1
   

Illegal Sep. of Church & State still happening

 
 
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 08:48 pm
John Edwards spoke about how prayer helped him get through the death of his son and his wife's cancer diagnoses. Barack Obama repeatedly invoked the biblical phrase "I am my brother's keeper" as he spoke about poverty and injustice.

Hillary Rodham Clinton credited her faith with getting her through her husband's infidelities - All this is fine for personal life matters but when it bleeds over into winning votes in any political arena - 200% wrong.

I'm sorry, what do people still not understand about "SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE?."

It's unbelievable, anyone that votes with religious content is breaking the law. Please keep "your" religion out of "our" politics. What presumption any religious intent has that their belief system is best of any majority.

Break it down again, there's religion you can have and believe in with your personal life, marriage, work, church on Sunday etc - fine. When it comes to politics, NO.

In America, we still have a corrupt political system due to religious involvement, people hit the morals election lever like rats asking for a food pellet when a candidate mentions religion. The worst part, the candidates know this and spew false claims of belief to get the weak minded vote!

Folks - that's one of the big reasons why separation of church and state exists! To avoid that kind of corruption. You think Bush has a conscience? Is a christian? Get real.

Voting with religious intent forces candidates that want to get elected to make false claims about what they really think about faith or religion, it's extremely flawed.

Voting with religious intent is illegal in every sense of the spirit of Separation of church and state.

Voting with religious intent is simply corrupt and ironically, against basic christian doctrine.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,605 • Replies: 21
No top replies

 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 09:50 pm
@DesertDave,
Hear hear!!!
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 09:57 pm
@DesertDave,
Read the Constitution, then tell me where is says, Sep of church and state. Till you find it in the Constitution, there is no such thing.
0 Replies
 
DesertDave
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 10:06 pm
@DesertDave,
Like the IRS? There is no mandate for the collection of taxes either. Separation of Church & State is what the constitution is based on, the very reason why the ships sailed from England, to escape the wrong government fucked up by religious involvement.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 10:17 pm
@DesertDave,
Quote:
History of the term
The phrase "separation of church and state" is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes: 'I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience,'[5]

Another early user of the term was James Madison, the principal drafter of the United States Bill of Rights, who often wrote of "total separation of the church from the state" (1819 letter to Robert Walsh). "Strongly guarded . . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States," Madison wrote, and he declared, "practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States" (1811 letter to Baptist Churches). This attitude is further reflected in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, originally authored by Thomas Jefferson, but championed by Madison, and guaranteeing that no one may be compelled to finance any religion or denomination.


Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


The Bill of Rights is a set of amendments to the Constitution of the United States. It limits power of the federal government, and helps secure the rights of the individuals. If you base you government on a particular religion, and make laws based on that religion, you are in violation of the Constitution, as those laws can infringe on the freedom of other that do not follow your religion.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 10:24 pm
@DesertDave,
Quote:
If you base you government on a particular religion, and make laws based on that religion, you are in violation of the Constitution,
Show me where in the Constitution it say that? The statement in your quote says "Congress shall make no law," is says nothing about the people, Scotus, Or the present administration?
Do you understand the context in which Jefferson used that statement, if you do don't you think your twisting it slightly?
0 Replies
 
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jun, 2007 02:50 pm
@DesertDave,
DesertDave;19608 wrote:
Like the IRS? There is no mandate for the collection of taxes either. Separation of Church & State is what the constitution is based on, the very reason why the ships sailed from England, to escape the wrong government fucked up by religious involvement.


And then they started a secular Puritan society with no involvement of religion, right?
0 Replies
 
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jun, 2007 02:52 pm
@DesertDave,
DesertDave;19592 wrote:
John Edwards spoke about how prayer helped him get through the death of his son and his wife's cancer diagnoses. Barack Obama repeatedly invoked the biblical phrase "I am my brother's keeper" as he spoke about poverty and injustice.

Hillary Rodham Clinton credited her faith with getting her through her husband's infidelities - All this is fine for personal life matters but when it bleeds over into winning votes in any political arena - 200% wrong.

I'm sorry, what do people still not understand about "SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE?."

It's unbelievable, anyone that votes with religious content is breaking the law. Please keep "your" religion out of "our" politics. What presumption any religious intent has that their belief system is best of any majority.

Break it down again, there's religion you can have and believe in with your personal life, marriage, work, church on Sunday etc - fine. When it comes to politics, NO.

