Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
December 18, 2014, 12:47:02 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: 24/7 Ventrilo Voice chat -click for instructions and free software here
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: WRITTEN BY A 15 yr. Old SCHOOL KID IN ARIZONA : New Pledge of Allegiance  (Read 12832 times)
beemaster
Site Founder
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6285


Location: Manchester, NJ

It is my pleasure to bring the forums to you.


WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2010, 11:30:13 AM »

Just a off topic thought:

19 posts and 1492 readers - that's equivalent to a Youtube video going viral in one day!

It is also one of the LONGEST one page posts I have ever seen.

Greenbee thanks for adding location.

Because of the unique characteristics of this post. I is going to the Post of the Day on our Twitter Feed @ www.twitter.com/beemasterforum where those who follow will get to keep up with all the hot topics and insider and behind the scenes stuff here at Beemaster Central.

I do need to make comment, NOT on anything said here in particular, but just generalizing. I can see how prayer in school (or pledge of allegiance in its whole form before taking God out) can be interpreted by most as a Christian thing. Just as Nascar must be a Christian Sport because each race has a benediction is ended "in Jesus Name. Amen"

I've grown to accept the world we live in is ruled by pansies who fold and flop at every threat of litigation. The do not represent the people, the try to reduce the damage caused to the respective parties as a whole. Do your time in office, screwing the people and get out with the least evidence possible.

a good solution seemed to me, years ago when God became a four-letter word to so many people who have little else in life but to fight battles and cause mayhem. I thought the "Moment of Silence" idea was a good compromise. Each student or teacher could use it to do whatever they wished, if indeed anything at all.

Then came along people spouting "it is the same as prayer, because if they aren't praying, what ARE they doing?" and the wackos chime in and say, the must be designing bombs or ways to bring guns into the schools.

The shame of it all is, you can't have it all ways, any single way can be interpreted from a peaceful moment between man and his maker, to devilish time to plot and destroy. I think that most people, if not using it positively, the are likely catching up with a really short power nap - just a moment of quiet in a frantic world.

I feel sorry for those who have SET IN STONE ideas that this is it, there is nothing after this. I'd rather comeback as cockroach through incarnation than to just simply stop existing completely.

I have always said I have Christian believes, which mean to me, I try my best to lead a good life, respect and praise my wife at all times and to every one, thank my Lord for every day when I awake and speak to him when I need advice, then before I go to bad each night, I recap the day and try to self evaluate if I did a good job, always asking to do better tomorrow but firstly, ask for the health and longevity of my wonderful wife Tracey.

Doing these things make me feel good. Many people argue I am wasting my time, but when is doing what feels right and hoping to be a better person each day a waste of your time?

I look at the world and the suffrage and starvation and I know before I ever address the Lord that I have been blesses - we all have, no matter how we have it, no matter if you live in rubble and steal your neighbors internet, look at the other 80% of the world's population and if you cannot see there is a God looking over you, then you are blind.

But if taking a person's moment away from them to speak with their God and thank him for all they have, that is okay, God is infinite and he'll be there when they can get a chance to speak. Lucky for us, the Leftist that would choose us talking to the Government to get handouts DON'T have control over us ever-minute. And the leftist ideas that trickle down to the haters who can't stand to see peace in anyone's lives, because they don't have peace in their own lives unless they've made someone else miserable - they will realize someday that their God "Government" will be here but a flashbulb in time - all societies fail eventually, it is the way of humans and of time. When Government goes away, where will the haters turn to then - anyone ever hear of foxhole religion?!

