Catholic Church no longer swears Bible to be all true

[Ghosthunter]

First off we are not a secular country. We are very much a Christian country just as Mexico is a Catholic country or Iraq is a Muslim country. What we have is a secular government.


I disagree.



When Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists he was talking about a wall of seperation between the government and and the church. He did not want government controling the church as was done with the Church of England. This is very clear in his writting.

Or the church controlling the govt.

The fact that Jefferson was not a practicing Christian has nothing to do with the fact that he wrote about and saw the inherant value of Christianity in the United States. This is backed up by him funding Catholic priest for converting indians and his holding church services in the capital building.

He was big on religious freedom as most of our forefathers were. He was a liberterian.


This has nothing to do with it. It says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;. Again they did not want government controling the churches. There was a huge debate about this because they were affraid of a Church of England type of set up in the States. So the fact that God is not mentioned in the constitution was done so with a specific intent. Anyway nice try at trying to trip me up with this question, I know the difference between the Deleration and the Constitution. Now WRT to the decleration it shows another piece of writting on our founders thoughts wrt to God and where our values and rights come from.

You can teach all the religions. My point is why tell people they can't pray in school?


I say if people want to pray go ahead but do it silently or go to another room, no reason for other people have to see it on a regular basis. School is meant to learn not a place of worship. If as a Christian want that bad enough then go to a private school.


Nobody if forcing anything on you. I hate it when you guys say this. Since it is your side that is trying to force religion out via the courts.


Well lets see many laws are being made becuase of legislating morality due to religious beliefs. That is where I have the biggest issue with religion.

[DaveW]

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

This also means that Congress also cannot pass a law promoting one religion over another in a public school. Requiring children to say "one nation under God" does that. Yes you can argue "God" isn't specific. But it is using the christian word for "God", and it excludes polytheist religions and those religions that do not worship a diety (e.g. Buddism).

On the other hand "prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" means children must remain free to say "under God" if they choose, and free to pray in school, and bring Bibles to the class room, and display christian symbols on their clothing etc.

Someone mentioned the ACLU... They are really on nobody's side. They just side with whoever appears to be the minority. Although they sometimes promote an atheist's cause, they aren't advocates for atheism. They may raise a big stink about any display of christianity anywhere, yet they pretty much bend over backwards to support Islam and other religions. They'll rip down a christmas tree in a public library, but they'll put up Ramadan and Quanza stuff instead.

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Someone mentioned the ACLU... They are really on nobody's side. They just side with whoever appears to be the minority. Although they sometimes promote an atheist's cause, they aren't advocates for atheism. They may raise a big stink about any display of christianity anywhere, yet they pretty much bend over backwards to support Islam and other religions. They'll rip down a christmas tree in a public library, but they'll put up Ramadan and Quanza stuff instead.

They also support convicted homicidal pedophiles.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38540,00.html

[UDawg]

I disagree.
Just saying you disagree is not a argument. The VAST majority of people in this country call them selves Christians. That makes us a Christian country. You can deny it if you want but that would be akin to putting your head in the sand. No one would say that Mexico is not a Catholic country and no one would say that Iraq is not a muslim country. Why is it that only the US is not considered a Christian country when the vast majority of its citizens are Christians? The answer is liberals don't want to admit this, there for to them it isn't true.




Or the church controlling the govt.
Like I said, they were intent on not having the government control the church. Just throwing the opposite is nice and is true but their focus was not having a Church of England.



He was big on religious freedom as most of our forefathers were. He was a liberterian.
Of course, this isn't a reubuttle to my post. It is only stating the obvious. My point is they supported religion as well. They did it directly by thier actions and government funds.



I say if people want to pray go ahead but do it silently or go to another room, no reason for other people have to see it on a regular basis. School is meant to learn not a place of worship. If as a Christian want that bad enough then go to a private school.
Then let me have my money that I pay into the government to go to a private school.



Well lets see many laws are being made becuase of legislating morality due to religious beliefs. That is where I have the biggest issue with religion.
This is obsurd, show me where Christians are forcing anything upon you. LOL Laws are being made by atheist who don't like any religion at all. They lose at the ballot box so they get a judge to run rough shot over the people and force their bench legislated ideas on the people like dictators.

