Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Air Force Academy creates worship area for Pagans, Druids, and Wiccans
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 244 (556580)
04-20-2010 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Faith
04-20-2010 1:25 AM


Absent God
I agree Buz. Freedom to practice your own religion isn't the same thing as having your religion officially recognized by an official body of the government
It's almost like maybe the government and religion should be separate. Oh, wait.... I'm curious why you think it is acceptable for the AF to except Christianity but not Wicca. It should either accept none or accept all, seems to me. And in the interest of this little document called the Constitution, I think the former makes more sense than the latter.
you and I know that the true God won't tolerate that for long.
Yes, because he's been working so many miracles in Myanmar, Darfur, Rwanda and Haiti. When I think of the hacking off of baby limbs, genocide, famine, pestilence, I just think God's not going to take that for long. Either that or I think maybe God is the cause, after reading the bible.

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 1:25 AM Faith has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 244 (556585)
04-20-2010 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Buzsaw
04-20-2010 10:12 AM


Re: Endorsement Not Establishment
My understanding is that the predominant religion in Haiti has, for a long time been a Roman Catholic voodoo religious aborition.
Buz, you have some very antiquated and ignorant beliefs about a lot of things. The majority of Haiti is Christian. Voodoo is a dying relic of the past. Secondly, China and Scandanavian countries have the highest atheist numbers on the planet and both are doing well compared to all the African nations who refer to themselves as Christian.
Maybe then there is no parallel, only that you've falsely invented one.
Interestingly, Lousiana is implicated in this as well in the Wiki site. Neither have fared well.
What precisely are you alluding to? That the Haiti earthquake and the N.O. levies breaking was God's vengence for Voodoo and/or Godlessness? Connect the dots for me.

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Buzsaw, posted 04-20-2010 10:12 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 48 of 244 (556587)
04-20-2010 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Faith
04-20-2010 11:44 AM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
I am not trying to be combative but can you answer my question? I'll rephrase, do you believe it should require a
Constitutional ammendment to allow what has occurred in the OP?
I haven't thought it through, but it sounds like a good idea to me considering the way things have gone so I'll say yes.
Perfect. If you don't mind, I have a follow-up question. Pretend for a moment that you agree with the concept of religious freedom as expressed in the OP and that you are writing an ammendment to the Constitution to make the changes that you feel are necessary. What would the wording of the New 1st Ammendment be in order to allow for the behavior that the AFA took?
I am not asking that you advocate for it, but what would someone have to change the 1st Ammendment to allow for "universal" religious freedom?
Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 11:44 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 2:29 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 49 of 244 (556614)
04-20-2010 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Jazzns
04-20-2010 12:49 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
OK, here's my proposal for a new amendment as per your request:
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.
The disputation having its center in the question whether the amendment specifically applied to the various denominations of Christianity extant at the time of writing or was meant to be extended to cover other religions as well, especially considering that our Congress once upon a time opened in the name of Jesus Christ, and inaugurated new members up until 1920 in that sacred Name, we amend it to specifically exclude ever saying that Name in public, especially in the rituals of government, and to include all those other religions under its protection in keeping with the current climate of opinion, naming the following but not intending to exclude any others by this list: Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Wicca, Voodoo, Zoroastrianism, Satanism, prohibiting only those religious practices that in any way threaten the peace of the community or the life or wellbeing of other citizens.
Well, it's not perfect but consider it a first draft.
================
That's my more or less serious attempt. 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.
The Supreme Court is explicitly designated as the arbiter of all laws, which they are hereby explicitly permitted to write themselves, ignoring the Constitution and the Congress and the President alike, not to mention the people.
We amend the first clause of the first amendment that says Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion to add that the Supreme Court can if it so desires.
We rescind the second clause of the first amendment that prohibits prohibiting the free exercise of religion as regards the Christian religion, but retain it as regards all other religions, particularly those that practice blood sacrifice and especially honoring those that practice human sacrifice. We strongly recommend the erection of a bronze statue of Moloch in the place of the Lincoln memorial, complete with provision for the burning of children. Christian children are most especially recommended for the purpose but Jewish children make a nice second choice.
Edited by Faith, : to add first line to clarify what this post is about

