Separation Of Church And State

“Is the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State (one of the litigants forcing the removal), "anti-religion"?”

“But even if I take your interpretation of the Establishment clause Deed, is there not a point in which one persons Freedom of Religion, if allowed to pervade certain aspects of life, starts to impinge on other's "Freedom of Religion".

In the same way that certain of my other freedoms are curtailed as they may have major impact on the lives of others.”

“All the justices have the authority to decorate the rotunda...and he didn't ask or put it in front of the others for a decision, he just did it.

It was removed by 2-3 workers using a metal bar to lever it up and place wooden blocks underneath, and then a hydraulic or pnumatic pallet jack was used to wheel it into a onsite storage room. I'm guessing these workers were state employees.”

“phaedrus -- nothing ad hom?

"Newspeak. [...]silly attempt [...] religious dogma [...]flawed logic"

And then nothing to back up those derogatory remarks.

Sure looks ad hominem to me.

But anyway, my statement of today's activist Secularism being a religion refers to a combination of two meanings for the word "religion". On one hand, religion is "a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices". Is not the belief of the absence of a supreme being a religion? After all there's no evidence to prove none exists. And on the other hand, there's the meaning: "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith".

Seems pretty clear that any true activist could be said to treat their cause as a religion. And in the case of atheistic Secularists, I think both definitions hold true.

And from the context I think it is pretty clear that I was stating that the anti-religious Secularist movement is being pushed forward with a religious fervor.”

“is there not a point in which one persons Freedom of Religion, if allowed to pervade certain aspects of life, starts to impinge on other's "Freedom of Religion"

That would rather depend upon what one means by "pervade certain aspects of life".

I doubt that static displays of inanimate objects would constitute such.

Should something extend to where it truly prevented someone's expression of their own religion, such as a firestation whistle next door to a Mosque going off every day during prayers, then yes it should be reasonably worked out.

Of course one can find extremes and exceptions to anything. Be careful not to let extreme examples be used to suggest that the general case is invalid.”

“I think there are far more important issues as Tom said. Like the fact that the big showdown between Freddy and Jason ended in a mother@%$ing tie!! Son of a @!#$!! Who'da thunk it? Another cliff hanger!”

“No one can fully appreciate exactly what the framers meant when the First Amendment was ratified ...simply because the framers are all dead. However, a substantial number of documents and government practices at that time seem to reinforce the idea that they wanted to ensure government neutrality between religious *factions* -- not between religion and irreligion. The Founders' intent was not to erect an impenetrable wall between church and state, and a convincing case can be made that the American experiment at its fundamental level has historically recognized its source in the transcendent. But the times they are a-changin', and it's been only within the context of more recent social and political realities over the last 60 or so years that interpretations of the First Amendment have resulted in the so-called "separation of church and state" (a phrase - and perhaps a concept as well - that exists nowhere in the First Ammednment). Changing times however, do not re-make history.

Perhaps more importantly, it should be pointed out that dense-wall proponents may be blocking the view looking BOTH ways. If the so-called "wall" must not be breached, the government finds itself in an ever more precarious position of increasing regulation of religious speech. If God is dead in the public sphere, somebody's gotta take his place, and when government expands speech regulations in order to micromanage ethics, we mustn't be surprised later to find moral relativism rearing its fire-breathing ugly head and scorching everyone's a$$es. Followed to its logical conclusion, when government is forced to play God, the so-called "wall of separation" may actually produce the opposite of what it claims to ensure.

From another perspective, it's curious how liberals seem to have no problem with people of religion who offer(ed) belief-driven support and action for such things as the civil rights movement, anti-war protests, immorality of nuclear weapons, the death penalty, etc. Then turn around and attack conservatives as "right wing religious extremists" when faith informs THEIR views. Why do Martin Luther King commemorations on public lands get a free pass when they fuse personal religious views to a certain concept of good government, while the faith-informed positions of a judge in Alabama get attacked as an offense, or a threat to the Republic? It's a double standard ...hypocrisy beyond belief (pun intended). If sculptural works (kitchy as this particular one is!) are to be banned from courthouses because of their religious content, why not also start removing large numbers of works from the National Gallery of Art because of the artists' religious bias?! After all, somebody just might get offeneded!

