• Lucid Dreaming - Dream Views




    Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
    Results 1 to 25 of 42
    1. #1
      adversary RedfishBluefish's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 2007
      Location
      Now
      Posts
      495
      Likes
      4

      "Separation of Church and State"

      What does that even mean?
      If any religion can be backed up by evidence, then it's no different to any other belief, right? So you can't oppose it. Or maybe religions are just faith.
      In any case, only an atheist sorry - agnostic (irreligious) president would be constitutional, since nobody can stop their beliefs from affecting the way they lead.

      Is there a legal definition of "religion"?
      Last edited by RedfishBluefish; 03-30-2008 at 01:05 PM.

    2. #2
      Member Achievements:
      1 year registered Veteran First Class 10000 Hall Points
      wasup's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2003
      Gender
      Posts
      4,668
      Likes
      21
      Legal definition of religion? Obviously.

      Secondly, NO religion can be backed up by evidence (that is pretty much a prerequisite to any religion. Not by law, but simply because it is). Please name me a religion backed by evidence (hint: bible is not evidence). Secondly, you can still oppose something if it is backed by evidence... Thirdly, Yes... yes you CAN stop your bleiefs from affecting the way you lead. I don't care if we have a Christian president as long as Christianity plays no part in his presidency. Say he makes a decision on abortion. Of course it has to be done on moral grounds, but it should be done on universal moral grounds, not christian ones. Stem cells, for example, when not looked at from a Christian view, are so obviously the right thing. Yet people reject it because of Christainity.

      You seem to entirely misunderstand the concept of separation of church and state... it basically means that religions cannot influence the government (generally vice versa too, I believe, but the primary focus is the former way). That is, no religious undertones in the government... but obviously separation of church and state is no longer respected (was it ever?). "In God We Trust." "One nation, under god..." An agnostic still has a belief (that there is no way to know), so in your logic, nobody is constitutionally eligible to lead (because everybody has a belief that has to do with theism). An agnostic is not "irreligious." Agnostic seems to be such a commonly misunderstood word... An agnostic can, technically, a fundamental christian. Or a hardcore atheist. I am a 100% atheist... but still 100% agnostic as well.

      It is the mark of a good president to be able to not have his or her beliefs affect the way that they lead. No doubt that some of their decisions will reflect their beliefs... but nowadays Bush blatantly opposes gay marriage, stem cell research, abortion, etc. simply because the Bible tells him to. I like Obama because though I am not sure his beliefs (I believe he is atheist), he guarantees to be a nonsecular president. Nonsecular is the keyword. I do not want a Christian president, a jewish president, an agnostic president... maybe not even an atheist president (okay, I'm lying there, I do in truth), I want a nonsecular president. Religion doesn't even play a part. It shouldn't!

      But at any rate, this debate doesn't even matter because (by the way, assuming that we are talking about separation of church and state in the US) the separation of church and state is a joke now in the eyes of the constitution and government.

    3. #3
      Sleeping Dragon juroara's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2006
      Gender
      Location
      San Antonio, TX
      Posts
      3,866
      Likes
      1172
      DJ Entries
      144
      thats like saying every Christian is a fundamentalist and that they all think the same regarding hot topics like evolution

      but that just isn't true. regardless of a persons religion, people think for themselves and choose to believe in what they believe

      look at the history of the US. it would be a lie to say that religious morality did not play a role in the foundation of this country. The forefathers felt people had 'God given rights' that no country, no pope, no church, no state had the right to take away. That is partly why we have the phrase under God - they felt this country was 'authorized' by God

      however, do not make the mistake of thinking that God = church. That was the very reason why they said Separation of Church and State. They weren't idiots. They knew that the Church would try to rule and control people as it did in Europe. The Church is not synomanous with God. It should not dictate over those God given rights. It is a human organization.

      It was felt that these God given rights were not created nor mandated by people. Therefore it was very necessary to separate the Church, which claims to have a monopoly of God, with State which doesn't make that claim.

