How is it Congress can have a chaplain....

[Flopper]

freedom OF religion doesn't mean freedom FROM it

~S~

Then why must a program funded with Federal dollars ban Christmas?

Simply because someone got a federal judge to agree it violated the constitution. I don't see how a sign in a federal building saying Merry Christmas or Happy Hanukkah or displaying a Christmas tree violates the separation of church and state because these symbols are used by people of different faiths and no faith at all. Now when the government starts illustrating the manger scene and baby Jesus or the Passover, that would clearly be government promoting a religion and a constitutional violation. It all depends on the details.

There is also the matter of political correctness. A business may believe that telling of the Christmas story is insensitive to people of other faiths.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

freedom OF religion doesn't mean freedom FROM it

~S~

Wrong.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment in fact safeguards citizens from religion by prohibiting government establishing an official religion, prohibiting government from codifying in secular law religious dogma, and prohibiting government from subjecting citizens to punitive measures by the state for failing to abide by government sanctioned religious doctrine and dogma.

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment safeguards the right of the people to practice whatever religion they wish – or to practice no religion at all – absent unwarranted government interference.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

Seeking to advance specific religious dogma absent a secular intent where government is excessively entangled in the promotion of that religion would be an Establishment Clause violation in any government entity, not just schools.

As for the Constitutionality of a chaplain opening legislative sessions with a prayer, the Supreme Court created a ‘set aside’ or ‘carve out’ of the First Amendment where such a practice does not violate the Establishment Clause because it’s predicated on the long-standing historical tradition of legislative chaplains (see Marsh v. Chambers (1983)).

Okay. Since school Christmas celebrations have become entirely secular in the past decades with all religious symbolism stripped out, I don't see where a 4 year olds' Christmas party involving a tree and Santa is "advancing specific religious dogma" in any way, shape or form.

That would depend on how such a celebration is organized and executed, what involvement – if any – of school officials, and the intent of such a celebration.

It’s likely a matter of school board policy to prohibit such celebrations to avoid a possible lawsuit, even if the Christmas celebration is Constitutionally permissible.

 

[JBond]

freedom OF religion doesn't mean freedom FROM it

~S~

But it should mean you don't have to pay for it.

Different people have different visions, different dreams, and different things they treat as a religion. Blind belief can cut many ways. Global warming or whatever the politically tested and approved name is these days comes to mind. Same for the anti self-defense crowd.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

I think they worship the US Treasury Building.

At any rate it irritates me to no end that an insignificant percentage of intolerant soviet cock suckers can get things like Christmas banned from public schools. When I was growing up we didn't have the school prayers anymore, but the whole school was decorated for Christmas, complete with baby Jesus and the manger scene.

We also never heard of someone coming to school and shooting anyone, and in the high schools at that point in time even in the People's Soviet Republic of New Yuck kids brought .22 rifles to school, locked them up in their lockers, and practiced for the shooting team in the indoor range in the school basement.

The intolerance of religion has gone way too far. Lately the holidays don't have the same feeling they did when I was a kid and it makes me sad that my kids don't get to share that experience. It's just a day off school for them.

That's why I loathe leftists. They deliberately ruin everything good, embrace and exalt everything perverse.

.

Ignorant nonsense.

There is no ‘intolerance of religion’ – citizens are at liberty to practice religion as they see fit; Establishment Clause jurisprudence applies solely to government entities, not private persons or religious organizations.

It’s understandable to loathe conservatives because of this sort of ignorance and stupidity common to most on the right.

 

[Wolfstrike]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

the founders of the country didn't want sects to dominate politics. Absolutely nothing they did was meant to be anti-Christian

 

[Snouter]

..the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that.

In case you missed it "jewish" syndicates basically have taken control of most public schools. In other words, they actually will treat the insanity of Old Testament myths as actual history, yet exclude New Testament content, which is also mythology by the way, but still very discriminatory since it (unfortunately) was adopted by the West to supplant the traditional festivals of Western people. But yes, the jewish establishment hates Christians (code word for Whites).

 

[sparky]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,"

Jefferson wrote about this

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,"

Tom must be rolling in his grave as today's religmo's lay down law to and established Congress then .....~S~

 

[sparky]

freedom OF religion doesn't mean freedom FROM it

~S~

Wrong.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment in fact safeguards citizens from religion by prohibiting government establishing an official religion, prohibiting government from codifying in secular law religious dogma, and prohibiting government from subjecting citizens to punitive measures by the state for failing to abide by government sanctioned religious doctrine and dogma.

