Removing parts of the 1ST Amendment

[RetiredGySgt]

We have one member here that started a thread claiming that to teach your child religion is mental abuse. How many people here think violating the 1st to remove religious freedom is the way to go? Justify your position.

 

[PaulS1950]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech,...

This is a right. we have a right to exercise our religion and to teach it to our children. There can be no law enacted that limits our free speech. (barring that exercise detracts from the rights of others)

Your rights end where they infringe upon the rights of others. - not their feelings but their rights.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech,...

This is a right. we have a right to exercise our religion and to teach it to our children. There can be no law enacted that limits our free speech. (barring that exercise detracts from the rights of others)

Your rights end where they infringe upon the rights of others. - not their feelings but their rights.

The person arguing claims teaching religion to someone is Mental abuse. I am just curious how many of our Liberal members agree with him and are willing to put forth an argument to support him.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech,...

This is a right. we have a right to exercise our religion and to teach it to our children. There can be no law enacted that limits our free speech. (barring that exercise detracts from the rights of others)

Your rights end where they infringe upon the rights of others. - not their feelings but their rights.

The person arguing claims teaching religion to someone is Mental abuse. I am just curious how many of our Liberal members agree with him and are willing to put forth an argument to support him.

Did this person advocate that a law be passed requiring the removal of a child from the home by the state’s child welfare services upon suspicion of teaching a child religion? And if ‘convicted’ of such a ‘crime,’ did this person further advocate that the child should be permanently removed?

If not then there is no Free Exercise Clause ‘violation,’ and his argument is rhetorical only.

 

[tipofthespear]

We have one member here that started a thread claiming that to teach your child religion is mental abuse. How many people here think violating the 1st to remove religious freedom is the way to go? Justify your position.

There is probably more than one member here who would suggest such a thing given the various comments I've read.........It really is to the point that the best thing to do is ignore such asinine comments completely. People who post such dribble are hardly worth honest debate in my opinion.

Which leads me to wonder, is there an "ignore" option here? Have to check that out......It prevents a lot of wasted time reading such comments.......On other Forums you can choose to "Ignore" a particular member, and their comments will not appear on a thread you might be reading...........don't know if it is an option here or not.

 

[Katzndogz]

The UN Rights of the Child consider religious instruction to be a form of child abuse.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech,...

This is a right. we have a right to exercise our religion and to teach it to our children. There can be no law enacted that limits our free speech. (barring that exercise detracts from the rights of others)

Your rights end where they infringe upon the rights of others. - not their feelings but their rights.

The person arguing claims teaching religion to someone is Mental abuse. I am just curious how many of our Liberal members agree with him and are willing to put forth an argument to support him.

Did this person advocate that a law be passed requiring the removal of a child from the home by the state’s child welfare services upon suspicion of teaching a child religion? And if ‘convicted’ of such a ‘crime,’ did this person further advocate that the child should be permanently removed?

If not then there is no Free Exercise Clause ‘violation,’ and his argument is rhetorical only.

He forcefully has put forth the idea that teaching your child religion is mental abuse, as you full well know. You are being dishonest but then I expect no less from someone that defends a person that puts forth such an idea and then tries to hide behind semantics.

 

[Wyatt earp]

The UN Rights of the Child consider religious instruction to be a form of child abuse.

Well you are aware that what some us feel about the UN right? We dont care what they think and just wish the U.S. would leave it. Watch it crumble like the league of nations.

 

[Wyatt earp]

We have one member here that started a thread claiming that to teach your child religion is mental abuse. How many people here think violating the 1st to remove religious freedom is the way to go? Justify your position.

I didnt read the posts but was that poster talking about all religions or just the Jim Jones and David Koresh type of cults? and child abuse was a state crime not a Federal one in Davids case.

 

[Katzndogz]

The UN Rights of the Child consider religious instruction to be a form of child abuse.

Well you are aware that what some us feel about the UN right? We dont care what they think and just wish the U.S. would leave it. Watch it crumble like the league of nations.

I hope that some of you feel about the UN the same way I do. You have articulated it admirably.

 

[Granny]

The UN Rights of the Child consider religious instruction to be a form of child abuse.

Well you are aware that what some us feel about the UN right? We dont care what they think and just wish the U.S. would leave it. Watch it crumble like the league of nations.

Amen to that. The UN should be viewed at a prime example of why this One World Order business is BS. The UN members cannot agree among themselves anything - not to mention it's probably the most corrupt of all the political leaders of its membership collective. History is rife with reasons why one body of people will always despise and act with malice toward some other body of people. That situation is never going to change.

Is the UN not the successor (for lack of a better word) to the League of Nations which was founded by our own FDR and leaders of a few other countries? And I think many of us see today the folly of some programs instituted under FDR's leadership "for the good of the people." I think mankind has this notion that it is far superior to any perceived "God" and therefore can duplicate and/or create a better "everything" that may be credited to this "God" that fools cling to for their non-existent "salvation."

 

[Wyatt earp]

The UN Rights of the Child consider religious instruction to be a form of child abuse.

Well you are aware that what some us feel about the UN right? We dont care what they think and just wish the U.S. would leave it. Watch it crumble like the league of nations.

Amen to that. The UN should be viewed at a prime example of why this One World Order business is BS. The UN members cannot agree among themselves anything - not to mention it's probably the most corrupt of all the political leaders of its membership collective. History is rife with reasons why one body of people will always despise and act with malice toward some other body of people. That situation is never going to change.

