Which version do you REALLY believe?

Which version do you REALLY believe? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Fightdirecto -> Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 12:02:32 PM)
Choose A or B: A. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peacefully to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievences. Or: B. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a state religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of any variant of Christianity, but shall permit regulation or prohibition of non-Christian religions and atheism. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peacefully to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievences. In your heart (not necessarily in the head), which do you REALLY believe? We hear from many Americans, for example, that Islam is "evil" and that all Muslims should be locked up and deported to some Islamic country, even if those Muslims. Were born American citizens. We hear from other Americans that all of America's problems would be solved if we were to re-introduce Protestant Christian prayers into the public school system. Do you believe in freedom of religion if the religion isn't some version of Christian? Do you believe that freedom of religion includes the freedom not to believe in any religion at all?

mnottertail -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 12:03:31 PM)
I'm A. it says that and it is all that is said about that. And I am heathen norse to the core.

Alecta -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 12:06:59 PM)
Actually, Islam is a version of Christianity. I do not believe in mixing religion with government, period. But I also do not believe Congress when they say they're not doing it.

SternSkipper -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 12:22:55 PM)
WITHOUT THE SLIGHTEST DOUBT, "A"! I might believe in my own faith, but I don't for a minute believe that the founder EVER felt governments should favor one human being over another.

SternSkipper -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 12:24:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I'm A. it says that and it is all that is said about that. And I am heathen norse to the core. You ARE a heathen!

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 12:41:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alecta Actually, Islam is a version of Christianity. I do not believe in mixing religion with government, period. But I also do not believe Congress when they say they're not doing it. Yes, you correctly point out that Islam is one of the Abrahamic religions. When politicians talk about Judeo-Christian values, I find it quite interesting because Islam comes from the same roots. I also agree that separation of religion and state means SEPARATION. But, yes I do believe that for many Americans, when they read this clause, they really are thinking about Christianity in its various forms, as well as, perhaps, Judaism. Beyond that? No, I don't think a lot of Americans care. The whole point of freedom of religion in the U.S. was to protect minority religions, but for many Americans, this means groups like Pentecostal Christians, Quakers, Shakers, etc. i.e., all within the Christian camp. I am American. I am Hindu by background, Buddhist by philosophical orientation, and Atheist by intellectual choice. Although my background and choices should be respected and upheld constitutionally, somehow, in America, I never quite feel that way. I'm also tired of a landscape here that seems to think religion only means Christian, Judaism or Islam. As someone from a non-Abrahamic religious background and orientation, I am tired of people ignoring the fact that there are lots of other mainstream religions out there. And Americans follow many different belief systems. [sm=2cents.gif]

Fightdirecto -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 1:23:56 PM)
I always remember something my Dad, a Baptist minister, said more than once: quote: Too many Americans believe that "freedom of religion" means "the freedom to be whatever form of Protestant Christian you want to be".

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 1:32:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto I always remember something my Dad, a Baptist minister, said more than once: quote: Too many Americans believe that "freedom of religion" means "the freedom to be whatever form of Protestant Christian you want to be". Yes, I suppose we should all remember that when JFK was running for president people actually raised the question of whether a Catholic would be able to keep church and state separate [&:] But, we are continuously in evolution. So while I expressed the perspective that I did above, I do believe one of the key strengths of American (and the Constitution) is its ability to naturally evolve with the times. I do envision a day where religion is not so narrowly defined. We are not quite there yet. But just as slavery, women's right to vote, gay rights, etc. have evolved over time, this too will evolve as people begin to see that there is no other possible definition as we move forward than a broad one. I am frustrated, but remain hopeful. Sort of like my dating life.....

