Playaa December 14, 2005 Share Playaa Member December 14, 2005 It is a bit odd that conservatives want the judean christian views to become law. I hear people complaing abot "no prayer in schools!!!"but don't want islamic prayers being taught to their children. Aug <{POST_SNAPBACK}> word some people (especially people who use God as an excuse) are jacked up. God is Love. that's all I got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Preacher December 29, 2005 Share Preacher Member December 29, 2005 Well the freedom of religeon we have in our constitution was really freedom from State sanctioned religeon. This is to say that it was freedom to worship the Christian God. I know this ruffles some of you democratic/liberal types but it's the truth. If it wasn't true then why was witchcraft and other beliefs not allowed? See our founding fathers were all professed Christians. This does not mean they were perfect any more than I am, but it does shed light on why they set things up the way they did and it also provides context for what was put down in our Bill of Rights and Constitution. All that being said we can have prayer in schools without the need to force a particular belief system on anyone. I had a teacher tell my daughter (10) that it was a violation of the constitution to bring her Bible to school! First off what an idiot since the first schools in the U.S. included the Bible as a text book.Most of the better univercities in the US still consider Christian Theology to be worthy of having degrees and post graduate degrees available. Long story short I told them I would be glad to get a lawyer if they wished to persecute my child because of her religieon and they decided to back me instead of the teacher. I'm not one of those pastors that trys to guilt people or scare people into becoming a Christian. I prefer to show them who I am, what I believe and offer kindness and reason instead of pointed fingers and a scowl. The best way to be "tollerant" is not to just let anything be put on our kids but to leave religion to the parents and clergy and teaching to the teachers. I do not feel it necessary for my kids teacher to tell him/her what is moral or right. That's my job. I also do not want them telling them what is truth, when it comes to religeon. Again that's my job. I feel evolution and creation should be taught so that intelligence can make the decision rather than teachers with agendas. God is love and that's why bad people have yet to win against Him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auggybendoggy January 19, 2006 Share auggybendoggy Member January 19, 2006 Well the freedom of religeon we have in our constitution was really freedom from State sanctioned religeon. This is to say that it was freedom to worship the Christian God. I know this ruffles some of you democratic/liberal types but it's the truth. If it wasn't true then why was witchcraft and other beliefs not allowed? simply because it was not allowed does it mean is was in accordance with the constitution. Actually seperation of church and state was implemented to avoid those very resulsts. Puritans didn't want the Gov't telling them how to worhip God. Thus the freedom was to worship God w/o the Govt' being involved which is exactly what right wing wants to do. Now as far as rights I agree but imposing christian law is another. It is your sons or daughters right to carry their bible but it is also the right of the teacher to teach your child to pray to Bhudda. Thus it's a melting pot of different people and religions. Nothing wrong with that. The problem is that people don't want teachers teaching homosexuality to thier children. So like the extreme islamist they say "believe my belief" or die (move out, find another country). eventually people all hate one another. people don't care what the inital intentions of the constitution were, they care about the princaples embedded in them. Auggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duma January 19, 2006 Share duma Member January 19, 2006 (edited) Well the freedom of religeon we have in our constitution was really freedom from State sanctioned religeon. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You couldnt be more wrong. Allow me to quote the amendment before I get into the meaning of the Bill of Rights. Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion... Now, if you look at the first word, it is "Congress." Congress is federal. The 1st amendment was to prevent the federal from making an established religion. It has nothing to do with the state. Further, the bill of rights does nothing for the states. That is right, if you look at the text of the Bill of Rights - as early Supreme Court justices did - the state could violate each and every one of the bill of rights and it would be just fine. Later court trials decided that perhaps some of the bill of rights should keep the states from doing things. However, to this day, states do not have to follow some of the bill of rights. If you really want to get into it, start reading about incorporated bill of rights. As for the rests of Preachers "facts" they have to be taken with a grain of salt - just like the first bit of "facts." Witchcraft... banned... There is (or at least was) no such thing. It was the christian church that started the whole "witchcraft." The people the church was so kind to burn to death were pagans, not witches, and they are the foundation of most of your time-lines, stories, and hate. Finally, it is a bit of hypocrisy to use the founding fathers as a model for using the bible in public schools. The reason being, they came here to get away