 sj |
||
|
||
BS: the constitution
|
|
|
Subject: BS: the constitution From: GUEST,guest Date: 26 Feb 04 - 10:07 AM Required reading and memorization :o) The Inevitability of Inseparability: Church and State from EagleForum.org Text of article replaced by link. --JoeClone, 1-Mar-04. Remember the quote from Zell Miller on the Floor of the Senate ""Everyone today seems to think that the U.S. Constitution expressly provides for separation of church and state. Ask any ten people if that's not so. And I'll bet you most of them will say 'Well, sure.' And some will point out, 'it's in the First Amendment.' "Wrong! Read it! It says, 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.' Where is the word 'separate'? Where are the words 'church' or 'state.' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: GUEST Date: 26 Feb 04 - 10:16 AM and the bit about "shall make no law ...prohibiting the free exercise thereof" is pretty much ignored as well" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Amos Date: 26 Feb 04 - 10:22 AM Codwallop. What is your point? That the U.S. government should promulgate Christianity?? That STates should be allowed to ban non-Christians from their borders? The separation of church and state is a long-standing tradition in law and practice, and it derives from the exact first amendment line which you quote above concerning making no law3 respecting the establishment of religion. The premise of most inerpretations is that the Federal goivernment has no business supporting the establishment of one religion over another. This a perfectly rational principle -- keep the Federal government out of relilgious issues. It is also a matter of individual freedom and privacy that an individual be free to worship as he chooses, barring harm to others. Just ignoring all the context and subtext and legacy of the issue does not make it any clearer, I'm afraid. You're gonna have to do the homework. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: GUEST,Bill Kennedy Date: 26 Feb 04 - 10:26 AM the reality of the first amendment is that you ARE free to practice whatever religion you like, but you are NOT free to impose your religious views on me. what part of that is hard for you to understand? stay out of our schools, stay out of our lives, practice your religion as you see fit but mind your own god damned business when it comes to the rest of us living our lives as we see fit to do |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: GUEST,guest Date: 26 Feb 04 - 10:53 AM well,excuse me billy boy kennedy....touchy,touchy,are'nt we? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: mack/misophist Date: 26 Feb 04 - 11:14 AM The greatest of all rights is the right to be left alone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 26 Feb 04 - 11:15 AM When an expression of religious belief is closely associated with a governmental function there is an implication that the beliefs being expressed are governmentally sanctioned. Having the Ten Commandments on a courthouse wall sends a message that the justice being dispensed therein is based on religious principles, not legal principles. Having children recite a Pledge of Allegiance which includes a reference to God implies that belief in God is a requirement of good citizenship. Laws requiring that businesses be closed on Sundays imply that belief systems with a Sunday Sabbath are sanctioned while those that may choose to worship on another day of the week are inferior. Does not the implication that one belief system is right mean that other systems are wrong? Does not saying that something is wrong amount to an aattempt to prohibit it? |
|
Subject: Lyr Add: THE GHOST FROM VALLEY FORGE From: GUEST Date: 26 Feb 04 - 01:18 PM THE GHOST FROM VALLEY FORGE I had a dream the other night I didn't understand, A figure walking through the mist, with flintlock in his hand. His clothes were torn and dirty, as he stood there by my bed, He took off his three-cornered hat, and speaking low he said: We fought a revolution to secure our liberty, We wrote the Constitution, as a shield from tyranny. For future generations, this legacy we gave, In this, the land of the free and home of the brave. The freedom we secured for you, we hoped you'd always keep, But tyrants labored endlessly while your parents were asleep. Your freedom gone - your courage lost - you're no more than a slave, In this, the land of the free and the home of the brave. You buy permits to travel, and permits to own a gun, Permits to start a business, or to build a place for one. On land that you believe you own, you pay a yearly rent, Although you have no voice in choosing how the money's spent. Your children must attend a school that doesn't educate, Your moral values can't be taught, according to the state. You read about the current "news" in a very biased press, You pay a tax you do not owe, to please the IRS. Your money is no longer made of silver or of gold You trade your wealth for paper, so life can be controlled. You pay for crimes that make our Nation turn from God to shame, You've taken Satan's number, as you've traded in your name. You've given