Arturas -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 1:55:21 PM)
Read A carefully and you will find it protects all religions. It does not however, require the U.S. Government to ignore it's roots as being established by believers of a Creator, in Christian terms, "God". The U.S. was established by men and women of God. Thus, you have God figuring prominently the Declaration of Independence yet the founders were wise enough to realize all citizens might call their Creator something other than God and he might not have a son named Jesus in their method of worship and their religion: From the Declaration of Independence text: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. " Their Creator" might be mother earth to some, but to the Americans signing the Delaration of Independence, "The Creator" while God to them was really a concept defining a Supreme Being of all religions. However, note the Government is not "Godless" or "Creatorless" then or now. The U.S. was and will be forever trusting in the Creator when putting forth the Great Declaration of Independence on that historic day of July 4, 1776 and when deciding to revoke the vote of non-tax paying citizens or deciding to impose payments for contraceptives on a Religion or it's supported agencies and schools.

mnottertail -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 2:00:42 PM)
I was created from my fathers jizz and my mothers eggs, and nobody else has done it different we know of. Heady language and meaningless it was a lassize faire policy towards religion, and state sponsored religion, or religious persecution, no more no less, when a people interferes with another people in the US a law may be made without respect to whether or not there is a religious underpinning.

Arturas -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 2:12:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I was created from my fathers jizz and my mothers eggs, and nobody else has done it different we know of. Heady language and meaningless it was a lassize faire policy towards religion, and state sponsored religion, or religious persecution, no more no less, when a people interferes with another people in the US a law may be made without respect to whether or not there is a religious underpinning. Not according to the Constitution. Congress cannot make a law that interfers with a religion or something with religious underpinning. The state is not sponsoring a religion over another when it admits it's people obtain (all) their rights from their creator, meaning not the Government, and that Government must respect the religions worshiping said creator, by whatever name, and must not also forget it was established by men who followed the direction of their creator and that this is not an atheist established Government but one established by the Creator by whatever name he is addressed.

Arturas -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 2:13:31 PM)
This is not opinion. This is in the founding documents of the United States.

mnottertail -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 2:15:02 PM)
quote: Not according to the Constitution. Congress cannot make a law that interfers with a religion or something with religious underpinning. Try again sport, that is nothing at all what the constitution says. How many catholic hospitals are gonna give birth control to their employees? You might want to lay off the law side of this, your record is abysmal.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 2:42:30 PM)
What the founding fathers may have written in the Declaration of Independence does not actually have much bearing on the Constitution. They are two entirely separate documents. And it was the founding fathers' intent that the Constitution should be the governing document of the country. And on the Constitution, we can certainly say the following: Number of times the word "God" appears: zero Number of times the word "Creator" appears: zero Number of times the word "Jesus" appears: zero Number of times the word "Bible" appears: zero Number of times the word "Church" appears: zero It is quite apparent that the Constitution was written to be as broad as possible - and I believe this to be quite intentional (confirmed by reading through the historical record). However, what the OP is asking, and I think is very interesting, is simply what Americans think the First Amendment means. There is, by the way, historical support for the fact that people like Thomas Jefferson might have actually been atheist, or more likely Deist. There is no evidence for every founding father that they would be "Christian" as we understand the term. Again, whether they were born into a Christian family, and baptized is completely irrelevant, as faith is a private matter. One can be born into a religion, but then decide that one does not agree with it. Personally, I believe the Constitution reads the way it does to satisfy some of the founding fathers who were atheist or Deist. But they did it quietly. Even Jefferson was extremely careful about what he shared about his private beliefs - for the obvious reasons. And despite his care, he was certainly still accused of being an atheist. Again, his viewpoint was not one that was broadly accepted by people. Regardless, I have no problem saying that the average American today does not really feel the First Amendment should apply to all religions.

Politesub53 -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 3:55:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Read A carefully and you will find it protects all religions. It does not however, require the U.S. Government to ignore it's roots as being established by believers of a Creator, in Christian terms, "God". The U.S. was established by men and women of God. Thus, you have God figuring prominently the Declaration of Independence yet the founders were wise enough to realize all citizens might call their Creator something other than God and he might not have a son named Jesus in their method of worship and their religion: From the Declaration of Independence text: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. " Their Creator" might be mother earth to some, but to the Americans signing the Delaration of Independence, "The Creator" while God to them was really a concept defining a Supreme Being of all religions. However, note the Government is not "Godless" or "Creatorless" then or now. The U.S. was and will be forever trusting in the Creator when putting forth the Great Declaration of Independence on that historic day of July 4, 1776 and when deciding to revoke the vote of non-tax paying citizens or deciding to impose payments for contraceptives on a Religion or it's supported agencies and schools. This is clearly nonsense...... Nothing requires the government to follow Christian roots. The wall of seperation is clear on that and you will be hard pressed to show anything stating otherwise, the First Amendment does just the opposite of what you suggest.

