Restore the Constitution and Our Religious Liberty!

[JudgeNot]

Ebia says:

I wasn't "dis"ing anyone.  I mealy said it's incomprehensible to the rest of us that you would put that level of confidence in any group of people, however impecable their credentials.

Hmm.  We put a lot of confidence in Church leaders – particularly the early ones, you know – that "group of people" called the disciples.  
It is actually our founder's wisdom we Americans hold in such high regard.  Not necessarily the individuals themselves.

The US consitution isn't the bible, and those men weren't infalliable.

No it isn’t the Bible.  But the Bible was used to write it.  I didn’t say they were infallible.  They were human.  Only God is infallible.

but opinion polls are notoriously unreliable.

Yes – unreliable.  That’s why everyone keeps using them.

I'm not an American, but I'm not an idiot.

Nope.  I’m not a name caller, and I didn’t call you an idiot.  I’m sure you know about as much of American History and politics as I know of Australian History and politics – in other words, I certainly wouldn’t even pretend to be able to debate you about your country’s history and policies.  That would be kind of like what that G. Polya person says is foolish, huh.

I don't doubt it, but men have had God "in their minds and hearts" and gone on to write some extreamly falliable documents.

Only God is infallible.  However, if you are calling the US Constitution “fallible” then you are on the verge of “dissing” the US.  Are the governing documents in your country better?  Are you worried about the speck in someone else’s eye while you have… well, you get my point.  That also gets back to what that G. Polya person says.

Ebia, I know I’m running the risk of sounding ‘highbrow’ by saying this – but you and I better stick to debating the Bible where we are on more even footing.  When it comes to the US Constitution I am a heavy weight and you don’t qualify to be a flyweight.  I’ve spent years studying the Constitution and the men who wrote it.  You've spent... minutes?

Yours in Christ,
JudgeNot  

[JudgeNot]

Greetings Alnilam,

You said:

I would carry the interpretation of the establishment clause a little further to say that government is not to favor (or dis-favor) one or more religions over others.  In essence, government is to be neutral regarding religion.  Do you agree?

Yes – pretty close.  The founders made very certain that what they wrote could not be left open to a lot of debate.  In other words, they pretty much said what they meant without getting too wordy.  The problem is that back then, the religion of Atheism was very, very small.  In fact, the founders probably didn’t even recognize it as a religion.  Today, we know it to be a religion.  That’s the problem – the Religion of Atheism is quickly becoming the “Official Government Religion” which is against the constitution.

There are limits to "free" speach but I do not feel these limits would include the mention of God, but would deal with things like libel for example.  So far, I do not see the mention of God being outlawed or repressed in and on its' own.  If you would provide one or more examples we could discuss it (them).

 
Valedictorians are forbidden from thanking God for their successes at High School graduations.  Children are forbidden to mention Jesus at school during Christmas time.  Pastors are forbidden to speak on anything political (the morals of candidates or bills for example) from the pulpit lest the IRS take their Church’s funds.  The Ten Commandments being removed from courthouses.  The list is almost endless.  I could probably give you hundreds of real-life examples.

I do not find this bill to be a good one for a number of reasons.  For one, it violates the checks and balances our founding fathers intended.  Eliminating past cases from being used as precedent seems a very bad thing.

Actually – deep in my heart, I don’t either.  I abhor anyone “messing with” the constitution.  What we need to do, as Americans, is to make sure we vote people into office that will quit reading fantasy into the Framer’s words and take them at face value.  As I said in a previous post; the founders were very, very careful to write the constitution in such a way as very little could be left open for debate.  But God-haters always find a way and an audience.  Lawyers will argue anything for a fee.  

If you read the bill I'm sure you can imagine situations where it could "backfire" on its' supporters.

Yep.  You are right on the money with that statement.  Look how the First Amendment, even though it is written quite plainly, has backfired!  Shoot, look at the Second Amendment!  (You get it?  “Shoot”…”Second Amendment”???  Ha-ha; I still kill me!)  

