|
Author
|
Topic: Separation of Church and State
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
Message 169 of 305 (270553)
12-18-2005 4:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 168 by randman
12-18-2005 3:35 PM
|
|
Re: Open your mind a bit
and making civil laws and even basing those laws on religious values and beliefs. only if those laws have a secular basis. if the laws are purely religious, or even if they have a particular religious bias then they are still proscribed by the constitution: that way lies theocracy. and once again "secular" doesn't mean "devoid" it means neutral of religious influences.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 168 by randman, posted 12-18-2005 3:35 PM | | randman has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 172 of 305 (270597)
12-18-2005 7:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 167 by randman
12-18-2005 3:32 PM
|
|
Re: Open your mind a bit
A theocracy is (that definition we started with from dictionary.com):
A government ruled by or subject to religious authority. That is defining the behavior pretty specifically, don't you think? Apply that definition to most of the governments in history and tell me what your conclusion is. The degree of the religious influence does not change or alter the fact of it being there. {abe} your "type" of government is defined by its behavior.{/abe} This message has been edited by RAZD, 12*18*2005 07:19 PM
Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 167 by randman, posted 12-18-2005 3:32 PM | | randman has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
Source? Comment? Anything?
Please cite your sources when you copy and paste from another website. This is not only more honest but more ethical. Otherwise this is plagarism. Please comment in your own words on any articles that you quote -- what we debate is your opinion not some book or other website.
Now I assume you - personally - are arguing that {Separation of Church and State is a Christian Principle} rather than the converse. If true, then this means that anyone that argues for any wedding of church and state is un-christian or even anti-christian, because it would violate this "Christian Principle" -- and christians should be the staunchest defenders of this seperation. If false, then it is just another false assertion by those wanting to take credit for every aspect of american government as some christian principle or other ... I'm still waiting for someone to assert that democracy is a "Christian Principle" -- and I won't be surprised if I see it.  There is also the matter of logically false construction: All{A} is {B} therefor All{B} is {A} is logically false because {B} could include {C} as well as All{A} Thus we have christians and deists and others claiming that separation of church and state is a vital principle of american government ... It is a principle that transcends just christian or just deist or just american. Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
Re: Source? Comment? Anything?
He may have been a Baptist, or just absorbed during all those Baptist meetings he attended as a youth or perhaps he discovered it by the use of reason. Most likely the latter. See List of deists - WikipediaThomas Jefferson Ever heard of The Jefferson Bible? ALL supernatural elements removed, treats jesus as a historical normal enlightened human being. Welcome to the steep learning curve of reality.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
Re: Source? Comment? Anything?
Anyone who advocates any sort of spiritual authority over government is un-american because he rejects the absolute and exclusive authority of the people over matters of government and violates what Founding Fathers called a more perfect union. Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
Re: The United State Was Founded As A Heathen Nation That Disowned God
Re: The "God" on the money is an unknown god When religion is mixed with politics, religion is always corrupted. In the case of "In God We Trust" on the nation's coins, the corruption is such that it prevents us from even determining which God we are under. Of course this is no different than reality, where we cannot determine (a) IF a god exists and then (b) WHICH of several billion possiblities is likely to be true. That makes the act of putting it on money not likely to be a real corrupting action. Who knows, considering this question may liberate some people from some archaic preconceptions. Personlly I think it makes money 'dirty' by tying it to something that has no relationship to it.
God should never be the object of human legislation. Fully concur. There should be no laws with the word, in any form, in it, or even of any religion, other than to express individual freedom to pursue the religious inclination of their chosing. Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 196 by FreddyFlash, posted 05-20-2006 10:31 PM | | FreddyFlash has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
What - public schools DIDN'T teach christianity???
The Myth That Public Schools Taught the Bible and General Christianity Exactly. And this myth is promoted by the religious right with no regard to their being wrong. Thanks.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 201 of 305 (319282)
06-08-2006 8:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 200 by Faith
06-08-2006 6:55 PM
|
|
There was no public school system until the late 1800s anyway. Isn't that really the issue though? If there was no public school system it couln't have used religious text for educating kids. Any schools before then would have been more community schools than "public" and would depend on the resources of the community. (Good) Teachers would also use resources that they knew the children had in their homes -- so teaching reading to Christian children using a bible when that is the only book in the childs house makes sense, but using it for non-christian children would not make any sense -- they would be better off with a loaned book or two. Predominantly Christian communities would likely select "good christian" teachers for their schools and some may even have directed that a certain amount of study be biblical -- but this does not make it correct. We also know that a lot of communities were racist and bigoted, and we've moved (hopefully) forward from those days. Just because something was done in the past is no justification to keep doing it, particularly when it is counterproductive to the ideals, the values, of america: that all people are created equal and have equal rights to pursue their chosen beliefs. Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 200 by Faith, posted 06-08-2006 6:55 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 227 of 305 (327413)
06-29-2006 7:02 AM
|
Reply to: Message 225 by riVeRraT
06-29-2006 6:27 AM
|
|
once more ...
...the "tyranny" is when people try to take God out of our schools, and government completely. We haven't. Last time I checked there was no litmus test for being an atheist to either go to school or to serve in government. There was no doctrine to sign for admission to either.
If you pray in school, you are not part of a religion. You can pray in the mannor of any religion, or choose not to pray, without fear. Because we are free. Or if you pray anywhere else. This is what is allowed by the constitution.