government control to those who do you harm, So they can padlock churches, and steal the family farm. And keep our country deep in debt, put men of God in jail, Harass your fellow countryman while corrupted courts prevail. Your public servants don't uphold the solemn oath they're sworn, Your daughters visit doctors so children won't be born. Your leaders ship artillery and guns to foreign shores, And send your sons to slaughter, fighting other people's wars. Can you regain your Freedom for which we fought and died? Or don't you have the courage, or the faith to stand with pride? Are there no more values for which you'll fight to save? Or do you wish your children live in fear and be a slave? Sons of the Republic, arise and take a stand! Defend the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land! Preserve our Republic, and each God-given right! And pray to God to keep the torch of freedom burning bright! As I awoke he vanished, in the mist from whence he came, His words were true, we are not free, and we have ourselves to blame. For even now as tyrants trample each God-given right, We only watch and tremble -- too afraid to stand and fight. If he stood by your bedside in a dream while you're asleep, And wonder what remains of your right he fought to keep. What would be your answer if he called out from the grave? Is this still the land of the free and home of the brave? Author Unknown |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: GUEST,Bill Kennedy Date: 26 Feb 04 - 01:49 PM what a load of crap |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Amos Date: 26 Feb 04 - 02:21 PM Billl: What is it you are referring to , exactly? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: LadyJean Date: 27 Feb 04 - 12:30 AM Our nation has changed drastically since the Revolution. You can't buy an African, Native American or orphan to be your servant. People with mental problems aren't locked up in cages. Burglary isn't a capital offense. Women attend universities, and practice law and medicine. Married women can own property. You won't be fined for missing church on Sunday morning. You won't be imprisoned for debt. Catholics aren't second class citizens. Jews aren't second class citizens. Quakers aren't second class citizens. If you beat a child to deth you'll go to jail. Yes, you do have to go through a lot of trouble to buy a gun. But it will work a whole lot better than even the finest 18th century firearms did. (It would be difficult to shoot someone on impulse with an 18th century gun.) Smallpox doesn't exist. The law doesn't care if you cheat on your wife, have a baby out of wedlock, use a four letter word, or have relations with someone of the same sex. Being a "good" American doesn't mean being a good Protestant. I'd say these were changes for the better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Janice in NJ Date: 27 Feb 04 - 07:38 AM And Rosie and Kelli can finally get married. Well, maybe. But not if our anonymous guest has his/her/its way! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Bobert Date: 27 Feb 04 - 10:07 AM Well, one needs to keep in mind two facts: 1. The "Founding Fathers" had first hand knowledge of the powers of the Church (Anglican) over the government and were trying to set up a government that was not flawed by that relationship. 2. Many folks who came to the "Hew World" did so because of the intolerance and dogmatism of the Churches from where they came. With those pointed out, it is also true that many of our laws are based on principles found in Judio/Christainity so there is a basis of human behavior in our codes. However, beyond the "basis", I don't want any *patricular* religious sect ramming their brand of religion down my throat, thank you. *Tolerance* is the operative undercurrent that allows a democracy to operate. Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Nerd Date: 27 Feb 04 - 10:59 AM I love how people on the right nowadays insert Judeo before Christian to suggest a veneer of tolerance. Then they invent take the ide of "secular Humanism" and leave off the "secular," (because of course many people whom they would like to agree with them think the government should be secular) and come up with a conflict between "the Judeo-Christian and the Humanist world views," which is, as many have pointed out here, a load of crap. The question is not which values we live our lives by, but what the government is allowed to require people to do, say, see and read. To put it in a way the right might understand, a law that forces certain businesses to be closed on Sunday (like liquor stores in Philadelphia) is a direct economic penalty on Jewish owners. If a Christian owner wishes to observe his religion, he can open for six days a week, while a Jew can only open for five, because the law favors specific Christian practice, not "Judeo-Christian values." The "pledge of allegiance" is another interesting case. Originally, of course, the words "under God" were not in it. They were added in a fit of governmental religious zeal in the 1950s. So the uproar over the pledge nowadays is not about some cherished old tradition, but