Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Teresa Heilevang on August 20, 2008, 03:07:45 PM
Title: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Teresa Heilevang on August 20, 2008, 03:07:45 PM
Tell me what you think...............
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: ericire12 on August 20, 2008, 03:10:17 PM
This guy never surprises me..... The only thing that I cant get over is how this fool is able to continue on in the election and can be looked upon as a legitimate candidate...... its laughable.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: sanjuancb on August 20, 2008, 03:49:33 PM
It is inconceivable that we, as a Christian nation, have allowed this man to get so close to being elected president. The shortsightedness of his remarks indicate what an amateur and unknowing, myopia-stricken individual he truly is. The Sermon on the Mount, being a proverbial axiom of the Christian faith, cannot be mocked and its opposer claim to be a Christian---that is a strife which is irreconcilable. May God protect this nation from those who have forsaken Him!
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: WatchManUSA on August 20, 2008, 04:43:36 PM
How can you hold him accountable for something he said in 2006?
The MSM didn’t even hold him accountable for taking credit for something with which he no involvement. He’s either a liar, or he really doesn’t have a clue what his responsibilities are in the Senate.
Quote
Fred Barnes: Obama Falsely Claims Banking Committee Membership July 25, 2008
It seems Barack Obama had a "senior moment" on Wednesday during his trip to Israel regarding which Senate committees he is a member of. On the same day's Special Report with Brit Hume, during the "Fox All Stars" segment, the Weekly Standard's Fred Barnes called out Obama for his claim, which the Illinois Senator made while trying to impress Israeli reporters, that he is a member of the Senate Banking Committee, and he took credit for the passage of legislation regarding Iran. Barnes: "[Obama] was trying to brag about how tough he was on the Iranians, and he said his committee, the Senate Banking Committee, had passed a resolution ... that would have caused American firms to divest of Iranian interests. And the trouble is, he's not on that committee. ... And he didn't vote for it. That would be a senior moment if McCain did it.
Indeed, the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs membership roster does not list Obama's name. But during a news conference, which aired live Wednesday morning during CNN Newsroom, Obama seemed to embellish his resume: "Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you don't have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon."
YouTube video of quote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjzb61wfyN0
The MSM just lets it slide by as if it never happened. I hope some 527 group or the McCain campaign runs this kind of video on network TV after the nominating conventions are over.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: MikeBjerum on August 20, 2008, 05:31:37 PM
It is inconceivable that we, as a Christian nation, have allowed this man to get so close to being elected president. The shortsightedness of his remarks indicate what an amateur and unknowing, myopia-stricken individual he truly is. The Sermon on the Mount, being a proverbial axiom of the Christian faith, cannot be mocked and its opposer claim to be a Christian---that is a strife which is irreconcilable. May God protect this nation from those who have forsaken Him!
The Founding Fathers would find it inconceivable that as a Christian Nation we would allow Freedom of Religion to be twisted to mean freedom from Christianity.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: sanjuancb on August 20, 2008, 06:40:46 PM
I second that...
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 20, 2008, 06:41:25 PM
This guy never surprises me..... The only thing that I cant get over is how this fool is able to continue on in the election and can be looked upon as a legitimate candidate...... its laughable.
Just proves PT Barnum right, there is a sucker born every minute, and every damn one of them is voting for b-ho!
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 20, 2008, 06:42:45 PM
It is inconceivable that we, as a Christian nation, have allowed this man to get so close to being elected president. The shortsightedness of his remarks indicate what an amateur and unknowing, myopia-stricken individual he truly is. The Sermon on the Mount, being a proverbial axiom of the Christian faith, cannot be mocked and its opposer claim to be a Christian---that is a strife which is irreconcilable. May God protect this nation from those who have forsaken Him!
B-ho is an empty suit, manipulated by his handlers. He is being used to further destroy the foundations of this country, so if he is elected, watch out!
I no longer believe he is the anti-Christ, too vacuous, to unknowing anything, but he is an excellent example of one who could be.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: TAB on August 20, 2008, 11:47:05 PM
he is right about one thing... "christians" don't read thier bible... or I should say, selectivly read the bible...
I also agree 100% with m58... freedom of religion was fine, as long as you were christian. I have real doubts about anyone that takes the bible litteraly.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: sanjuancb on August 20, 2008, 11:50:04 PM
Doubt me. No, I don't necessarily believe that everything should be done now as it was then, but Christ changed things. The old testament isn't completely applicable, however, you can find those little red words in KJV and take them to the bank. In addition, I think that you are misinterpreting what m58 is saying, but he'll have to determine that.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: alfsauve on August 21, 2008, 07:32:58 AM
I believe at the same lectern he also said that the US is no longer a Christian nation.
For reference over 75% of the country identifies with either the Catholic or Protestant religions. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html#People (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html#People)
Maybe it's the Democratic Party's "new" math where 75% doesn't constitute a majority.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 21, 2008, 12:23:01 PM
It sure sounds to me that folks who hold the belief that the US is a Christian Nation because the majority of the citizens are Christian are both asserting that Christianity is the State Religion and that our form of government is a Democracy rather than a Republic.
Because your group, be it a Religion, a Nationality or a political affiliation, is the majority does not give your group any greater rights, privileges or freedom than a minority .
I have posted this before and I do so again. Freedom of Religion must also mean freedom from Religion. I do not mean as an atheist, but as any other religion who is not the "favored majority".
Jews, Muslims Wiccans, Buddhists, American Indian, Satanists or any other minority Religion should not be required to pay tribute or follow the customs of the majority Religion. Neither, of course, should they be given any special treatment because they are a minority. Note that only Christians, Jews and Muslims believe in the same God referenced in "In God We Trust" or "One nation under God" .
Please note that I am not saying I condone or practice any of these Religions, but as long as they follow the law and do not infringe upon the rights of others, it is their business what they choose to believe.
As an extreme example, let us say we decided to allow the various Religions to take turns referencing their deity in the Pledge of Allegiance. So, for some period of time, the the Pledge might read "One nation under Satan". As Christians have said, the non-Christians can just not say that part or just not really believe it. I think most folks would find this not acceptable. I do not.
Neither would Buddha, Sun Spirit, Earth Mother or what ever be acceptable. On the same grounds, the deity of the majority faith should not be used in this context either.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: MikeBjerum on August 21, 2008, 01:11:02 PM
Reply #1
I think I have been misunderstood by some.
I feel that in this day and age of political correctness the courts have ruled and many public servants, including public school members, have decided that we need to not allow public expression of Christianity, but it is ok to allow many diverse groups to express themselves. It is ok to celebrate Kwanza (sp?) in public schools, but we need to have winter breaks and spring breaks rather than Christmas and Easter vacations. It is ok for a Jew to pray to God, but if someone prays to the very same God in "Jesus name," a Christian prayer, it is an infringement on "separation of Church and State."
