Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29
  1.    #1  
    Source
    From an article regarding budget cuts recently passed in the House:

    Democrats were scathing. "As the Bible teaches us, to minister to the needs of God's creation is an act of worship, to ignore those needs is to dishonor the God who made us," said House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California. "Let us vote no on this budget as an act of worship and for America's children."
  2. #2  
    No. One senator does not a state make.
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    No. One senator does not a state make.
    True, but are we not the sum of our parts?
  4. #4  
    If helping the poor is an act of worship, and the state can't "Worship" due to legal church-state issues... (that Nancy P. would probably agree with) then the state would be forbidden from helping the poor, the opposite of what Ms. Pelosi would want.
    "Everybody Palm!"

    Palm III/IIIC, Palm Vx, Verizon: Treo 650, Centro, Pre+.
    Leo killed my future Pre 3 & Opal, dagnabitt!
    Should I buy a Handspring Visor instead?
    Got a Pre2! "It eats iPhones for Breakfast"!
  5. #5  
    I don't think so. One Senator's rationale for helping the less fortunate probably wouldn't be enough.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  6. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Source
    From an article regarding budget cuts recently passed in the House:
    If it were from a conservative it would be, but since it is from a liberal of course not. We do have the double standard you know.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    True, but are we not the sum of our parts?
    Uh, sure. But just because one person votes communist, does that make us a communist state. We may be a "sum of our parts" but we aren't uniquely defined by a single part. My car is not the same as a steering wheel.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    Uh, sure. But just because one person votes communist, does that make us a communist state. We may be a "sum of our parts" but we aren't uniquely defined by a single part. My car is not the same as a steering wheel.
    Yes I know. I just find it interesting how tolerating the religious comments are because they come from a lib! If that was a conservative statement, Da would have worn out a keyboard by now
  9.    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Yes I know. I just find it interesting how tolerating the religious comments are because they come from a lib! If that was a conservative statement, Da would have worn out a keyboard by now
    This is what prompted me to present the quote to this forum. Besides the fact that she was refering to drilling in Alaska I found it such a strange use of terms to equate voting on a budget bill to an act of worship.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Yes I know. I just find it interesting how tolerating the religious comments are because they come from a lib! If that was a conservative statement, Da would have worn out a keyboard by now
    Agreed.
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Yes I know. I just find it interesting how tolerating the religious comments are because they come from a lib! If that was a conservative statement, Da would have worn out a keyboard by now
    This just doesnt seem to be that 'close' though.

    Hundreds (if not thousands) of things are passed in the Congress every year. We couldn't possibly know the reasons why each person voted the way they did and even if they all told us and they were all religious reasons, I don't think that would be enough. (Think back on how many times we have heard Pres. Bush say that he is guided by his religious convictions.) There has to be a balance between the 1st amendment and the establishment clause.

    The State Sponsored Religion argument usually comes up in the context of the State (not a single representative) taking the side of a particular religion (giving the perception that it is endorsing said religion). I am not sure how this example does that?
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  12.    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    This just doesnt seem to be that 'close' though.

    Hundreds (if not thousands) of things are passed in the Congress every year. We couldn't possibly know the reasons why each person voted the way they did and even if they all told us and they were all religious reasons, I don't think that would be enough. (Think back on how many times we have heard Pres. Bush say that he is guided by his religious convictions.) There has to be a balance between the 1st amendment and the establishment clause.

    The State Sponsored Religion argument usually comes up in the context of the State (not a single representative) taking the side of a particular religion (giving the perception that it is endorsing said religion). I am not sure how this example does that?
    For the record, I do not perceive of the representatives comments as establishing religion. I just find it a peculiar thing to describe the budget vote as an act of worship.

    Of course, in other contexts (schools) this forum has been filled with comments that a teacher serves as the "state" to students. If that same logic were applied here, this one statement could be construed as establishment.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    If it were from a conservative it would be, but since it is from a liberal of course not. We do have the double standard you know.
    Please. Again, it's a matter of personal expression versus state endorsement. Being a gov't employee does not remove your right to expression of personal religious belief. That is the standard.
  14.    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Please. Again, it's a matter of personal expression versus state endorsement. Being a gov't employee does not remove your right to expression of personal religious belief. That is the standard.
    Hmmm...

    So, even on government property, a personal expression is acceptable?
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Hmmm...

    So, even on government property, a personal expression is acceptable?
    hehe snicker snicker
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Hmmm...

    So, even on government property, a personal expression is acceptable?
    Yes. As I've said a million times before. As the ACLU has defended over and over again. There is no war on the christian faith. It's actually quite the opposite.
  17. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Yes. As I've said a million times before. As the ACLU has defended over and over again. There is no war on the christian faith. It's actually quite the opposite.
    One nation under God
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Hmmm...

    So, even on government property, a personal expression is acceptable?
    Pres. Bush has done this all the time while at the Oval Office. It's his 1st amendment right. Some might argue that because of his leadership role, he should be more cautious on what/how he states things but I tend to favor the 1st amendment side.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  19. #19  
    10 Commandments (multi religous doc).
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    For the record, I do not perceive of the representatives comments as establishing religion. I just find it a peculiar thing to describe the budget vote as an act of worship.
    Yeah, it did seem wierd.

    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Of course, in other contexts (schools) this forum has been filled with comments that a teacher serves as the "state" to students. If that same logic were applied here, this one statement could be construed as establishment.
    I think the circumstances are different in a school. Teacher=role model. Student=impressionable. Location=school, place of learning.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions