DescentBB

I just want to clarify something:

I would absolutely forbid my son to marry Zuruck.

Zuruck wrote: Cuda, Behemoth, you guys would love to see Christianity forced upon everyone, you have this idea that if it was, this country would be one big pot of love, but it wouldn't, it would be exactly the same, if not worse.

heh Zurich your sooo predictable and SOOO WRONG. I wish to FORCE my religion upon no one. but on the other hand I do not wish the secularists to force thier views upon me. you are entierly miss-guided and one sided if you think that is not the case. you need to seperate the religious Zealots from the Christians, they are NOT the same thing. there are fanatics on both side and for you to lump ALL christians into the Zealot side is Naieve and close minded. its time to open up and see the world the way it really is and not your narrow view of it.
if you ever chose to do REAL research you would find that when ever there is a disaster who are the first people on the scene. it is the Church. and I do not mean large orginizations. I mean individual churches, People. Christian people. as an example after Katrina several small churches in our area sent teams to N.O to help out, our church of 120 people sent a team of 15 men to help rebuild, they spent 2 weeks clearing out the CRAP that was there and rebuilding peoples homes, they took thier own time off work sometimes Vacation time, and money out of thier own pockets just to help. so if you think that is forcing my religion on people then so be it I'm guilty as charged. and yet I wonder if there was ANY orginization that you belong to that stepped up to "personally" do the same. that is what REAL Christianity is about. it is about helping people, building relationships with people, and ministering to them. and not always by thier words but by thier actions as well. because faith without action is just words. and since you have no Idea how I walk my walk it is rather presumtuous of you to imply that I would force my religion on anyone.

Kilarin, that's fine...but marriage to a man isnt' quite what I'm looking for. Thanks for the thought though

Cuda, I can't really figure out why religious types feel like we are supressing you. Keep it out of public domains, that's all I ask. Pray whenever you want, do whatever, but I don't want to see it. I choose not to see it in my house...and it does not belong in a public setting. If a private school wants to teach religion fine, I could care less, but not in public. How is that so hard to understand? Can't really say it any more clear. Do as you wish, but leave it out of the limelight, it's not difficult, it's not going to ruin your fun time.

on a side note, it's now obvious to me that religion also stunts your intelligence, anyone notice that the bible beaters have the worst spelling AND grammar??

Zuruck wrote:Pray whenever you want, do whatever, but I don't want to see it.

Isn't this pretty much the same argument as "don't hold hands with another guy in public" or "don't ask, don't tell"? That's not tolerance of gays; that's telling them that they can only be themselves behind closed doors. And you're not tolerating religion, you're telling religious people they're only allowed to practice if they can hide it from you.

It's actually stronger than that, because many religions have tenets of the form "share this with others". By advocating a general policy of "don't share with others", you're advocating a form of religious persecution (albeit a minor one.)

Religious tolerance requires you to allow people to practice their religious beliefs in public, and it requires them to allow you the freedom not to participate. That means teachers shouldn't be asking their students to pray with them, but it also means individual people should be free to pray in public.

Zuruck wrote: Keep it out of public domains, that's all I ask. Pray whenever you want, do whatever, but I don't want to see it.

then dont look when people pray

I choose not to see it in my house...and it does not belong in a public setting.

in your house is your choice but in the public venue you are you are incorrect. the Constitution gives me the freedom to worship. since it says that "the Government shall not establish a religion OR prohibit the free excercise there of" I have the right to worship in the public venue any time, any place, any where. and I'm sorry to burst your bubble but you cannot stop it.

If a private school wants to teach religion fine, I could care less, but not in public. How is that so hard to understand? Can't really say it any more clear.

as has been dicussed earlier in this same thread, and agreed upon by more level headed people in this forum. what are you afraid of, all religions should be taught in the public school system, are you afraid that buy teaching it that some people would accept it as a possible truth? how is this so hard to understand.

Do as you wish, but leave it out of the limelight, it's not difficult, it's not going to ruin your fun time.

do you feel the same way about Gay rights marches, or black pride days, or Aryan nation marches its not going to ruin thier fun time either. or is it only the Christian organizations that you wish to discriminate against?

on a side note, it's now obvious to me that religion also stunts your intelligence, anyone notice that the bible beaters have the worst spelling AND grammar??

how insightfull, your true colors shown through again, Grow up Zurich. if you wish to discuss then discuss. if you chose to throw insults it just proves the mental gaint that we all know you are

Zuruch wrote:it does not belong in a public setting.

The last time we had this discussion, Zuruch clarified that when he said "Public" he meant government sponsored. This is a "Hot Button" for us religious liberty types Zuruch, so if you specify that in your posts, you will avoid stirring up the pot.

ehhh...you guys are so block headed everytime this discussion comes up. Public does not mean a park, it does not mean a street, in this instance, it means schools, govt buildings, that sort of thing. KEEP IT OUT OF THERE! If you want your kids to be kept in the dark, by all means, teach them religion. Make them go against their will to church, make them do all that...fine by me. But dont' force it into the lives of those that choose reality. That's all...not a bad thing either...

