Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My prediction on the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by sebfrench76 View Post
    According to you,it's Arabic now ?
    Majority is speaking Dutch, a minority French,and within a generation the majority in Brussels will speak Arabic .
    Last edited by ljadw; 30 Jun 15, 12:47.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
      Mark Oppenheimer in the NY Times (of course) : "It is time to end tax exemptions for all churches ."

      The open attack on religion has begun.
      I didn't know a separation of church and state according to the constitution was an attack on religion. No wonder conservatives are so hysterical.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
        I didn't know a separation of church and state according to the constitution was an attack on religion. No wonder conservatives are so hysterical.
        It is when, in affect, it becomes elimination of church from state. That is, when the state eliminates any and all religion from the public square relegating it solely to a personal and private level.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
          It is when, in affect, it becomes elimination of church from state. That is, when the state eliminates any and all religion from the public square relegating it solely to a personal and private level.
          Religion should not be part of the public, ie. government, sphere. It should be left solely up to the individual, with government not interfering to regulate what is or isn't a religion.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
            I didn't know a separation of church and state according to the constitution was an attack on religion. No wonder conservatives are so hysterical.
            Of topic and irrelevant : the point is that the NY Times has started the attack on religion and churches and that this is invalidating the assurances that the church has nothing to fear .

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
              Of topic and irrelevant : the point is that the NY Times has started the attack on religion and churches and that this is invalidating the assurances that the church has nothing to fear .
              NYT has no power to tax churches. They've been calling for stuff for decades and decades that have never come about and never will.
              “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
              “To talk of many things:
              Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
              Of cabbages—and kings—
              And why the sea is boiling hot—
              And whether pigs have wings.”
              ― Lewis Carroll

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                No they can't.

                Because they can't.
                They can if 5 justices decide that the Miracle Amendment trumps the First Amendment... Which they technically did in this ruling.

                Churches and ministers don't have different First Amendment rights than county clerks, judges and JP's do.
                Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
                  Of topic and irrelevant : the point is that the NY Times has started the attack on religion and churches and that this is invalidating the assurances that the church has nothing to fear .
                  Again, more hysterics. There isn't and hasn't been an attack on religion nor churches - outside of actual attacks on churches, as happened in South Carolina.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                    Religion should not be part of the public, ie. government, sphere. It should be left solely up to the individual, with government not interfering to regulate what is or isn't a religion.
                    Half right. See Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists.
                    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                      They can if 5 justices decide that the Miracle Amendment trumps the First Amendment... Which they technically did in this ruling.

                      Churches and ministers don't have different First Amendment rights than county clerks, judges and JP's do.
                      Only in your fantasy construct land. The reality of the 14th and how courts handle it is entirely different. But we can't let facts get in the way.

                      Churches and Ministers don't work for the State.
                      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                      “To talk of many things:
                      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                      Of cabbages—and kings—
                      And why the sea is boiling hot—
                      And whether pigs have wings.”
                      ― Lewis Carroll

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                        Religion should not be part of the public, ie. government, sphere. It should be left solely up to the individual, with government not interfering to regulate what is or isn't a religion.
                        The government shouldn't be Atheist either. The above comes perilously close to saying it should. A secular government would not ban a non-denominational prayer or the display of some religious symbol or passage in public either.
                        However, those arguing loudest against religion in government want all vestiges, however minute, however long held, whenever established banned from government and often the public square. That amounts to promotion of the religion of Atheism over other religions.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                          Half right. See Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists.
                          I'm sorry, I didn't know my opinion was dependent on what Jefferson told Baptists.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            The government shouldn't be Atheist either. The above comes perilously close to saying it should. A secular government would not ban a non-denominational prayer or the display of some religious symbol or passage in public either.
                            However, those arguing loudest against religion in government want all vestiges, however minute, however long held, whenever established banned from government and often the public square. That amounts to promotion of the religion of Atheism over other religions.
                            An atheist government is a government taking on a religious view. A secular government is one taking on no religious view.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                              NYT has no power to tax churches. They've been calling for stuff for decades and decades that have never come about and never will.
                              If I recall correctly they "discovered" Jimmy Carter.

                              They are a tool of the establishment, for the most part. Although I give them credit on NSA surveillance and free speech issues.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by lakechampainer View Post
                                If I recall correctly they "discovered" Jimmy Carter.

                                They are a tool of the establishment, for the most part. Although I give them credit on NSA surveillance and free speech issues.
                                They certainly failed in mid to late 2002 and in 2003 concerning Iraq. But a vast majority of the others did also.
                                “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                                “To talk of many things:
                                Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                                Of cabbages—and kings—
                                And why the sea is boiling hot—
                                And whether pigs have wings.”
                                ― Lewis Carroll

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X