Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-18-2019 12:51 AM
27 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, dwise1, PaulK, PsychMJC, Tanypteryx (6 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 853,982 Year: 9,018/19,786 Month: 1,440/2,119 Week: 200/576 Day: 3/98 Hour: 3/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1011
12
1314
...
17Next
Author Topic:   Air Force Academy creates worship area for Pagans, Druids, and Wiccans
Faith
Member
Posts: 31649
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 166 of 244 (556994)
04-22-2010 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by bluescat48
04-22-2010 2:19 AM


Re: Freedom of religion
Well it appears that people like Palin, Huckabee, Dobson, Beck and Limbaugh would welcome a theocracy so thay could force their rightwing fascist christian values on the rest of us.

Beck is a Mormon, and I'm not even convinced Limbaugh is a Christian, but as far as any of them wanting a theocracy that's just being read into their upholding Christian principles as the best standards for the country. You argue for your own standards don't you? Why shouldn't they be allowed to?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by bluescat48, posted 04-22-2010 2:19 AM bluescat48 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by bluescat48, posted 04-22-2010 3:05 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 176 by Taq, posted 04-22-2010 9:36 AM Faith has responded

    
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2354 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 167 of 244 (556996)
04-22-2010 3:05 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by Faith
04-22-2010 2:27 AM


Re: Freedom of religion
Beck is a Mormon, and I'm not even convinced Limbaugh is a Christian, but as far as any of them wanting a theocracy that's just being read into their upholding Christian principles as the best standards for the country. You argue for your own standards don't you? Why shouldn't they be allowed to?

Mormons are Christians. There are hundreds of Christian Denominations. Limbaugh is either a Christian or a Christian Facsimile. To them it is their way or no way.


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Faith, posted 04-22-2010 2:27 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 1589 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


Message 168 of 244 (557002)
04-22-2010 4:27 AM
Reply to: Message 157 by Faith
04-22-2010 1:19 AM


Re: How America is/was Christian and how it is not
Columbus's motives were entirely Christian, basically to convert the world to Christ wherever he found anyone in need of conversion. Yes he was looking for a route to India but he understood that God led him to the New World instead.

But...wasn't Columbus one of those false Christians (aka Catholics)?

Why are you, a True Christian, basing anything off of what he did or said?

Even if his motives were pure (which they weren't), don't you think that his campaign of slavery and genocide belie his Christian motives? Or don't the suffering of pagan indigenous people matter to you?


"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London

"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Faith, posted 04-22-2010 1:19 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 1589 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


(1)
Message 169 of 244 (557004)
04-22-2010 4:52 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Faith
04-21-2010 11:44 PM


Re: Such as?
Yes, but in exalting virtue he is explicitly denying the right to exalt one's creed above others and requiring rendering honor to other creeds. This can only be done among followers of equal gods, but Christians do have the "arrogance" to believe we are following THE one and only God above them all, and we cannot say or do anything to imply otherwise. That always eventually puts us under persecution wherever the pagan gods are exalted.

Or when NO gods are. Like in our present day America.

Christians constantly feel persecuted here because they cannot exalt their god over any other or none.

They claim persecution when they cannot force other kids to pray or listen to their prayers.

They claim persecution when they cannot harass people of other religions or people who are gay.

Their religion mandates that they constantly harass people. That automatically pits their religion against the American Constitution.

It mandates that they be against the article in the OP.

That is unconstitutional. We have secular laws that allow for all forms of worship or none.

You can dredge up all of the maybes of personal opinion of the Founding Fathers, but the beauty of the Constitution is that the personal opinions of the individual authors didn't matter much.

The beauty of their thinking is that they realized that were fallible. They each realized that a government ruled by their own opinion would be a monarchy. They tried to institute (and quite successfully, despite the hiccups, IMO) a form of government that wasn't ruled by any one of their own opinions or religions, but one that would respect most of the people most of the time with rules in place to protect those who didn't have a great amount of power.

Faith, I would like you to read the whole letters that contain the quotes you have used in this debate. These men were more intelligent and less rigid than you have portrayed them to be.


"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London

"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea


This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Faith, posted 04-21-2010 11:44 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 1589 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


Message 170 of 244 (557010)
04-22-2010 5:37 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by Faith
04-21-2010 9:33 PM


Re: Freedom of religion
I say it came through Locke and I know he was taught by John Owen and I know that John Owen had suffered as a Puritan the intolerance of his beliefs by the established English church, and he wrote prodigiously about the necessity of honoring freedom of conscience, which is the main basis for freedom of religion as it says belief cannot be compelled and must be kept free of coercion.

