Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over Abortion


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over Abortion Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 8:41:21 AM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline
quote:

Article VI and Ammendment I.

Article VI:
quote:

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwith-standing.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.


Amendment I:
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

These are the statements of the Constitution touching on religion.  There is no mention at all about a "separation of church and state".

The phrase "separation of church and state" dates to an 1803 letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, wherein he referenced the First Amendment as creating a "wall of separation" between church and state.

The United States Supreme Court first referenced Jefferson's letter in Reynolds v. United States (98 U.S. 145), and thus the concept acquired force of legal precedent, and was reinforced in McCollum v. Board of Education (333 U.S. 203) and other cases.

However, Thomas Jefferson's original letter to the Danbury Baptists never describes the nature of said "wall of separation", merely that it is the consequence of the First Amendment.  Specifically, Thomas Jefferson said thus:
quote:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions -- 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 and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

However, even Jefferson's sparse description of said "wall" is in the direction of government ordinance as it applies to opinions and beliefs--in particular the religious beliefs of individual men.  The preceding sentence, ending with the statement "...that the legislative powers of the government reach acts only, and not opinions" definitively establishes that context.

Thus, even in interpretation, the Constitution does not mandate a "separation of Church and State," but mandates that government not stray from the civic sphere into the religious sphere.  In no part of the Constitution is any church placed under similar restriction.

This is reiterated in the last part of the First Amendment: "...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

One may, in good conscience, disagree with the stance of the bishops referenced in the OP.  I would hope that, in good conscience, all who disagree exercise their rights fully, and in principled opposition to the bishops' stance, by bringing countervailing pressure to the Oval Office.

One may not, in any conscience, disagree with the right of the bishops to take their stance, or to exercise their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, to bring their position to the attention of the government.

< Message edited by celticlord2112 -- 11/15/2008 8:47:11 AM >


_____________________________



(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 10:58:41 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
I never said anything about the Bishop's rights to bring their opinions to the attention of government. I was simply pointing out the facts evilty claimed to be unaware of.

(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 2:00:40 PM   
candystripper


Posts: 3486
Joined: 11/1/2005
Status: offline
Hey, I have no problem with the Conference of Bishops asking to see POTUS.  (Demanding to see him strikes me as rude, but their bad manners aren't my concern.) What bothers me is why they wanna see him.  Why can't the RCC in the  U.S. accept that it is *just* a religion, no better and nor worse than any other?
 
If the Catholic Church wishes to preach against abortion and birth control to its congregants, then they should by all means do so.  Nobody is forced to attend Mass.  I fail to see, though, why adherents of other faiths, agnoistics, atheists, and whatever else there may be, should not be afforded the same respect, not only by the Federal Government, but by the Catholic Church.
 
The U.S. Catholic Church seems bent on becoming the 'official state religion' of the U.S., which is blatantly unconstitutional and so freaking rude to non-Catholics.
 
candystripper 

< Message edited by candystripper -- 11/15/2008 2:01:43 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 3:56:08 PM   
BbwCanaDomme


Posts: 330
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: BbwCanaDomme

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: TNstepsout

I feel like I've gone back in time. I can't  believe we are actually discussing this issue. We need more abortion, not less. There are too many people on the planet.


In some countries they allow a couple to have x amount of babies and they just kill the ones after that....maybe we could try that for a while and see how it works.


Whoa! I'm going to take a wild guess and say you've never left your country. I'm pretty sure there are no countries that do that.


Yes I have left the country, but that doesn't really matter. All I need is the internet and google.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

The one child policy doesn't involve killing babies, it implements a fine for families with more than one child, and that's not across the board. The fines are waved for rural families/ families where the parents are only children. If you take the trouble to google it, could you at least go to the effort of reading it?

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 6:18:47 PM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline
quote:

The U.S. Catholic Church seems bent on becoming the 'official state religion' of the U.S., which is blatantly unconstitutional and so freaking rude to non-Catholics.

Every religion has and will promote a certain moral view.  What the Catholic bishops seek is neither unconstitutional nor rude.  Their behavior is in keeping with the best traditions of this nation and its government.

Their right to petition the government for a redress of grievances is the same as yours.  Their right to present their views is the same as yours.  What is rude is to suggest that it be otherwise.


_____________________________



(in reply to candystripper)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 6:27:35 PM   
michaelOfGeorgia


Posts: 4253
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: candystripper

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelOfGeorgia

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: TNstepsout

I feel like I've gone back in time. I can't  believe we are actually discussing this issue. We need more abortion, not less. There are too many people on the planet.