slvemike4u -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 4:04:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I was created from my fathers jizz and my mothers eggs, and nobody else has done it different we know of. Heady language and meaningless it was a lassize faire policy towards religion, and state sponsored religion, or religious persecution, no more no less, when a people interferes with another people in the US a law may be made without respect to whether or not there is a religious underpinning. Not according to the Constitution. Congress cannot make a law that interfers with a religion or something with religious underpinning. The state is not sponsoring a religion over another when it admits it's people obtain (all) their rights from their creator, meaning not the Government, and that Government must respect the religions worshiping said creator, by whatever name, and must not also forget it was established by men who followed the direction of their creator and that this is not an atheist established Government but one established by the Creator by whatever name he is addressed. Would one of "(all)their rights" that the people obtained for their creator be the right to vote ? That self same right that you are suggesting,in another thread, some future government abridge in the case of nearly half the countries citizens? How would this,or any,government go about removing rights that you claim(here) were obtained from the Creator ? Inquiring minds want to know [8\|]

SternSkipper -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 4:14:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas This is not opinion. This is in the founding documents of the United States. Gee maybe you can tell your other republifriends ... Because they haven't a good showing in regard to separation of church and state.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 4:17:31 PM)
I think too many Americans believe that the first amendment represents a "seperation of church and state". It does not. If there is a seperator (and there is), it is a one-way seperator. If you read the words as written - leaving little to know interpretation - it says that congress (house and senate) can't tell people what religion to follow and can't restrict the peoples' right to express their religion (nativity scenes and menorahs would seem to be a no-no, these days). It doesn't say that religion can't influence the government. If it did, each person running for either the house or senate (if we're still going with a sctrict interpretation) would be required to renounce religion in order to be eligible. Now, where we get into a lot of trouble is when we start getting into interpretations. For these questions, I tend to lean on the writings of Jefferson: quote: Mr. President To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut. Gentlemen The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & 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 & State. (Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.) 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 to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem. (signed) Thomas Jefferson Jan.1.1802. The section which I put in red font was supposed to be deleted as Jefferson wanted to be careful not to offend people of faith when choosing to not get involved in a pissing contest between the state and the people of the Danbury church. It is from this letter that people get the phrase "seperation of church and state". This is Jefferson, explaining what was in his mind, when he wrote the first amendment. It may be what was in his mind but it was not what he wrote. Please notice that he falls short of suggesting that the particular state should follow his lead. He only answers the question where it pertains to the whole country. It's too bad states' rights aren't still respected that way, today. Peace and comfort, Michael

tazzygirl -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 4:38:09 PM)
States rights not being respected? Or course they are.. when they follow what the moral majority wants them to be.

Politesub53 -> RE: Which version do you REALLY believe? (9/25/2012 4:41:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I think too many Americans believe that the first amendment represents a "seperation of church and state". It does not. If there is a seperator (and there is), it is a one-way seperator. If you read the words as written - leaving little to know interpretation - it says that congress (house and senate) can't tell people what religion to follow and can't restrict the peoples' right to express their religion (nativity scenes and menorahs would seem to be a no-no, these days). It doesn't say that religion can't influence the government. If it did, each person running for either the house or senate (if we're still going with a sctrict interpretation) would be required to renounce religion in order to be eligible. This is clearly absurd........ If you were correct, then there would be an established State Religion in the US. The wall of seperation is clearly a two way working. It is also wholly possible to run a nation without dragging your religious beliefs into it. Nothing says all men are equal as long as they are Christians. nothing says the Church should have seats in Congress or the Senate. Nothing says anything about the Church having any input into government what so ever. It seems to me some of you make up the constitution depending on what you think and not on what it actually says.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875