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.
How would Christine O'Donnell feel if she were congratulated for her positions by a Dearborn, Michigan school board, who informed her they wished to teach Sharia Law in class, and teach the just and merciful ways of Islam in their public schools? Local control, baby!
And then what if Delaware happened to gain a big influx of Muslims, and they elected Muslim school board members, who then wanted to do the same thing?
Somehow, I think Christine would be changing her tune!
Actually, that's roughly the time right-wing religous wack-a-doodles started replacing Government with God:
Adding the word God to the pledge of allegiance, changing our national motto from "E pluribus unum" (From one, many) to "In God We Trust", adding the word God to paper money..................
...and what harm, exactly, came from any of these? Did any of these require you to go to church, or require you to perform some action, or infringe on your liberty?
What the Constitution stops at the local high school door? I think not.
True, true.
But it takes a scholar to study the Constitution and come up with:
[paraphrased]
'...that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you,...'
How would Christine O'Donnell feel if she were congratulated for her positions by a Dearborn, Michigan school board, who informed her they wished to teach Sharia Law in class, and teach the just and merciful ways of Islam in their public schools? Local control, baby!
And then what if Delaware happened to gain a big influx of Muslims, and they elected Muslim school board members, who then wanted to do the same thing?
Somehow, I think Christine would be changing her tune!
did she call for schools to teach a specific religion, as you suggested?
Ahhhhh....ok. When your boy doesn't answer a question it's because he's too smart to stoop to that level...when the opponent doesn't answer it as you'd like to see it answered it (she was right, btw), you call her an idiot.
That's yet another example of leftist elitism that, honestly, we are sick of.
Kind of like the following:
Moderator: Would you like to have an opportunity to answer that before we move on?
Politician: ...I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people.
Oops, that was Sarah Palin, that leftist elitist , not only refusing to answer a question from her opponent, but from the debate moderator!
I almost agree with you... but I can't. It's because when this type of thing has happened in communities where the local boards decided to have ceremonies in Christian Churches, and it wasn't until those who opposed those grounds based upon the concept of separation of church and state had to file lawsuit and then have it decided in their favor. Christians who apparently didn't agree with that concept felt strongly that their local decision should have taken precedence.
So, what kind of uproar would those same folks have if their local community did decide to have their ceremony in a Mosque? Don't you think there would be a lawsuit filed by those folks to stop it? Or, as a Christian... would you say "Well, it's a local matter and I'll attend the ceremony even though it's in a place of worship that I don't worship?" Would you go to the Mosque? Or temple? Or whatever?
Still sounds like a local issue to me. A state can pass a regulation that says no religion of any kind is allowed in their schools, but is is not a matter for the federal government.
That letter written by Jefferson, that so many people here like to point to as the basis for the wall of separation between church and state, also has Jefferson referring to the god of man and our creator, but is this also used as a basis for law?
did she call for schools to teach a specific religion, as you suggested?
She has called for schools to be able to teach Creationism, which she is on record as defining as the literal 6000 year, Adam and Eve Genesis story.
A serious person cannot doubt that her desire to erase separation of church and state would be for the purpose of introducing Christianity into our government and institutions. The whole history of this "movement" of church/state separation deniers is expressly for this purpose, to return America to a status of "Christian nation", something it's never been, by the way.
Still sounds like a local issue to me. A state can pass a regulation that says no religion of any kind is allowed in their schools, but is is not a matter for the federal government.
That letter written by Jefferson, that so many people here like to point to as the basis for the wall of separation between church and state, also has Jefferson referring to the god of man and our creator, but is this also used as a basis for law?
The letter from Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists used the phrase "wall of separation" as a definition of the intent of the establishment clause of the 1st amendment.
Do you have anything to show that Jefferson explained the rationale for any other part of the Constitution in terms of a god or creator?
Still sounds like a local issue to me. A state can pass a regulation that says no religion of any kind is allowed in their schools, but is is not a matter for the federal government.
That letter written by Jefferson, that so many people here like to point to as the basis for the wall of separation between church and state, also has Jefferson referring to the god of man and our creator, but is this also used as a basis for law?
I don't think this is correct given the 14th amendment's privileges or immunities clause.
She has called for schools to be able to teach Creationism, which she is on record as defining as the literal 6000 year, Adam and Eve Genesis story.
A serious person cannot doubt that her desire to erase separation of church and state would be for the purpose of introducing Christianity into our government and institutions. The whole history of this "movement" of church/state separation deniers is expressly for this purpose, to return America to a status of "Christian nation", something it's never been, by the way.
I admit to being ignorant as to how you teach creationism, but it seems religion neutral.
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.
Local control, baby! 
, not only refusing to answer a question from her opponent, but from the debate moderator!