Logged

NJBeemaster my YOUTUBE Video Collection
Follow us on TWITTER
SKYPE NJBeemaster - include your FORUM NAME in contact request
My Personal FACEBOOK Page


"All donations to our forums are greatly appreciated"
Please click HERE to help support our forum.
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2010, 12:06:13 PM »

Quote
The Federal Courts have a long history of interpreting the First Amendment to mean that tax dollars cannot be spent on overt endorsements of religious beliefs.  That means that a public official is barred from leading a prayer when he or she is presiding in an official capacity over a publicly funded event.  When he or she is acting as a private citizen at a private event, then more power to them.  It's only an issue when they're representing the state.

this is incorrect.  the courts have a short history of misinterpreting the 1st amendment and selectively applying that misinterpretation.  for example, a child might be prohibited from mentioning God at a graduation ceremony, while our congress opens with prayer.  the courts can, and have, made massive errors in interpretation of the Constitution, but that does not change what the Constitution says.  there is no constitutional basis for the separation ruling.  there is no way that they could have interpreted the founders as having intended separation if they had actually read the prolific writings of the founders.  

this is not their  only error.  property rights, abortion, and many others issues have been taken up by the supreme court when those matters should have been left to states.

as for guns and corporal punishment, i am old enough also to remember our after school shooting team, gun racks in the back of the truck, and a swat on the backside for acting up in school.  what i do not remember is gang fights, students talking back to teachers or hitting them, uninvolved parents, and apathetic teachers.  don't recall any school shootings either.  so...society has changed in many ways....for the better?  i think not.  a little fear in a child is not a bad thing smiley

home schooling is not a bad idea.....takes money out of the failing system and gives your kids a shot at really succeeding. now if we could just get the feds out of the school system and give parents their money back so that they could make their own schooling choices, we might be able to create enough competition to fix our broken system.

oops, almost forgot:  maybe you could explain this "Christian privilege" thing and explain the unconstitutional part?
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #22 on: November 22, 2010, 12:13:55 PM »

Jerrymac, the Separation of Church and State.  The Federal Courts have a long history of interpreting the First Amendment to mean that tax dollars cannot be spent on overt endorsements of religious beliefs.  That means that a public official is barred from leading a prayer when he or she is presiding in an official capacity over a publicly funded event.  When he or she is acting as a private citizen at a private event, then more power to them.  It's only an issue when they're representing the state.

"Where in the constitution does it say a tax paid official can not say a prayer?" was my question. The statement you made does not answer the question.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2010, 12:17:31 PM »

Beemaster you did notice this was started two years ago right?
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
beemaster
Site Founder
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6285


Location: Manchester, NJ

It is my pleasure to bring the forums to you.


WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2010, 12:50:45 PM »

Beemaster you did notice this was started two years ago right?

Yeah... I know Ted hasn't posted in a long time, but I still say it is one of the longest one page posts and the post/readers ratio is still very high (viral by most accounts) and I needed a good Post of the Day for Twitter, and it seemed as good as any Smiley
Logged

NJBeemaster my YOUTUBE Video Collection
Follow us on TWITTER
SKYPE NJBeemaster - include your FORUM NAME in contact request
My Personal FACEBOOK Page


"All donations to our forums are greatly appreciated"
Please click HERE to help support our forum.
GreenBee86
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8

Location: Indiana


« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2010, 01:29:39 PM »

Quote
Yeah - peculiar that when places are declared "gun free" zones - the psychos who want to rack up a high body count before the police show up and ventilate them (or they finally put the gun to their own heads) -They head straight for places where they know with a certainty that their victims will not be armed. No one has ever heard of a shooting rampage at a gun club.

So your solution Bee Happy is to let every possibly unstable kid or teacher bring a gun to school?  I'm not saying that everyone who owns guns is unstable, don't get me wrong.  But what scenario is better?  A student, tired of getting picked on, finally gets into a fist fight; or he starts carrying his dad's gun everyday and it accidentally goes off when he waves it at a bully to scare them?  A teacher finally snaps one day and shouts and throws a chair at a student before storming off (happened in my high school while I was there); or he reaches for the gun he keeps in his desk when he loses it?


