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.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,922,771 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
Americans are a wildly diversely religious people who live in a nation which does not have an Official State Religion …
The idea (demand … ???) that religious beliefs and practice are or should be (merely; only) "private" is both unrealistic and frankly goes directly against the inherently PUBLIC character of many religious practices and beliefs … IF people of faith allowed such a position to be forced upon them, it would mean that overtly secular persons and institutions would be dictating the nature of religion …
Sorry, not gonna happen, not least because "free exercise" is both guaranteed and PROMOTED by the First Amendment …
You might want to tell us what Matthew 6:5-8 talk about.
I dislike Christian fundamentalists with a passion, but I agree with you. This has gone too far.
If I have a room that has a bible in it, I wouldn't bother to look at it. Or I can put it in a drawer in the room.
Exactly so …
It's a big … *yawn* …
There are other fish to fry, and this one is just a very small minnow ...
You might want to tell us what Matthew 6:5-8 talk about.
What do you want to know … ???
It is a very straightforward instruction by The Lord Jesus of Nazareth to His Disciples that they should avoid ostentatious (and hypocritical) shows of public piety …
However … The Lord Jesus of Nazareth Himself and His Disciples (reportedly) attended and participated in both Synagogue and Temple, both of which were (and still are today) public rather than private observances … (So, no … That Gospel snippet does NOT have The Lord telling everybody to just shut up and stay home …)
But … Admittedly, there are NO reports that He ever stayed in, say, a Motel 6, where He was glad for the presence of a "Gideon" Bible … In fact, according to The Stories (e.g., Luke 2:7; Matthew 8:20; Luke 9:58), The Lord Jesus of Nazareth and His Holy Family never took advantage of "reservations" for overnight lodging while away from home …
I thank God -- and the Founders -- for the First Amendment, which keeps the Fundamentalist Creationists out of biology classrooms, prevents a county clerk in Kentucky from imposing HER beliefs on every other resident of the county, and frustrates the Hell out of the zealous missionary "New Atheists" who dearly dearly want to send people of faith into a private closet ...
These things that divide us are born of a lack of love instantiated in ideologies. I remain hopeful and optimistic because I relate to your namesake's view,
“Someday, after mastering the winds, the waves, the tides and gravity, we shall harness for God the energies of love, and then, for a second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.”
― Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
There are other fish to fry, and this one is just a very small minnow ...
I don't want to fry any fish. I will not fall into the trap that fanatic Abrahamic believers set up. I am actually glad that this hotel has bible in each room. It shows that the manager clearly has an agenda to proselytize customers. Next time, I can choose a different hotel and warn my loved ones about this one.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,922,771 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
What do you want to know … ???
It is a very straightforward instruction by The Lord Jesus of Nazareth to His Disciples that they should avoid ostentatious (and hypocritical) shows of public piety …
Exactly.
Quote:
However … The Lord Jesus of Nazareth Himself and His Disciples (reportedly) attended and participated in both Synagogue and Temple, both of which were (and still are today) public rather than private observances … (So, no … That Gospel snippet does NOT have The Lord telling everybody to just shut up and stay home …)
No, it may not say anything about staying at home, but it does tell them to shut up. Any other interpretation of the direct language which is unambiguous, is not genuine. Is attempting to shoehorn what you think into what was said.
But nice try in trying to deflect.
Quote:
But … Admittedly, there are NO reports that He ever stayed in, say, a Motel 6, where He was glad for the presence of a "Gideon" Bible … In fact, according to The Stories (e.g., Luke 2:7; Matthew 8:20; Luke 9:58), The Lord Jesus of Nazareth and His Holy Family never took advantage of "reservations" for overnight lodging while away from home …
It was a (1) request and (2) authorization for a "Presidential Proclamation" …
It is NOT a "statute law" on the books ...
It seems both the Religious and Irreligious have trouble figuring out what they are looking at when the see Public Law 97-280.
It is a full-blown law...with the full force and authority of law. One can have an opinion as to its importance...but it is as "Law" as a law can get.
You can look it up in the listing of United States Statutes At Large. Click the link, Click 1982, Click Public Laws on the dropdown, Go to 97-280. FDsys - Browse STATUTE
I confess that I don't carefully ponder over every word of every sentence in every posting of every internet forum thread …
No one suggested you should. You simply should catch up with a conversation you are engaging in, and keep up with that conversation, so you don't appear the fool by asking questions that the rest of the participants in the conversation have already discussed fully. You're not a magic snowflake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
But I am real life real world -- and legally -- familiar with Church-State questions, so I do feel FREE to throw in my fifty cents ...
So stop being lazy, go back and read the thread, and respond to the comments the rest of us have already made about the matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
Indeed, no such law would stand in a court challenge …
I am not aware that any such law has been passed ...
Read that posting again, fully, for meaning. The government establishes laws all the time that allocate taxpayer money for government spending. None of those laws may support one religion and not all others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
Some of us would argue that the "Protest Ants" have corrupted the Church …
Yet you advocate the same behaviors, project the same claim of privilege, etc. If it walks like a duck and it sounds like a duck...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
Give it up ...
No. You "give it up". Stop trying to make excuses for transgressive behavior you like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
Oh, no … !!! HUGE sums of $$$ spent there …
Asked and answered. Yet again you demonstrate that you simply haven't read the thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
Sorry, not gonna happen
I bet that was what some folks said about the church tax, a rather egregious violation of freedom of religion, which wasn't rescinded in Massachusetts until 1833.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
Many religious people and indeed many religions are accustomed to automatic deference and respect that they haven't earned; and if they are members of a majority religion they are often accustomed to both overt and structural discrimination in their favor.
Christianity in America has has been in violation of the spirit and often the letter of the law on a routine basis until fairly recently and I can understand the dismay of Christians at losing their privilege and actually having no more standing than the Big Other -- those who don't practice their faith, or who don't practice any faith. But their dismay does not mean that they are in the right.
Precisely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule
Sure they can, and have done it.
Fair enough. I should correct what I wrote there to say, "So in order for the government to do something they have to establish a law, and government cannot legitimately establish a law that supports one religion and not all others."
It was about authorizing and requesting a Presidential Proclamation … It was the equivalent of the annual "Presidential Thanksgiving Proclamation" … It's the kind of thing that got guys like D. James Kennedy excited … but ...
*yawn*
You are right. It means absolutely nothing (in legal terms). It's no different than having a Senator propose a resolution recognizing "Teilhard Day" when you go visit at the Capitol. Joint Resolution? Meh.
The "New Atheist" movement is precisely the zealot group who want to eliminate, e.g., Gideon Bibles from public places …
I've only seen you mention 2 particular people who identify as "New Athiests", and none of them are part of the effort discussed in the OP. Like I said, if you need to continue to vent about your hatred towards them, perhaps a different venue is the right choice.
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.
