Mary had a little lamb..........

[wxtornado]

Then by those standards, neither one can be disproven.
soooo,,,, seems that since both are scientifically equally valid, why is the truth kept out of the schools?

I would never try to "disprove" your god - I personally don't have any gods or dieties, so disproving a negative is moot. And there's nothing scientific about your god. You can believe god fits in wherever you want on this subject. Just don't put yourself in denial and ignore good science because your beliefs disagree with the facts.

 

[Midnightrider]

all religions have a God.

so you and 2ndA would be ok with your kids praying to allah in school?

 

[2ndAmendment]

so you and 2ndA would be ok with your kids praying to allah in school?

No. But if some Muslim kid wanted to pray to their false god, that is their business.

 

[2ndAmendment]

just because you have a very skewed veiw of history doesn't mean that those of use who don't read history with religious colored glasses on are wrong.

Again i point to the numerous decisions by the courts that uphold the "common" interpretation of the constitution and its ammendments.
I'm pretty sure that the members of the SCOTUS are better educated and have a better understanding of these issue than you- but keep up the zealotry!!!

Jefferson complained about the courts overstepping the boundaries set by the Constitution.

"The Constitution... meant that its coordinate branches should be checks on each other. But the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch." --Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1804. ME 11:51

"To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves." --Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:277

It has only gotten worse. Why do you think there is such concern over SC Justices being appointed? Why do you think the Democrats scream bloody murder if a true conservative, a person that believes in the original meaning of the Constitution is proposed as a SC Justice? It is because they want to liberalize the meaning of the Constitution in order to concentrate power. Concentration of power is a bad thing.

“Here is the Golden Rule of sound citizenship, the first and greatest lesson in the study of politics: You get the same order of criminality from any State to which you give power to exercise it; and whatever power you give the State to do things FOR you carries with it the equivalent power to do things TO you.” —Albert Jay Nock

And if you think the Federal government wouldn't do the citizens harm, ask the remaining Japanese that were citizens in WWII how well they were treated - interment camps and loss of all property. Without a conservative, exacting, use of the Constitution according to the meaning at the time of the writing, the Constitution is meaningless. It is largely that way now.

 

[Midnightrider]

No. But if some Muslim kid wanted to pray to their false god, that is their business.

and in their veiw your god is the false one. there in lies the problem. A teacher with a similar background to yours would have an awful hard time not stepping all over "others'" religions. So it is the right thing to just not have any of it in school. If you want your kids to pray to your false god, then teach them to, and if johnny islam wants his kids to pray to his false god then he should teach them. not some religious zealot/teacher who thinks they are doing god's work.

as far as i can see, the appointment to the SCOTUS are handled according to the constitution and the process is working just fine. And i am sure that if a dem gets elected president and has the opportunity to appoint a truely liberal justice, the conservatives will be screaming bloody murder too. Thats how the system works. Thats why the approval process is there and the president doesn't have complete power over the appointments (they aren't automatic)

 

[2ndAmendment]

and in their veiw your god is the false one. there in lies the problem. A teacher with a similar background to yours would have an awful hard time not stepping all over "others'" religions. So it is the right thing to just not have any of it in school. If you want your kids to pray to your false god, then teach them to, and if johnny islam wants his kids to pray to his false god then he should teach them. not some religious zealot/teacher who thinks they are doing god's work.

as far as i can see, the appointment to the SCOTUS are handled according to the constitution and the process is working just fine. And i am sure that if a dem gets elected president and has the opportunity to appoint a truely liberal justice, the conservatives will be screaming bloody murder too. Thats how the system works. Thats why the approval process is there and the president doesn't have complete power over the appointments (they aren't automatic)

You and I will never see eye to eye.

"The great object of my fear is the federal judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting, with noiseless foot, and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step, and holding what it gains, is ingulfing insidiously the special governments into the jaws of that which feeds them." -- Thomas Jefferson (letter to Judge Spencer Roane, 9 March 1821) Reference: respec. Quot

I agree with Thomas Jefferson.

I leave you to your opinion. We will not resolve this and further discussion with you on this topic is a waste of my time.

 

[Midnightrider]

thats because i believe in a true freedom of religion, while you believe in religious freedom as long as that religion is your form of christianity. And people like you are exactly the reason we need to have a complete separation of church and state.

as far as what you think about the SCOTUS, you are welcome to your high horse and you know which way to ride it- far away......

 

[bcp]

so you and 2ndA would be ok with your kids praying to allah in school?