In America, we still have a corrupt political system due to religious involvement, people hit the morals election lever like rats asking for a food pellet when a candidate mentions religion. The worst part, the candidates know this and spew false claims of belief to get the weak minded vote!

Folks - that's one of the big reasons why separation of church and state exists! To avoid that kind of corruption. You think Bush has a conscience? Is a christian? Get real.

Voting with religious intent forces candidates that want to get elected to make false claims about what they really think about faith or religion, it's extremely flawed.

Voting with religious intent is illegal in every sense of the spirit of Separation of church and state.

Voting with religious intent is simply corrupt and ironically, against basic christian doctrine.



You can't make people not vote or run based on what they believe! Their religion is what they believe, and they have every right to believe that and they have every right to let that influence them, and they have the rights to freedom of speech and religion.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jun, 2007 03:05 pm
@Reagaknight,
Reagaknight;19747 wrote:
You can't make people not vote or run based on what they believe! Their religion is what they believe, and they have every right to believe that and they have every right to let that influence them, and they have the rights to freedom of speech and religion.


And others that do not believe the same have every right NOT to be influenced by others beliefs, or laws derived from them.
0 Replies
 
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jun, 2007 07:39 pm
@DesertDave,
Then they can be influenced by their own beliefs and run accordingly. If you take religion out of the equation, you have a lawmaking body of what? Atheists? No, that is not, of course what even Thomas Jefferson might have intended, the lack of religion is practiced as a religion today and overrepresentation of atheism would be dictatorship. You can't ask people to leave their beliefs at the door when voting, no one would vote.
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jun, 2007 10:12 pm
@DesertDave,
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


That provision is the only separation intended by the framers. They never intended that religion would not have influences on government.
Those who cry "Separation of Church and State" to get a statue or prayer taken away are misled and wrong in my opinion.
Religion and faith lead us all , even the non-religious. We all have the right to believe and worship in our own fashion and the government is proscribed from making law which takes away that right. A prayer in school or a Bible on display does nothing to violate rights of those of other faiths.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jun, 2007 07:20 am
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon;19804 wrote:
That provision is the only separation intended by the framers. They never intended that religion would not have influences on government.


How would you know? Got proof? Or you think because your religion is soooo right, it just MUST have been meant to be included in government? **** that, keep your faith to yourself.

You be the first one crying if a Wiccian or Satanist were in power trying to make laws according to their religion.

Quote:
Those who cry "Separation of Church and State" to get a statue or prayer taken away are misled and wrong in my opinion.


Your opinion means nothing.

Quote:
Religion and faith lead us all , even the non-religious. We all have the right to believe and worship in our own fashion and the government is proscribed from making law which takes away that right. A prayer in school or a Bible on display does nothing to violate rights of those of other faiths.



Yes, it does, it also protects others of different faiths from having yours pushed on them. You be the first one crying if your kid came home from school talking about how they were praying to Allah on a mat at school, and that mulsim teacher would be fired, if not sued and jailed in a heartbeat.
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jun, 2007 09:06 am
@DesertDave,
John Edwards is perhaps the most desperate of all Democratic candidates right now. He'll say anything to get elected. He learned well from John Kerry.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jun, 2007 04:14 pm
@DesertDave,
Quote:
How would you know? Got proof?
If the framers wanted it in there it would be in there, gladly it is not.
Why you neolibs keep quoting Jefferson out of context is beyond me. BTW lap 9 ITB's.
rugonnacry
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jun, 2007 06:25 pm
@Drnaline,
Drnaline;19958 wrote:
If the framers wanted it in there it would be in there, gladly it is not.
Why you neolibs keep quoting Jefferson out of context is beyond me. BTW lap 9 ITB's.


Thats right and the founding fathers wanted to keep black people as slaves, but some how we changed that.

The constitution does NOT say seperation of Church and State, but the constitution is Interpereted into law by the Supreme Court, and thus far it has always been interpreted as SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

For those who use the argument that the constitution DOES Not say those exact words, You have just been PWNT

Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Go to this link, Thomas Jefferson Said Sep of Church and State in 1802, The supreme court said it was the case for the first time in 1878, and it has been re affirmed multiple times since then.

Sorry Boys and girls SEP of Church and state DOES exist , just because its not in the constituion does not mean it is not law.

