 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MikeWinn
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 110
Location: South Carolina
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 2:14 pm Post subject: Challenge to libs |
 |
|
As an attempt to further define the liberal point of view, I would love for our left wing friends to attempt to show us poor uninformed conservatives just what is and how is it that there is this hoax perpetrated on the American folks called 'separation of church and state'? The question is,
do we have a Godly heritage in the USA, or not? The left wing has, very successfully, removed most elements of God from our everyday public lives and I, for one, am 'mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!' to quote the movie 'Network'. Thoughts???? 
_________________
LOCK & LOAD!
GunnerMike
Spectre Gunner and 141 FE
Dedicated to Rico. KIA March 14, 1971.
Love ya man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
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. |
I'd suggest we stay as close as possible to the discussion of the above. However, I would say that continuing attempts to remove what little reference to religion there is in our heritage as a nation angers the majority according to all polls.
The real debate is what constraints "we the people" need to put on an increasingly autocratic judiciary branch of government often dominated by a leftist social and economic agenda.
_________________
 On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 1603
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe this is an ignorant question, but if the government, by law, removes all references to God from public discourse, hasn't Atheism, by default, become the approved state religion?
_________________
Bye bye, Boston Straggler! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nakona
Lieutenant
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm going to make ONE comment on this thread, because I don't want to be here when it all falls apart in bitter argument. And this is the one post I'l be making.
"Seperation of Church & State" is a phrase used to describe a concept whereby a "wall" is erected between the two for the mutual protection of both.
"Freedom FROM Religion" is another phrase, this one of unknown origin, that essentially embodies the concept that people shouldn't have religion crammed down their throat. Hence, no organized school prayer.
However, moving on to removing all references to "God" in public discourse, such as in the pledge or on our money, is moving into the realm of silliness. We got there because both sides of this issues are insisting on this being a "zero sum game", which tends to rule out logic and common sense.
If you want to read about the origin of the seperation of church and state, which began with Jefferson, you can read this.
_________________
13F20P |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoophyDog
PO1
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 480
Location: Washington - The Evergreen State
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | ...do we have a Godly heritage in the USA, or not? |
| Quote: | Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
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. |
I've always wondered about this one as well. If you take the ammendment at face value it simply says Congress will not endorse nor deny any religion. That said, it would seem the petitions to remove "God" from the pledge, or to deny public school prayer and other decrees lately would be unconstitutional since that would be abridging a person's right of free speech.
To address the question posed we must look at the Declaration of Independence since it is there that the founders acknowledge "God" and a "Creator". So, yes, the U.S. has a Godly heritage.
Where the sticky wicket comes in is who's God? Each religion has its own view on that subject (if they didn't there would probably be only one religion). This is the foundation where I personally have the greatest heartburn: organized religion. I don't know of a single religion in this world that does not rely on an interpretation of "holy works". Each ism out there has priests, pastors, imams, rabis or whatever telling us their views of those "holy words". It is that interpretation that has caused the greatest strife not only in our own country but throughout the world.
I don't know of a single organized religion that has not altered its interpretation of its own dogma to fit the times or for political reasons. Coupled with this is the refrain found in virtually every dogma out there that says "my religion is the one true one, if you are not a member of it, you will go to hell".
Why this diatribe? Because it comes back to the main point. The drafters of the Declaration and the Constitution saw this and phrased the documents specifically with that in mind. While they acknowledged their personal belief of a God or Creator, they specifically stated that our government SHALL NOT endorse one religion over another. For the case of those who are athiests, this also applies. The goverment has not endorsed a religion, it has simply acknowledged a belief that its people are endowed by their God or Creator with certain rights. I profer to the athiests to use their own definition of a Creator. That too is a belief. In either case I don't believe these constitute a "religion" so it would seem the arguments and suits challenging the 1st ammendment are moot.
I am constantly amazed of how insightful our founding documents really are. If you take the base documents ie; Constitution and Bill of Rights, and their core statements at face value they literally cover all of the issues. It is only through the falability of man and his interpretations that we run into problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mikest
PO2
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | However, moving on to removing all references to "God" in public discourse, such as in the pledge or on our money, is moving into the realm of silliness. We got there because both sides of this issues are insisting on this being a "zero sum game", which tends to rule out logic and common sense. |
Too true.
