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 03-17-2009, 08:55 PM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,973 posts, read 24,719,484 times
Reputation: 15600

Advertisements

One problem I see off the bat is you cannot be Catholic AND support being gay, not my interpretation, the Pope's and he's the boss in the Catholic religion right?. I'm guessing it's kind of like supporting abortion?

Second, the above poster is correct marrage is not a right for anyone and no it shouldn't be.

Third, most people who raise the argument of seperation of church and state don't usually understand that it means that the government will not meddle in the church like telling them what to do, not the usual secular progressive view that it can't be anywhere near government or schools or courts etc. If you think otherwise then please be so kind as to show where it says that.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2009, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Way on the outskirts of LA LA land.
3,041 posts, read 10,955,272 times
Reputation: 1959
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Quote:
Originally Posted by harborlady View Post
freedom from religion is in the first amendment.
I disagree. Freedom from government sponsored or government established religion is in the First Amendment. Freedom of religion is in there also, meaning the government (Congress) can not make a law prohibiting the right of citizens to exercise their religion. One's right to practice their religion ceases to exist only when it infringes upon the rights of another person. Persecution of those whose beliefs differ from your own, for instance, is not your right.

If I choose to pray openly on a street corner, I have that right. If you don't like my public display of religion, that's too bad. You have the right to look away. If I tell you that you must do likewise, I've overstepped my right.

The same could be said of someone's (legally protected) lifestyle choices. I don't have to like thier lifestyle choices, but I also don't have the right to tell someone what lifestyle they must lead. Likewise, they don't have the right to tell me I must accept their lifestyle choices. This is equally true of gay rights issues and 2nd Amendment issues, among others.

The Constitution does not provide for freedom from offense. The choices made by others will at times offend you. That is a fact of life. It doesn't matter if it's a lifestyle choice, or a fashion choice. If you're offended, you have the right to remove yourself from the situation.

This is what I see those in Montana doing. They are offended that there is a real possibility that they may be forced, by the federal government, to accept a change in their lifestyle choices, contrary to their understanding of the 2nd Amendment. They don't want that change to affect them, so they want to leave. Sounds simple enough.

Last edited by jdavid93225; 03-17-2009 at 09:35 PM.. Reason: modified text
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2009, 06:44 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,973 posts, read 24,719,484 times
Reputation: 15600
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavid93225 View Post
I disagree. Freedom from government sponsored or government established religion is in the First Amendment. Freedom of religion is in there also, meaning the government (Congress) can not make a law prohibiting the right of citizens to exercise their religion. One's right to practice their religion ceases to exist only when it infringes upon the rights of another person. Persecution of those whose beliefs differ from your own, for instance, is not your right.

If I choose to pray openly on a street corner, I have that right. If you don't like my public display of religion, that's too bad. You have the right to look away. If I tell you that you must do likewise, I've overstepped my right.

The same could be said of someone's (legally protected) lifestyle choices. I don't have to like thier lifestyle choices, but I also don't have the right to tell someone what lifestyle they must lead. Likewise, they don't have the right to tell me I must accept their lifestyle choices. This is equally true of gay rights issues and 2nd Amendment issues, among others.

The Constitution does not provide for freedom from offense. The choices made by others will at times offend you. That is a fact of life. It doesn't matter if it's a lifestyle choice, or a fashion choice. If you're offended, you have the right to remove yourself from the situation.

This is what I see those in Montana doing. They are offended that there is a real possibility that they may be forced, by the federal government, to accept a change in their lifestyle choices, contrary to their understanding of the 2nd Amendment. They don't want that change to affect them, so they want to leave. Sounds simple enough.
That about sums it up...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2009, 08:10 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,051 posts, read 32,368,784 times
Reputation: 10559
Yes, landlocked Montana, with its vibrant and diversified economy, is going to secede from the United States and go it alone. And based solely on the fact that they want to run around carrying guns. Offhand, I can't recall any nations that were established on such a foundation, but I guess there could always be a first time.

I will make a voluntary contribution to the Sovereign Nation of Montana...just as soon as it happens. (That contribution, however, will be made in US dollars, which will probably not be a recognized currency in that august nation. They will undoubtedly be minting their own currency in short order. But that's a different story).
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2009, 08:33 AM
 
Location: The Woods
17,829 posts, read 24,239,351 times
Reputation: 10594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
Yes, landlocked Montana, with its vibrant and diversified economy, is going to secede from the United States and go it alone. And based solely on the fact that they want to run around carrying guns. Offhand, I can't recall any nations that were established on such a foundation, but I guess there could always be a first time.