There is nothing wrong with legislating morality, we do it all the time. We don't allow people to steal, sell their body for sex (except Las Vegas cuz they have a lower standard of morality.) and many other such laws based on Christian/Judeo morality.

Your whole point of view is of a liberal atheist who wants to ignore the history of this country.

[DaveW]

Just saying you disagree is not a argument.

I disagree

[UDawg]

I disagree
LOL


post

[CybrSage]

I disagree

I disagree with your disagreement...and no disagreeing with that...cause I am disagreement proof...even disagreement-proof-gun proof!

:p

[netviper13]

They also support convicted homicidal pedophiles.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38540,00.html

That's like saying the lawyers representing video game companies sued when kids go psycho and shoot up schools are supporting homicidal maniacs. They are not taking a moral stance on the organization, but rather arguing that viewing the website does not incite one to do those actions. That case has as many ramifications for the video, music, and video game industries as it does for NAMBLA. But people hear that one acronym and love to go crazy. Also that case is almost 5 years ago.

[DaveW]

What do people have against the National Association of Marlyn Brando Look Alikes anyway?

[AlphaWolf_HK]

That's like saying the lawyers representing video game companies sued when kids go psycho and shoot up schools are supporting homicidal maniacs. They are not taking a moral stance on the organization, but rather arguing that viewing the website does not incite one to do those actions. That case has as many ramifications for the video, music, and video game industries as it does for NAMBLA. But people hear that one acronym and love to go crazy. Also that case is almost 5 years ago.

It's illegal in the US to run websites that encourage illegal activity (such as murder, rape, etc.) NAMBLA's website encourages men to have sex with little boys, and the UCLA knows this. The whole point of NAMBLA is to encourage this behavior, it's even written in their mission statement. Tell me, is that illegal or not?

The UCLA wants to make it legal to encourage pedophelia on a website.

[netviper13]

It's illegal in the US to run websites that encourage illegal activity (such as murder, rape, etc.) NAMBLA's website encourages men to have sex with little boys, and the UCLA knows this. The whole point of NAMBLA is to encourage this behavior, it's even written in their mission statement. Tell me, is that illegal or not?

The UCLA wants to make it legal to encourage pedophelia on a website.

AFAIK, the Supreme Court has upheld such things as stories of child pornography as protected under the 1st Amendment. The lawsuit in question, though, was not about whether what NAMBLA does is illegal, but rather whether or not they can be held accountable for people reading their material and then acting. Courts in the past have sided with free speech, and held the individual accountable for his/her own actions.

[DaveW]

It's illegal in the US to run websites that encourage illegal activity (such as murder, rape, etc.) NAMBLA's website encourages men to have sex with little boys, and the UCLA knows this. The whole point of NAMBLA is to encourage this behavior, it's even written in their mission statement. Tell me, is that illegal or not?

The UCLA wants to make it legal to encourage pedophelia on a website.

<wimpy voice>

Thats horrifying...

How could anybody say that?

Whats wrong with wanting to love a child?

We're going to sleep, I tuck them in, give them some hot milk and cookies, watch a little movie.

its what the whole world should do!

</wimpy voice>

[UDawg]

It's illegal in the US to run websites that encourage illegal activity (such as murder, rape, etc.) NAMBLA's website encourages men to have sex with little boys, and the UCLA knows this. The whole point of NAMBLA is to encourage this behavior, it's even written in their mission statement. Tell me, is that illegal or not?

The UCLA wants to make it legal to encourage pedophelia on a website.
BAHAHAHAAH!!!!1 that is the best typo I've seen in a long time. :D

[DaveW]

Hey... good thing that green hyperlink ad thingy doesn't see NAMBLA as a keyword huh?

[UDawg]

<wimpy voice>

Thats horrifying...

How could anybody say that?

Whats wrong with wanting to love a child?

We're going to sleep, I tuck them in, give them some hot milk and cookies, watch a little movie AND THEN I CORNHOLE THEM!

its what the whole world should do!

