In my country our government constantly funds christian organisations
Ah well
I would prefer to see funding for a secular center for people from certain areas
__________________
Sign up for Minus online storage and get 10 GB of Free Space today! Sign up Here!
uhm
Where is Palin and the Tea Party?
This is about Christian Family Values, and Freedom and Taking America Back and REAL Americans.
Where are you people? Oh right, your puppet masters need you to follow the playbook.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Maxey
Do I think Sarah Palin is more qualified than Obama to lead this country, most certainly. She has the experience lacking in Obama because she ran Alaska. As for McCain, still not sure. I want to like him, but he has problems. Likely not my choice for president... Bob Maxey Nov.12, 2010
The heck are you smoking and why do you try and derail every thread I start?
Can't you follow along, must EVERYTHING be listed out for you.
1. People are AGAINST the NY Community Center
2. Now you complaining that TAX dollars will be used
3. While America CLAIMS of separation of C&S they are STILL peddling Christianity. Proof, look at the whole Obama is a Muslim thing, so WHAT if he is and or was. I thought you said separation of C&S...right
4. T Party ppl want to take America back and call for REAL Americans to stand up and also wanting traditional family values etc...
So, here is a clear case for them to protest if on nothing else but the TAX issue alone. So where are they?
droiduzr2: you DO realize that you're becoming an "anti-birther", right?
Not EVERY discussion of American politics requires "ZOMG!!!!!one1eleventy!! The Ebil Tee Partiez"
Sometimes, groups not even related to either the Left or the Right become involved in political issues. Weird, I know...
Honestly, I would prefer we remove all the BS concerning religion from our laws. No special privledges, no tax breaks, no Federal money. For ANY faith.
However... if Christian centers can get Federal dollars, so can Islamic centers...
__________________
NO Child Should Live in Fear
The Following User Says Thank You to Strings For This Useful Post:
3. While America CLAIMS of separation of C&S they are STILL peddling Christianity. Proof, look at the whole Obama is a Muslim thing, so WHAT if he is and or was. I thought you said separation of C&S...right
That's absolutely hilarious.
The fact that the citizens of a nation don't want a Muslim president doesn't mean the "government" peddles Christianity.
I understand that you believe what you believe and you don't need actual facts to back that up... but this is probably the biggest reasoning fail I've seen in a long time.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to byteware For This Useful Post:
Its not just religions they fund, anything they know will put the lint out the govs' hair. But I do believe they need to seperate church from state being that alot of people can not be in politics becuase of their religous beliefs. Especially if you have none.
The fact that the citizens of a nation don't want a Muslim president doesn't mean the "government" peddles Christianity.
I understand that you believe what you believe and you don't need actual facts to back that up... but this is probably the biggest reasoning fail I've seen in a long time.
Man, you really have comprehension issues.
I guess to you the Presidents RELIGION is MORE IMPORTANT that his ideas or leadership or character.
hmmm Didn't Hitler brainwash a Nation to become the "President" of Germany BASED on Religion or was it his IDEAS the PEOPLE VOTED FOR?
So in your world there can NEVER be an Atheist President because based on YOUR reply you would only vote for a Christian.
But I do believe they need to seperate church from state being that alot of people can not be in politics becuase of their religous beliefs. Especially if you have none.
That's actually more a function of the voting public than of any law that I've ever heard of.
wait wait, how's this. "I like your lifestyle as much as you like my church"?
You bring out the worst in this forum, that's quite the accomplishment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Jedi
Hows this. If you don't like what others post in your thread then don't post it to begin with. Saves you and others the headache.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crude
/ignored
What are you, 19 or something?
You retort seems juvenile complete with the sticker your finger in your ear image yelling la la la I can't hear you.
You do know what they say when you point your finger...3 are pointing right back at YOU.
That was the most childish thing I have seen on a forum...oh look someone that is challenging my thought process is hurting my feelings...*Crude takes his ball and runs home*
Dark Jedi- Crude is all about FREEDOM of HIS speech, didn't you get the email
Since this is a thread about church and state, I thought I would pose this question here. Where does a US Federal judge get the authority to make a ruling regarding the anti-Sharia law passed in Oklahoma? I can't seem to find anything in the Constitution that gives that authority.
__________________
Obama/Biden 2012...Because some Americans still have jobs!! ~ Mike Church
Since this is a thread about church and state, I thought I would pose this question here. Where does a US Federal judge get the authority to make a ruling regarding the anti-Sharia law passed in Oklahoma? I can't seem to find anything in the Constitution that gives that authority.
