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.
For 230 years it was and has always been very much constitutional, with church held in capitol buildings and state offices regularly, then overnight it is all the sudden unconstitutional.
We have the freedom of religion. Not the freedom from religion.
It really hasn't that's just an interpretation in some of the right wing religious states, not sure what they hope to accomplish through these symbolic gestures other than to irritate other religions. I'm not sure where else you can see a monument of the 10 commandments. Some local governments do allow temporary religious symbols at the local level for all religions.
Do you think it's healthy to start promoting one religion in government offices, would you also welcome a Buddhist monument.
We have a Democrat Party, the supporters of which regularly and relentlessly make bigoted comments about Jews, and Christians (seen often on this Forum). Reactionary (to use your word) when one is found to be 'out of step' with it's view on certain issues, as exemplified by the treatment of Brendan Eich because of his donation in support of Prop 8, resulting in his firing from Mozilla, a company he co-founded.
These "Progressives" have set themselves up as judge, jury, and executioner on matters of what is acceptable behavior and thought, hence they have become the "neo-Puritans," while claiming to be "non-judgmental." Example: Their quick condemnation of a private statement made by Donald Sterling, and smearing his name (though for some 35 years his views had been ignored — perhaps his donations to liberal causes had been waning in recent years). Paula Deen is another victim of their intolerance, but they had to go back many years and manipulate the 'evidence' to make sure they destroyed her completely.
Whether Deen and Sterling were treated fairly or not can be argued; but your thesis is silly. Not all of us Democrats use catchphrases like "non-judgmental" as synonyms for goodness. I judge that things like racism are bad, and I am proud to do so. I don't denounce racists, homophobes, Biblical buffoons, jingoists et al. because they are judgmental, but because they are stupid!
It really hasn't that's just an interpretation in some of the right wing religious states, not sure what they hope to accomplish through these symbolic gestures other than to irritate other religions. I'm not sure where else you can see a monument of the 10 commandments. Some local governments do allow temporary religious symbols at the local level for all religions.
Do you think it's healthy to start promoting one religion in government offices, would you also welcome a Buddhist monument.
Sure!
The gods of the sun, moon, and mother earth, are represented in North Dakota, by the tribe of the area in the State house.
Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Jewish, Baptist, Mormon and a host of others have been represented in the Texas Capitol rotunda, for over a century and a half.
It would be the call of the people of the State or community.
Well, if there no connection to the Christian religion, why does the "In God We Trust" appear in all kinds of official documents?
First: The phrase seems to have been invented in the 19th century. (Hint: Our nation was founded in the 18th century.)
Second: Many of the most notable founders of our nation were member of my religion, not your religion, and therefore if God was a feature in the founding of the nation it was our unitarian God, not your trinitarian God. (Needless to say, my point here it so mirror the absolutely nonsensical nature of your comment by showing that your "logic" leads to the exact opposite conclusion you thought it did.)
Can you tell me where you find such an interpretation? I would be interested to learn where you read that they wanted to "avoid religious references in government." No such interpretation is in my Constitution course. Such ideas are an invention of the Progressive movement, which is does not accept the founders views of "natural law" and "natural rights."
What do you think they meant by "... to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of natures God entitle them ..." ? Do you not think that they were referring to the God of the universe? The God of the Holy Scriptures? As believers, they would have understood that there is no other God. "Before me no God was formed, nor will there be one after me." (Isaiah 43:10)
What other religions were they "well aware of" which they were concerned about protecting? Do you think they were concerned with Buddhism? Do you think they were concerned about those who worshiped pagan idols?
There was only one God they recognized, and that is the God of the Scriptures. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
I guess you don't know much about the founders. Two of the committee members who wrote the Declaration of Independence were Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. Jefferson made the effort to write himself a copy of the New Testament leaving out all the "miracles" and leaving all the writings about how to live a good life. Most historians label him a "deist." Franklin did not belong to a church all his adult life. You would think if he was a devout Christian he would have joined a church sometime.
Their primary concern was to allow pure religious freedom for the citizens. They already knew how bad it was to have an official state church. Remember, they were under the Church of England prior to the Revolution.
BTW, that phrase "nature's God" can be interpreted many ways. Let's ask ptsum how the Native American tribes interpret that term. Do we have an wiccans reading this? They will have a different meaning for that term, too.
It's pretty safe to assume from their behavior that religion, including the God of the Bible, was not very important in the lives if some of the major Founding Fathers.
For 230 years it was and has always been very much constitutional, with church held in capitol buildings and state offices regularly, then overnight it is all the sudden unconstitutional.
We have the freedom of religion. Not the freedom from religion.
You can't have freedom of religion without also having freedom from religion.
I guess you don't know much about the founders. Two of the committee members who wrote the Declaration of Independence were Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. Jefferson made the effort to write himself a copy of the New Testament leaving out all the "miracles" and leaving all the writings about how to live a good life. Most historians label him a "deist." Franklin did not belong to a church all his adult life. You would think if he was a devout Christian he would have joined a church sometime.
And, as I alluded to earlier, another member of the committee, John Adams, was a Unitarian - understood the Truth to be that Jesus was a man; essentially, just a nice guy who taught some really nice things about love and compassion; i.e., believed nothing close to what a Christian must believe today to be considered Christian.
Last edited by bUU; 05-09-2014 at 12:11 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.