User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 7:31:21 AM EDT
[#1]
Shit Raf you are editing while I am posting....
To further illuminate my point. I was not accusing you of posting on Israels domestic matters as I have not kept a running track of your posts ( sorry to disappoint you) LOL However if you deem it inappropriate for me to post regarding American issues I will try to keep tabs on your posts....just to keep you honest! [beer] Edited to add.... Sorry raf...have to run. Have to go work a fund raiser for our Junior Program and review their results at last weeks Nationals....they kicked ass!! I am sure we can pick this up again.....perhaps in Chat? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 7:40:57 AM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: Raf Well basically you seemed to have taken offense at my commenting on what is correctly an American Domestic matter. Good heavens no, Stormbringer! We poor, benighted Americans need all the help we can get from informed, intelligent Canadians, such as yourself, who unselfishly share their unbounded expertise in things American at every turn. I therefore assumed that you would refrain from commenting on the current domestic situations in other countries.....I happened to pick Israel for an example. As an Ignorant American, I know my limitations, and seldom comment on the internal politics of other countries, except in cases where such directly impacts US interests. However in looking back at this thread I did notice one thing..... You only seem to mind it when people who are not Americans disagree with your POV....then you attack them for not being American instead of trying to defend your position. A very telling trait to say the least. My, my, Stormbringer. I've nothing against Canadians (or any foreigners) in general. I rather like most Canadians. I [b]do[/b] sometimes have issues with people offering unasked-for advice from on high... If a foreigner happens to agree with you, you are strangely silent....why is that? Well, maybe I'm learning to be more culturally and ethnically accepting. See? It has nothing to do with foreigners, now does it? And besides, as a genuine Stupid American, I realize that we Americans need all the help we can get; foreigners' help being the best of all. After all, no good idea could come from America, now could it? At any rate, good luck in your fundraiser. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 8:09:52 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted: Liberty.....you are plain wrong.... Most Canadians mirror Americans when it comes to religion ( or most other matters). You obviously know little about Canada if you think it lacks a religious base. They happen to mention god in the Canadian National Anthem. ( but I am working to change that up here as well) The contrary is true. 1 example? We now have "Human Rights Commissions", (read homosexual promotion and protection), in most of our counties. While they don't have the enforcement powers they do in Canada, they are being built on the Canadian model, with legislation to follow. How nice that you are trying to remove G*d from your national anthem. We will get around to erasing Him completly from our national life as well. You see, you anti-G*d socialists are winning here as well. Largely because of an apostate church in our country. Many of us know EXACTLY what is going on. We also know the end of the story...... Not all of us are cutsy-puffy wave yer hands in the air "christians" on sunday. Some are the kind of CHRISTIAN that founded and fought to establish this nation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 9:36:23 AM EDT
[#4]
I think that people are losing the sight of moral majority in this debate. An overwhelming number of americans belive in god. They may not be cristian, but they still believe in a god. I don't think that the gov't established it's own religion when adding two words to the pledge. I am tired of having to make consessions to the overwhelming MINORITY.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 11:05:24 AM EDT
[#5]
Um, can we get back to the dipwad that started all this?
He can [u]believe[/u] whatever. But if he is in a custody fight, I cheer him for what he has done -- shoot himself in the foot, that is. "The best interests of the child" is the governing principle, here. Now you have to wonder, and I believe so will the judge, why a father would drag his daughter into a national controversy and subject her to the embarassment and ridicule of her friends and class mates, not to mention national media, all of these people questioning her anti-God beliefs. Oh, wait, you say she really is Chistian, believes in the pledge, and totally disagrees with what her father is doing? And did he get her permission to lie about her beliefs? And jam her into the middle of this? "Oh yes, your honor, my client has nothing but the best interests of his child at heart" |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 11:23:11 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: I'm wondering why people are not more suspect about what exactly the word "indivisible" means. Seems to me it means the Fed is sovereign, not the people. It means that the country cannot be separated from God. "One nation under God, indivisible..." I think that the framers were trying to say that atheists suck, but are welcome in our nation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 12:08:46 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: It means that the country cannot be separated from God. "One nation under God, indivisible..." I think that the framers were trying to say that atheists suck, but are welcome in our nation. Would those be the farmers that added "Under God" to the pledge in the 1950s? I really don't care that much whether or not it stays in the pledge, but you have to admit that this lawsuit is pretty damm stupid. And I certainly don't mind decreasing the credibility of the leftists that start this kind of thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 2:01:01 PM EDT
[#8]
raf.....thanks we made about $1000! I would respond to your post...however. I do not think I can bet my tongue as far back in my cheek as you seem to be able too.