So as I said, in recent generations we have managed to work hard to create a freedom from Christianity in public life within the United States.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: MikeBjerum on August 21, 2008, 01:19:33 PM
Reply #2
I am not overly fond of the categorization that the United States is a Christian Nation, as much as I would love for it to be so. However, no one can deny the fact that a major reason for the first migrations to this continent were to flee religious persecution. Many European leaders were forcing everyone to attend and support a given denomination, and these churches were puppets for the governments. Religion was no longer serving God, but manipulating God and man to serve the greedy.
The fact that religious persecution was a leading factor in the migration and continued on to being a part of starting a new nation many, if not most, of our Founding Fathers were of Christian faith in Protestant churches. Many were not only members but also leaders in their churches. It was this moral foundation in the Judeo-Christian faith that not only was the basis for many of our laws, but is a major part of our Declaration of Independence, Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
So while it may be true that we are not a Christian nation, we were founded on Christian beliefs!
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 21, 2008, 03:03:22 PM
So while it may be true that we are not a Christian nation, we were founded on Christian beliefs!
And most of these same beliefs are common to many other religions. They are not valued because they are Christian, but because they respect the rights of others.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: PegLeg45 on August 21, 2008, 03:16:19 PM
I am not overly fond of the categorization that the United States is a Christian Nation, as much as I would love for it to be so. However, no one can deny the fact that a major reason for the first migrations to this continent were to flee religious persecution. Many European leaders were forcing everyone to attend and support a given denomination, and these churches were puppets for the governments. Religion was no longer serving God, but manipulating God and man to serve the greedy.
The fact that religious persecution was a leading factor in the migration and continued on to being a part of starting a new nation many, if not most, of our Founding Fathers were of Christian faith in Protestant churches. Many were not only members but also leaders in their churches. It was this moral foundation in the Judeo-Christian faith that not only was the basis for many of our laws, but is a major part of our Declaration of Independence, Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
So while it may be true that we are not a Christian nation, we were founded on Christian beliefs!
+1...Well put, Sir...well put.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 21, 2008, 06:56:00 PM
And most of these same beliefs are common to many other religions. They are not valued because they are Christian, but because they respect the rights of others.
No they were valued because it was those overtly Christian beliefs and sentiments that built this country. Not the Jews, not the "religion of peace", not the Buddhists, not the Wiccans, not anybody else.
It was because of the persecution of the Quakers, Protestants (of various forms), and even the Catholics that many of the different colonies were founded. Of course we respect the others, but because you are different does not mean I have to celebrate you or your religion, just tolerate it.
M58 is right, Christianity, and Judaism too, has been targeted by the one-worlders in an attempt to destroy one of the foundations of this country. Careful, lest you tolerate yourself into a fascist secular state.
You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: sanjuancb on August 21, 2008, 07:27:50 PM
If you think that the founding fathers of our great nation were not Christians, and that we do not live in a Christian Nation, I highly recommend that you read Thomas Paine's Common Sense. It is chock full of biblical references, and it is obvious that Paine was a fervent Christian who based his decisions on a biblical foundation.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 21, 2008, 07:47:30 PM
If you think that the founding fathers of our great nation were not Christians, and that we do not live in a Christian Nation, I highly recommend that you read Thomas Paine's Common Sense. It is chock full of biblical references, and it is obvious that Paine was a fervent Christian who based his decisions on a biblical foundation.
Even a secular scientist like Ben Franklin knew that ultimately, it all stemmed from God. The Christian influence on this country is huge.
And yes, I am fully aware that a Jewish financier in Philadelphia helped bankroll the colonies when they had no other source of income. Perhaps he saw the value in supporting a group of Christians who were not going to put him in a ghetto, cuz they or their ancestors had managed to escape from persecution in Europe.
From the 1st 2 paragraphs of the US Declaration of Independence:
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
OK, the last highlight has nothing to do with God, but I just had to highlight it, as it is seminal.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 22, 2008, 02:43:26 AM
Even a secular scientist like Ben Franklin knew that ultimately, it all stemmed from God. The Christian influence on this country is huge.
And yes, I am fully aware that a Jewish financier in Philadelphia helped bankroll the colonies when they had no other source of income. Perhaps he saw the value in supporting a group of Christians who were not going to put him in a ghetto, cuz they or their ancestors had managed to escape from persecution in Europe.
From the 1st 2 paragraphs of the US Declaration of Independence:
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
OK, the last highlight has nothing to do with God, but I just had to highlight it, as it is seminal.
Solus will Please take note that these references DO NOT specify a particular GOD, and are used interchangably with "Creator" to which no one can take exception even today.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: MikeBjerum on August 22, 2008, 05:26:07 PM
Solus will Please take note that these references DO NOT specify a particular GOD, and are used interchangably with "Creator" to which no one can take exception even today.
There are many that take exception to the term Creator. Their argument is that the thought of a Creator infers that there is some type of god or higher being. As you read American books, both factual books and novels, from the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries you will find God, Savior and Creator used interchangably when talking about mortality and impending doom.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 23, 2008, 02:13:27 AM
There are many that take exception to the term Creator. Their argument is that the thought of a Creator infers that there is some type of god or higher being. As you read American books, both factual books and novels, from the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries you will find God, Savior and Creator used interchangably when talking about mortality and impending doom.
There are also many who object to the round earth theory, Here's something for them.
86% of Americans believe in God, The other 14% should shut up and be thankful for what the rest of us have given them. (I could not find the original E mail, it was more nicely worded and FAR more insulting to those unbelievers who think sunsets and babies come from congress.)
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Ron J on August 23, 2008, 08:59:52 AM
I am just catching up with this post. My thoughts …
Doubt me too Tab.
You need to take into consideration that when the founders of our Republic were framing the premise of "freedom of religion" there was not the issues or variety of religions in America that we have today. Then, it was more to which Christian church versus where today you would frame this as to which religion.
As to taking the words of the Bible literally; this is something that if more people did, we would have a lot less problems in this world. Not saying that women must wear hats to worship but that the Old and the New Testament have great lessons for us.
Solus … If I read your posts right, you are making the case for equality for all people regardless of religion. That’s fine but the fact remains is that our country was founded on Christian values. Given the majority of Americans believing in God and that our foundation was built of Christian values, if someone doesn’t like the Ten Commandments on the wall of the US Supreme Court or that our currency says “In God We Trust”, I would suggest they find another country to live in.
Another way to look at this is like taking an “eraser” to our Christian foundation is like trying to use “white-out” on the 2nd Amendment.