Sure, some people might be offended by a rock depicting the Decalogue, but offensive expression is often just as much protected by the First Amendment as is that which is more to our liking. In the true sense of the term, "tolerance" means that we find ways of putting up with at least some of the things we disapprove. Liberals ought to take a swallow of their own medicine now and then.

The government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ...BUT it is also forbidden to prohibit the free exercise thereof. Strict separationists seem to give only lip service to the second part of that statement. Of course, at the opposite end, others appear to use the Constitution and related documents to try to impose some dominant version of a national religion. Inherent in the First Amendment lies a great tension, and the controversy has certainly generated a lot of noise over the last 60 or so years; and it's especially loud toward the extremes. One of the responsibilities of good government is to maintain the religious principles upon which it was built, while somehow maintaining religious neutrality. Easier said than done. Somewhere between the extremes is probably where the solution lies, and we must find the balance. Democracy is hard.

Rather than being a dense wall, maybe the First Amendment is more like a traffic signal at a busy intersection, where alternating traffic flow is accomodated in order for everyone to arrive safely at their destinations.

Personally, I think Judge Moore and his supporters ougtta back off a little and try to work this out through the judicial system. But to order the Ten Commandments removed from public view is a clear violation of that oft-ignored second part of the Establishment clause, "...nor the free exercise thereof."

My $.02”

“1. You have a misunderstanding of the term ad hominem. I can make fun of your idea all I want without it being ad hom. If I dismiss it because I don't like YOU, then that is an ad hom.

2. I'll say it again, you seem to have missed/ignored it the first time: Secularism is not religion. You do injustice to a number of christian secularists by saying so, as Violin has pointed out. Also, the origins of secularism come from christian beginnings.

3. Trying to define secularism as a religion also trips across its own circular logic, which from other threads I see you are fond of. An Anti-religion religion?

People may choose not to be secular in their personal lives - that is their right, and they may even be making the correct choice. However, it has to be their choice rather than a context which is forced upon them by others. Secularism as a personal philosophy rejects the relevancy of any transcendental beings or values, but secularism as a political and social philosophy rejects the validity of establishing any transcendental beings or values as central to the political and social realm.

The water gets muddy when you try to make the social ideal a personal one. Thereby, attesting that zeal toward secularism makes it a religion is akin to saying all lawyers' religion is law, or all doctors' religion is medicine.

It is a political and social philosophy based on law, not necessarily rejecting God, but not recognizing any particular religion as right. Just like the constitution says.”

“M silver's argument is so weak as to be nothing more than a rant.”

“1. You have a misunderstanding of the term ad hominem. I can make fun of your idea all I want without it being ad hom.

Let me respectfully suggest that it is you who apply too narrow a definition for ad hominem. Please see Merriam-Webster where you will find it refers not only to an attack on ones person but also "appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect." Therefore, attacks which belittle or make fun of a statement without presenting any sort of intellectual rebuttal or counter-argument fall under the more modern definition.

Regarding your second point -- I see your point and understand where you are coming from. Again we differ in terms of word usage. Where you choose broad, I choose narrow and vice versa.

Anyway, they've finally finished the floor. Time to go put the furniture back and begin the daunting task of putting back together the entertainment center. Attempting to remember where everything goes is a daunting task at best!”

“You know a thread has outlasted it's usefulness when the dictionaries come out. LOL!”

“LOL with Nigal

Good point.

Cheers.”

“Yeah. This was a good one. Did anyone change their minds?




...I didn't think so.

Plenty to think about though.”

“I changed my mind. I'm for the ten commandments.

I especially like the coveting ones.”

“Nigal saves the day.”

“I think this stayed a pretty civil debate...noone went nutzo and cussed anyone out..ideas were exchanged, information offered, opinions listened too.

I'm not against the TC...and i'd say let them stay...IF...we could add other displays such as The tablet of Hummnurabi's Code, maybe a statue of Socrates, something by Plutarch, Blackstone, some words by Confussious, or a wall hanging of a Prayer Rug...but we all know that would never happen...it's all history, and shared knowledge that has moved us forward and made us better, why does one part of it have to stand out...why can't we learn from ALL of it...who's to say who is right and who is wrong on any of this...for all we know we could all be going to hell because the supreme being is a giant chicken and KFC has doomed us all”

“I still like pink.....”

