Separation of church and state makes him want to throw up

[BluePhantom]

Speaking of Santorum,

Best. Headline. Ever.

"Poll: Santorum comes from behind in Alabama three-way."

Poll: Santorum comes from behind in Alabama three-way | Second Front

 

[BluePhantom]

For the record, although I am 100% opposed to abortion, I do not believe that overturning Roe is the answer to the abortion problem. 1) overturning it would only send it to the states. That solves nothing. 2) even if by force of law we could stop women from having abortions, they are going to get them regardless and with the medical/medicinal knowledge we now have we wouldn't even know about it in the vast majority of cases.

Abortion needs to be defeated in the hearts and minds of our citizens. It shouldn't be acceptable simply as the convenient birth control method it is, but all of this is better left to another thread and I have said too much here.

Immie

I agree with you completely. That has always been my position as well. And yes....a topic for a different thread.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Santorum: Separation Of Church And State 'Makes Me Want To Throw Up'

Damn that pesky little First Amendment. Its just SO inconvenient to Santorum.

Sadly, there are many rw's who are so dumb, they actually don't realize what this creep is saying.

Seperation of Church and State not in the constitution. Get over it.

 

[Big Fitz]

Santorum: Separation Of Church And State 'Makes Me Want To Throw Up'

Damn that pesky little First Amendment. Its just SO inconvenient to Santorum.

Sadly, there are many rw's who are so dumb, they actually don't realize what this creep is saying.

Seperation of Church and State not in the constitution. Get over it.

They won't because the goal is to END the constitution's meaning in our lives and replace it with socialism where the party members are the new nobility.

At least that's the functional result of their desires.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

The other thing to keep in mind here is that as much as people of strong faith THINK they want a government where religion is a legitimate basis upon which to make law or set policy, they ought to be very careful about what they wish for. While the citizens of the United States have historically been predominantly Christian, that is not to say that will always be the case. Let me provide an extreme example to make a point. If the day were ever to come that Islam became the most common religion of the citizenry and we have previously opened the door to allow religion to be a legitimate basis upon which to make law and set policy, then we have lost our Constitutional argument against the imposition of Sharia Law.

Granted, it's an extreme example, but remember....the moment we lose our vigilance is the moment when what we oppose begins to become reality. Government policy based upon religious conviction or personal moral code is great so long as you (by "you" I don't mean you specifically but in general) are in the majority....it's when you look around and suddenly you realize that the landscape has changed that you might regret your previous position.

yeah, i've said the same thing about a thousand times. but, just like our national debt and energy issues, some people never look past the end of their nose.

 

[BluePhantom]

The other thing to keep in mind here is that as much as people of strong faith THINK they want a government where religion is a legitimate basis upon which to make law or set policy, they ought to be very careful about what they wish for. While the citizens of the United States have historically been predominantly Christian, that is not to say that will always be the case. Let me provide an extreme example to make a point. If the day were ever to come that Islam became the most common religion of the citizenry and we have previously opened the door to allow religion to be a legitimate basis upon which to make law and set policy, then we have lost our Constitutional argument against the imposition of Sharia Law.

Granted, it's an extreme example, but remember....the moment we lose our vigilance is the moment when what we oppose begins to become reality. Government policy based upon religious conviction or personal moral code is great so long as you (by "you" I don't mean you specifically but in general) are in the majority....it's when you look around and suddenly you realize that the landscape has changed that you might regret your previous position.

yeah, i've said the same thing about a thousand times. but, just like our national debt and energy issues, some people never look past the end of their nose.

Well, the problem of course is that once one realizes and accepts that they often find themselves in a situation where they have split opinions. Just like my position on abortion: I am against it morally and theologically but I find that I have to support its continued legality for the reasons I outlined below. That's a REAL hard thing to do and something that, quite frankly, most people cannot do. Trying to get people to support the existence of something they hate with all their heart is a damn tough sell....unfortunately, the way I see it, it's the only way society can truly evolve. To steal a concept from the Tao Te Ching: sometimes you must be what you are not in order to become what you are.

 

[Rinata]

There is no separation of church and state mentioned in the first amendment

Only when it is convenient for the GOP.

 

[Gadawg73]

Seperation of church and state in no way takes people of faith away from having a voice in their communities and their support of any candidate and/or government policy.
Santorum knows that. He has to come up with some BS to inflame the dumb masses that believe the practice of seperation of church and state in this country for the last 240 years has stopped someone from practicing their religion and as a result of that not being allowed to be politically active.
What a crock of shit. Religous activity in politics these days is higher than at any time in the history of this country.

 

[Gadawg73]

Santorum: Separation Of Church And State 'Makes Me Want To Throw Up'

Damn that pesky little First Amendment. Its just SO inconvenient to Santorum.

Sadly, there are many rw's who are so dumb, they actually don't realize what this creep is saying.

Seperation of Church and State not in the constitution. Get over it.

God is not in The Constitution.
Get over it. Religion has no place in government.
We intend to keep it out. Those of us that value our faith and religous beliefs more than politics.

 

[Big Fitz]

Santorum: Separation Of Church And State 'Makes Me Want To Throw Up'

Damn that pesky little First Amendment. Its just SO inconvenient to Santorum.

Sadly, there are many rw's who are so dumb, they actually don't realize what this creep is saying.

Seperation of Church and State not in the constitution. Get over it.

God is not in The Constitution.
Get over it. Religion has no place in government.
We intend to keep it out. Those of us that value our faith and religous beliefs more than politics.

