Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,402 Year: 3,659/9,624 Month: 530/974 Week: 143/276 Day: 17/23 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Paul Harvey's take on prayer in public/Xmas (In general, a "freedom of speech" topic)
nator
Member (Idle past 2190 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 121 of 165 (174457)
01-06-2005 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Buzsaw
01-06-2005 12:29 PM


Re: Land of the Free and Home of the Brain Dead
quote:
What they wanted has been tried and tested. What they wanted produced the greatest, the most prosperous, the most blessed and the most free society ever.
Actually, while we are the most prosperous, we also have the greatest divide between the rich and the poor of any industrialized nation.
We have nearly a quarter of our children living below the poverty line.
quote:
It wasn't broke until folks began fixing it.
So, do you think that we shouldn't have given women the right to vote, or something?
quote:
Now we're loosing it, one law at a time. At the rate you revisionists are revising, it'l be gone soon and we'll join the loosers and the oppressed. I've been watching it's moral and Biblical decline for 50 of my nearly 70 years along with the loss of personal freedom; freedoms which Biblical principles bring.
If you want to see what it's like to live in a Theocratic nation, you could look at Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia. Iran, too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2005 12:29 PM Buzsaw has not replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 122 of 165 (174458)
01-06-2005 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by keith63
01-06-2005 2:06 PM


keith63 writes:
quote:
Here is the big one that most people who quote seperation of church and state miss!! A person praying at a game is not establishing a state or Federal religeon, thus not against the constitution, but prohibiting prayer is prohibiting the free exercise thereof, and should be a violation of the constitution!!
And here's what YOU missed: The 14th Amendment!!
You see, when the government allows a religion to offer prayer at a government-sponsored event (like a public high school football game), it is not offering equal protection under the law. There is no practical way that it could honor the equal protection cause while allowing prayer.
Why is this so difficult to understand?

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by keith63, posted 01-06-2005 2:06 PM keith63 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by keith63, posted 01-06-2005 2:41 PM berberry has replied

keith63
Inactive Member


Message 123 of 165 (174464)
01-06-2005 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by berberry
01-06-2005 2:16 PM


Why is this so difficult to understand?
I don't know? Why dont you understand it?
Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I think, like the first ammendment, this also says
No State shall make or enforce any law
Again if I am right a faculty member or student, by praying, are not making any laws. If anything someone says is "making a law" I would sure like to know that bacause I could think of some great laws I would like to speak. I am a public high school teacher after all. Maybe while I'm at it, and since I'm making laws, I could get the same insurance benefits as congressman. If so let me know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by berberry, posted 01-06-2005 2:16 PM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by berberry, posted 01-06-2005 2:51 PM keith63 has replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 124 of 165 (174465)
01-06-2005 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by keith63
01-06-2005 2:41 PM


No, you're still WRONG
keith63 misapprehends:
quote:
Again if I am right a faculty member or student, by praying, are not making any laws.
Please provide the quote where I said they were. I didn't. What I quite correctly said was that you were ignoring the 14th amendment. You quote it directly and still ignore it. Try to concentrate on this part:
...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Where do you get the silly notion that this only applies to law-making?

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by keith63, posted 01-06-2005 2:41 PM keith63 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by keith63, posted 01-06-2005 3:09 PM berberry has replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3932 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 125 of 165 (174466)
01-06-2005 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by keith63
01-06-2005 2:06 PM


Except for the mounds of legal precedent that says it does violate the Establishment clause.
from http://fact.trib.com/1st.religion.html
Minersville v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586 (1940) - Supreme Court rules that a public school may require students to salute the flag and pledge allegiance even if it violates their religious scruples.
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) - Court overturns Gobitis but is broader in its scope. No one can be forced to salute the flag or say the pledge of allegiance if it violates the individual's conscience.
McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948) - Court finds religious instruction in public schools a violation of the establishment clause and therefore unconstitutional.
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) - Court finds school prayer unconstitutional.
Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) - Court finds Bible reading over school intercom unconstitutional and Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) - Court finds forcing a child to participate in Bible reading and prayer unconstitutional.
Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980) - Court finds posting of the Ten Commandments in schools unconstitutional.
Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985) - Court finds state law enforcing a moment of silence in schools had a religious purpose and is therefore unconstitutional.
Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987) - Court finds state law requiring equal treatment for creationism has a religious purpose and is therefore unconstitutional.
Lee v. Weisman, 112 SCt. 2649 (1992) - Court finds prayer at public school graduation ceremonies violates the establishment clause and is therefore unconstitutional.
Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, (2000) - Court rules that student-led prayers at public school football games violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Also at the site are many examples of religious freedoms being protected when they were illegally restricted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by keith63, posted 01-06-2005 2:06 PM keith63 has not replied

keith63
Inactive Member


Message 126 of 165 (174469)
01-06-2005 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by berberry
01-06-2005 2:51 PM


Re: No, you're still WRONG
Where do you get the silly notion that this only applies to law-making?
By reading the entire thing instead of a chosen part out of context.
Try to concentrate on this part:
because that's how misinterpretations, such as you are making, happen.
Lets read the whole part in context.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
When taken in context this clearly says the state can't deny any persons equal protection under the law. I think the state implies our elected officials who legislate law. No laws are being broken, written, or enforced, No one is mandated to participate, therefore it shouldn't fall under the 14th amendment.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by berberry, posted 01-06-2005 2:51 PM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-06-2005 3:13 PM keith63 has not replied
 Message 129 by berberry, posted 01-06-2005 3:17 PM keith63 has not replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 127 of 165 (174470)
01-06-2005 3:10 PM


Here's a whole bunch of fun tidbits about the attitude of the founding fathers towards Christianity.
I already knew about Jefferson and Paine, but John Adams, Ben Franklin, Ulysees S. Grant, and Roger Williams (founder of Rhode Island, represent, baby!) are new ones on me.

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 128 of 165 (174472)
01-06-2005 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by keith63
01-06-2005 3:09 PM


Re: No, you're still WRONG
When taken in context this clearly says the state can't deny any persons equal protection under the law.
And schools are run by...?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by keith63, posted 01-06-2005 3:09 PM keith63 has not replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 129 of 165 (174473)
01-06-2005 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by keith63
01-06-2005 3:09 PM


Re: No, you're still WRONG
keith63 writes me:
quote:
When taken in context this clearly says the state can't deny any persons equal protection under the law.
Exactly. Try to follow me: the State makes the laws. The state runs the public schools. In fact, the state makes laws that govern the schools. The schools are thus an extension of the state. The state is not allowed to deny equal protection to ANYONE; atheist, Christian, Jew, ANYONE. Offering prayer at a state-sanctioned event of any sort denies equal protection to anyone present who might not concur with the prayer. It's that simple.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by keith63, posted 01-06-2005 3:09 PM keith63 has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 130 of 165 (174557)
01-06-2005 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by berberry
01-06-2005 12:40 PM


Re: Ungrateful American
Everything was just fine so long as we allowed slavery, denied women the vote and the right to own property, enforced segregation laws......
These things were accepted nearly worldwide at the time. In spite of them, people were desperately wanting to migrate to America. Even many of the slaves who had Christian masters had had a better life here than in the pagan jungle tribe where they often lived in fear and danger.
forced children into working 16-hour days in sweatshop factories, pursued polices to perpetuate poverty and starvation, etc.
Oh, come now. What percentage of America's children were forced to do this.......certainly a tiny percentage of all the children and there has been after America was established, relatively miniscule incidence of starvation and far less poverty than in most of the world. Why do you think people were waiting in line to emigrate here?

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by berberry, posted 01-06-2005 12:40 PM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by crashfrog, posted 01-07-2005 12:29 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 133 by Rrhain, posted 01-07-2005 2:21 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 134 by berberry, posted 01-07-2005 2:31 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 140 by nator, posted 01-07-2005 7:33 AM Buzsaw has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 131 of 165 (174565)
01-07-2005 12:26 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Buzsaw
01-06-2005 12:29 PM


freedoms which Biblical principles bring.
How can telling people they can't do something that doesn't hurt themselves or anybody else bring freedoms?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2005 12:29 PM Buzsaw has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 132 of 165 (174568)
01-07-2005 12:29 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Buzsaw
01-06-2005 11:39 PM


Even many of the slaves who had Christian masters had had a better life here than in the pagan jungle tribe where they often lived in fear and danger.
If you were offered the choice between freedom and risk, or slavery and safety for the rest of your days, which do you think you would pick?
Now imagine that someone just made that choice for you, only they chose the other one. How would you feel about that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2005 11:39 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 133 of 165 (174577)
01-07-2005 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Buzsaw
01-06-2005 11:39 PM


Re: Ungrateful American
buzsaw writes:
quote:
Even many of the slaves who had Christian masters had had a better life here than in the pagan jungle tribe where they often lived in fear and danger.
Oh, lord...not the "some slaves liked slavery therefore slavery isn't necessarily bad" argument again. I thought riVeRraT was gone.

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2005 11:39 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by berberry, posted 01-07-2005 2:49 AM Rrhain has not replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 134 of 165 (174578)
01-07-2005 2:31 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Buzsaw
01-06-2005 11:39 PM


Re: Ungrateful American
buzsaw writes me:
quote:
Oh, come now. What percentage of America's children were forced to do this......
What percentage is acceptable to you? A cursory scan through my old high school American history textbook (The American Pageant: A History of the Republic by Thomas A. Bailey and David M. Kennedy, 6th ed.) shows me that in 1820, half of America's factory workers were chldren under ten years of age. That would be 50%. As in HALF! Under TEN!
Perhaps you'd care to do a bit of research yourself. Here's a great place to start: Child Labor in Pennsylvania, from the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, an agency of the state government.
I don't mean to sound as though I'm dumping on you, buz, but I do wish you'd trouble yourself to look a thing or two up now and then before you post. My point is that things have ALWAYS been horrible in this country. But they've also ALWAYS been wonderful. Life is like that. Good and bad. That's how things are, that's how they always have been and that's how they always will be. Until now, things have steadily gotten better because we as a country have become more LIBERAL. That's not a bad thing.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2005 11:39 PM Buzsaw has not replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 135 of 165 (174580)
01-07-2005 2:49 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Rrhain
01-07-2005 2:21 AM


Re: Ungrateful American
Rrhain writes:
quote:
I thought riVeRraT was gone.
No, he's still around. In fact he seems to have mellowed slightly. In another thread he's been arguing with buz and other fundies that the recent tsunami disaster is not an example of God's wrath on heathen people. I was pleasantly surprised with him.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Rrhain, posted 01-07-2005 2:21 AM Rrhain 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