Quote
I do need to make comment, NOT on anything said here in particular, but just generalizing. I can see how prayer in school (or pledge of allegiance in its whole form before taking God out) can be interpreted by most as a Christian thing. Just as Nascar must be a Christian Sport because each race has a benediction is ended "in Jesus Name. Amen"

beemaster, the Pledge of Allegiance didn't have "under God" added to it until 1954.  It was placed there to emphasize our majority Christian population as the most important difference between us and the Soviet Union (though I personally think that the democratic government and mixed market economy vs. the authoritarian government and command economy are the important differences).  It was a slander against atheists, equating lack of a belief in the Christian god with loyalty to the Communist Party.  Before atheism became a dirty word due to the Red Scare we were accepted in American culture.  Robert G. Ingersoll, known as The Great Agnostic, even gave the keynote speech for the Republican National Convention in 1876.

Quote
I've grown to accept the world we live in is ruled by pansies who fold and flop at every threat of litigation. The do not represent the people, the try to reduce the damage caused to the respective parties as a whole. Do your time in office, screwing the people and get out with the least evidence possible.

As far litigation goes, I would support anyone here in fighting school officials that actually start banning people's right to to pray or talk about their religious beliefs in school.  I've heard of one case where all discussion of the Christmas season was prohibited by a principle who feared being sued.  The ACLU were then happy to threaten a suite on behalf of the First Amendment rights of the students and teachers because that principle had gone too far when he banned discussion of Christmas, and the ban was lifted.

Quote
a good solution seemed to me, years ago when God became a four-letter word to so many people who have little else in life but to fight battles and cause mayhem. I thought the "Moment of Silence" idea was a good compromise. Each student or teacher could use it to do whatever they wished, if indeed anything at all.

Then came along people spouting "it is the same as prayer, because if they aren't praying, what ARE they doing?" and the wackos chime in and say, the must be designing bombs or ways to bring guns into the schools.

I wouldn't say that a moment of silence is necessarily the same as prayer.  I would just ask why a public institution has a role in promoting prayer or meditation of any kind.  Our students go to school to learn, not to have moments of silence.  If any students want to pray between classes, or after they've completed an assignment, they can go ahead.  I just don't understand why some people need their government to validate their desire to pray by scheduling a particular time for it.  That to me sounds like the Sharia practices that people are getting paranoid about.

Quote
The shame of it all is, you can't have it all ways, any single way can be interpreted from a peaceful moment between man and his maker, to devilish time to plot and destroy. I think that most people, if not using it positively, the are likely catching up with a really short power nap - just a moment of quiet in a frantic world.

I feel sorry for those who have SET IN STONE ideas that this is it, there is nothing after this. I'd rather comeback as cockroach through incarnation than to just simply stop existing completely.

You're free to believe whatever you want about this life or the next, and take comfort in whatever ideas you choose.  I don't find having one life to live a reason to despair.  Everything else in the universe is temporary, and I see how out of all the possible organisms that could have lived, I'm one of the lucky few that actually have the opportunity to do so.  And even luckier that I have the comprehension and freedom to plot my own course in life and fill it with purpose.  That's meaning enough for me.

Quote
I have always said I have Christian believes, which mean to me, I try my best to lead a good life, respect and praise my wife at all times and to every one, thank my Lord for every day when I awake and speak to him when I need advice, then before I go to bad each night, I recap the day and try to self evaluate if I did a good job, always asking to do better tomorrow but firstly, ask for the health and longevity of my wonderful wife Tracey.

Doing these things make me feel good. Many people argue I am wasting my time, but when is doing what feels right and hoping to be a better person each day a waste of your time?

Most of your values I share as a Humanist.  The only difference that instead of looking to a deity that I find unconvincing, or an ancient book riddled with contradictions, I look at the consequences of my actions and empathize with my fellow man.  Has what I’ve done hurt them?  Has it helped them?  When deciding what to do in a new situation I can try to imagine how it may help or hurt, or if people I know have faced a similar situation and what results their actions brought.  We don’t need a god to know that killing is wrong; we can see it for ourselves.  I don’t need a god to know that it is right for me to treat my wife with respect.  She is a human being as well, I’m not more important or valuable than she is, so it is only right that I treat her as well as I want her to treat me.

