Comments on: Religious freedom, the cross, and America’s veterans http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/10/08/religious-freedom-the-cross-and-america%e2%80%99s-veterans/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=religious-freedom-the-cross-and-america%25e2%2580%2599s-veterans Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:23:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: wing tattoo designs http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/10/08/religious-freedom-the-cross-and-america%e2%80%99s-veterans/comment-page-1/#comment-4857 wing tattoo designs Sun, 25 Jul 2010 22:26:42 +0000 http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/?p=1659#comment-4857 Your site theme looks cool. What template did you use ? Your site theme looks cool. What template did you use ?

]]> By: Nancy Evans http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/10/08/religious-freedom-the-cross-and-america%e2%80%99s-veterans/comment-page-1/#comment-3649 Nancy Evans Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:08:52 +0000 http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/?p=1659#comment-3649 Steve: You state: "This places American citizens who are Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Pagans, Pantheists, Wiccans, Taoists, Sangriists, etc on the outside." I am not a religious person, however I do believe in God, a higher power. While anyone is free to practice any religion here, our nation was founded as a Christian nation and should not be required to bow to the practices that other religions Americans follow. All religions think they have the answer. In the end, it will not matter what religion you practice. Steve:
You state: “This places American citizens who are Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Pagans, Pantheists, Wiccans, Taoists, Sangriists, etc on the outside.”

I am not a religious person, however I do believe in God, a higher power. While anyone is free to practice any religion here, our nation was founded as a Christian nation and should not be required to bow to the practices that other religions Americans follow.

All religions think they have the answer. In the end, it will not matter what religion you practice.

]]> By: steve http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/10/08/religious-freedom-the-cross-and-america%e2%80%99s-veterans/comment-page-1/#comment-3647 steve Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:45:27 +0000 http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/?p=1659#comment-3647 Out of respect for the dead (and their loved ones) we should leave existing grave markers alone. However, your argument is based on the typical confusion between statements by individuals in public and statements-by-the-government. The First Amendment to the US Constitution requires that individual expression of religious faith out in public must be defended, but at the same time congressional expressions establishing a preference for one religion over another must be silenced. The congressional act which stuck "under God" in the pledge is an example. In that phrase "God" with its capital G is a proper noun, the name of the judeo-christian Almighty. Congress did not insert the phrase "one nation founded with a historical belief in the judeo-christian deity". No, Congress said we are a nation under that deity, i.e., under God (capital G). This places American citizens who are Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Pagans, Pantheists, Wiccans, Taoists, Sangriists, etc on the outside. They can either mumble the pledge or be accused of lack of patriotism. This is a violation of their constitutional rights BY CONGRESS since it was congress that established the preference for judeo-christian monotheism in the pledge. The Supreme court of course says the phrase is permissible as a theologically empty expression of "ceremonial deism" which is nothing more than well, window dressing with a nod to history. Thus the court concludes that the phrase under God (with its capital G) takes the Lords name in vain, which is a sin. Meanwhile, many Christians defend that phrase in the pledge by citing the court's ruling while privately thinking that the pledge is NOT a theologically empty statement. These folks are bearing false witness, which is also a sin. The phrase is unconstitutional as either civil strife or a braver court will someday conclude. In sum, existing graves should be left alone, I agree. But there is a grave difference between individuals expressing their religion in public and government establishing a preference for one religion over another. If we don't understand that, then the next cross we erect will be over the tomb of the First Amendment, and the rest of our Republic will soon join it in the hereafter. Out of respect for the dead (and their loved ones) we should leave existing grave markers alone. However, your argument is based on the typical confusion between statements by individuals in public and statements-by-the-government. The First Amendment to the US Constitution requires that individual expression of religious faith out in public must be defended, but at the same time congressional expressions establishing a preference for one religion over another must be silenced. The congressional act which stuck “under God” in the pledge is an example. In that phrase “God” with its capital G is a proper noun, the name of the judeo-christian Almighty. Congress did not insert the phrase “one nation founded with a historical belief in the judeo-christian deity”. No, Congress said we are a nation under that deity, i.e., under God (capital G). This places American citizens who are Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Pagans, Pantheists, Wiccans, Taoists, Sangriists, etc on the outside. They can either mumble the pledge or be accused of lack of patriotism. This is a violation of their constitutional rights BY CONGRESS since it was congress that established the preference for judeo-christian monotheism in the pledge. The Supreme court of course says the phrase is permissible as a theologically empty expression of “ceremonial deism” which is nothing more than well, window dressing with a nod to history. Thus the court concludes that the phrase under God (with its capital G) takes the Lords name in vain, which is a sin. Meanwhile, many Christians defend that phrase in the pledge by citing the court’s ruling while privately thinking that the pledge is NOT a theologically empty statement. These folks are bearing false witness, which is also a sin. The phrase is unconstitutional as either civil strife or a braver court will someday conclude.

In sum, existing graves should be left alone, I agree.

But there is a grave difference between individuals expressing their religion in public and government establishing a preference for one religion over another. If we don’t understand that, then the next cross we erect will be over the tomb of the First Amendment, and the rest of our Republic will soon join it in the hereafter.

]]> By: Nancy Evans http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/10/08/religious-freedom-the-cross-and-america%e2%80%99s-veterans/comment-page-1/#comment-3644 Nancy Evans Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:58:44 +0000 http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/?p=1659#comment-3644 As if we didn't have enough on our plate as it is. This country was created as a Christian nation. Therefore, Christianity trumps other religions in this country just as Judaism does in Israel and Islam does in Iran. And I say this as someone who questions religion in general. Your historic site idea is a good one as is your point on squatters rights. As if we didn’t have enough on our plate as it is. This country was created as a Christian nation. Therefore, Christianity trumps other religions in this country just as Judaism does in Israel and Islam does in Iran. And I say this as someone who questions religion in general.

Your historic site idea is a good one as is your point on squatters rights.

]]>