RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer!

RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (Full Version)

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

Message

thompsonx -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 7:20:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 History is called history because it is of the past. It is something to learn from, not to represent future results. History is full of a lot of terrible happenings and it also full of a lot of good things. I had a history professor once tell me that in history "there are no good guys and no bad guys only shit that happens. If you want to have good guys and bad guys get the fuck out of my class and go study sociology." People tend to base their beliefs on media, and a lot of times the negative media. I would venture to say people are prone to enjoy the negative and thrive on it. Then they base their entire beliefs on an entire group. Now what we have going on is people who want to change the laws to suit whatever their heart desires, Which people want to change what laws for what reason? things that have been in place and has worked, but coming here, living here, then trying to force issues like cry babies is ridiculous. We used to have involuntary slavery,segregation,genocide...I do not think that changing from those has been an unwise decission. SO sorry, but I don't feel the need to be political correct on every issue. I do not see the need to be p/c on any issue. If sensitivities run that deep, then I would be looking for a new place to live, because wow, its gotten to the point you cant turn around without someone saying. "Prejudice, discrimination, wah wah wah" If there is prejudice and discrimination then don't you think it appropriate to vocalize your opinion? That's exactly how I feel about it. These are words not bullets if they offend you. I am not that thin skinned

hot4bondage -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 7:27:05 AM)
~FR~ I think it's worth noting that Justices Thomas and Scalia didn't think the plaintiffs had standing because they believe that the Establishment Clause only applies to the federal government. "Thomas and Scalia believe the Establishment Clause applies only to the federal government, not to states or localities. So those two justices would have rejected the claims against the New York town without delving into the details of the dispute." http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/scotus-upholds-prayer-at-public-meetings-106343.html That's right. There is still an active debate about whether or not our Bill of Rights protects us from our local and state governments. It's called "incorporation." I think it's shameful that our government has yet to fully acknowledge the rights that we were born with. Even if one sidesteps the 14th Amendment and agrees with the piecemeal approach of incorporation, we have Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947), which seems to clearly rule that the Establishment Clause was incorporated as binding on the states. This is exactly the sort of mentality that has tainted the discussion of state's rights. The states should be free to ADD to the Bill of Rights, but never free to SUBTRACT.

thompsonx -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 7:41:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 Those people are not Christians. We are known by our actions. I can say I am a Jew, I can say I am an atheist, I can say I am a man, I can say anything but it doesn't make it true. Sadly those people might even think in their minds this is Christian. Have you not noticed a number of chrstians calling for the extermination of islam here on these boards?

cloudboy -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 7:56:21 AM)
Out local columnist did not like the ruling: "Supreme Court's decision about prayer at public meetings is a bad one: It allows a government to express favor for one religion over others." "While prayer might be part of the opening ceremonies of Congress or a state legislature, Meyerson says, the court should have seen such bodies as distinct from local government. There, as in my hypothetical, a citizen makes a direct, eyeball-to-eyeball appeal to a board that has espoused a religious preference. That's very different from ceremonial prayer offered by and for a larger representative body, Meyerson says. Mark Graber, professor of constitutional law at the University of Maryland, also disagreed with the Greece ruling. "If the lawmakers want to pray before legislating," he says, "they can pray in their cars, they can meet in private homes, or they can pray silently. The public prayer, particularly sectarian public prayer, is clearly designed to communicate a message of endorsement for religion, prayer and Christianity." There's something else, something offensively in-your-face about the whole thing — the piety and the insistence on prayer of a certain creed at meetings of a government body that's supposed to conduct the public's business without prejudice. It might now be constitutional, but it never struck me as particularly Christian."" Read more: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-rodricks-0506-20140506,0,5269245.column#ixzz30woO2ClA

