The Establishment Clause is that which was written by the Forefathers to prevent the known horror of a national religion because they had seen what comes from these abominations and did not want that to happen here.
I'm advised 'we will never agree' on the meaning of the clause and of course that's true when someone's purpose is to gut it but the fact remains preventing a national religion was the purpose of the clause and the self-proclaimed modern America is using every scurrilous subterfuge it can devise to sleaze a national religion into the country anyway.
One of the weakest they use is God in saying the word means the same thing to everyone. God does not mean the same thing to fucking everyone. Coincidentally, neither do Christians and that's why heathens love to put them in stewpots. I can see their logic when it's the only thing which works to make them stop preaching. Ha!
I'm advised 'we will never agree' on the meaning of the clause and of course that's true when someone's purpose is to gut it but the fact remains preventing a national religion was the purpose of the clause and the self-proclaimed modern America is using every scurrilous subterfuge it can devise to sleaze a national religion into the country anyway.
One of the weakest they use is God in saying the word means the same thing to everyone. God does not mean the same thing to fucking everyone. Coincidentally, neither do Christians and that's why heathens love to put them in stewpots. I can see their logic when it's the only thing which works to make them stop preaching. Ha!
There was some thinking today Christians would not be such an annoying pain in the ass if not for the Torah. If you strip the Old Testament out of the New Testament and it only talks about what Jesus did, people might even start liking Christians instead of breaking out the flea bomb kit whenever Jehovah's Witnesses are sighted.
Note: it's a standard precaution. Whenever Jehovah's Witnesses are sighted, break out a flea bomb to prevent an outbreak or infestation.
(Ed: Prince was a Jehovah's Witness!)
Well, if he had fleas, we're guessing he does not have them anymore.
If we step back through the material, we find Jesus didn't do the really horrible shit as God owns that. You can't blame Jesus for it because he had not even been born yet. Jesus didn't order the killing of the Midianites, that was God.
(Ed: Moses did that!)
Only in the New Testament, honey bunny. In the Old Testament, God did it.
(Ed: but Jesus was God!)
Hot tip, Dagwood: leave the logic behind for this part as the Son of God segment just doesn't hold up to any inspection of that nature.
So we see Jesus was the Son of God so he's not responsible for what that cranky fuck did. For example God behaved much like George Bush with the Egyptians. Just as Bush bombed hell out of Iraqis for no reason at all, God bombed the Egyptians with fookin' frogs for who cares what reason.
Jesus never bombed anyone with frogs in Egypt or Iraq.
(Ed: George Bush did!)
You're not keeping up, Dagwood. The premise here is Jesus was not like God and the fact George Bush was does not draw him any closer to Jesus, it only means he gets off on frogs. For someone who lives in Texas, we are not surprised.
So, there's your answer for making Christianity acceptable in America: get rid of the Old Testament.
(Ed: oh, that's right, blame it on the Jews!)
We're not blaming anything and I won't accept blaming for American slavery any more than some Jewish guy needs to take responsibility for Netanyahu being a murdering bastard. There's a fundamental difference between spirituality and writing history or there damn sure ought to be.
10 comments:
Of course the word God doesnt mean the same to everyone. Hence multiple religions. But God is a generic term. As even in the Bible the term is used under so many different names
I dont believe that anyone is tryimg to form a state sponsored religion but to prevent the elimination of all religion in the state. Even though the state was formed by religious people
The state has no business doing anything with religion and there's not an example anywhere in history in which a state dominated by religion went anywhere but into the toilet. So long as there's a balance things go ok but we're all screwed when the religion takes over. We can see in US the pushing for a more dominant role of religion in society but it's already out of control when religion pushes politically for anything.
We see how Pope Francis does it in making clear moral positions but he does not need any position in the state nor representation within it to present that message. It's also heard likely more clearly than any other religious message in the world. Therefore we see no benefit in state usurpation of this aspect of human existence when the Church does just fine on its own and evolves on its own merit.
If the state has no business doing anything with religion. Why does it spend so much time eliminating it from all aspects of life even when it
against the community involved
No worries each time your point of view is defeated in a public election you comment on how the process is flawed.
Pope Francis is the leader of a government that has no tolerance for rule outside of the Roman Catholic religion. The Vatican is a completely separate government with its own bank, post office and government services. The laws and rules of the government are governed by the canon of the Roman Catholic Church. This is exactly what the Establishment clause in the US constitution is meant to avoid. Based on the historical diversity and tolerance of different religious views in the US, the constitution has done a relatively good job over its 200+ year history. Some of the founders of the country held similar views as yourself. At the very beginning the question of separation of church and state was debated. Amoung the strongest proponents of the separation of church and state was Thomas Jefferson. Many colonies had state supported religions that were determined to be unconstitutional over the years.
The pledge of allegiance change to include 'Under God' was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Eisenhower, a strong Presbyterian, that pushed and supported the bill on June 14, 1954, Flag Day. The law over the last 25 years has been disputed based on many of your arguments. The judicial branch has determined within the last 20 years that the use of God on money and in the pledge of allegiance does not constitute an attempt to establish a national religion. Congress can pass a law to eliminate the use of God on money and Pledge of Allegiance just as it did to add it.
They can say whatever they like about their innocence regarding establishing a national religion when they're the same cynical crew who did it. Buddha, Allah, etc aren't God so it's illogical to say it represents any religion but the obvious.
I thought it was 1956 for 'under God' so I missed by a few years but the salient aspect is the Forefathers did not do it. God didn't change in that time and religion did not change either so, let's see, what else did.
The Fed is endlessly dealing with second-rate politicians trying to push their local views to a national stage. If not for that there would be almost nothing to do about church and state because the Fed doesn't do anything. It's constant cracker revolution which goes nowhere but, just like arguing abortion, it's been sixty years or so and no-one stopped yet.
God has become generic just as Kleenex has for tissue.
Most court cases are ACLU removing religion from small townhalls and events.
The ACLU changed from right to left as the leadership was overrun and changed its ideals
Make grand god-like announcements like that all you like but it still doesn't make them truth and in America there's no evidence God means anything anyway.
WOW. In Minnesota. Muslims are not only allowed to pray in school but are given a seperate private room for prayer. Ouch. I guess that the poor education system failed to teach the School Board the Establishment Clause. And giving state preferrence of one religion to another.
And tne ACLU supports the decision.
So is it all prayer that should be banned from all schools or just Christian prayer of which 75% of the nation are afilliated
I am sure you have a logical reason why this is acceptable.
There's no wow as most people couldn't care less or this would have been the law decades ago. It's just one more hemorrhoidal aspect of a country which got fat and full of itself.
Post a Comment