from religious persecution. It would be a shame that you look at what they tried to escape and suggest that they intended to do the same on the land they had "found." Further, as you so kindly presented, we don't have a national religion. So, what religion would be in the schools? Sorry, but if you want religion in your school system, send your kids to such an institution made for it. Edited January 20, 2006 by duma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auggybendoggy January 20, 2006 Share auggybendoggy Member January 20, 2006 im not as learned as Duma on the details of the constitution or any other law. Only as best as my memory serves. But I have to say Duma furthers my feelings on the subject. Even if they were truly satanist witches does that mean we should burn them at stakes? Simply becauase the great fathers of our contry believe enslaving blacks was permissable scriptually does that mean owning a black or any other person is a good thing. I personally feel legalizing slavery is flat out BAD! if you don't allow other religions then Congrats!!! You've just passed extreme islam 101. Aug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duma January 20, 2006 Share duma Member January 20, 2006 (edited) im not as learned as Duma on the details of the constitution or any other law. Only as best as my memory serves. But I have to say Duma furthers my feelings on the subject. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I just so happen to love my Constitutional law class. I also have a great prof. Simply becauase the great fathers of our contry believe enslaving blacks was permissable scriptually does that mean owning a black or any other person is a good thing. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That isn't completely true. The founding fathers were more towards not having slaves. However, they needed the constitution to pass. There was no way that they could get the southern states to vote it in, if it would remove the right to have slaves. Aricle 4 section 2(No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.) The above is the clause that permitted slaves. However, there is another section that limits the time frame that this clause could exist.... though I can't remember where it is. But more to the point, it was a trade off; they wanted the constitution, so they were willing to give the south their slaves - at least for a while. (And there were a few that were okay with it... though I am not sure of the exact number, nor who they were.) Edited January 20, 2006 by duma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norguard January 20, 2006 Share Norguard Member January 20, 2006 (edited) Satanists are satanists and pagans are pagans... fire is not in the Christian arsenal, though. Never has been. That's not to say that the Crusades, and Inquisitions weren't brutal travesties... ...they were... ...they just weren't right, or founded in any way on the New Testament - you know, the half written for Christians... Another thing you probably don't realize is that as much as the Catholic church was scourging heathen, they were attacking the more liberal front of the church at the same time. You see, at that time, anything to do with the Catholic religion was in Latin... ...only priests, monks and the dignitaries knew how to speak it. What peasant could rightly call their bluff, when all they know is Parisienne or Elizabethan English? ...on top of that, most of the teachings weren't the Bible... ...they were the Cathecism, a rulebook written about the Bible... The Latin Vulgate, as it was, at the time, was inaccurate, and corrupt, and yet, it's what the Catholics had been using for 800 years, as the only legal language to preach to the masses. 100 years prior to that, the scriptures were already available in 500 different languages. There were people working, underground in Scotland, to make the Bible available in English... ...many of them were burned at the stake or otherwise executed as heretics, as well. That doesn't have anything to do with the faith... As far as slaves, I can't see one part in the New Testament where slave ownership is encouraged. In Philemon, Paul welcomes in a runaway slave who has become a Christian - his owner is also a Christian. Paul tells the owner not to accept the slave back not as a slave, but as a fellow Christian... ...he doesn't go further into detail than that, but I don't think the message was: "All ye in need of rest and comfort, come to me and till my cotton fields, and I will give you cramped lodging and slop for food." And I don't agree with the US's style of much of anything, including the take on Christianity... ...just about everywhere else in the world, Christianity is a personal thing... ...faith is a personal issue... ...what you did with your gifts and your calling, for the church was a personal thing. There are now a zillion denominations, all quibbling over tiny little things, when all they have to do is agree on the big ones, instead. ...most of them are in the US, where people can afford to spend so much time worrying about exactly how everybody else prays. I think if they can touch on Islam and Judaism in a world religion course, they should also touch on Christianity. I think that if you're teaching philosophy, the letters of Paul and the teachings of Jesus are just as relevant as those of Sophoclese and Ghandi. Other than that, if you want your kids to have an hour of Bible schooling every day, send them to Bible school. And DJ, I still say that most of the backlash you percieve against the church is because the USA has become so very, very progressive in the past