Phydeaux -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:10:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess quote: ORIGINAL: SadistDave Unless you're locked in and compelled to convert to their religion when a government official invokes the imaginary sky-fairy of his or her understanding, your rights are not being violated. If it really offends you, leave the room until the prayer is over. The Constitution gives government officials as much of a right to pray as it gives you not to have to stick around and listen to it. -SD- Why should any resident or citizen be forced to leave a PUBLIC meeting? If it is a public meeting then it has to be conducted in a way to make all of the public feel welcome for the ENTIRETY of the meeting. Otherwise it is NOT public meeting. Holding a private religious ceremony is not something that should be part of a governmental public meeting. The two are not the same. I could turn this around and simply say that any governmental official who wants to pray should go their house of worship (or do it completely silently). There are times and places for prayer. I don't see why or how a PUBLIC meeting is one of them UNLESS you don't actually want all members of the public there. If you want to conduct an exclusionary meeting then this seems a good way to start it i.e., invoking some people's beliefs but not others. And if we were to invoke everyone's we would be there til the cows come home. According to estimates there are 4,200 religions in the world. Even if you only gave each one 30 seconds that is still 35 HOURS of prayer before the meeting can start in order to truly call it a PUBLIC meeting. Explain to me how exactly that is going to work if every time there is a meeting there has to be3 35 hours of prayer before it can start?? So for a one hour meeting they have to book space for 36 hours. Or for a one hour meeting they have to book a space for 5 consecutive days. Religion and prayer are PRIVATE matters for people to do ON THEIR OWN TIME. Bullshit. No one is forcing someone to leave a room. They are electing to. It is a freaking free country (relatively, although less so). If some councilman some where wants to say - Let us pray for wisdom - all you liberal nazi's get your panties in a wad. Free speech - until its speech you disagree with - like prayers at a council meeting or sceptics questioning the wisdom of climate change fraud. Your ideas can't win - so you resort to muzzling the opposition.

chatterbox24 -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:15:47 AM)
The prayers are not limited to Christianity. If one feels they are not properly represented, then ask to stand up and say your own prayer. Simple. People are afraid to do that? Contrary to popular belief Christians are not to be feared. Not every place is poo dunk dumb. ITs like me hating muslims because what extremists did and grouping them all together as one. They are not One and anyone who does that is not balanced nor Godly.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:30:17 AM)
FR This is a general response not directed at anyone in particular. Could someone please explain to me why the faith of Christians in America (and yes it is Christians in America because this Supreme Court case was about Christian prayers at council meetings) is so weak that they constantly have to remind others of their faith? To me that represents weakness of person, and weakness of faith. If your faith is strong, you can do it PRIVATELY without anyone else watching and know, and trust, that your god is there. Everything else is not FAITH. Everything else is SHOW. Why do Christians in America need their religion to be so carnival? Is Christian religion and faith that weak? Faith and prayer is supposed to be about one's personal relationship with god. It should not have to involve others in any way, shape or form. And anyone telling me that their faith is weakened if they are limited to private conversations with god is not interested in FAITH, but interested in SHOW. Three ring circus. That's what it makes me think. If one only thinks it is faith if there is an audience that really undermines what faith is supposed to be about. Faith is about what one carries around on the INSIDE. If someone was the last person on the face of the planet is it still prayer is there are not people around him to hear him pray? Because according to some, prayer is only prayer and faith is only faith, if it happens in front of others. Isn't the only thing that matters is whether that person and their god are communicating with each other? Does god really only hear when you say something out loud in front of other people who don't want to hear you. This just makes me question whether people even believe in their so called gods if this is what it leads to. Religion as three ring circus. So very sad. All gods are cringing at this narrow understanding of faith and prayer. [sm=2cents.gif]