      While people have argued that the forefathers were not Christians *some were atheist?* I still feel God played an important role. On a spiritual level I also feel the Holy Spirit played an important role as well, it goes where it deems necessary and Church did not have the right to say that only the Church can speak through the Holy Spirit. I feel, on a spiritual level, God did mandate the US as a way of saying "you have freedoms that no one has the right to take away from you, not even your churches". The forefathers tuned into this truth, regardless of their religious background. That is how the Holy Spirit works.

      To say that politicians can't act out of their beliefs is silly and childish. Some of the greatest moments and movements in American history were brought by politicians with strong beliefs. Lets name one. . .Martin Luther King Jr.

      People like him carried out the same spirit as the forefathers, that there are God given rights. It was not political propaganda to promote his Church.

      Today, there are a lot of issues - stem cell research, abortion, gay marriage, and so on and we haven't come to a happy consensus yet. That is because we have fundamentalists today, who are afraid of science. At the other end, we have people with no morality who feel the country should not enforce morality as well.

      Well, both parties are wrong. Not only will the nation continue to enforce morality, since it comes from something much higher than Church, it will also continue scientific progress. So those of us here that want to have an abortion left and right, countless times, without a care, shut up and close your legs. It is just as morally wrong for the government to take control over a womans body, as it is morally wrong for the woman to disrespect her own body.

    4. #4
      Banned
      Join Date
      May 2007
      LD Count
      Loads
      Gender
      Location
      Digital Forest.
      Posts
      6,864
      Likes
      386
      Fail #1 for the US:

      - Having a single leader in the position and powers that the president currently has.

      -----

      SW Episode 1-3 much?

    5. #5
      Member Achievements:
      1 year registered Veteran First Class 5000 Hall Points

      Join Date
      Sep 2004
      Gender
      Location
      Seattle, WA
      Posts
      2,503
      Likes
      217
      Quote Originally Posted by Seismosaur View Post
      Fail #1 for the US:

      - Having a single leader in the position and powers that the president currently has.

      -----

      SW Episode 1-3 much?
      Except the current president is basically jar jar

    6. #6
      Banned
      Join Date
      May 2007
      LD Count
      Loads
      Gender
      Location
      Digital Forest.
      Posts
      6,864
      Likes
      386
      Yes.

      Merely Palpatine using a Jar-Jar sock puppet in this case.

    7. #7
      adversary RedfishBluefish's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 2007
      Location
      Now
      Posts
      495
      Likes
      4
      Quote Originally Posted by wasup View Post
      Secondly, NO religion can be backed up by evidence (that is pretty much a prerequisite to any religion. Not by law, but simply because it is). Please name me a religion backed by evidence (hint: bible is not evidence). Secondly, you can still oppose something if it is backed by evidence...
      Well, ok then, so leaders aren't allowed to make decisions that can't be backed up by evidence?

      Quote Originally Posted by wasup View Post
      Thirdly, Yes... yes you CAN stop your bleiefs from affecting the way you lead. I don't care if we have a Christian president as long as Christianity plays no part in his presidency. Say he makes a decision on abortion. Of course it has to be done on moral grounds, but it should be done on universal moral grounds, not christian ones. Stem cells, for example, when not looked at from a Christian view, are so obviously the right thing. Yet people reject it because of Christainity.
      Code:
      Christian Point Of View
      Universal Moral Grounds = Christian Moral Grounds.
      Quote Originally Posted by wasup View Post
      An agnostic still has a belief (that there is no way to know), so in your logic, nobody is constitutionally eligible to lead (because everybody has a belief that has to do with theism). An agnostic is not "irreligious." Agnostic seems to be such a commonly misunderstood word... An agnostic can, technically, a fundamental christian. Or a hardcore atheist. I am a 100% atheist... but still 100% agnostic as well.
      I thought agnostic meant "I don't know" (otherwise known as lack of belief). So WTF would a person who doesn't know be a fundamentalist christian? Is someone who doesn't know if there is a god going to kill for it? Or stone people because of it?

