Government-Christian Groups Lock Horns over Anti-Conversion Bill

[rtwngAvngr]

AJ, Christianity is not a state religion. Must we make all aspects of the world immune from the misinterpretations of an ignorant child with bad parents? That seems like a tall order.

Again, stop it with your childish attacks on christianity. You're paranoid.

 

[ajwps]

AJ, Christianity is not a state religion. Must we make all aspects of the world immune from the misinterpretations of an ignorant child with bad parents? That seems like a tall order.

No Chrisitianity is not a state religion thanks to the Founding Fathers of this great country. What is wrong with teaching children about their religion and beliefs in their homes, churches and on privately owned religious facilities? Why make small children of the Hindus, Jews, Zoriastrians, Atheists, Agnostics, Buddhists and others say prayers in public schools to Jesus?

Why the priority? Don't tell me that it doesn't happen because I grew up in Texas public schools where I either said the prayers or had to leave the home room along with a few other outcasts. This probably is difficult for you to understand but it is painful to remember the disgrace of being isolated from my friends and classmates at the forced prayers and Christmas carols sung in my taxpayer funded elementary and secondary schools. The same ones my parents paid local and state school taxes to support.

Again, stop it with your childish attacks on christianity. You're paranoid.

So you feel threatened when I have never intended any attack on Chrisitanity or you. A bit paranoid are we?

 

[musicman]

AJ:

In the first place, why don't you drop the "Pollyana meets Joan of Arc" routine? You've hurled plenty of invective at me, so your attempt to play the martyr comes off as, to say the least, disingenuous.

"How would you like to have your young children, or maybe grandchildren to see statues of the God Visnu in many public buildings, parks, courthouses and other public facilities?"

Ah, there it is - the emotional appeal. Gonna tug at my heartstrings with the old *what about the children* routine, eh? Well, in the first place, my children do not enjoy a Constitutional right not to have their feelings hurt. In the second place, if I don't like what's going on in my community, I'm going to address it in my community, not go crying to the feds. It's a community matter, and - as such - none of the federal government's business. Same thing if I think that "public taxpayer properties" are being used to "promote a state majority religion". There are remedies available to me within my community, or in my state, without my making an ostentatious show of how put upon I am, and bringing in Big Brother.

As to the Supreme Court, it's powers and responsibilities are clearly outlined in the Constitution. It's job is to determine whether a given law meets the standard of constitutionality. It's one, immutable guiding constant is the U.S. Constitution. And, the Constitution states that ALL powers not specifically granted to the federal government revert to the states, or to the people. The framers couldn't have been any clearer if they were buttonhooks in the well water. The Supreme Court overreaches it's constitutional authority when it meddles in matters that the framers clearly understood to be the province of the people.

"Does your church not find man made wooden cross of Jesus as valid as the concrete and gold crosses found in the Catholic church?"

What do you mean, "valid"? As in symbolic, or holding some special significance? Actually, the answer is, "no". I do not carry a replica of the cross around, nor do I afford it any special powers. The Second Commandment states, "Thou shalt make unto thee no graven images". A crucifix is such an image. So, actually, by your yardstick, I should be crying to the ACLU every time I see a cross.

The Second Commandment, as I just related it, does not appear in the Catholic Bible, nor in Catholic teachings. I know - I was raised Catholic. Do you seriously deny that there are dramatic differences between Catholicism and Christianity? If you did. you'd be wrong - there are many. That's why I get angry when people try to blame everything from the Inquisition to Adolf Hitler on Christianity. It's just plain wrong.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

No Chrisitianity is not a state religion thanks to the Founding Fathers of this great country. What is wrong with teaching children about their religion and beliefs in their homes, churches and on privately owned religious facilities? Why make small children of the Hindus, Jews, Zoriastrians, Atheists, Agnostics, Buddhists and others say prayers in public schools to Jesus?

That would be over the line. A public sign saying merry christmas is not.

Why the priority? Don't tell me that it doesn't happen because I grew up in Texas public schools where I either said the prayers or had to leave the home room along with a few other outcasts. This probably is difficult for you to understand but it is painful to remember the disgrace of being isolated from my friends and classmates at the forced prayers and Christmas carols sung in my taxpayer funded elementary and secondary schools. The same ones my parents paid local and state school taxes to support.

Boo hoo. Have your recovered?

So you feel threatened when I have never intended any attack on Chrisitanity or you. A bit paranoid are we?

I don't feel threatened. Not at all.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I'm just curious aj, do you think all cultural expression should be controlled so no one feels in a minority of somekind? This is the logical extension of your statements to this point. What do you really think of it?