In America, a country founded by christians with christian belief, yes I would have a problem to our country being led down the path to hell, but I suppose at the same time if I moved to allahland, I could only expect that at some point my children would be forced to kneel on the red carpet while facing the sun bowing up and down while chanting some heathen ritual.
My choice would have come at the time I decided to move to a godless country in the first place.

they on the other hand, move here and demand that we give their false god respect.

at any rate, the supreme court was not given the absolute power in the constitution, that did not come for another 26 years. SO in reality, the supreme court is unconstitutional in its actions right from the start.

 

[Hessian]

just because you have a very skewed veiw of history doesn't mean that those of use who don't read history with religious colored glasses on are wrong.

Again i point to the numerous decisions by the courts that uphold the "common" interpretation of the constitution and its ammendments.
I'm pretty sure that the members of the SCOTUS are better educated and have a better understanding of these issue than you- but keep up the zealotry!!!

Here is the basic flaw in this view...that the Supreme court is immune from the subtle shifts in opinion and social pressures.
Imagine if you would ask O.W. Holmes 120 years ago: Mr Justice...do you think we should start consulting foreign law to help render our decisions?
He would be horified! "WHY??? We have Marshall's rulings, we have our roots in Blackstone et al. This is the foundation of Western Law in America!!!"

But here we are in the oh-so-sophisticated 21st century and our justices start to shift into the obscure non-American law. Our justices shift dramatically in less than two generations. They are guilty of losing sight of the original intent, and fall prey to quoting the last generation of justices who started to twist the 14th amendment into privacy issues.
Look at the 9th circus court: What a bunch of leftist activists who legislate unashamedly from the bench:
Our founders would be horrified!....and just to be clear: (95% were NOT deists)

 

[Midnightrider]

In America, a country founded by christians with christian belief, yes I would have a problem to our country being led down the path to hell, but I suppose at the same time if I moved to allahland, I could only expect that at some point my children would be forced to kneel on the red carpet while facing the sun bowing up and down while chanting some heathen ritual.
My choice would have come at the time I decided to move to a godless country in the first place.

they on the other hand, move here and demand that we give their false god respect.

at any rate, the supreme court was not given the absolute power in the constitution, that did not come for another 26 years. SO in reality, the supreme court is unconstitutional in its actions right from the start.

well its a good thing that bible thumpin right who feel they know what is best for everyone are here to protect the rest of us.
The thing is, religious freedom is just that, its not limited to just those religions of which you and 2ndA aprrove. Remember, your religion was brought to this country as well, and by your arguement, you should have all converted to some religion that was approved by the natives who preceded your ancestors here in this great country, or they should have stayed where they were to worship the approved god there.

 

[Midnightrider]

...and just to be clear: (95% were NOT deists)

and just to be clear, it doesn't matter what their religions were, they felt strongly enough about this issue to make it an ammedment. wether you like it or not, thats just the way it is.

 

[Hessian]

In the era of the "Seperation" letter...

JQ Adams was attending church-evangelical services...

a) In the Treasury Building
b) In the well of the senate
c) At the war dept.
d) All the above


D,...thats right Our founders were so firm about separation of church and state they held services in many of our Federal government buildings.
Gotta love those liberal myth builders.

 

[bcp]

well its a good thing that bible thumpin right who feel they know what is best for everyone are here to protect the rest of us.
The thing is, religious freedom is just that, its not limited to just those religions of which you and 2ndA aprrove. Remember, your religion was brought to this country as well, and by your arguement, you should have all converted to some religion that was approved by the natives who preceded your ancestors here in this great country, or they should have stayed where they were to worship the approved god there.

I suppose we can consider it the indians fault then for not getting along with each other and forming a nation before someone else came along and did it.

and I am equally as glad that you atheist types are trying so hard to protect this country from the evil christians.
Why, I already see a vast improvement in our society since God became illegal.


by the way, how come prayer in school was allowed right after the constitution was ratified? How come it took so long for the founding fathers to tell us what they were really thinking?
oh thats right, it wasnt the founding fathers, it was the founding hooker that started all of this along with the anti christian lawyers union.

 

[Midnightrider]

I suppose we can consider it the indians fault then for not getting along with each other and forming a nation before someone else came along and did it.

now there is an enlightened view


where have i said i am an atheist? I'm just not one for having my religious views dictated to me by a few idiots who THINK they know what is right for everyone.

