petition in favor of banning nativity

[Goofyluver]

Well we could be done if you would just admitt I am right

I'll spell it out. If it is the law of the land we have to follow it, if we disagree with it, it is our right and duty to oppose it and attempt to get it changed. Regardless of the issue or which side of the issue we are on. Can you agree with that?

Never. Will. That. Happen.

Haven't you learned by now? I acknowledge no one's rightness but my own.

I agree with you, Gregg. If you're passionate about something, by all means...start your own petition. And just as it is here, expect the opposition to sing just as loudly.

 

[Master Mason]

You edited. That's against the rules.

And I'm not saying get over it. I'm saying that to DENY that there is legal standing in regards to the separation of church and state is ridiculous. I'm not arguing whether you should or should not agree with anything. My posts have only been in response to those that refuse to acknowledge the fact that there is a legal standing in this country in regards to the separation of church and state. You may not like it, that doesn't change the way it IS.

As you know, there are current regulations in our country that I do not happen to agree with. But, I don't deny they exist.

I fully admit it is the current law, my arguement is that it is something that should not be the law because it wasn't written down that way, it was interpreted into existance. Just as there is no right to privacy in the constitution but it was interpreted into it as well.

The reason I say it doesn't exist, is because the words are not there in the costitution to support it. Does it exist legally yes, does it exist in the document that it was interpreted from. Absolutely not.

 

[Master Mason]

And just as it is here, expect the opposition to sing just as loudly.

As it should be, that's one of the things that makes this country such a great place to live.

 

[CowboyCO]

If he were in my town, I would have signed the petition as well.

There's a little ol' thing called separation of church and state. I do not think any city government has the right to display religious symbols of any kind.

Actually there isn't a thing called separation of church and state. There's things called the "Establishment Clause" and the "Free Exercise Clause" in the Constitution.

Establishment clause:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

This was in response to the existence of the Church of England and the desire that in a country with religious freedom, that government should not establish a church. It also expresses a desire that government not inhibit the exercise (practice) of religion in any way.

A town that is predominantly Christian has every right under the constitution to have a religious display, as long as they pass no law establishing a religion. Just as a predominantly Jewish community could have a menorah display.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it recognize a right to freedom FROM religion.

Interpretations and morphing of the establishment clause to the separation of church and state and what that means is different from what is actually written , in plain English, in the document.

 

[Goofyluver]

I fully admit it is the current law, my arguement is that it is something that should not be the law because it wasn't written down that way, it was interpreted into existance. Just as there is no right to privacy in the constitution but it was interpreted into it as well.

The reason I say it doesn't exist, is because the words are not there in the costitution to support it. Does it exist legally yes, does it exist in the document that it was interpreted from. Absolutely not.

There are many rights that are not stated explicitly in the Constitution that are nevertheless rights. The concept of separation of church and state is implied by and necessary for the establishment clause of the First Amendment to make sense. And while it is true that the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution, there can be no doubt that the concept is firmly ingrained therein.

 

[Goofyluver]

Actually there isn't a thing called separation of church and state. There's things called the "Establishment Clause" and the "Free Exercise Clause" in the Constitution.

Establishment clause:



This was in response to the existence of the Church of England and the desire that in a country with religious freedom, that government should not establish a church. It also expresses a desire that government not inhibit the exercise (practice) of religion in any way.

A town that is predominantly Christian has every right under the constitution to have a religious display, as long as they pass no law establishing a religion. Just as a predominantly Jewish community could have a menorah display.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it recognize a right to freedom FROM religion.

Interpretations and morphing of the establishment clause to the separation of church and state and what that means is different from what is actually written , in plain English, in the document.

See my post below yours.

And really, you're coming late to the game. This is our second-go-round on exactly this matter. I'm not going to keep responding to the same ol' thing time and time again. Read back. It's been fun.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

When the First Amendment was passed it only had two purposes.

There would be no established, national church for the united thirteen states. To say it another way: there would be no "Church of the United States." The government is prohibited from setting up a state religion, such as Britain has, but no barriers will be erected against the practice of any religion. Thomas Jefferson's famous "wall of separation" between church and state comment was made in a letter to a group of Baptist clergymen January 1, 1802 in Danbury, Connecticut, who feared the Congregationalists Church would become the state-sponsored religion. Jefferson assured the Danbury Baptist Association that the First Amendment guaranteed that there would be no establishment of any one denomination over another. It was never intended for our governing bodies to be "separated" from Christianity and its principles. The "wall" was understood as one directional; its purpose was to protect the church from the state. The world was not to corrupt the church, yet the church was free to teach the people Biblical values. It keeps the government from running the church but makes sure that Christian principles will always stay in government.
The second purpose of the First Amendment was the very opposite from what is being made of it today. It states expressly that government should not impede or interfere with the free practice of religion. The purpose of the separation of church and state in American society is not to exclude the voice of religion from public debate, but to provide a context of religious freedom where the insights of each religious tradition can be set forth and tested. As Justice Douglas wrote for the majority of the Supreme Court in the United States vs. Ballard case in 1944: The First Amendment has a dual aspect. It not only "forestalls compulsion by law of the acceptance of any creed or the practice of any form of worship" but also "safeguards the free exercise of the chosen form of religion." The First Amendment was a safe-guard so that the State can have no jurisdiction over the Church. Its purpose was to protect the Church, not to disestablish it.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

Actually there isn't a thing called separation of church and state. There's things called the "Establishment Clause" and the "Free Exercise Clause" in the Constitution.

