Posted on 11/23/2003 3:33:43 PM PST by Kerberos
Ironically, athiests are safer ruled by such theists than they are under other athiests.However, the followers of all religious beliefs are safest under a religiously neutral government that respects the inherent contradiction between true religious belief (a matter of pure conscience) and the inherently compulsive nature of law.
Separation makes the United States of America the safest place in the word to be an atheist, an agnostic, a Deist, a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Pagan, a Jew, a Muslim, or any type of Christian one desires.
-Eric
I did. Several times. The fact that you are too dumb to understand is not my problem. Ignorance can be corrected, Stupid is forever.
And please don't start crying now, YOU wanted this nonsense and you started this nonsense. YOU can end it. Like I said, you are dismissed goofy.
YOU wanted this nonsense and you started this nonsense...
The record shows that were the first to sink to name calling.
Close your zipper, doofus, your ignorance is hanging out.
I don't fire back with pistols when in a war. I show you just what you are into. It's called reductio ad absurdum.
Don't dance around, if you want to screw up the whole site with your childish BS by pretending that there is some polite way to insult people and pretend it's ok, go play in the corner.
And now we get to your homosexuality. You seem to have an unnatural interest in my genitalia.
Post 76 starts it and I tried to exit without a problem in post 80. In response to that you started it in earnest in post 85.
Then I showed you what it is all about so you could learn what a flame war is. You didn't learn because you are a moron.
It will continue to escalate until you secretly dial up the mods to cry and they come in and tell eveyone to knock it off.
All of that could be avoided as I asked you to do in the first place.
If you have anything further to say to me, please say it in freepmail so I can really tell you what you are, then you can post that in the forum too. Idiot
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, ...
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, ...
This is hardly religiously neutral. These were the words used to establish our sovereignty. An act that makes this document the organic law of the land.
Amendment ICongress 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.
That is hardly a neutral position. It is a strong and carefully worded stand. "Congress shall make no law ..." is very specific as to subject, 'Congress', and narrowly defined as to object, 'law.' The Judiciary can not make a law and it can't rule in the absence of a law. As an officer of the court Judge Moore had no ability to make any law. It just isn't possible Constitutionally. Judge Thompson made a ruling without any law to cite respecting Judge Moore's words and actions.
The 11th Circus Court acted extra-legally by ruling without law to cite. Even if one were to accept the false doctrine that the 14th Amendment incorporates some of the Bill of Rights that incorporation does not extend the wording of any clause. "Congress shall make no law ..." is the sum total of the 'Establishment Clause.' It names the body concerned and the action considered. Applying it to anything else requires a fabrication of intent which is not 'interpretation' it is invention.
Right. In post #76 I asked some questions. Pretty provocative of me. In post #80 you tried to duck out by claiming to know "where it was going." In post #85 I simply called you on your cowardice and asked some more questions. How cruel of me to ask you to back up your assertions.
Then I showed you what it is all about so you could learn what a flame war is.
Show me what it's all about, Flame Warrior! Bwaaaaaaaaaaa! You're a mindless robot. I have never and will never 'dial up the mods.' You can either put up or shut up, little man. FReepmail me and I will post it in the forum, nitwit. Count on it.
Dismissed!
You've already done a good job of that and little else. Who cares what you think of me? No one.
And please focus on someone else, I get a little unconfortable with homosexual advances from girlymen.
I believe you insulted me first. In fact I know you did. Time to adjust your meds.
Do you get a lot of them? Hmmmm?
A few times from queers like you. You know em right away when they start talking about your genitalia.
Have you taken your aids meds?
You must mean my reference to your ignorance. I didn't think you'd take that literally. Must be something about you we don't know.
Go wink and nudge your lovers. And try to stop thinking about other mens arousal.
We? You have more gay lovers on this thread?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.