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.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."
Seems like that is "prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
It appears religion is protected.
Don't see anything in there about homosexuality. Guess we can prohibit it all we like. /shrug
"Or prohibiting the free exersise thereof" does not cancel the first portion of that Clause, nor does it permit any people/organizations to force their religion onto others through g'ment support and laws.
The Establishment Clause was meant to preserve religious equality and rights by keeping the institutions of Religions and Government seperated, so that no relgiion, or sect, could influence laws with their own versions of religious doctrine thus forcing their doctrines onto people of other religions, other sects, or of no religion as well.
"Or prohibiting the free exersise thereof" applies to the private sector only.
Maybe if you learned some of the basics about how to EXTEND equal accommodation first. Your god isn't special. Your religion isn't special. You aren't special because of your god or your religion.
You want it? Give it to other people first. Then maybe we can talk.
-- Jesus
The Assistant Principal removed one sign and told the students in the club to remove the other one because students might be offended by the signs. She said that new signs could be put up if they did not include Jesus’ name, although the signs could include the word “Bible.”
Oh, and don't forget the MOST important part of Jesus's birth....FOOTBALL....bet more time is spent watching football than going to church to see the baby Jesus or singing religious carols........
To the poster who repped me with an insult for this post...Thank You.
A rep's a rep.....coward.
No, it's not a religion. It's (the swastika) just a symbol. So there's no conflict between church and state. So...? Free expression gives them the right to do so, right?
Actually, it is a holy symbol of several religious systems. Hinduism, Buddhism, some Native American tribes, etc...
You mean there's no mandated separation of Church and State? "Religious symbols" = Church. "Public Property" = State.
No there isn't. Those who claim such come to this conclusion by selectively supporting it. The government can not establish one, enforce doctrinal rule, etc... Nothing protects one from being offended of another exercise of such and in fact, it specifically prohibits such a restriction.
You mean there's no mandated separation of Church and State? "Religious symbols" = Church. "Public Property" = State.
There may be local ordinances mandating such seperation. There may be laws in some states that do the same. But there is not, to my knowledge & understanding, any such statement in the Constitution of the U.S. Someone (I don't believe it was you) said that displaying a religious symbol on public property is specifically prohibited by the US Constitution. I'd like to see that constitutional prohibition, or an acknowledgment that it doesn't exist.
Well, that's just silly. Not to mention rude, and more than a touch arrogant. Of course they own the holiday. The holiday is CHRISTMAS. Yes, CHRISTIANS created the holiday and define the hoiday. Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ. If you are celebrating Christmas, then you are celebrating the birth of christ. You can't just change the definition of the word to suit your whims & wants. Now, if you want to take Decenber 25th off, and have a party and a tree, but don't believe in Christ, you go right ahead & do that, all you want. BUt in that case, you aren't celebrating christmas, you're just taking advantage of a convenient day of celebration. Please though, don't be so pompous and arrogant that you think it's ok to tell CHRISTIANS that CHRISTMAS doesn't involve CHRIST.
*chuckle*
Christians, or more specifically the Catholic Church created the dates to such events. In fact, the dates for things like Christmas and Easter aren't actually the time of year to which those events happened. The Catholic Church picked those days to coincide with winter and summer solstice to overlap the druidic ceremonies in order to downplay it. It is an interesting historic point, but the dates picked as such are specifically chosen for Christian purposes regardless if they are not the actual times. If I remember correctly, Christ was born in the summer time, or around that time.
Anyway, the point for it being a Christian holiday still stands and was specifically defined as such. People who get offended by it do not do so because they seek "equal protection", rather they are simply using the government to oppress the religion, something that Jefferson so very clearly explained to the Danbury congregation that it had no power to enforce.
What is it that they say though? The Constitution is a "living document" to which they can manipulate... oops I mean adjust to fit minority demand... opps I mean the change of times.
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.
.
