Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Africa


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 26th, 2011, 10:59 AM   #71
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1319648970' post='364045

No, it's "promote," because anyone not wanting to join in a public prayer is free not to, however, that's not good enough for atheists. They want to rule with their lack of any spiritual belief, and impose that upon the majority.



You're pretty keen on disallowing the tyranny of the majority, but rather comfy with allowing the tyranny of a minority.
How is upholding the constitution "allowing the tyranny of a minority"? Those 5,999 people are still free to pray, just as the one person is free not to pray. The only difference is that the state is no longer permitted to violate the establishment clause, and the civil right of the individual to be free from religious interference by the state is no longer infringed.




Where does it say that in the Constitution?



Certainly not in the First Amendment:



Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof



In fact one could make the opposite argument, that banning prayer in schools is a perfect example of prohibiting the free exercise of religion.



I don't see any references to schools in the First Amendment.



It's also interestimg to note that Fisher Ames, who is considered by many to be the author of the 1st Amendment, expressed concern over the trend of introducing more and more secular books into the classroom in addition to the Bible



Fisher Ames stated:



“...we have a dangerous trend beginning to take place in our education....We've become accustomed of late to putting little books in the hands of children containing fables with moral lessons. We are spending less time in the classroom on the Bible, which should be the principle text in our schools. The Bible states these great moral lessons better than any other man made book.”



Who better to understand the true meaning of the First Amendment than the guy who wrote it?



Yet today even opening a Bible in school is considered by some to breach the First Amendment!



It proves how far we have drifted away from the intentions of the Founding Fathers.
garysher is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:02 AM   #72
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 54,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1319648970' post='364045

No, it's "promote," because anyone not wanting to join in a public prayer is free not to, however, that's not good enough for atheists. They want to rule with their lack of any spiritual belief, and impose that upon the majority.



You're pretty keen on disallowing the tyranny of the majority, but rather comfy with allowing the tyranny of a minority.
How is upholding the constitution "allowing the tyranny of a minority"? Those 5,999 people are still free to pray, just as the one person is free not to pray. The only difference is that the state is no longer permitted to violate the establishment clause.



If you need a megaphone, a large crowd and state endorsement for your prayer to be effective, your imaginary friend is rather hard of hearing.


You're a shameless cherry-picker, and on top of that you present "skrekk-approved" definitions to base your arguments, which is another form of cherry-picking.



In fact, your premise - that a public prayer at a school sporting event is violating the establishment clause and/or endorsing religion - is mere convenience, mere smoke and mirrors excusing the government for endorsing your religion, imposing the tenets of your religion upon those with beliefs different from yours.



How insecure, intolerant, and hypocritical you atheists really are. "Bigot" fits very well.
imaginethat is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:14 AM   #73
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk' timestamp='1319652648' post='364060

[quote name='imaginethat' timestamp='1319648970' post='364045']

No, it's "promote," because anyone not wanting to join in a public prayer is free not to, however, that's not good enough for atheists. They want to rule with their lack of any spiritual belief, and impose that upon the majority.



You're pretty keen on disallowing the tyranny of the majority, but rather comfy with allowing the tyranny of a minority.
How is upholding the constitution "allowing the tyranny of a minority"? Those 5,999 people are still free to pray, just as the one person is free not to pray. The only difference is that the state is no longer permitted to violate the establishment clause.



If you need a megaphone, a large crowd and state endorsement for your prayer to be effective, your imaginary friend is rather hard of hearing.


You're a shameless cherry-picker, and on top of that you present "skrekk-approved" definitions to base your arguments, which is another form of cherry-picking.



In fact, your premise - that a public prayer at a school sporting event is violating the establishment clause and/or endorsing religion - is mere convenience, mere smoke and mirrors excusing the government for endorsing your religion, imposing the tenets of your religion upon those with beliefs different from yours.



How insecure, intolerant, and hypocritical you atheists really are. "Bigot" fits very well.

[/quote]





One could argue that banning prayer in schools is a clear sign the government is encouraging the establishment of atheism, because a lack of prayer is clearly an atheistic ritual.



Atheism is the only "religion" that doesn't involve praying, so banning prayer shows clear favouritism toward atheists
garysher is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:16 AM   #74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
In fact, your premise - that a public prayer at a school sporting event is violating the establishment clause and/or endorsing religion - is mere convenience, mere smoke and mirrors excusing the government for endorsing your religion, imposing the tenets of your religion upon those with beliefs different from yours.
That's odd.....SCOTUS agrees with my premise, not yours. In fact they've repeatedly agreed with me on this issue. Citing just one such case:

Quote:
http://www.civilrigh...no4/art2p1.html

Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, upholding the decision of the Court of Appeals, saying "the simple enactment of this policy, with the purpose and perception of school endorsement of student prayer, was a constitutional violation." He continues, " such a system encourages divisiveness along religious lines and threatens the imposition of coercion upon those students not desiring to participate in a religious exercise. Simply by establishing this school-related procedure, which entrusts the inherently nongovernmental subject of religion to a majoritarian vote, a constitutional violation has occurred."
skrekk is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:27 AM   #75
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1319655736' post='364078

