Religion in politics/schools

[AllieBaba]

I would like for some of you religious people to explain to me WHY you can't teach your kids about YOUR religion at home/church. Why is it you feel the need to PREACH to people who don't want to be a part of your religion(if I want to I will just look for the closest building with a cross). Why do you think YOUR religion should be in the PUBLIC square?

Because our constititution was written to ensure we didn't have to hide our religious beliefs from the public, and we could openly discuss and preach without fear of persecution.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Constitution does not protect private evangelizing in the public classroom, nor state-sanctioned public religion in the tax-supported schools.

Alli, you can stand there like a red-eyed whiny teenager all you want and say the moon is made of cheese, and you are always going to get the same answer, "no", as you will about state-sanctioned religion in the public square, namely tax-supported schools. You know it, and I know it.

Here is a guide for your children. They can pray privately and quietly in the classroom, they cannot disrupt the educational process, and they can't impose their religious views on others in the public forum.

Here is a guide for you. Teach your children long suffering and charity. I commend I Corinthians 13 to you, and hope that you embrace it. Have a blessed day.

 

[Gudrid]

Did already. Wasn't there.

Lol. Yes, it is. Look under the main entry "approve."

It says ". . . respecting an establishment of religion", and you have to really torture the English language to make "establishment" not a noun, in my never-humble opinion.

Yes, very good, it's a noun. And it's a noun that refers to the act of establishing something. You aren't trying to claim that because it's the noun version, it somehow doesn't apply? Cause that would be really stupid.

Really? What religion are they establishing by allowing kids to pray if they choose to?

What are you talking about? I've already stated that kids praying if they choose to is a protected right. Kids can pray whenever they want - they simply cannot subject others to their faith or take up others time with it. In other words, no organized prayer, and no standing at the door of the school in signboards saying all the non-Christians were going to hell.

Please name a time that Christians behaved as though a legal ruling against them never happened.

I have personally witnessed it. And if you honestly believe that you can universally speak for all Christians then you're living in fantasyland.

Actually, it's NOT your personal choice. It's your coincidental circumstance, at least as far as you know. Truth is, you have no idea if the civil servant you're waiting on to come back to his desk so you can take care of your business is on coffee break, in the john, or a Muslim performing one of his daily prayers in a back room.

Yes, it is my personal choice. If they're on the clock and making me wait while they pray, they're stealing. The fact that they have the ability to sneak and deny me my personal choice doesn't make it not my choice.

I have not advocated any organized prayers, and you're setting up a straw man if you're trying to pretend that's the argument.

Then what are you arguing about? You responded to my post. I stated pretty clearly that kids could pray whenever they wanted, but that it can't be organized and take up others' time. Why did you disagree with me when I said the minority kids shouldn't have to sit in study hall during others' prayer time? You, for some odd reason, argued with that and have followed up with insults. Was it just too much for you to handle that you agreed with someone you clearly perceive as a leftist?

Speaking of which:

When you "compassionate" leftists come even CLOSE to spending as much of your own personal money - not tax dollars you've stolen from your neighbors at the point of the government's gun - on the poor and downtrodden as Christians routinely do, MAYBE I'll be interested in hearing what you have to say about how they should practice their religion. But I doubt it, because I'm fairly certain it will still be akin to listening to a virgin give sex lessons.

What kind of nasty little hypocrite puts "Christians" on one side and "Leftists" on the other? I happen to have very dear friends who are both leftwing and Christian. I simply find it reprehensible to equate Christianity or any religion with a political side.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

well, first maybe you can show me where he said for Ceasar to take money from you and others to help the poor

First, Jesus made it clear that money was never a priority, even when giving to the poor. Helps of many kinds can be given, even personal help from oneself rather than money. Then Jesus considered following Him, and abiding by God's commandments to be more significant than the help for the needy. Jesus told at least one person, "Let the dead burry the dead, come follow me now." This was when he had asked a person to become one of His kingdom kids. We can still give foor and blankets, even while taking care of issues of our own. There is no sin in that, unless it is about "love of money" on our part.

Jesus did not heal everyone he passed. Jesus said the poor will always be with us. We will not ever win the poverty war. Jesus would rather they learn how to fish rather than to give them food. Then they can do it for themselves.

Where it is possible, we certainly need to be about doing the community well. However, not all of the problems are our tasks.

but the point i was making is these libs making the claim Jesus said to take care of the poor and them supporting the government FORCING the unwilling to do so
Jesus said to do it YOURSELF
not force others to do it

Well Dive my post was in response to a "christian" saying paying legal bills to keep a monument in a PUBLIC PARK was more of a priority than helping the poor.

 

[DiveCon]

First, Jesus made it clear that money was never a priority, even when giving to the poor. Helps of many kinds can be given, even personal help from oneself rather than money. Then Jesus considered following Him, and abiding by God's commandments to be more significant than the help for the needy. Jesus told at least one person, "Let the dead burry the dead, come follow me now." This was when he had asked a person to become one of His kingdom kids. We can still give foor and blankets, even while taking care of issues of our own. There is no sin in that, unless it is about "love of money" on our part.

Jesus did not heal everyone he passed. Jesus said the poor will always be with us. We will not ever win the poverty war. Jesus would rather they learn how to fish rather than to give them food. Then they can do it for themselves.

Where it is possible, we certainly need to be about doing the community well. However, not all of the problems are our tasks.

but the point i was making is these libs making the claim Jesus said to take care of the poor and them supporting the government FORCING the unwilling to do so
Jesus said to do it YOURSELF
not force others to do it

Well Dive my post was in response to a "christian" saying paying legal bills to keep a monument in a PUBLIC PARK was more of a priority than helping the poor.

but i wasnt replying to you

 

[rdean]

I would like for some of you religious people to explain to me WHY you can't teach your kids about YOUR religion at home/church. Why is it you feel the need to PREACH to people who don't want to be a part of your religion(if I want to I will just look for the closest building with a cross). Why do you think YOUR religion should be in the PUBLIC square?

They can't do it. It's impossible. Once someone is indoctrinated into mysticism and the supernatural, it's like a highly addictive drug. Reason is simply "gone".

If someone came up and told you one of those Bible fables without naming Bible names, you would laugh in their face.

Occult religions spread in two way, converts (peaceful or otherwise) and the command to breed like rabbits. I suspect it's probably the main reason they are "anti gay". Gays don't really "breed" unless they are closeted or by choice.

They also believe that without supernatural "spirits" keeping you in check, what's to stop you from murdering and raping. It's probably good that those people are checked by religion. They already told us what they would do if they had no faith.

 

[Care4all]

Oh and remind me how many of the Ten Comandments directly translate into laws.

do you think breaking a contract, adultery....should be legalized?
do you think stealing should be legalized?
do you think lying, obstructing justice, bearing false witness is ok and should be legal?
do you think murder is ok and should be legalized?

what was your point of this post CF?

care

 

[goldcatt]

Oh and remind me how many of the Ten Comandments directly translate into laws.

do you think breaking a contract, adultery....should be legalized?
do you think stealing should be legalized?
do you think lying, obstructing justice, bearing false witness is ok and should be legal?
do you think murder is ok and should be legalized?

what was your point of this post CF?

care

I think Cold might have been trying to point out that several of the Ten Commandments deal with the relationship between humans and God, not humans and other humans. Of course our laws are not predicated on those.
But it's the symbolism of the contribution that is worthy of a certain respect, not necesarily the laws themselves (although you have a great point, Care). Others on this thread have pointed out contributions of other law-givers such as Hammurabi or Justinian, and I have no problem giving any of them their due.
To go as far as to remove any nod toward ancient law-givers if they had anything to do with religion, Lady Justice would have to take off the rest of her toga and put on jeans, a t-shirt and an i-pod. How silly would that be?

 

[Douger]

Ring don't you kind it disturbing that so many(all be it a small minority)of Christians have NO PROBLEM WHAT-SO-EVER with putting religious monuments on PUBLIC property?

Yeah ! Like Obelisks and the statue of liberty ! How about Promethius at Rockefeller center ?

I gotta go burn some witches.
Later.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Oh and remind me how many of the Ten Comandments directly translate into laws.

do you think breaking a contract, adultery....should be legalized?
do you think stealing should be legalized?
do you think lying, obstructing justice, bearing false witness is ok and should be legal?
do you think murder is ok and should be legalized?

what was your point of this post CF?

care

I think Cold might have been trying to point out that several of the Ten Commandments deal with the relationship between humans and God, not humans and other humans. Of course our laws are not predicated on those.
But it's the symbolism of the contribution that is worthy of a certain respect, not necesarily the laws themselves (although you have a great point, Care). Others on this thread have pointed out contributions of other law-givers such as Hammurabi or Justinian, and I have no problem giving any of them their due.
To go as far as to remove any nod toward ancient law-givers if they had anything to do with religion, Lady Justice would have to take off the rest of her toga and put on jeans, a t-shirt and an i-pod. How silly would that be?

