Date: 10/24/2003 6:42:00 PM
From Authorid: 62367
This can be simply put. Under the law either no one's relgious symbols can be displayed in government buildings or everyone's must be. If the Ten Commandments are allowed to be on public display then all other legal codes held by beliefs in this country have to be displayed side by side with them. How would the Georgia judge have felt if he had to give equal space to Pagan and Islamic moral teachings. I think the man would have had a stroke.  |
Date: 10/24/2003 6:47:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 15070
I agree. The only time I get my back up, is if a Cross is allowed (or Star of David, or Eastern Star), but I were asked to remove my Pentagram. It is quite small & very lovely. But, if I wanted to wear one 10" around, that is still my buisness. I think most people (I am generalizing folks), are so ignorant to what a Pentacle REALLY means, that if I put one up like a crucifix, people would think I murder puppies, or something. Point is, you are correct. And the REMOVAL of a symbol, from a public owened, public place is NOT discrimination.  |
Date: 10/24/2003 7:30:00 PM
From Authorid: 3125
No, I only see discrimination if it is left on.  |
Date: 10/24/2003 7:42:00 PM
From Authorid: 60052
Personally, I don't care what they do. It isn't going to change anything in my everyday life. I will still have to go to work and pay my bills just like I do now. Removing those words will not be a life changing event for me, so even if this sounds stupid, I don't care.  |
Date: 10/24/2003 8:28:00 PM
From Authorid: 36967
How about changing it to "In Whatever we trust." That is not discrimination, or leaving anyone out. Or "One Nation under Whatever." You can pick or choose whatever is there, or not there.
 |
Date: 10/24/2003 9:43:00 PM
From Authorid: 16671
As I said, one nation under freedom.  |
|
Date: 10/24/2003 10:18:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 15070
How about "One Nation Under Canada, Over Mexico......?" paraphrased from Robin Williams. :):):) |
Date: 10/25/2003 10:17:00 AM
From Authorid: 1225
How about putting it back to the original "one nation indivisable"?  |
|
Date: 10/25/2003 11:57:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 15070
that would be the best change of all. |
Date: 10/25/2003 2:37:00 PM
From Authorid: 24924
RESTORE THE PLEDGE TO ITS ORIGINAL: "One Nation, Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for ALL". RESTORE OUR MONEY TO ITS ORIGINAL: "E PLURIBUS UNUM " (out of many, One). THAT would be the right thing to do.  |
|
Date: 10/25/2003 5:23:00 PM
From Authorid: 36967
A Federal Judge Last Summer, has ruled, that "In God we Trust" is not religion. |
Date: 10/25/2003 7:12:00 PM
From Authorid: 34487
Honestly, as I have no control over this issue and as to what will be...I just don't care much anymore. I don't want it removed but it most likely will be eventually. Someone always has to find fault with everything in this world....and they need new hobbies or causes to fight for. I think time is better spent worrying about the real problems and atrocities in this world such as the prevention of murders, rapes, child abductions and so on then on this subject. So, there is really no debate for me here, only my opinion.  |
|
Date: 10/25/2003 8:33:00 PM
From Authorid: 24924
You Choose, Different people have different priorities; different people take on different fights. Just because YOU don't think it important or a big deal doesn't mean that it doesn't matter to some, myself included. I think it's about time that someone stood up to at least one instance of religion in our government; remember, the fundamentalists like to point to "under God," "In God We Trust," and other God references to "prove" that we are a Christian nation. There's MORE at stake here than a couple of words!! A WHOOOOLE LOT MORE.
|
|
Date: 10/25/2003 8:51:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 15070
I am afraid-Lovely Lady Liberty (Thinker) is telling the truth. You see, there really ARE little powerplays going on behind the scenes. The Powers that be (think government), certainly is not above promoting an idea for PURELY political self-promotion. Case in point, Ronald Reagen declared (1984?) (1986)? The "YEAR OF THE BIBLE". He was so close to the "Moral Majority" (still careful to avoid connection with their more radical views), and yet, his wife Nancy, CONSULTED ASTROLOGERS & OTHERS, even about PRESIDENTAL BUISNESS. Now, it would seem to me that the type of Christianity the former president embraced in public was directly opposed off the type of activity going on behind closed doors. |
|
Date: 10/25/2003 8:59:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 15070
My point? If a politician wants the peoples support, he will embrace what the people want. If he wants to be REALLY successful, he looks at the things his citizens hold to be true, looks at a decision he is making & combinds the two in order to get citizen cooperation. Case in point: The Bible teacher authority to higher power. It also teaches taking directions. And structure. Excellent thinking for a future soldier, And a future soldiers parents,uncles, employers, after all, God & Country are so intertwined. That is not an accident either.Don't you think if the Bible taught rebellion, and question all leaders, and do not fellowship with like-thinker, but be independant in all you do, your politicians would embrace THAT??????!? |
|
Date: 10/25/2003 9:21:00 PM
From Authorid: 24924
Ya know what... Religion and Christianity is NOT the problem. There are MANY Christian's who understand the NECESSITY for keeping government and religion separate. Prayer is not really even the problem; because a student CAN still pray in a public school, silently or even in a group as long as no one is coerced to participate. The problem is only with a selective, fundamentalist group wanting the government to sponsor THEIR brand of Christianity. Fundamentalist Conservative Christians can not even be honest (which should say a lot about their brand of Christianity) in claiming that prayer is BANNED in public schools. It's not about prayer in public schools -- it's USING the government to sponsor their prayer and it is about being SEEN and HEARD praying in a government setting.
The quandary that the " Fundamentalist Conservative Christians" find themselves in is with the mass amount of information available to children in this information age. Fundamentalist Conservative Christians are driven by FEAR of this knowledge that is available in public schools. The Fundamentalist Conservative Christian knows their kids are exposed to more and more knowledge that is BEYOND the scope of the fundamentalist view of the universe, their children are abandoning religion. What's the old song, "How are you going to keep them down on the farm after they've seen Paree?" to say, "once they visit the city, it’s darned near impossible to keep them down on the farm," shows the predicament the Fundamentalist Christians find themselves in. MY OPINION IS THIS, and it IS firm: IF the christian doctrine WERE true; and IF people REALLY REALLY believed it to be true, and.....IF this Christianity could stand alone on ITS OWN MERITS, then they needn't be so scared; nothing to worry about. But it can't. Deep deep down they KNOW. They know, so they MUST keep everything out there before the public; in public, plastered upon everything, and at least give lip service, give the APPEARANCE that everything is all nice and "christian" like. I know this as well as I KNOW my name. It needs to be said. I can't help it. And for those who hate it because I do have the guts to say what few will, and call me a "left-wing, evil atheist commie,
lib bur al" ....well, let em have their fun. It will NOT stop me from calling them on their lies and deception.
|
|
Date: 10/25/2003 9:26:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 15070
Well spoken, my friend........ |
|
Date: 10/25/2003 9:27:00 PM
From Authorid: 34487
Thinker, people who obtain the most credibility in life and get the best results are those that don't attempt to belittle others that don't embrance their own OPINIONS. They also don't choose to fight against ONLY one particular segment of society and continue to use only them as an example of what is unjust in this world. |