Liberty...are you speaking of Canada as being Socialist or ME! Please clarify before I blow a gasket. Devil....do you really know so little of even your own country?? That is shameful indeed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 2:10:04 PM EDT
[#9]
You have NO idea as to the situation in Canada....perhaps if you removed your head from your ass you would be able to see better. the diffence is that Canadians DO know quite a bit more about the American Situation.... Thus we area able to comment on it ( or so I thought) If you knew ANYTHING about Canada you would be free to discuss.....as it is that is doubtful. This does not take away from the merrits of the case ( IMO) as separation of church and state is what is at stake Just for your personal edification: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" It does not say however that religion being a part of government is forbidden. I would have thunk that somebody who knows sooooo much about the American situation would be aware of this. Basically throughout the entirety of your posts on this subject you claim that you know more about this than Americans, that Americans know nothing about the rest of the world, that we are narrow-minded and ignorant, but that you are tolerant and enlightened. Your speech is eerily similar to the condescending bullshit constantly spouted by European socialists. 1. You don't know as much as you think you do (which is endemic of the truly ignorant). 2. You are a hypocrite for claiming we are narrow-minded (while simultaneously refusing to accept the validity of any of our opinions). 3. You are implying that your opinion and belief system is somehow more valid than that of others (particularly ETH and gman), all the while deriding them for being narrow-minded. Frankly bud, you can't see the forest from the trees. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 2:19:46 PM EDT
[#10]
red...
Ummm Where did I ever say that I knew more about this issue than Americans?? Please point it out.....I may have misstyped. As for Canadians or Zelbonians knowing more about the rest of the world than Americans...well that is a fact that does not seem to be in question. I guess your point about the constitution and religion is up for grabs...my angle on it would be that this is EXACTLY what they are saying......or why was god not added to the pledge in its original form. I NEVER said your opinions were not valid..( again PLEASE POINT IT OUT) I find it odd however that my opinion is disregarded NOT for its merrit but due to my locale....Hmmm As to ETH and Gman...I have the utmost respect for both of them and they are aware of it...However they also seem to be able to carry on a decent conversation. Please again point out where i said your perspective is NOT VALID.....what I contend is that mine and yours are EQUAL!! Gee what a concept!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 2:36:24 PM EDT
[#11]
Eric the(intolerant)Hun seems to have a problem with anything that sways against christianity. The father is a prick because he doesn't want the pledge said in schools? Wait wait wait, it's ok for the non-believers to be "brainwashed" by having to listen tp the pledge, but don't you dare piss of the christians.
I do believe in god (not necessarily the christian god) but this intolerance has got to stop. The "they don't have to say the pledge" argument is bs. If we are going to allow a pledge that has the word "god" in it, then we need to have one that allows every other idol/non-christian god/kachina doll that people worship. You want your side to be heard and no one elses. Period. Great job guys, great job. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 2:40:58 PM EDT
[#12]
MrGreen.....the nerve...How dare YOU!! You are not even a Socialist Canadan Liberal Stooge!
Oh you are a Floridian...all the Snowbirds down there must have polluted your mind.....That or you are talking sense. To me the only logical thing for a PUBLIC school and government to have is a Neutral Stance on issues such as this...that way if both sides are equally unhappy it must be ok.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 2:44:48 PM EDT
[#13]
The father is a prick because he dragged his child into the media frenzy to get back at his wife. She has full custody of her daughter. They are both Christian.
