Text 1131, 65 rader
Skriven 2008-01-05 18:58:52 av Daniel Prather (170.holysmok)
     Kommentar till en text av Ross Cassell (1:123/456)
Ärende: Big stink in Green Bay
==============================
  Re: Big stink in Green Bay
  By: Ross Cassell to Daniel Prather on Sat Jan 05 2008 07:31 pm

 > Notice how "make no law establishing... or prohibiting"
 >
 > "make no law"..
 >
 > Its in the details.
 >
 > It doesnt say separate or separation.

Congress makes laws, the executive branch enforces them, and the judiciary
interprets/reviews them when necessary.  Since all of those pieces encompass
"government", and the Constitution forbids the creation of religious laws, it
would seem the rest is moot.  To me, that means religion is not to be part of
government.

 > If it did, it would be illegal for Congress to have Chaplains or the
 > symbolism of religion that adorns the USSC.

I think having a chaplain there is up to the elected officials of Congress.
The chaplain is there for their own usage, but not that of the government
itself.  However, I don't think the government should pay for a chaplain unless
it's willing to pay for any "religious" representative one or more
Congresspersons want there.

I think symbolism is wrong because it implies impartiality.

 > So as a non-believer myself, I am happy to be apathetic about it as opposed
 > to being a subscriber to the fear mongering you and Ceppa subscribe to.

I know you don't care about it, and it's not an issue to you.  Apparently
you're perfectly content to allow our government to discriminate and encourage
prejudice against people who aren't necessarily in the mainstream.  That's your
opinion, and you do whatever you want.  Those of us who see where the problems
are will talk about it and do what we can to stop it, with or without your
help.

 > AFAIC, people like you and Dan represent a far greater danger to our
 > society than any holy roller.

Yes, because we want government based in reality, as opposed to fantasy.

 > You mean those whom dont want to redefine the definition of marriage???

Those who have any problem with two or more people being able to enter into a
legal contract with one another that requires the government to treat them as
"family".

 > Abortion should not like ordering fast food or used as a form of
 > contraception.

No, it shouldn't be.  But, a woman has the right to exercise whatever control
necessary over her own body.  The government has no authority whatsoever to
restrict her.

 > Arent you glad your mother made the correct choice?

My mother wanted children.  Had she not wanted children, I wouldn't be here,
and I wouldn't care.  She made the CHOICE she wanted to, and didn't have a
bunch of right wing fundamentalist male chauvanists make the decision for her.

-- Daniel
--- SBBSecho 2.12-FreeBSD
 * Origin: :: The Realm of Dreams :: bbs.mysticone.com (1:112/10)