Thats the book they used in the link for 1993 & 2001 survey. I dont have the number of people polled in that book, but if its as random as you said they are, looseyourname, then this whole conversation is pointless.

Last edited: Apr 5, 2005
18. Apr 5, 2005

### Rev Prez

A way bigger village of Christians, don't you think?

Interesting but irrelevant and, absent the actual poll data, lacking on points we can evaluate here.

Rev Prez

19. Apr 5, 2005

### cronxeh

The actual poll data was taken from that book and its in the link on census website - the one you drew 150 Mil+ from

20. Apr 5, 2005

### Rev Prez

Um, no it's not.

Rev Prez