Well I guess 4 out of 10 ain't bad. Oh and the four laws you refer to predate Christianity by a millenia.

 

[goldcatt]

do you think breaking a contract, adultery....should be legalized?
do you think stealing should be legalized?
do you think lying, obstructing justice, bearing false witness is ok and should be legal?
do you think murder is ok and should be legalized?

what was your point of this post CF?

care

I think Cold might have been trying to point out that several of the Ten Commandments deal with the relationship between humans and God, not humans and other humans. Of course our laws are not predicated on those.
But it's the symbolism of the contribution that is worthy of a certain respect, not necesarily the laws themselves (although you have a great point, Care). Others on this thread have pointed out contributions of other law-givers such as Hammurabi or Justinian, and I have no problem giving any of them their due.
To go as far as to remove any nod toward ancient law-givers if they had anything to do with religion, Lady Justice would have to take off the rest of her toga and put on jeans, a t-shirt and an i-pod. How silly would that be?

Well I guess 4 out of 10 ain't bad. Oh and the four laws you refer to predate Christianity by a millenia.

With all due respect, so what?

 

[Smartt33]

well, first maybe you can show me where he said for Ceasar to take money from you and others to help the poor

First, Jesus made it clear that money was never a priority, even when giving to the poor. Helps of many kinds can be given, even personal help from oneself rather than money. Then Jesus considered following Him, and abiding by God's commandments to be more significant than the help for the needy. Jesus told at least one person, "Let the dead burry the dead, come follow me now." This was when he had asked a person to become one of His kingdom kids. We can still give foor and blankets, even while taking care of issues of our own. There is no sin in that, unless it is about "love of money" on our part.

Jesus did not heal everyone he passed. Jesus said the poor will always be with us. We will not ever win the poverty war. Jesus would rather they learn how to fish rather than to give them food. Then they can do it for themselves.

Where it is possible, we certainly need to be about doing the community well. However, not all of the problems are our tasks.

but the point i was making is these libs making the claim Jesus said to take care of the poor and them supporting the government FORCING the unwilling to do so
Jesus said to do it YOURSELF
not force others to do it

If "these libs" are not actually working in the Kingdom work (the Christians) then you are correct, they are getting someone else to do their job. That is waong, but worse is that these same libs that are not doing their jobs are likely the same ones robbing the boopr with emotional calls for their money.

However, If these libs are actually out there serving the community, and society, they may be just trying to get some help because it is a huge job.

Shame on the church for not stepping up to the plae and being the church.

I personally am not one of the libs, I do not support the government takeover, and while I am not well to do, I do reach out to my community as much as I can.

That too is not enough. I would call for the "True Church" to stand up, and get to work. I know that I can do more if I am among the workers.

The government is stepping in where it does not belong.

 

[Smartt33]

well, first maybe you can show me where he said for Ceasar to take money from you and others to help the poor

First, Jesus made it clear that money was never a priority, even when giving to the poor. Helps of many kinds can be given, even personal help from oneself rather than money. Then Jesus considered following Him, and abiding by God's commandments to be more significant than the help for the needy. Jesus told at least one person, "Let the dead burry the dead, come follow me now." This was when he had asked a person to become one of His kingdom kids. We can still give foor and blankets, even while taking care of issues of our own. There is no sin in that, unless it is about "love of money" on our part.

Jesus did not heal everyone he passed. Jesus said the poor will always be with us. We will not ever win the poverty war. Jesus would rather they learn how to fish rather than to give them food. Then they can do it for themselves.

Where it is possible, we certainly need to be about doing the community well. However, not all of the problems are our tasks.

It isn't like Christians are the only ones to have noticed that you often do people more good by giving them something other than money, such as the time and encouragement to learn to take care of themselves. I can never decide if the disconnect is that LEFTISTS haven't noticed this fact, or that they somehow think WE aren't aware of it.