I am not familiar with this Oklahoma judge and his views. Is his ruling for or against Sharia law? Please clarify.
We have laws that some argue make sense that are not specifically addressed in the Constitution. Nothing specifically about smoking, transfats, or driving slower than 65 MPH. One could interpret "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" as being all the justification you need to enjoy smoke, fats, and going fast. If so, then we can do almost anything we want and screw the laws and society.
As for Sharia law, have you investigated what that means? It is certainly tied to religion and therefore, it violates the Separation of Church and State provisions some people falsely claim is written somewhere in our founding documents. Trust me; you do not want Sharia law because it is quite dangerous and can be abused by extremists.
Bob Maxey
The Following User Says Thank You to Bob Maxey For This Useful Post:
According to answers provided by Mr. Google, "In God We Trust" was put on all paper currency by an Act of Congress in 1955; the phrase was declared the national motto by an Act of Congress in 1956 and first appeared on paper currency in 1957."
So perhaps we change our national motto and that might change the currency. I am a Philatelist, not a numismatist.
Trust in this folks: if you think religion was not important in the founding of this country, you need to read a flipping book or two or 25. Christianity has always played an important part; the founders recognized this and lived their life by the good book.
This country is still predominantly Christian, I suppose.
Bob Maxey
The Following User Says Thank You to Bob Maxey For This Useful Post:
Trust in this folks: if you think religion was not important in the founding of this country, you need to read a flipping book or two or 25. Christianity has always played an important part; the founders recognized this and lived their life by the good book.
Except for the fact that this nation was founded as a secular one, and that most of the prominent founders were deists and were very outspokenly against organized religion.
Except for the fact that this nation was founded as a secular one, and that most of the prominent founders were deists and were very outspokenly against organized religion.
I can give you 25 quotes off the top of my head that show they were against government. Can you give me 5 that show they were against organized religion?
I can give you 25 quotes off the top of my head that show they were against government. Can you give me 5 that show they were against organized religion?
Google.com
From what I remember, some were against it like Thomas Jefferson, and some were for it. You can easily find your answers through google.
I am not familiar with this Oklahoma judge and his views. Is his ruling for or against Sharia law? Please clarify.
We have laws that some argue make sense that are not specifically addressed in the Constitution. Nothing specifically about smoking, transfats, or driving slower than 65 MPH. One could interpret "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" as being all the justification you need to enjoy smoke, fats, and going fast. If so, then we can do almost anything we want and screw the laws and society.
As for Sharia law, have you investigated what that means? It is certainly tied to religion and therefore, it violates the Separation of Church and State provisions some people falsely claim is written somewhere in our founding documents. Trust me; you do not want Sharia law because it is quite dangerous and can be abused by extremists.
Bob Maxey
This past election cycle, the state of Oklahoma put a measure on the ballot that would not allow any state judge from using Sharia law in any of it's rulings. A member of CAIR has sued the state in federal court and a federal judge has stopped the law from taking effect.
So my question is, where does a US Federal court judge get the authority to step in and even hear this case? Seems to me this belongs in a state court and that this is between the citizens of Oklahoma and the state.
What are you, 19 or something?
You retort seems juvenile complete with the sticker your finger in your ear image yelling la la la I can't hear you.
You do know what they say when you point your finger...3 are pointing right back at YOU.
That was the most childish thing I have seen on a forum...oh look someone that is challenging my thought process is hurting my feelings...*Crude takes his ball and runs home*
Dark Jedi- Crude is all about FREEDOM of HIS speech, didn't you get the email
Sorry I don't drink his Kool-aid
He can Ignore me all he wants to. I wont cry over it.
And how exactly does it damage you if we don't reove our national motto from our national currency? What would you suggest to replace it?
Bob Maxey
Remember it was our gov that said church and state should be separate. So our currency should have that motto taken off as it deals with a religious deity. God is part of the christian faith? Right?
Me personally it doesn't matter. Its just if our gov should practice what they preach lol.
Remember it was our gov that said church and state should be separate. So our currency should have that motto taken off as it deals with a religious deity. God is part of the christian faith? Right?
Me personally it doesn't matter. Its just if our gov should practice what they preach lol.
True to a point. Our government must follow the constitution and it is that document that says there is a separation of sorts. It says “congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.” That means, there will never be a state church. The words Separation of Church and State is NOT in the founding documents.
The belief in God or a god is very much a part of the United States and it has ALWAYS been important to the majority of Americans. So get over it.
One can argue that the motto on the currency should be changed because it seemingly violates this arguable separation clause that does not really exist; I argue that our founders and most of the country were religious and it reflects the views of the majority of Americans and it respects the religious view held by most people.
And again, what the hell difference does it make if “In God We Trust” is on the money or something else. Guaranteed you will not see it changed because every little piss ant fool in the country would argue until hell freezes over about what should replace the motto.
I think that the motto should perhaps be changed before you start worrying about it on the money.
God, there are better things to worry about, don’t you think?
Reverend Bob Maxey
The Following User Says Thank You to Bob Maxey For This Useful Post:
True to a point. Our government must follow the constitution and it is that document that says there is a separation of sorts. It says “congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.” That means, there will never be a state church. The words Separation of Church and State is NOT in the founding documents.
The belief in God or a god is very much a part of the United States and it has ALWAYS been important to the majority of Americans. So get over it.
One can argue that the motto on the currency should be changed because it seemingly violates this arguable separation clause that does not really exist; I argue that our founders and most of the country were religious and it reflects the views of the majority of Americans and it respects the religious view held by most people.
And again, what the hell difference does it make if “In God We Trust” is on the money or something else. Guaranteed you will not see it changed because every little piss ant fool in the country would argue until hell freezes over about what should replace the motto.
I think that the motto should perhaps be changed before you start worrying about it on the money.
God, there are better things to worry about, don’t you think?
Reverend Bob Maxey
Many of the founding fathers wasn't religious and didn't attend church. They did believe in a higher power.
Also it doesn't matters to me if in God we trust is on the money or not. Some one posted seperation church and state. So I always bring this up as its funny . So don't blow a gasket thinking this takes up my time and I think it shouldn't be on there.
Man, you really have comprehension issues.
I guess to you the Presidents RELIGION is MORE IMPORTANT that his ideas or leadership or character.
Ok... let me point something out... you can find the same leadership qualities and ideas in EVERY religion... so yes, his religion is a criteria in this country, one of many.
As for comprehension issues...
Quote:
Originally Posted by droiduzr2
hmmm Didn't Hitler brainwash a Nation to become the "President" of Germany BASED on Religion or was it his IDEAS the PEOPLE VOTED FOR?
It's Chancellor, and HITLER was not elected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by droiduzr2
So in your world there can NEVER be an Atheist President because based on YOUR reply you would only vote for a Christian.
Now we see a MAJOR comprehension issue here.
I don't take someone's religion into account when I vote for someone. However, you are NOT getting elected in this country unless you are a practicing Christian.
Just so we comprehend each other. Don't bring hitler into a conversation, unless you actually know what you are talking about.
Ok... let me point something out... you can find the same leadership qualities and ideas in EVERY religion... so yes, his religion is a criteria in this country, one of many.
As for comprehension issues...
It's Chancellor, and HITLER was not elected.
Now we see a MAJOR comprehension issue here.
I don't take someone's religion into account when I vote for someone. However, you are NOT getting elected in this country unless you are a practicing Christian.
Just so we comprehend each other. Don't bring hitler into a conversation, unless you actually know what you are talking about.
Hey, what's the matter doncha like my Tea Party strategy to link anything I don't like to the Nazis and Hitler? The people on Fox news says the President is another Hitler.
Chancellor = Prime Minister = Taoiseach (he put "President" in brackets - reffering to the executive - I guess )
Chancellor != President. The President of Germany was Hindenburg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowninty
Hitlers party got the most votes in two elections, most knew of their extreme bigotism
Elect the party - leader becomes Prime Minister
Hitler ran for President. He received 36% of the vote. Hindenburg was re-elected with 53% of the vote.
Hitler was APPOINTED Chancellor by President Hindenburg. Granted there was a huge amount of manipulation going on in the background, but that isn't really what's important in this discussion.
Considering this all happened on YOUR door step, it's pitiful that you have to be informed of the facts by an American.
Chancellor != President. The President of Germany was Hindenburg.
Of course, I thought you were confused with regards to the executive
Quote:
Hitler ran for President. He received 36% of the vote. Hindenburg was re-elected with 53% of the vote.
Yes, the German war hero
In Ireland today (our system is modelled on the Weimar system) our President plays a VERY ceromonial role - she just accepts the nomination of PM and signs in laws
Quote:
Hitler was APPOINTED Chancellor by President Hindenburg.
Yes your point?
Quote:
Granted there was a huge amount of manipulation going on in the background, but that isn't really what's important in this discussion.
True, Hidenburg was no fan of Hitler IIRC, however he had little choice - the peoples will
Quote:
Considering this all happened on YOUR door step, it's pitiful that you have to be informed of the facts by an American.
1Likes
Seperation of church and state?