Quote
I look at the world and the suffrage and starvation and I know before I ever address the Lord that I have been blesses - we all have, no matter how we have it, no matter if you live in rubble and steal your neighbors internet, look at the other 80% of the world's population and if you cannot see there is a God looking over you, then you are blind.

When I look at the world and the universe at large I see a thing of wonder.  But it is a thing of wonder that has come about through means that are natural and can be understood by man.  And you’re right, the majority of mankind has for all of history lived short lives filled with suffering.  If the Christian scriptures are correct, than the majority of people who have ever and will ever live are going to then have that suffering amplified infinitely in hell for eternity.  I can believe that is the plan of a vindictive god that sees mankind as a plaything, but not the plan of an omnipotent and omnibenevolent god.

Quote
But if taking a person's moment away from them to speak with their God and thank him for all they have, that is okay, God is infinite and he'll be there when they can get a chance to speak. Lucky for us, the Leftist that would choose us talking to the Government to get handouts DON'T have control over us ever-minute. And the leftist ideas that trickle down to the haters who can't stand to see peace in anyone's lives, because they don't have peace in their own lives unless they've made someone else miserable - they will realize someday that their God "Government" will be here but a flashbulb in time - all societies fail eventually, it is the way of humans and of time. When Government goes away, where will the haters turn to then - anyone ever hear of foxhole religion?!

Yes, I agree that no one is harmed if school led prayer goes away.

I’m not sure what you’re getting at with “leftists” and “haters,” but is sounds like you’re slandering me for promoting a pluralist society where no one gets special preference because of the religion they choose to follow.

There are atheists in foxholes.  That is at best a misconception, and at worst a slander against the brave Americans that serve our country and just happen to not share your belief in a god.  A Google search of “foxhole atheist” brings up several blogs and organizations of atheist and freethinker veterans.  Studies also show that active military personnel, our brothers and sisters serving right now in Iraq and Afghanistan, are less likely to be religious than the overall population (search for Epiphenom & “Maybe there are more atheists in foxholes!” for summary of the study).


Quote
a child might be prohibited from mentioning God at a graduation ceremony

That’s not true, kathyp.  The school can’t organize a prayer for graduation ceremony, but the Valedictorian or any other student that speaks can talk about their religion as much as they want.  That’s the First Amendment’s position on relgion in a nutshell; the government can’t endorse or prohibit religion or religious speech.

Quote
maybe you could explain this "Christian privilege" thing and explain the unconstitutional part

I would, but About.com already has a good explanation of Christian Privilege and where it shows up in our culture.  Search About.com for “Christian Privilege & Religious Privilege: Christian Claims to Privilege” if you want to know more.
Logged
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2010, 02:08:14 PM »

The school can’t organize a prayer for graduation ceremony, but the Valedictorian or any other student that speaks can talk about their religion as much as they want.  That’s the First Amendment’s position on relgion in a nutshell; the government can’t endorse or prohibit religion or religious speech.

You do know what the first amendment says right? It says nothing about a school organizing prayer. It says...

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

I do believe some people have got it wrong when they prohibit the free exercise there of..... by school officials, or anyone else.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
Bee Happy
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1656


Location: Between Panama city, Florida and Dothan Al.

that's me - setting a phoenix free


« Reply #27 on: November 22, 2010, 02:12:19 PM »

Quote
Yeah - peculiar that when places are declared "gun free" zones - the psychos who want to rack up a high body count before the police show up and ventilate them (or they finally put the gun to their own heads) -They head straight for places where they know with a certainty that their victims will not be armed. No one has ever heard of a shooting rampage at a gun club.

So your solution Bee Happy is to let every possibly unstable kid or teacher bring a gun to school?  I'm not saying that everyone who owns guns is unstable, don't get me wrong.  But what scenario is better?  a student, tired of getting picked on, finally gets into a fist fight; or he starts carrying his dad's gun everyday and it accidentally goes off when he waves it at a bully to scare them?  a teacher finally snaps one day and shouts and throws a chair at a student before storming off (happened in my high school while I was there); or he reaches for the gun he keeps in his desk when he loses it?


