Since there is NO official religion(thank you founding fathers), I would think that having a religious group meddling in the affairs of the government would be equally as dangerous as having the government meddle in church business.

I don't say this as an aethiest. I say this as an American citizen that sees our country as the proverbial melting pot that it is. Having ANY religious law inspire the laws of the country as a whole would be messy and unfair to those of other or NO religion.

What I see AS an aetheist, here in the buckle of the Bible Belt, are many public displays of Christian religious celebration while companies like Lowes are picketed for buying air time on shows that celebrate OTHER religions. I also see political candidates get picked apart because some don't see their choice of religion as "Christian enough".

With that and the comments we saw combined, I find it hard to believe that Christianity in America is under siege. If anything, it seems to have become a form of cult to some!

quote:

Originally posted by RainbowHed:
Since there is NO official religion(thank you founding fathers), I would think that having a religious group meddling in the affairs of the government would be equally as dangerous as having the government meddle in church business.

Since an establishment of a religion can not be made, laws given that would force you to adhere to the will of one religion can not be. As stated by the Supreme Court in 1878 when taking Jefferson's letter in context, "The rightful purpose of civil government are for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order..." The case this was stated in was because a man (Mormon) brought forth the letter when he wanted to marry more than one woman and he thought it would be successful to get the government to overturn the 1862 Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act...a federal enactment signed into law on July 8, 1862 specifically targeting the Mormons plural marriage belief.

Jefferson also stated, it is usually ignored by the "Separation of Church and State" crowd, that "power to prescribe any religious exercise...must rest with the States".

quote:

Originally posted by RainbowHed:
What I see AS an aetheist, here in the buckle of the Bible Belt, are many public displays of Christian religious celebration while companies like Lowes are picketed for buying air time on shows that celebrate OTHER religions. I also see political candidates get picked apart because some don't see their choice of religion as "Christian enough".

I know, I know, the non-believing few always hold Christians feet to the fire of needing to be infallible...you're going to be disappointed every time. I have a buddy that gave a testimony a few weeks back after he became a pastor of his own church, and he was telling everyone why he backslid twice into his life of drugs 15 years ago...because of "Christians". What made him stay on his track after the third time (which was not due to "Christians") was the pastor of the church I attend. His statement regarding our pastor was "he was the first man that came up to me, shook my hand looked me straight in the eyes and and said, 'glad you are here I am so happy to meet you'. He didn't once look at my long hair, my tattoos, or ear-rings, he looked in my eyes."

It's odd but I don't think we're actually on different sides of this church and state issue. Unless you DO want religious law to control our country, I can say it's a non-confront between us.

I think your Pastor made the difference on a VERY human scale. My wife and I have done something similiar with some "throw away" youth a few years ago. You look'em in the eyes and tell them the truth and let THEM make up their mind if they want the life of slavery or a life of doing things for themselves and others!

I don't REALLY put much stock in the comments that were on the FB page. LIke forums, there are people that will say a lot of stuff via their computer that they wouldn't dare say face to face.

My favorite one was the kill'em and then rape'em. That girl SERIOUSLY had her thong in a bad spot!

Ideally, we could allow religious teachings to stay out of schools and government, but when we do that, anti-religious teachings and practices fill the void. The problem is that people take their athiesm as a religion, and work to impose it on those who disagree.

Are we teaching fact or are we giving sermons, ken?

Churches are for belief in the unprovable. Classrooms are for knowledge that is based on something concrete. They can cohabitate in our society just fine UNTIL the extremists take over. THAT'S the problem!

We have enough problems in the public schools with teaching a whitewashed version of history without adding to the confusion by teaching them something like creationism.

I believe in another realm of existence where beings commonly called "ghosts" can be found. It's enough that I KNOW what I see isn't some chemical high that I'm on because I want to see them. I don't HAVE to beat others over the head with it. I don't think Christians need to either. Religion is for the parents to teach and for the kids to make up their minds about when they get old enough. UNLESS, of course, it's a Christian school.

I support your right to believe and worship as you please. Please do the same for me and others like me. I have no agenda that includes imposing my disbelief on you. It's only when religious belief impacts those that don't feel the same way that my claws come out. To date...I haven't seen any legislation asked for that limits your right to get married because you believe in Jesus. The Supreme Court hasn't, to my knowledge, ordered the arrest of pastors for calling for the death and eventual damnation of people they consider to be "damned". I've been to a few churches where that kind of talk is cheered on.

In OKC, our News Channel Four MIGHT do a small piece on the Gay Pride Parade. If so, it lasts about 30 seconds and is followed by the news crew laughing and chortling. However, an ad for their story about a former Satanic worshiper turned Christian minister played several times during the day and night for the last three weeks. Just another Mike Warnke dog and pony show. If you don't know who that is, he was an exposed fake.

Christians don't have to fear. You're still on top as far as this little aethest can see!

quote:

However, an ad for their story about a former Satanic worshiper turned Christian minister played several times during the day and night for the last three weeks. Just another Mike Warnke dog and pony show. If you don't know who that is, he was an exposed fake.

Yep. Prety bad when you get previews for several days of a "news story."

This guy was "The Devil's assassin" for thirty years before seeing the light but never actually got around to whackin' anybody?

Oh well. He's gonna sell lots of books to the faithful and the local media sure helped out with free publicity.

I SHOULD have taken what I know about the Satanic religion and done this too. I could have made a boatload of money off it. Grow a Van Dyke beard, dress in black and regale the crowds with my stories of bloodletting and pentangles.

Only people can make the devil real.

You're no con artist, RH.

Nope...It's against my "religion" to dupe people for profit.

It's also against my "religion" to dupe people for prophet!

Sorry...had to!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RainbowHed,

quote:

Originally posted by RainbowHed:
It's odd but I don't think we're actually on different sides of this church and state issue. Unless you DO want religious law to control our country, I can say it's a non-confront between us.

I believe on some issues we agree, yes, like when stated by Jefferson, the laws "break out into overt acts against peace and good order". However, where we may disagree, and I am sure of that we do, that when a court house or school has the Ten Commandments on display, I don't believe it is a violation of "church and state". As I set forth here, Jefferson, when originally making that statement, was referring to the fact that the federal government could "make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". However, a display of the Ten Commandments in a public building is far from a law establishing a religion. So, just as those that wish to invoke, and take out of context, Jefferson's January 1, 1802 personal letter to the Danbury Baptists, his letter to Samuel Miller on January 23, 1808 should also apply, but be taken in context, giving the States the power to decide if something can or can't be displayed.

quote:

I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises.

This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the States the powers not delegated to the United States.

Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume any authority in any religious discipline has been delegated to the General [Federal] Government. It must then rest with the State.