 

[ajwps]

I'm just curious aj, do you think all cultural expression should be controlled so no one feels in a minority of somekind? This is the logical extension of your statements to this point. What do you really think of it?

RWA you'r curious? All cultural expressions are not controlled but when the Constitution of the US is violated by promoting one particular religion, then there is no public property exempt from the law of the land.

All logical extensions of truth and all truths that logic can warrant must turn upon meaning in the sense of intension.

 

[ajwps]

That would be over the line. A public sign saying merry christmas is not.

Over the line you say? Small children forced to say prayer to one religion not their own is over the line for sure?

Boo hoo. Have your recovered?

Thanks I have recovered but there are many people now grown who have lost their faith because of a concerted effort to evangelise in elementary schools. Including many Christians who have given up Christ for beliefs in agnosticism or atheism because they found this religion a hollow dogma and makes no sense. Good try but you still lack understanding of other people with your own certainty in faith.

I don't feel threatened. Not at all.

You wouldn't but you will......

 

[ajwps]

AJ:

In the first place, why don't you drop the "Pollyana meets Joan of Arc" routine? You've hurled plenty of invective at me, so your attempt to play the martyr comes off as, to say the least, disingenuous.

Feeling a bit frustrated and a loss of credibility, are you?

Ah, there it is - the emotional appeal. Gonna tug at my heartstrings with the old *what about the children* routine, eh? Well, in the first place, my children do not enjoy a Constitutional right not to have their feelings hurt.

TUG, TUG..... Your children certainly do not have a Constitutional right to have their feelings hurt but they do have a legal right to not be forced to pray to Allah in their classrooms by an Islamic teacher exercising some Constitutional right to have her students pray to her god.

In the second place, if I don't like what's going on in my community, I'm going to address it in my community, not go crying to the feds. It's a community matter, and - as such - none of the federal government's business. Same thing if I think that "public taxpayer properties" are being used to "promote a state majority religion". There are remedies available to me within my community, or in my state, without my making an ostentatious show of how put upon I am, and bringing in Big Brother.

You may not like what's going on in your community and you have every right to address grievences to anyone you choose but you still live under the laws of the United States of America. But your G-d given rights do not override those same rights of your fellow citizens. The Federal government has usurped many Constitutional rights of American citizens but the Feds have also in some cases tried to protect the rights of everyone instead of foisting Fed laws promoting the wishes of one particular group over others. You can cry to your local community, your city and your state but in the end the loss of basic human freedoms to all harms everyone.

As to the Supreme Court, it's powers and responsibilities are clearly outlined in the Constitution. It's job is to determine whether a given law meets the standard of constitutionality. It's one, immutable guiding constant is the U.S. Constitution. And, the Constitution states that ALL powers not specifically granted to the federal government revert to the states, or to the people. The framers couldn't have been any clearer if they were buttonhooks in the well water. The Supreme Court overreaches it's constitutional authority when it meddles in matters that the framers clearly understood to be the province of the people.

I agree with you to a point. Placing religious icons or bibles on every citizen's public property is a matter truly designated by the Framers of the Constitution for the US Supreme Court to determine.

What do you mean, "valid"? As in symbolic, or holding some special significance? Actually, the answer is, "no". I do not carry a replica of the cross around, nor do I afford it any special powers. The Second Commandment states, "Thou shalt make unto thee no graven images". A crucifix is such an image. So, actually, by your yardstick, I should be crying to the ACLU every time I see a cross.

We weren't talking about your right to carry a cross or complain of crosses on church property but we were discussing the differences between the Protestant churches and the Catholoic Church. You have no reason to complain to the ACLU as these symbols are on private church property. I have attended weddings in most of the Protestant and Catholic church denominations in my community. I saw the cross and pictures of Jesus symbolizing the crucified Christ in almost all of the churches.

The Second Commandment, as I just related it, does not appear in the Catholic Bible, nor in Catholic teachings. I know - I was raised Catholic. Do you seriously deny that there are dramatic differences between Catholicism and Christianity? If you did. you'd be wrong - there are many. That's why I get angry when people try to blame everything from the Inquisition to Adolf Hitler on Christianity. It's just plain wrong.

Did you forget the commandment? Exod. 20:3 you shall have no other gods before me. Should I run to the ACLU or the US Supreme Court because you believe in a son god-man and a third god-head holy spirit?

You get angry when people try to blame Christianty for things from inquisitions to Adolph Hitler. But the fact that you are saved from your sins by accepting the shed blood of Jesus exonerates all these activities from any ultimate justice.

