Day of Prayer Ritual Deemed Unconstitutional
-
Funny that you refuse to capitalize God, but forgot to bestow your little snark to Christianity.
WSS
-
I didn't use a capital g for god because I was grouping him with all the other gods that ever "existed." If I refer to the Christian god by name, I'll use Yahweh or YHWH
-
I didn't use a capital g for god because I was grouping him with all the other gods that ever "existed." If I refer to the Christian god by name, I'll use Yahweh or YHWH
I didn't use a capital g for god because I was grouping him with all the other gods that ever "existed." If I refer to the Christian god by name, I'll use Yahweh or YHWH
So this non existing Deity has a name?
C'mon.
WSS
-
Does Zeus have a name? Does Mario have a name? Does Tom Sawyer have a name? If you really wanna get into this, none of those technically exist either.
-
Does Zeus have a name? Does Mario have a name? Does Tom Sawyer have a name? If you really wanna get into this, none of those technically exist either.
Does Zeus have a name? Does Mario have a name? Does Tom Sawyer have a name? If you really wanna get into this, none of those technically exist either.
Actually I'm sayuing that I think you're just being snotty by not capitalizing God.
That's all.
In the same fashion one might upon meeting, ahem, Senator Boxer and purposely calling her Mrs. or Barbie.
WSS
-
I'm giving the Christian god, God, if it so pleases you, the same respect that Christians give all other gods.
-
Vapor, you are confusing belief in God, with religion.
People can pray to that deity they believe in.
I don't diss and ridicule other religions, but you lefties go
berserk with dissing Christianity.
Do any of us diss your worshipping Obamao? NO.
Would I think badly of you if you pray to him? No, because
when you find out what his "answer" is, you won't think he's
a deity anymore.
-
I'm giving the Christian god, God, if it so pleases you, the same respect that Christians give all other gods.
I'm giving the Christian god, God, if it so pleases you, the same respect that Christians give all other gods.
Exactly my point.
Since Christians believe in one God they may well show their disrespect in the same fashion.
And I think Cal has a good point that often God is confused with religion.
WSS
-
Vapor, you are confusing belief in God, with religion.
Can you expand on this?
People can pray to that deity they believe in.
Okay, if that's what they want to do, it's fine, but not above my criticism, feel free to critique me as well.
I don't diss and ridicule other religions, but you lefties go berserk with dissing Christianity.
Not only Christianity, but that's probably what you'll hear most about seeing as it's the major religion of the country, and most of the people you know are Christian, and most members on this forum are Christian.
Do any of us diss your worshipping Obamao? NO.
I don't hold Obama as infallible or divine, like you do to God or maybe even the pope. I like much of what he's done, giving more government support to student loans, taking a step toward universal healthcare. There are things I don't like. Why are we not moving more troops out of Iraq like he said he would? Why are whistleblowers getting f*cked by his administration? He's not all-knowing, he's not all-good, hell I'd say that he's been doing a half-decent job since he's been in office, which is way more than I can say about the last guy.
Would I think badly of you if you pray to him? No, because when you find out what his "answer" is, you won't think he's a deity anymore.
He was never one to begin with.
-
Again, God doesn't signify one or any religion. Much like, Yahweh, it is a name given to a conceptual believe. Like the definition I gave Vapor in another thread it is just a name we give to a definition. Also, again someone please explain to me how praying signifies a religion so to violate the 2nd amendment. The 2nd does not say freedom FROM it says freedom OF. For this judge to rule in the manner she did presupposes the later. Also, if you are an atheist or even agnostic than you should have no problem any way, shape or form with any of this. To my knowledge there is no atheist 'sec' or religion. Since there is no religion there is not one that can be violated by the notion of pray or meditation in general.
I might be able to buy this ruling if praying was solely a Catholic or even Christian practice, but it is not, it covers (especially when considering praying and meditation signify the same purpose (in general)) practically all religions. Certainly enough to where having a National Day of Prayer doesn't equate to the government sanctioning one religion over another (again the purpose of the 2nd amendment).