To the original point of this thread, Barack Hussein Obama had belonged to a radical church with a mission statement to follow Black Liberation Theology. This is a religion (or cult) that was formed around Marxist ideology. We do need to question BHO beliefs.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 23, 2008, 10:38:59 AM
You need to take into consideration that when the founders of our Republic were framing the premise of "freedom of religion" there was not the issues or variety of religions in America that we have today. Then, it was more to which Christian church versus where today you would frame this as to which religion.
Ron, that is the point I was trying to make, and here you go and make it so easily and so eloquently. Good job.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: MikeBjerum on August 23, 2008, 11:15:26 AM
I am just catching up with this post. My thoughts …
Doubt me too Tab.
You need to take into consideration that when the founders of our Republic were framing the premise of "freedom of religion" there was not the issues or variety of religions in America that we have today. Then, it was more to which Christian church versus where today you would frame this as to which religion.
As to taking the words of the Bible literally; this is something that if more people did, we would have a lot less problems in this world. Not saying that women must wear hats to worship but that the Old and the New Testament have great lessons for us.
Solus … If I read your posts right, you are making the case for equality for all people regardless of religion. That’s fine but the fact remains is that our country was founded on Christian values. Given the majority of Americans believing in God and that our foundation was built of Christian values, if someone doesn’t like the Ten Commandments on the wall of the US Supreme Court or that our currency says “In God We Trust”, I would suggest they find another country to live in.
Another way to look at this is like taking an “eraser” to our Christian foundation is like trying to use “white-out” on the 2nd Amendment.
To the original point of this thread, Barack Hussein Obama had belonged to a radical church with a mission statement to follow Black Liberation Theology. This is a religion (or cult) that was formed around Marxist ideology. We do need to question BHO beliefs.
Exactly. No one will ever convince this gray-bearded old country boy that BHO spent 20 years as a member of the "Good Reverend Wright's" (if you can call him that) congregation and failed to absorb anything from the endless rants and diatribe that the congregation was subjected to (by their own choice, I might add). If BHO didn't see eye-to-eye with Wright's position on American values, why did he wait so long to seperate himself. It didn't seem to be an issue to BHO until he realized that it might reflect poorly on his bid for POTUS.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: MikeBjerum on August 23, 2008, 08:32:23 PM
Exactly. No one will ever convince this gray-bearded old country boy that BHO spent 20 years as a member of the "Good Reverend Wright's" (if you can call him that) congregation and failed to absorb anything from the endless rants and diatribe that the congregation was subjected to (by their own choice, I might add). If BHO didn't see eye-to-eye with Wright's position on American values, why did he wait so long to seperate himself. It didn't seem to be an issue to BHO until he realized that it might reflect poorly on his bid for POTUS.
You got it!
Remember that when he split with the church he publicly announced that the reason was that he feared remaining a member would harm his political career. He tried to make comments earlier about disagreeing, but he was caught in the fact that this has been going on for years, and the leaders were close friends and one was a mentor.
My latest revelation is that this man does not understand the meaning of Republic. He is strictly about public opinion. Shall we go back to the Bible he does not respect and quote passages on solid rock and shifting sand? Mr. Obama reminds me of shifting sand ... oh oh oh oh oh ... is that a new poll coming out ... yep ... hang on for the latest stance.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Ron J on August 23, 2008, 10:44:34 PM
Remember that when he split with the church he publicly announced that the reason was that he feared remaining a member would harm his political career. He tried to make comments earlier about disagreeing, but he was caught in the fact that this has been going on for years, and the leaders were close friends and one was a mentor.
My latest revelation is that this man does not understand the meaning of Republic. He is strictly about public opinion. Shall we go back to the Bible he does not respect and quote passages on solid rock and shifting sand? Mr. Obama reminds me of shifting sand ... oh oh oh oh oh ... is that a new poll coming out ... yep ... hang on for the latest stance.
X-ring! I agree with what you Pegleg and Pathfinder say!
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: twyacht on August 24, 2008, 07:33:21 PM
Read all the posts, and have let it all be absorbed what "little gray matter" I have left.
Evidently BHO didn't read Deuteronomy too well at Rev. Wrights church:
"Now it shall come to pass, if you diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God, to observe carefully His commandments, that the Lord will set you high above all nations of the earth. And all these blessings shall come upon you and overtake you, because you obey the voice of the Lord. Deu. 28: 1-2.
That sounds like bad advice for America?
Good 'ol Abe Lincoln wrote; "But for the Bible we could not know right from wrong. All things most desirable from man's welfare "are to be found in it."
The wisdom of the Bible also describes Barack to a "T"
"But there were also false prophets, among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in damnable heresies, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways." 2 Peter 2: 1,2.
It goes against every grain this country was founded on.
I hope more people realize as we get closer to Nov. How dangerous it will be to make him President. Maybe Rick Warren should get a copy of this video, and invite him back for Saddleback Rd. 2. and maybe BHO need to read American History.
"It is impossible to govern,... without God and the Bible." George Washington
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: sanjuancb on August 24, 2008, 07:53:07 PM
"But there were also false prophets, among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in damnable heresies, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways." 2 Peter 2: 1,2.
BINGO!!!
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 25, 2008, 12:39:52 PM
I am just catching up with this post. My thoughts …
Doubt me too Tab.
You need to take into consideration that when the founders of our Republic were framing the premise of "freedom of religion" there was not the issues or variety of religions in America that we have today. Then, it was more to which Christian church versus where today you would frame this as to which religion.
As to taking the words of the Bible literally; this is something that if more people did, we would have a lot less problems in this world. Not saying that women must wear hats to worship but that the Old and the New Testament have great lessons for us.
Solus … If I read your posts right, you are making the case for equality for all people regardless of religion. That’s fine but the fact remains is that our country was founded on Christian values. Given the majority of Americans believing in God and that our foundation was built of Christian values, if someone doesn’t like the Ten Commandments on the wall of the US Supreme Court or that our currency says “In God We Trust”, I would suggest they find another country to live in.
Another way to look at this is like taking an “eraser” to our Christian foundation is like trying to use “white-out” on the 2nd Amendment.
To the original point of this thread, Barack Hussein Obama had belonged to a radical church with a mission statement to follow Black Liberation Theology. This is a religion (or cult) that was formed around Marxist ideology. We do need to question BHO beliefs.
We have heard and disagree with similar arguments that we need to take into account that when the founders drafted the Second Amendment they did not take into account anything by muzzleloading black powder rifles and we often use the example that they didn't imagine radio, television and the internet when drafting the 1st Amendment.
If we wish it maintain that is is the spirit of the Amendment and not the specific situation at the time it was drafted that is the intended Right, then we must also accept that for the increased number of Religious beliefs held by citizens of America.