 

[bcp]

now there is an enlightened view


where have i said i am an atheist? I'm just not one for having my religious views dictated to me by a few idiots who THINK they know what is right for everyone.

And I just happen to be one not for having my religious views quited by a few individuals suffering froim profound mental deficiency that realize their religion is so weak that even the mention of God or Jesus Christ will cause their children to see the light and convert.
I certainly would not go to muhumad land and dictate that they should start praying to Jesus Christ, or that they should stop praying to their allah because it hurt my feelings.
I dont expect to have the opposite done here either.

so, how come school prayer didnt stop right after the constitution,, what with that separation thing and all, you would think that the founding fathers would have put a stop to that foolish behaviour right away.

 

[2ndAmendment]

now there is an enlightened view


where have i said i am an atheist? I'm just not one for having my religious views dictated to me by a few idiots who THINK they know what is right for everyone.

Resorting to name calling? The term "idiot" is considered obsolete from a mental intelligence point of view. The new classification is "profound mental deficiency" and applies to those with an IQ of less than 20. I doubt seriously that anyone on this board has an IQ less than 20. So, once again, you have proved your own ignorance in what you profess.

 

[Penn]

I just found a great Christmas gift to enlighten our minds!

http://www.newsmaxstore.com/nms/showdetl.cfm?&DID=6&Product_ID=2124&s=al&promo_code=2A24-1

......she demonstrates how, thanks to liberals who dominate our courts, our schools, our government bureaucracies and our media, liberalism is now the established religion of our country.


In her new book, Coulter – author of the best-sellers “How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)” and “Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right” – says the Church of Liberalism has its own:

• Saints (JFK).
• Holy documents (Roe v. Wade).
• Martyrs (Soviet spy Alger Hiss).
• Churches (public schools, where prayer is banned).
• Clergy (teachers in public schools).
• Sacraments (abortion).
• Cosmology (mankind is an accident).
• Creation myth (Darwin’s theory of evolution).

Coulter uncovers the essential truth about Darwinism that liberals won't confront: It is bogus science. After a century and a half of examining the fossil record, Coulter states, evolution's proponents have failed to substantiate its claims, and instead one supposed piece of evidence after another has been exposed as a hoax.

 

[Pandora]

Really? Can you support this?

Drugs:
According to the University of Michigan and DOJ figures: Drug use in teenagers is lower today than in 1975, somewhere between 40 and 45% for all drugs, including alcohol and steroids. For "hard" drugs its lower, but follows the same pattern: there was a steady decline from 1975 to 91, then a lesser upturn and leveling off. The rise in the early 90s is mainly Ecstasy and with inhalants and LSD showing minor increases.

The trend is moving back upward....

he White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) Information Clearinghouse has prepared this fact sheet to summarize drug use trends in the United States.

Plus, we are talking about a comparison between the 60’s and beyond. There are not many accurate stats available prior to the 80-90's. Technology just didn’t have the ways and means to track them like we do today.

Violence:
As I mentioned above, violent crime is down in every category across the board. Juvenile crime has fluctuated within a relatively narrow band, but there's no steady trend upwards from the 60's to today.

Did you pull that out of your butt? Because, It is my understanding that school violence (which is what I previously mentioned) wasn’t even tracked until sometime during the 80’s.

The Court Case
Ms OHaire wasn't the only plaintiff in that case, although she got top billing.
Abington vs Schempp was also part of the decision and it followed previous cases: Engel vs Vitale, Cantwell vs Connecticut, etc. There were a string of cases, all overwhelmingly decided at the Federal level in favor of removing Teacher led prayer and official prayer functions in schools, all of which was upheld by the Supreme Court. The case also reinforced the existing decisions of many states to block teacher-led prayer, not because some atheist firebrand got angry, but because different Christian denominations became bitterly divided over which prayers to include, which Bibles to use and who should be allowed to give or hear such prayer. Pennsylvania actually saw the wall working better the other way, religious schools feared government interference and worked to control what they saw as their area of expertise.

I think I read somewhere that 90 some percent of all students attend public school. Each of those children comes from different backgrounds and belief systems. You cannot possibly keep everyone happy, and in the world today, it seems that when you cannot make everyone happy, just nixed the entire thing. But, my case and point in mentioning Ms. O’Haire was she is one of the nastiest, foul mouthed bitter woman that stands out forth right in my mind as one of the heavy hitters in getting prayer out of the school. Ever see the videos of her interviews? IF she would have been my mother, I would have been deeply ashamed.

