Religious pic removed from public school, justice prevails

[Dot Com]

"But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures." Not if they are being used in a secular sense. That's pretty hard to do with a portrait our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

yeah come on Marty

 

[Dot Com]

"But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures." Not if they are being used in a secular sense. That's pretty hard to do with a portrait our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

yeah come on marty

 

[martybegan]

"But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures." Not if they are being used in a secular sense. That's pretty hard to do with a portrait our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Well according to Atheists he was just a man, so why are they so butthurt about it.

and again you cant quote like a normal fucking person. Please go die in a fire.

 

[martybegan]

"But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures." Not if they are being used in a secular sense. That's pretty hard to do with a portrait our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

yeah come on Marty

You two guys need a room to fellate each other?

 

[martybegan]

"But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures." Not if they are being used in a secular sense. That's pretty hard to do with a portrait our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

yeah come on marty

Farkey, please note that my statement is being attributed to you, not to me. Fix it.

 

[daws101]

False comparison if church is making money it should be taxed .
Churches are not exempt from the law.

Figures you would make that dodge.

Hack-ey Hack is being Hack-ey.

The dodge is all you.

Bullshit hack-ey mc-hackerstien.

Excellent dodge Smithers!

Moron.

Butthurt Smithers?

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, the statement is in quotes, which means it is from someone else, not me. Anyone following the thread knows that it is yours. You don't like it, I know. I will try to care harder. OK, I tried, and that's it.

No establishment of religion at school.

 

[daws101]

Churches should not have tax exemptions.

Why not? I thought government and churches are separate?

Why should churches be treated any differently than any other business?

Because congress cannot interfere with the free exercise of religion, the part of the amendment you keep forgetting about, while you expand the establishment clause to attack religion instead of protect it.

Free doesn't mean exempt. As to the exercise of it, it ends where the right not to begins.

A picture doesn't compel you to worship. Now, a sign stating that all must bow to Mecca 5 times a day, under which is a large man with a sword to ensure compliance, that's compulsion.

Bullshit the method is different the intent the same.

 

[daws101]

Why should churches be treated any differently than any other business?

Because congress cannot interfere with the free exercise of religion, the part of the amendment you keep forgetting about, while you expand the establishment clause to attack religion instead of protect it.

Free doesn't mean exempt. As to the exercise of it, it ends where the right not to begins.

No it doesn't, freedom of religion does NOT mean freedom from it, i.e. that it is not allowed in public. Just because seeing religious stuff gives you the vapors, like some ditzy southern belle, doesn't mean we have to hide it from your view.

Grow a fucking pair.

Absolute bullshit of means any faith or none at your discretion.

Is that sentence even English?

Wimp.

hemorrhoid cream Smithers?

 

[daws101]

The libertarians (oooo govt is all bad) and the far right social cos (oooo govt is bad if it does not allowing only the posting of my Christian items) are a bunch of fucking idiots on this issue.

Posting a picture of Jesus in the school hallway is an endorsement by the
administration of a religion.

No, it isn't. and the key is establishment.

Yes, it is, and establishment is action by public goverment, which is a public school.

It's not establishment. You anti-religious types really are fragile little sissy flowers.

ZOMG A PAINTING IS COMPELLING ME TO BE RELIGIOUS!!!!!

would you say the same thing if it were a muslim prophet/deity?

Or a giant painting of Satan?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Marty, Foxfyre, and those of their ilk just don't get.

They think the will of the individual can override the compact of We the People.

 

[Pete7469]

A picture doesn't compel you to worship. Now, a sign stating that all must bow to Mecca 5 times a day, under which is a large man with a sword to ensure compliance, that's compulsion.

 

[daws101]

The libertarians (oooo govt is all bad) and the far right social cos (oooo govt is bad if it does not allowing only the posting of my Christian items) are a bunch of fucking idiots on this issue.

Posting a picture of Jesus in the school hallway is an endorsement by the
administration of a religion.

No, it isn't. and the key is establishment.

Yes, it is, and establishment is action by public goverment, which is a public school.

It's not establishment. You anti-religious types really are fragile little sissy flowers.

ZOMG A PAINTING IS COMPELLING ME TO BE RELIGIOUS!!!!!

would you say the same thing if it were a muslim prophet/deity?

Considering Muslims can't make images of animate objects, that point is kind of moot.

But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures.

They are architectural marvels the Taj Mahalis not a religious structure it's a tomb.

Why should churches be treated any differently than any other business?