Pathfinder, you say that we will tolerate their religion, but don't expect us to celebrate it. (As I stated, I do not feel that minority religions have any "right" to have their ceremonies or symbols be accepted either) That is fine as long as you are willing to grant the followers of other religions the same freedom. They only have to tolerate Christianity but are not required to celebrate it.
This, of course, means we have Spring Break rather than Easter Vacation or Passover Break.
Having the Ten Commandments on the wall of the Supreme Court tends to imply that they are somehow given status as the "Laws of the Land". My problem with this lies mostly with the first 3 commandments which speak strictly to an individuals relationship with God. This has no business in any place of official capacity because they specify when and how citizens are required to worship. They also forbid any false gods, which would include all but the Jewish and Christian God.
The rest of the commandments work pretty well for establishing working "rights" in a free society except for the 7th which has been used to outlaw many non-harmful acts between consenting adults. While I don't ever condone betraying your spouse or even significant other (lying still applies) we don't need to have any court stick their nose in any bedroom.
So now we are down to 6 Commandments which pretty common rules of behavior. I have thought they could all be combined and expressed in the Golden Rule...Treat everyone as you, yourself, would be treated. However, that was before I became aware of Masochists who, it appears, don't want to be treated anything like I want to be...
The solution to not officially favoring one religion over another is to simply not mention religion or deity in official government business. This is not to deny Christianity, but to treat all religion equally.
Of course, then it will be said that the Atheist has won.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: PegLeg45 on August 25, 2008, 02:28:55 PM
In this great country.."of the people, by the people, and for the people"......shouldn't the 'majority' still rule?
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: sanjuancb on August 25, 2008, 04:09:33 PM
Someone has a fundamental misunderstanding of what a democracy is. Demos Kratos, "Let the People Rule" means that there is a majority rule with minority rights. What is the majority religion of the United States? If you are Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, hell Zoastrian, I don't care--you are free to live here, but don't think that you can impinge on the rule of the Christian majority under their God.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 26, 2008, 01:36:29 AM
We have heard and disagree with similar arguments that we need to take into account that when the founders drafted the Second Amendment they did not take into account anything by muzzleloading black powder rifles and we often use the example that they didn't imagine radio, television and the internet when drafting the 1st Amendment.
If we wish it maintain that is is the spirit of the Amendment and not the specific situation at the time it was drafted that is the intended Right, then we must also accept that for the increased number of Religious beliefs held by citizens of America.
Pathfinder, you say that we will tolerate their religion, but don't expect us to celebrate it. (As I stated, I do not feel that minority religions have any "right" to have their ceremonies or symbols be accepted either) That is fine as long as you are willing to grant the followers of other religions the same freedom. They only have to tolerate Christianity but are not required to celebrate it.
This, of course, means we have Spring Break rather than Easter Vacation or Passover Break.
Having the Ten Commandments on the wall of the Supreme Court tends to imply that they are somehow given status as the "Laws of the Land". My problem with this lies mostly with the first 3 commandments which speak strictly to an individuals relationship with God. This has no business in any place of official capacity because they specify when and how citizens are required to worship. They also forbid any false gods, which would include all but the Jewish and Christian God.
The rest of the commandments work pretty well for establishing working "rights" in a free society except for the 7th which has been used to outlaw many non-harmful acts between consenting adults. While I don't ever condone betraying your spouse or even significant other (lying still applies) we don't need to have any court stick their nose in any bedroom.
So now we are down to 6 Commandments which pretty common rules of behavior. I have thought they could all be combined and expressed in the Golden Rule...Treat everyone as you, yourself, would be treated. However, that was before I became aware of Masochists who, it appears, don't want to be treated anything like I want to be...
The solution to not officially favoring one religion over another is to simply not mention religion or deity in official government business. This is not to deny Christianity, but to treat all religion equally.
Of course, then it will be said that the Atheist has won.
You need to go back and read your 1st Amendment "Congress shall make no laws [concerning] religion" Could not remember the exact word used, but the point is the same, you do NOT have freedom of religion, you DO have freedom from Govt iterference with your religion, unless you are a Christian, like the majority of Americans.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 26, 2008, 09:06:50 AM
You need to go back and read your 1st Amendment "Congress shall make no laws [concerning] religion" Could not remember the exact word used, but the point is the same, you do NOT have freedom of religion, you DO have freedom from Govt iterference with your religion, unless you are a Christian, like the majority of Americans.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
and
The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the federal government. Subsequently, under the incorporation doctrine, certain selected provisions were applied to states. It was not, however, until the middle and later years of the twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by state governments
Before this discussion continues, if it does, let me try to clarify my position. I am not attacking Christianity or any other religion or religious position. I am saying that under our Constitution all religions should be treated equally (as long as the followers of that religion do violate the rights of others by following it's tenets).
No religion should have a favored relation with government institutions even if it is the majority religion.
One of the strengths of our country is that the rights of no majority group have precedence of any minority group.
I do agree that ban Christian prayer, customs or symbols in government institutions but to allow the same display to a minority religion is hypocrisy.
It is not that I think Christian prayer should be banned from public schools, for instance, but to allow it would necessitate allowing prayer from all religions in public schools to maintain equality. The logistics involved make this impractical.
I see only two solutions that might maintain equality. One would be to establish the percentage of the population that practice each religion and no religion. Then divvy up the school days according to that percentage. So on a certain number of days, the children would be lead in a Christian prayer, another number a Jewish prayer, a Satanist prayer, bow to Mecca on some days and on some days have no prayer.
Or we simply don't have any religious reference or prayer. But then it could be said that the Atheist get all the days.
Myself, I think the last solution to be the most workable.
As an aside, Moses, who received the Ten Commandments wasn't Christian.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Ron J on August 26, 2008, 09:57:48 AM
Solus,
As you stated, the purpose of the 1st Amendment is to ensure that you are not prosecuted by the government for religious beliefs. Can the government “acknowledge” (not saying as you do, to “accept”) various beliefs (i.e.; Christmas)? Yes. Just as long as they don’t persecute for any belief in the sense of valuing one religion over another.
The government is not implying or suggesting “preference” that you should be a Christian or whatever because the 10 Commandments are on the wall of a building. Simply stating where the bases of our laws are carried over from. Look at it as “art” instead of being about you.
Now, if you have a “problem” with the fact that we were founded as a country on Christian beliefs and values (such as what the 10 Commandments state) or that the majority of America believes in “God” … sorry. We were founded on Christian beliefs so subsequently we have Christian beliefs in our framework. Unless you can prove Einstein’s theory of time travel, I would suggest it would be easier to move to another country than to try to rewrite history or change that framework to fit a minority’s beliefs or values.
Moses was not a Christian?!? Really? Hmmm … I wonder why?