 

[Hessian]

Nucklesack: quoted:

"Based on your Above quote, then it should definetly NOT be Christianity that is taught.

A Majority of the Founding Fathers were Not CHRISTIANS.

The founding fathers may have been religious, but they were in NO WAY Christians, a majority of them did not believe in the Trinity or "Supernatural Acts" they were either Deist or Unitarian, . Different than Christians in they dont believe in the Holy Trinity, and or Supernatural Events (talking burning bushes)

• George Washington - He was more likely a Deist or Unitarian, as most of the Founding Fathers were."
  
  CAN WE START RIGHT HERE AND ASK YOU TO STOP POSTING NONSENSE FROM LIBERALS WHO FEAR THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS?
  GW: Writing fervent prayers as a youth...
  GW: Writes to his Brother in Law 8/28/1762; "Dear Sir, I was favored with your epistle wrote on a certain 25th of July when you ought to have been at church, praying as becomes every good Christian Man who has as much to answer for as you have; strange it is that you will be so blind to truth that the enlightening sounds of the Gospel cannot reach your ear, nor the examples awaken you to a sense of goodness: could you but behold with what religious zeal I hye me to church on every Lord's day it would do your heart good, and fill it I hope with equal fervency."
  In this brief snatch of a personal letter we get a sense that GW
  a) Felt church attendence was crucial
  b) Believed thatultimate truth is found therein
  c) Was ZEALOUS to attend no matter where he was (I have a list of all his encampments in the war and what churches he attended as well as some of the ministers)
  d) he believed in the power of Prayer.
  e) He believed that we all will have to answer someday to our Father in heaven.
  
  SO...would you quit listening to idiotic liberal garbage about our Deist/unitarian Washington??? It is pure rubbish.
  
  *Jefferson? Absolutely leans deist while president...where was he 20 years before?
  Co-founding the Calvinistical Church of Charlottesville under Pastor Davies.
  So what happened to his beliefs? his wife died in the early 1780's...he was inconsolable in his grief and then had the unfortunate assignment to serve as Ambassador to France where he was caught up in the atheistic philosophers of the pre-revolution period.
  He believed!...then sadly fell away to doubt and humanism.
  *Franklin? Yes...His faith wavered beteen evangelical and humanistic deism-the records are clear on that.
  *Other characters mentioned,...some may barely considered "founders"
  
  If you look at the 1st & 2nd Continental Congress: you find a clear testimony of Belief in the redemption of sins through Jesus Christ and support for the authenticity of Scripture:BY 95% of them!
  They would dismiss the false teachings about their lack of faith as a Jacobite lie or infernal gossip from hell.
  
  Their words echo from their graves: America has forsaken its first love and the roots of its laws & freedoms....fundamental Christianity as taught from Methodism, Presbyterianism, Congregationalism & Baptist (even Anglicanism in its purest form).
  
  And because the masses have accepted these lies instead of reading their words, and because the masses reject the true intents of the constitution, we are bound to continue losing the freedoms it guarantees and continue to be harrassed by enemies as God slowly withdraws his Providential protection.
  
  
  .....endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights....
  (I bet you really hate knowing our rights came from a belief in the Christian God)

 

[bcp]

The difference, you seem to not be able to comprehend, is in those Countries YOU DO NOT HAVE A FREEDOM OF RELIGION. We do.

Yes we do have a freedom of religion, not a freedom from religion. Its really a different thing totally

And the outrage you feel at having to kneel towards the Sun to pray in their "Heathen" Religion, is no different than those that feel the Government And Schools shouldn’t be teaching religion!

And again, it is different.
You see, if in their country I don’t kneel towards the sun in a manner dictated by their government, I can be executed.
Yet in this country, there is no force applied, or has there ever been any force applied to the compliance of prayer. Other than the swearing in on the bible in courts.

Yeah you show your respect in that post.

Yes I do, and I’m glad you see it.
They have a right to worship their sun god allah in their country without my interjection.
I expect that in this country, the same should apply when I decide when and were praying is acceptable. When and where reading a bible is acceptable, when and where wearing a religious shirt is acceptable.
yet, in this country, our freedom from religion will keep me from doing these very things in certain places.
Simply put, my rights to my religious belief are being denied.


The problem here is that the heathens expect that the Christians should take the slap on the face and just turn the other cheek and move on. Yet when the Christian instead slaps back, they are surprised, and even go as far as to point that out as an indication of the hate that is prevalent in the Christian faith.
Failing to see that the resistance is only a response to the initial attack.