I'm still feeling the effects of yesterday but I'll try to answer. Nakona does a good job of distilling it down. Some people do see it as being crammed down their throat. I remember growing up all around the country seeing kids picked on because they didn't believe in the same religion as the majority of other kids. Jewish kids who would not sing Christmass songs about Jesus were occasionally beaten up. Mostly it was just taunting but even that was pretty brutal for them.
I think when some people hear polititions talking about this country being a Christian nation they feel that they are not welcome and sometimes even hated. When people like Ann Coulter say we should invade and convert people to Christianity it only deepens those feelings and resentment. One of the great ideas behind this country is that the minority's rights should not be taken away by the majority and some people think that is what happens when the Christian nation label is used.
As far as the pledge, it seemed fine without "under God" for a long time and it flows better that way.
All that said this is a non issue to me and most people on the left. I'm not overtly religious, it's much more personal for me, but I understand the value of it to so many people. There are times when I cringe at the screaming done on both sides of the issue but there are far more pressing issues that should be addressed.
Nakona does a better job of distilling the feelings on this issue. I'm just too tired to really get a grip on what I want to say. This is an emotional issue for many and those are always the hardest ones to debate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lorin
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:35 pm Post subject: Re: Challenge to libs |
|
|
| MikeWinn wrote: | As an attempt to further define the liberal point of view, I would love for our left wing friends to attempt to show us poor uninformed conservatives just what is and how is it that there is this hoax perpetrated on the American folks called 'separation of church and state'? The question is,
do we have a Godly heritage in the USA, or not? The left wing has, very successfully, removed most elements of God from our everyday public lives and I, for one, am 'mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!' to quote the movie 'Network'. Thoughts???? |
Matthew 6
4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Reference to the Separation of Church and State does not appear in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, or any of our country’s official founding documents. It does appear in another document, the constitution of the former Soviet Union:
"The church in the U.S.S.R. is separated from the state and the school from the church." (Article 52) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marine4life
Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 591
Location: California
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2004 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is true that the majority should not impair the rights of the minority, however the minority should not be allowed to impair the rights of the majority. I am not religious, I don't believe at all, but the principal and wording that was put in place by our founding fathers should remain because it is as much of a part of the drafting as "We the people". It is simple, put it on the ballot and We the people will vote. Like I said I am not religious but I will vote to keep the exact wording and our past practices in tact. The bottom line is that we have allowed a rouge anti American group of wierdo's to desimate our Constitution, the ACLU has succeded in making everything that we are and stand for racist or discriminatory. There is no such thing as separation of church and state, it was a memo for God's sake just a stinking memo, not ratified, not law not even comonsense. Semper Fi.
_________________
Helicopter Marine Attack Squadron 169 which is now HMLA-169. They added Huey's to compliment the Cobra effectiveness. When I served we just had Snakes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeWinn
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 110
Location: South Carolina
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2004 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lorin,
Is there not also a verse about not keeping your light under a basket, but,
letting it shine? I don't want to get into a bible chapter and verse debate, we'd be here forever. My only concern is that the left in this country, mainly through activist judges, have made our governing documents and evolving social morals and values nearly moot. When people like Larry Flynt become highly successful businessmen it turns my stomach. When I
was in public school, granted a long time ago, we said the pledge and the Lord's Prayer every morning and teachers had disciplinary authority. Look what we have today. Thanks, Madelline O'Hare! Do you think there might
be a connection, or just coincidence?? We have had a president foul OUR
Oval Office and told to just ignore it, it's his personal life. We have a party who supports, maybe not directly, websites showing W morphing into Hitler, and biting off the heads of children and we call this just our two party system exercising their rights to be heard. geeez I could go on and on as I'm sure any of y'all could, too. Where does it end? What is the end?
My God, where has the civility, respect, and support for each other gone?
We used to be a 'melting pot' of the world's people who wanted to come here and become one of us, Americans. Now, we are nothing more than a smorgasbord of nationalities wanting the freedoms, rights, and benefits of Americans, but, keeping their old customs, values, and language constant.
I can only imaging how this will play out when have to legislate each people differently according to race, nationality, or religion. It's coming folks, just get ready. Especially if the likes of John-boy Kerry gets the nod in November. 
_________________
LOCK & LOAD!
GunnerMike
Spectre Gunner and 141 FE
Dedicated to Rico. KIA March 14, 1971.
Love ya man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Indianbaboon
Lieutenant
Joined: 04 Jul 2004
Posts: 234
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2004 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mike, you make the mistake of equating morality with religion. Religion gives you morality, but it is not the only way.