generation and a half. The baby boomers really did mark a lot of change in America - before that, most suburban life really was rather close-knit, moral and kinda "Leave it to Beaver"... ...even during the war. ...so it's not until Rock Hudson and AIDS and Maddonna and the sex, drugs and rock'n'roll lifestyle that the church in the US even HAD to take a stance on values as a whole (I'm not talking about being taught in-school)... ...and every decade it seems the US pioneers a new type of people who have special needs, and the boundaries will be pushed. On one end, you see the progressives, who want to segregate these new needs, and come up with rules for them. On the other, you have people who are traditional, wondering why we even need to be treated differently to begin with. Church related change: There are now homosexual denominations of Christianity - that is, churches who see that as a viable and holy lifestyle... can you blame the church for fighting that one? Non-Church related change: Vancouver was one of the first cities in North America with clinics set up just so junkies could get clean needles, and get their fix in a warm, sanitary place. ...okay, so the people have problems, but shouldn't they be problems that should be fixed? Shouldn't fighting rampant drug use, and helping people from their addictions so they can start rebuilding their lives be the call of order, and not giving them a heated, furnished lounge, free of charge, or of legal process? These are the things that usually come to my mind when I see the church getting into politics... neither of these things are things that the church has changed on. They didn't suddenly take a vote and decide on these things... ...it was the rest of the society that did. Personally, I don't care what the federal laws are about outside influence. ...the faith I back is the one on the streets. The one in the homes. Daniel's faith in the face of Nebuchanezzar. John Wycliffe's, Jon Hus' and Martin Luther's in the face of the Catholic church. The one in the hearts - not the politik with the zealot congregation waiting to make him money, because they think he's right. Guh. Edited January 20, 2006 by Norguard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Preacher January 30, 2006 Share Preacher Member January 30, 2006 (edited) Ok got some time now. First of all Norg seams to have a rough attitude towards us Americans, wow. I have a few comments: I love historical stuff so thanks for relaying the Biblical history of the 15th and 16th centuries there. Good stuff prior to the protestant reformation. Slavery in Biblical times was a very different thing than slavery in American history. There were (for the most part) 2 ways to become a slave. Being conquered by another nation or selling yourself into slavery. This differs from the African slave trade because the people we had as slaves were rounded up like cattle and kidnapped from their homes for proffit. Noone conquered their people and none of them sold themselves. I hold that it was a dark patch in American history. The whole argument of the separation of church and state is goofy to me, because it was never "Established" and is not in the constitution. The quote above "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" follows exactly what I said before, Church was to be kept out of the hands of the government. We can argue symantics all day, the fact of modern life is that secular humanism rules in most courts and lawmakers minds. This is the strongest movement to destroy not just the teaching but the credibility of what 93% of the U.S. citizenry believe. That God created the heavens and the Earth. Beyond that 82% profess to be some type of Christian. These statistics say what you don't hear from the other 7-18% and that is that anyone dumb enough to believe in a providential God is deserving of a boot to the head for their incompetance. As far as denominations fighting each other, it is a sad thing indeed. I have friends both in Catholocism and protestant faith based churches. I see what the scripture says about other people doing stuff different than us and it is pretty plain. Jesus says "If they are not against us then they are for us" This was in responce to the disciples when the came to Jesus and said there were other folks doing good stuff in Jesus name. There is always the selfish desire to tell everyone that you have the corner on truth. While I disagree with some stuff different churches do, I am not bold enough to claim to know all. I have worked with Methodist, baptist, Lutheren, Catholic and many other churches. I believe strongly and whole heartedly that we were never meant to separate into "denominations" because the word itself means division and Jesus was here for unity. On my website for my old church I posted a statement that said basically "As soon as we reach everyone with the message of Jesus then we can work out the details of dynamics or procedure. Like Billy Graham once said " I'm not here to preach the doctines of a church, I'm here to tell people about Jesus. Right now I work with an Assembly of God church, but 2 years ago I had a run-in with an AOG pastor. He was an idiot but I don't blame AOG for it. Likewise, people get offended from a pastor or Christian and leave church. This only punishes them because they are the ones without the foundation of the Bible in their lives anymore. "You've just passed extreme islam 101." I didn't say my way is the only way to heaven, but Jesus did say "None will get to Father (God) except through Me (Jesus). I'm not advocation burning Muslims at the stake or witches for that matter. How will that