Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one is demanding to stop prayer at home, in church or outside govt buildings.
No one is addressing that. We all agree on that.
If you missed my point, you missed my point. I am not arguing just to argue. I am saying there are two sides to this . . . folks can demand people DO NOT PRAY at a meeting but people can't demand that they ARE ALLOWED TO PRAY.
That means one group has rights the other group doesn't have - at least, that is the way the folks who are being denied the right to pray feel.
As I have stated, it is not a problem to me. I do my own praying and meditation in my own way and at whatever time I feel is appropriate. I don't need group prayer in order to exercise my "rights." But not everyone feels the same way I do.
If you missed my point, you missed my point. I am not arguing just to argue. I am saying there are two sides to this . . . folks can demand people DO NOT PRAY at a meeting but people can't demand that they ARE ALLOWED TO PRAY.
That means one group has rights the other group doesn't have - at least, that is the way the folks who are being denied the right to pray feel.
As I have stated, it is not a problem to me. I do my own praying and meditation in my own way and at whatever time I feel is appropriate. I don't need group prayer in order to exercise my "rights." But not everyone feels the same way I do.
well the folks demanding they not pray at a meeting have the law on their side...
..and I don't think you are arguing just to argue, I would call it dialogue.
Maybe marriage should be restricted to being an entirely religious construct, and a civil union would be the government version.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDL
That would solve the problem, now wouldn't it .
It's my way of saying: "I agree "
But what would government do, if there were no problems to solve? What if legislation had an end, instead of following a path of never ending conflict and confusion?
I come from a family that belongs to several different religions. I learned tolerance as a child for that reason.
Bingo.
Now, as a devout Christian, it saddens me that you have less and less 'of a stomach,' for the religious right.
But I think the main problem stems from a lack of respect, and adherence to, the Constitution.
The Constitution, when practiced, ensures that every man and woman has a voice.
But as we moved further and further away from the Constitution, a tension between the Left, and the Right, developed.
There are fascistic elements from the secular left, attacking the religious right.
There are fascistic elements from the religious right, attacking the secular left.
Getting back to the Constitution, will ensure that everyone's rights are protected. For as we move further and further away from the Constitution, rights of the individual give way to the rights of the majority. And in any collective group, will you find factions who disagree - the fruit of which we see today.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,809 posts, read 34,481,998 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDL
Bingo.
Now, as a devout Christian, it saddens me that you have less and less 'of a stomach,' for the religious right.
But I think the main problem stems from a lack of respect, and adherence to, the Constitution.
The Constitution, when practiced, ensures that every man and woman has a voice.
But as we moved further and further away from the Constitution, a tension between the Left, and the Right, developed.
There are fascistic elements from the secular left, attacking the religious right.
There are fascistic elements from the religious right, attacking the secular left.
Getting back to the Constitution, will ensure that everyone's rights are protected. For as we move further and further away from the Constitution, rights of the individual give way to the rights of the majority. And in any collective group, will you find factions who disagree - the fruit of which we see today.
I'm just plain tired of the lack of tolerance which is not confined to NC, or any geographic area. I have a cousin who learned religious intolerance from his wife, & they are in the Midwest.
The influx of people in this area isn't an excuse. The Presbyterians, Germans, & Quakers all came to the Piedmont during the colonial period about the same time. The Moravians came & many of the Quakers had Baptist family members who came as well. They all had one thing in common. They were all dissenters who were second class citizens. These are all christian religions. For politicians to try to cram their brand of christianity down other people's throats is not right. There were Jewish people in colonial North America, as well as members of other christian religions. We are not to put any one religion above another.
The ACLU got involved with these 2 guys in Rowan County. The ACLU gets involved when there is a complaint. What these guys did was against the law, plain & simple. It was also rude to put their religion above all others.
People can say what they want about Shelby. When you drive in Shelby there are signs on 2 major roads that the roadsides have been adopted by the Church of Wicca. They are not christian but they contribute their time & energy to the city. Everyone should be respected.
I'm just plain tired of the lack of tolerance which is not confined to NC, or any geographic area. I have a cousin who learned religious intolerance from his wife, & they are in the Midwest.
I ask for edification purposes: what constitutes religious intolerance?
I ask for edification purposes: what constitutes religious intolerance?
IMO its a "my religion is the true religion and anyone who doesnt practice it will burn in hell"
I asked earlier and no one answered. What if my religion has snakes... or requires me to speak in tongues... can I do that at a meeting? If Im a satanist can I pray to the devil? If I sit through your prayer will you sit through mine?
As a Christian, I just don't understand why anyone would want to force their religion on people who don't share their religion. By forcing, I do not mean me praying, worshiping, and serving in the name of Jesus Christ, but I mean commandeering government forums and events to communicate endorsement of religious views. Atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, Wiccans, and liberal Christians should not feel a stranger to their government anymore than the Christian. As such, the Constitution requires neutrality toward religion, ie, a secular state. Individuals and private groups are free to do as they please, but they can't commandeer the government to endorse their religious views. As a Christian, I consider this as doing unto my neighbors as I would have them do unto me. It's about respecting people of different religious orientations.
IMO its a "my religion is the true religion and anyone who doesnt practice it will burn in hell"
But this isn't this the point of organized religion? Either you believe it or you don't. All infidels go to hell.
I think the intolerance part comes in when you take some sort of action against the infidel because of this belief.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
"