“Geez! Nothing like coming back to a thread and finding it too long (imo) to read and catch up on.”

“Gee Buddur, your own thread went out of control?

Oh well, move on,,,,nothing to read here folks.”

“No kidding Budder. Once a thread reaches page 3 I just give up. All the "click click click click" just to find where ya left off is a waste of my time.”

“In light of the many perversions and jokes we send to one another for a
laugh, this is a little different: This is not intended to be a joke, it's
not funny, it's intended to get you thinking.



Billy Graham's daughter was interviewed on the Early Show and Jane Clayson
asked her "How could God let something like this happen?" (regarding the
attacks on Sept. 11). Anne Graham gave an extremely profound and insightful
response. She said "I believe God is deeply saddened by this, just as we are,
but for years we've been telling God to get out of our schools, to get out of
our government and to get out of our lives.



And being the gentleman He is, I believe He has calmly backed out. How can
we expect God to give us His blessing and His protection if we demand He
leave us alone?"




In light of recent events...terrorists attack, school shootings, etc. I
think it started when Madeleine Murray O'Hare (she was murdered, her body
found recently) complained she didn't want prayer in our schools, and we said
OK.





Then someone said you better not read the Bible in school ... the Bible
says thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbor as
yourself. And we said OK.





Then Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they
misbehave because their little personalities would be warped and we might
damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock's son committed suicide). We said an
expert should know what he's talking about. And we said OK.




Then someone said teachers and principals better not discipline our
children when they misbehave. The school administrators said no faculty
member in this school better touch a student when they misbehave because we
don't want any bad publicity, and we surely don't want to be sued (there's a
big difference between disciplining, touching, beating, smacking,
humiliating, kicking, etc.). And we said OK.




Then someone said, let's let our daughters have abortions if they want, and
they won't even have to tell their parents. And we said OK.




Then some wise school board member said, since boys will be boys and
they're going to do it anyway, let's give our sons all the condoms they want
so they can have all the fun they desire, and we won't have to tell their
parents they got them at school. And we said OK.




Then some of our top elected officials said it doesn't matter what we do in
private as long as we do our jobs. Agreeing with them, we said it doesn't
matter to me what anyone, including the President, does in private as long as
I have a job and the economy is good.



Then someone said let's print magazines with pictures of nude women and
call it wholesome, down-to-earth appreciation for the beauty of the female
body. And we said OK.


And then someone else took that appreciation a step further and published
pictures of nude children and then further again by making them available on
the Internet. And we said OK, they're entitled to free speech.


Then the entertainment industry said, let's make TV shows and movies that
promote profanity, violence, and illicit sex. Let's record music that
encourages rape, drugs, murder, suicide, and satanic themes. And we said it's
just entertainment, it has no adverse effect, nobody takes it seriously
anyway, so go right ahead.



Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they
don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill
strangers, their classmates, and themselves.



Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, we can figure it out.
I think it has a great deal to do with "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW."




Funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the
world's going to hell. Funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but
question what the Bible says.






Funny how you can send 'jokes' through e-mail and they spread like wildfire
but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice
about sharing.



Funny how lewd, crude, vulgar and obscene articles pass freely through
cyberspace, but public discussion of God is suppressed in the school and
workplace.




Are you laughing?






Funny how when you forward this message, you will not send it to many on
your address list because you're not sure what they believe, or what they
WILL think of you for sending it. Funny how we can be more worried about what
other people think of us than what God thinks of us.




Pass it on if you think it has merit. If not then just discard it... no one
will know you did. But, if you discard this thought process, don't sit back
and complain about what bad shape the world is in!”

“"[W]here is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if
the sense of religious obligation deserts the oaths...?" --George
Washington”

“"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."
-George Washington”

“stratdewd...

Thanks for sharing the copy-and-paste. Basically good stuff there, but some critical innacruracies need to be pointed out. Check out...

Urban Legends Reference Pages: "Where Is God?"

I wonder how many other "facts" in the cut-and-paste are distorted?”

“Well, hot doggie! That didn't work. Try this one instead >>>

Okay, so I messed up - go ahead and shoot me why dontcya?