      BTW: Assume I haven't got the slightest idea what I'm talking about, since I do not live in America.
      Last edited by RedfishBluefish; 03-31-2008 at 02:09 AM.

    8. #8
      Member Achievements:
      1 year registered Veteran First Class 10000 Hall Points
      wasup's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2003
      Gender
      Posts
      4,668
      Likes
      21
      [quote=RedfishBluefish;753839]Well, ok then, so leaders aren't allowed to make decisions that can't be backed up by evidence?

      Leaders can't make decisions which don't have some sort of backing to them other than a religious one. I hope you aren't trying to pose these questions as if they are fallacies in my argument (if that were the case they are simply fallacies in your understanding of my argument )
      I thought agnostic meant "I don't know" (otherwise known as lack of belief). So WTF would a person who doesn't know be a fundamentalist christian? Is someone who doesn't know if there is a god going to kill for it? Or stone people because of it?

      BTW: Assume I haven't got the slightest idea what I'm talking about, since I do not live in America.
      You thought wrong... that's not what agnostic means.

    9. #9
      adversary RedfishBluefish's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 2007
      Location
      Now
      Posts
      495
      Likes
      4
      Well I just find it bizarre that so many people are encouraged to hold (illogical) beliefs with no evidence to them, while having laws stating that leaders aren't allowed to make their decisions based on those beliefs (ones with no evidence!).
      Religion is "great", "inspiring", "brings love", but... causes bad government (and all other decisions too)?

      BTW - assume I wasn't talking about "Permanant Agnostic in Principle"s

    10. #10
      Member Mick Jagger's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Posts
      14
      Likes
      0
      Quote Originally Posted by RedfishBluefish View Post
      What does that even mean?
      I have aways assumed it was a figure of speech for the concept of no civil authority over religion.

      Is there a legal definition of "religion"?
      One can reasonable argue -using the first three common law "rules of construction" -that the word "religion" in the U. S. Constitution means "the duty we owe to our Creator and the methods of discharging it."

    11. #11
      Member Scatterbrain's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 2007
      Gender
      Posts
      1,729
      Likes
      91
      Someone created a DV account just to post on the insanity that is R/S. These are dark times.
      - Are you an idiot?
      - No sir, I'm a dreamer.

    12. #12
      I LOVE KAOSSILATOR Serkat's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2005
      Posts
      2,609
      Likes
      2
      Quote Originally Posted by Scatterbrain View Post
      Someone created a DV account just to post on the insanity that is R/S. These are dark times.
      Well, it's Mick Jagger so that's a plus.

      Or is it?...
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1eP84n-Lvw

      Ich brauche keine Waffe.

      Ich ermittle ausschließlich mit dem Gehirn!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1eP84n-Lvw

    13. #13
      Consciousness Itself Universal Mind's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 2004
      Gender
      Location
      Everywhere
      Posts
      12,871
      Likes
      1046
      Quote Originally Posted by Korittke View Post
      Well, it's Mick Jagger so that's a plus.

      Or is it?...
      The comment was way too left brained for the real Mick Jagger. Mick would say something like, "Hey baby, it means we should like just love God but not be pigs and stuff, yeah baby."
      How do you know you are not dreaming right now?

    14. #14
      Member Mick Jagger's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Posts
      14
      Likes
      0
      Over the years, liberal judges have twisted the First Amendment's phrase about "free exercise of religion" to mean the opposite — that you are not free to exercise your religion if atheists or members of non-Christian religions say that they are offended.

      --Thomas Sowell
      When did the Supreme Court ever say "you are not free to exercise your religion if atheists or members of non-Christian religions say that they are offended?"

    15. #15
      Member
      Join Date
      May 2007
      Posts
      715
      Likes
      31
      Quote Originally Posted by juroara View Post
      That is partly why we have the phrase under God - they felt this country was 'authorized' by God
      If you're referring to the Pledge of Allegiance, then you're way off base. The Pledge wasn't written until 1892, and has only had the words "Under God" in it since 1954 under the Eisenhower administration. The inspiration for it's addition came from the Lincoln Gettysburg Address from 1863, still 87 years after the US achieved independence and nothing to do with the founding fathers.