-
Again, God doesn't signify one or any religion. Much like, Yahweh, it is a name given to a conceptual believe. Like the definition I gave Vapor in another thread it is just a name we give to a definition. Also, again someone please explain to me how praying signifies a religion so to violate the 2nd amendment. The 2nd does not say freedom FROM it says freedom OF.
I think the point to take away from this is that people of any belief should not be discriminated against by the government for those beliefs. I would contend that since some Americans are atheists, that their religious beliefs of a lack of belief (ironic, eh?) should be respected too. I just think that the "of vs from" argument is really sketchy because atheists' beliefs are still religious beliefs.
For this judge to rule in the manner she did presupposes the later. Also, if you are an atheist or even agnostic than you should have no problem any way, shape or form with any of this. To my knowledge there is no atheist 'sec' or religion. Since there is no religion there is not one that can be violated by the notion of pray or meditation in general.
Yes, while there is no 'sect' of atheism, it's still a set of beliefs that gets infringed upon by encouraging us to pray. I am an atheist and I see no reason that a government should encourage me to go out and pray, it's a fruitless and completely religious activity as far as I'm concerned. If you're going to say, as a government, that you're going to treat all of the beliefs of every American citizen equally, then holding a special day of prayer singles out atheists because it's a religious function.
-
Then I'm going to start a new religion - we worship freedom, and the prayer is that
the attempted economic and legal tyranny by the Obamao admin will be ruled unconstitional,
as an attempt to impose the statist religion of socialistic tyranny upon us.
Which violates our rights, since some of us don't believe in that tyranny.
Thusly, we have our rights to our beliefs, and they cannot be infringed upon.
The Obamao and leftist Congressional regimes are trying to impose their religion upon us.
Separation of Church and state, says I.
Gar-r-r-r-r. (crap. where's a pirate emoticon when you need it?)
-
Again, God doesn't signify one or any religion. Much like, Yahweh, it is a name given to a conceptual believe. Like the definition I gave Vapor in another thread it is just a name we give to a definition. Also, again someone please explain to me how praying signifies a religion so to violate the 2nd amendment. The 2nd does not say freedom FROM it says freedom OF. For this judge to rule in the manner she did presupposes the later. Also, if you are an atheist or even agnostic than you should have no problem any way, shape or form with any of this. To my knowledge there is no atheist 'sec' or religion. Since there is no religion there is not one that can be violated by the notion of pray or meditation in general.
I might be able to buy this ruling if praying was solely a Catholic or even Christian practice, but it is not, it covers (especially when considering praying and meditation signify the same purpose (in general)) practically all religions. Certainly enough to where having a National Day of Prayer doesn't equate to the government sanctioning one religion over another (again the purpose of the 2nd amendment).
Again, God doesn't signify one or any religion. Much like, Yahweh, it is a name given to a conceptual believe. Like the definition I gave Vapor in another thread it is just a name we give to a definition. Also, again someone please explain to me how praying signifies a religion so to violate the 2nd amendment. The 2nd does not say freedom FROM it says freedom OF. For this judge to rule in the manner she did presupposes the later. Also, if you are an atheist or even agnostic than you should have no problem any way, shape or form with any of this. To my knowledge there is no atheist 'sec' or religion. Since there is no religion there is not one that can be violated by the notion of pray or meditation in general.
I might be able to buy this ruling if praying was solely a Catholic or even Christian practice, but it is not, it covers (especially when considering praying and meditation signify the same purpose (in general)) practically all religions. Certainly enough to where having a National Day of Prayer doesn't equate to the government sanctioning one religion over another (again the purpose of the 2nd amendment).
Meditation is a mental exercise that some religions have incorporated but is not inherently religious...... Prayer to a "higher power" IS inherently religious which is why there is a problem with state sanctioning of prayer.........
Get over the fact that a federal judge is enforcing secularism......
-
Judge Crabb was using the First amendment for her argument.
Nobody was telling anyone they had to pray. Plus the National day of prayer isn't a violation of the first amendment. It neither creates or endorses a national religion.
Christians, Jews, Muslims all pray. I would bet that even Scientologists, Buddhists and Atheists meditate.
It is no different than saying "One Nation Under God" or saying "God Bless America".
-
Judge Crabb was using the First amendment for her argument.