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/wheregod.htm”

“Now that is strange!!!!


I don't want any coupons.

????

8)”

“I find Strat’s cut and paste a perfect example of one of the worst religious theologies I can think of…the theology of guilt. We don’t require kids to pray in school so G-d let’s jets fly into the twin towers? Sometimes bad things happen. That’s life. While I do believe in divine intervention I don’t believe in a puppet master G-d. We are not on our own but we do have free will and moral latitude to make life what we will.”

“I was going to ask what the church has to do with coopons. LOL!”

“Nigal...

Crappy theology notwithstanding, sometimes guilt can be a good thing.”

“Stratdewd's cut and paste kinda sounds zippy, but is dead wrong. Spock's son didn't commit suicide. Spock's kids are alive.

The US and the world have been subject to tons of disasters - many with more than a few thousand killed. Think of the Civil War, or the number of American servicemen who died in Vietnam.

People like to bash Michael Moore for being intemperate, but at least he didn't claim 9/11 was God's vengeance on America for accepting the rule of an illegitimate president.”

“FYI: Here is the interview with the actual words of Anne Graham Lotz:

http://www.cbsnews.com/earlyshow/healthwatch/healthnews/20010913terror_spiritual.shtml”

“I thought George and Barb were married....”

“Do you want your church run by Georgie boy? Do you want your country run by Jerry Falwell?

Separation of church and state is a good idea.”

“Of course it is! for just that reason. It was meant to keep this country from being run by any one religous group or person that would ban the citizens from having their own religon. Not so every detail that remotley suggests support of a religon to be removed from any public place. When the government begins to limit what someone can believe then something needs to be done.”

“Howitzer: How does the government limit what one can believe?”

“ok, it can't get in your head, but it certainly can punish you for expresing your belifs.”

“People like to bash Michael Moore for being intemperate, but at least he didn't claim 9/11 was God's vengeance on America for accepting the rule of an illegitimate president."
pedxing

no, he practically claimed bush flew the planes by remote controll....great roll model

i think both sides were actually wrong here. i don't think it's that big of a deal about this monument but you watch ...."in God we trust" on our money will be the next target. it just seems bizarre to me. it seems to have become vouge to undo Christianity, which is mostly a conservative school of thought. it's not about religion at all; it's about legislating by judiciating in order to steer the country to the left, by force, because the country will not vote that way. that's why libs are blocking all of bush's appointees.

Nigal, why do you spell God with a - ? just wondering.”

“"no, he practically claimed bush flew the planes by remote controll....great roll model"
Stratdewd...

1) Interesting, no comment on the errors he repeats.
2) Could anyone tell me where exactly did Michael Moore practically claim that?
3) I didn't hold him up as a roll model (or a role model, for that matter). I see him as sort of a liberal equivalent to Coulter, i.e. he offers more than a little hyperbole.”

“Zealots

Now I don't want to get off on a rant here, but if religion is the opiate of the masses, then religious zealots are the crack addicts.

The great struggle in the world right now is not between Islam and the West, or between wealthy nations and poor ones. It's between religious tolerance and religious fanaticism. It's between the notion of God as a warm, loving, father figure like Bing Crosby in "The Bells of St. Mary's," and an angry, vengeful, frightening one like Bing Crosby in real life.

Part of the problem is that the doctrine of many religions requires believers to constantly recruit new members. Hey, can't I even go to the Home Depot without some holy-roller accosting me with his prayer pamphlets and spiritual pie charts in the hopes of saving my soul? Listen, Marjo, let me save you some time. I'm in show business. My soul took the redeye outta here years ago.

Dangerous though they are, thankfully, most religious zealots are easy to spot. It's the twitchy cabbie with the monobrow who seems a little too eager to take you to the airport, it's the Christian mommy making s'mores at the book-burning, and it's the slack-jawed weekend bow-hunter who sees an abortion clinic, and flies into a spittle-flecked rage like Bobby Knight getting cut off on the freeway.

Most religious zealots start out simply as people devastated by tragic circumstances and left groping for answers. And that unfortunate point of departure perpetually clouds their judgement. You're a zealot if you can't see the blinding irony inherent in using force to convince other people that your belief about the unknowable is more accurate than their belief in the unknowable. I'm pretty sure the Donner party wasn't even that misguided.