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment safeguards the right of the people to practice whatever religion they wish – or to practice no religion at all – absent unwarranted government interference.

So Clay, how do Faith Based Initiatives factor in then?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-faith-based-initiative/

President Bush’s Faith-Based and Community Initiative

Trump signs executive order giving more freedom to federally funded religious groups

~S~

 

[sparky]

Keep in mind that on every piece of American currency, you will see "In God We Trust". If anything violates the separation of church and state this surely does.

There's a history of insidious infiltration surrounding our $$$ & pledge....

Undergraduate Research Journal for the Human Sciences

When the Declaration of Independence was signed, only seven percent of the people in the thirteen colonies belonged to a church. Yet, by the 1950s the country they had created was so controlled by religion that a vote against “In God We Trust” as the national motto or a vote against “Under God” being added to the Pledge of Allegiance would be confused with a vote for communism and a vote against America.

Keep in mind, these are a people who were essentially theocratic refugees , seeking asylum from religmo's

~S~

 

[OldLady]

freedom OF religion doesn't mean freedom FROM it

~S~

But it should mean you don't have to pay for it.

People pay for stuff all the time that they don’t want but are considered rights for others. Come on, your side wrote the book on that. Time to drink your own medicine.

If Congress can have a chaplain, those kids could have Christmas. Sound fair to you?

I'll up the ante' and say Congress gets a chaplin, rabbi & mullah , the kids get xmas, hanukkah and ramadan

and i'd sure like to see the rabbi & mullah get into it during some congressional session where 'faith based' fed funds are being tossed about

~S~

Don't know about the second part, but I like the deal. The more the merrier, I always say.

 

[OldLady]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

If you did away the House Chaplin due to constitutional violation of church and state, you would have to do away with Chaplin's in the armed forces and the VA. And that would be a bit much, to ask people to fight and die for their country without the availability spiritual guidance.

Keep in mind that on every piece of American currency, you will see "In God We Trust". If anything violates the separation of church and state this surely does.

Then it seems clear we need to allow secular Christmas in programs funded by federal dollars.

 

[OldLady]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

Seeking to advance specific religious dogma absent a secular intent where government is excessively entangled in the promotion of that religion would be an Establishment Clause violation in any government entity, not just schools.

As for the Constitutionality of a chaplain opening legislative sessions with a prayer, the Supreme Court created a ‘set aside’ or ‘carve out’ of the First Amendment where such a practice does not violate the Establishment Clause because it’s predicated on the long-standing historical tradition of legislative chaplains (see Marsh v. Chambers (1983)).

Okay. Since school Christmas celebrations have become entirely secular in the past decades with all religious symbolism stripped out, I don't see where a 4 year olds' Christmas party involving a tree and Santa is "advancing specific religious dogma" in any way, shape or form.

That would depend on how such a celebration is organized and executed, what involvement – if any – of school officials, and the intent of such a celebration.

It’s likely a matter of school board policy to prohibit such celebrations to avoid a possible lawsuit, even if the Christmas celebration is Constitutionally permissible.

No. The entire school celebrates, except the Pre-K.

 

[LeftofLeft]

freedom OF religion doesn't mean freedom FROM it

~S~

Wrong.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment in fact safeguards citizens from religion by prohibiting government establishing an official religion, prohibiting government from codifying in secular law religious dogma, and prohibiting government from subjecting citizens to punitive measures by the state for failing to abide by government sanctioned religious doctrine and dogma.

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment safeguards the right of the people to practice whatever religion they wish – or to practice no religion at all – absent unwarranted government interference.

So Clay, how do Faith Based Initiatives factor in then?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-faith-based-initiative/

President Bush’s Faith-Based and Community Initiative

Trump signs executive order giving more freedom to federally funded religious groups

~S~

He’s supporting religious groups in the US to give them a voice. He’s not calling himself religious and judging other people. That would be hypocritical as in the case where a politician or celebrity wags their finger at you for your gun ownership and driving SUVs yet they enjoy second amendment protection as their are driven around town in an SUV.