Today's quality of education/ educators is almost a seperate issue. (I'm sure somewhere it was a lawyer who argued that a lunatic teacher does not necessarily make a bad educator)  I think generally - yes even a teacher with a bad temper will very likely think twice before simply shooting a student, it is after all the difference between throwing a desk and deliberately killing someone. I'd even bet there's a handful of teachers with concealed carry permits who keep their pistols locked in their cars.
 What if the profs at the kentucky shootings were armed? - maybe a five shot shooting spree?
Armed students? I dunno - I'd prefer the students who already are armed be shot anyway.
I'm totally in favor of teachers being armed - I think the responsibility of teaching is already far more awesome than the power over instant life and death.
my main point was that when a fruitcake wants to kill as many human beings as s/he possibly can - it makes a beeline for large crowds of people who are guaranteed to be unarmed. I certainly don't accept that we have become so civilized a society as to be ready to dispense with the need for firearms altogether.  Anyway - a firearms dicsussion tends to hijack the post.
I think the aggressive deletion of "god" in schools may not be the problem itself, but it is certainly a symptom.
(edited to correct typos)
« Last Edit: November 23, 2010, 09:38:32 AM by Bee Happy » Logged

be happy and make others happy.
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #28 on: November 22, 2010, 02:19:03 PM »

Quote
but the Valedictorian or any other student that speaks can talk about their religion as much as they want

and yet...they have been kept from it.  you may google it as i am not in the mood for this today.

i am curious why those who do want and belief system for themselves are so rabid about the belief systems of others.  i don't know you, so i can not put you in that category.  what i can say is that the lack of religious beliefs for many, is as much a religion as anyone has.  maybe more, as they are very proactive in making sure that their point of view is the only one supported.  

i don't care what you choose to believe or not to believe. i don't care if they pray or not in school.  they have the constitutional right to do so if they wish.

  i will tell you what i tell everyone in every one of these conversations.  read and understand your constitution.  read and understand your founders.  when you have done that, you will find that you have retained your right to believe what ever you want, and practice whatever you want; but you will also find that there is no constitutional foundation for the separation argument and there is no founding argument to support it.

we have laws so that we are not subject to the whims of changing society or to emotional decision.  if you do not like the constitution, there are a couple of ways to change it.  one of those ways is not by judicial activism.  if our constitution is ignored because some judges and some people find it inconvenient, we have nothing.  when you have no foundation, you are open to lovely things like our current 4th, 9th, and 10th amendment violations, and discussions of 1st amendment restrictions.

you might want to re-read the 1st.  perhaps review the others if you have forgotten what they say.

another pot of coffee and i might warm up to this  evil
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
GreenBee86
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8

Location: Indiana


« Reply #29 on: November 22, 2010, 02:58:55 PM »

Quote
I do believe some people have got it wrong when they prohibit the free exercise there of..... by school officials, or anyone else.

I will just explain it one last time for you Jerrymac, they are only prohibited from doing so when they are representing the state.  Being a representative of the state makes you beholden to a specific code of conduct, just as being a representative of the armed services does.  It is improper for a public official to speak for only a portion of the people that they are supposed to be representing or working for, and ignore the rest.


Quote
Quote
but the Valedictorian or any other student that speaks can talk about their religion as much as they want

and yet...they have been kept from it.  you may google it as i am not in the mood for this today.

Look up Greenwood HS, Indiana, this year.  A school prayer at the graduation ceremony was prohibited after the Valedictorian raised a protest against it.  However, another student invoked a religious blessing when she stood up to spoke.  No one stopped her, no one had any right to.  That is her freedom to do so.  I only object when it's the state that is mandating it.  Also, if you make a claim and but can't be bothered to cite evidence, then I'm not going to take it seriously.  "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

Quote
i am curious why those who do want and belief system for themselves are so rabid about the belief systems of others.  i don't know you, so i can not put you in that category.  what i can say is that the lack of religious beliefs for many, is as much a religion as anyone has.  maybe more, as they are very proactive in making sure that their point of view is the only one supported. 