Some religious zealots act like the code of morality they claim to be upholding can be temporarily shelved when it gets in the way of their more immediate goals. Like these supposed "pro-lifers" who kill doctors. Hey, we may not all agree on when life begins, but we sure as #&%!$ do agree on when it ends. It's not called the "Ten Commandments And One Hundred Footnotes."

Why is it that when applied to religion, the word "Fundamentalist" almost always takes on a meaning completely opposite of the commonly accepted one? I mean how do you get the word "fun damental" when you're looking at a tattooed, pot-bellied chain-smoker whipping a hissing rattle snake around like Prince's microphone cord while screaming in unintelligible tongues like a Ubange warrior with Tourette's Syndrome?

Nowadays, the Taliban lea d off the "Who's no longer who" of religious zealots. These are the guys who celebrate by firing guns into the air while screaming "God is Great," which if you think about it, is a pretty #&%!$ed up way of showing your appreciation to the beloved entity re siding in the Heavens. "Sorry I wasn't able to help out with that flood folks, but I was pinned down by crossfire because some #&%!$'s goat broke a fever."

These days, the Boss Hawg of the Christian right is the Reverend Jerry Falwell, a man whose ass is as wide as his mind is narrow. Hey, Jerry --If you get any bigger, Hindus are going to start worshipping you. There's a difference between following Jesus and stalking him.

There are people on earth who start cults by claiming to be gods or have a direct link to them. Before you give up your entire life to follow them, check out their resumes and see how one summer they went from a clerk at Pep Boy's to a deity named MAN-MOE-JACK after being laid off for shoplifting fir tree air fresheners.

Exp erts warn that a cult transforms from the merely oddball to the potentially dangerous when it begins to display such warning signs as a belief in the close proximity of an apocolypse, and the desire to trigger that apocolypse through violent and destructi ve acts. If that's too much to remember, just try my simple tip: the instant someone tells you that God wants you to cut off your balls, get the hell out of there. Trust me. I've spoken to God, and he doesn't want you to cut off your balls. The most he wo uld possibly ask is that you occasionally lower them into a bowling ball cleaner and buff them to glossy shine.

Its perfectly understandable to discover the roots of your religion and want to share it with everyone you meet. By the same token please und erstand the basic tenets of my religion which specifically proscribe that should you knock on my door, corner me on an elevator, or sit next to me on a flight yammering on and on about how your way is the right way I am morally obligated by the elderes of my church to tell you to shut the #&%!$ up. Can I get an Amen?

Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
-Dennis Miller”

“"Nigal, why do you spell God with a - ? just wondering."

The name of G-d or any pseudonym of it isn’t written out fully that it could be thrown away, deleted or disrespected. It’s no real sin, just a sign of respect.”

“For those who did not read Ed Carnes opinion delivered in the 11th Circuit, you should.

It is well written, defines the law on the subject fairly clearly, and states in no uncertain terms that the Justice Moore will follow the law.”

“This is for chil1 who said he "was both a Christian and a Mason". Impossible. Masonry is a secret society based on the so-called "ancient mysteries", which are all Pagan in orgin. Is that why he opposes the Ten Commandments from being displayed? God's Word always offends sinners and those lost in darkness. Masons are lost in darkness and need to be "saved". Of course this will offend most everyone here on this board but who cares. I speak the truth and lie not, with God as my witness. Even the Book of Mormon speaks about "secret combinations" whose founder is the devil.”

“It's more amussing than offensive oh great holder of the ultimate truth.”

“I hear the only way to save a Mason is to hold him down and tickle the demons out of him.

This is now your task, Ohio Hiker, if you so choose to accept it.”

“Hell, Ohio Hiker, if you want to try Buddur method you won't even have to come to Memphis. I will come to where ever you are and let you have a shot at it.”

“"We've got a 440 Hemi, half a pack of ciggaretts, a full tank of gas and we're on a mission from G-d.".”

“Question. Was our country founded upon freedom, or religion?”

“I thought it was found on a Rock.”

“freedom, including freedom of religion.”

“Buddha - Both and then some, however, it's been taken by the throat and gang banged into submission.”