Yes, but God is not barred from the Constitution either. The two are not mutually incompatible. That said, we have a lot of protections from any law being crafted to force any religion on us, save it seems, for Atheism/Humanism/Secularism. I suspect that is because of the current bias in this nation for these ideas and the general tolerance of the Christian majority.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

[That's correct, It's vague when it comes to many constitutional questions, it's why the supreme court defined it further to mean that there is a wall that the founders were too negligent to build.

The Supreme Court doesn't have that authority.

Sure they do, it's what they are there for, to answer constitutional questions that the actual constitution is not clear on. What do you think their purpose is?

They are there to interpret the Constitution based upon previous points of view supported by researched documentation dating back to earlier Supreme Court decisions, and legislation that effect the view points of when that ammendment was originally written within the context of those who wrote it. It doesn't mean taking a phrase out of context from its original intent, or throw your own "view" without the ability to provide any previous supported Constitutional judicial case decisions, but rather based soly upon what you think it OUGHT to say.

 

[BluePhantom]

There is no separation of church and state mentioned in the first amendment

Only when it is convenient for the GOP.

Liberals insist on government intrusion when it suits their purposes then bitch about it when it doesn't. Same as the GOP. Let's not get holier than thou. Both sides play this game when it's advantageous for them.

 

[Mac1958]

.

This isn't even a Constitutional issue for me. It's about a person in the most influential and powerful office on the planet thinking that they have an ongoing two-way communication with some all-powerful, all-knowing, omnipotent diety who has The Answer To Everything. And, perhaps worse, that the person thinks that their interpretation of these magic fairy words is 100% on the money.

Hearing voices, are ya? There are some pretty good meds for that, I hear.

.

 

[Gadawg73]

Seperation of Church and State not in the constitution. Get over it.

God is not in The Constitution.
Get over it. Religion has no place in government.
We intend to keep it out. Those of us that value our faith and religous beliefs more than politics.

Yes, but God is not barred from the Constitution either. The two are not mutually incompatible. That said, we have a lot of protections from any law being crafted to force any religion on us, save it seems, for Atheism/Humanism/Secularism. I suspect that is because of the current bias in this nation for these ideas and the general tolerance of the Christian majority.

We are not a majority rule nation as The Constitution protects the rights of the individual, not the majority.
The Founders knowing that the majority of citizens WERE Christian and religous had a great influence in them not mentioning God in The Constitution and not naming Christianity as the national religion when that was proposed by many at the convention.
We are a nation OF LAW, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs and ideology.

 

[BluePhantom]

This isn't even a Constitutional issue for me. It's about a person in the most influential and powerful office on the planet thinking that they have an ongoing two-way communication with some all-powerful, all-knowing, omnipotent diety who has The Answer To Everything.

That's quite an exaggeration.

.
And, perhaps worse, that the person thinks that their interpretation of these magic fairy words is 100% on the money.

That's not

 

[Mac1958]

This isn't even a Constitutional issue for me. It's about a person in the most influential and powerful office on the planet thinking that they have an ongoing two-way communication with some all-powerful, all-knowing, omnipotent diety who has The Answer To Everything.

That's quite an exaggeration.

.
And, perhaps worse, that the person thinks that their interpretation of these magic fairy words is 100% on the money.

That's not

LOL, hell, I'll take 50%!

.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Yes, but God is not barred from the Constitution either. The two are not mutually incompatible.

Whose God? Let me guess, yours, but not mine.

That said, we have a lot of protections from any law being crafted to force any religion on us, save it seems, for Atheism/Humanism/Secularism.

Secularism is not a religion. Nor is Atheism synonymous with secularism. There are many deeply spiritual people, like myself, who support maintaining a secular perspective in public policy, so as to protect all people of all spiritual persuasions.

 

[sealybobo]

You can always tell how the GOP are doing in an election by how pathetic their attacks get. Can't attack Obama on his Economic or Foreign policy, talk about seperation of church and state or gay marriage or solyndra or abortion.

Based on all the threads, I say Republicans are in big trouble come November. Neither Santorum or Romney can beat Obama. Even if gas goes to $5 a gallon, we all know who's in bed with the oil companies. And if you don't, its the GOP.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, but God is not barred from the Constitution either. The two are not mutually incompatible.

Whose God? Let me guess, yours, but not mine.

That said, we have a lot of protections from any law being crafted to force any religion on us, save it seems, for Atheism/Humanism/Secularism.

Secularism is not a religion. Nor is Atheism synonymous with secularism. There are many deeply spiritual people, like myself, who support maintaining a secular perspective in public policy, so as to protect all people of all spiritual persuasions.

The secular perspective in public policy is a myth.

There is no secular perspective. There is only the guarantee that our federal government will not establish a state religion, and the guarantee that the state shall never prevent us from adhering to our own religions as we see fit. Openly, without shame, and with absolutely no interference.

 

[Gadawg73]

You can always tell how the GOP are doing in an election by how pathetic their attacks get. Can't attack Obama on his Economic or Foreign policy, talk about seperation of church and state or gay marriage or solyndra or abortion.

Based on all the threads, I say Republicans are in big trouble come November. Neither Santorum or Romney can beat Obama. Even if gas goes to $5 a gallon, we all know who's in bed with the oil companies. And if you don't, its the GOP.

Solyndra is fair game.
Seperation of church and state, gay marriage and abortion are why we have the kook in office now.
If the Republicans backed off the gay marriage boogeyman issue and left abortion issue alone and to the states there would be a Republican President for the next 50 years.
Plenty of gay folk and moderate women that are fiscal conservatives.
Romney can beat Obama. SOMEONE needs to beat Obama.
Small business can not afford 4 more years of a nice guy that has no clue about the business world.