Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 185
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    My opinion is that we are lacking people who will simply say "No, there's nothing wrong with this, if you don't like it, shut your mouth, or don't come."
    There may be nothing wrong with it but I don't think the best strategy is to tell people to shut up

    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    Too many times we playcate to the lawyers and the other bottom-feeders.
    Well the reason the lawyers are there is to limit the institutions liability. Don't blame the lawyers for giving the advice, blame the institutions for accepting it. They make the final decisions on whether to use that venue or to choose a different one.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    Why are we often catering to the minority (not race, but the literal sense), negatively impacting the majority. The majority of the people don't have a problem, yet the lawyer scare and the fear of being unpopular somehow influences these decisions.
    A lot of social change has come because we have looked at and examined the minority interest...otherwise its mob rule.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    I think we need to punch these people in the face.
    LOL-yep, thats how you get people to accept your point of view.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    Heaven forbid some of the social deviants gleen some basic morality from the location.
    Whats 'wrong' with being a social deviant? Should we all act like you?

    I don't need to remind anyone that the 'church' (in a broad sense) has never been above social deviancy (I could list tons of examples but recent things that come to mind are sexual assaults, rapes (cover ups by high church authorities), etc...

    In general, they do appear to hold the higher moral ground but because there have been individuals who have violated that trust, many secular people have lost trust in them.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    If you didnt have an opinion, and really dont care, why say anything. Shop wanted to start the thread and talk about it. You just wanna stifle opinions that differ from yours. Trollboy
    My opinion is that the high school is not doing anything that is causing any great disservice either to its students or parents. I do not see any kids being denied graduation or any other interruption of thier curriculum.

    What do all of you suggest, that we impose some type of injunction that should require the school to have the graduation in the church? I think that sounds kind of silly to me.

    This is a local school board matter and the local individuals have a right to elect new school board members in the future, if they don't like what they are doing.

    So I do have an opinion on this. Sorry if it is not the same as yours, but that happens in this forum.

    By the way, calling people names is kind of childish, don't you think?
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    If you truly understood the concept, you would understand how it protects not just your religion but everyone's. And THAT is exactly what the framers were after.
    I do truly understand the concept - but thanks for continuing your regular habit of using a condescending attitude to try and bully others into accepting you words as gospel (no pun intended).
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    My opinion is that the high school is not doing anything that is causing any great disservice either to its students or parents. I do not see any kids being denied graduation or any other interruption of thier curriculum.

    What do all of you suggest, that we impose some type of injunction that should require the school to have the graduation in the church? I think that sounds kind of silly to me.

    This is a local school board matter and the local individuals have a right to elect new school board members in the future, if they don't like what they are doing.

    So I do have an opinion on this. Sorry if it is not the same as yours, but that happens in this forum.

    By the way, calling people names is kind of childish, don't you think?
    YAWN
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    If you truly understood the concept, you would understand how it protects not just your religion but everyone's. And THAT is exactly what the framers were after.
    I disagree with the anachronistic attributes you are applying. They were united under Christianity as a whole, but different denominations as well as protestant/orthodox beliefs. At no point was this country founded with or on the religious differences we see today. Judaism, Mormonism, Wicca, or Buddhism never played a role in the development of the Constitution as we know it. If so, blatant Christian overtones such as "In God we trust" and God given rights would never have appeared.

    Don't get your timeline confused with the invalid application of present day societal views on the true intent.
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    YAWN
    I am glad we are in agreement now!
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    I disagree with the anachronistic attributes you are applying. They were united under Christianity as a whole, but different denominations as well as protestant/orthodox beliefs. At no point was this country founded with or on the religious differences we see today. Judaism, Mormonism, Wicca, or Buddhism never played a role in the development of the Constitution as we know it. If so, blatant Christian overtones such as "In God we trust" and God given rights would never have appeared.

    Don't get your timeline confused with the invalid application of present day societal views on the true intent.
    Amen.
    BTW, Mormonism wasn't around until the 1830s. Also most of the Christian churches today came about after and because of the religious freedom the founding fathers set up in the Constitution in the 1770s.
  8. #48  
    We better not have any high school graduations in this church....
  9. #49  
    It's hard to argue with the Left Coast folks and the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia. Once you get past the regurgitation of media-fed drones you're left with the absence of any type of belief system.

    Of course, I've never understood the liberal party either. The party itself is a derivative of the word liberty, yet the only thing that political party has done well has been to strip away the civil liberties we once had and to create a following of hyper-sensitive pussified men.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    I disagree with the anachronistic attributes you are applying. They were united under Christianity as a whole, but different denominations as well as protestant/orthodox beliefs. At no point was this country founded with or on the religious differences we see today. Judaism, Mormonism, Wicca, or Buddhism never played a role in the development of the Constitution as we know it. If so, blatant Christian overtones such as "In God we trust" and God given rights would never have appeared.

    Don't get your timeline confused with the invalid application of present day societal views on the true intent.
    Sorry but the framers did allow for atheistic beliefs etc in their attempts to protect individual religious liberties.
  11.    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by meyerweb
    ...The University of Maryland is close by, has at least two venues that will seat as many, and offers no issues with the establishment clause.
    For sure. I did a quick search but did not come up with costs for renting Byrd Stadium or Comcast Center. But, depending on costs, these are viable options.

