|
Author
|
Topic: Air Force Academy creates worship area for Pagans, Druids, and Wiccans
|
ZephyrWiccan
Junior Member (Idle past 5106 days) Posts: 9 Joined: 04-18-2010
|
|
Message 61 of 244 (556697)
04-20-2010 7:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 8 by Faith
04-20-2010 1:25 AM
|
|
So then, Faith, Christianity should not be officially recognized then, correct? I could care less about "the true God" of yours.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 8 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 1:25 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
ZephyrWiccan
Junior Member (Idle past 5106 days) Posts: 9 Joined: 04-18-2010
|
|
|
Message 62 of 244 (556698)
04-20-2010 7:20 PM
|
Reply to: Message 16 by Faith
04-20-2010 2:17 AM
|
|
What else could the First Amendment have meant? The Supreme Court disagrees with you.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 16 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 2:17 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
ZephyrWiccan
Junior Member (Idle past 5106 days) Posts: 9 Joined: 04-18-2010
|
|
|
Message 63 of 244 (556700)
04-20-2010 7:23 PM
|
Reply to: Message 26 by Buzsaw
04-20-2010 10:12 AM
|
|
Re: Endorsement Not Establishment
And yet, say, atheistic/paganistic countries like Japan and Sweden have much higher birthrates and better health than "christian" societies like america, etc.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 26 by Buzsaw, posted 04-20-2010 10:12 AM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
ZephyrWiccan
Junior Member (Idle past 5106 days) Posts: 9 Joined: 04-18-2010
|
ATTN: Everyone, here is an update
Wow, looking around more, it appears Christians have chosen to show the "love" and desecrate the site: Cross found at Air Force Academy's Wicca center From there:
quote:
The Air Force Academy, stung several years ago by accusations of Christian bias, has built a new outdoor worship area for pagans and other practitioners of Earth-based religions. But its opening, heralded as a sign of a more tolerant religious climate at the academy in Colorado Springs, Colo., was marred by the discovery two weeks ago of a large wooden cross placed there. "We've been making great progress at the Air Force Academy. This is clearly a setback," said Mikey Weinstein, a 1977 graduate of the academy. He is founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, and has often tangled with the academy over such issues. Although he credits the academy's superintendent, Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael Gould, with an improved climate of religious tolerance, Weinstein criticized other academy officials as trivializing the incident, which he said was not revealed to cadets. Rhetorically addressing academy officials, Weinstein said Tuesday, "It's been two weeks -- were you going to get around to telling them about this horrible thing that happened, and why haven't you?" Academy spokesman John Van Winkle said officials reported the situation to those on base and issued a message reiterating the school's policy of religious tolerance and respect. In a statement, Gould said, "We absolutely will not stand for this type of destructive behavior. I consider this no different than someone writing graffiti on the Cadet Chapel." In 2004, an academy survey found that many cadets felt that evangelical Christians were imposing their views and harassing non-Christians at the school. The following year, an Air Force task force determined that there was no overt discrimination but the academy had failed to accommodate the religious needs of some cadets. Since then, the academy has worked to change that, Van Winkle said. "It boils down to the key issue of respect -- respect for everyone's right to practice their faith as they choose," he said. Specific steps include the creation of a Cadet Interfaith Council that identifies upcoming religious holidays and helps adjust cadets' schedules to observe them. The academy -- which also has worship areas for Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Buddhist and Jewish faiths -- already had a designated area for Wiccans, pagans and followers of similar traditions, but it was located on the north end of the 19,000-acre campus and was not easy for cadets to visit, Van Winkle said.
What is wrong with these people?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by ZephyrWiccan, posted 04-18-2010 6:16 PM | | ZephyrWiccan has not replied |
|
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3119 days) Posts: 1548 Joined: 06-05-2008
|
Re: ATTN: Everyone, here is an update
ZephyrWiccan writes: Wow, looking around more, it appears Christians have chosen to show the "love" and desecrate the site:...What is wrong with these people? Don't you know that as long as you are a Christian and doing things with a Christian motive it is ok to disobey the law? Yet if a pentagram was placed outside a christian church, an all-out witch hunt (pun intended) and criminal prosecution would ensue. It is all pure hipocracy and double-standard.
One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan "It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 64 by ZephyrWiccan, posted 04-20-2010 7:29 PM | | ZephyrWiccan has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 66 of 244 (556709)
04-20-2010 8:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 37 by Faith
04-20-2010 11:38 AM
|
|
Re: The Constitution is OLD
Faith writes: The Constitution created the three branches equal, it did not grant the Supreme Court power over the other two. To answer your edit, there are no checks and balances when one branch can trump the other two. That was the point of Jefferson's many statements on the subject. The Constitution did not grant the Court that power, he says, and by usurping it they become despots over the whole nation. This is an important point. This is why there should be term limits on judges. If Congress would assert themselves by insisting on their third, the activist judges would not be allowed to judiciate beyond their perameters. The president said something to the effect that he wanted judges who have an empathy for the people. The problem is which people. Judges should have empathy for the Constitution and the law.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 37 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 11:38 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 820 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: 08-12-2009
|
|
|
Message 67 of 244 (556710)
04-20-2010 9:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 66 by Buzsaw
04-20-2010 8:51 PM
|
|
Re: The Constitution is OLD
The problem is which people. Perhaps,..... ALL people, Buz? I know, i know, you and faith want people to respect ONLY your particular subset of your particular religion. You who else thinks that way? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Il.
"Some people think God is an outsized, light-skinned male with a long white beard, sitting on a throne somewhere up there in the sky, busily tallying the fall of every sparrow. Othersfor example Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einsteinconsidered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe. I do not know of any compelling evidence for anthropomorphic patriarchs controlling human destiny from some hidden celestial vantage point, but it would be madness to deny the existence of physical laws."-Carl Sagan "Show me where Christ said "Love thy fellow man, except for the gay ones." Gay people, too, are made in my God's image. I would never worship a homophobic God." -Desmond Tutu
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 66 by Buzsaw, posted 04-20-2010 8:51 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 70 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 9:52 PM | | hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied |
|
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3119 days) Posts: 1548 Joined: 06-05-2008
|
|
|
Message 68 of 244 (556713)
04-20-2010 9:23 PM
|
Reply to: Message 52 by Jazzns
04-20-2010 3:21 PM
|
|
Re: "New" First Ammendment
Jazzns writes: Faith writes: Here's where I think the nation is REALLY going, however: Due to the passage of time and changing customs in the nation, many have come to regard the first amendment guaranteeing religious freedom to be ambiguous, which has led to rancorous disputation that disturbs the peace. We propose an amendment in the hope of resolving the dispute. Since Congress has made no law breaching the original amendment but on the other hand the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution in such a way as to make such a law in any case, on occasion prohibiting the freedom of specifically the Christian religion (forbidding children to use the Bible in their work, or even bring it to school, or a teacher to have it on his/her desk) while advancing the interests of other religions in the public schools (having children celebrate Ramadan), for instance, we propose that this interpretation of the amendment be explicitly stated: The visible practice of Christianity in the nation should be utterly abolished, and Christians subject to fines for any public display of their beliefs. They should further be made to feel the humiliation of their foolish and ignorant beliefs by being elbowed off the sidewalk and spat upon by Muslims as has been done in the past and is still done in the practice of dhimmitude in some Muslim nations. Regular raids on Christian households should also be encouraged as also practiced in some Muslim nations, also Hindu nations for that matter, burning their houses and churches and the people themselves. In other nations, however, dhimmitude is also practiced against Jews and Hindus and any nonMuslim religion, so we explicitly forbid that. Except for the Jews. A modified dhimmitude is permitted against Jews, Zionist Jews in particular. But Christians are to be most especially so treated. Churches should be taxed or turned over to the government to be used for other purposes. We particularly recommend the voodoo ritual of eating the head off a live chicken to be practiced on church lawns and encourage the making of voodoo curses against Christians... Lets find out. Anyone else in this thread, do you support in any way the 2nd version of Faith's proposed ammendment? Yes, all us evil scheming nazi socialist communist leftist atheists and non-believers want to burn your Bibles and Churches, drive you God-fearing Christians out of your homes and country, forbid you to pray, teach, preach or worship your god, etc. Oh, wait, that's right! It was Christians who promoted these same actions against the Jews and other ethnic groups! Case in point:
The Great Protestant Reformer Martin Luther in 'On the Jews and Their Lies' writes: Accordingly, it must and dare not be considered a trifling matter but a most serious one to seek counsel against this and to save our souls from the Jews, that is, from the devil and from eternal death. My advice, as I said earlier, is: First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire... Second, that all their books-- their prayer books, their Talmudic writings, also the entire Bible-- be taken from them, not leaving them one leaf, and that these be preserved for those who may be converted... Third, that they be forbidden on pain of death to praise God, to give thanks, to pray, and to teach publicly among us and in our country... Fourth, that they be forbidden to utter the name of God within our hearing. For we cannot with a good conscience listen to this or tolerate it... But what will happen even if we do burn down the Jews' synagogues and forbid them publicly to praise God, to pray, to teach, to utter God's name? They will still keep doing it in secret. If we know that they are doing this in secret, it is the same as if they were doing it publicly. For our knowledge of their secret doings and our toleration of them implies that they are not secret after all and thus our conscience is encumbered with it before God... If we wish to wash our hands of the Jews' blasphemy and not share in their guilt, we have to part company with them. They must be driven from our country... ...they remain our daily murderers and bloodthirsty foes in their hearts. Their prayers and curses furnish evidence of that, as do the many stories which relate their torturing of children and all sorts of crimes for which they have often been burned at the stake or banished... ...that everyone would gladly be rid of them... If I had power over the Jews, as our princes and cities have, I would deal severely with their lying mouth... They [rulers] must act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set in proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone, and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them, as Moses did... If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs.
If you're going to rape, pillage and burn, be sure to do things in that order No, this is another typical ludicrous fundamentalist strawman characture and really nothing more than projecting their own hypocritical, dogmatic and intollerance onto others. Nothing new. I am all for freedom for all religious beliefs no matter how ridiculously stupid they are (case in point, Scientology), as long as they don't infringe on the rights, freedoms and beliefs or non-beliefs of others. Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given. Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.
One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan "It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 52 by Jazzns, posted 04-20-2010 3:21 PM | | Jazzns has not replied |
|
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1462 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 69 of 244 (556718)
04-20-2010 9:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 58 by Rahvin
04-20-2010 6:31 PM
|
|
prohibiting the free exercise of religion in the service of the first amendment
I guess you all haven't kept up with some of the zealous attempts by school officials over the last few decades to obey the first amendment by prohibiting Christian clubs, even prayer groups, on school grounds and prohibiting the Bible too, as if, weirdly enough, a private citizen could violate what was written only for the purpose of restricting Congress. Of course they think the school administration itself represents Congress or the U.S. since they are a public institution so they feel it's their duty to make sure they don't "establish" Christianity by allowing such Christian practices on their premises. Of course in this misguided zeal what they are really doing is violating the second clause of the amendment against prohibiting "the free exercise thereof." I'm amazed you all deny this. This sort of thing has been going on for years. I even saw something in the news this morning I think about such a case. Sorry, it's SO common, the idea that I have to track down evidence makes me very tired. But who knows, if I have to I'll try to get to it later.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 58 by Rahvin, posted 04-20-2010 6:31 PM | | Rahvin has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 71 by Rahvin, posted 04-20-2010 9:55 PM | | Faith has replied | | | Message 73 by Asgara, posted 04-20-2010 9:57 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 1462 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: The Constitution is OLD
Buz's point was that the Supreme Court is to serve the law, justice and truth, not people, and anyone who reduces their obligation to being sensitive to people has already trashed justice. And he's right, if you make sensitivity to people the job of the courts you are of course choosing some people over others because all court issues have at least two sides. No, judges are to be about justice, not people. You know, that lady with the blindfold on holding the scales? That's to symbolize the impartiality of justice, that it's not to be a respecter of persons. The exact opposite of what Obama wants.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 67 by hooah212002, posted 04-20-2010 9:03 PM | | hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 72 by Rahvin, posted 04-20-2010 9:56 PM | | Faith has replied | | | Message 76 by nwr, posted 04-20-2010 10:06 PM | | Faith has replied | | | Message 96 by Taq, posted 04-20-2010 11:18 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Rahvin