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Jazzns, posted 04-20-2010 12:49 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-20-2010 3:13 PM Faith has replied
 Message 52 by Jazzns, posted 04-20-2010 3:21 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 56 by Apothecus, posted 04-20-2010 5:33 PM Faith has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 50 of 244 (556616)
04-20-2010 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Buzsaw
04-19-2010 9:05 PM


Your statement doesn't make any sense
Buzsaw writes:
If Jehovah be true, things will not go as well with the Air Force Academy and the USAF for accommodating Wicca and other pagan activities on campus.
Are you sure? How, specifically, will things "not go so well"?
I mean, if Jehovah actually existed and took action to make things "not go so well" whenever Wicca or other pagan activities took place... why do those religions still exist?
Is Jehovah not able to erradicate them?
Are the things Jehovah does to make it "not go so well" not all that difficult to deal with anyway?
If what you say is true, we should expect to see all these other religions lose adherents by the millions.
But... we don't see this. Over hundreds (some for thousands) of years all these other religions have gotten along just fine.
Perhaps Jehovah exists, and he likes these other religions?
Or, maybe, Jehovah just doesn't exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Buzsaw, posted 04-19-2010 9:05 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 244 (556625)
04-20-2010 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
04-20-2010 2:29 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
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
I think it is pretty straight forward and unambiguous.
the question whether the amendment specifically applied to the various denominations of Christianity extant at the time of writing or was meant to be extended to cover other religions
Being that Jews and synagogues existed from the very beginning of the fledgling nation, it would certainly seem to extend to the government simply taking a neutral position on religion.
It is true the verbiage from Thomas Jefferson concerning a wall of separation was written to the Danbury Baptists, which whom were concerned that the gov't would institute an offical state religion. He quelled their fears by assuring them there would be no state religion.
But, of course, there could have been no forseeable way the framers could have known about Wiccans being that Wicca was invented in the 1950's. But the spirit of the writing remains intact, and that is that the U.S. government will pass no law giving preference to a religion or an official endorsement.

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 2:29 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 3:22 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 52 of 244 (556629)
04-20-2010 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
04-20-2010 2:29 PM


"New" First Ammendment
Thank you for the time you took on this.
I think what I had hoped would be the rest of something revealing of what you feel is actually "deficient" (again presuming that you are an advocate for universal freedom of religion) in the current language of the 1st Ammendment.
What you did post is a good description of how you currently interpret the 1st but most of the other Ammendments are dense, concise fundamental principles of our freedoms.
Let me give it a shot and see what you think.
Here is the original for reference.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Congress shall make no law favoring any religion over another or restricting the free exercise of any religion with the sole exception to practices that are in volation of other rights in this Constitution.
I don't like making a blanket exception for hard to define things such as "peace/wellbeing" as noble as those things are. All that would do would make a loophole where congress could pass laws that make ringing a church bell, knocking on nighbors doors to witness, etc illegal and have it be upheld as Constitutional under that caveat. I was trying to appeal to your language though so I tweaked it to try to get at what I think your goal is which is to be able to constitutionally restrict crazy things such as voluntary human sacrafice, etc.
As for your 2nd longer version, I would wager that if we asked every single one of your detractors in this thread or elsewhere if they would support such a thing you would find exactly ZERO. I realize that some of it is probably intentional hyperbole, but in all seriousness, nobody really wants that world.
Lets find out. Anyone else in this thread, do you support in any way the 2nd version of Faith's proposed ammendment?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 2:29 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-20-2010 9:23 PM Jazzns has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 53 of 244 (556630)
04-20-2010 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Hyroglyphx
04-20-2010 3:13 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
Since others disagree with you, however, the point would be to resolve the disagreement by establishing the predominant interpretation of what it means in writing as a new Constitutional amendment.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-20-2010 3:13 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-20-2010 3:40 PM Faith has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 244 (556635)
04-20-2010 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Faith
04-20-2010 3:22 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
Since others disagree with you, however, the point would be to resolve the disagreement by establishing the predominant interpretation of what it means in writing as a new Constitutional amendment.
We don't make new amendments because people argue over the interpretation (see Second Amendment), that's why we have the Supreme Court, but even supposing we did, what amendment would you propose?

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 3:22 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 3:42 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 55 of 244 (556636)
04-20-2010 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Hyroglyphx
04-20-2010 3:40 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
The one I drafted for Jazzns above in Message 49.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-20-2010 3:40 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Apothecus
Member (Idle past 2410 days)
Posts: 275
From: CA USA
Joined: 01-05-2010


(1)
Message 56 of 244 (556674)
04-20-2010 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Faith
04-20-2010 2:29 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
Hey there Faith.
...forbidding children to use the Bible in their work, or even bring it to school...
This is, of course, false. Besides maybe having to endure some "bible beater" ribbing from the knuckle-draggers, a school can in no way prohibit anyone from bringing a bible (or Quran, Torah, Confucian Analects, etc...) into school. As far as "using the Bible in their work," I don't think you need me to tell you what would happen should a student attempt to "use" a religious text as a reference for public school geology class.
...while advancing the interests of other religions in the public schools (having children celebrate Ramadan)...
My kid gets 2 weeks off from public school for Christmas break, and no time off for Ramadan. Muslim children get Christmas break off, as well, and I know one 7 year old Minnesotan who would do cartwheels if he could get the whole month of November off for Ramadan. I'll tell him you're pulling for him.
Have a good one.

"My own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. J.B.S Haldane 1892-1964

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 2:29 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 6:25 PM Apothecus has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 57 of 244 (556684)
04-20-2010 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Apothecus
04-20-2010 5:33 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
I didn't say ALL schools across the board. Are you denying these things have EVER happened ANYWHERE in American schools?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Apothecus, posted 04-20-2010 5:33 PM Apothecus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Rahvin, posted 04-20-2010 6:31 PM Faith has replied
 Message 59 by PsychMJC, posted 04-20-2010 6:47 PM Faith has not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 58 of 244 (556688)
04-20-2010 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Faith
04-20-2010 6:25 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
I didn't say ALL schools across the board. Are you denying these things have EVER happened ANYWHERE in American schools?
We're denying that those things are legal, Faith.
It's illegal for a school administrator to prohibit a child from bringing a Bible to school. Or praying in school. Whether an administration has ever done something like that somewhere is immaterial - people break the law all the time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 6:25 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 9:44 PM Rahvin has replied

  
PsychMJC
Member (Idle past 1301 days)
Posts: 36
From: Modesto, California
Joined: 11-30-2007


Message 59 of 244 (556691)
04-20-2010 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Faith
04-20-2010 6:25 PM


Re: The Constitution is OLD
The fact of the matter is that it is against the law to expressly prohibit a student from bringing a Bible to school. It is against the law to expressly forbid anyone from reading the Bible as long as it is at an appropriate time. Does this mean that in the ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE WORLD it has never happened? Well gosh Faith, what do you think!
When it does happen, it's plastered all over the news and the people responsible get in trouble for it. Can you show that there are public schools, teachers, and administrators that forbid the Bible (Be careful here, I have a feeling you are going to whip out some foolish article about how some kid was told he had to pray privately, I would hope you can see the difference) from being brought to school or read during free time and get away with it? And are ALLOWED to continue to forbid the expression of religion as appropriate for the time and place?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Faith, posted 04-20-2010 6:25 PM Faith has not replied

  
ZephyrWiccan
Junior Member (Idle past 5087 days)
Posts: 9
Joined: 04-18-2010


Message 60 of 244 (556696)
04-20-2010 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Buzsaw
04-19-2010 9:05 PM


quote:
Hi ZeppherWiccan. I'm glad that Wiccan paganism wasn't acknowledged at West Point when my son was there and back in the 1950s when I was in the USAF. If Jehovah, the Biblical god be true, Wiccan and other forms of paganism become a curse to a culture. Things did not go well when Israel allowed the pagan high places and King Saul was rejected as king when he consulted the Witch Of Endor.
If Jehovah be true, things will not go as well with the Air Force Academy and the USAF for accommodating Wicca and other pagan activities on campus.
Allright - things didn't go well back then according to your book. So, should we also go back to "suffer ye not a witch to live" as well? Get back to the days when things "went well"?
Edited by ZephyrWiccan, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Buzsaw, posted 04-19-2010 9:05 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024