help people to see the Love of Christ? Instead I believe (proactive defence against terrorism withstanding) in loving people into the Kingdom of God not persecuting them till they relent. See we don't win the support of the Iraqi people by blowing up the radical extremists, we do it by turning the lights on and building schools or providing a sence of security when they walk down the street. Yeah there still are "hot zones" in Iraq and yeah the crazies still blow themselves up to kill a few Israelis all the time, but in general the Afghani people and the Iraqi people are not just better off by our standards, they feel safer and are thankful we removed evil folks from their leadership. You don't hear about this stuff on CNN but talk to someone who's been over there building hospitals and installing water purification systems over there. I can't help the worldwide perspective of how the U.S. is viewed except to say Americans love their country, we love freedom so much we can't tand to see the oppression of the weak by the evil and we try to lend a hand every chance we get. Look at the budget we have for foriegn aid. What does this do for us? Most countries still hate our guts but when they are in need they know we'll still be there to help. If Russia decided to invade Canada from the North who would be the first call? Ol George would be the first to be asked for help and you know what, he would help. If China invades Russia they'ld call us for help too. We got a bad rep from the U.N. for going into Iraq this time around but the U.N. is so corrupt it should be disbanded. Heck the whole charter was to unite against the Soviet nations, which is no longer a threat but members of the U.N. lol It's a crazy world we live in today. We have a no drug policy and are helping them get needles. We have rules that say if you are homosexual you can't give blood because it's a medically unsafe lifestyle, but we have folks pushing to allow special considerations for it. It's not usually very popular to stand for what is right and people are always trying to undermine what is right for what they want or for what is more conveinient. The different churches that have allowed corruption to invade like a cancer will answer to God. I don't presume to be their judge, because it aint my job. I do say however that the Bible is clear that homosexuality is an abomination to God( that's a bad thing to be) so any "Christian" who advocates the lifestyle of a homosexual is either decieved or a deciever. God bless you all Edited January 31, 2006 by Preacher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duma February 9, 2006 Share duma Member February 9, 2006 The whole argument of the separation of church and state is goofy to me, because it was never "Established" and is not in the constitution. What? It was never established because it is in the Constitution. The quote above "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" follows exactly what I said before, Church was to be kept out of the hands of the government. We can argue symantics all day, Actually you said: Well the freedom of religeon we have in our constitution was really freedom from State sanctioned religeon. This is to say that it was freedom to worship the Christian God. I know this ruffles some of you democratic/liberal types but it's the truth. If it wasn't true then why was witchcraft and other beliefs not allowed? To which I replied about it really being a federal thing when it was written (nothing to do with the states), and further that you were wrong about it being about the right to worship christ. ....the fact of modern life is that secular humanism rules in most courts and lawmakers minds. This is the strongest movement to destroy not just the teaching but the credibility of what 93% of the U.S. citizenry believe. That God created the heavens and the Earth. Beyond that 82% profess to be some type of Christian. These statistics say what you don't hear from the other 7-18% and that is that anyone dumb enough to believe in a providential God is deserving of a boot to the head for their incompetance. There was a point when people believed the earth was flat. I would guess that the percent who believed it, was about 93%. Does that make the other people wrong for knowing that it wasn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auggybendoggy February 12, 2006 Share auggybendoggy Member February 12, 2006 (edited) >>Slavery in Biblical times was a very different thing than slavery in American history. There were (for the most part) 2 ways to become a slave. Being conquered by another nation or selling yourself into slavery. This differs from the African slave trade because the people we had as slaves were rounded up like cattle and kidnapped from their homes for proffit. Noone conquered their people and none of them sold themselves. I hold that it was a dark patch in American history.