1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Seperation of Church and State goes out the window yet again.

Discussion in 'Religion and Spirituality' started by Pagan, May 1, 2008.

  1. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,465
    37,345
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts

    Blame it on Boomer, mate, all of this predraft stuff that he has written and that I've read has infected my keyboard...:lol:
     
  2. Pagan

    Pagan Metal & a Mustang

    20,403
    39,953
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Newburgh, NY
    What are you getting at bro?

    Molesting altar boys? (ooooh....I know, I know...but you lobbed that one over the plate. I had to swing at it!)

    Now had I been able to hear your John Cleese delivery, I'd have known. ;)
     
  3. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,465
    37,345
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts


    There is not a central Wiccan figure who is looked to for advice on thing slike holding a day of prayer etc.

    No worries, your high blood pressure is effecting your posts, all of that salt don't ya know..:lol:

    The parrot has ceased to be!:lol:
     
  4. Pagan

    Pagan Metal & a Mustang

    20,403
    39,953
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Newburgh, NY
    I know what you were saying, there is no "Pope" in Wicca. Each Coven does have a High Priestess or Priest, though.

    What I'm trying to figure out is how it pertained to my original statement of:

    "As for the organizing, I would be against Wiccans organizing on a base to form some "National" day that excluded all others. I never said I had any problems with Christians organizing on bases. If there are Christian soldiers there and they want to have a mass on Sunday, that is their right. The example I brought up was of Christians trying to deny Wiccans even that simple right, while they organize whatever they please."

    Ah...if only I could have salt. PKD interrupted that love affair. :tongue:

    Actually, it's more my love of cringe humor. ;)

    No no! 'E's pining!
     
  5. Vendigo

    Vendigo German Gigolo Club Member

    7,723
    5,683
    113
    Nov 30, 2007

    Pray tell: Why would it be a bit superflous? And why isn't a National Day for Prayer just as superflous? And why does the President of the United States engage in these matters in the first place? It's a delicate issue, I know, but the way I see it, it constitutes a violation of the First Amendment. There's clearly a preferentialist stance here.
     
  6. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,465
    37,345
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    Because good sir, it would be just another day, no prayer, no appalations to a higher power, none of that, what exactly would one do on a "National Atheism Day"?

    As for a President issuing such proclaimations, such is traditional, going back to our first President, America is still a fairly young place in the broader scheme of things.

    As to "Violation of Seperation of Church and State", if we look at the First Amendment, it only prohibits the Establishment of a Religion by Congress, not a recognition of a Religion.
     
  7. Ohiophinphan

    Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box

    For the fjords???? Wonderful plumage on the Norwegian Blue
     
    Pagan and padre31 like this.
  8. Vendigo

    Vendigo German Gigolo Club Member

    7,723
    5,683
    113
    Nov 30, 2007

    Exactly. But that's the nature of atheism, isn't it? Just because you don't see a point in the celebration of not believing doesn't mean that there isn't one. For an atheist, there isn't a point in celebrating the ostensible existence of a fictional entity either. That's basically why, in my opinion, government should refrain from engaging in such matters in the first place because it opens a can of worms. If believing is encouraged by the government, then said government is also obliged to encourage not believing because it's required to be unbiased in such matters by the Constitution.



    But the President specifically encouraged people to practice religion. Which is, in fact, in violation of the First Amendment because it's preferential. In "Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet" the Supreme Court explicitly ruled that government was not to prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion.
     
  9. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,465
    37,345
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    Then the Atheist would be imposing their religion on Society, quite the conundrum isn't it?



    Indeed, we need more of a president encouraging religion among Americans.
     
  10. Vendigo

    Vendigo German Gigolo Club Member

    7,723
    5,683
    113
    Nov 30, 2007

    No. He would merely be granted the same rights the believers are granted.



    More religion, less Constitution. That's an interesting stance. Please forgive me that I'm pretty skeptical of promoting religious beliefs over constitutional rights. A burned child dreads the fire.
     
  11. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,465
    37,345
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts

    Not at all, the Atheists positions declares Deistic religions null, as the practice of even acknowledging a Deity would offend the Atheist, which is quite odd, if there is no Deity, what would an Athiest care if one was acknowledged or not?