I don’t care one way or another about your belief system.  I am simply arguing that you don’t have the right to demand that your belief system be recognized as more valuable or more American, or otherwise receive special treatment via my tax dollars.  No one has that right, not Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, etc.  See the Religious Privilege article on About.com if you don’t understand.

Quote
i don't care what you choose to believe or not to believe. i don't care if they pray or not in school.  they have the constitutional right to do so if they wish.

I couldn’t agree with you more on in this paragraph.  All Americans have the right to pray when and to whom they want to.  They also have the right to not support someone else’s prayers with their tax dollars.

Quote
  i will tell you what i tell everyone in every one of these conversations.  read and understand your constitution.  read and understand your founders.  when you have done that, you will find that you have retained your right to believe what ever you want, and practice whatever you want; but you will also find that there is no constitutional foundation for the separation argument and there is no founding argument to support it.

There is the First Amendment.

There is Thomas Jefferson’s letters stating that: “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”

And we have the Treaty of Tripoli, ratified unanimously by Congress only 8 years after our Constitution: “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”

There are many more writings from the Founding Fathers about their intent to keep the state from interfering with religion and vice versa, but these documents alone refutes the claim that the Founders had no intention of instituting a separation of Church and State.

Quote
we have laws so that we are not subject to the whims of changing society or to emotional decision.  if you do not like the constitution, there are a couple of ways to change it.  one of those ways is not by judicial activism.  if our constitution is ignored because some judges and some people find it inconvenient, we have nothing.  when you have no foundation, you are open to lovely things like our current 4th, 9th, and 10th amendment violations, and discussions of 1st amendment restrictions.

Actually what you call judicial activism are simply parts of the Judicial Review process that you disagree with.  The Judicial Branch was designed to interpret the law and the Constitution as a check and balance against the powers of the Legislative and the Executive branches.  US Constitution 101.

I’m not sure what specifics grievances you have on issues of Federalism, but they aren’t really relevant to the issue of Church State separation or Christian Privilege.

Quote
you might want to re-read the 1st.  perhaps review the others if you have forgotten what they say.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, non-religion over religion, or religion over non-religion.  Originally this was only a restriction on the Federal government.  However the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment expands the responsibility of the Federal government to ensure Constitutional protections are also enforced at the state and local level.  Without this expansion the federal government would have had no power to stop the institutionalized segregation in the South, for example.
Logged
ronwhite3030
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 218

Location: Red Bluff, CA


« Reply #30 on: November 22, 2010, 03:10:05 PM »

All i can say is i have to applaud green bee, being that its his first day on the forums and having the balls to enter this discussion and being so articulate in your posts. Way to dive in head first.
-Ron
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #31 on: November 22, 2010, 03:52:15 PM »

Quote
they are only prohibited from doing so when they are representing the state

please cite your constitutional basis for this.


Quote
Also, if you make a claim and but can't be bothered to cite evidence, then I'm not going to take it seriously.  "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

the info is here already.  you have not been on here long enough to know that this conversation has been had before.  since you fail to back your arguments with anything, i didn't feel the need to do your work for you.

Quote
I am simply arguing that you don’t have the right to demand that your belief system be recognized as more valuable or more American, or otherwise receive special treatment via my tax dollars

no one is demanding that.  they do demand the constitutional freedom that is guaranteed them.  there are plenty of things i'd rather not have my tax dollars spent on, and they are not constitutionally mandated....yet i am still taxed.  in fact, why am i taxed for education at all?  if my state chooses to tax me to support education, it is their right.  the feds have no right to be involved.

apparently you are not familiar with Jefferson, the context of that letter, or his greater writing.  we can have a Jefferson conversation when you do your homework.  that treaty has no bearing on the 1st amendment.  it's about what bush said when we went to war this time.

