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.
Xians should NOT be given any priviledge over any other faith or non-faith on any level of government.
Says who? That's definitely not in the Constitution. That wasn't the intent of the founding fathers. They just didn't want the federal government telling us what religion we had to be or giving special treatment.
Why even ask this? What if I push that atheists be banned from the internet because I happen to disagree with their dogma? That would be just as unfair and ridiculous.
Why even ask this? What if I push that atheists be banned from the internet because I happen to disagree with their dogma? That would be just as unfair and ridiculous.
Because atheists have sued and argued over putting Christmas decorations at public places, and are well known for doing it. This happened in Santa Monica, and many other cities across the nation.
Only "X-Mas" type symbols should be displayed on government property (Santa, Rudolph, Frosty, etc). Anything else violates the separation between church & state.
It doesn't violate anything, read up about the first amendment. It's whiners that like to think that you can't have a religious symbol on public property. You sure can and it violates nothing.
Because atheists have sued and argued over putting Christmas decorations at public places, and are well known for doing it. This happened in Santa Monica, and many other cities across the nation.
Actually, the Santa Monica case was Christians fighting because the city stopped allowing any Christmas decorations in a city park. The city held a lottery to determine who got spots, and the atheists displays were vandalized. The city also said it was costing too much time and money to set up the lottery and the grass at the park was being destroyed.
Because atheists have sued and argued over putting Christmas decorations at public places, and are well known for doing it. This happened in Santa Monica, and many other cities across the nation.
Don't lie. The display of religious symbols in public places has never been objected to.
The question is whether the government should advance religion by placing or allowing religious symbols and displays in government buildings.
Only "X-Mas" type symbols should be displayed on government property (Santa, Rudolph, Frosty, etc). Anything else violates the separation between church & state.
1. Please show me the words "separation of church and state" in the constitution..... bet you cant
2. the first amendment protects religous freedom..the ONLY thing it does is restrict a "STATE/GOVERNMENT religion"
3. you statement(above) is quite false
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.
The Christians and the Pagans