This guy should be jailed for being that kind of ass. You guys are so smart. Even Einstein and Darwin were pretty sure that there is a God. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 2:48:23 PM EDT
[#14]
Mister greens,
How are they being brainwashed? How stupid can you be...I guess if I watch enough news, I'll be a liberal? You're so full of schitt, in the name of tolerance. I tell you something else novel greenie, how bout let's put this to a vote? That would be fair..right? I wonder what the outcome would be? And for you Storm...in this case we have principle over logic. I'm still stuck on the atheistic "fairy tale" comments...again, you have no idea how this country was founded...lawfully or idealogically. [b][blue]NAKED[/blue][/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 2:51:55 PM EDT
[#15]
Pretty sure??
Hmmm have you had recent conversations with them? What about Galileo? Was he pretty sure? This has NOTHING to do with the existance of god. ( Mind you it would help if he would drop in and say hi to clear things up) It has everything to do with the RIGHT to be free to think as one wishes.... The mother is a christian...no doubt. The Daughter....she is what??? 8?? Somehow I do not think that an eight year old is equipped to make such choices.....they are far to malable. Which is exactly why the mention of god in government sanctioned items is so dangerous. You are trying to make it the norm....what is wrong with a neutral government and neutral government schools and you teach your kids the way you want and mine get taught the way I want....What a concept!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 6:02:44 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: To me the only logical thing for a PUBLIC school and government to have is a Neutral Stance on issues such as this... OK, that is a start. The words "under god" do not bother me personally but I totally understand why they were found unconstituional. The problem is that it is in a way a "free plug" for chrsitianity (in a very loose sense) everyday that these kids have to listen to. Either have a moment of silence where everyone of ALL faiths or whatever can privately pray to their gods, or don't do it at all. The reason why many christians are upset at the 9th circuit ruling is this belief, that if you want people to believe the way that you do then you have to get to them early, and taking it out of the schools is one less mechanism for propaganda. All religious values should be left to the children to decide. I know that that is nearly impossible the way children are born into a certain faith. I was born and raised christian but I finally became old enough to make my own decisions. And to your dismay, I too am a believer in god. You guys can flame away all you want but I have said this before, that the world does NOT run on christian values. There are kids who go to school with your kids who do NOT believe in god. It may be cliche but would if your child was forced to say "one nation under Buddha" or whatever. Try to look at it from the other side. The bottom line is that it is not fair. Oh, and Naked-Gunman, I am well aware that more Americans would favor the words to be kept in place than against it. I'll be sure to cast my vote against it if and when the time comes. I'll fire 50 warning shots as a salute just for you on my way to (your so-called)hell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2002 6:54:46 PM EDT
[#17]
Dude, its really quite simple. The man is a dick. He doesn't live with his daughter. and that right there says alot. If he is so worried about her being in a public school that he will actually SUE the school district for teaching/saying THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (note: THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE! say that a few times so it sinks in.) why doesn't he take her out of the PUBLIC school system and home school her, where he can teach her his own ideals? Because he's adick. Personally, I will have nothing to do with anyone who does not Pledge Allegiance to our nation under God.
I am a christian, and I am homeschooled. in kindergarden, I was busted for bringing a david and goliath comic book for show and tell. I was punished and sent out in the hall for a time out because I prayed before lunch. I wasn't yelling out a prayer, I was on my knees bowing down, I was saying a silent prayer. So my parents took me out of school and I've been home schooled ever sense. A little off topic, but you never hear of Christian Homeschoolers shooting up there highschools do you? Why do you think that is? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 4:36:50 AM EDT
[#18]
92fs? Are you saying that all divorced people are scum or some other low life that do not deserve to have children? IIRC the divorce rate on this board is rather high. Quite a statement if I understand correctly.