Establishment clause:



This was in response to the existence of the Church of England and the desire that in a country with religious freedom, that government should not establish a church. It also expresses a desire that government not inhibit the exercise (practice) of religion in any way.

A town that is predominantly Christian has every right under the constitution to have a religious display, as long as they pass no law establishing a religion. Just as a predominantly Jewish community could have a menorah display.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it recognize a right to freedom FROM religion.

Interpretations and morphing of the establishment clause to the separation of church and state and what that means is different from what is actually written , in plain English, in the document.

Exactly, its Freedom OF Religion, not Freedom FROM Religion.

 

[Gagirl69]

That may be for you, but that's not the situation for everyone. And to say you feel sorry for someone whose beliefs are different than yours comes off as nothing but judgmental and "holier than thou".

And your statement is exactly the reason why the separation of church and state is such a needed legal standard in our country. Because not everyone believes the way you do.

And no one needs anyone's pity.

I'm not being judgemental. I'm simply stating a fact. Santa Clause will NOT get you to heaven. Only accepting the Lord as your savior will. If you've never experienced this life changing event then you won't understand. I do feel sorry for people that have not experienced that. It's truly an amazing thing.

 

[Goofyluver]

I'm not being judgemental. I'm simply stating a fact. Santa Clause will NOT get you to heaven. Only accepting the Lord as your savior will. If you've never experienced this life changing event then you won't understand. I do feel sorry for people that have not experienced that. It's truly an amazing thing.

I'm not going to argue with you on your statements, which clearly imply that only those that believe as you do will go to Heaven. Making statements such as the above is exactly the thing that turns people off to organized religion and makes people feel judged by some Christian religions. And as I said before...no one needs anyone's pity.

 

[ilisao]

I'm not being judgemental. I'm simply stating a fact. Santa Clause will NOT get you to heaven. Only accepting the Lord as your savior will. If you've never experienced this life changing event then you won't understand. I do feel sorry for people that have not experienced that. It's truly an amazing thing.

That's only according to your religion/belief system.

 

[CowboyCO]

I'm not going to argue with you on your statements, which clearly imply that only those that believe as you do will go to Heaven. Making statements such as the above is exactly the thing that turns people off to organized religion and makes people feel judged by some Christian religions. And as I said before...no one needs anyone's pity.

Well, it wasn't GaGirl69 that said it first. It was said by Jesus. (paraphrasing) No one comes to the Father, but through me"

It's a basic tenant of Christianity. To accept the Messiah. TBS, I'm not overly religious.

 

[sha_lyn]

Can someone just explain to me how "Winter Solstice" became a holiday? What decorations are there for that? A snowflake??

Why is it that the "tolerant of others" group has to get all up in arms over something trivial like this? If they were so tolerant of others, then they'd obviously have no problem with this....is it because they can't stand the thought of anything traditional being held sacred these days?? Did they not have anything of "tradition" to keep from their childhood? Seems when we were kids, 98% of the country celebrated Christmas. People said Merry Christmas, and it was all good. I have yet to encounter a Jewish person who threw a fit at being wished Merry Christmas. I have yet to encounter a Christian who threw a fit at being wished a Happy Hanukah. If people can get past all the semantics and realize the intent behind the actions, the world would be a generally happier place.

Goodwill towards men appears all but lost on people with too much time on their hands.

It was not intended to be a snarky comment. Until the PC Police started storiming through the country I'd never even heard of this as a "holiday". Kwanza didn't exist until the not so distant past either, which makes me wonder just how many holidays do we need to make up before we accomodate every single human being? There's always going to be one in the crowd not happy no matter what you do.

It does bear pondering, though....what would the retail world do without "Christmas shoppers"? Everyone is so worried about offending people with "Christmas"....why are we all up in arms over possibly offending the approximately 4% of this country that do NOT celebrate Christmas?

By the way...what is more special about Winter Solstice as opposed to any other change of season throughout the year? Why should the weather cycle be recognized as a holiday? I'd really really like to know.

If it were up to me I'd steal Brad Stine's idea. Boycott any retail place that is more focused on being politically correct and when their sales plummet, see how they feel about offending the MAJORITY of America....then, the next year, when they go back to what has worked for decades for them, take a nice steaming pile of camel poo, preferrably from a live nativity, wrap it up, and send it to the ACLU with a card that says "Merry Christmas!".

