Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 27 to 36 of 36
  1. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I'm an old cowhand from the Rio Grande
    Posts
    17,089
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    If government enacts laws because a religious organization dictates to politicians of that religion to do so, the state most certainly is supporting church. I realize the fine line here. It is despicable of the Catholic church to even attempt to dictate state policy.
    I believe dictate is an inappropriately strong word and hysterically overstates the situation.

    This is a group of college presidents sending a letter to Catholic congressmen, not the Inquisition.

    As Hugh wrote and I agreed, this is a constitutionally approved action.

    I am the first person to denounce religions that violate the establishment clause. in this case there is no violation and the presidents are merely exercizing their constitutional rights to petition the government and its representatives.




    With such a non-defined subject as the intent of the constitutions reason for mentioning a seperation of church and state, how you see it in detail is no more valid than how I see it. So stop trying to make it sound like you or understand something that others don't. It is the non-descript way seperation of church and state is stated in the constitution that has allowed for the problems that anti-theological organizations have caused for those of us of faith.
    Actually the problems are not caused by what you mistakenly label "anti-theological organizations" but rather by theological organizations and individuals violating the constitution.

    If the Catholic Churce wants to preach to Catholics to work together to change immigration laws, that is one thing. To go directly to Catholic politicians and tell them to change immigration laws is despicable. It may not be illegal, and it may be the right of the Catholic Church to do it, but it is still no less despicable than how anti-theological organizations have acted.
    Oh hell, every religion and religious organization in the land tries to influence politicians and legislation.

    Happens every day.

    I would say your dislike of the Catholic Church is the primary motivation rather than any perceived violation of the establishment clause.

  2. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I'm an old cowhand from the Rio Grande
    Posts
    17,089
    Quote Originally Posted by glennac View Post
    I want all immigration stopped legal or illegal unless they bring money and are not Muslims, preferably Christians from Europe as opposed to Muslims from Europe. Thank you very much
    What about a black European who is loaded with money?

  3. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    436
    Here in Utah, there really isn't a separation of church and state. The Mormons quite literally run the place. The vast majority of residents, especially those not in Salt Lake City itself, are Mormons. The church is by far the biggest corporation in the state and owns a lot of downtown SLC. They just built the biggest shopping center in the state, a multi block outdoor mall called City Creek. The money to influence lawmakers is definitely available. Even worse than that is the blind devotion the Mormon people have to the church leaders. They are not Christian, no matter what they claim. They choose to believe a book written by a man (Joseph Smith) who claims to know the Bible is flawed. They believe HIS word over the Bible. That kind of blind trust is still carried out today for prophets and presidents of the church. They believe the prophets literally talk to God so that they can spread the word to the common members, and then they must obey it or they won't make it to the next kingdom of heaven. This life, to them, is all about doing what they are told so they can keep progressing and eventually become a god themselves, as the Christian God did. Yes, they believe he was once an imperfect man. They are not here on earth for any other reason than to progress to the next level, and the only way to do that is to follow the word of the current prophets which are always changing. They only do what they're told. And the worst part is Mitt Romney, a very devout Mormon, almost became president. I know for a fact that he would have felt the need to consult with the church president on his decisions as POTUS. In effect making the LDS church president the USA president. THAT would have destroyed separation of church and state. I speak from experience, living in Utah with a never ending stream of Mormon governors and legislators publicly asking for LDS church opinion on everything from abortion to liquor laws to zoning decisions.

    Sorry for any typos, I'm typing on my phone.
    Last edited by Fixerdude; 07-19-2013 at 12:29 AM.

  4. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Dacula, GA
    Posts
    12,612
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    OK, then. I retract my last comment that was based on your previous comment which I commented on before reading this comment. (Try saying that after a few drinks...)

    Yes, I am all for the freedom of speech. I am simply stating that it is despicable for an organization to use God as a political tool. I have more respect for organized labor using the threat of violence than I do organized religion using God's will in such a manner.