How can thought or belief be kept free of coercion if first grade reading books are based on Christian Bible readings? Or if Christian prayers are recited in school? Or if Congress is opened by an invocation of Jesus Christ? Or if Congress members are welcomed in the name of Jesus Christ? Or if Presidents openly endorse certain religions through their speech and/or actions?

How are any of the above (but especially the ones involving children) not coercion?

Nobody was fighting in Constitutional America. DeToqueville reported on a peaceful society saturated in a spirit of religion that the people held to be indistinguishable from their political life.

I'm not sure why you use de Tocqueville as a support for "Constitutional America" seeing as how he was born 14 years after the Constitution was ratified.

I also fail to see why you use a Frenchman as any sort of support since you clearly think that France at the time (and maybe now?) was a moral cesspool.


"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London

"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea


This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Faith, posted 04-21-2010 9:33 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 1589 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


(1)
Message 171 of 244 (557011)
04-22-2010 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Faith
04-21-2010 11:26 PM


Re: Such as?
Well, but you do need the Christian version of religious freedom for the kind of religious freedom that we have. What they have is not the same freedom of religion, it's simply one pagan god honoring another, but not the true God. But the true God respects His human creation and their choices and honors them despite their religions.

Sorry, but I have to go off topic here.

No, Faith your god does NOT respect humans or honor their faults. He told his followers to kill those who worship other gods. No exceptions. Babies included.

He sends those who don't toe the line to a fiery pit of doom for eternity for the choices that he made them for.

He is a tyrant. He hates human free will. He loathes humans so much that he devised an eternity of pain and sorrow for those who don't sign up for his mind games.

A peaceful society cannot possibly be derived from your sociopathic god's will.


"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London

"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea


This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Faith, posted 04-21-2010 11:26 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 1589 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


Message 172 of 244 (557012)
04-22-2010 6:03 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by Faith
04-22-2010 1:41 AM


Re: Freedom of religion
Que?

Please elaborate. Maybe start a new topic?


"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London

"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea


This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 04-22-2010 1:41 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 1265 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 173 of 244 (557014)
04-22-2010 6:18 AM
Reply to: Message 157 by Faith
04-22-2010 1:19 AM


Re: How America is/was Christian and how it is not
Faith writes:

Columbus's motives were entirely Christian, basically to convert the world to Christ wherever he found anyone in need of conversion. Yes he was looking for a route to India but he understood that God led him to the New World instead.

Sure if you call enslaving indigenent people of a country and shipping them back to Europe as slaves Christian. I will go with that.

Christopher Columbus writes:

As soon as I arrived in the Indies, on the first Island which I found, I took some of the natives by force in order that they might learn and might give me information of whatever there is in these parts.

...their Highnesses may see that I shall give them as much gold as they need .... and slaves as many as they shall order to be shipped

Columbus was a an entrepeneurer and an exploiter who used his religion as many did, to cloke the attrocities he committed. Nothing more.

Because he did not send back enough gold his first trip on his succeeding trips to the New World he sent back over 1200 Native Americans as slaves to Europe to impress King Ferdinand and Queen Isabel who financially backed his ventures, and thus effectively kick-started the massive gears of the Slave Trade machine into work. Columbus also enslaved nearly all the inhabitants he found and put them to work finding the gold he so desparetely wanted and needed to keep his ventures afloat (literally). However, there was very little gold in the Indies and so he built encampments and plantations on which he enslaved the Native Americans and put them to work to help pay back his massive debt.

Here is more of the story I found interesting and quite disturbing:

'Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress:
People's History of the United States' by Howard Zinn writes:

In Book Two of his History of the Indies, Las Casas (who at first urged replacing Indians by black slaves, thinking they were stronger and would survive, but later relented when he saw the effects on blacks) tells about the treatment of the Indians by the Spaniards. It is a unique account and deserves to be quoted at length:

"Endless testimonies . . . prove the mild and pacific temperament of the natives.... But our work was to exasperate, ravage, kill, mangle and destroy; small wonder, then, if they tried to kill one of us now and then.... The admiral, it is true, was blind as those who came after him, and he was so anxious to please the King that he committed irreparable crimes against the Indians..."

Las Casas tells how the Spaniards "grew more conceited every day" and after a while refused to walk any distance. They "rode the backs of Indians if they were in a hurry" or were carried on hammocks by Indians running in relays. "In this case they also had Indians carry large leaves to shade them from the sun and others to fan them with goose wings."

