That has nothing to do with Christianity being the most influential dictate of our Founding Fathers, --- who knew the dangers that the religious posed to the nation.
and still continues to be in this Nation. ----- not so ... I understand that you christians are feeling marginalized these day .... you'll get used to it. On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 2:05:12 PM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote: > > There is a separation between Church and State, as mandated by the > Constitution and as it should be. That has nothing to do with Christianity > being the most influential dictate of our Founding Fathers, and still > continues to be in this Nation....Again, whether you like it or not. > > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:53 PM, plainolamerican > <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Unfortunately for you Plain Ol, during yours and my lifetime, the >> United States is, and will continue to be a non-secular Nation-State >> ---- >> speculation noted ... not shared. >> A *secular state* is a concept of >> secularism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism>, >> whereby a state <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_%28polity%29> or >> country <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country> purports to be officially >> neutral in matters of religion <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion>, >> supporting neither religion nor >> irreligion.[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_state#cite_note-1>A >> secular state also claims to treat all its citizens equally regardless of >> religion, and claims to avoid preferential treatment for a citizen from a >> particular religion/nonreligion over other religions/nonreligion. Secular >> states do not have a state >> religion<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion>(established religion) >> or equivalent. >> The United States does not have an official religion at either the >> federal or state level. There are some traditions and customs regarding the >> use of a Bible when taking oaths in court, or for the President of the >> United States during the oath of office, but neither of these are required >> by law. The First Amendment to the United States >> Constitution<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution>is >> written as "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" and >> is held to be applied to the state via the Fourteenth >> Amendment<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution>. >> >> Furthermore, Article Six of the United States >> Constitution<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Six_of_the_United_States_Constitution>prohibits >> the use of any religious test as qualification for any public >> office. >> >> Alas, many American religious leaders resent the concept of religious >> freedom. What they seek is religious dominion. The late Jerry Falwell was a >> prime example of this; he despised >> America's Constitution, and desperately tried to advance dominion. Not a >> progressive society, but a fundamentalist one. >> >> “If we are going to save America and evangelize the world,” said Falwell, >> “We cannot accommodate secular philosophies that are diametrically opposed >> to Christian truth.” >> >> *Before the Constitution, religious leaders using "spectral evidence" to >> justify murder:* >> >> How is this so different from the words of former Taliban spiritual >> leader Mullah Mohammed Omar who, before September 11, 2001, oversaw the >> campaign to destroy all his country's ancient Buddhist statues, some of >> which dated back to the second century? And what reason for this >> destruction? Omar explained: “I don't care about anything else but Islam.” >> Religious pluralism, indeed, any pluralism, is forbidden. Law comes from >> the "inspired" rule of the church or mosque. >> >> >> On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:24:51 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote: >> >>> Unfortunately for you Plain Ol, during yours and my lifetime, the >>> United States is, and will continue to be a non-secular Nation-State, >>> relying upon it's Christian heritage as its moral compass and depending >>> upon Christian values, principals and tenets for the concept of "Ordered >>> Liberty". You hate this I know, and you and your secularist liberal >>> friends do everything in your power to revise history, but it's pretty >>> much for naught! >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:18 PM, plainolamerican >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> the government cannot mandate or regulate social behavior or morality. >>>> --- >>>> nor can the religious. >>>> >>>> the good news! >>>> as Americans become more secular the religious will lose political >>>> power and influence. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:12:50 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote: >>>> >>>>> As a "Genocidal Conservative"; I think this just goes to show that >>>>> the government cannot mandate or regulate social behavior or morality. >>>>> It's been tried and failed at each and every attempt. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:35 AM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *"Herewith another and yet worse confession: I do not see, or care, >>>>>> why it is thought my duty to like, or dislike, groups because of their >>>>>> race, creed, color, sex, sexual aberration, or national origin. Nor do I >>>>>> think it their duty to like me. I especially do not understand why the >>>>>> federal government should decide with whom I ought to associate." * >>>>>> *"So what?" * >>>>>> *How do you like them apples? *By Fred Reed >>>>>> April 22, 2014 >>>>>> >>>>>> I am puzzled as to why racism is thought to be a terrible thing, >>>>>> rather than entirely natural and often reasonable, and why people allow >>>>>> themselves to be brow-beaten about it. Maybe we should stop. Domestic >>>>>> tranquility would follow in torrents. >>>>>> >>>>>> As nearly as I can tell, a racist is one who approves of rigorous >>>>>> education, good English, civilized manners, minimal criminality, and >>>>>> responsible parenthood, among other things. I am, then, a racist. I see >>>>>> no >>>>>> reason to grovel about it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I decided long ago that if, while I was doing a radio interview, a >>>>>> caller-in told me, “You a *racist!”* I would hesitate as if puzzled, >>>>>> and say “…So what?” This would add immeasurably to the planetary supply >>>>>> of >>>>>> stunned silence. The expectation is that anyone so charged will fall on >>>>>> his >>>>>> knees and beg for mercy. It would be a lesser offense to be caught >>>>>> sexually >>>>>> molesting autistic three-year-old girls while attending a Nazi >>>>>> torch-rally. >>>>>> >>>>>> Herewith another and yet worse confession: I do not see, or care, why >>>>>> it is thought my duty to like, or dislike, groups because of their race, >>>>>> creed, color, sex, sexual aberration, or national origin. Nor do I think >>>>>> it >>>>>> their duty to like me. I especially do not understand why the federal >>>>>> government should decide with whom I ought to associate. >>>>>> >>>>>> But back to “So what?” Among its charms is that there is no answer to >>>>>> it, other than huffing and puffing and indignant expostulation. All of >>>>>> these amuse me. Used frequently, “So what?”would shut up people who >>>>>> badly >>>>>> need to shut up, or else force them to think. Not likely, as most >>>>>> apparently cannot. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let us, improbably, glance at reality. A characteristic of human >>>>>> groups is that they do not like each other. The greater the difference >>>>>> between the groups, the greater the dislike; the closer the contact >>>>>> between >>>>>> them, the more open the friction. Note that before the advent of mass >>>>>> immigration, Americans of whatever politics had no dislike of Hispanics. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thus separation increases the likelihood of amity. Is this not >>>>>> obvious? The instinctive rancor between disparate groups accounts for >>>>>> most >>>>>> of the world’s problems. Moslems and Christians dislike each other, >>>>>> Tamils >>>>>> and Sinhalese, Cambodians and Vietnamese, blacks and whites, Americans >>>>>> and >>>>>> Frenchmen, men and women, homosexuals and the normal and, as Tom Lehrer >>>>>> famously sang, “…everybody hates the Jews.” >>>>>> >>>>>> Except that in America Jews are so assimilated that most of us don’t >>>>>> remember to hate them. They aren’t different enough. I’ll have to make >>>>>> myself a note. >>>>>> >>>>>> Humans like to be among their own kind. This can mean many things. It >>>>>> can be political. In Washington, white liberals cheerlead for diversity >>>>>> while spending their time exclusively with white liberals and execrating >>>>>> Southerners, Jesus Creepers, genocidal conservatives (understood to mean >>>>>> all conservatives), Catholics, racists, owners of guns, rednecks, and so >>>>>> on. No dissenting voices are heard because, like conservatives, liberals >>>>>> choose to be among their own. Similarly, if in any of Washington’s dives >>>>>> you know that one person in a table of six has an IQ in excess 130, it >>>>>> is a >>>>>> good bet that all do. It isn’t snobbery. Smart people enjoy the company >>>>>> of >>>>>> smart people. Their own kind. So what? >>>>>> >>>>>> If left alone, people will naturally and peacefully form such >>>>>> associations as seem to them desirable. If left alone. So what? >>>>>> >>>>>> The Chinese cluster together in China Towns because they want to be >>>>>> among their own. So what? Jews have yeshivas because they want to >>>>>> preserve >>>>>> their culture. So what? On campus, black students want separate >>>>>> fraternities and dormitories. So what? When men can find a pretext for >>>>>> being among other men, they do. So what? >>>>>> >>>>>> In all of this, I am a bit of an outlier, having lived among many >>>>>> cultures and generally liked them. Some can do this. Yet as a white >>>>>> American of European extraction, I too want to preserve my culture. This >>>>>> involves (or did) respect for law, studiousness, the production of >>>>>> children >>>>>> within marriage, self-reliance, honesty, sexual restraint, and so on. >>>>>> Another part of my cultural package is the literature of Milne, Milton, >>>>>> Twain, Galsworthy, Gibbon, and others at length. I want my children to >>>>>> read >>>>>> them >>>>>> >>>>>> However, I do not want to impose my values and culture on others. >>>>>> American blacks for example are truly *African *Americans, and quite >>>>>> reasonably may have as little interest in European history as I do in >>>>>> African. Rationally this would argue for separate schools where each >>>>>> could >>>>>> study what and as it chose. For reasons impenetrable to me, to suggest >>>>>> this >>>>>> is thought worse than genocide. >>>>>> >>>>>> A reason for letting people associate as they choose is that, while >>>>>> groups naturally do not like each other, they overlap in curious ways. >>>>>> Left to themselves, people sort these matters out like water reaching >>>>>> its >>>>>> level. When I lived in Washington I used to spend afternoons over a Bass >>>>>> and several of its friends at the Cafe Asia, on Wilson Boulevard just >>>>>> across Key Bridge into Virginia. The Asia was then staffed by Asian >>>>>> girlsMalays, Chinese, Vietnamese, and a lovely Japanese woman who >>>>>> managed >>>>>> it. The clientele ran to young white professionals. >>>>>> >>>>>> Their unanimous opinion held of these women by white men was highly >>>>>> favorable. Why? Well, these young ladiesthey *were* ladies–were >>>>>> sleek, pretty, classy, never toilet-mouthed, and smart. Smart: One was >>>>>> doing graduate work in computer security, another was a wide-area >>>>>> network >>>>>> engineer, a third had been unable to find work after a master’s in >>>>>> biochem, >>>>>> and so was in dental school. >>>>>> >>>>>> Here we have an example of people, being* left alone*, deciding *for >>>>>> themselves* who to hang out with. The young white professionals had >>>>>> decided, probably not consciously, that the Asian women had enough in >>>>>> common with us, and enough not in common but appealing, that we really >>>>>> enjoyed them. >>>>>> >>>>>> Where is the fly in this ointment? I suppose we were racists, as we >>>>>> were assuredly discriminating racially: We thought Malays pretty. The >>>>>> horror. No doubt we were sinners all. >>>>>> >>>>>> Today of course we are federally admonished not to choose our own >>>>>> friends and neighbors as if our lives were our own business. No. >>>>>> Instead >>>>>> we must follow the social directives of the Potomac Soviet, whether >>>>>> anyone >>>>>> wants to or not. Few do. In Washington, on the Hill, upper Connecticut, >>>>>> the >>>>>> inner suburbs, the outer suburbs, everywhere, clubs and restaurants are >>>>>> either almost perfectly white or perfectly black. Whites happily >>>>>> patronize >>>>>> Latin American restaurants intended for the general trade, yet in >>>>>> mini-barrios many venues tacitly are for browns only. So what? It is >>>>>> how >>>>>> people want it. If freedom of association is racism, I am for it. >>>>>> >>>>>> So what? >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.fredoneverything.net/LaudableRacism.shtml >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>>>> >>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> -- >>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>> >>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>> >>>> --- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> -- >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "PoliticalForum" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