Zuruck : My reply was not based on christian sentiment but rather i was saying in a proper way, that if you have nothing to add to the thread please do not post at all,

Also, in response to you're reply about me thinking that if the world was all christian it would all be \"one big pot of love\"? umm, no.. Real life tells me otherwise, all i can say is that if the world had more REAL christians, that actually walked what they talked then the world would still be the same, but people would handle it better.

Anyways even if you ARE against christianity, or religion itself (although i do not consider christianity a religion, just phrasing it alongside religion for the sake of being prompt with my post) Do you think that gives you the right to be anymore of an ***hole to somebody else just because you dont believe you answer to anybody? it's called ethics, practice it.

Behemoth, I've only been an azz to the idiots, not to you. I lose my temper with adults that simply don't respond to logic. No harm no foul lad.

Zuruck, do you mean \"if you're in school you shouldn't pray until after school\" or do you mean \"if you're a teacher you shouldn't tell your kids to pray\"? There's a big difference.

I don't like public prayers (like, over the intercom) in school. I don't think that should ever happen, because it creates a sort of oppressive atmosphere. But I don't mind a bunch of students getting together in the hallway or a spare classroom to pray, even loudly, as long as they're not blocking the hallway or anything. I don't care what religion they are, either.

Same thing in government. I don't want the president to lead a prayer on national radio and make everyone feel like they should participate, but if he and some others want to pray together, even out loud, they have every right.

In both cases, I don't like the person in authority making others feel like they have to pray, but I don't mind them deciding to pray with others even in a visible way.

At other public events... like, say, a sporting event... if the people running it want prayer, that's their decision, and they get to deal with the market forces at work. (Bandimere speedway in Denver always kicked off their races with a short prayer; it didn't seem to hurt their business.)

Zuruck wrote:Behemoth, I've only been an azz to the idiots, not to you. I lose my temper with adults that simply don't respond to logic. No harm no foul lad.

who's logic yours? Zurich, you call us intolerant, you need to look into the mirror. the difference between me and you is, you hate what I stand for, your words are proof, I do not have the same opinion of you. your view of things is focused on your narrow little scope of the world and your total hate of God. yet you resort to name calling and innuendo's, I only wish to educate and allow people to see both sides. I want the people to have all the knowledge available and to deceide for them selves, can you say the same.

Zurich wrote:I've only been an azz to the idiots,

it's now obvious to me that religion also stunts your intelligence,

.you guys are so block headed everytime this discussion comes up

But dont' force it into the lives of those that choose reality.

Keep it out of public domains

ahhh...a religion of love yes? WWJD for a klondike bar?

apparently not so now I will sit back and wait for you to find another way to flame me while you again avoid the discussion

Zurick...don't let them bully you, your doing fine and your intent is clear. I'm going to help you soon.

Bettina

Zurich wrote:Public does not mean a park, it does not mean a street, in this instance, it means schools, govt buildings,

just a bit of History for you Zurich about religion in Govt Buildings.

Because of the faith of many of our founding fathers, public prayer and national days of prayer have a long-standing and significant history in American tradition. The Supreme Court affirmed the right of state legislatures to open their sessions with prayer in Marsh vs. Chambers (1983).

The National Day of Prayer is a vital part of our heritage. Since the first call to prayer in 1775, when the Continental Congress asked the colonies to pray for wisdom in forming a nation, the call to prayer has continued through our history, including President Lincoln's proclamation of a day of "humiliation, fasting, and prayer" in 1863. In 1952, a joint resolution by Congress, signed by President Truman, declared an annual, national day of prayer. In 1988, the law was amended and signed by President Reagan, permanently setting the day as the first Thursday of every May. Each year, the president signs a proclamation, encouraging all Americans to pray on this day. Last year, all 50 state governors plus the governors of several U.S. territories signed similar proclamations.

Religion has LONG been a part of our government. it wasnt until Madeline Murray O'hare around 1900 that people started to take religion out of government. to this day every new session of Congress is started with a prayer, and in the Supreme court sitting over top of the Justices it says "in God we Trust" how fitting is it that the Supreme court ruled that Government lead Prayer was legal in government buildings

so when you say

I can't really figure out why religious types feel like we are supressing you

I will point to this

Zurich wrote:Public does not mean a park, it does not mean a street, in this instance, it means schools, govt buildings,

so if you would have your way, you personaly would erase 200+ years of tradition and supreme court precidence all because of your hate of God. I will say to you

it's not going to ruin your fun time.

so now if you wish to discuss or debate with more than your personal feelings about not wanting it, then I will be more than willing to engage in that discussion.

Because of the faith of many of our founding fathers, public prayer and national days of prayer have a long-standing and significant history in American tradition. The Supreme Court affirmed the right of state legislatures to open their sessions with prayer in Marsh vs. Chambers (1983).