    And, Glenn, I did post a link to the article that my comments are based on. Saying you are not aware of the RCC pressuring Catholic politicians tells me that you didn't bother to read the article that this thread is based on.
    Well robo my first post was done on the fly with my android and was in response to the title of the thread. You should have defined it better and said the RC church is pressuring politicians on opening up immigration for illegals, etc.

    Anyhow apologize for that. I see nothing wrong with the church taken a moral stand on abortion or same sex marriage, etc. but immigration is a no no. This is killing us as a nation. We are being overran by the 3rd world.

    I strong support their stand on abortion if for no other reason than those women getting abortion average a much higher IQ than the norm and thus our collective IQ as a nation is dropping like a rock along with the low IQ immigrants coming here. Anyhow immigration is purely should not be a concern for any church or religion. It is political and involves the health and well being of a county. So I am upset as you here on this. Thank you, thank you very much
    "I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle."
    "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution."
    Barry Goldwater

  5. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Dacula, GA
    Posts
    12,612
    Quote Originally Posted by geerair View Post
    What about a black European who is loaded with money?
    Didn't realize there was such a thing. Thank you very much
    "I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle."
    "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution."
    Barry Goldwater

  6. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Indianapolis IN
    Posts
    404
    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    Seems to me that the "spirit" and the actual words here are telling us that they want the FEDERAL government to stay the hell out of the freedom of the people to practice the religion, or lack thereof, that they choose. Otherwise I can see no purpose for the second sentence. To me that looks like a separation of state from church and not so much a separation of church and state or church from state. When laws are getting passed that respect a religion or church that infringe upon the freedom of others to practice their religion, then that is where the problem lies. Like for example mandating by FEDERAL law that one can't pray at school, or on the flip side, that one has to pray at school.

    Also, wouldn't a Federal law telling any church that they cannot express their views absolutely fly directly into the face of "prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?

    Call me dumb, but I don't get the confusion here.

    Seems simple enough. The FEDERAL government has been directed to stay out of religious matters. Not to quash religion, the practices of the religious or ignore input from religious people or groups. Individuals, groups, states and the country as a whole are not prohibited from practicing religion or expressing their religious views. As a matter of fact we are guaranteed protection of that freedom from being infringed upon by any FEDERAL law in the second sentence of the first amendment.

    But boy if you let someone with an agenda loose...
    ______________________________

    I lift things up and put them down.

  7. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    21,171
    Quote Originally Posted by DarrinB View Post
    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    Seems to me that the "spirit" and the actual words here are telling us that they want the FEDERAL government to stay the hell out of the freedom of the people to practice the religion, or lack thereof, that they choose. Otherwise I can see no purpose for the second sentence. To me that looks like a separation of state from church and not so much a separation of church and state or church from state. When laws are getting passed that respect a religion or church that infringe upon the freedom of others to practice their religion, then that is where the problem lies. Like for example mandating by FEDERAL law that one can't pray at school, or on the flip side, that one has to pray at school.

    Also, wouldn't a Federal law telling any church that they cannot express their views absolutely fly directly into the face of "prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?

    Call me dumb, but I don't get the confusion here.

    Seems simple enough. The FEDERAL government has been directed to stay out of religious matters. Not to quash religion, the practices of the religious or ignore input from religious people or groups. Individuals, groups, states and the country as a whole are not prohibited from practicing religion or expressing their religious views. As a matter of fact we are guaranteed protection of that freedom from being infringed upon by any FEDERAL law in the second sentence of the first amendment.

    But boy if you let someone with an agenda loose...
    Good post there!

    Seems we are back to whether the FEDERAL govt has authority in states rights issues... which IMO is one of the issues here.

    Polecats are about power... If they can grab it they will. We the people need to remind folks who would run for federal office, they need to limit their aspirations to what they are allowed to do under the founding documents... or we will remove them from office.