about reversing the Christian activism of the previous generation. In general, I think it is amusing in the first place that we can force children to recite a pledge claiming that we value "liberty and justice for all." How about the liberty not to pledge "allegiance" to a flag (whatever the hell that means), which in a strict interpretation of Judaism is idolatry? Why is the Ghost from Valley Forge so silent about infringements of this kind of liberty? That poem is execrable in many ways of course. One is that it uses such statements as: "Your daughters visit doctors so children won't be born" as an example of the violation of a "God-given right." Which right is that? The right to control and imprison your daughter and force her to do your will? No thanks, I'll pass. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Amos Date: 27 Feb 04 - 12:03 PM The poem is execrable, and if that's what Bill Kennedy called a load of crap I will second the motion. Its scanning is moronic, its imagery cloyed and cliched, and its sentiments muddy and unthoughtful. I can sympathize, fe4eling that way often myself. Pushing religion of any shape or form is no business of a Federal government, at least not this one. It is the business of moral busybodies and people who do not want to face the real problems of life. Grundies and nabobs are ideally suited to it. Public servants should swear off this sort of moralistic bohunkus as they would from cocaine or heavy drinking (come to think of it...) It is disrespectful in the extreme to assume that an individual cannot decide on his own religion without your help. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Peace Date: 27 Feb 04 - 12:42 PM I don't really care what religion anyone is. When proselytizers come to my door I politely say no thanks. If they persist, I politely tell 'em to eff off. I live in a simple world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Don Firth Date: 27 Feb 04 - 01:21 PM Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion. —John Adams And, I would add, vice versa. When Bush says that Americans' freedom and the principles they live by come form God, he (and anyone else who believes this) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Amos Date: 27 Feb 04 - 02:59 PM BEautiful link, Don; thanks. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: beadie Date: 27 Feb 04 - 03:49 PM Don: I note one missing from the list attributed to Pres. Jefferson. On the occasion of his second innaugural address, (I apologize for having misplaced the exact quote) he noted that, in his opinion, the Constitution placed issues of religion outside the general powers of the government and that he had endeavored to observe that separation in his past term and would continue to do so in the next. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Peace Date: 29 Feb 04 - 12:25 AM Yeah, we have lots of self-proclaimed preachers speaking on God's behalf. It is a boondoggle of magnificent proportions. I'm sorry I didn't get into it. I'd be rich by now. Anyone know Falwell's net worth? Does his congregation know? Come to brucie's Church on the Lake. If you can't come, send a donation and I'll say a prayer for you. It doesn't have to be a large donation: $50 ____ $100 ____ $500 ____ More ____. (Please check one.) Make cheques payable to Brother brucie. Note, prayers will be said as soon as the cheque clears. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: catspaw49 Date: 29 Feb 04 - 12:43 AM Aw dammit ta hell brucie!!! There ya' go making some serious bucks off this separation of church and state thing and I think back and now realize I should have gone with the infomercials when Cletus, Paw, Buford, and the Reg Boys gave me the problem of the separation of church and garage............... There was this great celebration they had in my backyard one night resulting in a new religious icon and a visit from the local sheriff: It became a joyous evening of the three of them and the Reg boys getting drunk on "Iron City" and 'Shine and roasting a hog out in my backyard alongside the garage. Of course, after a while, Paw started lighting up farts as is his wont, and that's what I now have come to believe is one of those things best left unexplained. The neighbors began to complain about 11 o'clock or so after one of Paw's flamers had ignited the hedge on his property. That would have passed as the boys got it put out pretty quick, being full of Iron City and all, but when a major rip set fire to his wife's bird feeder....well, that was it. I tried to calm the guy down and assured him nothing like that would happen again. He went back into his house dragging the charred remains of the feeder and a roasted squirrel that had been looting it when Paw let fly with that fiery thundersprecht. Anyway, I got them situated again and since my house has aluminum siding, my only request was that they point Paw towards the wall. I figured a good hosing would clean off the worst of it in the morning. I went inside and the revelry continued at a somewhat decreased decibel level with only the occasional flash lighting the window of my den. Around 