Member Posts: 4039 Joined: 07-01-2005 Member Rating: 8.0
|
|
|
Message 71 of 244 (556720)
04-20-2010 9:55 PM
|
Reply to: Message 69 by Faith
04-20-2010 9:44 PM
|
|
Re: prohibiting the free exercise of religion in the service of the first amendment
I guess you all haven't kept up with some of the zealous attempts by school officials over the last few decades to obey the first amendment by prohibiting Christian clubs, even prayer groups, on school grounds and prohibiting the Bible too, as if, weirdly enough, a private citizen could violate what was written only for the purpose of restricting Congress. Of course they think the school administration itself represents Congress or the U.S. since they are a public institution so they feel it's their duty to make sure they don't "establish" Christianity by allowing such Christian practices on their premises. Of course in this misguided zeal what they are really doing is violating the second clause of the amendment against prohibiting "the free exercise thereof." I'm amazed you all deny this. This sort of thing has been going on for years. I even saw something in the news this morning I think about such a case. Sorry, it's SO common, the idea that I have to track down evidence makes me very tired. But who knows, if I have to I'll try to get to it later. Faith, there is a rather large difference between prohibiting the formation of a school club (which would receive money/space/whatever from public dollars and thus constitute an official endorsement of that religion over others) and prohibiting the possession of Bibles or prayer by individual students. And when a teacher or other employee of a public school endorses their own religion over others (by wearing religious iconography on front of students, or having their holy book of choice on display), that also constitutes a government endorsement of one religion over others, and is a no-no. Think of it this way. Do you want your tax dollars paying for a Muslim/Hindu/Wiccan club in your local public high school? No? Then you can't fund the Christian version, either. Do you want to send your child to a 2nd grade classroom in a public school if the teacher has a Quran on her desk and wears Muslim religious iconography and verbally praises Allah in front of the kids? No? Then Christian teachers have to leave their faiths at the door, too. At the same time, the teacher cannot tell the kids not to pray, or confiscate their holy books, or tell them that their religion is false. Do you not see the difference here?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 69 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 9:44 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 77 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 10:10 PM | | Rahvin has not replied | | | Message 102 by subbie, posted 04-21-2010 12:31 AM | | Rahvin has not replied |
|
Rahvin
Member Posts: 4039 Joined: 07-01-2005 Member Rating: 8.0
|
|
|
Message 72 of 244 (556721)
04-20-2010 9:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 70 by Faith
04-20-2010 9:52 PM
|
|
Re: The Constitution is OLD
Buz's point was that the Supreme Court is to serve the law, justice and truth, not people, and anyone who reduces their obligation to being sensitive to people has already trashed justice. And he's right, if you make sensitivity to people the job of the courts you are of course choosing some people over others because all court issues have at least two sides. No, judges are to be about justice, not people. You know, that lady with the blindfold on holding the scales? That's to symbolize the impartiality of justice, that it's not to be a respecter of persons. The exact opposite of what Obama wants. The purpose of law and justice is to serve the people.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 70 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 9:52 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 74 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 9:58 PM | | Rahvin has replied |
|
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2321 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined: 05-10-2003
|
|
|
Message 73 of 244 (556722)
04-20-2010 9:57 PM
|
Reply to: Message 69 by Faith
04-20-2010 9:44 PM
|
|
Re: prohibiting the free exercise of religion in the service of the first amendment
When you hear of such things, you need to advise the victims to call the ACLU. That is what they do, fight unconstitutional actions.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 69 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 9:44 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 1462 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 74 of 244 (556723)
04-20-2010 9:58 PM
|
Reply to: Message 72 by Rahvin
04-20-2010 9:56 PM
|
|
Re: The Constitution is OLD
No, it's to serve justice.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 72 by Rahvin, posted 04-20-2010 9:56 PM | | Rahvin has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 75 by Rahvin, posted 04-20-2010 9:58 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Rahvin
Member Posts: 4039 Joined: 07-01-2005 Member Rating: 8.0
|
|
|
Message 75 of 244 (556724)
04-20-2010 9:58 PM
|
Reply to: Message 74 by Faith
04-20-2010 9:58 PM
|
|
Re: The Constitution is OLD
Why do we have justice, Faith? Why do we want it?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 74 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 9:58 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2