• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Freedom of religion, not from religion

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Thursday, October 29, 2009

Freedom of religion, not from religion

Thursday, October 29, 2009


Dear Editor:

I found the following article on the Internet and checked out the veracity with "TruthorFiction" on the Web, and thought most of the local residents would enjoy.

This is a statement that was read over the public address system at the football game at Roane County High School, Kingston, Tenn., by school principal, Jody McLeod:

"It has always been the custom at Roane County High School football games, to say a prayer and play the national anthem, to honor God and country. Due to a ruling by the Supreme Court, I am told that saying a prayer is a violation of federal law.

"As I understand the law at this time, I can use this public facility to approve of sexual perversion and call it 'an alternate life style,' and if someone is offended, that's OK.

"I can use it to condone sexual promiscuity, by dispensing condoms and calling it, 'safe sex.' If someone is offended, that's OK.

"I can even use this public facility to present the merits of killing an unborn baby as a 'viable means of birth control.' If someone is offended, no problem.

"I can designate a school day as Earth Day and involve students in activities to worship religiously and praise the goddess mother Earth and call it ecology.

"I can use literature, videos and presentations in the classroom that depict people with strong, traditional Christian convictions as 'simple minded' and 'ignorant' and call it enlightenment.

"However, if anyone uses this facility to honor God and to ask him to bless this event with safety and good sportsmanship, then federal law is violated. Apparently, we are to be tolerant of everything and anyone, except God and his commandments.

"Nevertheless, as a school principal, I frequently ask staff and students to abide by rules with which they do not necessarily agree. For me to do otherwise would be inconsistent at best, and at worst, hypocritical. For this reason, I shall 'Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's,' and refrain from praying at this time.

"However, if you feel inspired to honor, praise and thank God and ask him to bless this event, please feel free to do so. As far as I know, that's not against the law yet."

The Web statement continued, "One by one, the people in the stands bowed their heads, held hands with one another and began to pray. They prayed in the stands. They prayed in the team huddles. They prayed at the concession stand and they prayed in the announcer's box.

"The only place they didn't pray was in the Supreme Court of the United States of America - the seat of Justice in the 'One nation, under God."

Somehow, Kingston, Tenn., remembered what so many have forgotten. We are given the freedom of religion, not the freedom from religion.

Gerald Berry

Salida

http://www.themountainmail.com/main.asp?SectionID=6&SubSectionID=6&ArticleID=17624
 

MsSage

Well-known member
There is more than one way to skin a cat LOL

I am about to skin mine if she dont stop sitting on my keyboard while I am typing LOL
 

Einstein

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
However, if anyone uses this facility to honor God and to ask him to bless this event with safety and good sportsmanship, then federal law is violated. Apparently, we are to be tolerant of everything and anyone, except God and his commandments.

little trivia:

name the supreme court judges and the political parties of the President who was in office when each judge was nominated.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Einstein said:
hypocritexposer said:
However, if anyone uses this facility to honor God and to ask him to bless this event with safety and good sportsmanship, then federal law is violated. Apparently, we are to be tolerant of everything and anyone, except God and his commandments.

little trivia:

name the supreme court judges and the political parties of the President who was in office when each judge was nominated.

The past 40 years (since 1969- when Nixon appointed Warren Burger)---12 of the 15 Supreme Court Justices appointed were appointed by Republican Presidents..... :wink:
 

Einstein

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Einstein said:
hypocritexposer said:
However, if anyone uses this facility to honor God and to ask him to bless this event with safety and good sportsmanship, then federal law is violated. Apparently, we are to be tolerant of everything and anyone, except God and his commandments.

little trivia:

name the supreme court judges and the political parties of the President who was in office when each judge was nominated.

The past 40 years (since 1969- when Nixon appointed Warren Burger)---12 of the 15 Supreme Court Justices appointed were appointed by Republican Presidents..... :wink:


excellent attempt. now then...

name the supreme court judges and the political party of the President who was in office when each judge was nominated.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Einstein said:
Oldtimer said:
Einstein said:
little trivia:

name the supreme court judges and the political parties of the President who was in office when each judge was nominated.

The past 40 years (since 1969- when Nixon appointed Warren Burger)---12 of the 15 Supreme Court Justices appointed were appointed by Republican Presidents..... :wink:


excellent attempt. now then...

name the supreme court judges and the political party of the President who was in office when each judge was nominated.

40 years- and all the Supreme Court Chief Justices have been appointed by Republicans- and 80% of the Supreme Court Associate Justices have been appointed by Republicans...

So you have problems with the last 40 years court rulings :???:


Warren E. Burger Nixon Republican
Harry Blackmun Nixon Republican
Lewis F. Powell, Jr. Nixon Republican
William Rehnquist Nixon (Reagan Chief Justice) Republican
John Paul Stevens Ford Republican
Sandra Day O'Connor Reagan Republican
Sandra Day O'Connor Reagan Republican
Anthony Kennedy Reagan Republican
David Hackett Souter GHW Bush Republican
Clarence Thomas GHW Bush Republican
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Clinton Democrat
Stephen Breyer Clinton Democrat
John G. Roberts GW Bush Republican
Samuel Alito GW Bush Republican
Sonia Sotomayor Obama Democrat
 

Einstein

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
40 years- and all the Supreme Court Chief Justices have been appointed by Republicans- and 80% of the Supreme Court Associate Justices have been appointed by Republicans...