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 26, 2008, 11:01:14 AM
As you stated, the purpose of the 1st Amendment is to ensure that you are not prosecuted by the government for religious beliefs. Can the government “acknowledge” (not saying as you do, to “accept”) various beliefs (i.e.; Christmas)? Yes. Just as long as they don’t persecute for any belief in the sense of valuing one religion over another.
The government is not implying or suggesting “preference” that you should be a Christian or whatever because the 10 Commandments are on the wall of a building. Simply stating where the bases of our laws are carried over from. Look at it as “art” instead of being about you.
Now, if you have a “problem” with the fact that we were founded as a country on Christian beliefs and values (such as what the 10 Commandments state) or that the majority of America believes in “God” … sorry. We were founded on Christian beliefs so subsequently we have Christian beliefs in our framework. Unless you can prove Einstein’s theory of time travel, I would suggest it would be easier to move to another country than to try to rewrite history or change that framework to fit a minority’s beliefs or values.
Moses was not a Christian?!? Really? Hmmm … I wonder why?
To early in history, He and his followers were not even Jews as we know that religion, but were rather the Founding practitioners of what would become Judaism. To Solus and others who have a problem with the Christian dominance in America, first let me state that I AM NOT a practicing Christian, however America was founded and made great by Christian European settlers. No other Race / religion has EVER achieved and maintained the level of advancement reached by this Nation. Major Chistian holidays in America have been hijacked so totally by toy and candy sales that Christ is forgotten, if you can not stand to be nice to people for the month of Dec. just shut up, you can get really drunk on New Years eve and go back to being a pr!ck for the next 11 months, if you are not a Christian, shut up and be glad you have a day off with pay.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 26, 2008, 12:17:15 PM
To Solus and others who have a problem with the Christian dominance in America, first let me state that I AM NOT a practicing Christian, however America was founded and made great by Christian European settlers. No other Race / religion has EVER achieved and maintained the level of advancement reached by this Nation. Major Chistian holidays in America have been hijacked so totally by toy and candy sales that Christ is forgotten, if you can not stand to be nice to people for the month of Dec. just shut up, you can get really drunk on New Years eve and go back to being a pr!ck for the next 11 months, if you are not a Christian, shut up and be glad you have a day off with pay.
Tom,
Calling me a prick, insinuating that I can't be nice for a month and telling me to get drunk and to shut up a few times are not actions that tend to inspire me to respect your views.
At least you had the courtesy to disassociate yourself with Christians.
No where in my posts have I ever even mentioned the role Christians have played in the settling and founding of America, so I do wonder where that came from?
If you, perhaps, mean that I am suggesting that Christians should not receive special treatment for the accomplishments of our founders, you are correct. Neither should we receive punishment for their faults and mis-steps.
I also wonder at your use of the term Christian dominance. I wonder if the Founding Fathers would be proud that Christians dominate other citizens.
You also seem to imply that non-Christians might not be able to be nice or have the values needed for greatness. I hope you know this is not true.
My reference to the 10 Commandments was to show that, as Founding Values of America, they were not only Christian.
I would be interested in the values and attributes that made our country great that are uniquely Christian.
I admit that I have little detail knowledge of the race/religious/national make up of American settlers of any time period.
I tend to look at the value of the individual and not associate their positive or negative achievements with any groups in which they may be included.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 26, 2008, 09:38:15 PM
Calling me a :D If you, perhaps, mean that I am suggesting that Christians should not receive special treatment for the accomplishments of our founders, you are correct. Neither should we receive punishment for their faults and mis-steps.
I also wonder at your use of the term Christian dominance. I wonder if the Founding Fathers would be proud that Christians dominate other citizens.
You also seem to imply that non-Christians might not be able to be nice or have the values needed for greatness. I hope you know this is not true.
My reference to the 10 Commandments was to show that, as Founding Values of America, they were not only Christian.
I would be interested in the values and attributes that made our country great that are uniquely Christian.
I admit that I have little detail knowledge of the race/religious/national make up of American settlers of any time period.
I tend to look at the value of the individual and not associate their positive or negative achievements with any groups in which they may be included.
Solus, you from California? Or Europe? You took what Tom was saying, made it personal, and as a result totally blew what he was trying to say.
And you got your facts wrong, another California/Europe thing to do. Right now, in this US, Christianity is under relentless assault by one-worlders, atheists, wiccans and other religions. It is hardly a case where "that Christians dominate other citizens." Those who attack the Christian institutions fail to recognize the second part of the 1st Amendment on religion - "or prohibit the free expression thereof". Thus, kids can be taught nature worship in school (wicca) or Kwanzaa (a socialist screed more than a religion) or forced to adopt muslim names, but crosses around one person's neck are forbidden.
Rather than rise to the bait you have thrown out, and since facts can be taken out of context, ignored, or endlessly debated, I personally think it is time to end this "debate". It is clear you have no real interest in understanding what is and has been going on this country, only to mindlessly pound your point - over and over and over again, adding little or nothing new. Kinda reminds us of Tab, no??? :D
So, solus, enjoy yourself wherever you live, secure in your own warped sense of self-righteousness. Just be decent and leave the rest of us the hell alone to be and do as we believe is right.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: sanjuancb on August 26, 2008, 09:41:48 PM
So, solus, enjoy yourself wherever you live, secure in your own warped sense of self-righteousness. Just be decent and leave the rest of us the hell alone to be and do as we believe is right.
...and this is the part where we all say AMEN!
AMEN!
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: twyacht on August 26, 2008, 10:59:43 PM
The most respected man in America walked out onto the the balcony of Federal Hall in full view of the assembled multitude to be sworn into office. The date was April 30, 1789, and the man was George Washington. He was NOT required to put his hand on a Bible, HOWEVER, after he repeated the words that secured his position, he placed his hand on the Bible and added the words, So Help Me God. The Bible was opened to Deu. 28. ( Another one Obama missed while in Rev. Wrights Church for 20 years.)
His Inaugural address began:
"It would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being, who rules over the universe, who presides in the council of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States,..."
Washington was reminding all Americans that leaving God out of our nation's official proceedings was unacceptable to him.
The American Way, has to be traced to it's origins. Of the 55 men who wrote and signed the U.S Constitution of 1787, all but "three" were orthodox members of one of the established Christian churches of the time.
2 were Roman Catholic 2 were Lutherans 2 were Methodists the rest were Anglican (Church of England), Quakers, Puritans, and Calvinist. (Later known as Protestant Episcopal, Baptists, and Presbyterian).
The wisdom IS, that despite these fundamental beliefs, religeous freedom is a right.
If Obama "scoffs" the Bible, he's ignorant, and forgetting history.