    But, back to my point in initiating this discussion. The issue to me is not to suggest in any way that graduation should be held at the church facility. It should be held somewhere that accomodates the the ceremony. I was just saddened by the reason expressed for not using the church in particular.
    Quote Originally Posted by meyerweb
    Something else I find thought provoking: Montgomery County, MD has one of the largest concentrations of Jews, outside of the New York area, on the East Coast. There are several very large synagogues in the county. I wonder why the county isn't holding graduation in one of them? Maybe because the same Christian parents who screamed bloody murder over the county's sex education curriculum would have screamed about having graduation in a synagogue?
    Intriguing hypothesis. Were it the case, it would be just as ridiculous.
    Quote Originally Posted by meyerweb
    Tolerance is a two edged sword.
    The edge that tolerates religion seems to be getting dull (or razor sharp, depending on your view I suppose))
    Quote Originally Posted by meyerweb
    And, frankly, I find the Christian right to be exceptionally intolerant of any belief structure but their own, while demanding that society as a whole should be exceptionally tolerant of their beliefs.
    For the record, "tolerance" is not a higher plane "ideal" that should be sought unilaterally. There is no inherent value in tolerating any and everything without careful consideration of the impacts and implicatons of the thing. Some people wear their lack of discernment as a tolerant "badge of honor", only to subsequently wonder why conditions around them are deterioriating.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Sorry but the framers did allow for atheistic beliefs etc in their attempts to protect individual religious liberties.
    Can you give me a specific example, and/or, quote or is that an implicit inferred assumption based on your views of the text?
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kahuna
    aprasad,

    Good point but no I would not have a problem with having a meeting in a mosque. Now of course this is not going to happen I doubt that a mosque would sub-lease to anyone.

    It is interesting that people these days just hate to be inconvenienced and are so selfish that they prefer to make everyone else inconvenienced. We have become such a touchie feely society

    For the record.. i am an Athiest.
    Me too. And proud of it.

    It's a slippery slope thing. An single small item, be it on gun control-rights, pro-anti-choice, church-n-state sets off the concerns in the concerned, even though that one thig may seem innocuous.

    Happens to both sides (right/left, conservative/liberals, Dems/Repubs).
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  14. #54  
    Why can't we all just get along?

    ....oh ya...because I might be wearing Adidas in the presence of someone who works at Nike.

  15.    #55  
    Adidas? Why you yellow-bellied, ...........
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Why can't we all just get along?

    ....oh ya...because I might be wearing Adidas in the presence of someone who works at Nike.


    From the dawn of time . . . . . . we have been a work in progress. The real question is: Will we all get along in the next life (assuming you believe in one)?

    Cheers, Perry.
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Won't attempt to speak for everyone, but I would feel the same way. If the mosque required the females in attendance to be covered from head to toe, then I would suggest an alternative location. Likewise, if the church required the attendees to take communion, I would suggest an alternative. If the church people were leaving tracts/leaflets in the seats I would suggest an alternative.
    You are religious and extremely tolerant. Good for you. I don't think the rest of the majority will be so understanding if the ceremony was held in a mosque.

    Tyranny of the majority is very insidious .. it progresses in small harmless steps until the very questioning of such steps provokes a reaction.

    I think it is best to keep things as separate as possible. Makes life simple. Avoids arguments like this.

    Hypothetically (the SAME arguments apply here.. think about it): Would the families agree if the ceremony was held in the local temple/church/place-of-worship of Devil worshippers?

    Gasp!

    The majority effect is very much in play in this discussion....
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  18. #58  
    You didnt quote me but your response seem to indicate me in the group you addressed so...

    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    It's hard to argue with the Left Coast folks and the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia.
    I totally agree! Its very difficult to engage in an argument with someone if you don't make an argument (something you can support with evidence.) Otherwise its just an opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    Once you get past the regurgitation of media-fed drones you're left with the absence of any type of belief system.
    Quite the contrary. You can listen to someone speak all the time, but that doesnt mean that you loose all your beliefs?? Otherwise we would all be liberal by now

    If what someone says is just a regurgitation of an argument (which by definition means its been said before), then you must make a counter-argument (and chances are, someone has).

    I have a very strong Christian belief system...I just don't feel that I should impose it on every other person (and I don't want someone else's imposed on me) simply because I may be in the majority now. That is why we need a separation of church and state.

    Christianity is about acceptance...not enforcement. Jesus Christ didnt die for all sinners to MAKE us become Christians...we have to CHOOSE it.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    Of course, I've never understood the liberal party either. The party itself is a derivative of the word liberty, yet the only thing that political party has done well has been to strip away the civil liberties we once had and to create a following of hyper-sensitive pussified men.
    I dont think we will ever see the libertarian party (or any 3rd party) do much in this country because its predominantly a two party system with a winner take all set up (but I dont want to get off topic).
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    Judaism, Mormonism, Wicca, or Buddhism never played a role in the development of the Constitution as we know it. If so, blatant Christian overtones such as "In God we trust" and God given rights would never have appeared.
    Wow, way to mistakenly equate "Mormons" with non-Christian religions. You are misinformed on this issue. Even the real name of the church shows its Christ-foundation: "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints."
    http://lds.org/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism

    It was those same (un-Christian?) "Mormons" who installed the 10 Commandments statues in front of various Utah courthouses, which statues were then attacked 1 by 1 by the ACLU as an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I just don't feel that I should impose it on every other person (and I don't want someone else's imposed on me)
    So in this particular case do you see the use of a Church for a non-religious ceremony to be an imposition of the Church's beliefs?
Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions