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.
It's not a religious test. You don't have to be a Christian to swear on a bible. It's just tradition.
If I choose to insert myself in a historically muslim majority country only and choose to work in the government, I'll swear on the damn Koran even though I'm not muslims and hate islam.
I don't have much of a problem per se of a real American swearing on a Koran, but of foreigners with a foreign religion being allow to import in the first place.
Apparently you’re good with a false display of belief. I’m not.
Not sure what you’re trying to get at here, but if you’re asking me whether I disapproved of false displays of religious belief before 9/11, yes I did.
Apparently you’re good with a false display of belief. I’m not.
It's not a display you believe in the bible or the religion per se. You're not asked if you believe in the bible and are a Christian. It's a display that you respect tradition and the many people who do belief. If you refuse to swear on the bible then you are saying eff American tradition and many of the American people. Why are you here and entering government when you're displaying you're the enemy of the people?
It's not a display you believe in the bible or the religion per se. You're not asked if you believe in the bible and are a Christian. It's a display that you respect tradition and the many people who do belief. If you refuse to swear on the bible then you are saying eff American tradition and many of the American people. Why are you here and entering government when you're displaying you're the enemy of the people?
What you're advocating is the textbook definition of taking the Lord's name in vain. Isn't that frowned upon? I for one seem to recall it being on the short list of no-nos you and yours are so fond of plastering anywhere.
What you're advocating is the textbook definition of taking the Lord's name in vain. Isn't that frowned upon? I for one seem to recall it being on the short list of no-nos you and yours are so fond of plastering anywhere.
How do you conclude that swearing to tell the truth is "taking the Lord's name in vain"?
It's tradition. It's respectful of our American culture and values. It's really quite silly and petty to find a fault with it. It's even sillier to place that fault on Christians by insisting we should know it's... ummmm, how did you put it?... a "no-no".
How do you conclude that swearing to tell the truth is "taking the Lord's name in vain"?
It's tradition. It's respectful of our American culture and values. It's really quite silly and petty to find a fault with it. It's even sillier to place that fault on Christians by insisting we should know it's... ummmm, how did you put it?... a "no-no".
No it's not. It's disrespectful of American culture and values. It would be silly, pointless bureaucracy to force people to swear on the Bible. It would make us seem stupid. Thankfully, I'm under the impression people don't have to do that.
It's not a display you believe in the bible or the religion per se. You're not asked if you believe in the bible and are a Christian. It's a display that you respect tradition and the many people who do belief. If you refuse to swear on the bible then you are saying eff American tradition and many of the American people. Why are you here and entering government when you're displaying you're the enemy of the people?
Being anti-Christianity is not being an enemy of the American people, necessarily. It's just as likely to mean being an ally of the American people. There's nothing wrong or anti-American about wanting Christianity destroyed. Many people I've heard talk about advocating the destruction of Christianity want that because they believe it'll help people...the American people.
Being anti-Christianity is not being an enemy of the American people, necessarily. It's just as likely to mean being an ally of the American people. There's nothing wrong or anti-American about wanting Christianity destroyed. Many people I've heard talk about advocating the destruction of Christianity want that because they believe it'll help people...the American people.
No that makes one the definition of the enemy of the people and the constitution. They don't want or need anyone to decide what they should and must believe or what would "help them".
No that makes one the definition of the enemy of the people and the constitution. They don't want or need anyone to decide what they should and must believe or what would "help them".
If being anti-Christianity means being an "enemy of the people" you're already deciding what people should or must believe. Defending Christianity has nothing more to do with defending Americans than wanting to destroy it, or wanting to spread Satanism. The main difference is spreading Satanism would probably help people more than spreading Christianity a little, and destroying Christianity would probably help Americans a lot.
Last edited by Clintone; 09-23-2018 at 07:42 PM..
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.