 
Quote
The Judicial Branch was designed to interpret the law and the Constitution as a check and balance against the powers of the Legislative and the Executive branches.  US Constitution 101
.

yes it was (kind of) but there is no interpretation of the 1st amendment that leads to the "separation" ruling.

part of  Article 3 section 2

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.


i have no issues with federalism as described by our constitution and founders.  in this country we were designed to have minimal central government with the main balance of power to the states.  unfortunately, we have tipped the other way.  states are as much to blame as anyone since they find it much easier to suck up federal dollars than to make tough decisions on their own.

the 14th has indeed been interpreted that way, but was not intended as an excuse to usurp states powers.  it's primary reason for being written (section 1),  was to protect freed slaves.  you can't even read it out of context and extend it's meaning the way that it has been extended.  if you read it in context, you know that it has been used as an excuse to extend federal powers.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #32 on: November 22, 2010, 04:02:15 PM »

even if i accepted your interpretation of the 14th, all it would mean was that states couldn't have A state mandated religion.  you still can't get to the current separation argument from there.

sorry guys, i am a bit under the weather today.  enjoy the debate.  i'll come back after a nap  grin  it's snowing anyway.  not much else to do...........
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
GreenBee86
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8

Location: Indiana


« Reply #33 on: November 22, 2010, 04:09:18 PM »

Thanks Ron.  I was interested in joining but this topic was a red flag for me.  I wanted to see how hostile the members were to non-Christians before joining.  I also wanted to clear the air about some of the lies of atheists and secular society.  Some of you have been welcoming and rational, and I appreciate it.

However the most vocal members seem to be culture warriors pushing a Christian Privilege agenda.  That wouldn't be a problem for me on its own, but they also have no issue with casually throwing around false and slanderous remarks about people they disagree with.  Not a crowd that I want to associate with.

Enjoy your beekeeping everyone.
Logged
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #34 on: November 22, 2010, 04:35:18 PM »

For the most part, the crew here doesn't really care about other folks religious beliefs.   I am not a christian at all and they find plenty of other reasons to disagree with me.

but that's all just part of the fun. 

wait till you try telling folks you don't believe in adding chemicals or treatments into your hives.  This will look like a tea and twinkie party compared to that.

 evil
Logged
GreenBee86
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8

Location: Indiana


« Reply #35 on: November 22, 2010, 04:59:40 PM »

It has been fun indeed bigbearomaha, but that's because I have a masochistic streak when it comes to these things.  I sure hope they don't ever slander you for your choice to not use chemicals though.  Whether or not I choose to use treatments is a discussion I would have with you based on facts, I wouldn't ever make it personal, disrespect you by flinging untrue stereotypes, or repeatedly ignore what you say to return to the same old straw-man.

But implying that I cannot have any morals without Christianity and the Ten Commandments ("no religion=no moral structure"), that my lack of faith is shallow and selfish and as soon as I'm in trouble I'll suddenly start believing ("anyone ever hear of foxhole religion?!"), that I have no hope or purpose ("I feel sorry for those who have SET IN STONE ideas that this is it, there is nothing after this"), that I must be a relativist (do what feels good), or an anarchist (we have laws so that we are not subject to the whims of changing society); these statements tell me that they do not respect me as a person, just because I happen to disagree with them about Christians wanting to get their own way in every part of public life.

For anyone that missed the prompt to the about.com article, I'll paste the relevant parts here.

Christian Privilege and Public Schools:
There are many ways in which Christians have fought for Christian privilege in schools: organized prayers, using schools as permanent churches, Christian-specific prayers and speeches at graduations, holding graduations at churches, etc. It is argued that the religious preferences of the majority count for more than the religious equality of the minority. Non-Christians are told that they must be “tolerant” of Christians using the state to further their own religious interests.