Nobody was telling anyone they had to pray.
Agreed.
Plus the National day of prayer isn't a violation of the first amendment.
Yes, it is.
It neither creates or endorses a national religion.
That's not the issue. While it doesn't endorse a national religion, it does endorse religion.
Christians, Jews, Muslims all pray. I would bet that even Scientologists, Buddhists and Atheists meditate.
Have you read anything sev or I have said? Meditation isn't inherently religious, prayer is. That's why the government endorsing prayer is unconstitutional.
It is no different than saying "One Nation Under God" or saying "God Bless America".
I agree, and I think that the nation under god should be removed from the pledge and in god we trust taken off our money.
-
Judge Crabb was using the First amendment for her argument.
Nobody was telling anyone they had to pray.
Agreed.
Plus the National day of prayer isn't a violation of the first amendment.
Yes, it is.
It neither creates or endorses a national religion.
That's not the issue. While it doesn't endorse a national religion, it does endorse religion.
Christians, Jews, Muslims all pray. I would bet that even Scientologists, Buddhists and Atheists meditate.
Have you read anything sev or I have said? Meditation isn't inherently religious, prayer is. That's why the government endorsing prayer is unconstitutional.
It is no different than saying "One Nation Under God" or saying "God Bless America".
I agree, and I think that the nation under god should be removed from the pledge and in god we trust taken off our money.
Judge Crabb was using the First amendment for her argument.
Nobody was telling anyone they had to pray.
Agreed.
Plus the National day of prayer isn't a violation of the first amendment.
Yes, it is.
It neither creates or endorses a national religion.
That's not the issue. While it doesn't endorse a national religion, it does endorse religion.
Christians, Jews, Muslims all pray. I would bet that even Scientologists, Buddhists and Atheists meditate.
Have you read anything sev or I have said? Meditation isn't inherently religious, prayer is. That's why the government endorsing prayer is unconstitutional.
It is no different than saying "One Nation Under God" or saying "God Bless America".
I agree, and I think that the nation under god should be removed from the pledge and in god we trust taken off our money.
Tough. It won't be.
"You planning on having a long relationship with that glass or are you going to drink it? Drink up, man. Maybe we can get another.” - Janis Joplin, 1970. -
Judge Crabb was using the First amendment for her argument.
Nobody was telling anyone they had to pray.
Agreed.
Plus the National day of prayer isn't a violation of the first amendment.
Yes, it is.
It neither creates or endorses a national religion.
That's not the issue. While it doesn't endorse a national religion, it does endorse religion.
Christians, Jews, Muslims all pray. I would bet that even Scientologists, Buddhists and Atheists meditate.
Have you read anything sev or I have said? Meditation isn't inherently religious, prayer is. That's why the government endorsing prayer is unconstitutional.
It is no different than saying "One Nation Under God" or saying "God Bless America".
I agree, and I think that the nation under god should be removed from the pledge and in god we trust taken off our money.
Tough. It won't be.
Tough. It won't be.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it removed in the next 10-15 years.
You still gotta love the misguided ones who feel that we need to be fair.
What are you talking about? Advocating equality of treatment of people of every religion or lack thereof = misguided? Okay.
Here is an ideal, all of those liberals who feel that the world is not neutral enough should stay silent so they wont offend anybody.
Yes. You've hit the nail on the head.
-
Tough. It won't be.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it removed in the next 10-15 years.
You still gotta love the misguided ones who feel that we need to be fair.
What are you talking about? Advocating equality of treatment of people of every religion or lack thereof = misguided? Okay.
Here is an ideal, all of those liberals who feel that the world is not neutral enough should stay silent so they wont offend anybody.
Yes. You've hit the nail on the head.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it removed in the next 10-15 years.
What are you talking about? Advocating equality of treatment of people of every religion or lack thereof = misguided? Okay.
Yes. You've hit the nail on the head.
I think you're in for a shocker. Some atheist from San Francisco tried to sue to have them removed a few years back and lost. It will never happen, not in your lifetime. Sorry. You can always move to a more atheist friendly country (are there any?). The majority of people in this and all countries are not atheist. You are a small minority.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login