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.
I have a right to my opinion. Sorry that bothers you. Actually, I'm not sorry.
Wrong. All they said is that we would not have one official national church.
Your contempt for religion coincides with the breakdown of moral values and society.
And you think it's intelligent to want that.
You must not read history. There has always been immorality. But there have been few times like the present where it is so openly celebrated.
It is disgraceful that children are being raised in such an atmosphere of depravity and perversion. The way to destroy a society and enslave its people begins with attacking moral and aesthetic values. We are well on the way in that regard.
When people are too selfish to consider what sort of world their children are going to inherit, then one begins to understand the significance of the day of judgment!
Tell the SCOTUS and 200 years of history and constitutional scholars your twisted view of the separation clause.
i think it is intelligent to accept facts and seek knowledge, not turn back the clock in fear of the unknown.
People like you have always sought to halt progress, education and discovery.
Your turn-back-the clock morality and belief that you know how to create, sustain and nurture society is laughable.
Read history? Hah! I read enough to know that your "pious gentlemen" kept humans as property. Did you skip that chapter?
Or just incapable of imagining your mother, father and sister being kept in chains and raped nightly?
I read enough to know that our founding fathers made separation of church and state a founding principle. Suck on that a while.
What really makes me happy is knowing you live in fear of progress and the future. Luddites and fundamentalists always have and always will.
Last edited by shaker281; 12-14-2017 at 04:26 AM..
My contempt is for you. And what you do with your made up belief system.
Your backwards morality and belief that you know how to create, sustain and nurture society is laughable.
Read history? Hah! I read enough to know that your 'pious gentlemen" kept humans as property. Did you skip that chapter?
i read enough to know that our founding fathers made separation of church and state a founding principle. Suck on that a while.
So you think the founding fathers are great because they supposedly separated church from state (which they didn't do), but you think they are terrible because they kept humans as property.
You strike me as rather confused -- on this and many other issues.
So you think the founding fathers are great because they supposedly separated church from state (which they didn't do), but you think they are terrible because they kept humans as property.
You strike me as rather confused -- on this and many other issues.
Yes, because people are complex and flawed. You haven't noticed that?
People can be deeply flawed and also do great things. Crazy, huh?
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." T. Jefferson - slave owner and former POTUS
"Jefferson's metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Reynolds v. United States (1879) the Court wrote that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment." In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." T. Jefferson - slave owner and former POTUS
"Jefferson's metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Reynolds v. United States (1879) the Court wrote that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment." In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."
But hey, maybe we should take your word for it!
Jefferson wasn't the only founding father.
And "a wall of separation between church and state" is nowhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Either he meant to insinuate sexual favors or did not realize that it would obviously be perceived that way. I'm not sure either is good.
The same people who deny this was sexual were probably saying the Megyn Kelly comments had nothing to do with menstruation. Either complete morons or liars.
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.