I don't believe Christians "dominate" anyone, Hell even the Har'e Khrishna's can hand out flowers at public places, or that Kansas church can insult and interrupt Fallen Soldiers funerals, or Tom Cruise can believe in aliens, Wiccans can worship the solstice. Their not "dominated by Christians".
They have the freedom to worship trees, stars, celestial bodies, I don't care pick one,...
I don't thrust my beliefs on anyone, and expect the same from anyone else.
If that's a "Do unto others coincidence," so be it.
BUT, I refer back to the Founding Father's. "One Nation Under God", if mine isn't yours, that's just one thing that makes America great.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 27, 2008, 01:59:14 AM
Just for the record, the "Christian dominance" comment referred to percent of population. Also the reason I disassociate myself from organized religion is because of the many narrow minded bigots who use it to justify their particular form of ignorance and fear mongering. I have no problem with God, My problem is with the a$$holes that claim to represent Him. I also don't have to go to a particular building on Sunday to worship him, I worship MY Creator every time my heart keeps beating all day, I thank God for every pretty girl I see, and I know MY God when I see little kids laughing. The church I worship in is not of man, but is the creation of the Lord.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 27, 2008, 08:35:27 AM
Solus, you from California? Or Europe? You took what Tom was saying, made it personal, and as a result totally blew what he was trying to say.
And you got your facts wrong, another California/Europe thing to do. Right now, in this US, Christianity is under relentless assault by one-worlders, atheists, wiccans and other religions. It is hardly a case where "that Christians dominate other citizens." Those who attack the Christian institutions fail to recognize the second part of the 1st Amendment on religion - "or prohibit the free expression thereof". Thus, kids can be taught nature worship in school (wicca) or Kwanzaa (a socialist screed more than a religion) or forced to adopt muslim names, but crosses around one person's neck are forbidden.
Rather than rise to the bait you have thrown out, and since facts can be taken out of context, ignored, or endlessly debated, I personally think it is time to end this "debate". It is clear you have no real interest in understanding what is and has been going on this country, only to mindlessly pound your point - over and over and over again, adding little or nothing new. Kinda reminds us of Tab, no??? :D
So, solus, enjoy yourself wherever you live, secure in your own warped sense of self-righteousness. Just be decent and leave the rest of us the hell alone to be and do as we believe is right.
I took Tom's post personal because he prefaced what I responded to with To Solus
I will also take what you posted personally since you also addressed it to me.
I was born in Chicago, Ill., raised a Catholic, attended 8 years of Catholic grade school, seriously considered becoming a Priest.
I've lived my entire life in the Midwest, except for the time I spend overseas during my enlisted service in the US Army during the Vietnam War.
I would like you to tell me exactly what facts I have wrong?
The only "fact" I was trying to express was my belief that religions should be treated equally. If you re-read my posts, you will see that I clearly state that not allowing the Majority Religion, whatever it might be (in this case Christianity), to display their symbols and customs but to allow Minority Religions to do is is hypocritical.
Please show me where in my posts I have done other than speak to my belief in religious equality in government. True, moving to this equality would mean the removal of certain Christian symbols or allowing the same privilege to other religions.
Sanjuancb posted "If you are Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, hell Zoastrian, I don't care--you are free to live here, but don't think that you can impinge on the rule of the Christian majority under their God."
I find this attitude disturbing. Shall I assume all Christians posting here are of the same attitude? In light of this expressed point of view, I do worry about religious equality.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 27, 2008, 08:47:26 AM
BUT, I refer back to the Founding Father's. "One Nation Under God", if mine isn't yours, that's just one thing that makes America great.
The Founding Fathers didn't place "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, nor did they every speak the Pledge. The Pledge was written in the late 1800's and the phrase "under God" was not added until July 14th, 1954 (Flag Day).
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: twyacht on August 27, 2008, 11:25:36 AM
The Founding Fathers didn't place "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, nor did they every speak the Pledge. The Pledge was written in the late 1800's and the phrase "under God" was not added until July 14th, 1954 (Flag Day).
Solus, you are correct. and I never inferred that The Founding Fathers did place Under God anywhere.
I did however, state the they were men of faith, that founded this Country with "God" in mind. Your quote:
"Please show me where in my posts I have done other than speak to my belief in religious equality in government. True, moving to this equality would mean the removal of certain Christian symbols or allowing the same privilege to other religions."
As far as Religious "Equality", the numbers don't add up. The majority of this country is of Judeo-Christian beliefs. Not Hindu or Muslim, or whatever. The offset in America is: you CAN worship whatever you want, without persecution. If your specific belief is a minority of the population, than be thankful your not living in China, or the Middle East, where people "disappear" in the middle of the night, for not being part of the Majority.
Similarly, the majority of this country, (for now anyway), speaks English. Should there be "Language Equality" for those that come to this country and don't speak it?
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 27, 2008, 12:10:51 PM
The Founding Fathers didn't place "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, nor did they every speak the Pledge. The Pledge was written in the late 1800's and the phrase "under God" was not added until July 14th, 1954 (Flag Day).
Solus, you are correct. and I never inferred that The Founding Fathers did place Under God anywhere.
Sorry, Twyacht. I did think you associated the phrase with the Founding Fathers. My mistake
I did however, state the they were men of faith, that founded this Country with "God" in mind. Your quote:
"Please show me where in my posts I have done other than speak to my belief in religious equality in government. True, moving to this equality would mean the removal of certain Christian symbols or allowing the same privilege to other religions."
As far as Religious "Equality", the numbers don't add up. The majority of this country is of Judeo-Christian beliefs. Not Hindu or Muslim, or whatever. The offset in America is: you CAN worship whatever you want, without persecution. If your specific belief is a minority of the population, than be thankful your not living in China, or the Middle East, where people "disappear" in the middle of the night, for not being part of the Majority.
By equality, I did not mean equality in numbers, but equality in rights. If a single person forms a minority group, their rights should be the same as the rights of a majority group of even every other citizen of the country belongs to that majority group. Rights are not determined by majority/minority status
Similarly, the majority of this country, (for now anyway), speaks English. Should there be "Language Equality" for those that come to this country and don't speak it?
I will answer this, but please do not infer that I mean any relation to my view on religious freedom by this reply on language.
I would not oppose making English the official language of the US. Language is needed to communicate and there is no practical means to accommodate every possible spoken or written language. English is the established language in this country and is widely in use as a primary or secondary language in many places.
I would oppose any law making the use of any other language illegal (not that anyone has suggested that as far as I know) but I would also oppose any law requiring the inclusion of any other language in any capacity, i.e government documents, road signs, consumer packaging)
I have mixed feelings about requiring English to be understood as a condition of naturalization. This is because I have misgivings about the past abuse of reading "tests" for voter eligibility.