In some countries they allow a couple to have x amount of babies and they just kill the ones after that....maybe we could try that for a while and see how it works.


let's start with getting rid of the politicians, lawyers and rich people in general before we start getting rid of babies. might actually work better.



Aw, and I thought you liked me, Michael. 
 
*Wink*
 
candystripper 


i do, candy...still can't respond to your email.


_____________________________

Are we having fun, yet?

(in reply to candystripper)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 6:28:02 PM   
GoddessDustyGold


Posts: 2822
Joined: 4/11/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: candystripper

Hey, I have no problem with the Conference of Bishops asking to see POTUS.  (Demanding to see him strikes me as rude, but their bad manners aren't my concern.) What bothers me is why they wanna see him.  Why can't the RCC in the  U.S. accept that it is *just* a religion, no better and nor worse than any other?

 
Why should you be bothered why they want to see him?  It's probably pretty obvious why.
It is just a religion, no better and no worse than any other?  They may have a strong presence as to the tenets of the faith and a world wide history.  So what?  Same thing could be said of certain other religions. 
 
quote:

If the Catholic Church wishes to preach against abortion and birth control to its congregants, then they should by all means do so.  Nobody is forced to attend Mass.  I fail to see, though, why adherents of other faiths, agnoistics, atheists, and whatever else there may be, should not be afforded the same respect, not only by the Federal Government, but by the Catholic Church. 

 
What makes you think they aren't?  Is there something I missed about the Catholics saying to all other Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, et al faiths that they don't have the same privilege of having an audience to air their grievances on this or any other matter of moral or civil concern?  Or is this just your take on the audacity of a church (not any church, mind you...but the Catholic Church)  that might stand up and make a moral stand against a particular law?

 
quote:

The U.S. Catholic Church seems bent on becoming the 'official state religion' of the U.S., which is blatantly unconstitutional and so freaking rude to non-Catholics.

 
candystripper 


Paranoid much?  Small chance of that in this country...Even the evangelicals are not afforded any respect.  Catholics are tame compared to some of them!
 
Edited for emphasis.

< Message edited by GoddessDustyGold -- 11/15/2008 6:29:55 PM >


_____________________________

Dusty
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety
B Franklin
Don't blame Me ~ I didn't vote for either of them
The Hidden Kingdom


(in reply to candystripper)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 6:31:12 PM   
tweedydaddy


Posts: 673
Joined: 9/1/2008
Status: offline
Not that long ago the catholic church was debating whether or not black men had souls. I bet he's not expecting the Spanish Inquisition.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 7:19:05 PM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
It was a smart assed comment to this sentence

"We need more abortion, not less. There are too many people on the planet"

Sorry you got all worked up about it, it wasn't a serious suggestion.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to BbwCanaDomme)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/15/2008 8:16:34 PM   
BbwCanaDomme


Posts: 330
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

It was a smart assed comment to this sentence

"We need more abortion, not less. There are too many people on the planet"

Sorry you got all worked up about it, it wasn't a serious suggestion.


Obviously it wasn't a serious suggestion, it was just a really bad/inaccurate joke. Also kind of offensive.

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/16/2008 6:05:50 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BbwCanaDomme

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

It was a smart assed comment to this sentence

"We need more abortion, not less. There are too many people on the planet"

Sorry you got all worked up about it, it wasn't a serious suggestion.


Obviously it wasn't a serious suggestion, it was just a really bad/inaccurate joke. Also kind of offensive.


Yes, but so is the idea that more abortions is the answer to anything, but I noticed you didn't have a problem with that statement. Maybe you agree?

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to BbwCanaDomme)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over A... - 11/16/2008 2:21:10 PM   
BbwCanaDomme


Posts: 330
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: BbwCanaDomme

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

It was a smart assed comment to this sentence

"We need more abortion, not less. There are too many people on the planet"

Sorry you got all worked up about it, it wasn't a serious suggestion.


Obviously it wasn't a serious suggestion, it was just a really bad/inaccurate joke. Also kind of offensive.


Yes, but so is the idea that more abortions is the answer to anything, but I noticed you didn't have a problem with that statement. Maybe you agree?


Honestly? I don't care who has an abortion. They can have as many as they want, it doesn't affect my life at all, and it doesn't affect anyone other than the people choosing to have them. It's no one else's business, and no one should try to take the right away from other people. While it may not be a choice I would make, it's not my place to try to make that choice for other people.

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 72
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Bishops Vow to Confront Obama Administration Over Abortion Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078