Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14
[#] Sat May 22 2021 01:22:06 EDT from arabella

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Wed May 19 2021 07:47:28 PM EDTfrom ParanoidDelusions


Yeah... the idea that the establishment clause means "zero-tolerance on generic religious expression in functions of the State" is silly. It isn't even close to the plainly evident truth. 



Why is it silly?

Or do you mean Christian, rather than generic, because I'd be willing to bet if the Muslims asked for some form of expression in the functions of state, your happiness would be sub-optimal.

In the Function of state, as in sports, there is no place for religion.

It is, at best, devisive.

By all means practice your chosen God's Laws, but do it privately, and don't involve me.

If the state passes a law that decrees *thing* because God said, then it has not served thhe people, except by serendipity. It has also subjected me to the Law of a god I do not accept.

 

Aside:

Until recently an insurance company could erfuse to pay a claim, if it was decided the damge/loss was caused by an "Act of God."

If I had been refused a claim on those grounds, my response would have been: "Get me His written apollogy, or give me what I'm owed"



[#] Sun May 23 2021 14:54:09 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Remember that we are talking about United States law here -- your situation will be different.

Directly from the US Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

This means, among other things, that there shall be no state religion.  The first part means that the government cannot establish a theocracy; it cannot persecute its citizens based on their adherence, or lack of adherence, to one specific religion.  The second part guarantees that the citizens are free to practice a religion of their choice.  Both of these things were important to the colonists, many who migrated for the express purpose of freeing religious persecution.

The FFRF deliberately corrupts this clause by claiming that "freedom of religion is freedom from religion."  This is of course absurd.  They rally, rather militantly, against any display of Christianity that is viewable in public.  (Interestingly, they spend little to no time persecuting Islamists, who actually are trying to force their religion on everyone.)

It could be argued that Madalyn Murray O'Hair actually did us a favor by lobbying to remove prayer in schools.  She was despised in the 1960's, but today, that precedent is keeping Satanism and Islam out of the public schools as well.



[#] Sun May 23 2021 21:41:47 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Arabella, Ig nailed it here. 

The Establishment Clause means that the US Government will establish no official State Religion that citizens must be members of. That means you can be a Catholic, you can be a Muslim, you can be a Protestant... 

Furthermore - they felt that local communities had the right to establish *their* community based on the values of their religious values. The Quakers, the Mennonites, the New England Protestants. 

It just so happened that the majority of people fleeing persecution in the old world when this was a REAL big thing came from Western European Christian traditions - so the dominant expression of religious freedom in the New World was Christian. 

The rest of the world, and far too many US Citizens, have gotten this into their head as "separation of Church and State..." which is a phrase that isn't in any of the actual foundational documents of the Republic. 

Most of this comes from having dealt with the Roman Catholic Vatican and the Anglican Church of England - both of which had spent a good deal of time oppressing anyone who thought any different than they did, in the name of "State" religion. 

You can practice Santeria - you can have halal or kosher meat. We have expressions of tolerance for Muslim, Jewish and other religious cultural values throughout America in officially recognized, legally permissible community religious values. 

You can't practice pure sharia law here. We've generally decided that you can't violate civil, secual law in the pursuit of your religion - although even then, sacramental use of peyote is permissible for Native Americans in the act of ceremonial activities.

Separation of Church and State is a phrase that simply means that the State will not interfere in matters of the Church, and no single Church will interfere in matters of the State. 

The general jurisprudence of this means that if an Amish county in Lancaster wants to be a DRY county - we tend to allow this kind of local legislation, excepting that a resident of that county is absolutely free to leave the county, go and buy his 12 pack somewhere else, and bring it back to his trailer and drink it on his front porch just like any other red-blooded American. 

It is a fine balancing act, but it tends to work pretty well. 

My unease with Muslims practicing their religious freedom here (or in many other Western European nations, like England...) is that they start to extend to this concept of "Sharia No Go Zones," where outsiders are discouraged from visiting, and where local Imams start usurping the authority of the actual civil authorities. This doesn't *always* happen - but Islamic Fundamentalist radicalism/Jihadism is a problem - and it is naive to deny that or claim it is "racism" or "xenophobia" to be concerned about it. 

 

 

Sun May 23 2021 14:54:09 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

Remember that we are talking about United States law here -- your situation will be different.

Directly from the US Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

This means, among other things, that there shall be no state religion.  The first part means that the government cannot establish a theocracy; it cannot persecute its citizens based on their adherence, or lack of adherence, to one specific religion.  The second part guarantees that the citizens are free to practice a religion of their choice.  Both of these things were important to the colonists, many who migrated for the express purpose of freeing religious persecution.

The FFRF deliberately corrupts this clause by claiming that "freedom of religion is freedom from religion."  This is of course absurd.  They rally, rather militantly, against any display of Christianity that is viewable in public.  (Interestingly, they spend little to no time persecuting Islamists, who actually are trying to force their religion on everyone.)

It could be argued that Madalyn Murray O'Hair actually did us a favor by lobbying to remove prayer in schools.  She was despised in the 1960's, but today, that precedent is keeping Satanism and Islam out of the public schools as well.