As to home schooling.....I have not done any research on the subject however would not shooting up their school be shooting up mom and dad? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 5:09:46 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Amen, [b]Brother loonybin[/b], you have it all down correct, Sir! Just remember, when you dislodge the 'original intent' underpinning from the First Amendment, and permit a Judge some 200 years later to give it a totally different meaning than that intended by the framers, then the very same thing can more easily be done with the Second Amendment. Eric The(Perplexed)Hun[>]:)] Exactly. We've been bamboozled by linguistic parlor tricks, verbal sleight of hand, and a torrent of postmodern sophistry into believing what is written in the Constitution is not what is meant by it. No system of government based on inviolate, enduring texts can survive postmodern thought. The raping of the Second Amendment is one of the best examples of that to date. It's staggering. Furthermore, I'm curious if those objecting so viscerally to "under God" would object to "under the Creator" in its place. ;) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 5:41:45 AM EDT
[#20]
ummm
yes. Great turtle as well |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 6:15:29 AM EDT
[#21]
Greenie,
It's 31 shots...and make sure you have clear field of fire..so to speak. What if christians are right? What if there is a hell? Just because you can't see the wind and don't believe it exists...does that mean there is no wind? [b][blue]NAKED[/blue][/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 7:52:55 AM EDT
[#22]
What if christians are right? What if there is a hell? Just because you can't see the wind and don't believe it exists...does that mean there is no wind? This is illogical. The converse shows this: Just because you can't see it doesn't mean that it is there. I cannot see Buddha, or Ra, or Wotan, or the Great Green Arkleseizure, but I don't believe they exist. The onus of proof lies upon he who is asserting the positive. Evidence of wind can be proven by its effects. There can be no evidence of God, thus faith of the Christian and the doubt of the Athiest. But this is irrelevant to the argument at hand. The core of the arguement, to my understanding, lies with the interpretation of the line "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". One camp reads this to mean that Congress can make no laws in regard to religious establishments; the concept of separation of Church and State. The other camp reads this to mean that Congress can make no law which establishes a religion; preventing a Church of America mirroring that of England. Both camps ferverently believe that their interpretation represents the will of the framers, and both can produce evidence to support their view. The solution is simple: build a time machine, and go back and ask the framers to be more specific. Get them to expand upon the second amendment while they're at it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 3:01:42 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Post from mattja - Are you trying to say the only legitimate God is the Christian God? What about the Jewish God and the Muslim God, which we all accept as being the same God as the Christian God? The only 'legitimate' God to both Jews and Christians is Jehovah, the Great "I am" as described in the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible). The god known as 'Allah' was a creation of the founder of Islam, Mohammad, and while Mohammad presents him as the same 'God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Israel)', he is most definitely unlike the God described in the Old Testament in so many ways as to defy identifying him as such! Go to any Muslim website and check on how they view the efforts of Allah in creating anything, much less the cosmos. So, in short, I could write my own 'Hun Bible' and describe the 'God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob' as an elderly gent living down the street from me, and say that he and the God in the Old Testament were one and the same. But it wouldn't make it so, would it? [:D] Eric The(LordForgiveMeOfTheBlasphemy)Hun[>]:)] Okay, I didn't know that. I thought they all referred to the God of the Old Testament. Are you saying the Muslims reinvented him? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 4:05:45 AM EDT
[#24]
Post from Dominus -
One camp reads this to mean that Congress can make no laws in regard to religious establishments; the concept of separation of Church and State. The other camp reads this to mean that Congress can make no law which establishes a religion; preventing a Church of America mirroring that of England. Both camps ferverently believe that their interpretation represents the will of the framers, and both can produce evidence to support their view. What evidence do you have that the Founding Fathers believed the way those in the 'first camp' read the no establishment clause? That single letter from T. Jefferson? Eric The(WantToHearTheEvidenceSupportingTheSecondCamp?)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 4:10:36 AM EDT
[#25]
Post from mattja -
Okay, I didn't know that. I thought they all referred to the God of the Old Testament. Are you saying the Muslims reinvented him? Hmm, I'd hate the use the phrase 'reinventing God', but, basically, the God of the Old Testament is nothing like the Allah referred to in the Koran, and nothing, but nothing, is said concerning Allah in the Koran that didn't come from the mind of Mohammad. So Mohammad 'invented' his own god, giving this god some 'cachet' by linking him to the one described in the Hebrew Bible. Eric The(HonestToGod)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 4:36:02 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Not all of us are cutsy-puffy wave yer hands in the air "christians" on sunday. Some are the kind of CHRISTIAN that founded and fought to establish this nation. Liberty, I don't always agree with you, but I'll be damned if you didn't hit this one squarely on the head... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 4:45:21 AM EDT
[#27]
I'm not choosing a side, Eric, I'm just presenting the situation as I see it. I said that both sides can produce evidence, not that *I* have evidence one way or another.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 4:54:32 AM EDT
[#28]
Well, the evidence is mighty thin for those in camp 1, the separation of church and state side!