<< does conquering them and making them slaves make slavery permissable. How bout Exodus when in the law is states ..."if a slave is beaten to near the point of death but the slave does not die the owner shall not be punished since the slave is his property" my point was no wonder they believed such things and that doesnt make it right. Slavery is flat out evil. It's passages like this that it's hard to understand why God says such things or made such laws. But people take one verse and build a whole ideal out of it. "You've just passed extreme islam 101." I didn't say my way is the only way to heaven, but Jesus did say "None will get to Father (God) except through Me (Jesus). I'm not advocation burning Muslims at the stake or witches for that matter. How will that help people to see the Love of Christ? Instead I believe (proactive defence against terrorism withstanding) in loving people into the Kingdom of God not persecuting them till they relent. See we don't win the support of the Iraqi people by blowing up the radical extremists, we do it by turning the lights on and building schools or providing a sence of security when they walk down the street. Yeah there still are "hot zones" in Iraq and yeah the crazies still blow themselves up to kill a few Israelis all the time, but in general the Afghani people and the Iraqi people are not just better off by our standards, they feel safer and are thankful we removed evil folks from their leadership. You don't hear about this stuff on CNN but talk to someone who's been over there building hospitals and installing water purification systems over there. my point here was that it must be allowed for people to believe as they see fit. As for teachers you seem to want creationism taught but are you ok with the bhuddist theories of the beginnings? How bout islamic? Thats why the church needs to stay out of the public institutions. If they mandate a system of govt. then indeed the church is in charge. If the govt allows a majority vote to rule in a religious issue then once again the church is in the govt. If the govt bows to the church and begins teaching what protestans want then it will only be a matter of time before we all have to speak in tounges because our next pres is pentecostal. Or you will have to sign papers stating you believe calsinism is true because some reformed theologian is in office. Then half the nation is angry and like sunnis and tutsis they begin to hate each other. Keep the govt institutions like class rooms nuetral! another point I might add is that teachers are govt employees. Kids should be allowed to pray as they want...either to Jesus, bhuddua, muhummad, whoever... But the teacher is the one who should not lead prayers nor show favoritism to any particular students. This is where the liberals get mixed up. They want no one praying in school and thats all CRAP! Kids in school are not govt. employees. I can't help the worldwide perspective of how the U.S. is viewed except to say Americans love their country, we love freedom so much we can't tand to see the oppression of the weak by the evil and we try to lend a hand every chance we get. Look at the budget we have for foriegn aid. What does this do for us? Most countries still hate our guts but when they are in need they know we'll still be there to help. If Russia decided to invade Canada from the North who would be the first call? Ol George would be the first to be asked for help and you know what, he would help. If China invades Russia they'ld call us for help too. We got a bad rep from the U.N. for going into Iraq this time around but the U.N. is so corrupt it should be disbanded. Heck the whole charter was to unite against the Soviet nations, which is no longer a threat but members of the U.N. lol I agree. I have freinds who are iranian and they have family in iraq and they have shared with me how happy they are saddam was found. They expressed that their family in iraq was extremely happy the u.s. was there. And it is true that NO OTHER country aids like we do. True we should do more, I agree...rowanda and so on. But overall who dares point a finger at the u.s. It's a crazy world we live in today. We have a no drug policy and are helping them get needles. We have rules that say if you are homosexual you can't give blood because it's a medically unsafe lifestyle, but we have folks pushing to allow special considerations for it. It's not usually very popular to stand for what is right and people are always trying to undermine what is right for what they want or for what is more conveinient. The different churches that have allowed corruption to invade like a cancer will answer to God. I don't presume to be their judge, because it aint my job. I do say however that the Bible is clear that homosexuality is an abomination to God( that's a bad thing to be) so any "Christian" who advocates the lifestyle of a homosexual is either decieved or a deciever. I disagree here. I don't believe homosexuality is any different than hetrosexuality. People seem to think a guy who sleeps with a guy is worse than a guy who sleeps with a girl. Whats the different. I don't recall homosexuality being called a abomination. The usual response is non-manogomous. So I'm not ready to judge all homosexuals. I think unbridled control of sex (hetro, homo) is all bad before God. The big question is can 2 of the same sex be commited in a monogomous relationship. I'm not ready to subscribe to that either. I have not done a full blown study on it but from my recollection I believe homosex, is frowned on in the scripture. But my point is that I agree with Kieth Green..."Homosexuality is the same as hetro, its with the wrong person at the wrong time...only under marraige is sexuality permitted". and what about fallinf in love w/o the sex? Thats another issue they raise? OH MAN BROKEBACK.... no i don't want to see it hahahahaha hahahahahah my friend at worked asked me...you know they don't have no ky on the prarie, I think they just cracked open a cactus..... GROSS! God bless you all Edited February 12, 2006 by auggybendoggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discom February 24, 2006 Share discom Member February 24, 2006 (edited) EDIT: *deletes everything i wrote i forgot to read the second page, oops Edited February 24, 2006 by discombobulated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.