Your brother in HIM!
JudgeNot

[Reba]

wow judge i am sorry you divorced me.
 

A statesman!  Sir Statemen Judge

[JudgeNot]

Reba, just for you:


PS:  YOU divorced ME

[ebia]

Ebia says:

I wasn't "dis"ing anyone.  I mealy said it's incomprehensible to the rest of us that you would put that level of confidence in any group of people, however impecable their credentials.

Hmm.  We put a lot of confidence in Church leaders – particularly the early ones, you know – that "group of people" called the disciples.  
It is actually our founder's wisdom we Americans hold in such high regard.  Not necessarily the individuals themselves.

In which case you need to support that without reference to the individuals.  The only reason for regarding their wisdom in high regard that has been given so far IS based on who the individuals were.

The US consitution isn't the bible, and those men weren't infalliable.

No it isn’t the Bible.  But the Bible was used to write it.  I didn’t say they were infallible.  They were human.  Only God is infallible.

You seem, from an outsiders perspective, to treat it with a level of regard non-American Christians would reserve for the bible.

but opinion polls are notoriously unreliable.

Yes – unreliable.  That’s why everyone keeps using them.

Yes - mostly by people who want to "prove" a conclusion that they have already decided upon.  And the media, who don't care what the conclusion is or how reliable, as long as it makes a good story.

I'm not an American, but I'm not an idiot.

Nope.  I’m not a name caller, and I didn’t call you an idiot.  

Didn't think you were.

I’m sure you know about as much of American History and politics as I know of Australian History and politics – in other words, I certainly wouldn’t even pretend to be able to debate you about your country’s history and policies.  That would be kind of like what that G. Polya person says is foolish, huh.

I could be wrong, but I suspect I know quite a bit more about American history and politics than you (or virtually anyone outside Oz) knows about Australia's.  America's politics affect the world, Australia's (on the whole) don't.   According to one or two of those polls you like, a lot of American's don't even know the difference between Austria and Australia (not that I'm putting anyone here in that category), whereas I doubt there are more than a handful of people in the world who don't know something about America.

I don't doubt it, but men have had God "in their minds and hearts" and gone on to write some extreamly falliable documents.

Only God is infallible.  However, if you are calling the US Constitution “fallible” then you are on the verge of “dissing” the US.  

No I'm not.  I'm saying that, however good it is, it could be better.

Are the governing documents in your country better?  

I doubt it.  No-one - seriously no-one - outside America holds their documents in that sort of regard.

Ebia, I know I’m running the risk of sounding ‘highbrow’ by saying this – but you and I better stick to debating the Bible where we are on more even footing.  

I'll debate where I choose, thanks.  You may know your facts when it comes to your consititution, but facts aren't wisdom.

When it comes to the US Constitution I am a heavy weight and you don’t qualify to be a flyweight.  I’ve spent years studying the Constitution and the men who wrote it.

I thought you said that the qualities of the individuals who wrote it weren't relevent, make your mind up.

[nChrist]

Ebia:
You might try to sound like you mean that.

LOL, Ebia!
If this forum had sound I'm certain you would hear the sincerity in my voice.    

Oklahoma Howdy to JudgeNot,

   Brother, you must remember that morals, God, and the Holy Bible are foreign subjects to some folks. I'm glad to hear about your lengthy study of the founding of America. I have done the same, and I'm convinced the founding fathers would start another revolution if they saw what happened to their dream.

Judge, after lengthy thought for the last 30 seconds, I've decided that I could care less what people from other countries think about what Christians want or don't want in America. I would take it one step further and say that I could care less what the children of darkness want for America. Christians are still the majority here, and we will vote however we wish.

Love In Christ,
Tom

[nChrist]

The way Americans seem to regard those who originally wrote your Constitution as though they were divinely inspired is incomprehensible to the rest of the world non-Christians and those who are ignorant of America's founding, what America was for 200 years, and what the majority want it to be again.