 



[#] Mon May 24 2021 17:25:38 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The general jurisprudence of this means that if an Amish county in
Lancaster wants to be a DRY county - we tend to allow this kind of
local legislation, excepting that a resident of that county is

Fine point: this is accomplished when there are enough people of a particular religious persuasion in a community that they dominate the local government.
So if they for example prohibit the sale of liquor in the county, that is permissible, but if they delegate the jurisdiction of liquor to the Mennonite church, that is unconstitutional.

It can be abused, however. Not far from here, there is a town that is dominated by an Orthodox Jewish community. Members of that community hold a supermajority of seats on the school board, where they vote to defund pretty much everything because their own children don't go to the public schools. This keeps their school taxes to a minimum, but the schools are falling apart. There is something that "feels" wrong about this, but they technically have not violated any laws.

[#] Mon May 24 2021 22:03:27 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Well, and there again - I think the "separation of Church and State," part of the establishment clause says, "If you're not part of the local supermajority - they can't prevent you from leaving and finding a community that has laws you wish to live by." 

That is what the Establishment Clause was about... you couldn't LEAVE London and get away from the Anglican church by starting a Protestant or Pilgrim community in say, Devonshire or Liverpool or Cardiff. The State established Anglican church was the supreme church of England. You had to renounce your English citizenship and move to some other country - or go be a Colonist, where the King of England didn't really care (and still, officially, you had to be an Anglican... you just had freedom to practice what you actually believed without State persecution for that.) 


So, the Colonists founded the nation on the idea of things like the New England "City on a Hill," a *distinctly* Christian concept of Government. The Puritans, the Protestants, the Pilgrims - all had their own religious beliefs, practices and customs. If you moved into one of these communities and found their laws stifling, the founding fathers would have said, "Well, why do you continue to live there, you dumbfuck? No one is preventing you from taking up stakes and moving on to a community more aligned with your personal values." 

Most of the earliest communities in the Americas *were* founded by people *exclusively* of a particular religious persuasion - seeking not SEPARATION of Church and State, but the freedom to practice RELIGIOUS freedom. 

We've lost that last term in modern discussions about America and the establishment clause, even moreso than we've replaced The Establishment Clause with the phrase, "separation of Church and State." That is intentional. Denying people the right to see their religious values reflected in their government is not *RELIGIOUS FREEDOM*. It is the State oppressing your religious expression at the very level of the nation you live in. It used to be that we talked all the time about people coming to America to escape religious persecution and SEEKING religious freedom. No more. Because religious freedom implies that OPPOSITE of the *separation* of Church and State. Religious freedom implies that every religion has a vested interest in influencing the policies, practices, and customs of their Government. And there is an element that absolutely wants to *remove* that freedom of religious expression from American society. 


It is the same element that wants to remove most other expressions of freedom from American society. You know - the Democrats. 

 

Mon May 24 2021 17:25:38 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar
The general jurisprudence of this means that if an Amish county in
Lancaster wants to be a DRY county - we tend to allow this kind of
local legislation, excepting that a resident of that county is

Fine point: this is accomplished when there are enough people of a particular religious persuasion in a community that they dominate the local government.
So if they for example prohibit the sale of liquor in the county, that is permissible, but if they delegate the jurisdiction of liquor to the Mennonite church, that is unconstitutional.

It can be abused, however. Not far from here, there is a town that is dominated by an Orthodox Jewish community. Members of that community hold a supermajority of seats on the school board, where they vote to defund pretty much everything because their own children don't go to the public schools. This keeps their school taxes to a minimum, but the schools are falling apart. There is something that "feels" wrong about this, but they technically have not violated any laws.

 



[#] Tue May 25 2021 08:22:33 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Could just ban all religion. problem solved.

You can still believe what you want, but no one gets to organize.  So no favorites or favors..   ( or people getting fleeced by their chosen religion as it demands their obedience, and cash )



[#] Tue May 25 2021 11:19:04 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Banning religion won't work. There are several reasons for this.

The obvious one is that God is real (unless declared integer) and people will continue to feel a call to worship. Heck, even the Unitarians feel a call to worship even though they refuse to believe in the One who is calling them.

The other reason is practical: there are dogmatic movements that require a holiness spiral, even though they are not "real" religions they organize and behave as religion. We don't have to name them here, but they are the usual culprits -- political movements masquerading as science but behaving as religion.

[#] Tue May 25 2021 12:25:52 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I was mostly being sarcastic. 

Banning religion is the very definition of oppression.  

Tue May 25 2021 11:19:04 AM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar
Banning religion won't work. There are several reasons for this.

The obvious one is that God is real (unless declared integer) and people will continue to feel a call to worship. Heck, even the Unitarians feel a call to worship even though they refuse to believe in the One who is calling them.

The other reason is practical: there are dogmatic movements that require a holiness spiral, even though they are not "real" religions they organize and behave as religion. We don't have to name them here, but they are the usual culprits -- political movements masquerading as science but behaving as religion.