2 AM the boys came in for a final pee call and of course they couldn't just go. I heard either Reg or Reg in my pantry and before I could get up there, the whole crew was playing sink the Cheerios in my downstairs bathroom. Karen, my wife who is usually blessed with some patience for them, came downstairs at this point and threw a fit since our kids watch everything "The Boys" do and we were spending a fortune in Cheerios. After a severe ass-reaming from Karen, I herded them back outside and suggested they get some sleep around the smouldering pig carcass. I went back in and after cleaning and disinfecting the bathroom and taking a shower, I again settled down in front of the TV to watch a half-hour Infomercial on how I could make thousands a week by selling quinnine pills through Direct Mail Order and running tiny little ads. They were just getting to the good part with the testimonials and all when there was this giant blast from the backyard and the night sky lit up like a Buddhist monk. There was a moment of silence and then I heard Cletus yell, "HOH-LEE SHEEEEIT!!!" Well, there wasn't anyway I could avoid it, so I went out through the garage into the backyard and there they stood, the whole damn bunch of them, except for Buford who was throwing up Iron City and pork fat down his bib overalls over by the smoking hedge. They were staring at an image that Paw's last fart had scorched onto the siding with their mouths hanging open. I stepped back and looked and my first thought was, "Well this ain't gonna' clean off too good and Karen will be really pissed." But when I started to say something Cletus stopped me and I noticed that the look on all of their faces was almost reverent. Paw was standing with his mouth agape and the others seemed awestruck as well, so I looked again. Cletus turned to me and said, "Doncha seez it Catspaw? Its rite thar!!! Paw done farted Jerry Falwell out his ass!!!" Well, I kinda' had to admit, it DID resemble him in the flickering light of the burning porker on the spit, but I was too much in fear of what the morning would bring from Karen to say anymore than tell them to get some sleep. Problem was, they didn't. I went back inside, the group outside quieted down, and I nodded off before I could get the 800 number for the "501 All-Time Polka Greats" by Myron Kopetz and the Nose Flute Kings. What I didn't know was that the group had gone off and gotten Pastor Sharphorn, his wife, the Ladies Auxillary, and the Deacons, from the "Church of Evangelical Brethren and Tongue Talking Mohunkers" and they arrived for a look-see about sun-up. When I woke up to the commotion outside it was about 6 AM I guess. The sight that confronted me was reasonably bizarre. At least 150 people were assembled in the backyard and I could see more coming down the alley. A small altar had been erected out of the remains of my stockade fence which was now on the ground, the crowd overflowing into my neighbor's backyard and trampling his stupid-ass garden gnomes into powder....it was the only high spot of the day. Those kneeling at the altar would place small plastic Madonnas and Jesus statuary at the foot of the garage wall and say a little prayer and move on to the donation box that Cletus was guarding. It was then that I noticed that everyone donating more than $25.00 was getting a "Holy Relic" to commemorate their visit to this newest religious icon which had previously only sheltered my vehicles and assorted cans of dried out wax and rubbing compound. There, perched upon a throne-like affair that I noticed had been assembled from our porch furniture, was Paw. As each person gave his donation, Buford would cut a small piece from Paw's overalls and hand it to them. For $50. they got a piece from the seat, and for $500. a snippet from the flap of his longjohns. It was a kind of poor man's "Shroud of Turin" I guess. Business must have been good since Paw was missing one entire leg of his bibs and he was about bareassed already. I was dumbfounded and I was just considering how to set this up as an infomercial and start booking tours when the County Sheriff showed up and ran everybody off. Then he proceeded to fine me for 19 different offenses and gave me a summons to appear in court for destruction of my neighbors property. I was able to head off Cletus and the money, which covered almost all of the fines and my neighbor's friggin' gnomes, but it cost another 50 bucks to get rid of the Falwell image. Now if I could just get shed of the real one for the same price.......................Anyway, I haven't been able to figure out how that happened and I suppose it is one of those things best left unexplained. I've always thought that Falwell was talking out his ass, but I never figured you could blow him out your ass as well, but Paw's a really religious ol' coot so I guess you just never know. Really, I think Cletus had it right with his first two words, "Holy Shit!!" The Sheriff suggested that they "get out of the county" at least for awhile and they left this morning for a festival in either Alabama or Mississippi where they had a contract for the porta-potty business they have been trying to run called "Crappers on Casters." Damn but I'm sorry I never went with the infomercial idea........... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Peace Date: 29 Feb 04 - 12:49 AM Full article is available with the link. The Falwell organization also does not subscribe to the Evangelical Council for Financial Responsibility, and it does not comply with the Better Business Bureau standards for charitable organizations that solicit funds. In l979, income raised by Falwell`s television program was $35 million, while its operating costs for direct-mail appeals, promotion, and administration -- including maintaining Falwell`s 12-room house and his private Westwind II jet - amounted to $26 million. And there have been some disquieting differences between what Falwell said was happening and what was actually going on. For instance, in l980 Falwell refused to pay $67,000 in taxes on land which was not tax-exempt. One of the officers of "The Old Time Gospel Hour" told reporters at the time that the church owned no property not "involved in the ministry of the gospel of Jesus Christ," when in fact it was leasing space to a supermarket, a gift shop, and a restaurant-bar in the shopping plaza which contained its offices.20. www.religion-online.org/cgi-bin/relsearchd.dll/ showchapter?chapter_id=2055 www.religion-online.org/cgi-bin/relsearchd.dll/ showchapter?chapter_id=2055 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: dianavan Date: 29 Feb 04 - 12:54 AM nor shall there be any time allocated, by the state, to those who wish to pray on company time. Hats, scarves and adornment are permitted. The President of The World, Your Benevolence, (From Cascadia) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Walking Eagle Date: 29 Feb 04 - 08:05 PM Well, I was going to write something intellectual, such as that Jefferson was a Unitarian and so was the man that challenged the reading of the Lord's Prayer in school. But all I can write is 'Spaw--LMAOWROTF! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Irish sergeant Date: 02 Mar 04 - 01:28 PM I've lately done research into the constitution pursuiant to an article or series based on the unconstitutionality of the proposed amendment banning gay marriage and the formation of the secret police, I mean the homeland security department. While it is a fact that our forebearers were more religious than many of us today Bill is absolutely right about the separation of church and state Kindly refer to the first amendment in the Bill of rights. Youi don't have to be a lawyer to understand it. The language is concise and to the point. I neither desire or require "King George" or his right wing religeous fanatics to tell me how to pray or whom to marry. The man should be impeached for violating the constitution for signing into law a bill he rammed down Congress's throat under the threat of continuing terrorism that violate several constitutional amendments. In addition to the one stated above kindly add the Fourth, Fifth, sixth, ninth, tenth, fourteenth and fifteenth. He drew our armed forces into a second conflict with Iraq after promoting a policy based on non-existant evidence. I fully agree Sadaam Hussein needed to go but it should have been via the world court. The president can be impeached for high crimes and misdomeanors. A ploy the conservative right tried unsuccessfully tried with Clinton for having a relation with someone other than his wife. Here's a clue, That wasn't illeagal and neither was his lying about it. Oliver North did far worse and the conservative factions lionize him. Our president allows a company (Haliburton) to gouge the American taxpayer for services rendered in the rebuilding of Iraq. Why ? Because Dick Cheney has ties to them (Or did if we believe him), American men and women are being asked to die in the name of freedom while the same person asking them to do wants to stifle the rights of a substantial cross section of the American populous. Vote Bush and his cronies out in November! Thank you for putting up wityh my rant in the name of liberty, Neil (AKA Irish Sergeant) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Don Firth Date: 02 Mar 04 - 02:10 PM Good rant, Neil! ". . . income raised by Falwell`s television program was $35 million. . . ." And I chose to be a perpertually broke singer of folk songs. Jeez! I coulda made myself a prophet! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Chief Chaos Date: 02 Mar 04 - 03:38 PM Folks, as much as I curently don't like the situation as it is in America, please remember that those of us working in the so called Dept. of Homeland Security (and I do mean my co-workers and myself)are hard working blokes like yourselves. And just like we wouldn't grab your guns for the far left anti-gun lobby, we won't be trying to infringe upon your rights for the far right. All we are concerned with is the safety and security of this nation (by which I mean the people that constitute the USA). We are republicans, democrats, libertarians, etc. The people in the Dept. are from all walks of life and from every corner of the nation. My men and I are not "Jack Booted Thugs". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Wesley S Date: 02 Mar 04 - 04:21 PM And the Trolls win again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Donuel Date: 02 Mar 04 - 06:05 PM spaw I remember the first version where the burn mark was of Jesus. 3 years ago? We all knew that Bush wasn't elected but adjudicated by the Supreme Court. Of course Gen. Boykin says W was not elected but appointed by God. As the war president and the master of morality who will defend preserve and protect the inequality of selected impure Americans, we really need a better name for this president. His holiness the president needs a catchy new name. Inquisitor? God Czar, why not Bishop and chief or Ayatolla US. A privitized incorporated faith based universal multinational president - PIFBUMP as a title, needs to be shortened to something easier on the tongue. The World Oil Minister Bush And Theologian WOMBAT is no better. I'm open to suggestions... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Donuel Date: 02 Mar 04 - 06:08 PM American Society Secretary & Holy Ordained Legislative Executive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: GUEST,yuwhooo Date: 02 Mar 04 - 06:40 PM How about Julio Siezer? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: GUEST,Arne Langsetmo Date: 02 Mar 04 - 06:45 PM Guest: More CRW revisionist nonsense. Look here for an real exposition on this. More generally, look here for refutations of the various twisted and half-wit "arguments" made in the Eagle Forum propaganda page. If you want to see the nature of the dishonesty of the revisionist historians currently pushing this CRW crapola, click here and here. And there's plenty more examples of these type lies all over the web. Give Jim Allison and Susan Batte thanks for taking the time to reserach and collate this information and set the record straight. Cheers, -- Arne Langsetmo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: GUEST,Arne Langsetmo Date: 02 Mar 04 - 06:55 PM Bobert: Ummm, what Christian principles are in the Constitution? Which are even in civil law? How many of the Ten Commandments are in the Constitution? How many in civil law (and more tellingly, which ones)? Keep in mind, in answering, that Christianity has no patent on "Thou shalt not kill" and no copyright on "love your neighbour". I know you probably agree with my point here; just wanted to make that clear. Cheers, -- Arne Langsetmo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Irish sergeant Date: 03 Mar 04 - 01:04 PM Chief Chaos: I believe that you and your co-workers are not the problem. Nor do I believe that you are trying to undermine the Constituttion but i can not say the same for the so called copetent authorities appointed above you. I stand by my previous statement about the illegal, unnecessary and unconstitutional nature of the law that brought your department into being. It smacks of movement to a totalitarian state when we as a nation would even consider such a move. While you and your co-workers might not be lining up to take our weapons or rights there are certainly misguided indivduals who are proposing just that and acting on it. Witness Jose Padilla being held without trial as an enemy combatant. Bring him to trial in open court for treason or what ever charge the Government can rightly bring. Possesion of explosives would be a good start. Secret star chamber hearings are not what this nation is about or supposed to be about and it surely isn't why I spent most of my adult life in service to this nation. (And yes, I am a combat veteran) The people appointed above you are trying under the guise of national security to legislate this contry into a theoccratic right wing dictatorship (exactly the sort of thing we're supposed to be fighting against)anything to keep an illegaly appointed president and an attorney-general who couldn't win an election against a dead opponant in office I stand by the constitution and against any person or organization that would supress the liberties guarenteed by the consitution. Kindest regards, Neil |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Chief Chaos Date: 03 Mar 04 - 01:29 PM Neil, Surprisingly enough I agree with you. I'm just trying to head off the lynch mobs that might consider my men and I to be the "DARK AGENTS" much as the FBI and ATF were maligned after Waco and Ruby Ridge. As far as the argument for separation of Church and State goes I know one thing for certain: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men (everybody, regardless of sex, creed, color, religion, etc.) are created equal (not seperate but equal) and are endowed by THEIR CREATOR (not Jesus, not Yaweh, not Buddah, not Mohammed) with certain inalienable (not able to be taken away) rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." I find it hard to believe that the founding fathers, being the Christians that they most definitely were, would mistakenly use "their creator" instead of "God, the Father" or some other distinctly Christian phrasology, unless they deliberately meant for a separation of church and state. Oh, and by the way, That's my take on Gay marriage as well. All men have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Who am I to deny my fellow man his rights? Marriage is a great institution.... but then who want's to be institutionalized? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Irish sergeant Date: 03 Mar 04 - 04:05 PM Chief; Sounds like we're on the same page. Let's hope those apointed above us have some common sense. Have a great afternoon and evening. Kindest regards, Neil |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Gareth Date: 03 Mar 04 - 06:54 PM Sci Fi Fans might remember - If this Goes On ! Heinlien (SP) One of the three stories published under "Revolt in 2100" Suggest read, digest, then comment. Makes some interesting comments on Catholics, Mormons, Jews and Free Masons. On yes and the Mexicans, South Africans, Canadians ans us Brits ! Gareth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Irish sergeant Date: 04 Mar 04 - 03:50 PM I also suggest Orwell's 1984. Neil |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Chief Chaos Date: 05 Mar 04 - 09:46 AM I was just talking to a doctor the other day who stated that one of his aunts from out in the country, refused to watch TV if she was not fully clothed. She was sure that if she could see, then she could be seen! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Irish sergeant Date: 05 Mar 04 - 04:04 PM Damn, When I think about what I've done in fornt of the tv!:~) I hate when that happens! Neil |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 05 Mar 04 - 04:30 PM "Does not saying that something is wrong amount to an attempt to prohibit it?" No. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Frankham Date: 05 Mar 04 - 04:46 PM The reason for the "Separation" is to reduce intolerance. The US is not a Christian nation. It is not a theocracy. It is composed of many different religious beliefs and our country was founded on tolerance for diversity. Frank |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Irish sergeant Date: 05 Mar 04 - 05:27 PM Culdn't agree more with you Frank. And Kevin, you are absolutely right. Have a good weekend. Neil |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: LadyJean Date: 06 Mar 04 - 12:36 AM My ancestors were Huguenots, French Protestants. They were forced to leave France in 1715, because King Louis and comany wanted their nation to be 100% Catholic. I read a history of France written for French children in the mid twentieth century. Which told les petits Francaises, that the king had been wise to get rid of this odd minority. In doing so, he created the Swiss watch industry. Most of the watchmakers in France were Protestants, and they all went to Geneva. He gave us Paul Revere, who's father was a Huguenot. In short they shipped lots of excellent people out of the country for the sake of religious unity. Jefferson and Franklin both said they hoped our country would welcome people of ALL faiths as full citizens. They specifically mentioned Moslems. Our nation's great strength is it's diversity. I don't want to lose that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Peace Date: 06 Mar 04 - 02:51 AM Hear! Hear. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Don Firth Date: 06 Mar 04 - 01:45 PM Those who claim that there is, or should be, no separation between church and state invariably have only one religion in mind: their own. I wonder how Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore would have reacted if, instead of ordering the unconditional removal of the 2.6 ton granite Ten Commandments monument from the Alabama judicial building's rotunda, U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson had said, "The monument can stay, provided it actually goes back to its Biblical, and presumed historical roots. The Ten Commandments must not be written in English, they must be written in Hebrew." Druids of the world, unite!!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Irish sergeant Date: 06 Mar 04 - 08:27 PM All for it Don! Up the Druids! Neil |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Peace Date: 08 Mar 04 - 09:54 PM All for it Neil! Up the Fluids! Brucie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Amos Date: 09 Mar 04 - 12:07 AM I think Bush should be impeached for violating his oath and also for the commission of premeditated murder, a much more serious crime than that spontaneous moment of passion Bill Clinton caught all that heat for. Worse even than trying to coverup for it! Threatening to use the Constitution to push a moralistic religous agenda is about as big a doublecross of one's oath as I can recall. Impeachable offense, I woudl think. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: the constitution From: Peace Date: 09 Mar 04 - 06:50 PM I agree with Amos. He should know he swore to uphold the Constitution. Not remake it in his image. You guys to the south have got some serious work cut out for you. The Constitution shouldn't be going to the highest bidder, religious or otherwise. I hope Americans are aware of what they stand to lose (or maybe will lose if they don't stand). |
