re: #8 ArchangelMichael

I’m sure the wingnut response to that is something like this: “Activist liberal judges can find away to make the constitution say whatever they want. They will twist logic to make it somehow ok for Sharia law to exist in the US.”

Of course that is ricockulous, but I’m sure that is the ‘reasoning’ behind it.

If activist judges will do such, why does it matter if we have a Constitutional ban? Won’t they just twist that too?