Seriously, political correctness has caused an illness in this country that is slowly killing it. It's like a cancer.

Wow you are extremely closed minded. You think that just because you haven't heard of a holiday before that is must be new or made up.
Yes your comment about a snowflake is extremely snarky.

You want tolerance from non-Xtians but you have absolutely no tolerance or respect for us.

I doubt you will take seriously any answers about why the solstice is celebrated but I'll go ahead and play along.

It isn't just the winter solstice. There are 8 holidays called Sabbats in the Pagan wheel of the year. The 4 season changes and the 4 midpoints between each.


This site has a lot of good info
http://www.healinghappens.com/wheel.htm

Wikipedia actually has a good article on the wheel of the yr and each individual Sabbat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_of_the_Year

Symbols.....
The Yule log
The Great Stag
Battle between the Oak King and the Holy King
the Sun


Well I'm off to finish writing my Yule ritual.

 

[Saxsoon]

I'm not going to argue with you on your statements, which clearly imply that only those that believe as you do will go to Heaven. Making statements such as the above is exactly the thing that turns people off to organized religion and makes people feel judged by some Christian religions. And as I said before...no one needs anyone's pity.

It is no better when people tell Christians that they are fools, or that they believe in fairy tales (directly from the Heathen Thread). They are no better, because they too have the "right path".

Part of choosing a religion, or lack thereof, relies in the fact that you believe what you believe in is correct. You can't cop out and say all faiths correct simply because the world religions don't mesh like that. Either you are right, or you are wrong. Even I can see that I am right or I am wrong, I can't have both. I choose Christianity because it is what I deem as right. I am not going to choose something that I think is wrong.

 

[sha_lyn]

It is no better when people tell Christians that they are fools, or that they believe in fairy tales (directly from the Heathen Thread). They are no better, because they too have the "right path".

Part of choosing a religion, or lack thereof, relies in the fact that you believe what you believe in is correct. You can't cop out and say all faiths correct simply because the world religions don't mesh like that. Either you are right, or you are wrong. Even I can see that I am right or I am wrong, I can't have both. I choose Christianity because it is what I deem as right. I am not going to choose something that I think is wrong.

To believe that there are many paths up the same mountain is not a cop out

 

[ford family]

It is no better when people tell Christians that they are fools, or that they believe in fairy tales (directly from the Heathen Thread). They are no better, because they too have the "right path".

Part of choosing a religion, or lack thereof, relies in the fact that you believe what you believe in is correct. You can't cop out and say all faiths correct simply because the world religions don't mesh like that. Either you are right, or you are wrong. Even I can see that I am right or I am wrong, I can't have both. I choose Christianity because it is what I deem as right. I am not going to choose something that I think is wrong.

Which brings us to Ockham's Razor, if there is more than one possible answer, go for the simplest.
There are hundreds of religions. They cannot all be right but they can all be wrong.

ford family

 

[Goofyluver]

It is no better when people tell Christians that they are fools, or that they believe in fairy tales (directly from the Heathen Thread). They are no better, because they too have the "right path".

Part of choosing a religion, or lack thereof, relies in the fact that you believe what you believe in is correct. You can't cop out and say all faiths correct simply because the world religions don't mesh like that. Either you are right, or you are wrong. Even I can see that I am right or I am wrong, I can't have both. I choose Christianity because it is what I deem as right. I am not going to choose something that I think is wrong.

Believe what you want. No one's stopping you. But, do not use your beliefs to put your pity on others simply for holding a different ideal. It's that simple.

 

[Uncle Remus]

It is no better when people tell Christians that they are fools, or that they believe in fairy tales (directly from the Heathen Thread). They are no better, because they too have the "right path".

Part of choosing a religion, or lack thereof, relies in the fact that you believe what you believe in is correct. You can't cop out and say all faiths correct simply because the world religions don't mesh like that. Either you are right, or you are wrong. Even I can see that I am right or I am wrong, I can't have both. I choose Christianity because it is what I deem as right. I am not going to choose something that I think is wrong.

Which deduces that everyone else's religion is wrong.

I don't know about heathens, but atheists believe there is no right path because there isn't a path at all.

 

[Uncle Remus]

Which brings us to Ockham's Razor, if there is more than one possible answer, go for the simplest.
There are hundreds of religions. They cannot all be right but they can all be wrong.

ford family

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

Quote by Sha Lyn "To believe that there are many paths up the same mountain is not a cop out"


I actually agree with you. I don't agree that you can't learn from other faiths or religions either, as most "religion" has basic truths that coincide with one another like God is Love for instance, and it isn't a cop out. Then again I am someone who personally has had probs with organized religion, though I don't deny anyone their right. My God says, "I am a rewarder of those that diligently seek me." He also says judge not. Sorry, not meaning to get into a religious debate here either as it is off subject.