When we took prayer out of the schools, we made atheism a religion, and a national one at that. We haven't. See your comment quoted above. What part of being able to pray in school means prayer was taken out of school? Or do you mean when they took out forced prayer in certain (not all) schools where they were enforcing a religion on others? You cannot have enforced prayer just like you cannot have enforced non-prayer. That is what the freedom is about -- both ways. And going back to your first comment quoted, taking out enforced prayer while leaving individual prayer allowed means that it has not been taken completely out. What is left is your pure freedom to pray when and where you as an individually want to, unsullied by others trying to dictate it to you. Enjoy. Edited by RAZD, : typ0
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 225 by riVeRraT, posted 06-29-2006 6:27 AM | | riVeRraT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 230 by riVeRraT, posted 06-29-2006 8:12 PM | | RAZD has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 235 of 305 (327691)
06-30-2006 7:07 AM
|
Reply to: Message 234 by nator
06-29-2006 9:33 PM
|
|
Re: once more ...
The specific prayer that all students in one New York school district were required to recite in the 1950's was what brought on the Supreme Court decision that stopped state-sponsored prayer in school: It is also instructive to look at when the prayers were introduced before we discuss the issue of "taking them out" -- in this case in the 1950's ... during McCarthyism Hysteria? As a result of {SOME} chrisitans again trying to get where they don't belong? There has been a constant assault since the days of the constitution on this religious freedom by those who only want it "free" for their kind. Enjoy Edited by AdminOmni, : fixed the quote box
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 234 by nator, posted 06-29-2006 9:33 PM | | nator has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 274 of 305 (328288)
07-02-2006 2:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 253 by riVeRraT
07-01-2006 9:57 AM
|
|
We all have kids. They go to school to learn ...
I'm sorry riVeRraT, but you just don't see how absolutely wrong you are.
I was involved with getting "The Power Team" in our local area.
The Power Team is a ministry that preaches the gospel. In other words you were directly involved in an activist christian political movement whose express purpose is to impose a christian bias on your public funded school system The Power Team 2.0
To reach people with the gospel of Jesus Christ which an ordinary church meeting or event cannot. That's from their website "vision" statement. Can you tell me how it pertains to education?
They are never allowed to mention the word God. They have to teach Christian principals without saying the word Christ or God. Schools are NOT churches, and are NOT places to preach YOUR religion, no matter WHAT it is. So here you are, complaining about people "taking god out of school" etcetera, when it is YOU trying to IMPOSE it on others REGARDLESS of THEIR beliefs. You have a arrogant unmitigated gall if you want my personal opinion. So you are blocked from instigating such an ILLEGAL and IMMORAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL imposition on PUBLIC schools, and YOU complain. Well BOO eF'in HOO. Now get out of my constitution.
I live in the greater NYC area, many Godless liberal abound. In other words, everyone that doesn't pander to your pet religious discrimiination du jour? Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 253 by riVeRraT, posted 07-01-2006 9:57 AM | | riVeRraT has replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 275 of 305 (328291)
07-02-2006 2:57 PM
|
Reply to: Message 263 by riVeRraT
07-01-2006 8:13 PM
|
|
Re: To clear things up a bit...
They do not mean the exact same thing. There is 365 names for God, in the Christian faith, Yahweh is but one of them. A rose by any other name ... Stop equivocating.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 263 by riVeRraT, posted 07-01-2006 8:13 PM | | riVeRraT has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 276 of 305 (328297)
07-02-2006 3:09 PM
|
Reply to: Message 266 by riVeRraT
07-01-2006 8:27 PM
|
|
You sure got gall.
riVeRraT writes: Message 266Not promotion, education of. The school can stand there and say, we are not promoting this, we are just showing what it is. DrJones* writes: Message 270So you support Muslims, Hindus, Sihks, Satanists coming into your school and using public money (taxes are paying for the school) to show your children what their religion is? More to the point, what have YOU - riVeRraT - done to educate the kids in your school about other religions: what have YOU done to "just showing what" {they are}, as it does NOT promote other religions but just educates people on them right? Or are you just another biased closed minded political activist christian hypocrite? If you have not provided any other relibious "education" then you ARE promoting ONE religion over all others. YOU are violating the principal of separation - YOU are wrong. Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 266 by riVeRraT, posted 07-01-2006 8:27 PM | | riVeRraT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 288 by riVeRraT, posted 07-02-2006 10:59 PM | | RAZD has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 298 of 305 (328457)
07-03-2006 7:23 AM
|
Reply to: Message 287 by riVeRraT
07-02-2006 10:50 PM
|
|
Re: We all have kids. They go to school to learn ...
Can you tell me how it pertains to education?
To reach people with the gospel of Jesus Christ which an ordinary church meeting or event cannot. School is not the place to teach religion period end argument. That is your church and YOUR job to do. Allowing it in public school IS ESTABLISHING a religion.
Message 288ore to the point, what have YOU - riVeRraT - done to educate the kids in your school about other religions:
IT is not my job to teach kids about something I am not qualified to teach. IT is my job to allow it. Cop-out. YOU brought one religion into school and then wash your hands of providing the rest of the educational experience.
Or are you just another biased closed minded political activist christian hypocrite?
Get a life, have you not learned anythign ahbout me yet? I thought I had, which is why I am more appalled at this behavior from you than I would be from others. You have demonstrated yourself to be just another biased closed minded political activist christian hypocrite. You come on here crying about being SO restricted and SO put down in your kid's schools, when the truth is that YOU are trying to subvert the system, the truth is that YOU want to expose kids in public school to ONE and ONLY ONE religion, the truth is that YOU are trying to impose one religion on others. Get a life? I've got one, it is called american, where we have freedom for all different religious views from atheism to completely irrational fundyisms, but NO-ONE has the 'freedom' to impose their religious views on others. You want sunday school not public school. Enjoy. Enjoy. Edited by RAZD, : added more rant
Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 287 by riVeRraT, posted 07-02-2006 10:50 PM | | riVeRraT has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2