Whatever the problem there, there's another huge disconnect in that they seem to think Christianity is primarily a charitable organization like the Red Cross or the local Food Bank, full of community organizers and existing mainly for the purpose of doing nice things for people. In fact, being nice to people is an ancillary offshoot of the real focus of the whole thing, which is worshipping God.

Great point. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

I think Cold might have been trying to point out that several of the Ten Commandments deal with the relationship between humans and God, not humans and other humans. Of course our laws are not predicated on those.
But it's the symbolism of the contribution that is worthy of a certain respect, not necesarily the laws themselves (although you have a great point, Care). Others on this thread have pointed out contributions of other law-givers such as Hammurabi or Justinian, and I have no problem giving any of them their due.
To go as far as to remove any nod toward ancient law-givers if they had anything to do with religion, Lady Justice would have to take off the rest of her toga and put on jeans, a t-shirt and an i-pod. How silly would that be?

Well I guess 4 out of 10 ain't bad. Oh and the four laws you refer to predate Christianity by a millenia.

With all due respect, so what?

Well with all due respect there are MANY Christians that think these laws are some how exclusive to the Ten Comandments.......They are WRONG!

 

[goldcatt]

Well I guess 4 out of 10 ain't bad. Oh and the four laws you refer to predate Christianity by a millenia.

With all due respect, so what?

Well with all due respect there are MANY Christians that think these laws are some how exclusive to the Ten Comandments.......They are WRONG!

Some, perhaps. But why make such a big deal out of the few and the uninformed?

 

[Avatar4321]

Well I guess 4 out of 10 ain't bad. Oh and the four laws you refer to predate Christianity by a millenia.

Um duh. Christianity as we know it didnt develop until 1000+ years after the Ten Commandments were given. You act as this is some shocking fact when any idiot who can read would know this.

 

[Avatar4321]

If "these libs" are not actually working in the Kingdom work (the Christians) then you are correct, they are getting someone else to do their job. That is waong, but worse is that these same libs that are not doing their jobs are likely the same ones robbing the boopr with emotional calls for their money.

However, If these libs are actually out there serving the community, and society, they may be just trying to get some help because it is a huge job.

Shame on the church for not stepping up to the plae and being the church.

I personally am not one of the libs, I do not support the government takeover, and while I am not well to do, I do reach out to my community as much as I can.

That too is not enough. I would call for the "True Church" to stand up, and get to work. I know that I can do more if I am among the workers.

The government is stepping in where it does not belong.

With all due respect, i think the Church is stepping up to the plate. Many churches are really. The idea that Christianity is unified at the moment behind one specific group and all are uniform is false unfortunately.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If "these libs" are not actually working in the Kingdom work (the Christians) then you are correct, they are getting someone else to do their job. That is waong, but worse is that these same libs that are not doing their jobs are likely the same ones robbing the boopr with emotional calls for their money.

However, If these libs are actually out there serving the community, and society, they may be just trying to get some help because it is a huge job.

Shame on the church for not stepping up to the plae and being the church.

I personally am not one of the libs, I do not support the government takeover, and while I am not well to do, I do reach out to my community as much as I can.

That too is not enough. I would call for the "True Church" to stand up, and get to work. I know that I can do more if I am among the workers.

The government is stepping in where it does not belong.

With all due respect, i think the Church is stepping up to the plate. Many churches are really. The idea that Christianity is unified at the moment behind one specific group and all are uniform is false unfortunately.

I see, Avi, that your quotes are from, first, a hater of all who disagree with him, and, second, a right wing whack at one time who had the grace to reform himself by the time death came calling. Please do not represent Neal and Ezra to be what they were not.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

With all due respect, so what?

Well with all due respect there are MANY Christians that think these laws are some how exclusive to the Ten Comandments.......They are WRONG!

Some, perhaps. But why make such a big deal out of the few and the uninformed?

Becuase the FEW and UNINFORMED are an EXTREMELY vocal MINORITY!

 

[DiveCon]

Well I guess 4 out of 10 ain't bad. Oh and the four laws you refer to predate Christianity by a millenia.

Um duh. Christianity as we know it didnt develop until 1000+ years after the Ten Commandments were given. You act as this is some shocking fact when any idiot who can read would know this.

ROFLMAO

good catch
i missed that subtle point the first time
actually, the ten commandments predated christianity by about 3000 years