So you have problems with the last 40 years court rulings :???:

thanks Oldtimer. very impressive work!

the issue about the formal restriction of belief as it pertains to public events seems to be the opposite of the foundation of what our country was built on. i would think the reason the Supreme Court rulers appears to be changing philosophies has something to do with the sitting judges.

to answer your question directly, yes, i have an issue with the last 40 years of nominations by sitting Presidents, which by the way, is proof that something else is in play, yet formally defined.

however, i can partially understand why these rulings exist, mainly due to the fact that no one can prove the existence of God when asked. scientists deal with mostly the same thing every day of their life. surely the justices and scientists are about to become insane. i know it would be hard for me to quit the perception of why i think our nation became so great.

this was a good exercise for all because it teaches conservatives that conservatives screw up also, as any God fearing person can plainly see. once we screw up as a voting nation, how does one undo the error? are you going to fire a Supreme Court judge? a scientist can be fired. maybe we need to change the firing law.

what do you think?
 

Triangle Bar

Well-known member
Einstein, this is how one of our founders put it. James Wilson was a signatory to the Declaration of Independence, a framer of the Constitution, and appointed to the Supreme Court by George Washington and served for nine years.

“Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.” –James Wilson
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Triangle Bar said:
“Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.” –James Wilson

This is one thing I do not understand about "Liberalism". Liberals, as a whole, do not seem to realize any benefit in traditional values and Religion.

But want to control morality with additional laws and regulations. Whether one believes in God/Allah, or not, Religion is a means of increasing morality.

Laws and Religion, working together, will aid eachother, towards the intended outcome.


not sure I'm explaining this correctly....but I agree with the quote.
 

Einstein

Well-known member
Triangle Bar said:
Einstein, this is how one of our founders put it. James Wilson was a signatory to the Declaration of Independence, a framer of the Constitution, and appointed to the Supreme Court by George Washington and served for nine years.

“Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.” –James Wilson

does this mean the Supreme Court justices, as a whole, disagree with one man by the name of James Wilson?
 

Triangle Bar

Well-known member
Einstein said:
Triangle Bar said:
Einstein, this is how one of our founders put it. James Wilson was a signatory to the Declaration of Independence, a framer of the Constitution, and appointed to the Supreme Court by George Washington and served for nine years.

“Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.” –James Wilson

does this mean the Supreme Court justices, as a whole, disagree with one man by the name of James Wilson?

As a whole?....it'd probably be like all of their other decisions, a 5-4 split.:wink: As individuals?.....who knows, it would be a good question to put to a nominee don't you think. Where do derive your moral compass?

Unfortunately, we are far removed from the culture of our country's foundation, but those ideals & principles still remain at our core.

To answer your earlier question, 'should we change the firing process'. NO, the electoral process is our firing mechanism. The problem I see is that we're always supporting the incumbent, regardless of party. Take old Arlen Spector, during the primary of that race Bush endorsed him and so did the Repub. Party just because he was the incumbent. The man opposing him, Pat Tumme (I think), was a stronger conservative morally & fiscally but the establishment party bosses would not endorse him. The good old boy system prevailed again. That's why I think term limits are still a good idea.
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Triangle Bar said:
“Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.” –James Wilson

This is one thing I do not understand about "Liberalism". Liberals, as a whole, do not seem to realize any benefit in traditional values and Religion.

But want to control morality with additional laws and regulations. Whether one believes in God/Allah, or not, Religion is a means of increasing morality.

Laws and Religion, working together, will aid eachother, towards the intended outcome.


not sure I'm explaining this correctly....but I agree with the quote.

the answer is easy.. with legalism, you can rationalize and use terms to circumvent lawless behavior.. so when you don't have to look at yourself to define what is right and wrong, you can rationalize,... .."I didn't break the law," even when you know in your heart you broke the intent of the law...

with religion it looks at where your heart and mind are and makes a person look within for an answer.. so you know your intent and must abide by the spirit of the laws...
 

Steve

Well-known member
Triangle Bar said:
Einstein said:
Triangle Bar said:
Einstein, this is how one of our founders put it. James Wilson was a signatory to the Declaration of Independence, a framer of the Constitution, and appointed to the Supreme Court by George Washington and served for nine years.

“Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.” –James Wilson

does this mean the Supreme Court justices, as a whole, disagree with one man by the name of James Wilson?

As a whole?....it'd probably be like all of their other decisions, a 5-4 split.:wink: As individuals?.....who knows, it would be a good question to put to a nominee don't you think. Where do derive your moral compass?

Unfortunately, we are far removed from the culture of our country's foundation, but those ideals & principles still remain at our core.

To answer your earlier question, 'should we change the firing process'. NO, the electoral process is our firing mechanism. The problem I see is that we're always supporting the incumbent, regardless of party. Take old Arlen Spector, during the primary of that race Bush endorsed him and so did the Repub. Party just because he was the incumbent. The man opposing him, Pat Tumme (I think), was a stronger conservative morally & fiscally but the establishment party bosses would not endorse him. The good old boy system prevailed again. That's why I think term limits are still a good idea.

I have always favored term limits and feel adding run-off elections would allow more choice,,

here in New Jersey we have two mediocre choices.. and one bad choice..

but a good chance the mediocre choices will split the vote and the bad choice will get in ...
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Good for them!

Don't you think a football game was not the appropriate place for this? Bring on the reminders of homosexual behavior, slutting around, and abortion now get out there and play ball! :roll:

Maybe a letter to the editor would have been better.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
Sandhusker said:
Good for them!

Don't you think a football game was not the appropriate place for this? Bring on the reminders of homosexual behavior, slutting around, and abortion now get out there and play ball! :roll:

Maybe a letter to the editor would have been better.

Spoken by a true follower of Suess. :wink: :wink: :wink:
 
Top