I Say We Duke It Out!

Setanta,

Actually, I don't recall saying that I could do it wherever and whenever I like. I DID NOT SAY THAT. (Caps for emphasis only).

I have stated numerous times, I have no problem with separation of church and state to a point. But, that seems to be ignored everytime I say it.

I asked you if I were restrained to practicing my religion to keeping it strictly to myself aren't you then taking away a right of mine? And if you are, what makes your right any more important than mine?

0 Replies

You only accept separation of church and state "to a point." That's where the problem begins.

0 Replies

edgar,

Forgot to address you in that post. Sorry.

I agree with you. I have no problem with you not wanting someone to come pounding on your door and force feed religion to you. I promise not to do that. Laughing

I have no problem in keeping a separation of church and state. However, I do feel that some of these things can be offered as electives and thus, accomodate more than one side of the fence.

0 Replies

I have to side with S here. By the simple extension of expecting to be able to practice your religion when and where you want you are imposing on the right to freedom from it that those who choose not to follow have. They should be able to go out without having to be subjected to any religion or religious propaganda if they choose, just as you should have the right to practice your religion. It's kind of a catch-22, but that's the way it is.

0 Replies

Edgar,

Only to the point that it should be offered as an elective. Banning these classes, etc., is completing taking away from my rights, just as you would say condoning these and making them mandatory would be taking away from your rights. Your tax dollars work in schools and so do mine. So, I offer the compromise of making it elective and letting the people decide. It seems, to me, you don't want to let them decide. It seems, to me, in this case you are deciding for them.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Setanta,

Actually, I don't recall saying that I could do it wherever and whenever I like. I DID NOT SAY THAT. (Caps for emphasis only).

I have stated numerous times, I have no problem with separation of church and state to a point. But, that seems to be ignored everytime I say it.

I asked you if I were restrained to practicing my religion to keeping it strictly to myself aren't you then taking away a right of mine? And if you are, what makes your right any more important than mine?

You're attempting to dance around the question. How is your free exercise of your religion negated if you are not allowed to practice your religion whenever and wherever you choose? And if you are willing to acknowledge that you are not asking to practice your religion whenever and wherever you choose--what's your beef?

Once again, how is your free exercise of religion diminished by anyone else's freedom from religion?

0 Replies

DavidH wrote:

Where's the rest of the story?

The cited article is linked via the blue-formatted headline of the article - common practice hereabouts. And welcome to A2K.

Oh, BTW - I see you list Wisconsin as your location - I'm there too. Roughly where in Wisconsin are you?

0 Replies

Setanta,

If I am restrained to practicing my religion, let's say in my home only as an extreme, then yes, you are taking away my right. I have the right to pray in public. I have the right to speak of God in public. If you take these things from me, you are infringing on my constitutional right.

My beef? I am just trying to get you and everyone else to understand that we are all just lobbying for what we want. But, what I keep getting is because I am lobbying for something because of my religious beliefs, I am imposing on others.

Again, if you are lobbying for something I don't want, I could say you are imposing on my beliefs. I just want to know why you (and others) think it is different than just both sides lobbying for what they want.

0 Replies

J_B

I am sorry, but I think that your first sentence and your last sentence cancel each other out.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

You only accept separation of church and state "to a point." That's where the problem begins.

Indeed. Well put, edgar.

0 Replies

Timber - I live in Racine and work in Union Grove. And I tried that link; it took me to a page asking for a password and user name. I'm just curious to see the whole article, not join a whole news crew.

0 Replies

I will state that I think MA's position comes under freedom of speech, not freedom of religion. She's free to stand on a soapbox and preach, but you're free not to listen.

Freedom of speech does not guarantee an audience.

0 Replies

When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites. They love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men" (Matthew 6:5).

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

I will always stand up for God/Jesus when anyone calls Him names.

Yes Momma, but the point I think many here are trying to make is we are not attacking God when we call a "Christian" an idiot. The fault is with the person but they hide behind Christ and demand all good christians come to their aid.