The supreme court has certainly made some MAJOR mistakes in it's time. This is right near the top. A few quotes from the founding fathers:

On the congressional chaplains:

"Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the US forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them; and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation." -James Madison, "Detached Memoranda."

On National Days of Prayer, Thomas Jefferson received a letter from Samuel Miller requesting that he officially "recommend" a national day of prayer. This is Thomas Jefferson's response:

"But it is only proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe a day of fasting & prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the U.S. an authority over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly precluded them from. It must be meant too that this recommendation is to carry some authority, and to be sanctioned by some penalty on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and imprisonment, but of some degree of proscription perhaps in public opinion. And does the change in the nature of the penalty make the recommendation the less a law of conduct for those to whom it is directed? I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct it's exercises, it's discipline, or it's doctrines; nor of the religious societies that the general government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting & prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises, & the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands, where the constitution has deposited it."
(Thomas Jefferson, letter to Samuel Miller, Jan. 23, 1808).

Which is why I find it so ironic that George Bush used a Thomas Jefferson quote on one of his declarations of a National Day of Prayer.

Cuda wrote:so if you would have your way, you personaly would erase 200+ years of tradition and supreme court precidence all because of your hate of God.

I love God, but I would certainly LOVE to see the 200+ years of tradition and precedent in violating the principles of religious liberty wiped away.

Religious Liberty is a simple matter of applying the Golden Rule. We conservative Christians would NOT appreciate it if the government spent tax dollars to pay for Voodoo priests or opened government sessions with officially sanctioned Hindu prayers. OR, to do something a bit more likely, what if every single session of congress was begun by an official, government paid, congressional "Skeptic", who stood in front of congress, read the Atheist Creed and gave an official pronouncement of the non-existence of God.

Atheists are my fellow citizens, and despite anything George Bush Senior said, they have JUST as much right to live here and believe the way they wish as I do. The government is JUST as much their government as it is mine. Which is why I do NOT support the government using their tax dollars to pronounce MY prayers.

If I ignore THEIR rights now, someday I'll be in the minority and MY rights will be ignored. Religion is safest when the government stays OUT of it.

Kilarin wrote:

Because of the faith of many of our founding fathers, public prayer and national days of prayer have a long-standing and significant history in American tradition. The Supreme Court affirmed the right of state legislatures to open their sessions with prayer in Marsh vs. Chambers (1983).

The supreme court has certainly made some MAJOR mistakes in it's time. This is right near the top. A few quotes from the founding fathers:

On the congressional chaplains:

"Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the US forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them; and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation." -James Madison, "Detached Memoranda."

On National Days of Prayer, Thomas Jefferson received a letter from Samuel Miller requesting that he officially "recommend" a national day of prayer. This is Thomas Jefferson's response:

"But it is only proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe a day of fasting & prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the U.S. an authority over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly precluded them from. It must be meant too that this recommendation is to carry some authority, and to be sanctioned by some penalty on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and imprisonment, but of some degree of proscription perhaps in public opinion. And does the change in the nature of the penalty make the recommendation the less a law of conduct for those to whom it is directed? I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct it's exercises, it's discipline, or it's doctrines; nor of the religious societies that the general government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting & prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises, & the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands, where the constitution has deposited it."
(Thomas Jefferson, letter to Samuel Miller, Jan. 23, 1808).

Which is why I find it so ironic that George Bush used a Thomas Jefferson quote on one of his declarations of a National Day of Prayer.

Cuda wrote:so if you would have your way, you personaly would erase 200+ years of tradition and supreme court precidence all because of your hate of God.

I love God, but I would certainly LOVE to see the 200+ years of tradition and precedent in violating the principles of religious liberty wiped away.

Religious Liberty is a simple matter of applying the Golden Rule. We conservative Christians would NOT appreciate it if the government spent tax dollars to pay for Voodoo priests or opened government sessions with officially sanctioned Hindu prayers. OR, to do something a bit more likely, what if every single session of congress was begun by an official, government paid, congressional "Skeptic", who stood in front of congress, read the Atheist Creed and gave an official pronouncement of the non-existence of God.

Atheists are my fellow citizens, and despite anything George Bush Senior said, they have JUST as much right to live here and believe the way they wish as I do. The government is JUST as much their government as it is mine. Which is why I do NOT support the government using their tax dollars to pronounce MY prayers.

If I ignore THEIR rights now, someday I'll be in the minority and MY rights will be ignored. Religion is safest when the government stays OUT of it.

That was very nicely put. Some of us atheists are not bad people once you get to know us.

Bettina

Zurick i too wrongly thought from your comments regarding the \"public\" ment that you wanted ppl to only practice their religion in private. Glad that's cleared up now though.

And be careful not to go the Mobius route, you seem to be quickly approaching his level of vocal intollerance for all religion. If \"all religion is stupid\" is something you'd like to shout from the rooftops then please do it in another thread - in which i will give my (refreshingly non-christian) reasons for completely disagreeing with you.