Phydeaux -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:38:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess FR This is a general response not directed at anyone in particular. Could someone please explain to me why the faith of Christians in America (and yes it is Christians in America because this Supreme Court case was about Christian prayers at council meetings) is so weak that they constantly have to remind others of their faith? To me that represents weakness of person, and weakness of faith. If your faith is strong, you can do it PRIVATELY without anyone else watching and know, and trust, that your god is there. Everything else is not FAITH. Everything else is SHOW. Why do Christians in America need their religion to be so carnival? Is Christian religion and faith that weak? Faith and prayer is supposed to be about one's personal relationship with god. It should not have to involve others in any way, shape or form. And anyone telling me that their faith is weakened if they are limited to private conversations with god is not interested in FAITH, but interested in SHOW. Three ring circus. That's what it makes me think. If one only thinks it is faith if there is an audience that really undermines what faith is supposed to be about. Faith is about what one carries around on the INSIDE. If someone was the last person on the face of the planet is it still prayer is there are not people around him to hear him pray? Because according to some, prayer is only prayer and faith is only faith, if it happens in front of others. Isn't the only thing that matters is whether that person and their god are communicating with each other? Does god really only hear when you say something out loud in front of other people who don't want to hear you. This just makes me question whether people even believe in their so called gods if this is what it leads to. Religion as three ring circus. So very sad. All gods are cringing at this narrow understanding of faith and prayer. [sm=2cents.gif] Bullshit. Arraunt bullshit. Making a prayer in public has nothing to do with being weak or strong. It has to do with the left illegally and immorally trying to muzzle people they don't agree with.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:41:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 The prayers are not limited to Christianity. If one feels they are not properly represented, then ask to stand up and say your own prayer. Simple. People are afraid to do that? Contrary to popular belief Christians are not to be feared. Not every place is poo dunk dumb. ITs like me hating muslims because what extremists did and grouping them all together as one. They are not One and anyone who does that is not balanced nor Godly. There are an estimated 4300 religions in the world. If you wanted to be fair and represent each one, let's say give them 30 seconds each, that would take 35 HOURS. The only way to be fair is to do all of them. Anything less than that is simply not fair. And no one has to tell any public official what their religion is. So the only way to know that you've covered every religion that could be represented in the room is to do ALL of them. I don't know about you, but I have better things to do than to wait for 35 hours before the actual council business can begin. Wouldn't it make more sense to have everyone pray silently in their own car, or home, or not pray at all BEFORE the meeting. Wouldn't that be more respectful of everyone's faith AND also allow the meeting to start and finish in a timely manner? I also wonder if you can possibly imagine what it is like for a person at a meeting like that who is in the minority. Have you ever lived for an extended period of time where Christianity was not the majority religion? If so, I'm not sure you can fully understand what it would feel like to be at a meeting where the people make it clear from their prayer that other viewpoints are not actually welcome. How safe would you feel speaking out if you were in the minority after they just opened the meeting with a prayer that represents most of the people in the room and that does not represent you? Do you still think you would feel like the council represented you and your interests? If you had any issue to raise that involved your faith or place of worship in that meeting would you feel comfortable doing so (in public, in a room, with everyone who just prayed to another god sitting right around you)? If you would feel comfortable, then you are much, much stronger than most people. But the constitutional laws in the bill of rights are not supposed to be there to protect the strong. They are supposed to be there to protect the weak.

altoonamaster -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:49:46 AM)
leave the room until the prayer is over or pray to the devil

MistressKel -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:51:24 AM)
Like it or not, if I get offended when people PUSH shit on me, I will let them know it. And if they don't like it? Well...quite frankly, if they don't care that they are offending me, and want to bitch that I am offending them by asking them to keep their prayers between themselves and God, I just take Karma into my own hands. Results of this? The people around me are real, and the assholes tend to stay away. Simple. I have moved time and time again to places that don't have these people there, but they tend to infect every place I've gone with their mindless prattling on about their right to push their religion on me. Well, I have a right to NOT have it put on me. And, if you get in that space without respect, you get what you got coming. Personally, I don't care what their God says, nor what their Bible says. I believe what I believe and don't really need them to force their beliefs on me or mine. Who does that? Only those who are straight the hell outta their minds, that's who. In my experience, aside from the obvious differences, like one believes in God, and the other Believes in Satan...the only real difference I've seen in these two religions is that Satanists are much kinder and don't push their beliefs on others. Just calling it like I see it. Not really going to argue the point, just so people know.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:53:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess FR This is a general response not directed at anyone in particular. Could someone please explain to me why the faith of Christians in America (and yes it is Christians in America because this Supreme Court case was about Christian prayers at council meetings) is so weak that they constantly have to remind others of their faith? To me that represents weakness of person, and weakness of faith. If your faith is strong, you can do it PRIVATELY without anyone else watching and know, and trust, that your god is there. Everything else is not FAITH. Everything else is SHOW. Why do Christians in America need their religion to be so carnival? Is Christian religion and faith that weak? Faith and prayer is supposed to be about one's personal relationship with god. It should not have to involve others in any way, shape or form. And anyone telling me that their faith is weakened if they are limited to private conversations with god is not interested in FAITH, but interested in SHOW. Three ring circus. That's what it makes me think. If one only thinks it is faith if there is an audience that really undermines what faith is supposed to be about. Faith is about what one carries around on the INSIDE. If someone was the last person on the face of the planet is it still prayer is there are not people around him to hear him pray? Because according to some, prayer is only prayer and faith is only faith, if it happens in front of others. Isn't the only thing that matters is whether that person and their god are communicating with each other? Does god really only hear when you say something out loud in front of other people who don't want to hear you. This just makes me question whether people even believe in their so called gods if this is what it leads to. Religion as three ring circus. So very sad. All gods are cringing at this narrow understanding of faith and prayer. [sm=2cents.gif] Bullshit. Arraunt bullshit. Making a prayer in public has nothing to do with being weak or strong. It has to do with the left illegally and immorally trying to muzzle people they don't agree with. But the "left" is not muzzling people - the people are free to pray in private and their houses of worship as often and as long as they wish. They can even be praying silently to themselves during the entirety of the public council meeting if that's what they want to do. So there is no muzzling of prayer going on. But clearly, you do, in fact, believe that it's not faith or prayer unless it is said out loud in front of people who don't want to listen to it. What a strange definition of faith and prayer. I guess the last person on the face of the planet really is out of luck when he goes to pray because it's not prayer unless it's a council meeting and your prayer is out loud and forced on another person. Private prayer just doesn't cut it for Christians, I guess. WHAT IS WRONG WITH PRIVATE PRAYER? Because your arguments suggest that private prayer is "muzzling people", i.e., it isn't prayer at all. Explain to me what is so special about public prayer in front of people who are not interested in hearing it? You seem to think this type of prayer is better somehow than just plain ole private prayer? Does your god hear better when you are praying around people who don't want to hear you? Is that how your faith works? The god of my family hears just fine when my family prays privately. We don't need others around to make our faith or our prayers real. Just saying. I truly appreciate how difficult it must be to be part of a faith where your god can't hear you unless you are imposing yourself on others. What does faith and prayer mean to you? If praying in a public council meeting is the only way Christians can keep the faith, then there are some more serious fundamental problems going on here. If one's faith is strong you actually don't need to do public prayer. [sm=2cents.gif]

