Just a couple of things....

#1) What about MY rights? Do I, or don't I have the right to say "Under God"?

#2) See above.

#3) Will my right to do that be protected by the court system?

#4) I have the right to say the words, "Under God".

#5) Nobody but me has no ability or right to change #4.

Sorry if I missed the point, but, you know - others have practiced various religions in the US for years, and NOW it's a problem? I just don't get it. Make, pass, or rule on a subject like this - and it has NO affect on me. I'll keep doing what I have been doing all my life...practicing my faith in my own way.

I've never had a judge to dinner to discuss it, but if I did, I think he/she would say..."Yeah, go ahead, I can't keep you from doing it".

We (Christians) have been forced into the minority already...the court is just confirming that with this ruling. I'm comfortable being in the minority, since the majority always seems to get their shit manipulated.

I've gotten tired, so tired of this bullshit...whatever.

Why there was even a case brought to court to spend more tax money is beyond me.

I'm about at the point of giving up on this stupid shit.

[tongue-in-cheek] I'm sure this ruling will change the Country for the better, I really feel that this was VERY important, and that we should all just agree with it and get on with our lives [/tongue-in-cheek]

Spanky

Fuck off newbie! You have NO rights!

You smell like fish...did Ophelia just insert in you, bitch?

Actually, Jefferson would have the most likely of all of them to intend a complete separation. He openly mocked religion.

Quote:

The modern (mis)inperpretation of "Seperation of church and state" is now attempting to exclude a the Dec. of Indep. from schools because it mentions God.

The Declaration does not mention the Christian God. It mentions "Nature's God."

Regardless, technically speaking, the Declaration has absolutely no weight in our government. Once the Constitution was signed, the Declaration lost any authority (not that it really had any in the first place - all it said was the colonies were now independent).

Quote:

Clearly we've misinturpreted what that founders intent. What's worse is we allowed our misinturpretation of the opinions of 2 founders to hijack the constitution.

No, sorry. It's the Christian revisionists who are misinterpreting. The two founders CLEARLY stated what the intention was of the First Amendment.

Quote:

2. I doubt that the other founding fathers would have agreed that Madison and Jefferson were the most important. I think its easy to tell who John Hancock thought was the most important.

I would disagree. They chose Jefferson to write the Declaration. Madison, Jefferson, Franklin and Adams were the big ones - they are the ones who continued on in national roles (Franklin already had - he was perhaps the most respected of all of them).

NO rights of your's have been removed.

Quote:

#2) See above.

See above.

Quote:

#3) Will my right to do that be protected by the court system?

It has always been protect to say under God or pray or whatever. Nobody is taking any rights away from you to say whatever you want.

Quote:

#4) I have the right to say the words, "Under God".

Absolutely you do. That's never been questioned.

Quote:

#5) Nobody but me has no ability or right to change #4.

And nobody has tried to change #4.

Quote:

Sorry if I missed the point, but, you know - others have practiced various religions in the US for years, and NOW it's a problem?

We did fine without a mention of God in pretty much any government issue until it was put on money and the pledge.

Quote:

I just don't get it. Make, pass, or rule on a subject like this - and it has NO affect on me. I'll keep doing what I have been doing all my life...practicing my faith in my own way.

So why do you have a problem with it being removed from it should never have been in the first place?

Quote:

I've never had a judge to dinner to discuss it, but if I did, I think he/she would say..."Yeah, go ahead, I can't keep you from doing it".

See above. Nobody has tried to keep you from doing it.

Quote:

We (Christians) have been forced into the minority already

Bullshit. No rights have been removed.

Exactly my point - thanks. Why spew the verbal vomit (not you, directly, Mobycat) when everybody is going to do what ever they want to anyway?

Pass whatever law you want pertainting to my personal beliefs or mores...I'm not letting some man/woman dictate that by rule of law. If I do, I am living very precariously - leaving my core to the rule and law of people that I don't know, and those that do not know me.

Fight your fight...I'll do what I want (when it comes to this, anyway).

Spanky.

I don't entirely disagree. The fact that "under God" is in there...doesn't bother me personally. I couldn't care less. But I understand the view for wanting it out.

Jefferson said "endowed by their Creator (captial C) with unalienable rights". Nature can't endow rights.

Furthermore, this "Nature's Creator" entitles things to man (equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God (Capital G) entitled them.

Even if you don't believe he's talking about the Judeo/Christian God, you must admit he's talking about a creator - a being who created nature and endows man with rights.

Besides, if Jefferson openly mocked religion, it's interesting that when he wrote for the Continental Congress (aka the Dec of Independance), that he included God. Perhaps this shows the fact that he never could have convinced the rest of the fathers (or the states) to vote for something that didn't include God.

It keeps coming back to the fact that religion is protected by the Consitution (approved by the Constitutional convention and the states) and idea of the seperation of church and state was never mentioned in any document which required any more vlidation than a postage stamp.

Says you. Talk to some Native Americans or some Wiccan, or some Pagans (not making the two the same).

Quote:

Furthermore, this "Nature's Creator" entitles things to man (equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God (Capital G) entitled them.