THe liberals with their moral relativism have don a damned good job of removing morality from our youth. THey've suppressed religion, one of the best tools for teaching morality, as 'dogmatic, prejudicial, etc'
But i think the separation of church and state in our country are nonetheless really important. prolly half the 13 colonies were founded in order to avoid religious persecution. Why invite that to happen again?
Lemme end this by saying that I'm not a christian. i'm a Hindu/Buddhist. You'd be scared at how similar our morals are. Indeed, my closest friends are all, with nary an exception devout christians.
Religion is important to morality. and it is our govts duty to foster a healthy environment in which religion can grow and prosper, allowing morality to do so. But govt and religion should be separate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lorin
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2004 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MikeWinn wrote: | Lorin,
Is there not also a verse about not keeping your light under a basket, but,
letting it shine? I don't want to get into a bible chapter and verse debate, we'd be here forever. My only concern is that the left in this country, mainly through activist judges, have made our governing documents and evolving social morals and values nearly moot. When people like Larry Flynt become highly successful businessmen it turns my stomach. When I
was in public school, granted a long time ago, we said the pledge and the Lord's Prayer every morning and teachers had disciplinary authority. Look what we have today. Thanks, Madelline O'Hare! Do you think there might
be a connection, or just coincidence?? We have had a president foul OUR
Oval Office and told to just ignore it, it's his personal life. We have a party who supports, maybe not directly, websites showing W morphing into Hitler, and biting off the heads of children and we call this just our two party system exercising their rights to be heard. geeez I could go on and on as I'm sure any of y'all could, too. Where does it end? What is the end?
My God, where has the civility, respect, and support for each other gone?
We used to be a 'melting pot' of the world's people who wanted to come here and become one of us, Americans. Now, we are nothing more than a smorgasbord of nationalities wanting the freedoms, rights, and benefits of Americans, but, keeping their old customs, values, and language constant.
I can only imaging how this will play out when have to legislate each people differently according to race, nationality, or religion. It's coming folks, just get ready. Especially if the likes of John-boy Kerry gets the nod in November. |
Yes. The Sermon on the Mount
Matthew 5
15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Does that not seem to encourage one to be as a "shining example"?
It is written:
Matthew 5
38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
And one might consider that the resistance of evil may well feed that which one would oppose.
Jesus instructed to pay ones tax and Paul instructed to submit to the government. Neither one advocated to become the government. And much of the use I see made of Jesus toward a political end seems to be more a follower of Judas rather than Jesus.
Salvation is a personal thing that cannot be imposed.
If the end result of a struggle is sure to lose more than is gained then who is the struggler working for?
And bringing religion into politics is presumptuous to declare which side God might favor.
And did Jesus amend the proscription against graven images that people would claim it to honor their God to insist to erect monuments dedicated to God?
I would think it should be the more important to the church to remain separate from the power of the state lest the church be corrupted by the contact.
I would as soon not get into religious debate here my own self. Perhaps I even stray by voicing exception when it would amount to "resist not evil" when I take exception to what I see as a misuse.
So, I said my piece and will say no more on the topic for now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Indianbaboon wrote: | Mike, you make the mistake of equating morality with religion. Religion gives you morality, but it is not the only way.
THe liberals with their moral relativism have don a damned good job of removing morality from our youth. THey've suppressed religion, one of the best tools for teaching morality, as 'dogmatic, prejudicial, etc'
But i think the separation of church and state in our country are nonetheless really important. prolly half the 13 colonies were founded in order to avoid religious persecution. Why invite that to happen again?
Lemme end this by saying that I'm not a christian. i'm a Hindu/Buddhist. You'd be scared at how similar our morals are. Indeed, my closest friends are all, with nary an exception devout christians.
Religion is important to morality. and it is our govts duty to foster a healthy environment in which religion can grow and prosper, allowing morality to do so. But govt and religion should be separate. |
Religion, as a source of a civil moral code, was central to the decisions of the founders, but only as source! The wonder is the clarity and brevity of the drafting.
Congress shall make no law respecting "an" establishment of religion
The key word is "an". If you read the founders, religion (in all its forms) is the source or our civil moral code and should not be rejected. The beliefs of one or more religious societies cannot be legislated.
Change the word "an" to "the" and you might find support for "Separation of Church and State" crowd. Do a search on "Jefferson and Religion". You'll learn a lot.
Moderator note: we're discussing religion (noun) in our "Constitutional Republic" (proper noun), not "Religions" (proper noun) and their differences.  