I will make a voluntary contribution to the Sovereign Nation of Montana...just as soon as it happens. (That contribution, however, will be made in US dollars, which will probably not be a recognized currency in that august nation. They will undoubtedly be minting their own currency in short order. But that's a different story).
The british marching to Lexington and Concord were on a mission to confiscate arms. The british attempted to restrict the ownership and carrying of arms in the colonies. That set off the actual revolution...and this isn't just about guns in Montana but also about the over-expansion of federal control over many other issues to, ranging from wildlife management to environmental issues to taxation to Real ID Act to NAIS to the feds' land grabs...

And there are plenty of landlocked countries doing just fine...Switzerland, Austria...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2009, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,618,972 times
Reputation: 954
LOL the state of Montana is not going to try to secede. This is just some wingnut people trying to get press coverage. It's funny enough that the press will cover it, but the state legislature isn't going to do anything.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2009, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,106 posts, read 37,035,029 times
Reputation: 4924
Gee - over 20 states LEGISLATURES passing similar resolutions - yet the God of the Boards - Mr. Knowitall - Richurch KNOWS the legislature won't do anything!

Oh yeah - I forgot. Richurch runs the Government. He said so
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2009, 09:20 AM
 
Location: NW MT
1,436 posts, read 3,098,531 times
Reputation: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
The british marching to Lexington and Concord were on a mission to confiscate arms. The british attempted to restrict the ownership and carrying of arms in the colonies. That set off the actual revolution...and this isn't just about guns in Montana but also about the over-expansion of federal control over many other issues to, ranging from wildlife management to environmental issues to taxation to Real ID Act to NAIS to the feds' land grabs...

And there are plenty of landlocked countries doing just fine...Switzerland, Austria...
Nobody sees the bigger picture do they... Everyone thinks it is just a bunch of wingnuts making trouble. The stupidity of the American people will be the death of this country !!! We already have one foot in the grave because of it... and most of the people are kicking at the other leg and don't even know it !

And imagine that, someone living in the US that has no clue how or why the very country they live in was created ! Noooooo, no nation in all of history has ever been created over RIGHTS... guns being one of them ! Just when you thought you heard it all...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2009, 09:45 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,973 posts, read 24,719,484 times
Reputation: 15600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan_K View Post
Nobody sees the bigger picture do they... Everyone thinks it is just a bunch of wingnuts making trouble. The stupidity of the American people will be the death of this country !!! We already have one foot in the grave because of it... and most of the people are kicking at the other leg and don't even know it !

And imagine that, someone living in the US that has no clue how or why the very country they live in was created ! Noooooo, no nation in all of history has ever been created over RIGHTS... guns being one of them ! Just when you thought you heard it all...
No it was not! It was created to provide houses,healthcare and food to everyone without regard to what they produce or if they produce, didn't you know that?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2009, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Brendansport, Sagitta IV
7,907 posts, read 13,743,995 times
Reputation: 3421
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavid93225 View Post
I disagree. Freedom from government sponsored or government established religion is in the First Amendment. Freedom of religion is in there also, meaning the government (Congress) can not make a law prohibiting the right of citizens to exercise their religion. One's right to practice their religion ceases to exist only when it infringes upon the rights of another person. Persecution of those whose beliefs differ from your own, for instance, is not your right.

If I choose to pray openly on a street corner, I have that right. If you don't like my public display of religion, that's too bad. You have the right to look away. If I tell you that you must do likewise, I've overstepped my right.
But that's exactly what freedom from religion is. You can do your thing on streetcorners all you want; if I'm offended by it, too bad for me, it's a public place and everyone has the right to be there. But you can't grab me by the ear and force me to listen. And when your religion becomes the basis for laws that affect me, then I've lost my freedom from your religion.

This very lack of freedom from religion is what many of us find appalling about some Muslim countries -- that the dominant religion dictates laws to be enforced by the state, which affect everyone who lives there, Muslim or not.

This has nothing to do with stuff like "thou shalt not murder" or "thou shalt not steal" -- which fall under "your right to swing your fist stops where my nose begins". There's no need for morals to be enforced by religion, only by "equal rights and equal treatment for all".

As to "but it's a Christian country" -- oh? Which one? Catholic? Baptist? Lutheran? Quaker? Puritan? Calvinist? Mormon? Is this France, where the state mandates that all must be Catholic?

Did you know that in some countries (including at least one Canadian province), you cannot vote unless you've declared an affiliation to the state-approved church? Is that what you want??
Rate this post positively 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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top