Ebia,

Now it's accurate, including the spelling of Constitution. I tried to ignore the bad grammar.

[Alnilam]

Hello JudgeNot,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.  Glad to see we are in general agreement on the first ammendment, and I did appreciate your 2nd ammendment humor.  I guess the question I have to ask now is whether a non-mention of God by government constitutes a promotion of atheism, or, as I would like to think, a sign of respect and sensitivity for all those (not just atheists) who do not share our monotheistic belief ?

Thank you for the examples.  I'm not familiar with the first three, but don't doubt you.  But without having any background I'd feel better not commenting at this time.

The 10 Commandment issue is a good one though.  I've read about cases in Indiana, Wisconsin, Alabama and recently Minnesota.  To be fair, the issue in Deluth has not gone to any court and probably will not do so.  AFAIK, the courts treat each case individually.  Sometimes the commandments were left in place, sometimes not.  The issue in Alabama (Roy Moore) probably got the most media attention.  It might have been better if SCOTUS did hear the appeal (they refused without comment), but I think I understand why they did so.  Did you have a particular case in mind ?

The Newdow case is also an interesting one, questioning the words "under God" in the PoA.  The SCOTUS heard arguments 2 days ago (March 24).  There are religious groups supporting both sides, emotions are running a little high (by court standards anyway), and one justice (Scalia) has recused himself, allowing for a 4-4 tie.  I'm pretty sure a decision either way will not effect me personally, but I am hoping the court does not dismiss the case based on Newdows standing.

God Bless

Alnilam

[ebia]

Judge, after lengthy thought for the last 30 seconds, I've decided that I could care less what people from other countries think about what Christians want or don't want in America.

If this were really true, you wouldn't have felt the need to respond to my post.  

[nChrist]

Ebia -
If this were really true, you wouldn't have felt the need to respond to my post.  

My post was to JudgeNot, not you. Besides, I have better funny faces than you do.

[BUTCHA]

[/center]

WERE DO YOU FIND THE PICTURES THAT YOU PUT UP FUNNY FACES AND RELIGOUSE ONES , I WANT A PICTURE FOR ME TO.

[Reba]

http://www.gifs.net/animate/giflist.htm
http://www.clicksmilies.com
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Meadows/2080/snows.gifs.html
http://www.oksda.com/resources/graphics.htm

 Here are some  fun 'pictures' i still dont have a nack for using them  there are tons more  OUT THERE

[ebia]

My post was to JudgeNot, not you.

This:

Ebia,

Now it's accurate, including the spelling of Constitution. I tried to ignore the bad grammar.

was to JudgeNot.  I don't thinks so.

Besides, I have better funny faces than you do.

Wow.

[nChrist]

My post was to JudgeNot, not you.

This:

Ebia,

Now it's accurate, including the spelling of Constitution. I tried to ignore the bad grammar.

was to JudgeNot.  I don't thinks so.

Besides, I have better funny faces than you do.

Wow.

Ebster,

Now you are quoting from two different posts. The one you quoted from even had JudgeNot's name in it. You must work harder on being precise. And, YES!, my funny faces are much better.

[nChrist]

[/center]

WERE DO YOU FIND THE PICTURES THAT YOU PUT UP FUNNY FACES AND RELIGOUSE ONES , I WANT A PICTURE FOR ME TO.

Oklahoma Howdy to BUTCHA,

I get a lot of them in emails from friends, family, and through my web site. However, I did a Google search one day for "Animated Smilies", and the first site I went to had hundreds of them.

If you want Christian Graphics, it would depend on what you want. I have about 5 pages of Bible Verse graphics on my web site, and you are welcome to freely use any and all.

http://www.sirinet.net/~blkidps/bibleart.html

For a huge assortment of Christian graphics, I recommend the following Google searches:  "Christian Clipart" and "Christian Smilies".

I haven't been to the sites that Reba recommended, so you might want to go there first.

Love In Christ,
Tom