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.
So why have a day to recognize Christmas or Easter. What about 4th of July, Memorial Day. The bottom line is, there are already days put aside on the calendar.
Easter isn't a National Holiday. Christmas has been so secularized as to be unrecognizeable. The 4th of July and Memorial Day are non-religious holidays.
Ferd, the basic problem is this: Although we were founded by Christians, this nation cannot establish religion by law. Nor can it restrict the free exercise by law. It can be said the NDOP violates the establishment clause of the first amendment. Another poster has pointed out that NDOP is not a law. If this is so, then we'll see where the process takes this case. I believe it will go all the way to SCOTUS.
Jefferson got a lot of flak for the letter to the Danbury Baptists. So this issue is not a new one.
Does this recognition do such? Does it violate a freedom, does it dictate adherence, does it do anything of this nature? Does it?
Does anything change from such? Are you restricted from your beliefs? Are you condemned for your beliefs? Please make your case!
Does this recognition do such? Does it violate a freedom, does it dictate adherence, does it do anything of this nature? Does it?
Does anything change from such? Are you restricted from your beliefs? Are you condemned for your beliefs? Please make your case!
Nomander, it is all according to (as I see it) if the NDOP is a law, or can be considered a law. Nobody is demanding adherence to the NDOP, most times I forget about it, unless I hear something on the news.
No, I'm not restricted from exercizing my beliefs, and, no, I am not condemned for my beliefs. Some see this case as a pattern of attack on religion. I don't.
Like I said, this will more than likely go before the SCOTUS.
Gad zooks ! Don't these religious NUTBAGS have enough prayer ??? Why a special day ? Absurd. What if the NRA wanted a special day to shoot guns, or the fly fishers wanted a day to fly fish ? What if chefs wanted a special day to cook ?
It would not surprise me one bit if these other groups have some recognized "day". Such proclamations are quite common.
Ferd, the basic problem is this: Although we were founded by Christians, this nation cannot establish religion by law. Nor can it restrict the free exercise by law. It can be said the NDOP violates the establishment clause of the first amendment. Another poster has pointed out that NDOP is not a law. If this is so, then we'll see where the process takes this case. I believe it will go all the way to SCOTUS.
Jefferson got a lot of flak for the letter to the Danbury Baptists. So this issue is not a new one.
I don’t agree with your assessment. NDOP is not the establishment of religion and as I have pointed out, establishment means to pick one for preferential treatment over all others. NOT to generally promote the concept of faith. NDOP is simply a promotion of faith/religion in general. It is not an effort by government to “take sides†and establish one group over the others. (this is the heart of the establishment clause and it is what Jefferson was talking about. )
Madison also spoke about the dangers of favoring one religious group over others. No where do they suggest that government should not be supportive of faith in general.
NDOP can only be unconstitutional if we change what “establish†means in the first amendment. I know there is an effort to do that. I also know that there has been some success in doing that.
Gad zooks ! Don't these religious NUTBAGS have enough prayer ??? Why a special day ? Absurd. What if the NRA wanted a special day to shoot guns, or the fly fishers wanted a day to fly fish ? What if chefs wanted a special day to cook ?
My opinion is that it wouldn't matter. The issue is simply not that there is a holiday that has no dictation on the people. It is simple that you are a Christian and everything you stand for is a odds with the forces to which would take rule. As long as you remind them of strict adherence to a principal, you are a threat and no matter how much you relinquish, it will not be acceptable until you are eradicated.
This is the nature of these movements.
I disagree with you 100%. My Christianity is not a threat and is not perceived as a threat by the powers that be and no one in the United States government is interested in eradicating me.
I, along with and all the other Christians in the U.S., am free to worship publicly and openly 365 days a year in any manner I see fit. I can attend church daily if I wish, wear religious icons around my neck, pray before meals in restaurants if I wish, observe the Sabbath as strictly as I wish and send my daughter to parochial school if I wish. No one has said a single word about taking any of that away from me or anyone else.
That said, I agree that a NDoP is unconstitutional. Having the president call on people to pray sounds like the establishment of religion to me, which is barred by the First Amendment. I'm glad the judge struck it down and hope her opinion is upheld on appeal.
I don’t agree with your assessment. NDOP is not the establishment of religion and as I have pointed out, establishment means to pick one for preferential treatment over all others. NOT to generally promote the concept of faith. NDOP is simply a promotion of faith/religion in general. It is not an effort by government to “take sides” and establish one group over the others. (this is the heart of the establishment clause and it is what Jefferson was talking about. )
Madison also spoke about the dangers of favoring one religious group over others. No where do they suggest that government should not be supportive of faith in general.
NDOP can only be unconstitutional if we change what “establish” means in the first amendment. I know there is an effort to do that. I also know that there has been some success in doing that.
I think it is terribly wrong.
Another poster has pointed out that NDOP is not a law.
I'm not a Constitution Lawyer, but if the NDOP is not a law, then I really don't see the problem with it.
I just don't think the government should have anything to do with religion. If someone in their church or synagogue or mosque or temple or whatever wants to pray or even initiate their own sort of Prayer Day, by all means. But to have this national holiday, even if it doesn't inherently force anyone to pray one way or the other, I think is kind of ridiculous.
Another poster has pointed out that NDOP is not a law.
I'm not a Constitution Lawyer, but if the NDOP is not a law, then I really don't see the problem with it.
well we agree on that. but even if it was a law, which it likely isnt, i still dont have a problem with it.
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.