Christian Privilege as Majority Rule:
a common defense of Christian privilege is the idea that Christians are a majority, and in a democracy, the majority rules. If Christians want to shape legal, political, and cultural institutions to express their religious values and to privilege both Christianity, that’s what being a Christian Nation is all about. In a liberal democracy, however, the rights and equality of all are protected. Christians can no more vote to privilege Christianity than whites can vote to privilege their race.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2010, 05:15:33 PM by GreenBee86 » Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #36 on: November 22, 2010, 05:26:17 PM »

Quote
wait till you try telling folks you don't believe in adding chemicals or treatments into your hives.  This will look like a tea and twinkie party compared to that.

oh, i don't know.  haven't most of us gone treatment free for one reason or another?  i don't think most of us care to much about that either.

my first impression, greenbee, is that you came here with a chip you were expecting to get knocked off.  i am not particularly religious either.  my positions is from a conservative/constitutional point of view.  while i welcome the debate, i don't welcome someone trying to prove a pre-conception. 

since i have been here awhile and since we have had many of these conversations, you could have taken the advantage and known far more about my positions than i know about yours. 

i do not believe that morality, whatever society decides that is, resides naturally in man.  structure in society is externally enforced.  that leaves few choices for that enforcement.  i would far rather choose to follow a structure that is along the lines of Christianity, than one along the lines of  humanist experiments.  they tend to end badly.  i am not in favor of a heavy handed government to enforce structure.  they tend to end badly.  man is not basically good.  given a choice, with no external moral structure, man will almost always choose fairly despicable behavior.  every society that has killed their god, has had to substitute totalitarian government to keep man in line....and all eventually failed.
all but the French, i guess.  realizing their mistake, they tried to make a new god, but that didn't work out to well.  they got fixed by a dictator......
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
GreenBee86
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8

Location: Indiana


« Reply #37 on: November 22, 2010, 05:38:54 PM »

And another slander if I'm reading you right.  Equating atheism/humanism to Nazis and Communists if I'm reading you right.  For something to be causal it must both be required for and sufficient to justify actions.  Lacking a belief in the Christian god is neither required for dictatorship/genocide, nor sufficient to justify it.  Sure it's compatible, but so is Judaism/Christianity (divine right monarchies / genocide in the Old Testament like Jericho).

There has never been a society led by Humanists, so your accusation that it ends terribly is false.  However, the Enlightenment and our Founding Fathers were the foundation of modern Humanism, so secular American governance is the closest thing we have seen.  Learn what Humanists are before you start making assumptions about what we do or don't believe, or what actions are or are not consistent with our philosophy.

And with that, I'm done with your bigotry kathyp.

Have a good life everyone, be good for the sake of goodness.
Logged
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #38 on: November 22, 2010, 05:40:02 PM »

actually, I was just trying to be witty.  I say trying because  I obviously didn't succeed.

here's the way all of this boils down for me...

There is no law forcing everyone to be christian.  Try hard as they might, it's not gonna happen.  There is no law forcing everyone to be devoid of religion or spiritual belief.  Try hard as they might, not gonna happen.

there is no law forcing people to use medications or chemicals in their own hives.  don't like "treatment-free?  no problem, they don't have to do that, at the same time, they can't stop me from doing it either.

what's my point?  partially that  I haven't slept in about a week and  I have no business posting at all.

Also partially that the Constitution says the government has nothing to say about my having or not having a certain religious belief  (or not).  The worst that happens is that a lot of people don't like it or dis agree with me.  

Which, they can disagree with me all day long, doesn't much matter to me except that it might be fun to argue or even have some useful information come up during the discussion.

I think people in general need to have thicker skins and not care so much if there are more christians or chemical adders or whatever.  

While majority rules in the elections, the same constitution protects us minority folks too in that the more populous groups can have their religion or party or whatever, they still can't bulldoze those of us who don't share their numbers.

I happen to think that is one of the coolest things about this country.

Did you know that sleep deprivation makes you feel so lucid at times it's heat distortion coming off your brain?

Or maybe it's just being really tired?  could bee.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #39 on: November 22, 2010, 05:43:19 PM »

wow.  you are twitchy.  if you want to take everything said as if it were directed to you personally, go for it.  enjoy you time on the forums. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.532 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page December 09, 2014, 04:36:40 AM