Example:

In early 1960's, the Nazi mass murderer Adolph Eichmann was taken to Israeli court for crimes against humanity. Following his conviction, the judges asked Eichmann if he wanted to make peace with his maker. A minister was called in to get Eichmann to accept Jesus and be forgiven for his sins. Eichmann refused to accept the shed blood of Jesus Christ.

Following his execution, the news media approached the Lutherin minister. They asked if Eichmann had been saved by accepting Jesus as his savior. The minister said that he had not and would not be living with Jesus and his mansions in the sky. One reporter asked the minister about the fate of the innocent murdered millions who never accepted Christ as their savior.

The minster replied, "well they (including the babies) are burning in an everlasting fire and brimstone in hades. There is no exception in the saving blood of Jesus."

Does that make you mad or is that the way it is?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

RWA you'r curious? All cultural expressions are not controlled but when the Constitution of the US is violated by promoting one particular religion, then there is no public property exempt from the law of the land.

All logical extensions of truth and all truths that logic can warrant must turn upon meaning in the sense of intension.

The agreement is "congress shall make no law...", not congress shall rewrite the history of the u.s. and remove all references to christianity.

Turn upon meaning in the sense of intention? You're fading out aj. come back to us.

Still, your argument turns on the assertion that damage is done if one feels NOT in the majority. Explain it more thoroughly. I would like an anecdote about a child scarred by exposure to a nativity scene.

You know aj. The holocaust ended long ago. You can stop villainizing christians.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Over the line you say? Small children forced to say prayer to one religion not their own is over the line for sure?

We agree. Why the continual combative tone?

Thanks I have recovered but there are many people now grown who have lost their faith because of a concerted effort to evangelise in elementary schools. Including many Christians who have given up Christ for beliefs in agnosticism or atheism because they found this religion a hollow dogma and makes no sense. Good try but you still lack understanding of other people with your own certainty in faith.

Hollow dogma? How does trimming penile skin represent a covenant? It seems a bit silly to me. You'd think god would have a pen and paper to do a normal contract. Right? can't god make pens and paper and afford the best lawyers to draw it up?

You wouldn't but you will......

Why? Why will I feel threatened, aj? Tell me. Tell us all. Are you gonna open up the ark and melt my face off like the chinese nazi in Raiders?

 

[musicman]

AJ:

I'll respond to the last part of your post, first. It makes me mad. I'm no Bible scholar, but I think I can say without fear of contradiction that that minister was full of shit.

Now, I'll answer your first question with a question of my own: Are you insecure about your credibility? I only ask because what you say is so off the wall, I can't imagine where it's coming from. You and I have had some spirited conversations in the past, and, I dare say, even took an occasional swipe at one another. You didn't see me pissing and moaning about it, or playing to the balcony. Why do we have to walk on eggs all of a sudden? Buck up, big guy. I can take it if you can.

Now, I'll do my best to respond to the rest, but, quite honestly, AJ, you're raving at this point. I'm sorry you got your feelings hurt in school. They could have been a lot more sensitive about your religion. But, with all that, it still ain't a federal matter. Nobody was forcing you to pray then, and nobody's forcing anybody to pray now. The only religion being forced on anybody is secular humanism. I'm sorry the movie, "The Passion" burned your ass so badly. I'm sorry you loathe Christianity so vehemently. I'm sorry you see coercion where none exists, and fail to see it where it exists so abundantly. There just doesn't seem to be a hell of a lot I can do about it.

About Catholicism, you seem to have missed my point entirely. I honestly don't know what else to say.

 

[ajwps]

The agreement is "congress shall make no law...", not congress shall rewrite the history of the u.s. and remove all references to christianity.

Unfortunately it is not Congress or the US Supreme Court trying to rewrite the Framer's Constitution. There is nowhere in the Constitution of the United States that has any references to Christianity, Judaism or any other religion. You just can't find a guaranteed freedom for Christianity to be the religion of this country.

Turn upon meaning in the sense of intention? You're fading out aj. come back to us.

The main concerns of US courts appear to be twofold: The compulsive nature of prayer. Although most state laws which attempt to allow school prayer usually permit the student to excuse themselves and wait in the hall, the courts still see an element of compulsion. By separating themselves from the rest of the class, the student risks later harassment and abuse by fellow students.

The risk of religious indoctrination. The 1st amendment of the U.S. constitution states that there shall be no law regarding the establishment of religion. The courts view prayer in the classroom to be one example of the government approving one religion over another. Even a student-selected, student-given, non-sectarian, non-proselytizing prayer still carries with it the stamp of approval of the state - i.e. the state approves of, and is seen to promote, belief in G-d (and whatever other religious content that the prayer might have).