</wimpy voice> :eek:

[UDawg]

Hey... good thing that green hyperlink ad thingy doesn't see NAMBLA as a keyword huh?
I want to make a sentence that has all hyperlinks to them. :D

[DaveW]

"
We're going to sleep, I tuck them in, give them some hot milk and cookies, watch a little movie AND THEN I CORNHOLE THEM!
"
</wimpy voice>

:eek:

UDawg must have a "Michael Jacksonese" to "What he actually meant to say" translator :)

[DaveW]

keywords for advertising bring revenue and increased sales through marketing

<edit> never mind, I think I read theres a limit on how many green links per page </edit>

[Ghosthunter]

This is obsurd, show me where Christians are forcing anything upon you. LOL Laws are being made by atheist who don't like any religion at all. They lose at the ballot box so they get a judge to run rough shot over the people and force their bench legislated ideas on the people like dictators.

There is nothing wrong with legislating morality, we do it all the time. We don't allow people to steal, sell their body for sex (except Las Vegas cuz they have a lower standard of morality.) and many other such laws based on Christian/Judeo morality.

Your whole point of view is of a liberal atheist who wants to ignore the history of this country.

You know nothing about me, and you make yourself look like a fool for judging me.


Just because I dont believe in the Judeo-Christian God and beliefs, does not automatically make me an aethist. where in any post did I ever say I did not believe in a God? Or ever say I was an aethist?

As far as liberal goes you got me wrong again , I am a liberterian at heart, just like our forefathers


As far as legislating morality hmm here is a perfect example how about using the FBI to go after obscenity? I guess we got all the terrorists that we now can go after legal pornography becuase somsone finds it offensive?

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1125318960389

[CybrSage]

As far as liberal goes you got me wrong again , I am a liberterian at heart, just like our forefathers

Actually, none of our forfathers were liberterians:


George Washington Federalist
John Adams Federalist
Thomas Jefferson Democratic-Republican
James Madison Democratic-Republican
http://www.presidentsusa.net/partyofpresidents.html

[Ghosthunter]

Actually, none of our forfathers were liberterians:


http://www.presidentsusa.net/partyofpresidents.html


They might not have had the official label, but many of our forefathers had many more liberterian ideals and beliefs then either republican or democrat today.

[UDawg]

You know nothing about me, and you make yourself look like a fool for judging me.


Just because I dont believe in the Judeo-Christian God and beliefs, does not automatically make me an aethist. where in any post did I ever say I did not believe in a God? Or ever say I was an aethist?

As far as liberal goes you got me wrong again , I am a liberterian at heart, just like our forefathers


As far as legislating morality hmm here is a perfect example how about using the FBI to go after obscenity? I guess we got all the terrorists that we now can go after legal pornography becuase somsone finds it offensive?

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1125318960389
Ok, fine I'm a fool but that's a topic for another thread. You still haven't touch the issue. You turned this personal in an effort to avoid my points. So you are not a atheist, congradulations. This still has nothing to do with the fact that your arguments come right from the human secularist point of view.

You may be a libertarian (a party that is pathetic and has no power) but that doesn't doesn't change the facts I put forth about what our founding fathers believed. This was a Christian nation from its inception. From the time the pilgrams stepped foot on this continent right up till Rev. Billy Graham's last broadcast. It also doesn't change the fact that they wanted the government to not have control over the churches. They feared having the government tell them what they could believe in. This popular notion by the left that religion has to be keept in the churches and out of public life is a lie based upon a lie of history. I have cited examples to back up my points and facts are stubborn things.

[DiscipleDOC]

They might not have had the official label, but many of our forefathers had many more liberterian ideals and beliefs then either republican or democrat today.
Oh, really? Do you want to provide a link to support your claim, or are you just gonna throw that out here and hope we take your word? :rolleyes:

[DiscipleDOC]

What really gets me that Atheism is a minority...and they are trying to control the majority. Whatever happened to that tolorence, that you preach? Oh, that's right, that's only when YOU'RE being discriminated against.....:rolleyes:

[Ghosthunter]

Oh, really? Do you want to provide a link to support your claim, or are you just gonna throw that out here and hope we take your word? :rolleyes:


Nope...i guess you did not take up american history in School.

I guess you were too busy praying in school or did you actually learn something of value?


What is the point of me providing links, i provided a link about feds going after pornography and everyone avoided it, so I wont bother. Do the research yourself.