U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-20-2010, 05:03 PM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,243 posts, read 15,265,325 times
Reputation: 4583

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinloki1 View Post
Its not fair to simply generalize them as incompetents. Some of their points are legitimate.

When you do that, its just like those who generalize with liberals. It also gives extremists momentum.

All it creates is partisanship, extremism on both sides and people who expect that they get their way all the time no matter how it affects others. (now there's some entitlement!)
Forgive me, but any candidate that wants to repeal HC, in my mind, is incompetent. This Country has tried and failed for 100 yrs to get it started, until now. Congress needs to continue to improve it, not repeal. Yes, the HC system needs to evolve with Conservative ideas incorporated. Canning it and starting over, would be incompetent representation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-20-2010, 06:38 PM
 
32,283 posts, read 26,139,669 times
Reputation: 18927
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
Forgive me, but any candidate that wants to repeal HC, in my mind, is incompetent. This Country has tried and failed for 100 yrs to get it started, until now. Congress needs to continue to improve it, not repeal. Yes, the HC system needs to evolve with Conservative ideas incorporated. Canning it and starting over, would be incompetent representation.
so it is incompetent representation to want to repeal something that is essentially a junk law? the health care law is going to need so much modification to make it work without killing the economy, that it is indeed far better and less time consuming to kill what we have and start over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 07:15 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,390 posts, read 20,026,742 times
Reputation: 8319
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
O'Donnell questions separation of church, state - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101019/ap_on_el_se/us_delaware_senate - broken link)


Wheee! This just gets funnier and funnier... Thank you, Delaware Tea Party voters, for providing us with such quality entertainment!

I'm cool with Obama's folks being voted out and opposing ideas being voted in, but next time...can we at least pick some half-way intelligent people? Is that too much to ask?


"Religious doctrine"?

You mean like any explanation of the Universe's existence beyond spontaneous emergence from nothing and just because?

Now who believes in fairy tales?

Sorry you don't have a better explanation for the existence of the well ordered Universe than "it just happened and we don't need mythology to explain what we don't understand".

Thinking people know the Universe had a beginning, was caused to exist and that requires a cause.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 07:22 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
19,495 posts, read 20,840,695 times
Reputation: 13756
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
"Religious doctrine"?

You mean like any explanation of the Universe's existence beyond spontaneous emergence from nothing and just because?

Now who believes in fairy tales?

Sorry you don't have a better explanation for the existence of the well ordered Universe than "it just happened and we don't need mythology to explain what we don't understand".

Thinking people know the Universe had a beginning, was caused to exist and that requires a cause.
(Too soon to rep you again, momonkey, but right freakin on! Keeping in mind of course that some religions, especially those which endorse reincarnation, consider the "beginning" of the universe moot...)

My favorite fairy tale is "the First Amendment protects all speech except that which criticizes Muslims and causes them discomfort of any kind."

Funny how some religions just sort of shouldered their way to the front of the preferential treatment line. Even funnier is the ACLU's deafening silence on the matter. It's so funny it makes you cry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 07:24 PM
 
5,915 posts, read 4,160,975 times
Reputation: 1396
The 1st Amendment doesn't say anything about separation of Church and State
Churches would have to pay taxes if there was constitutional separation of Church and State.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 07:26 PM
 
Location: FL
1,137 posts, read 2,431,229 times
Reputation: 787
Thumbs up Newt

quote=Calvinist;16317068]She's right. To anyone here...can you tell me where it says that church and state must be separate?

9 of the original 13 states had official state religions. They didn't think there should be a separation...they just didn't want the feds telling them how to do it.[/quote]
I recall Newt Gingrinch, ex House Speaker who is also a World History Professor, stating in a documentary about America, that the separarion of church and state is not written anywhere except in a letter from Jefferson to, a pastor. Jefferson said he was concerned about that issue. That is the origin. See link below...

Rediscovering God in America - Google Books
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 07:28 PM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,243 posts, read 15,265,325 times
Reputation: 4583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirdik View Post
The 1st Amendment doesn't say anything about separation of Church and State
Churches would have to pay taxes if there was constitutional separation of Church and State.
Is that you Christine?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 08:02 PM
 
4,047 posts, read 4,474,680 times
Reputation: 1326
If the government can't do anything promoting (respecting an establishment of) or prohibiting religion, then how is that not keeping government and religion separate?

The first amendment may not use the exact phrase, but that's what it means. It amazes me how many people keep saying "she's right". I guess those people don't understand that in the English language, one meaning can be expressed in different ways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 08:27 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
13,913 posts, read 10,873,846 times
Reputation: 12663
If congress makes no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, then by definition, the state stays out of the business of religion. That IS effectively the separation of church and state.

In the old days, people didn't need to argue about this as much, because this was by and large a Christian nation by virtue of the demographics. Today, things are different as we have people from all different ethnic and cultural backgrounds living here. Therefore, separation of the state from any of the multiple religions - Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism - and yes, even Islam - becomes increasingly relevant. The Supreme Court has clearly weighed in on this in their interpretation of the Constitution over the last half century. The prayers and stuff on coins today are purely a traditional relic of a general theistic nature that have (and should have) no real bearing on public government policy.

Right wing folks: public schools are NOT an establishment of religion. Therefore, publicly funded schools that reflect the processes, curricula, and management of law-based government entities, be it at national or local levels, should NOT be pushing Christian doctrine of Creationism (or any other religion) in science classes.

Furthermore, Creationism IS NOT science; it is a belief that has nothing whatsoever to do with the scientific method. The theory of evolution may only be a theory, but there is at least some rational science-based evidence for it. There is NONE for Creationism. It cannot be taught on part with evolution in a science class. Evolution's limitations as a theory can be explained in science class, and creationism can be covered in context of a religious history class. Teach your kids the rest yourself, or enroll them in a private Christian school if you wish.

I can't believe that in 21st century civilization we still even have to have these ridiculous debates from the Dark Ages...do we also wish to still teach children in science classes that the Earth is flat?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 08:32 PM
 
25 posts, read 25,299 times
Reputation: 31
Coons: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
O’Donnell: “That’s in the First Amendment?”

I don’t know how it can be any more clear. She returns to the point two other times, not with some philosophical argument to the contrary, but with plain incredulity. She later suggests that senators don’t need to memorize the constitution. Well I’m sorry but if you’re going to be dictating political policy at a federal level, you DO. I would not want my representatives learning civics while determining policy.

It is apparent that she doesn’t know anything about the Constitution. She’s echoing a stream of thought started by very conservative Evangelicals that denies that the 1st Amendment created separation of Church and State–meaning, for them, that there can’t be a state church, but that things like prayer in public schools, the posting of the Ten Commandments in government buildings, and a State acknowledgment (which supposedly does not amount to governmental coercion) that the United States is a “Christian” nation (whatever that means) is permissible. These are people who want to establish a Theocracy in the United States, but they want to do it in a way so they can feel they are in accord with the Founding Fathers.

Aside from the absurdity of this point of view, it is apparent that Christine O’Donnell has only been vaguely absorbing the propaganda put forth by these Evangelicals without any kind of analysis and that she doesn’t care at all about facts or history, or even the actual tenets of the people she thinks she agrees with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:58 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top