Almost nonexistent, I would say. It's like the old chestnut 'Hey, the Founding Fathers were all deists!' Maybe two or three were, but they were in such a small minority as to not even count! Only Paine, Jefferson, and Franklin, have been claimed to have been 'Deists.' Thomas Paine was not even a 'Founding Father', and Franklin repented of his deistic beliefs late in life, and Jefferson's daughter steadfastly maintained that her father was as orthodox as anyone. Eric The(HonestToGod)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:10:55 AM EDT
[#29]
I'm not particularly religious myself, but I think it's relevant that the basis of our legal system stems from Judeo-Christian beliefs.
The second salient point is that, "allowing" students to choose to recite the pledge, the Lord's prayer, or a passage from the Torah, is FAR removed from the "establishment" of a specific State sponsored religion. Our laws were intended to prevent PERSECUTION, not to avoid offending the sensibilities of some whiners. Our Constitution is steeped in Judeo-Christian beliefs, but guarantees' your right to worship as you see fit. No one will be banished, burned at the stake or turned into a toad, for practicing their religion or lack thereof. I'm fairly sick of people who wish to undermine the moral grounding of our country, for petty reasons wholly related to their own aggrandizement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:19:29 AM EDT
[#30]
"Almost nonexistent, I would say"
Well thanks for adding that caveat ETH...... Since you were not there either you are trying to read their words with YOUR perspective on the issue which as biased as mine. I cannot hope but think that your founding fathers wanting a free country would not support shoving religion of ANY stripe down peoples throat. I could be wrong but hey as has been pointed out here umteen times I am a foriegner so how dare I voice an opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:32:08 AM EDT
[#31]
[b]Hipower[/b], you are correct, Sir!
It's amazing how many otherwise intelligent folks would rather climb up a tree to say that this nation was not founded on Judeo-Christian theology, than remain on the ground and tell the truth. And just why would that be? Because at some point in their personal lives, something or someone identified as being a Christian, disappointed them? Maybe. It could also be that they desire to do something that they feel is constrained, or discouraged, or prohibited by Judeo-Christian morality, and rather than recognize that what it is they desire to do is quite possibly wicked, or at least immoral, they would rather try and tear down Western Civilization to feel better about themselves! The gays and lesbians try do it all the time! The liberal idiots in this country try to do it all the time. [b]But [u]we[/u] should know better![/b] Eric The(HonestToGod)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:44:01 AM EDT
[#32]
LOL!!
Oh thats right ETH you caught me.... I am a super secret member of a cadre determined to further the intents of Lesbian Lieberals everywhere..... LOL Oh and when you get to the top of the tree you can see further then those who are stuck on the ground. You can see further than the trees that BLIND those on the ground..... Come on up!! The view is GREAT!! Oh BTW is anyone else bemused at the length this thread has gone!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:46:38 AM EDT
[#33]
Post from Stormbringer -
I cannot hope but think that your founding fathers wanting a free country would not support shoving religion of ANY stripe down peoples throat. I could be wrong but hey as has been pointed out here umteen times I am a foriegner so how dare I voice an opinion. Your being a Canadian means nothing to me, if you have an opinion on this subject, I want to hear it. But in point of fact the Founding Fathers did not want to shove a particular religion down anyone's throat, but they were very keenly aware that their Revolution, and their founding principles, were squarely founded in Judeo-Christian theology and morality. They immediately went about establishing the posts of Chaplains for their legislature, for their armies and navies, one of their first acts in Congress was to purchase King James Bibles for the people. And, as someone pointed out in another thread, while there is no mandate for swearing an oath in the Constitution, with the words 'so help me God' or using the Bible to swear upon when taking an oath, George Washington went to church the morning of his inauguration as our nation's first President, along with members of Congress, took the oath of office with his hand firmly placed upon his family Bible, and uttered the same words then, as we heard from every President since! [b]So help me, God![/b] That, in a nutshell, says it all! You can rant and rave about it, you can besmirch the honor of the Founding Fathers and call them hypocrites, you can belittle them, you can excoriate them, you can do as you wish, but you cannot take their clearly and remarkably expressed Christian faith away from them! Eric The(NeedISayMore?)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:50:11 AM EDT
[#34]
Post from Stormbringer -
Oh and when you get to the top of the tree you can see further then those who are stuck on the ground. You can see further then the trees that BLIND those on the ground..... Come on up!! The view is GREAT!! Nonsense, m'boy, I can see very clearly from the heavenly perch that I aspire to![:D] It is the same heavenly perch from which the Founding Fathers saw this country and the handiwork of the Lord, as well. Eric The(HonestToGod)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:52:00 AM EDT
[#35]
[i]MisterGreens writes[/i]: Either have a moment of silence where everyone of ALL faiths or whatever can privately pray to their gods, or don't do it at all. The reason why many christians are upset at the 9th circuit ruling is this belief, that if you want people to believe the way that you do then you have to get to them early, and taking it out of the schools is one less mechanism for propaganda. As 'fair' a solution as this would be, it is sadly unfeasible. There are several instances where established 'moments of silence' have been ruled violations of the Separation Clause. And no, sir...the reason why many Christians are so upset over the decision is that it is another step towards the neuterizations of public religious expressions of any kind. [i]Stormbringer writes[/i]: The mother is a christian...no doubt. The Daughter....she is what??? 8?? Somehow I do not think that an eight year old is equipped to make such choices.....they are far to malable. Which is exactly why the mention of god in government sanctioned items is so dangerous. You are trying to make it the norm....what is wrong with a neutral government and neutral government schools and you teach your kids the way you want and mine get taught the way I want....What a concept!! Yes, but as primary caregiver, the mother has even more of a legal and moral right to decide how her child will be raised...a matter of which was not consulted when the case was brought forth. It is not the concept of a neutral government that is the issue, but the methods by which it is being established. Stringent elimination of all religious references, and in some cases punishing the use of religious speech is NOT creating a 'neutral' environment. It is creating, in a practical sense, a pro-atheist environment, one which is designed to favor firstly the rights of the nonbeliever, and is not in keeping with the concept of religious liberty. There exists a right to religious freedom AND religious liberty, and were this to truly be a 'neutral' undertaking, then BOTH most be accorded the utmost levels of respect. ...that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty. [url]http://www.worldpolicy.org/americas/religion/va-religiousfreedom.html[/url] Whether or not Jefferson was a deist, and considering his pledge of eternal opposition of tyranny over the mind of man, he has a keen respect for the right of religious expression. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:54:27 AM EDT
[#36]
Hey I have no problem with Judeo Christian morality.....as my office Bible thumper says I would make an ideal Christian..........if only for the fact that I do not believe in god.
For the record. Please point out the following.. When did I rant? When have I raved? When have I besmirched....ANYONE?? Oh as to your perch??? I thought you only got that when you have died?? Are you some sort of ghost sent to haunt me?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 5:59:18 AM EDT
[#37]
Hardcase....anyone who is against a moment of silence to honour an occasion is AN ASSHOLE!! Plain and simple!!