    If we consult our Constitution, the First Amendment also states "..or the free excersize thereof..." in practicing one's religion, one is indeed behaving Constitutionally.
     
  12. Vendigo

    Vendigo German Gigolo Club Member

    7,723
    5,683
    113
    Nov 30, 2007

    No it would not. Atheism isn't any more or less intolerant than any given religion is. Yeah, there might be Atheists who think along these lines. Just as there are Christians who are offended by the thought that Atheism exists. If the existence of extremists were a legitimate reason to abandon the equal rights doctrine, Chistians or Muslims would have a rather hard time to practice their religion at all.



    No one is claiming that people shouldn't be allowed to practice their religion. No one is claiming that the President can't practice his religion. We are talking about the promotion of a specific set of beliefs over another by the government. Which is unconstitutional.
     
    DOLPHAN1 and Fin D like this.
  13. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,678
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Again, that is not a call to war at all. Just because he used the word "war" does not mean he was for it. The Bible is about each person's interpretation of it, but the examples you have used so far, have absolutely no value in proving your point.


    I don't remember him saying anything to anyone about being alcoholics, pedophiles, drug addicts, necrophiliacs, etc. Following your logic, those are OK by Jesus, too. I got it now. Just because Jesus wanted us to love our fellow man, stopped a woman from being stoned and lived by the 10 Commandments, doesn't mean he'd be against war, because he never came out and said war is bad? How do you type your rebuttals with your fingers in your ears while going ,"lalalalalala, I can't hear you, lalalalalala"?


    Ah, so you're Jewish...
     
    DOLPHAN1 likes this.
  14. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,678
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    We don't care what an individual believes. We care when that individual tries to make everyone else believe that way, and uses those beliefs to create laws that we all have to live by.

    Also, I've never been offended by the simple fact that someone is a believer. However, many believers have been offended that I am not.
     
    DOLPHAN1 likes this.
  15. Pagan

    Pagan Metal & a Mustang

    20,403
    39,953
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Newburgh, NY
    The problem with this is that he's only encouraging HIS religion. ;)

    If he encourages ALL religions, that's fine with me.
     
    DOLPHAN1 likes this.
  16. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,465
    37,345
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    I would expect nothing else, if we ever have a Wiccan Prez, then I would fully expect a "Goddess Bless Day".

    I mean let's be real here, gwB issuing a "call to unity of religions day" would be as phoney as a 3 dollar bill or a FRN...:lol:
     
  17. JCowScot

    JCowScot So funky the dead dance Club Member

    3,380
    774
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    FLA USA
    I wouldn't exactly go that far, since not all religions look peacefully upon their fellow man (woman). Personally, I don't want the president advocating any religion at all. That's not his job. His job is to run the country and make sure everything goes smoothly and people's rights don't get trampled on, religious or otherwise. (I won't go into whether or not they've done a good job of it recently...we've got another forum for that.:wink2: ) Also, the problem with encouraging ALL religions is that most religions have basic tenets that call into question and even nullify those of the others. That would be like saying, "Lets encourage ALL forms of ethnic pride." Well, some of those forms involve the detriment and destruction of others, so that really just doesn't work.:no:

    It would be nice if it could, but it just doesn't.
     
    gafinfan likes this.
  18. Pagan

    Pagan Metal & a Mustang

    20,403
    39,953
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Newburgh, NY
    Dude...your fellow Christians would **** themselves. :lol:

    That makes sense bro. If he can't include all then there should be none at all.
     
    JCowScot likes this.
  19. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    the idea of seperation of church and state is not to remove religion from existence in society. it is to allow ALL religion freedom because no one is primary. the idea is for all faiths to exist without exclusion. if the Government sanctions one type of religion, then it will only be a matter of time before the others are discriminated against or even abolished all together. to maintain true religious freedom in this country, seperation is an absolute necessity.

    go ahead Padre.....
     
    gafinfan and Pagan like this.
  20. gafinfan

    gafinfan gunner Club Member

    I couldn't agree more. The President and Congress need to get out of the religion business because it is none of their business and its in the 1st amendment, too :no:. That means, to me, the government can't be pro or con. Right now it seems that all the government does is promote anti-religion. Just as the non believers have rights; believers should have those same rights.
     

Share This Page