Freethought & Rationalism Archive

atheistdave · 07-31-2002, 04:40 AM

I recieved a reply from him in the mail in response to my e-mail. It actually has an ink signature. Probably his secratary, but signed never the less.

"Thank you for contacting me regarding the ruling in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals relating to the Pledge of Allegiance.

As you are aware, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit ruled that the words"under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The impact of the ruling has been put on hold. The case could be heard by the entire panel of judges on the ninth Circuit.

On June 27, the House of Representatives passed a resolution, H.Res.459, which I cosponsored, expresses the view that this decision is inconsistent with the First Amendment; that the phrase "under God" should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance; and that the entire Ninth Circuit should agree to rehear the ruling in order to reverse the ruling. This measure passed the House by a vote of 416 to 3 with 11 voting "present."

Do not hesitate to contact me again on matters of concern to you.

Best regards,
Steve Buyer
Member of Congress"

Well, there you have it. Another Congressman going with the flow. It does sound to me that the entire Ninth Circuit Court will have to agree to hear it, in order to reverse, so there may be some hope. Obviously Mr. Buyer is not too sharp on Constitutional Law, but is vote savvy.

Dave

capsaicin67 · 07-31-2002, 05:45 AM

I guess I'm relieved to hear that ANYONE voted against it. Who were these people? The spin is so hard right now that I'm not hearing any buzz about their dissent. They either were very courageous or I'm missing part of the story. Maybe we should write them and thank them, I'm sure they must not be getting many of those!

p.s.---greetings to a fellow Hoosier

[ July 31, 2002: Message edited by: capsaicin67 ]</p>

beejay · 07-31-2002, 07:15 AM

<a href="http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2002&rollnumber=273" target="_blank">http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2002&rollnumber=273</a>

First time poster of a URL, not sure that will work, but it is the location of the vote.

Honda, Scott and Stark (all Democrats) voted "no".

It's clearly a "feel good" resolution...the House has no power to tell the courts what to do.

Toto · 07-31-2002, 10:13 AM

Welcome to the forum, beejay. You're in the right place.

Your URL works fine. (You can either paste it directly in, surrounded by white space, and UBB will create the link for you, or you can click on the URL button below the window, and UBB will help you.)

07-31-2002, 04:40 AM	#1
atheistdave Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Dana, IN USA Posts: 225	Reply from Congressman Steve Buyer I recieved a reply from him in the mail in response to my e-mail. It actually has an ink signature. Probably his secratary, but signed never the less. "Thank you for contacting me regarding the ruling in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals relating to the Pledge of Allegiance. As you are aware, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit ruled that the words"under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The impact of the ruling has been put on hold. The case could be heard by the entire panel of judges on the ninth Circuit. On June 27, the House of Representatives passed a resolution, H.Res.459, which I cosponsored, expresses the view that this decision is inconsistent with the First Amendment; that the phrase "under God" should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance; and that the entire Ninth Circuit should agree to rehear the ruling in order to reverse the ruling. This measure passed the House by a vote of 416 to 3 with 11 voting "present." Do not hesitate to contact me again on matters of concern to you. Best regards, Steve Buyer Member of Congress" Well, there you have it. Another Congressman going with the flow. It does sound to me that the entire Ninth Circuit Court will have to agree to hear it, in order to reverse, so there may be some hope. Obviously Mr. Buyer is not too sharp on Constitutional Law, but is vote savvy. Dave

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-31-2002, 05:45 AM	#2
capsaicin67 Contributor Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Gold coast plain, sea, scrubland, mountain range. Posts: 20,955	I guess I'm relieved to hear that ANYONE voted against it. Who were these people? The spin is so hard right now that I'm not hearing any buzz about their dissent. They either were very courageous or I'm missing part of the story. Maybe we should write them and thank them, I'm sure they must not be getting many of those! p.s.---greetings to a fellow Hoosier [ July 31, 2002: Message edited by: capsaicin67 ]</p>

07-31-2002, 07:15 AM	#3
beejay Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Richmond IN Posts: 375	<a href="http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2002&rollnumber=273" target="_blank">http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2002&rollnumber=273</a> First time poster of a URL, not sure that will work, but it is the location of the vote. Honda, Scott and Stark (all Democrats) voted "no". It's clearly a "feel good" resolution...the House has no power to tell the courts what to do.

07-31-2002, 10:13 AM	#4
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Welcome to the forum, beejay. You're in the right place. Your URL works fine. (You can either paste it directly in, surrounded by white space, and UBB will create the link for you, or you can click on the URL button below the window, and UBB will help you.)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.