      Personally I consider that a breach of the separation of church and state, and Eisenhower acted inappropriately in pushing for its addition to the Pledge. At least 10% of the US doesn't believe in the God it's referring to and a further 8-10% don't believe in any god at all.

    16. #16
      Dreaming up music skysaw's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2007
      Gender
      Location
      Alexandria, VA
      Posts
      2,330
      Likes
      5
      Quote Originally Posted by juroara View Post
      look at the history of the US. it would be a lie to say that religious morality did not play a role in the foundation of this country. The forefathers felt people had 'God given rights' that no country, no pope, no church, no state had the right to take away. That is partly why we have the phrase under God - they felt this country was 'authorized' by God
      The US was not founded as a Christian or a religious nation but rather on freedom from oppression by religion. Not only was any mention of God left out of our constitution, but any attempt to consider language that included God was summarily voted down.

      The following quotes by our founding fathers will hopefully help dispell any myth that they had God-itis.

      Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind.
      - Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

      The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. Lighthouses are more helpful than churches.
      - Benjamin Franklin

      This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.
      - John Adams

      I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth.
      - Thomas Jefferson

      What has been [Christianity's] fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.
      - James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, 1785

      There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness.
      - George Washington

      In 1796, President John Adams signed into law The Treaty of Peace and Friendship Between the United States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli and Barbary and read it aloud to the nation. Article 11 of the treaty reads:

      As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. [emphasis mine]
      The senate approved it unanimously.

      So please, stop trying to convince us that wording created in the '50s (for the pledge) is evidence of what our nation is founded upon. Our founding fathers were long since dead and rotting (spinning, in this case) in their graves. Next time, try the constitution... our nation's founding document.
      Last edited by skysaw; 05-21-2008 at 02:36 PM.
      _________________________________________
      We now return you to our regularly scheduled signature, already in progress.
      _________________________________________

      My Music
      The Ear Is Always Correct - thoughts on music composition
      What Sky Saw - a lucid dreaming journal

    17. #17
      Member Mick Jagger's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Posts
      14
      Likes
      0
      Quote Originally Posted by skysaw View Post
      The US was... founded...on freedom from oppression by religion.
      Where does the Constitution say that?

    18. #18
      I LOVE KAOSSILATOR Serkat's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2005
      Posts
      2,609
      Likes
      2
      The USA really started out quite cool (in fact, much cooler than some Western countries even today) but it went to complete shits with the uprising of Christianity and most of the country just dumping a fat turd on the constitution (forced 12-step anyone?).
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1eP84n-Lvw

      Ich brauche keine Waffe.

      Ich ermittle ausschließlich mit dem Gehirn!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1eP84n-Lvw

    19. #19
      Member Mick Jagger's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Posts
      14
      Likes
      0
      The Constitution of Iran officially recognizes Christianity. The Religious Right should move to that country.

    20. #20
      Dreaming up music skysaw's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2007
      Gender
      Location
      Alexandria, VA
      Posts
      2,330
      Likes
      5
      Quote Originally Posted by Mick Jagger View Post
      Where does the Constitution say that?
      The first ammendment tells us that:
      "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

      Ratified in 1791

      That's where. There are many letters and other writings by Jefferson and other founding fathers clarifying their position on this. Their intent is quite clear. If you wish me to post pertinent excerpts of these letters, just ask and I will.
      _________________________________________
      We now return you to our regularly scheduled signature, already in progress.
      _________________________________________

      My Music
      The Ear Is Always Correct - thoughts on music composition
      What Sky Saw - a lucid dreaming journal

    21. #21
      Member
      Join Date
      May 2007
      Posts
      715
      Likes
      31
      Quote Originally Posted by Mick Jagger View Post
      Where does the Constitution say that?
      Right here, in the First Amendment


      edit: Sup skysaw, tag-teaming ITT.