Where in the constitution does it say that if the speed posting says 65, I will get a speeding ticket if i do 75?

PWNT PWNT PWNT PWNT IAM ALL THAT IS MAN youve been PWN LMAO
0 Replies
 
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jun, 2007 08:21 am
@DesertDave,
Haven't you heard? According to the libs, the Constitution is a "living document" to be changed according to the times. If this is so, why worry about the motivation of the "founding fathers?"
rugonnacry
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jun, 2007 12:33 pm
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;20428 wrote:
Haven't you heard? According to the libs, the Constitution is a "living document" to be changed according to the times. If this is so, why worry about the motivation of the "founding fathers?"


So you agree Speration Of Church and State exists. SO much For Biblepartyusa holding an office greater than alderman eh?
0 Replies
 
STNGfan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jun, 2007 01:38 pm
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;19599 wrote:
Hear hear!!!


I double that motion.

Also they all have to confess that Jesus is their personal savior.

I mean what does being a Christian have to do with becoming a president.

It makes me sick. Personally I think they cannot disclose which religion they are in running for president. Relgion has nothing to do with politics. I personally would like to see a Muslim,Buddhist,hindu, Wiccan or Agnostic run for president.

Having to be a Christian to be the President of the united states when we "claim" to accept and tolerate all religions is hypocritical.

No wonder other countries see us as a joke.
0 Replies
 
Dmizer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jun, 2007 01:48 pm
@DesertDave,
This is a copy of a post that I had on another thread, To re-iterate:
While it is true there are innumerable references to God throughout government documents, and while it also may be true that the majority of American citizens have been Judeo-Christian, it does not follow that America was established as, or even was intended to be, a Judeo-Christian national government. Remember that America was originally settled not by religiously tolerant people, but in fact by highly intolerant religious sects who were free to carve out their own religious niches in an unsettled land.
That religious intolerance, and the forcing of one group's religious beliefs on another group, was what the framers of the Constitution were protecting all Americans against. Thomas Jefferson, unquestionably a framer of the Constitution and a Founding Father, was perhaps the champion of Religious Freedom in Revolutionary America. Thomas Jefferson's most persuasive admonition against the mixing of government and religion is in his “Notes on the State of Virginia,” Query XVII.
In his “Autobiography,” Jefferson discusses the removal of the words “Jesus Christ” from the bill establishing religious freedom “in proof that they [the authors] meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination.”
In his “Report to the Commissioners for the University of Virginia,” Thomas Jefferson refers to the “principles of our Constitution, which places all sects of religion on an equal footing….”
Thomas Jefferson believed in God. But he also believed in the inevitable corruptibility of religious and political leaders and felt strongly that a corrupt politician who was a religious demagogue would lead the nation to intolerance and ruin. Indeed, the lessons of history that I remember most clearly were that political-religious leaders (priests, kings, emperors, popes, and witch-hunting tribunals) who, by virtue of their holy mandate, represented the Word of God, committed unforgivable abuses. Perhaps our separation of church and state is an unintended, but fortuitous, check-and-balance that keeps the United States from repeating that history.
For America to be safe for all Americans to worship as they choose, it must be safe for any American to worship as he or she chooses. If the rights of a single American are abridged, the rights of every American are endangered. You may want to think of religious leaders as good people, but if they are advocates of injecting (their) religion into the American government, they are enemies of the Constitution, enemies of the state, and enemies of religious freedom.
As for the Holidays that America declares as National holidays, I speculate that the majority of the people who celebrate Easter and Christmas, fail to realize that pagen symbolism and commerical influence has completely morphed the holidays from christian to anything but christian. Easter Bunny? Christmas Tree? Christmas itself is not even celebrated in the same time of year that Christ was born. You speak of Hypocracy, I surmise that hypocracy is best recognized by those who practice it.
STNGfan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jun, 2007 02:02 pm
@Dmizer,
Dmizer;20548 wrote:
You speak of Hypocracy, I surmise that hypocracy is best recognized by those who practice it.


HA!! This statement is about as true as "it takes one to know one" statement.

As for the christmas tree not being truly a form of christmas than you have no problem with changing its name to a holiday tree. So that we can put it up in public place without promoting one religion over an other.
and changing Easter back to Oster which is where the name originated from for the greek goddess of fertility.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Illegal Sep. of Church & State still happening
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/28/2024 at 05:48:36