 

[norwegen]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

the founders of the country didn't want sects to dominate politics. Absolutely nothing they did was meant to be anti-Christian

This is absolute truth. That the country was Christian is a given. Its charter extends gratitude to "divine Providence" and the "Supreme Judge," two names for God commonly found in rabbinic and Christian theological literature, for His part in the founding of our country.

It was understood that the First Amendment restricted any federal sectarianism. Religion was synonymous with Christianity.

 

[bendog]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

If the GOP protestant house members real reason was to try and fire the guy was because he was a Catholic, then perhaps they should not have a chaplain who serves them all. And rather, perhaps each member should seek guidance individually.

In public schools, when parents seek to introduce religion it seems the parents view one religion superior to others. And then there are the god-deniers who will suffer for eternity alongside the muslims. (-:

 

[OldLady]

..the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that.

In case you missed it "jewish" syndicates basically have taken control of most public schools. In other words, they actually will treat the insanity of Old Testament myths as actual history, yet exclude New Testament content, which is also mythology by the way, but still very discriminatory since it (unfortunately) was adopted by the West to supplant the traditional festivals of Western people. But yes, the jewish establishment hates Christians (code word for Whites).

Sorry, Snouter, but I asked for serious answers.

 

[EGR one]

..the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that.

In case you missed it "jewish" syndicates basically have taken control of most public schools. In other words, they actually will treat the insanity of Old Testament myths as actual history, yet exclude New Testament content, which is also mythology by the way, but still very discriminatory since it (unfortunately) was adopted by the West to supplant the traditional festivals of Western people. But yes, the jewish establishment hates Christians (code word for Whites).

Sorry, Snouter, but I asked for serious answers.

At the time of adoption of the constitution, each of the 13 original colonies had their own state sponsored religions. When the first amendment is read with that knowledge, it is easy to understand that the colonies did not want the new federal government to establish its own state sponsored religion, nor to prohibit the state sponsored religions already existing in the colonies.

The concept of separation of church and state is a tenet created solely by our Supreme Court. And, look what those idiots have wrought.

 

[sakinago]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

It’s because people not only misinterpret what separation of church and state actually means...they also don’t know that there is no mention of church and state in the constitution. The closest mention of church and state is the first amendment which pretty much states that congress shall make no law concerning the establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof. All this means is that the state CANNOT make any law restricting, reshaping, or compelling your religious/non-religious actions/beliefs (I would argue that very few are actually non-religious since many people replace traditional religions with new age practices/beliefs that they treat just like a religion whether that be CrossFit, left/right ideology, etc.) If someone is trying to do this we all should have a problem with it, but there is a big difference between being influenced by ones religion vs compelling others to practice religion a certain way. Are you suggesting that just because someone holds a governmental position that they loose the right to freely practice that religion? Or they loose the right to let that religion influence them? That would defeat the point of the whole first amendment thing.

If we’re talking about someone trying to pass a bill forcing people to take off work Sundays or make students pray or something, that would be an issue. But if it’s a teacher wearing an ugly sweater with a Xmas tree or nativity scene on it, or say a congressman praying in front of the house, that’s a different story. Should congress not have a Chaplin? As long as they aren’t forcing people to see the Chaplin I don’t see why not. If another congressman wants a rabbi or priest of the spaghetti monster church to pray, what in all honesty is the problem there? People just confuse being forced to participate in religious things with witnessing religious things, the two are not the same, and if you can’t freely practice your religion in front of others, that goes pretty far against the first amendment.

 

[rightwinger]

I don't care if the House and Senate have a chaplain, or if they begin each session prostrating before Gozer the Destructor. What I want to know is how the House and Senate have been able to get away with praying and paying a man of the cloth since 17-something, when the Pre-K at one of our local elementary schools, which is funded entirely by Federal grants, could not decorate with so much as a Christmas tree or Santa or stocking, or participate in the Christmas parties that the rest of the school were involved in. All because the Pre-K was funded by a Federal Grant.

I would appreciate a serious answer to that. Every time I hear about the chaplain for Congress I think of those poor Pre-K kids with their window covered over so they wouldn't see all the other kids celebrating Christmas. True story.


In a reversal, Speaker Ryan says the House chaplain will remain in his post

Because they are Congress and their constituents expect them to cater to their religion