Is the UN not the successor (for lack of a better word) to the League of Nations which was founded by our own FDR and leaders of a few other countries? And I think many of us see today the folly of some programs instituted under FDR's leadership "for the good of the people." I think mankind has this notion that it is far superior to any perceived "God" and therefore can duplicate and/or create a better "everything" that may be credited to this "God" that fools cling to for their non-existent "salvation."

thank you for the post, but the league of nations was a pushed through by a US Presedent Woodrow Wilson and correct me if I am wrong, but in my opinion gave rise to Hitler in Germany.

 

[The Irish Ram]

The UN Rights of the Child consider religious instruction to be a form of child abuse.

That's right, and our leaders, both Democrat and Republican, plan to make the UN constitution, our constitution, while we are busy arguing over which party is better.
The constitutional rights of religion need to be suppressed for the UN to be successful. No borders, no beliefs, with the exception of Islam. The UN has no such agenda effecting the Muslim/UN community.

They no longer want us to teach Christ. Anything else is acceptable. The Universal Church is coming, the charter has been signed, where Christ doesn't exist and God and Allah are the same.
Since Allah has no son, for them to be the same means Christ has to go. Those who refuse to let Him go, will realize the same fate as John the Baptist. < Prophesy.

I don't see our constitutional rights being upheld for much longer. We'll drone them.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The UN Rights of the Child consider religious instruction to be a form of child abuse.

That's right, and our leaders, both Democrat and Republican, plan to make the UN constitution, our constitution, while we are busy arguing over which party is better.
The constitutional rights of religion need to be suppressed for the UN to be successful. No borders, no beliefs, with the exception of Islam. The UN has no such agenda effecting the Muslim/UN community.

They no longer want us to teach Christ. Anything else is acceptable. The Universal Church is coming, the charter has been signed, where Christ doesn't exist and God and Allah are the same.
Since Allah has no son, for them to be the same means Christ has to go. Those who refuse to let Him go, will realize the same fate as John the Baptist. < Prophesy.

I don't see our constitutional rights being upheld for much longer. We'll drone them.

Obviously you’re unaware of the fact that this makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Toronado3800]

Well you are aware that what some us feel about the UN right? We dont care what they think and just wish the U.S. would leave it. Watch it crumble like the league of nations.

Amen to that. The UN should be viewed at a prime example of why this One World Order business is BS. The UN members cannot agree among themselves anything - not to mention it's probably the most corrupt of all the political leaders of its membership collective. History is rife with reasons why one body of people will always despise and act with malice toward some other body of people. That situation is never going to change.

Is the UN not the successor (for lack of a better word) to the League of Nations which was founded by our own FDR and leaders of a few other countries? And I think many of us see today the folly of some programs instituted under FDR's leadership "for the good of the people." I think mankind has this notion that it is far superior to any perceived "God" and therefore can duplicate and/or create a better "everything" that may be credited to this "God" that fools cling to for their non-existent "salvation."

thank you for the post, but the league of nations was a pushed through by a US Presedent Woodrow Wilson and correct me if I am wrong, but in my opinion gave rise to Hitler in Germany.

I do not view it as a direct cause but rather part of the story. Sure a super strong NATO might have stopped Hitler sooner, then again I think the Charles Lindberghs and Commie haters would have kept us indecisive anyway.

Is religion mental abuse? It could be. Teaching your child that flogging himself is part of worship is probably over the edge but the mental rigors of memorizing commandments and the like seem no big deal. Especially since I don't want them telling me how to raise my kid any more than necessary.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

I've taken that oath about 5 times (maybe 6) I'll continue to live by it.....No they are not going to change our constitution. At least not easily....

 

[Bezukhov]

Mental abuse!!! LOL!!!

No! Keep thumping those Bibles over your kids' heads. There is no better recruiting tool than that. When they reach adulthood they want to learn how the other side lives. So I show them how to mix drinks, score weed, fornicate, and play the ponies. Once that happens they forget all about you.

 

[AVG-JOE]

We have one member here that started a thread claiming that to teach your child religion is mental abuse. How many people here think violating the 1st to remove religious freedom is the way to go? Justify your position.

It's the codification of ANY religion or beliefs in to laws that all must follow that's wrong.

Freedom of beliefs are essential, and if a Monkey can't talk to his/her kid about what he/she believes, the point of parenting among semi-Sentient animals, like Monkeys, is lost.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Well you are aware that what some us feel about the UN right? We dont care what they think and just wish the U.S. would leave it. Watch it crumble like the league of nations.

Amen to that. The UN should be viewed at a prime example of why this One World Order business is BS. The UN members cannot agree among themselves anything - not to mention it's probably the most corrupt of all the political leaders of its membership collective. History is rife with reasons why one body of people will always despise and act with malice toward some other body of people. That situation is never going to change.

Is the UN not the successor (for lack of a better word) to the League of Nations which was founded by our own FDR and leaders of a few other countries? And I think many of us see today the folly of some programs instituted under FDR's leadership "for the good of the people." I think mankind has this notion that it is far superior to any perceived "God" and therefore can duplicate and/or create a better "everything" that may be credited to this "God" that fools cling to for their non-existent "salvation."

thank you for the post, but the league of nations was a pushed through by a US Presedent Woodrow Wilson and correct me if I am wrong, but in my opinion gave rise to Hitler in Germany.

Just an FYI - It's impossible to be wrong about your opinion.

Even if you change your mind, in your opinion, you're still right. Same holds true for each and every Monkey with an opinion.

 

[freedombecki]

The UN Rights of the Child consider religious instruction to be a form of child abuse.

The UN is just a tool of people interested in the demise of the USA. I hear they're interested in... Oh, never mind.