Phydeaux -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 8:54:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 The prayers are not limited to Christianity. If one feels they are not properly represented, then ask to stand up and say your own prayer. Simple. People are afraid to do that? Contrary to popular belief Christians are not to be feared. Not every place is poo dunk dumb. ITs like me hating muslims because what extremists did and grouping them all together as one. They are not One and anyone who does that is not balanced nor Godly. There are an estimated 4300 religions in the world. If you wanted to be fair and represent each one, let's say give them 30 seconds each, that would take 35 HOURS. The only way to be fair is to do all of them. Anything less than that is simply not fair. And no one has to tell any public official what their religion is. So the only way to know that you've covered every religion that could be represented in the room is to do ALL of them. I don't know about you, but I have better things to do than to wait for 35 hours before the actual council business can begin. Wouldn't it make more sense to have everyone pray silently in their own car, or home, or not pray at all BEFORE the meeting. Wouldn't that be more respectful of everyone's faith AND also allow the meeting to start and finish in a timely manner? I also wonder if you can possibly imagine what it is like for a person at a meeting like that who is in the minority. Have you ever lived for an extended period of time where Christianity was not the majority religion? If so, I'm not sure you can fully understand what it would feel like to be at a meeting where the people make it clear from their prayer that other viewpoints are not actually welcome. How safe would you feel speaking out if you were in the minority after they just opened the meeting with a prayer that represents most of the people in the room and that does not represent you? Do you still think you would feel like the council represented you and your interests? If you had any issue to raise that involved your faith or place of worship in that meeting would you feel comfortable doing so (in public, in a room, with everyone who just prayed to another god sitting right around you)? If you would feel comfortable, then you are much, much stronger than most people. But the constitutional laws in the bill of rights are not supposed to be there to protect the strong. They are supposed to be there to protect the weak. The idea that "fairness" requires representative time for all religions is .. ludicrous. Anyone that goes to the council meeting can speak. Thats fair. We agree that the costitution and the bill of rights are there to protect minorities. However not to make sure they are not uncomfortable. How ludicrous. paraphrasing "Congress shall pass no law reqarding the establishment of religion". HAS. NOTHING. TO. DO. WITH. SAYING. A. PRAYER. AT. CIVIC. FUNCTIONS. Congress is not making you belong to a religion. It is not requiring you to believe in order to be heard.