    22. #22
      Member Mick Jagger's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Posts
      14
      Likes
      0
      Quote Originally Posted by skysaw View Post
      The first ammendment tells us that:
      "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

      Ratified in 1791

      That's where. There are many letters and other writings by Jefferson and other founding fathers clarifying their position on this. Their intent is quite clear. If you wish me to post pertinent excerpts of these letters, just ask and I will.
      I read you to say that the Constitution's text does not actually say, "The US was... founded...on freedom from oppression by religion."

      Quote Originally Posted by skysaw View Post
      The first ammendment tells us that:
      "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
      The First Amendment implies that the government was granted general unlimited power over religion in the Original Constitution.

      There are many letters and other writings by Jefferson and other founding fathers clarifying their position on this.
      Where did you get the notion that the lawmakers made the Constituton with the understanding that it would be construed according to "letters and other writings by Jefferson and other founding fathers clarifying their position?"

      Their intent is quite clear. If you wish me to post pertinent excerpts of these letters, just ask and I will.
      I thought "the fairest and most rational method to interpret the will of the legislator, is by exploring his intentions at the time when the law was made, by signs the most natural and probable. And these signs are either the words, the context, the subject matter, the effects and consequence, or the spirit and reason of the law." (see Blackstone's Commentaries)

    23. #23
      I LOVE KAOSSILATOR Serkat's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2005
      Posts
      2,609
      Likes
      2
      I'm not a native speaker so excuse this question... In "no law respecting an establishment of religion" does "respecting" mean "having respect for" or "regarding"?
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1eP84n-Lvw

      Ich brauche keine Waffe.

      Ich ermittle ausschließlich mit dem Gehirn!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1eP84n-Lvw

    24. #24
      Dreaming up music skysaw's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2007
      Gender
      Location
      Alexandria, VA
      Posts
      2,330
      Likes
      5
      Quote Originally Posted by Korittke View Post
      I'm not a native speaker so excuse this question... In "no law respecting an establishment of religion" does "respecting" mean "having respect for" or "regarding"?
      It means "regarding."
      _________________________________________
      We now return you to our regularly scheduled signature, already in progress.
      _________________________________________

      My Music
      The Ear Is Always Correct - thoughts on music composition
      What Sky Saw - a lucid dreaming journal

    25. #25
      Dreaming up music skysaw's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2007
      Gender
      Location
      Alexandria, VA
      Posts
      2,330
      Likes
      5
      Quote Originally Posted by Mick Jagger View Post
      I read you to say that the Constitution's text does not actually say, "The US was... founded...on freedom from oppression by religion."
      You read incorrectly. I did not say it used precisely those words, but I supplied words that support the same effect. If laws cannot be made in regard to religion, religion cannot oppress because it has no leg to stand on.

      The First Amendment implies that the government was granted general unlimited power over religion in the Original Constitution.
      Timeline
      US Constitution: 1787
      First Ammendment: 1791

      Wow... it seems that the entire constitution got flipped on its head in only three short years! But no, any intelligent person can figure out why the first ammendment was added. It was to clarify the nation's position on the matter for people like you. In any case, 1791 sure as hell beats 1954 as a founder's intent, wouldn't you agree?

      Where did you get the notion that the lawmakers made the Constituton with the understanding that it would be construed according to "letters and other writings by Jefferson and other founding fathers clarifying their position?"
      I offered the letters to show you their intent, not to be interpreted by law. Those who do the interpreting generally have a better grasp of it than you do. But we can leave them out if you like, the point still stands.

      I thought "the fairest and most rational method to interpret the will of the legislator, is by exploring his intentions at the time when the law was made, by signs the most natural and probable. And these signs are either the words, the context, the subject matter, the effects and consequence, or the spirit and reason of the law." (see Blackstone's Commentaries)
      Oh wait... perhaps we should take back your last statement and my response... Now you do want to explore the intentions at the time the law was made. Hence my reference to letters which explained them in plain English.
      _________________________________________
      We now return you to our regularly scheduled signature, already in progress.
      _________________________________________

      My Music
      The Ear Is Always Correct - thoughts on music composition
      What Sky Saw - a lucid dreaming journal

    Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •