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.
Ron Paul wrote back in 2003 that the “secular Left” has been waging a war on religion and Christmas and that “the notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers.”
Waging "war on religion and Christmas", sounds like Bill O'Reilly. He obviously doesn't believe in a separation of church and state, many scholars would disagree. RP seems to be interpreting the Constitution to his liking in this case.
Which I agree with him.For one there is no written statement in the Constitution seperating church and state,it is a concept I believe that was talked by Thomas Jefferson.
Most founding fathers were very religious,the concept of seperation of church and state is based on the church or a certain church being the government,which in history such as the Spanish inquisition the church ruled much power over government and brought tyranny.
That is different from politicians being "religious" though.Modern day liberals have often fought to eliminate any mention or reference to God in public,which in my view is bringing a certain tryanny from the state itself.
Sorry to burst some bubbles here, but he has good ideas on some things, he is just irrelevant in my opinion..
He'll continue to run because he's stocking up cash for other campaigns. He has raised more cash then other candidates, but has anyone seen any political ad from him? Not me..
He's not fooling me why he will continue his election even though he has no chance of winning. All of the cash he's collecting he can use for his other campaigns.
Which I agree with him.For one there is no written statement in the Constitution seperating church and state,it is a concept I believe that was talked by Thomas Jefferson.
Most founding fathers were very religious,the concept of seperation of church and state is based on the church or a certain church being the government,which in history such as the Spanish inquisition the church ruled much power over government and brought tyranny.
That is different from politicians being "religious" though.Modern day liberals have often fought to eliminate any mention or reference to God in public,which in my view is bringing a certain tryanny from the state itself.
Certainly that's your right to believe that, but many Constitutional scholars don't. So, when Paul supporters claim he's upholding the Constitution, that's not cut and dried, that's open to debate. It also reinforces my point that for all the rhetoric to the contrary, RP is really just a member of the religious right of the Republican party.
Certainly that's your right to believe that, but many Constitutional scholars don't. So, when Paul supporters claim he's upholding the Constitution, that's not cut and dried, that's open to debate. It also reinforces my point that for all the rhetoric to the contrary, RP is really just a member of the religious right of the Republican party.
There is a difference between being religious, and persecuting someone who is not.The problem is,many on the leftist side lump anybody who is religious and pronounces they are as being a religious right wing nut who will imprision you if you don't go to church or something.
On the other hand,those who are leftist who want to eliminate all public account of God,if God is taken away then where do your rights come from then?If life liberty and pursuit of happiness doesn't come from a higher power then it belittles those rights as coming from a government or from man to man,which as history indicates when man has the power to give another man something most often he uses that power to take it away instead.
if the members of this forum had their way ron paul would be elected president months back- but the fact is he isnt as good as the other candidates so why cant yall just accept it
if the members of this forum had their way ron paul would be elected president months back- but the fact is he isnt as good as the other candidates so why cant yall just accept it
Certainly that's your right to believe that, but many Constitutional scholars don't. So, when Paul supporters claim he's upholding the Constitution, that's not cut and dried, that's open to debate. It also reinforces my point that for all the rhetoric to the contrary, RP is really just a member of the religious right of the Republican party.
Since you're the authority here... what does the Constitution prohibit in terms of religion, and who exactly does it prohibit?
if the members of this forum had their way ron paul would be elected president months back- but the fact is he isnt as good as the other candidates so why cant yall just accept it
I love it... isn't as good? Since Bush won the presidency twice, we can assume that he is great, right?
There is a difference between being religious, and persecuting someone who is not.The problem is,many on the leftist side lump anybody who is religious and pronounces they are as being a religious right wing nut who will imprision you if you don't go to church or something.
When you are told, such as non believers are, that they're going to hell over and over, you begin to wonder. Also, many on the religious right would be perfectly happy in a theocracy. Why can't those on the religious right keep their beliefs private instead of trying to push it on the rest of the country, as in advocating teaching intelligent design in our schools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking
On the other hand,those who are leftist who want to eliminate all public account of God,if God is taken away then where do your rights come from then?If life liberty and pursuit of happiness doesn't come from a higher power then it belittles those rights as coming from a government or from man to man,which as history indicates when man has the power to give another man something most often he uses that power to take it away instead.
Many of us don't believe in a higher power, yet we live our lives with a moral code devoid of all religion. You don't need a belief in God to be a good person.
Christians act as if they're being persecuted just because some parents don't want their children saying Christian prayers in school. Again, why can't religion be kept private, it doesn't belong in politics anymore than the Ten Commandments belongs being plastered in a courtroom.
Since you're the authority here... what does the Constitution prohibit in terms of religion, and who exactly does it prohibit?
Though it's a source of great debate, many believe the establishment clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or the preference of one religion over another, or the support of a religious idea with no identifiable secular purpose.
I think you have to admit the last two prohibitions relate directly to today's Christianity.
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.
