WTH is wrong with a moment of silence or reflection?Originally Posted by vidcc
If you don't want to reflect then STFU.
WTH is wrong with a moment of silence or reflection?Originally Posted by vidcc
If you don't want to reflect then STFU.
Last edited by Busyman; 10-10-2005 at 07:37 PM.
Silly bitch, your weapons cannot harm me. Don't you know who I am? I'm the Juggernaut, Bitchhhh!
Flies Like An Arrow, Flies Like An Apple
---12323---4552-----
2133--STRENGTH--8310
344---5--5301---3232
Originally Posted by Busyman
They already have it
It would take time out of the school day that should be used for teaching and learning. Do you think American students need less study time?
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Originally Posted by clocker
Katrina was not a terrorist act, last I heard, but leaving that for a moment, if not the (admittedly flawed) Patriot Act, what, alternatively?
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
That phrase means precisely this:Originally Posted by vidcc
"Congress (acting as the agent of the government) shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" (by, or on behalf of, the government).
Our difference of opinion stems from your belief that words are made of elastic, not realizing that, especially when used in a document such as this, such elasticity is neither desired nor allowed.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Does " ... an establishment of religion ..." mean Church, or Temple that sort of thing.
Or does it mean a religion being formed.
If not, what does the phrase actually mean.
To avoid the Church of England thing happening here.Originally Posted by JPaul
Is was viewed as slightly oppressive, enough to warrant this mention in the Constitution, at any rate.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
On the contrary I find your view of the words to be elasticOriginally Posted by j2k4
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
So the 1st amendment was (included) that the Government would not establish a religion.
I have to say mate that this does seem to imply that, from the outset, your founding fathers wanted religion kept totally seperate from the State. Or at least from your government.
I have to then take the point that there should be no religious symbolism in places like courts or schools (save for private ones).
Also that there should be no mention of God in things like pledges.
It seems only sensible.
Then our debate is over.Originally Posted by vidcc
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Not merely that the government should not establish a religion, but that it adopt a hands-off stance with regard to the practice or choice of religion by it's citizens.Originally Posted by JPaul
That the Founding Fathers wrote and abided this sentiment, then proceeded to salt their writings with religious reference should be considered the best indicator of their intent.
I don't recall off-hand, but as to the variety of religions represented among this gathering of men, I am sure were a variety of what are termed Christian religions as well as others.
The only proper conclusion would be that they agreed to adopt a passivity toward the religion/government relationship because the desire for an atmosphere of religious cohabitation was a founding premise, and also that they realized entertaining religious strictures while also attempting to formulate a new government incorporating religious freedom was a recipe for failure.
That they overlooked the eventuality the wider variety of immigration the future held would bring with it a selection of dieties not referred to as GOD should not preclude keeping the basic idea intact; indeed it should be expanded to make space for them, rather than constricted in any way, much less with any sort of selectivity.
Agree with this or not, that this is not clear to at least a few of you disheartens me beyond words.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Bookmarks