Laws of nature? Seems like Nature CAN endow rights.

Quote:

Even if you don't believe he's talking about the Judeo/Christian God, you must admit he's talking about a creator - a being who created nature and endows man with rights.

Never said he didn't believe in a creator.

Quote:

Besides, if Jefferson openly mocked religion, it's interesting that when he wrote for the Continental Congress (aka the Dec of Independance), that he included God. Perhaps this shows the fact that he never could have convinced the rest of the fathers (or the states) to vote for something that didn't include God.

Interesting you should mention that. There was a motion to put Christianity in the Constitution. It was voted down.

Quote:

It keeps coming back to the fact that religion is protected by the Consitution (approved by the Constitutional convention and the states) and idea of the seperation of church and state was never mentioned in any document which required any more vlidation than a postage stamp.

But Madison, who wrote that First Amendment...he explained later what it meant. That much is clear.

Atheist and Agnostic are not that far apart in definition.

Atheist is "the belief there is no diety". Agnosttic is "one who is not committed to believing in either the existance or the nonexistance of a God".

In short, Atheists say there is no god, agnostics don't give a shit.

I personally don't believe in the existance of a god. I'm not one to base my life on the belief of something I've never seen.

No. But that wasn't exactly my point either.

Sure you can influence your child's religion, just as you can what is good for their body. But soon enough, they will grow up and find their own. How you react to that as a parent is the point.

If your child decides to become an atheist or an entirely different religion alltogether, then you shouldn't look down upon that child.

By all means teach your children religion. But at the same time teach them that there are other religions out there and the fact that it happens in this country is a GOOD thing. Not that it is a bad thing that must be destroyed by filing lawsuits.

Once again, lets clearly truthfully define this so-called "separartion of church and state". Its original intent was to keep government out of our religious choices. It meant that government could not say THIS IS your religion and that is the only choice you have. If you choose another, you will be prosecuted. That is the original intent. Liberals have taken it to extrememes, even saying the original intent was misinterpreted from the people that thought this up. Having the commandments in a court house is not the government forcing you into one religion. The Pledge with its "under God" is not forcing you into one religion.

Moby, you claim to know Jefferson, then you do know the truth. Now, is your liberal side able to admit it.

This, coming from someone who thought Hamilton wrote the Constitution and Jefferson rewrote it.

(Jefferson wasn't at the event, by the way...he was in France at the time.)

If you think you know the truth, then explain this first draft of the First Amendment from Madison:

The Civil Rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, nor on any pretext infringed. No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases

Notice he says "in any manner nor on any pretext."

Notice he also says "No State shall."

Do you know WHY Jefferson wrote the letter to the Baptists? They wanted him to declare a day of fasting. He refused to.

I know enough about Jefferson and Madison to know what they meant.

You obviously don't.

[/qb][/QUOTE]The Civil Rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, nor on any pretext infringed. No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases[/QB][/QUOTE]

My right to express my religion (Christian) is denied everywhere I go. Yet, so-called fame-seeking aethiests seem to have their will enacted upon and supported at every turn. Teaching Christian values never harmed anyone. Not teaching them has harmed countless. Whether you believe in God, whether you believe Jesus was the Son of Man is not my point. My point is our values work, and they work for everyone. An aethiest can be an aethiest in school. I cannot be a Christian in school. Meaning, a group of aethiests can meet in public school, discuss how much they hate Christians, and everything is fine. A group of Christians gather at the same school, during the same time, discuss their relationship with Jesus and the world goes ape-shit. Christians do not have the same rights as others. You are such a supporter of special rights, well then, where are ours.

Bullshit. Where?

Again, bullshit. You can be Christian all you want in school. The school cannot SPONSOR it, and they can't (or at least shouldn't be able to) sponsor an atheist group, either.

Edit to add - Bull Run Elementary School, which is about 5 miles from where I work...public school. On Sundays, a church uses it for services.

The church rents the school. It has nothing to do with the school. If a high school football team gets together on the field and prays, it is illegal. It is not school sponsored. The team is, but not the prayer, yet still illegal. There is your bullshit flag. Your argument only holds water when you put that spin on it. My argument holds water in reality.

Is the coach bringing them all together, or are they doing it on their own?

I like cornflakes!

Plus, this whole thing is making my urticaria flare up (Google it).

Anyway, can't we all just agree to disagree and move on to more important things, like...why is Madonna being bithed at in the UK?

Or...where is Kate Moss going to get her next line?

Probably from Keith Richards...

Just going to throw out a random quote I saw today.

Happiness cannot come from hatred or anger. Nobody can say, "Today I am happy because this morning I was very angry." On the contrary, people feel uneasy and sad and say, "Today I am not happy because I lost my temper this morning." Through kindness, whether at our own level or at the national and international level, through mutual understanding and through mutual respect, we will get peace, we will get happiness, and we will get genuine satisfaction.

-His Holiness the Dalai Lama

You liking your Subaru, you big ugly girl?

Why yes I am

I feel like a new woman. bwhahahahahaha