Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   separation of church and state - a christian perspective please.
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 16 of 64 (222203)
07-06-2005 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tal
07-06-2005 1:09 PM


I thought the issue here was "separation" of church and state? Where did this come from?
It came from one of those guys you assert did not mean to create a separation between church and state. Jefferson described creating a "wall" between church and state.
Perhaps instead of rambling about what you think the founding fathers meant, by taking snippets of the Constitution out of context, and applying what the latest evangelicals and hard right conservatives say they meant, and just freakin' read their own writings.
You know Jefferson even made his own Bible? Yep, he actually cut up the version you guys use to create his own version. So your idea that he'd be for your religion or iconography of it hanging about govt buildings is just a tad off.
And by the way, no one is suggesting that Xian iconography be done away with completely, just not projected at us from govt buildings in a massive wave of historical revision and Constitution burning.
Personally I do agree that some complaints against Xian iconography are a bit much. But then again Xians are arguing my iconography showed be wiped from the face of the globe, so turn about's fair play and all.
Now you want God taken out of the courtroom, prayer out of everything, and God wiped from the pledge.
Yes. Those are all blatant attempts to prosyletize and establish a religion.
Ok, tell me how the commandments being presented at the front of a courthouse is congress making a law respecting the establishment of a religion and the FREE EXERCISE THEREOF.
It all depends how they are depicted. It has already been stated why some would be correct and others are not. Perhaps you should read the Supreme Court decision in this case as one of the Justices mentions the oft cited example of Moses and the tablets on display in the Supreme Court itself.
If it is part of a historical depiction of laws being made or used, then it makes sense. If it sits as if to say, this is the law you will find within, or an example of the greatest laws ever, then it is prosyletizing and thus along the lines of (respecting) establishing a religion.
The Constitution holds for states as well as the federal govt, and having functions or permissions from the state are the same as "making law".
I doubt you'd be holding the same position if some county decided to put up giant piss-christ displays or depictions of Moses as a liar and murderer in permanent display on the front of their courthouses.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Tal, posted 07-06-2005 1:09 PM Tal has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by LinearAq, posted 04-24-2006 3:29 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 22 of 64 (222226)
07-06-2005 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Tal
07-06-2005 2:35 PM


So what law did congress make respecting the establishment of a religion?
In addition to my reply to you... #16... you have now received two other replies to this same question.
Do you now understand, and will you admit, that a breach of the 1st amendment has occured in the described case?
If not, why not?

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Tal, posted 07-06-2005 2:35 PM Tal has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 32 of 64 (222350)
07-07-2005 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Phat
07-07-2005 11:31 AM


Legislating from the bench is an attempt to redefine established standards based on "modern" relativistic concepts.
That would be moralizing from the bench. Legislating from the bench is passing decisions which work to create law, rather than simply rendering a verdict and letting the legislature formulate laws in light of the verdict.
I realize fundies want to confuse this issue, but those are the facts.
Spme of us think that humanity is incapable of actually determining morality for itself...since humanity is flawed in nature.
The founding fathers thought that govt, being as it is inherently members of humanity making decisions, is actually unable to determine morality for others.
That's why they don't get to choose which religion/morality is right for the salvation of this nation.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Phat, posted 07-07-2005 11:31 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Phat, posted 07-07-2005 12:22 PM Silent H has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 35 of 64 (222359)
07-07-2005 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Phat
07-07-2005 12:22 PM


For the conservative, not to decide is to decide.
Then it appears that the crux of the issue is that conservatives are discovering that they are not really american citizens and actually fundamentalist militants ala the Taliban.
The role of the govt is to NOT deal in these types of issues at all, specifically not to make choices for how its citizens must conduct their lives. That is throughout all of the founders' writings. The govt is only supposed to focus on temporal secular issues that all share together. Otherwise it becomes divisive and dictatorial.
To not agree on this truth means that everyone agtrees on relative morality and relative truth, which is equal to "ye shall be as gods"....ye shall make your own truth.
But to agree on it is something much much much worse. Ye shall pretend at being gods, making your own truths, and in fact be devils creating your own hell.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Phat, posted 07-07-2005 12:22 PM Phat 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