In fact, your premise - that a public prayer at a school sporting event is violating the establishment clause and/or endorsing religion - is mere convenience, mere smoke and mirrors excusing the government for endorsing your religion, imposing the tenets of your religion upon those with beliefs different from yours.
That's odd.....SCOTUS agrees with my premise, not yours. In fact they've repeatedly agreed with me on this issue. Citing just one such case:

Quote:
http://www.civilrigh...no4/art2p1.html

Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, upholding the decision of the Court of Appeals, saying "the simple enactment of this policy, with the purpose and perception of school endorsement of student prayer, was a constitutional violation." He continues, " such a system encourages divisiveness along religious lines and threatens the imposition of coercion upon those students not desiring to participate in a religious exercise. Simply by establishing this school-related procedure, which entrusts the inherently nongovernmental subject of religion to a majoritarian vote, a constitutional violation has occurred."




Not the first time SCOTUS has misinterpreted the Constitution and not the last.



Part of the price Americans pay for living under a judiciocracy
garysher is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:30 AM   #76
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary View Post
Part of the price Americans pay for living under a judiciocracy
Certainly preferable to the Iranian-style theocracy you prefer.



By the way, have you murdered your disobedient children today? Don't forget that your imaginary friend commands it!
skrekk is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:30 AM   #77
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,677
BTW shriek and ryder will be delighted to know that



homofascist



has now been accepted and published in the Urban Dictionary



http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...rm=homofascist



Further proof that homosexuals are not the only ones who can invent words!
garysher is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:31 AM   #78
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 54,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1319655736' post='364078

In fact, your premise - that a public prayer at a school sporting event is violating the establishment clause and/or endorsing religion - is mere convenience, mere smoke and mirrors excusing the government for endorsing your religion, imposing the tenets of your religion upon those with beliefs different from yours.
That's odd.....SCOTUS agrees with my premise, not yours. In fact they've repeatedly agreed with me on this issue. Citing just one such case:

Quote:
http://www.civilrigh...no4/art2p1.html

Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, upholding the decision of the Court of Appeals, saying "the simple enactment of this policy, with the purpose and perception of school endorsement of student prayer, was a constitutional violation." He continues, " such a system encourages divisiveness along religious lines and threatens the imposition of coercion upon those students not desiring to participate in a religious exercise. Simply by establishing this school-related procedure, which entrusts the inherently nongovernmental subject of religion to a majoritarian vote, a constitutional violation has occurred."


As Radicalcentrist correctly has pointed out, you cherry-pick SCOTUS decisions as well. How easy it is to rewrite Stevens:



"The simple enactment of this policy, with the purpose and perception of school endorsement of secularity, was a constitutional violation. ...such a system encourages divisiveness along religious lines and threatens the imposition of coercion upon those students desiring to participate in a religious exercise. Simply by establishing this school-related procedure, which entrusts the inherently nongovernmental subject of atheism to a minority vote, a constitutional violation has occurred."



Atheists are insecure, dishonest, intolerant, and hypocritical regarding their world view. "Bigot" fits very well.
imaginethat is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:32 AM   #79
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary' timestamp='1319657258' post='364088

Part of the price Americans pay for living under a judiciocracy
Certainly preferable to the Iranian-style theocracy you prefer.




The similarities are striking - a handful of people wearing black robes make imperious decisions, influenced by their personal moral views, that rule the lives of millions
garysher is offline  
Old October 26th, 2011, 11:34 AM   #80
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 54,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk' timestamp='1319656570' post='364084

[quote name='imaginethat' timestamp='1319655736' post='364078']

In fact, your premise - that a public prayer at a school sporting event is violating the establishment clause and/or endorsing religion - is mere convenience, mere smoke and mirrors excusing the government for endorsing your religion, imposing the tenets of your religion upon those with beliefs different from yours.
That's odd.....SCOTUS agrees with my premise, not yours. In fact they've repeatedly agreed with me on this issue. Citing just one such case:

Quote:
http://www.civilrigh...no4/art2p1.html

Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, upholding the decision of the Court of Appeals, saying "the simple enactment of this policy, with the purpose and perception of school endorsement of student prayer, was a constitutional violation." He continues, " such a system encourages divisiveness along religious lines and threatens the imposition of coercion upon those students not desiring to participate in a religious exercise. Simply by establishing this school-related procedure, which entrusts the inherently nongovernmental subject of religion to a majoritarian vote, a constitutional violation has occurred."




Not the first time SCOTUS has misinterpreted the Constitution and not the last.



Part of the price Americans pay for living under a judiciocracy

[/quote]



No gary, the SCOTUS is always right ... unless skrekk disagrees with it.
imaginethat is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Africa

Tags
law, libya, sharia, strict



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Libya Embassy Security Zack Current Events 44 October 28th, 2012 09:19 AM
Top Revelations from Libya Hearing Jimmyb Current Events 21 October 12th, 2012 09:57 AM
$25 MILLION in aid on its way to Libya Dude111 Americas 2 April 22nd, 2011 02:08 PM
One more reason to Despise Sharia... tadpole256 Religion 5 August 6th, 2010 04:59 PM
Canada struggles with Islam's Sharia law Steven M Religion 3 September 8th, 2005 08:11 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.