Where did I say that? You obviously did not read what I wrote. Please read it again carefully. Pay close attention to the word Constitution.
H. -----Original Message----- From: Fleischer, Beth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 8:56 AM To: CF-Community Subject: RE: Bush Wins! If in this country, I have the right to practice whatever religion I choose without someone elses religion being imposed upon me, then having the majority of folks vote in a national religion would be against my right to practice what I choose, no? And to have christian prayer imposed upon me in school would be as well. So, what you are saying is that all of that is ok as long as the majority agrees. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 12:53 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: Bush Wins! > > You're obfuscating. My point was pretty elemental about teaching children > what they do not know. > > You may disagree, but that doesn't make you right. > > In all cultures, for all peoples, the rights are the same (under the > theory > of Natural Law). Another government may not recognize it, but that > doesn't > mean that government is right. > > Who is talking about making religious rules into law? Clearly I am not. I > am > saying that if a majority of people believe something should be law, for > whatever reason, then maybe it should be law (potential violations of the > Constitution aside for the moment). The reason the majority acts the way > it > does is secondary to how it acts. > > H. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fleischer, Beth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 1:25 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: Bush Wins! > > > Actually, the ABC's are arbitrary symbols assigned by humans. In other > languages the ABC's are different. In other cultures are these rights > different? > > Clearly, H, if you think its ok for religious rules to be made into law, > and > I consider my right to practice religion as I choose to mean that your > religious rules shouldn't be my law, then folks have different opinions as > to what the right to religious freedom means. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 12:24 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: RE: Bush Wins! > > > > We all know what water is, so why do we need to teach children that it's > > H2O? > > > > Do children inherently know their ABC's? > > > > No, we must teach them, even though the ABC's never change and existed > > before they were born and will exist afterwards. They are not born > > knowing > > their ABCs. And they are not born knowing their rights. > > > > The Bill of Rights says, "We believe these are the rights that God has > > given > > to all of us. We want to make sure we all know what those rights are so > > that > > they are protected for future generations." > > > > Even so, look how many people want to trample our rights. In one poll a > > few > > years ago, 37% of those polled couldn't name even one of the five > freedoms > > guaranteed by the First Amendment. > > > > As to people having different opinions over rights, what does that mean? > > If > > one person says it's day and another says it's night, obviously, one > > person > > is wrong. If one person says you have a right to free speech and > another > > doesn't, obviously, one person is wrong. And you need not be a religious > > person to believe in Natural Law (many of the Founders were not). > > > > H. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Fleischer, Beth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 12:49 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: RE: Bush Wins! > > > > > > I do fault religious folks for imposing their religion on my laws. > > > > If our rights are inherent why do we need to define them at all? Its > > because they aren't really inherent - some folks differ in opinion as to > > rights. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Lon Lentz [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 11:41 AM > > > To: CF-Community > > > Subject: RE: Bush Wins! > > > > > > I don't fault religiously oriented people making their legal > arguments > > > based on their religious affiliations. We all have to have a basis for > > > the way we see things, even if their reasoning annoys other people. We > > > as a society do not see marriage with another as a right and > therefore, > > > we pass laws to control it. Therefore, the majority wins, no matter > why > > > they believe that way. > > > > > > Also, and I'm not trying to pick nits. Constitutions are about > defining > > > the roles and limitations of government. The US Constitution tells the > > > government what its job is and what authority the people allow it to > > > have. The Bill of Rights reminds the government of some of the > people's > > > rights. Rights which can not be infringed. We do not derive these > rights > > > from the Constitution. We do not derive these rights from the > > > Government. Our rights are based on our mere existence. And the > > > Government's authority is based on our permission. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Fleischer, Beth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 12:13 PM > > > To: CF-Community > > > Subject: RE: Bush Wins! > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > However, as an example of where religion has no place in law: in > alaska > > > they just voted to add to the constitution that a marriage can only be > a > > > man > > > and a woman in order to prevent same sex marriage from ever being > > > legalized > > > in this state. When discussing this with proponents of it they > claimed > > > the > > > reasoning was that a) same sex marriage is against the law of the > bible > > > - > > > the bible specifies man and woman so therefore a same sex marriage can > > > never > > > be a marrriage and b) its a crime against god and c) it makes a > > > "mockery" > > > of heterosexual marriage. Now, same sex marriage was not legal in > > > alaska > > > before this happened, but they wanted it in the constitution of the > > > state to > > > ensure their religious beliefs would be inflicted on generations to > > > come. I > > > had the opportunity to talk to a woman who was involved in writing the > > > Alaska State Constitution and she was just terribly upset about the > > > whole > > > thing - it goes totally against the constitution which is about the > > > rights > > > given to the people by the state - to make its purpose to remove > rights > > > from > > > individuals is just apalling to her. But I digress: the point being > is > > > that these folks reasoning involves god all the way - the bible says > its > > > bad, god struck down sodom and gomorrah - these concepts have no place > > > in > > > law, whatsoever. And generally folks who believe this stuff do not > > > understand that their religious beliefs are just that - there is no > > > conception that their religious views dont' apply to everyone. > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
