Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 184
  1. #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    So how does this relate to the rule of law in this country?
    Do you have any idea who created the rule of law in America? You cant possibly think it was Budists or Valkyres- Surely you are not that ignorant
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Do you have any idea who created the rule of law in America? You cant possibly think it was Budists or Valkyres- Surely you are not that ignorant
    Of course not...do me a favor. Whenever you look at an issue...put yourself in the minority and look at it from that perspective. Be an advocate. Im a Christian but I totally understand how gays must feel about not having the same rights.

    I am not agnostic or atheist but I can understand and relate to them that they may not want a government run under Christian morals (and I know I am going beyond the fringe but I am trying to make a point.)

    Not everyone agrees with the Christian perspective.
  3. #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho

    Not everyone agrees with the Christian perspective.
    And that's okay - actually that's how it should be - so long as those that have the Christian perspective are not shouted down for it.
    Last edited by treo2die4; 04/29/2005 at 09:10 PM.
  4. #84  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Of course not...do me a favor. Whenever you look at an issue...put yourself in the minority and look at it from that perspective. Be an advocate. Im a Christian but I totally understand how gays must feel about not having the same rights.

    I am not agnostic or atheist but I can understand and relate to them that they may not want a government run under Christian morals (and I know I am going beyond the fringe but I am trying to make a point.)

    Not everyone agrees with the Christian perspective.
    Truth be told... You are probably "more" christian (if you could assigns levels) than I am. But I am not ignorant as to who and when and why America was founded. I also happen to think its a great place to live. If I didn't I would move.
  5. #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo2die4
    I that's okay - actually that how it should be - so long as those that have the Christian perspective are not shouted down for it.
    Precisely!
  6. #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    What the crap does the environment have to do with the onslaught on christianity?

    Animal rights? Once again, this offends christians?

    PC is often stupid but again, how it disenfranchises christians I can't guess.
    The examples were from you previous question on conservatives, not christians:

    [/QUOTE] Please help me identify this MAJOR ONSLAUGHT on the conservatives [/QUOTE]

    Nice try though
  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo2die4
    I that's okay - actually that how it should be - so long as those that have the Christian perspective are not shouted down for it.
    I agree on the 'shouted down' part.

    My problem is with the outcome of a conservative 'Christian' government that is run on 'Christian' principles (there is disagreement in the various denominations on what these are) in the face of the Constitution and the establishment clause. (Personally I would probably be ok with it because Im Christian...my concern is for everyone else who not Christian (or is but their church doesnt support that issue) or anyone who doesnt support that particular issue. i.e. gay rights, abortion, etc. come to mind off the top.
  8. #88  
    DA,
    There is a HUGE difference between allowing a cross to be displayed or even displaying it for that matter than to FORCE you to display one. If our government ever actually FORCES you to display one as you seem to think they already do- I will be screaming right beside you.
  9. #89  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    But I am not ignorant as to who and when and why America was founded.
    Would you agree that it was for religious freedom and the right not be persecuted by it? If so, then you should be able to see my point as well. People who are not Christian do not want it forced on them (hence the persecution part.)

    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    I also happen to think its a great place to live. If I didn't I would move.
    You don't have to tell me. I love this country so much that I was willing to die for it . But-I don't think people should move because they disagree and don't think its a great place to live.

    God, Country, Corps (this is my belief and I don't expect everyone to accept it or be ruled by it.)
  10. #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    (this is my belief and I don't expect everyone to accept it or be ruled by it.)
    nail on the head!
  11. #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Of course not...do me a favor. Whenever you look at an issue...put yourself in the minority and look at it from that perspective. Be an advocate. Im a Christian but I totally understand how gays must feel about not having the same rights.
    I assume you are talking about mariage? Who said they cant be married. The marriage reconized by law (At least in America) was founded by christianity. At one time it was only performed by officials of a church. Gay people by definition are not christian so why would they even want to be "married" in the christian sense? Why not create thier own version?

    As far as property rights for married people goes... I am not familiar with all states but in my state any person or group of people can hold title to property however they choose and this includes "rights of survivor ship"

    I just don't understand how bieng married in the christian sense would benifit them. If I am missing something please fill me in.
  12. #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Would you agree that it was for religious freedom and the right not be persecuted by it? If so, then you should be able to see my point as well. People who are not Christian do not want it forced on them (hence the persecution part.)
    Please give me an example of the Government forcing christianity on anyone. If they actually banned the display of other religions or forced people to display christian symbols I could see the outrage. Alas they don't and will not- The 1st ammendment guarranties this. There is a difference in believing and forcing someone else to believe.
  13. #93  
    When I was in Elementary, my school had moring prayer. I chose to not pray and I was NEVER punished for that choice.
  14. #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I agree that the guy can quit but why make the girl go somewhere else for a medication or prescription? The pharmacist shouldnt be allowed to discriminate.
    Whoa! Pharmacies should have the right ro determine what products they will and will not carry. It is reasonable for a pharmacy to fire a pharmacist that refuses to carry out the pharmacies policies. It is not reasonable for the government to mandate that a pharmacy carry a given pill.

