Posted on 01/28/2008 12:05:56 PM PST by Dr. Carl S. Parnell
That’s right. He sits in the heavens and laughs are our foolishness.
It's easy enough to break people of that. Just say "He's not going to help you in THAT tone of voice."
Yeah, wouldn’t want kids to learn about other religions now would we?
Woops, I meant laughs AT our foolishness. Sigh.
How about pre-empting having to make that decision and keep them bottled up somewhere with the superiority of our technology (military power) which stems from our religious basis?
(The basic assumptions about our Deity give us the basis for our scientific discovery and advancement - theirs does the opposite.)
I have been using Bill's call sign for some time now.
As in: GDSOB!
Well, yes, that kind of proves my point. If Christians were really the persecuted group portrayed by the article, do you think the leaders of the nation would make a show of professing their membership in that group?
I wonder if insisting that one plus one equals two would be considered mathematical totalitarianism by Thomas Friedman?
Yep, that is why the only words you can't say on a state owned microphone are Jesus Christ. And the only words forbidden in public schools, Jesus Christ. Meanwhile, promotion of teenage sex, homosexuality and abortions is the norm. Yep, a lot of politicians give lip service, but few of them really mean it.
I say "barnacles" whenever I smash my finger.
What is different about Islam is that while there have been a few attempts at such a reformation, none have flowered or found the support of a Muslim state. We patronize Islam, and mislead ourselves, by repeating the mantra that Islam is a faith with no serious problems accepting the secular West, modernity and pluralism, and the only problem is a few bin Ladens. Although there is a deep moral impulse in Islam for justice, charity and compassion, Islam has not developed a dominant religious philosophy that allows equal recognition of alternative faith communities. Bin Laden reflects the most extreme version of that exclusivity, and he hit us in the face with it on 9/11.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E1D6113AF934A15752C1A9679C8B63
I can't wait to see the reaction when I try your suggestion.
“It is also an abomination to God when members of the media and the entertainment industry use Jesus Christ’s name in vain.”
I think, that being as Al Gore is now a god of the environmental movement for the left, that his name should be substituted when someone wants to use the Lord’s name in vain. Everytime you hear this happen on TV or wherever, picture substituting the name of Al Gore.
“Al Gore! That car almost hit me!”
Did you see the Exorcism of Emily Rose? The priest in that movie was also portrayed in a heroic manner. Even though the possession scenes were very scary and intense, the movie as a whole was very good. I especially liked the ending.
Not until He comes back. Or at least, that’s what I thought I understood Him to say.
While I understand those are popular urban legends, those statements just don't hold any water.
You can't use a state owned microphone, or a school, to proselytize. That's good. I don't want my local school used to promote Methodism any more than I want the government to have any say in what's in the sermon at my local Methodist church.
You know why it's considered ok to poke fun at Christians? Because they are a hugely powerful majority that dominates a great deal of the government. That's why it happens, and that's why its good that it happens. The powerful should be the target of some mockery. That's good for our system, and it's ultimately good for the church itself.
And what authority does the government have on that? The only authority the government has is to not establish a religion and is specifically forbidden to suppress religious expression. Besides, how is thanking God at graduation proselytizing? How are student lead prayers proselytizing? These aren't urban legends, they are court rulings.
“
This nation is so anti-Christian that only 99% of our elected leaders in Washington are openly Christian, mega-churches wield enormous political and economic influence, and nearly every Presidential candidate openly discusses the importance of his Christian beliefs.”
You can’t be that dumb to believe what you wrote!
The authority that recognizes when you use public resources to advance religion, it creates the appearance, if not the reality, of a government-established religion.
I don't know about you, but I really, really like the fact that I can go to church on Sundays without the government having to approve of what the pastor says. In order to keep it that way, we have to be extremely vigilant in keeping the government's business in the government's hands, and the church's business in the church's hands.
What people often fail to consider when arguing against the separation of church and state is that it is a two way street: you simply cannot increase religions role in government without also increasing government's role in religion. Do you really want your government to become more involved in your church?
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.