 



[#] Tue May 25 2021 13:09:04 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I took it literally too. 

That is the problem with sarcasm today - so many people would actually do the thing - when someone says it ironically, it is easy to take them at face value. 

 

Tue May 25 2021 12:25:52 EDT from Nurb432

I was mostly being sarcastic. 

Banning religion is the very definition of oppression.  

Tue May 25 2021 11:19:04 AM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar
Banning religion won't work. There are several reasons for this.

The obvious one is that God is real (unless declared integer) and people will continue to feel a call to worship. Heck, even the Unitarians feel a call to worship even though they refuse to believe in the One who is calling them.

The other reason is practical: there are dogmatic movements that require a holiness spiral, even though they are not "real" religions they organize and behave as religion. We don't have to name them here, but they are the usual culprits -- political movements masquerading as science but behaving as religion.

 



 



[#] Tue May 25 2021 14:38:18 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Ya but coming from me, should have been obvious it was sarcasm.  I almost never would support a ban on something that consenting adults do on their own time. No matter how much i may or may not agree with it for myself.

 

 



[#] Tue May 25 2021 21:35:00 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Yeah... which is why I was making that, "WTF?!?" face when I read it. 

"You just never know where people are going to do a complete 180 degree turn..." 

I mean, I have those issues, myself... where my Conservative friends go, "Um... so, how is that Covid-vaccination working out for you?" 

 

Tue May 25 2021 14:38:18 EDT from Nurb432

Ya but coming from me, should have been obvious it was sarcasm.  I almost never would support a ban on something that consenting adults do on their own time. No matter how much i may or may not agree with it for myself.

 

 



 



[#] Sun Aug 08 2021 16:05:33 EDT from Nurb432

Subject: Sabbath mode

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Was looking at the manual on my new stove before i threw it away.. ran across this...what in the hell?  LoL

"cant start a fire, but you can keep the oven running if you turn it on before"


____

What is Sabbath Mode on an oven? When in Sabbath Mode, your oven will disable its automatic shut-off function to stay on longer than 12 hours. This means that the oven will stay in a Bake mode until shut off, which will allow you to use the oven for cooking or warming food.

____



[#] Mon Aug 09 2021 23:50:56 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

Subject: Re: Sabbath mode

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That's pretty much the interpretation. I don't personally agree with it but I respect those who do. Lighting a fire is considered work, and there is to be no work on the sabbath. Energizing an electric appliance or light is considered lighting a fire. So apparently this mode runs the oven nonstop at a low temperature so that you can simply turn it up when you're ready to cook a meal -- which for some reason is *not* considered work.

It's more complicated than that, but the simplified version is what I understand.

[#] Tue Aug 10 2021 18:06:48 EDT from Nurb432

Subject: Re: Sabbath mode

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

To me its more like :

"our great deity made up these rules here, and its our obligation to find ways around it" "We cant technically cheat as then we cant go to the *insert appropriate after-life resort here*, but not really follow the spirit either"



[#] Wed Aug 11 2021 19:53:26 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

How is turning on a light switch not work but turning on a stove switch is? 

 



[#] Wed Aug 11 2021 20:31:28 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I guess they cant turn the lights off for the duration. 

 

Wed Aug 11 2021 07:53:26 PM EDT from ParanoidDelusions

How is turning on a light switch not work but turning on a stove switch is? 

 



 



[#] Tue Aug 17 2021 09:38:16 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I don't make the rules, and I may not even be describing them accurately.
I'm describing the rules as I understand them. Also understand that there is a wide range of different levels of adherence/strictness. It's a thing, it's their thing, and I'm willing to respect it even though legalism makes little sense to me. I'm sure my adherence to a messiah who refused to save himself from execution makes little sense to them.

Let's just all agree to make fun of the Unitarians. Those people are morons.

[#] Tue Aug 17 2021 18:08:20 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

When i was a child i was sent to a Unitarian church a few times.  Its one place i learned to despise the entire concept of organized religion. Sure, belief is a personal choice, even if i think its silly, its still a person's choice so more power to them.  Organized religion however, is no different than organized crime.

 

( and ya that will annoy many, sorry, but its how i feel )

Tue Aug 17 2021 09:38:16 AM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar


Let's just all agree to make fun of the Unitarians. Those people are morons.

 



[#] Wed Aug 18 2021 13:54:45 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


There's atheists, and there's agnostics, and then there's UU's who believe that all beliefs are valid and therefore don't believe anything in particular.



Hehe. mosephine's mom was a UU. Some of my good friends are UU-ish. I could do without some of their beliefs, personally.

[#] Thu Aug 19 2021 04:38:19 EDT from darknetuser

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

2021-08-11 20:31 from Nurb432
I guess they cant turn the lights off for the duration. 

 
Wed Aug 11 2021 07:53:26 PM EDT from ParanoidDelusions



How is turning on a light switch not work but turning on a stove
switch is? 


I have heard certain muslims think they can't even switch a light on during "that time of the year".

Go to page: First ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14