Phydeaux -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 9:02:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess FR This is a general response not directed at anyone in particular. Could someone please explain to me why the faith of Christians in America (and yes it is Christians in America because this Supreme Court case was about Christian prayers at council meetings) is so weak that they constantly have to remind others of their faith? To me that represents weakness of person, and weakness of faith. If your faith is strong, you can do it PRIVATELY without anyone else watching and know, and trust, that your god is there. Everything else is not FAITH. Everything else is SHOW. Why do Christians in America need their religion to be so carnival? Is Christian religion and faith that weak? Faith and prayer is supposed to be about one's personal relationship with god. It should not have to involve others in any way, shape or form. And anyone telling me that their faith is weakened if they are limited to private conversations with god is not interested in FAITH, but interested in SHOW. Three ring circus. That's what it makes me think. If one only thinks it is faith if there is an audience that really undermines what faith is supposed to be about. Faith is about what one carries around on the INSIDE. If someone was the last person on the face of the planet is it still prayer is there are not people around him to hear him pray? Because according to some, prayer is only prayer and faith is only faith, if it happens in front of others. Isn't the only thing that matters is whether that person and their god are communicating with each other? Does god really only hear when you say something out loud in front of other people who don't want to hear you. This just makes me question whether people even believe in their so called gods if this is what it leads to. Religion as three ring circus. So very sad. All gods are cringing at this narrow understanding of faith and prayer. [sm=2cents.gif] Bullshit. Arraunt bullshit. Making a prayer in public has nothing to do with being weak or strong. It has to do with the left illegally and immorally trying to muzzle people they don't agree with. But the "left" is not muzzling people - the people are free to pray in private and their houses of worship as often and as long as they wish. They can even be praying silently to themselves during the entirety of the public council meeting if that's what they want to do. So there is no muzzling of prayer going on. McFLy! The consitutional right to speech isn't granted by a government. Its granted by a supreme authority (endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights and among them are life, liberty and the persuit of happiness). Thats the law in this country. The first law, in fact. Since our government does not grant the right to free speach, it cannot remove it either. The government rather is supposed to ensure it. Thats why we have a government (government are instituted among men....). So your insistence that prayer should be silent is, indeed, muzzling. quote: But clearly, you do, in fact, believe that it's not faith or prayer unless it is said out loud in front of people who don't want to listen to it. What a strange definition of faith and prayer. I guess the last person on the face of the planet really is out of luck when he goes to pray because it's not prayer unless it's a council meeting and your prayer is out loud and forced on another person. Private prayer just doesn't cut it for Christians, I guess. WHAT IS WRONG WITH PRIVATE PRAYER? Because your arguments suggest that private prayer is "muzzling people", i.e., it isn't prayer at all. Explain to me what is so special about public prayer in front of people who are not interested in hearing it? You seem to think this type of prayer is better somehow than just plain ole private prayer? Does your god hear better when you are praying around people who don't want to hear you? Is that how your faith works? The god of my family hears just fine when my family prays privately. We don't need others around to make our faith or our prayers real. Just saying. I truly appreciate how difficult it must be to be part of a faith where your god can't hear you unless you are imposing yourself on others. What does faith and prayer mean to you? If praying in a public council meeting is the only way Christians can keep the faith, then there are some more serious fundamental problems going on here. If one's faith is strong you actually don't need to do public prayer. [sm=2cents.gif] Faith and prayer aren't the issues. Our founding fathers started and ended each day of the constitutional convention with a prayer. The idea that we should surrender our freedom that was purchased at great cost - is offensive.

Musicmystery -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 9:04:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 The prayers are not limited to Christianity. In this case, yes, they were, except for 4 cases out of 199. That's . . . a little lopsided.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 9:12:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux McFLy! The consitutional right to speech isn't granted by a government. Its granted by a supreme authority (endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights and among them are life, liberty and the persuit of happiness). Thats the law in this country. The first law, in fact. Since our government does not grant the right to free speach, it cannot remove it either. The government rather is supposed to ensure it. Thats why we have a government (government are instituted among men....). So your insistence that prayer should be silent is, indeed, muzzling. Faith and prayer aren't the issues. Our founding fathers started and ended each day of the constitutional convention with a prayer. The idea that we should surrender our freedom that was purchased at great cost - is offensive. No where did I say that prayer should ONLY be silent. I said prayer can be PRIVATE or if in a PUBLIC meeting where other activity is going on, then silent so as not to disturb the rest of the proceedings. So now you are arguing that people should have the right to scream their prayers while other business at the public meeting is actually taking place??? How is not praying in public "surrendering our freedom"? It can only be that if you believe faith and prayer is not meaningful unless it is done at a public council meeting in front of people who don't want to hear it. Your very responses are confirming my concerns. You think that religion, faith and prayer don't even exist unless they are done out loud, in public venues, in front of people who don't want to listen. And you feel if you are not allowed to do that you have "surrendered" your faith. Your god is cringing…..

BitYakin -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 9:21:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess Religion and prayer are PRIVATE matters for people to do ON THEIR OWN TIME. REALLLYYYYY? PRIVATE? is that why they have those HUGE BUILDINGS that LARGE CROWDS go to and pray together at,and hold picnic and BBQs etc. etc. etc..... sorry but religion and prayer as a rule is QUITE the SOCIAL EVENT! I think what you meant was, I don't like religion so they SHOULD KEEP IT PRIVATE, like it was something DIRTY or SHAMEFULL

MistressKel -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 9:37:28 AM)
Aside from the fact that the Bible makes clear that prayer should be private (and no, I can't quote to you where I got that, just read the damn Bible and you'll know for yourself)... quote: I think what you meant was, I don't like religion so they SHOULD KEEP IT PRIVATE, like it was something DIRTY or SHAMEFULL When you push it on other people, it IS dirty and shameful...much more shameful than ANYTHING I've ever done. Why can't Christians not accept the words, I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT? My Aunt...OMG. I quit going to holiday functions because she would corner me and push God on me. Despite my telling her that I'm good with God, and have my OWN relationship with him that I handle my OWN way. She continues to tell me that I need Jesus as my saviour...how the FUCK does this silly bitch KNOW what I need when she doesn't even listen to what I DO believe??? SO, the main reason I don't like public prayer is because it's bullshit and just a way to "weed out" 'unbelievers" so that they can target them for brainwashing.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 9:37:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess Religion and prayer are PRIVATE matters for people to do ON THEIR OWN TIME. REALLLYYYYY? PRIVATE? is that why they have those HUGE BUILDINGS that LARGE CROWDS go to and pray together at,and hold picnic and BBQs etc. etc. etc..... sorry but religion and prayer as a rule is QUITE the SOCIAL EVENT! I think what you meant was, I don't like religion so they SHOULD KEEP IT PRIVATE, like it was something DIRTY or SHAMEFULL My point about "private" is in contrast to doing it in a "public" i.e., governmental forum. I am using the term as it is commonly understood when discussing politics, i.e., private vs. public. Just like I think what someone chooses to read is a private matter and should not be subject to governmental control. This has nothing to do with whether the reading material is dirty or shameful. That's not the point. Of course people of the same religion are free to gather in their homes and their houses of worship to pray - that is what freedom of religion is. The distinction between private and public here is about whether something that is of a private, personal nature should be imposed on public, i.e. governmental gatherings when those gatherings include private residents/citizens who are attending in their regular capacity as local residents and not in their capacity as governmental officials or in their capacity as religious people. In other words, when someone attends a town council meeting they are actually not planning on attending a religious service. (Of course there are some on this thread who seem to think it is only faith and prayer if it occurs in a town council meeting :) In the same way, if I go to a house of worship to pray, I'm not interested in suddenly having a politician take the pulpit as part of the actual religious service and start discussing politics, education, or other issues when my purpose of going to the house of worship is to pray. I would consider that an invasion of my privacy and of my right to worship free from the interference of government. Again, there are time and place considerations here that are very important. If I show up to a house of worship different from my own, I don't have the right to tell that congregation that they have to allow me to go to the pulpit and give my own prayer of my own faith when their faith is different. They are under no obligation to allow me to do that. But a town council meeting is a public meeting i.e., open to the public, and where the public is allowed to speak. So to me, the public nature of those meetings is very different from expressions of faith which should take place in private, and by that I would include houses of worship.

BitYakin -> RE: You can now violate someone else's religion with prayer! (5/6/2014 9:40:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess But the "left" is not muzzling people - the people are free to pray in private and their houses of worship as often and as long as they wish. They can even be praying silently to themselves during the entirety of the public council meeting if that's what they want to do. So there is no muzzling of prayer going on. hate to tell you this but what you describe is pretty much the DEFINTION of muzzling as long as your dog is in your home or car or someplace PRIVATE they don't need a MUZZLE, but if they go out in PUBLIC then they NEED TO BE MUZZLED!

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625