Because congress cannot interfere with the free exercise of religion, the part of the amendment you keep forgetting about, while you expand the establishment clause to attack religion instead of protect it.

Free doesn't mean exempt. As to the exercise of it, it ends where the right not to begins.

No it doesn't, freedom of religion does NOT mean freedom from it, i.e. that it is not allowed in public. Just because seeing religious stuff gives you the vapors, like some ditzy southern belle, doesn't mean we have to hide it from your view.

Grow a fucking pair.

Absolute bullshit of means any faith or none at your discretion.

Is that sentence even English?

Wimp.

Freedom of religion or freedom of belief is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion.[1] The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group—in religious terms called "apostasy"—is also a fundamental[peacock term] part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of United Nations' 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[2]

Freedom of religion is considered by many people and nations to be a fundamental human right.[3][4] In a country with a state religion, freedom of religion is generally considered to mean that the government permits religious practices of other sects besides the state religion, and does not persecute believers in other faiths.

 

[daws101]

"But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures." Not if they are being used in a secular sense. That's pretty hard to do with a portrait our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Well according to Atheists he was just a man, so why are they so butthurt about it.

and again you cant quote like a normal fucking person. Please go die in a fire.

there is no evidence he was anything else .

 

[daws101]

"But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures." Not if they are being used in a secular sense. That's pretty hard to do with a portrait our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

yeah come on Marty

You two guys need a room to fellate each other?

oh no! it's the I got jackshit so I'll make a gay slur ploy!

 

[hadit]

Why not? I thought government and churches are separate?

Why should churches be treated any differently than any other business?

Because congress cannot interfere with the free exercise of religion, the part of the amendment you keep forgetting about, while you expand the establishment clause to attack religion instead of protect it.

Free doesn't mean exempt. As to the exercise of it, it ends where the right not to begins.

A picture doesn't compel you to worship. Now, a sign stating that all must bow to Mecca 5 times a day, under which is a large man with a sword to ensure compliance, that's compulsion.

Bullshit the method is different the intent the same.

The bottom line remains, a picture is not compulsion, any more than a picture of Einstein makes kids smart.

 

[hadit]

"But would you want a painting of the Taj Mahal or the Dome of the Rock taken down? those are religious structures." Not if they are being used in a secular sense. That's pretty hard to do with a portrait our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Well according to Atheists he was just a man, so why are they so butthurt about it.

and again you cant quote like a normal fucking person. Please go die in a fire.

there is no evidence he was anything else .

So why all the angst about a picture?

 

[hadit]

The libertarians (oooo govt is all bad) and the far right social cos (oooo govt is bad if it does not allowing only the posting of my Christian items) are a bunch of fucking idiots on this issue.

Posting a picture of Jesus in the school hallway is an endorsement by the
administration of a religion.

No, it isn't. and the key is establishment.

Yes, it is, and establishment is action by public goverment, which is a public school.

It's not establishment. You anti-religious types really are fragile little sissy flowers.

ZOMG A PAINTING IS COMPELLING ME TO BE RELIGIOUS!!!!!

would you say the same thing if it were a muslim prophet/deity?

Or a giant painting of Satan?

Well, if you want to scare the kids every day. Jesus doesn't scare kids.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Why should churches be treated any differently than any other business?

Because congress cannot interfere with the free exercise of religion, the part of the amendment you keep forgetting about, while you expand the establishment clause to attack religion instead of protect it.

Free doesn't mean exempt. As to the exercise of it, it ends where the right not to begins.

A picture doesn't compel you to worship. Now, a sign stating that all must bow to Mecca 5 times a day, under which is a large man with a sword to ensure compliance, that's compulsion.

Bullshit the method is different the intent the same.

The bottom line remains, a picture is not compulsion, any more than a picture of Einstein makes kids smart.

Einstein is not the primary symbol of a religion.

 

[hadit]

Because congress cannot interfere with the free exercise of religion, the part of the amendment you keep forgetting about, while you expand the establishment clause to attack religion instead of protect it.

Free doesn't mean exempt. As to the exercise of it, it ends where the right not to begins.

A picture doesn't compel you to worship. Now, a sign stating that all must bow to Mecca 5 times a day, under which is a large man with a sword to ensure compliance, that's compulsion.

Bullshit the method is different the intent the same.

The bottom line remains, a picture is not compulsion, any more than a picture of Einstein makes kids smart.

Einstein is not the primary symbol of a religion.

And a picture of him doesn't make kids smart. Likewise, the smart people understand that a picture of Jesus won't force the kids to become Christians.