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lorin
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ASPB wrote: | | Indianbaboon wrote: | Mike, you make the mistake of equating morality with religion. Religion gives you morality, but it is not the only way.
THe liberals with their moral relativism have don a damned good job of removing morality from our youth. THey've suppressed religion, one of the best tools for teaching morality, as 'dogmatic, prejudicial, etc'
But i think the separation of church and state in our country are nonetheless really important. prolly half the 13 colonies were founded in order to avoid religious persecution. Why invite that to happen again?
Lemme end this by saying that I'm not a christian. i'm a Hindu/Buddhist. You'd be scared at how similar our morals are. Indeed, my closest friends are all, with nary an exception devout christians.
Religion is important to morality. and it is our govts duty to foster a healthy environment in which religion can grow and prosper, allowing morality to do so. But govt and religion should be separate. |
Religion, as a source of a civil moral code, was central to the decisions of the founders, but only as source! The wonder is the clarity and brevity of the drafting.
Congress shall make no law respecting "an" establishment of religion
The key word is "an". If you read the founders, religion (in all its forms) is the source or our civil moral code and should not be rejected. The beliefs of one or more religious societies cannot be legislated.
Change the word "an" to "the" and you might find support for "Separation of Church and State" crowd. Do a search on "Jefferson and Religion". You'll learn a lot.
Moderator note: we're discussing religion (noun) in our "Constitutional Republic" (proper noun), not "Religions" (proper noun) and their differences. |
Yes - there is this where Jefferson said something about the issue:
Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut were persecuted because they were not part of the Congretationalist establishment in that state. The Danbury Baptist Association, concerned about religious liberty in the new nation wrote to President Thomas Jefferson, Oct. 7, 1801.
Sir, Among the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your Election to office; we embrace the first opportunity which we have enjoyd in our collective capacity, since your Inauguration, to express our great satisfaction, in your appointment to the chief Majestracy in the United States; And though our mode of expression may be less courtly and pompious than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, Sir to believe, that none are more sincere.
Our Sentiments are uniformly on the side of Religious Liberty -- That Religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals -- That no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious Opinions - That the legitimate Power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor: But Sir our constitution of government is not specific. Our ancient charter together with the Laws made coincident therewith, were adopted on the Basis of our government, at the time of our revolution; and such had been our Laws & usages, and such still are; that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation; and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights: and these favors we receive at the expense of such degradingacknowledgements, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at therefore; if those, who seek after power & gain under the pretense of government & Religion should reproach their fellow men -- should reproach their chief Magistrate, as an enemy of religion Law & good order because he will not, dare not assume the prerogatives of Jehovah and make Laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ.
Sir, we are sensible that the President of the United States, is not the national legislator, and also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the Laws of each State; but our hopes are strong that the sentiments of our beloved President, which have had such genial affect already, like the radiant beams of the Sun, will shine and prevail through all these States and all the world till Hierarchy and Tyranny be destroyed from the Earth. Sir, when we reflect on your past services, and see a glow of philanthropy and good will shining forth in a course of more than thirty years we have reason to believe that America's God has raised you up to fill the chair of State out of that good will which he bears to the Millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence & the voice of the people have cald you to sustain and support you in your Administration against all the predetermined opposition of those who wish to rise to wealth & importance on the poverty and subjection of the people.
And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.
Signed in behalf of the Association.
Nehh Dodge
Ephram Robbins The Committee
Stephen S. Nelson
On January 1, 1802, in response to the letter from the Danbury Baptist Association, Thomas Jefferson wrote:
Gentlemen:
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which are so good 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, and 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 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 of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessings of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.
Thomas Jefferson
Following the exchange of letters, Jefferson created the bill which established freedom of religion in the state of Virginia. It was this bill that influenced the clause of freedom of religion in the First Amendment.
Source: Lipscomb, Andrew and Bergh, Albert, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 16, pp. 281-282. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lorin,
Nail on the Head! Danbury Baptists is the interpretation that is most important until Justice Black in 1947.
If you're a constructionist as I am, it's still in the actual words of the ratified Constitution. It's still the "an" vs. "the" debate and it still, to this day, says "an"!
Interpretation of words ought to go their roots and not to personal partisan opinion.
Remember Bill Clinton; What is "is"? I'll trust the Oxbridge Unabridged before I'll trust Lawyers and Politicians for interpretation. Besides which, the Brits don't have a potitical row to hoe in American politics.
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