The US Supreme Court ruled against mandated daily school prayer in Engel v. Vitale (1962). In 1963, it struck down laws in Pennsylvania and Maryland which mandated Bible reading and prayer. In other words, the government is not in the business of preventing anyone's religion from being practiced but a free society cannot promote one religion above another.

Still, your argument turns on the assertion that damage is done if one feels NOT in the majority. Explain it more thoroughly. I would like an anecdote about a child scarred by exposure to a nativity scene.

There is no anecdotal evidence of scarring any child by the mandated prayers or religious observances in tax payer public schools. The US Constitution does not prohibit prayers or bibles or religious icons in private religious secular schools.

You are beating a dead horse with twisted logic. You misread the Framer's intentions as illustrated in their written words.

Sometimes the only protection Americans have is the legal recourse to prevent well-meaning but damaging systems from changing the nature of a fuly democratic society where everybody is equal under the law. NOT JUST CHRISTIANS....

You know aj. The holocaust ended long ago. You can stop villainizing christians.

Sorry but the holocaust did not end long ago but continues to this very day when people of other religions are murdered because of their race, religion, skin color which does not conform to the ideations by one's certainty of the truth of his or her religion or rights over others.

 

[dilloduck]

Unfortunately it is not Congress or the US Supreme Court trying to rewrite the Framer's Constitution. There is nowhere in the Constitution of the United States that has any references to Christianity, Judaism or any other religion. You just can't find a guaranteed freedom for Christianity to be the religion of this country.



The main concerns of US courts appear to be twofold: The compulsive nature of prayer. Although most state laws which attempt to allow school prayer usually permit the student to excuse themselves and wait in the hall, the courts still see an element of compulsion. By separating themselves from the rest of the class, the student risks later harassment and abuse by fellow students.

The risk of religious indoctrination. The 1st amendment of the U.S. constitution states that there shall be no law regarding the establishment of religion. The courts view prayer in the classroom to be one example of the government approving one religion over another. Even a student-selected, student-given, non-sectarian, non-proselytizing prayer still carries with it the stamp of approval of the state - i.e. the state approves of, and is seen to promote, belief in G-d (and whatever other religious content that the prayer might have).

The US Supreme Court ruled against mandated daily school prayer in Engel v. Vitale (1962). In 1963, it struck down laws in Pennsylvania and Maryland which mandated Bible reading and prayer. In other words, the government is not in the business of preventing anyone's religion from being practiced but a free society cannot promote one religion above another.



There is no anecdotal evidence of scarring any child by the mandated prayers or religious observances in tax payer public schools. The US Constitution does not prohibit prayers or bibles or religious icons in private religious secular schools.

You are beating a dead horse with twisted logic. You misread the Framer's intentions as illustrated in their written words.

Sometimes the only protection Americans have is the legal recourse to prevent well-meaning but damaging systems from changing the nature of a fuly democratic society where everybody is equal under the law. NOT JUST CHRISTIANS....



Sorry but the holocaust did not end long ago but continues to this very day when people of other religions are murdered because of their race, religion, skin color which does not conform to the ideations by one's certainty of the truth of his or her religion or rights over others.

I had no idea that holocaust=hate crime.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Unfortunately it is not Congress or the US Supreme Court trying to rewrite the Framer's Constitution.

Yes it is. It's liberal members of congress and liberal activist judges. All religions are to be celebrated:except christianity. It's oppressive.

There is nowhere in the Constitution of the United States that has any references to Christianity, Judaism or any other religion. You just can't find a guaranteed freedom for Christianity to be the religion of this country.

Right. We allow all religions to practice. Even the majority religion. Imagine that? Can you?

The main concerns of US courts appear to be twofold: The compulsive nature of prayer. Although most state laws which attempt to allow school prayer usually permit the student to excuse themselves and wait in the hall, the courts still see an element of compulsion.

And the courts are screwed in the head. As are you. The only solution to "problem" you cite is an active indoctrination into a homogenous state culture, one that erases historical and ethnic differences, and every other prosocial value in the process.

By separating themselves from the rest of the class, the student risks later harassment and abuse by fellow students.

The risk of religious indoctrination. The 1st amendment of the U.S. constitution states that there shall be no law regarding the establishment of religion. The courts view prayer in the classroom to be one example of the government approving one religion over another.

They're idiotic liberals. They're allowing students to do as they please.

Even a student-selected, student-given, non-sectarian, non-proselytizing prayer still carries with it the stamp of approval of the state - i.e. the state approves of, and is seen to promote, belief in G-d (and whatever other religious content that the prayer might have).