Total control led to total cruelty. The Spaniards "thought nothing of knifing Indians by tens and twenties and of cutting slices off them to test the sharpness of their blades." Las Casas tells how "two of these so-called Christians met two Indian boys one day, each carrying a parrot; they took the parrots and for fun beheaded the boys."

The Indians' attempts to defend themselves failed. And when they ran off into the hills they were found and killed. So, Las Casas reports. "they suffered and died in the mines and other labors in desperate silence, knowing not a soul in the world to whom they could tun for help." He describes their work in the mines:

"... mountains are stripped from top to bottom and bottom to top a thousand times; they dig, split rocks, move stones, and carry dirt on their backs to wash it in the rivers, while those who wash gold stay in the water all the time with their backs bent so constantly it breaks them; and when water invades the mines, the most arduous task of all is to dry the mines by scooping up pansful of water and throwing it up outside....

After each six or eight months' work in the mines, which was the time required of each crew to dig enough gold for melting, up to a third of the men died. While the men were sent many miles away to the mines, the wives remained to work the soil, forced into the excruciating job of digging and making thousands of hills for cassava plants.

Thus husbands and wives were together only once every eight or ten months and when they met they were so exhausted and depressed on both sides . . . they ceased to procreate. As for the newly born, they died early because their mothers, overworked and famished, had no milk to nurse them, and for this reason, while I was in Cuba, 7000 children died in three months. Some mothers even drowned their babies from sheer desperation.... In this way, husbands died in the mines, wives died at work, and children died from lack of milk . . . and in a short time this land which was so great, so powerful and fertile ... was depopulated.... My eyes have seen these acts so foreign to human nature, and now I tremble as I write...."

When he arrived on Hispaniola in 1508, Las Casas says, "there were 60,000 people living on this island, including the Indians; so that from 1494 to 1508, over three million people had perished from war, slavery, and the mines. Who in future generations will believe this? I myself writing it as a knowledgeable eyewitness can hardly believe it...."

Thus began the history, five hundred years ago, of the European invasion of the Indian settlements in the Americas. That beginning, when you read Las Casas-even if his figures are exaggerations (were there 3 million Indians to begin with, as he says, or less than a million, as some historians have calculated, or 8 million as others now believe?) is conquest, slavery, death. When we read the history books given to children in the United States, it all starts with heroic adventure-there is no bloodshed-and Columbus Day is a celebration.

So basically Columbus was a cruel, money-hungry tyrant and exploiter who used religion to cloak his abuses (slavery, torture, raping native women, needless killing and murder even of native children, greed, deception, etc, etc), which was of course par for the course during that day and age (and in some places today). So you may really want to reconsider whether you want to brand Columbus' actions or motives as Christian.

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 157 by Faith, posted 04-22-2010 1:19 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 174 of 244 (557025)
04-22-2010 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by DevilsAdvocate
04-21-2010 5:52 AM


Again And Again, Promoting Not Establishment
DevilsAdvocate writes:

The bottom line is that it is unfair to all Americans to promote one religion in the schools, government, etc at the expense of those who practice other religions.

Well then, you are implying that the founders of the US of A republic and our Constitution were unfair, promoting the Christian religion and encouraging the usage of the New England Primer, the Bible and Watts Hymnal etc exclusively in the schools.

You keep on keeping on ignoring our valid points that what the founders did not allow was the establishment of a state religion as was the case in Europe, the UK and in the Dark Ages.

You keep on keeping on ignoring the valid point that in a republic the representatives of the republic determine to what extent anything should be promoted or excluded.


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 104 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-21-2010 5:52 AM DevilsAdvocate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Taq, posted 04-22-2010 9:32 AM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 177 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-22-2010 10:07 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 178 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 04-22-2010 12:25 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7882
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 175 of 244 (557032)
04-22-2010 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by Buzsaw
04-22-2010 8:16 AM


Re: Again And Again, Promoting Not Establishment
Well then, you are implying that the founders of the US of A republic and our Constitution were unfair, promoting the Christian religion and encouraging the usage of the New England Primer, the Bible and Watts Hymnal etc exclusively in the schools.

The founders did a lot of things incorrectly. Your point? They weren't demigods for Pete's sake.

You keep on keeping on ignoring the valid point that in a republic the representatives of the republic determine to what extent anything should be promoted or excluded.

The powers given to Congress by the Constitution do not include stripping people of their constitutional rights. It sounds to me as if you don't want a constitutional republic. You want anarchy where might makes right.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Buzsaw, posted 04-22-2010 8:16 AM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by Buzsaw, posted 04-22-2010 1:11 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7882
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 176 of 244 (557035)
04-22-2010 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by Faith
04-22-2010 2:27 AM


Re: Freedom of religion
but as far as any of them wanting a theocracy that's just being read into their upholding Christian principles as the best standards for the country. You argue for your own standards don't you? Why shouldn't they be allowed to?

The problem is that their argument for putting these standards into law is because "the bible says so". In our government you need a better argument than this.

Also, if we were to codify the Ten Commandments into law we would lose religious freedom in this country. How does that make sense? The very first commandment is "thous shalt have no other gods before me". So much for "worship as you please".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Faith, posted 04-22-2010 2:27 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by Faith, posted 04-22-2010 1:06 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 1265 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 177 of 244 (557041)
04-22-2010 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by Buzsaw
04-22-2010 8:16 AM


Re: Again And Again, Promoting Not Establishment
Well then, you are implying that the founders of the US of A republic and our Constitution were unfair, promoting the Christian religion and encouraging the usage of the New England Primer, the Bible and Watts Hymnal etc exclusively in the schools.

#1 Define 'founders'.
#2 Not all the founding fathers, however you define them, actively encouraged the usage of the New England Primer, the Bible and Watts Hymnal usage in schools. Can you provide evidence indicating this to be true?
# 3 There were very few printed books that most common people had possession of besides a Bible or a hymnal, mainly because this was the frontier and printing presses were few and far between.
#4 Many children (mainly boys) were taught at home until they entered apprenticeships as opposed to school houses.
#5 Many schoolhouses in that era were actually the village church thus teaching using Bibles and hymnals were rather convenient.
#6 No schools were paid directly out of federal funds until the 1920s. All of it was paid initially by local citizens and local governments (villages funds) and then later by municipalities and states and then finally in the early 20th century by federal funds. Therefore, the federal government had little room for regulating the separation of church and state of a non-federally funded school system.

So bottom line is that 'necessity' at the time made it convenient for them to use these religious materials in 'schools' and in essence most of these schools were really 'private' schools until the late 19th and early 20th century.

Also, nearly everyone during that timeframe in the colonies was of the 'Christian' mindset or influence. However, the framers of the constitution, though many Christians themselves, specifically went out of their way to enforce religious neutrality and separation of Church and State both in the Constitution and other related documents so as not to fall into the pitfalls of religious persecution prevalent in many other preceding governments.

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 174 by Buzsaw, posted 04-22-2010 8:16 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 1265 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 178 of 244 (557056)
04-22-2010 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Buzsaw
04-22-2010 8:16 AM


Re: Again And Again, Promoting Not Establishment
You keep on keeping on ignoring the valid point that in a republic the representatives of the republic determine to what extent anything should be promoted or excluded.

So if satanists outnumbered Christians in America, than you would be ok if Satanism was enforced in the US government rather than Christianity?


“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 174 by Buzsaw, posted 04-22-2010 8:16 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 31649
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 179 of 244 (557064)
04-22-2010 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by Taq
04-22-2010 9:36 AM


Re: Freedom of religion
The original laws of the American government were based on the Bible. Read Blackstone. A hundred years later the Bible was thrown out and now we have a whole different set of legal ideas. But you are wrong. The Bible was woven into all our institutions at the beginning including our educational system.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Taq, posted 04-22-2010 9:36 AM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by Theodoric, posted 04-24-2010 12:20 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 180 of 244 (557067)
04-22-2010 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Taq
04-22-2010 9:32 AM


Re: Again And Again, Promoting Not Establishment
Taq writes:

The founders did a lot of things incorrectly.

A lot of things, Taq? How about some specificities.

Taq writes:

The powers given to Congress by the Constitution do not include stripping people of their constitutional rights. It sounds to me as if you don't want a constitutional republic. You want anarchy where might makes right.

One of those rights is the free exercise of religion and the Constitution does not limit that free exercise in government buildings or functions. Exercising does not constitute establishment.

What you're advocating is exactly what you claim to decry, i.e. the stripping of the rights to exercise religion.


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 175 by Taq, posted 04-22-2010 9:32 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Rahvin, posted 04-22-2010 1:16 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 182 by subbie, posted 04-22-2010 1:51 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 200 by Taq, posted 04-23-2010 10:29 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1011
12
1314
...
17Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019