I have often struggled with trying to come up with a balance between my desire for non-religiousness( is that a word) and my earnest desire for EVERYONES FREEDOM OF THOUGHT.....( Even for those individuals who belive in god All I have been able to come up with it to rally behind the anit religion banner in an effort to keep balance. I have NO doubt what so ever that give 1/100th of a chance the religious right would turn the USA into a theocracy......followed by the religious freedom war agianst the hordes of the North. Edited to add..... I also have NO DOUBT that some atheiests would take away the RIGHT for anyone to believe in a god of their choice..... Sad very sad. Edited to remove besmirchment |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 6:00:07 AM EDT
[#38]
Sorry, [b]Stormbringer[/b], but when did I say that [u]you[/u] ranted and raved, or besmirched?
I said [u]no[/u] such thing. No more than I accused you of being gay, lesbian, or liberal! And, in response to your last point, the lofty perch that I see from is that permitted to members of our faith, sometimes referred to as a 'glimpse of glory', and no, you do not need to be dead to see it. But I am most certain that the Founding Fathers were there, at times! But I ain't a holy ghost [u]yet[/u]! Eric The(HonestToGod)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 6:05:35 AM EDT
[#39]
Here!?!
Quoted: You can rant and rave about it, you can besmirch the honor of the Founding Fathers and call them hypocrites, you can belittle them, you can excoriate them, you can do as you wish, but you cannot take their clearly and remarkably expressed Christian faith away from them! quote] You know I had a "friend" in hight school that had similar experiences....he said he had glimses of an alternate reality...Prompted him to write some real great novels...Till he burned out on drugs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 6:09:55 AM EDT
[#40]
I'm sorry, [b]Stormbringer[/b], but that was the universal 'you' that I was using in the post that you referred to.
When I think that [u]you[/u], [b]Stormbringer[/b], have ranted and raved, and besmirched, I will certainly let [u]you[/u] know! [u]You[/u] can count on it![:D] Until then, it is simply the way we Yanks talk! Eric The(Ugh!'Yanks'ReferringToMe!)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 6:27:55 AM EDT
[#41]
LOL
Oh in that case I will run above and remove the besmirchment I put in for your amusement..... No harm No foul |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 6:32:02 AM EDT
[#42]
Quoted: Post from mattja - Okay, I didn't know that. I thought they all referred to the God of the Old Testament. Are you saying the Muslims reinvented him? Hmm, I'd hate the use the phrase 'reinventing God', but, basically, the God of the Old Testament is nothing like the Allah referred to in the Koran, and nothing, but nothing, is said concerning Allah in the Koran that didn't come from the mind of Mohammad. So Mohammad 'invented' his own god, giving this god some 'cachet' by linking him to the one described in the Hebrew Bible. Eric The(HonestToGod)Hun[>]:)] Thanks for the information. I never studied the God of Mohammad as he relates to the Hebrew God. Looks like I need some edumacating in that department. :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 6:35:57 AM EDT
[#43]
ETH.....all men invented their gods.
God created man in his own image... Man being the consummate gentleman....returned the favor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 6:38:50 AM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: I'm not particularly religious myself, but I think it's relevant that the basis of our legal system stems from Judeo-Christian beliefs. The second salient point is that, "allowing" students to choose to recite the pledge, the Lord's prayer, or a passage from the Torah, is FAR removed from the "establishment" of a specific State sponsored religion. Our laws were intended to prevent PERSECUTION, not to avoid offending the sensibilities of some whiners. Our Constitution is steeped in Judeo-Christian beliefs, but guarantees' your right to worship as you see fit. No one will be banished, burned at the stake or turned into a toad, for practicing their religion or lack thereof. I'm fairly sick of people who wish to undermine the moral grounding of our country, for petty reasons wholly related to their own aggrandizement. That's basically what I always thought, with the slight exception that it was my understanding US law is based on English Common Law. But as to your main point, that the establishment clause was put there to avoid the establishment of a state religion and to prevent religious persecution, that's 100% as far as I know. I think the whiners have the right to whine, but to let the flea control the dog is absolutely insane. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 6:43:48 AM EDT
[#45]
Post from Stormbringer -
ETH.....all men invented their gods. Well, that's [u]one[/u] theory! [:D] Eric The(IHaveQuiteAnother)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