You're getting confused between "allow" and "promote". Look em up, Doc.

The US Supreme Court ruled against mandated daily school prayer in Engel v. Vitale (1962). In 1963, it struck down laws in Pennsylvania and Maryland which mandated Bible reading and prayer. In other words, the government is not in the business of preventing anyone's religion from being practiced but a free society cannot promote one religion above another.

This decision is fine. The underlying impetus of all this is fear of christians however. And the threat they pose to attempts to ruin america with socialism.

There is no anecdotal evidence of scarring any child by the mandated prayers or religious observances in tax payer public schools. The US Constitution does not prohibit prayers or bibles or religious icons in private religious secular schools.

I thought you'd have a tough time with that.

The supreme court should allow students to pray or read bibles in public school, when appropriate, and of course, noone should be forced. Why is that not ok? You phantom theory about low self esteem from not being in the majority? That's crap and you know it.

You are beating a dead horse with twisted logic. You misread the Framer's intentions as illustrated in their written words.

I'm reading it fine. Even the majority has religious protections in this country.

Sometimes the only protection Americans have is the legal recourse to prevent well-meaning but damaging systems from changing the nature of a fuly democratic society where everybody is equal under the law. NOT JUST CHRISTIANS....

That sounds good to me. But your positing the right to not be exposed to a majority religious as an actual right, when it is in fact, an illusion.

Sorry but the holocaust did not end long ago but continues to this very day when people of other religions are murdered because of their race, religion, skin color which does not conform to the ideations by one's certainty of the truth of his or her religion or rights over others.

How about your ideations of the truth. As as far as I can tell your a bit whacked out in the head. What kind of doctor are you anyway?

 

[DKSuddeth]

I had no idea that holocaust=hate crime.

its the same thing, just on a very large scale......a very LARGE scale.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

its the same thing, just on a very large scale......a very LARGE scale.

Kind of like how murder is like a pinch, but just on a very large scale?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Kind of like how murder is like a pinch, but just on a very large scale?

not a good analogy.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

not a good analogy.

Yes. Comparing the crimes of one person to a state sponsored attempt at genocide is not a good analogy. :teeth:

Pscyh! Don't get angry baby.

 

[ajwps]

Kind of like how murder is like a pinch, but just on a very large scale?

I prefer Hitlers's late propagandist Josef Goebels statement:

When ten people are murdered its a tragedy, when hundreds are murdered its a catastrophe and when tens of millions are murdered its a statistic.

For Dilloduck, 'a holocaust is equal to a love crime....'

 

[ajwps]

Yes it is. It's liberal members of congress and liberal activist judges. All religions are to be celebrated:except christianity. It's oppressive.

Right. We allow all religions to practice. Even the majority religion. Imagine that? Can you?

And the courts are screwed in the head. As are you. The only solution to "problem" you cite is an active indoctrination into a homogenous state culture, one that erases historical and ethnic differences, and every other prosocial value in the process.

By separating themselves from the rest of the class, the student risks later harassment and abuse by fellow students.

They're idiotic liberals. They're allowing students to do as they please.

You're getting confused between "allow" and "promote". Look em up, Doc.

This decision is fine. The underlying impetus of all this is fear of christians however. And the threat they pose to attempts to ruin america with socialism.

I thought you'd have a tough time with that.

The supreme court should allow students to pray or read bibles in public school, when appropriate, and of course, noone should be forced. Why is that not ok? You phantom theory about low self esteem from not being in the majority? That's crap and you know it.

I'm reading it fine. Even the majority has religious protections in this country.

That sounds good to me. But your positing the right to not be exposed to a majority religious as an actual right, when it is in fact, an illusion.


How about your ideations of the truth. As as far as I can tell your a bit whacked out in the head. What kind of doctor are you anyway?

And the courts are screwed in the head. As are you. The only solution to "problem" you cite is an active indoctrination into a homogenous state culture, one that erases historical and ethnic differences, and every other prosocial value in the process.

Your above statement appears to be the most rational of all your ramblings about being the poor mistreated Christian not allowed to have your own prayers as the single official allowed public display of your valid faith. What historical, prosocial values or ethnic differences do you think are being erased by the Constitution of these United States?

Do you not feel that your faith is not real unless it is used above all others in public schools? Are you that insecure in your salvation faith?

I guess when you know in your heart you are right, then anyone who disagrees with you is a whacked out, hate monger, idiotic moron. Your words are certainly a Christian view of respect for others in this homogenous state culture called America for all?