    Keeping govt afraid of the citizens is freedom... when the citizens are afraid of the govt, that is tyranny.
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  8. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Indianapolis IN
    Posts
    404
    Seriously, this isn't rocket science. The whole intent and purpose of the Constitution was to create our Federal Government and it's official offices, define their duties and regulate their powers. It was supposed to spell out what our Federal Government and officials can and cannot do. It isn't a list of laws that are applicable to states or individuals except to define instances where Federal Law holds precedence and rule to protect the Union of states and it's people as a whole. That meaning that it established duties that are specific only to the Federal Government and the required laws to protect these duties against states, companies, groups or individuals

    Also, the Bill of Rights doesn't create freedoms or rights. On the contrary, it is there to declare and protect certain freedoms and rights of states and the people from being infringed upon by an oppressive Federal government and limit the power of our Federal Government to prevent it from becoming too powerful and oppressive where it may infringe upon those rights.

    It was a great idea while it lasted.
    ______________________________

    I lift things up and put them down.

  9. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,944
    Quote Originally Posted by Fixerdude View Post
    Here in Utah, there really isn't a separation of church and state. The Mormons quite literally run the place. The vast majority of residents, especially those not in Salt Lake City itself, are Mormons. The church is by far the biggest corporation in the state and owns a lot of downtown SLC. They just built the biggest shopping center in the state, a multi block outdoor mall called City Creek. The money to influence lawmakers is definitely available. Even worse than that is the blind devotion the Mormon people have to the church leaders. They are not Christian, no matter what they claim. They choose to believe a book written by a man (Joseph Smith) who claims to know the Bible is flawed. They believe HIS word over the Bible. That kind of blind trust is still carried out today for prophets and presidents of the church. They believe the prophets literally talk to God so that they can spread the word to the common members, and then they must obey it or they won't make it to the next kingdom of heaven. This life, to them, is all about doing what they are told so they can keep progressing and eventually become a god themselves, as the Christian God did. Yes, they believe he was once an imperfect man. They are not here on earth for any other reason than to progress to the next level, and the only way to do that is to follow the word of the current prophets which are always changing. They only do what they're told. And the worst part is Mitt Romney, a very devout Mormon, almost became president. I know for a fact that he would have felt the need to consult with the church president on his decisions as POTUS. In effect making the LDS church president the USA president. THAT would have destroyed separation of church and state. I speak from experience, living in Utah with a never ending stream of Mormon governors and legislators publicly asking for LDS church opinion on everything from abortion to liquor laws to zoning decisions.

    Sorry for any typos, I'm typing on my phone.
    Local jurisdictions should be allowed to operate based on the desires of local citizens. If most voters in Utah are Mormon, then it only makes sense that the laws in Utah will reflect the values of the LDS. I am referring to Federal laws such as how to deal with persons from other countries illegally entering the U.S. and illegally remaining in the U.S.

    The RCC is telling Catholic persons in Congress that the beliefs of the leaders of the RCC should be able to disregard the laws of the U.S. and dictate to those Congressional leaders that they should disregard illegal actions that have already been committed and reward those who have disregarded the laws of the U.S.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  10. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,944
    Quote Originally Posted by DarrinB View Post
    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    Seems to me that the "spirit" and the actual words here are telling us that they want the FEDERAL government to stay the hell out of the freedom of the people to practice the religion, or lack thereof, that they choose. Otherwise I can see no purpose for the second sentence. To me that looks like a separation of state from church and not so much a separation of church and state or church from state. When laws are getting passed that respect a religion or church that infringe upon the freedom of others to practice their religion, then that is where the problem lies. Like for example mandating by FEDERAL law that one can't pray at school, or on the flip side, that one has to pray at school.

    Also, wouldn't a Federal law telling any church that they cannot express their views absolutely fly directly into the face of "prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?

    Call me dumb, but I don't get the confusion here.

    Seems simple enough. The FEDERAL government has been directed to stay out of religious matters. Not to quash religion, the practices of the religious or ignore input from religious people or groups. Individuals, groups, states and the country as a whole are not prohibited from practicing religion or expressing their religious views. As a matter of fact we are guaranteed protection of that freedom from being infringed upon by any FEDERAL law in the second sentence of the first amendment.

    But boy if you let someone with an agenda loose...
    I'm with you on this, Darrin. Others do read and interpret the constitution differently, though. This is what happens when we let the lawyers run the country.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event