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 my very thoughtful and 100% accurate response was "avoiding the question" in your mind?
OK..
Let me be more direct for you.
My opinion does not matter.
now you may respond to what I wrote concerning the intentions of the people who actually wrote the constitution thought about prayer being in direct conflict with the "separation" clause
If the
So let me get this straight.
The same founding fathers who wrote the 1st amendment, which is trumpeted by uninformed leftists to attack religious freedom on the basis of "separation of church and state" then violated their own values and belief system by opening congress with a prayer?
So if THEY who wrote the separation of church and state clause, also opened congress with prayer you are essentially arguing that THEY were in violation of the very constitution they created.
OR
maybe the "separation of church and state" clause has been very very twisted by the "tolerant" leftists, who don't really know their history but instead have been brainwashed into believing they do.
Again, this is not a response to the question asked and quoted. I'm really not sure what you are expecting in reply.
There's a difference between proselytizing vs a display of religion in public.
A prayer board is not trying to convert students to Christians.
Incorrect. Both are encouraging the practice of religion in public school. If she wants to put up a prayer board for students, there's a job for that: teaching at a parochial school. She is free to apply at any of the thousands of parochial schools in America.
Again, this is not a response to the question asked and quoted. I'm really not sure what you are expecting in reply.
Let me shorten it and try to be less wordy.
The fact is that those founding fathers who wrote the 1st amendment and who wrote the separation of church and state clause, also opened congress with prayer so you are essentially arguing that THEY were in violation of the very constitution they created.
The belief that a deity will hear prayers is a religious belief. If there isn't a deity to hear, then why pray?
But no one is FORCING them to believe ANYTHING. They are free to not participate.
Why should it be offensive that Johnny would like it if those who wish to could pray for his sick grandfather?
I do not agree with Muslims, yet a Muslim engaging in prayer to Allah does not offend me in the least.
How on earth can you feign being "offended" because someone says IF you want us to we will pray for you?
Continuing on that last thought the fact is what you people have done is the EXACT opposite of what the founding fathers wrote the clause for.
They didn't want Catholics telling protestants you MUST believe the same as us. If you are a catholic and someone else is a protestant you MUST not infringe on their right to practice their FREE EXERCISE of their religious beliefs.
NOT keep that stuff to yourself while you are at home.
The point was that NO one's point of view should infringe upon another person's right to freely express their religious beliefs.
They weren't constantly offended by one another. They respected each others right to worship as they saw fit without trying to silence them.
You are free to believe or not believe in whatever you like, but when you get "offended" by someone else's religious expression, then YOU Are trampling THEIR rights that were protected by the 1st amendment.
There's also a reason it was 1st...
We have twisted the heck out of that amendment.
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.