    My dentist has recommended a particular brand of dental products for me. I only know of one drug store chain that carries it. Am I in a position to sue the other chains for discrimination? No. I go to the one that carries it. If, on the other hand, that chain refuses to sell it to me, then we have cause for action.
  15. #95  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Whoa! Pharmacies should have the right ro determine what products they will and will not carry. It is reasonable for a pharmacy to fire a pharmacist that refuses to carry out the pharmacies policies. It is not reasonable for the government to mandate that a pharmacy carry a given pill.

    My dentist has recommended a particular brand of dental products for me. I only know of one drug store chain that carries it. Am I in a position to sue the other chains for discrimination? No. I go to the one that carries it. If, on the other hand, that chain refuses to sell it to me, then we have cause for action.
    See? You always explain it just a little better
  16. #96  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    I assume you are talking about mariage? Who said they cant be married.
    The President supports a constitutional ban on marriage. Many states have passed laws banning the recognition of gay marriage. My guess as to why there is no constitutional ban is because it requires 3/4's of the states to sign off on it and I don't think it has that kind of support.

    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    The marriage reconized by law (At least in America) was founded by christianity. At one time it was only performed by officials of a church.
    I would prefer it be done ONLY in church and if two people want legal rights, they get a civil union down at the courthouse. This way, everyone is treated the same. Gays would have to find a church that would marry them.

    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Gay people by definition are not christian so why would they even want to be "married" in the christian sense?
    First of all, who decides what a Christian is? I am sure some 'christian' churches (I use the term loosely) are in full support of gay marriage. My guess is that gays do not want to be treated any differently (much the same argument about racial discrimination).

    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Why not create thier own version?
    Seperate is not equal. Why should they have to create 'their own'?

    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    As far as property rights for married people goes... I am not familiar with all states but in my state any person or group of people can hold title to property however they choose and this includes "rights of survivor ship"

    I just don't understand how bieng married in the christian sense would benifit them. If I am missing something please fill me in.
    Its about equality. Put yourself in their shoes...wouldnt you want the same rights, the same opportunities (nevermind the fact that I personally believe that being gay is wrong in Gods eyes.)
  17. #97  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Whoa! Pharmacies should have the right ro determine what products they will and will not carry. It is reasonable for a pharmacy to fire a pharmacist that refuses to carry out the pharmacies policies. It is not reasonable for the government to mandate that a pharmacy carry a given pill.

    My dentist has recommended a particular brand of dental products for me. I only know of one drug store chain that carries it. Am I in a position to sue the other chains for discrimination? No. I go to the one that carries it. If, on the other hand, that chain refuses to sell it to me, then we have cause for action.
    I just said the pharmacist shouldnt be able to discriminate on who he sells to...not what he stocks on his shelves.
  18. #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Seperate is not equal. Why should they have to create 'their own'?
    So do think that Budist (or any other religion) should also start praticing Christian marriage traditions?
  19. #99  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Please give me an example of the Government forcing christianity on anyone. If they actually banned the display of other religions or forced people to display christian symbols I could see the outrage. Alas they don't and will not- The 1st ammendment guarranties this. There is a difference in believing and forcing someone else to believe.
    I am not trying to say that the government is trying to 'make' everyone become a christian. (Sorry if there is confusion.)

    Take gay marriage as an example. Under the current administration, if you are not gay, you can get married (if you are gay, then you cant get married.) Isnt that forcing a particular doctrine onto another group by limiting and controlling benefits to get a desired result (I know-not the same but maybe you see my point.) And look at the Administration's rationale-'marriage is holy union between a man and woman.'

    The same thing is being done with money to planned parenthood organizations. If they support abortion, then the funding gets cut. If they don't, the money keeps coming. In an eerie way, the government is forcing Christian doctrine on others.

    My point is that the government shouldnt create policies citing Christian concepts. It alienates everyone who is not a christian or does not follow those principles (hence the division in each political party when it comes to its moderates.)

    And I believe this runs counter to the constitution. If it was to be expected and accepted by the founding fathers, why did they put the establishment clause in? My answer is because they did not want the country run on a Christian code primarily because the problem is who is going to interpret what that christian code will be?

    In a weird way, it might be better to create these policies under the guise of "Its for the good of the country". At least that way, it wouldnt appear so overtly religious
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    So do think that Budist (or any other religion) should also start praticing Christian marriage traditions?
    Im confused. Are you saying that if your a Budhist then you cant get married and enjoy the same rights as a Christian couple?

    As far a I know, Budists can get a marriage license. (Maybe Im wrong...I don't know much about Budhists).

Posting Permissions