I do feel naturalized citizens must "become" Americans. A speech by Teddy Roosevelt, I believe, expressed that strongly.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: twyacht on August 27, 2008, 05:14:03 PM
"By equality, I did not mean equality in numbers, but equality in rights. If a single person forms a minority group, their rights should be the same as the rights of a majority group of even every other citizen of the country belongs to that majority group. Rights are not determined by majority/minority status"
I agree with you Solus, if 1 or 25 people want to worship a large seashell as a divine idol, in America, they should have every right to do so. Should seashell icons be placed next to Nativity scenes at X-mas, probably not going to happen on the public square, but if those want to display it on their property, That's great, I have no problem with that at all. I'll save the X-mas debate for another time,...
Please understand this was just a very "general" example leading to a bigger point.
Organized religeon doesn't represent me. For others, it may be a daily event. That's what's great about this country. But I don't think America denies a "minority" religeous group of their "rights". Too many ACLU lawyers, civil right lawyers would love to jump on that train.
The recent events of the Latter Day Saints, or David Koresh's outfit, or the others that have come and gone, ALL had the right (in the beginning), to practice their religeon as they wanted. When it morphed into something criminal, or people were hurt, or individual rights were violated, something had to be done, and the "law" stepped in.
There are hippy commune's here in the mountains of NC, worship Nature, total pacifists, vegetarians, make hemp products and sell them. They have just as many rights as the mega church in Charlotte.
I won't make personal remarks, I think that's not my style on a great forum, I enjoy a good debate, and I'll shut myself up now.
Take Care Solus,
Tom W.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Rob10ring on August 27, 2008, 05:27:54 PM
"The recent events of the Latter Day Saints, or David Koresh's outfit, or the others that have come and gone, ALL had the right (in the beginning), to practice their religeon as they wanted. When it morphed into something criminal, or people were hurt, or individual rights were violated, something had to be done, and the "law" stepped in.
What recent events were the Latter Day Saints involved in? If you're referring to the polygamist sect stuff that was recently in the news, that wasn't the actual Mormon church.
Just pointing that out. I'm not meaning to sound over sensitive, or offended.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Sgt Z Squad on August 27, 2008, 05:39:18 PM
"We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition, and that every person may here worship God according to the dictates of his own heart. In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man's religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States." George Washington: 1793 - letter to the Members of the New Church in Baltimore
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: twyacht on August 27, 2008, 07:51:04 PM
What recent events were the Latter Day Saints involved in? If you're referring to the polygamist sect stuff that was recently in the news, that wasn't the actual Mormon church.
Just pointing that out. I'm not meaning to sound over sensitive, or offended.
I was just referring to the events in Texas, and the Warren Jeffs disgraceful actions.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23993440/
"The members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints spent their days raising numerous children, tilling small gardens and doing chores. But at least one former resident says life was not some idyllic replica of 19th-century life.
"Once you go into the compound, you don't ever leave it," said Carolyn Jessop, one of the wives of the alleged leader of the Eldorado complex. Jessop left with her eight children before the sect moved to Texas.
Jessop said the community emphasized self-sufficiency because they believed the apocalypse was near.
The women were not allowed to wear red — the color Jeffs said belonged to Jesus — and were not allowed to cut their hair. They were also kept isolated from the outside world.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Rob10ring on August 28, 2008, 12:35:40 AM
"The members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints spent their days raising numerous children, tilling small gardens and doing chores. But at least one former resident says life was not some idyllic replica of 19th-century life.
"Once you go into the compound, you don't ever leave it," said Carolyn Jessop, one of the wives of the alleged leader of the Eldorado complex. Jessop left with her eight children before the sect moved to Texas.
Jessop said the community emphasized self-sufficiency because they believed the apocalypse was near.
The women were not allowed to wear red — the color Jeffs said belonged to Jesus — and were not allowed to cut their hair. They were also kept isolated from the outside world.
The FLDS aren't the Ladder Day Saints.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 28, 2008, 01:54:32 AM
"By equality, I did not mean equality in numbers, but equality in rights. If a single person forms a minority group, their rights should be the same as the rights of a majority group of even every other citizen of the country belongs to that majority group. Rights are not determined by majority/minority status"
I agree with you Solus, if 1 or 25 people want to worship a large seashell as a divine idol, in America, they should have every right to do so. Should seashell icons be placed next to Nativity scenes at X-mas, probably not going to happen on the public square, but if those want to display it on their property, That's great, I have no problem with that at all. I'll save the X-mas debate for another time,...
Please understand this was just a very "general" example leading to a bigger point.
Organized religeon doesn't represent me. For others, it may be a daily event. That's what's great about this country. But I don't think America denies a "minority" religeous group of their "rights". Too many ACLU lawyers, civil right lawyers would love to jump on that train.
The recent events of the Latter Day Saints, or David Koresh's outfit, or the others that have come and gone, ALL had the right (in the beginning), to practice their religeon as they wanted. When it morphed into something criminal, or people were hurt, or individual rights were violated, something had to be done, and the "law" stepped in.
There are hippy commune's here in the mountains of NC, worship Nature, total pacifists, vegetarians, make hemp products and sell them. They have just as many rights as the mega church in Charlotte.
I won't make personal remarks, I think that's not my style on a great forum, I enjoy a good debate, and I'll shut myself up now.
Take Care Solus,
Tom W.
Don't include Koresh in this , His group were law abiding citizens murdered by Janet Reno' ATF
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: twyacht on August 28, 2008, 11:06:32 AM
"The FLDS aren't the Ladder Day Saints."
Distinction noted,...
"Don't include Koresh in this , His group were law abiding citizens murdered by Janet Reno' ATF"
Being a polygamist, with some underage "wives" as young as 12. Isn't legal.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 28, 2008, 11:17:01 AM
"Don't include Koresh in this , His group were law abiding citizens murdered by Janet Reno' ATF"
Being a polygamist, with some underage "wives" as young as 12. Isn't legal.
That accusation was investigated previously by the State of Texas and found to be unwarranted. The same with the alleged "Drug activities" neither of which came under the jurisdiction of ATF. Find the back issues of Soldier of Fortune magazine with their investigation in it, they received press awards for investigative journalism. It might be on their website. ( That's the Branch Davidians, I have not heard any defense for the FLDS )
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Solus on August 28, 2008, 12:03:07 PM
That accusation was investigated previously by the State of Texas and found to be unwarranted. The same with the alleged "Drug activities" neither of which came under the jurisdiction of ATF. Find the back issues of Soldier of Fortune magazine with their investigation in it, they received press awards for investigative journalism. It might be on their website. ( That's the Branch Davidians, I have not heard any defense for the FLDS )
Koresh was in the process of walking out to meet the AFT storm troopers. He was unarmed and telling the AFT agents that this was not necessary and was willing to allow them to conduct an investigation as he had done several times before with local authorities.
One of the AFT agents, while jumping off the back of the truck shot himself in the leg and shouted "I'm hit" . The AFT agents opened fire on the unarmed Koresh wounding him 4 times. His followers opened fire in the ATF agents, killing 6, I believe, in the standoff.
In addition to finding the initial accusations of the ATF unwarranted, no one found guilty of killing Federal Agents. I believe 4 members were convicted of what was termed minor firearms violations. I do not know the nature of these violations.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Rob10ring on August 28, 2008, 03:13:46 PM
Did they ever even have anything on the Branch Davidians?
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 28, 2008, 06:52:54 PM
Did they ever even have anything on the Branch Davidians?
Just Reno's raging ego, the unadulterated arrogance and illegality of the FBI and ATF, and some minor piss-ant charges that a small number (2, 3?) went to jail for. Of course, the aforementioned gummint agents did happen to just accidentally don't you know murder all of the Branch Davidians in the compound, thereby avoiding the time-consuming, messy and very expensive trials. Of course, none of the gummint types ever were indiced, let alone went to trial. >:(
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: twyacht on August 28, 2008, 09:03:20 PM
I won't ever disagree with the absolute clusterf*** the ATF and other agencies handled the Branch Davidians. The situation went from bad to worse to catastrophic thanks to a inept Justice Dept.
BUT Koresh raised red flags all over town which of course escalated interest by the feds.
Interesting link to the whole series of events. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/koresh/1.html
Small excerpt from the article;
Known as the Mount Carmel Center, the place was occupied by members of an apocalyptic religious group that was led by a man named David Koresh. Rumored to be stockpiled inside was an arsenal of explosives and weapons, some of which reportedly had been illegally converted to rapid-fire automatic.
That put them under the ATF's jurisdiction. A UPS driver had tipped off the government when a package bound for Mount Carmel had broken open to reveal casings for hand grenades. While the group did earn money from gun sales and were legally allowed to trade in arms, it appeared that they weren't following protocol. Some neighbors also reported a lot of target practice.
But there was more, too, which came out in the days ahead. Linedecker claims that the local newspaper was running a series of articles about Koresh's dubious activities, entitled "The Sinful Messiah," based on accounts by defectors like Marc Breault, who later authored Inside the Cult. Breault had hired detectives to snoop around and when contacted by the ATF, he supplied a number of detailed descriptions of his former associates. He denounced Koresh, speaking of child abuse and polygamy.
Back to the premise of the this threads new direction, the Davidians right or wrong, drew attention to themselves, and raised the ire of an awful Janet Reno led DOJ.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 28, 2008, 09:58:06 PM
I won't ever disagree with the absolute clusterf*** the ATF and other agencies handled the Branch Davidians. The situation went from bad to worse to catastrophic thanks to a inept Justice Dept.
BUT Koresh raised red flags all over town which of course escalated interest by the feds.
Interesting link to the whole series of events. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/koresh/1.html
Small excerpt from the article;
Known as the Mount Carmel Center, the place was occupied by members of an apocalyptic religious group that was led by a man named David Koresh. Rumored to be stockpiled inside was an arsenal of explosives and weapons, some of which reportedly had been illegally converted to rapid-fire automatic.
That put them under the ATF's jurisdiction. A UPS driver had tipped off the government when a package bound for Mount Carmel had broken open to reveal casings for hand grenades. While the group did earn money from gun sales and were legally allowed to trade in arms, it appeared that they weren't following protocol. Some neighbors also reported a lot of target practice.
But there was more, too, which came out in the days ahead. Linedecker claims that the local newspaper was running a series of articles about Koresh's dubious activities, entitled "The Sinful Messiah," based on accounts by defectors like Marc Breault, who later authored Inside the Cult. Breault had hired detectives to snoop around and when contacted by the ATF, he supplied a number of detailed descriptions of his former associates. He denounced Koresh, speaking of child abuse and polygamy.
Back to the premise of the this threads new direction, the Davidians right or wrong, drew attention to themselves, and raised the ire of an awful Janet Reno led DOJ.
All true apparently. Great documentary about it too, sleeze Schumer was point man for BJ's minions on the white wash "investigation".
However, the ATF was trained by the US military at one of the TX bases, and was serving a knock and serve warrant for - ready for this? - drugs. Not even close to ATF's mission statement and certainly not meriting stock trailers full of armor clad automatic weapons bearing gummint types.
Punch line? The ATF was pinned down and ran out of ammo, Koresh and his people let the ATF walk out. Real criminal types.
We will never know the real truth, sadly, as most of the key people were killed by the US gummint.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Rob10ring on August 30, 2008, 03:08:52 PM
I won't ever disagree with the absolute clusterf*** the ATF and other agencies handled the Branch Davidians. The situation went from bad to worse to catastrophic thanks to a inept Justice Dept.
BUT Koresh raised red flags all over town which of course escalated interest by the feds.
Interesting link to the whole series of events. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/koresh/1.html
Small excerpt from the article;
Known as the Mount Carmel Center, the place was occupied by members of an apocalyptic religious group that was led by a man named David Koresh. Rumored to be stockpiled inside was an arsenal of explosives and weapons, some of which reportedly had been illegally converted to rapid-fire automatic.
That put them under the ATF's jurisdiction. A UPS driver had tipped off the government when a package bound for Mount Carmel had broken open to reveal casings for hand grenades. While the group did earn money from gun sales and were legally allowed to trade in arms, it appeared that they weren't following protocol. Some neighbors also reported a lot of target practice.
But there was more, too, which came out in the days ahead. Linedecker claims that the local newspaper was running a series of articles about Koresh's dubious activities, entitled "The Sinful Messiah," based on accounts by defectors like Marc Breault, who later authored Inside the Cult. Breault had hired detectives to snoop around and when contacted by the ATF, he supplied a number of detailed descriptions of his former associates. He denounced Koresh, speaking of child abuse and polygamy.
Back to the premise of the this threads new direction, the Davidians right or wrong, drew attention to themselves, and raised the ire of an awful Janet Reno led DOJ.
I don't think I ever heard the whole story on this before. What a big mess. Kind of like the Randy Weaver thing at Ruby Ridge where something small turned into Americans getting killed.
Title: Re: Obama scoffs the Bible
Post by: Pathfinder on August 30, 2008, 04:08:31 PM
I don't think I ever heard the whole story on this before. What a big mess. Kind of like the Randy Weaver thing at Ruby Ridge where something small turned into Americans getting killed - by their own gummint!!!!
Update: The documentary you want is "Waco: The Rules of Engagement" (1997) a very balanced review of the situation and the government's outrageous behavior. Most chilling is the FBI (?) agent making sure there was plenty of blank VHS tapes to record her "success".