Too many Christians are like you in that they are so willing to defend God they defend idiots claiming to speak for God. The issue with "Christians" didn't arise out of the non Christians. It comes from people using him for their own purposes and getting others to come to their aid based on an "attack on God."

0 Replies

edgar,

That does not mean that we are to pray in a closet. The point of that verse is that we pray with sincerity and not for show.

When my husband and I go to dinner in a restaurant and say grace, we don't do it for show. We do it to show our gratitude to the Lord.

Drewdad,

Finally, someone understands! Thank you.

0 Replies

DavidH wrote:

Interestingly enough, it's not the church that's choosing not to recognize Christ, it's the members. The church planned to have the service, but had to cancel it due to low attendance.
At least that's what it seems like from the little article shown.
Where's the rest of the story?

I really have trouble trying to justify a church cancelling services due to low attendance. Jesus said that "Where 2 or more are gathered in my name, there I am also". IMHO, a church service should never be cancelled. That would never happen in my church.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Setanta,

If I am restrained to practicing my religion, let's say in my home only as an extreme, then yes, you are taking away my right. I have the right to pray in public. I have the right to speak of God in public. If you take these things from me, you are infringing on my constitutional right.

As DD has observed by the time i respond to this, you are confusing the freedom of speech with the free exercise of religion. You can practice your religion in your home, you can practice your religion in the church or churchs of your choice. I can avoid those venues if such practice is offensive to me. You can pray in public, and i can mock you to universal ridicule by virtue of the same freedom of speech if you do so. What you cannot do is insist on the inclusion of your religious tenets in public institutions or public events. What you cannot do is exercise your religion at the public expense. What i and so many others here will never accept is that your imposition of what you allege is "god's law" on the rest of us constitutes free exercise.

Quote:

My beef? I am just trying to get you and everyone else to understand that we are all just lobbying for what we want. But, what I keep getting is because I am lobbying for something because of my religious beliefs, I am imposing on others.

This is disingenuous in the extreme. Neither i nor anyone else in this thread has lobbied for public, official statements that there is no god or that religion is a pernicious evil. What you are lobbying for is for the assertion that this is a christian nation and that christianity has a special place in society, which should include prayer and religious study on the public's dime. These are not equivalent positions at all. You indulge special pleading here.

Quote:

Again, if you are lobbying for something I don't want, I could say you are imposing on my beliefs. I just want to know why you (and others) think it is different than just both sides lobbying for what they want.

Sure, you could say that--it wouldn't mean anything, but you could say it. I've already explained that you are engaged in special pleading. I don't want religion in public life and i don't want it at the public expense. I also don't want to replace it with something different. I'm simply insisting on the absence of religion, which imposes nothing on you. You are attempting to impose, no matter how many times you deny it.

0 Replies

Intrepid - True, but the point I was trying to make was that it was not the church's fault that people weren't showing up.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

I will state that I think MA's position comes under freedom of speech, not freedom of religion. She's free to stand on a soapbox and preach, but you're free not to listen.

Freedom of speech does not guarantee an audience.

And to reinforce a point, it would allow me to laugh her to ridicule if she preached from her soap box. It would allow me to set up right next to her on a soap box from which i heap scorn on every proposition she utters. Which would in no way infringer her free exercise of religion.

0 Replies

DavidH - quite familiar with the neighborhood - I hail from the Stateline area, roots and family in Cook, Dupage, Lake, McHenry & Rock Counties Illinois and Rock, Walworth, Kenosha, & Milwaukee Counties in Wisconsin. Way up Northwest now; quite happily remote from such things as traffic lights, parking meters, major malls, and the rest of civilization's irritations.

Sorry 'bout the registration-required thing, that's one of the Internet's native inconveniences. You might wanna check out BugMeNot.Com; its a frewuently effective worksround for such irritations. So is the employment of fictitious identity and web-based throw-away free email addresseses. For every measure, there's prolly a countermeasure :wink:

0 Replies

I Say We Duke It Out!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know