Separation of Church and State - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-19-2004, 11:08 AM   #31
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 09:28 AM
Most bodies of government open with an invocation - and have been doing it for years and years and years.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 11:17 AM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,270
Local Time: 11:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Most bodies of government open with an invocation - and have been doing it for years and years and years.
Does that make it right, though?

Angela
__________________

__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 02-19-2004, 11:22 AM   #33
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 09:28 AM
That doesn't mean it should continue. But let's say it does, and the invocator calls upon whatever it is that Wiccan followers call upon. Exclusively. Would that be acceptable to you? Remember, this is the opening of a body of government. That means the invocator is acting as an agent of your government.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 11:28 AM   #34
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 09:28 AM
No, the invocator is an invited guest of the government. The government does not prescribe what is to be said nor do they necessarily act upon what is said.

And yes, many government bodies take a pluralistic approach, inviting people of different faiths and beliefs.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 11:34 AM   #35
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:28 PM
George Washington: “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.”


Thomas Jefferson: “The Bible is the cornerstone of liberty. . . . Students’ perusal of the sacred volume will make us better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands.”


Andrew Jackson: “That Book [the Bible] is the rock on which our Republic rests.”
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 11:35 AM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:28 PM
1892 Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States: “Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise, and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian.”


1952 Zoarach v. Clauson: “The First Amendment does not say that in every and all respects there shall be a separation of church and state. . . . We find no constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence.”


1971 Lemon v. Kurtzman: “Separation is not possible in the absolute sense. Some relationship between government and religious organizations is inevitable.”


1985 Wallace v. Jaffree: “The ‘wall of separation between church and state’ is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned.”
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 11:39 AM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:28 PM
In the words of the man who wrote the first amendment.....Fisher Ames:

“Should not the Bible regain the place it once held as a school
book? Its morals are pure, its examples, captivating and noble.
In no book is there so good English, so pure and so elegant;
and by teaching all the same book, they will speak alike, and
the Bible will justly remain the standard of language as well
as of faith.”
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 11:42 AM   #38
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:28 PM
Maybe Fisher Ames had it right here:

We are sliding down the mire of a democracy that pollutes the morals of the people before it swallows up their freedoms.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 01:00 PM   #39
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 11:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
George Washington: “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.”


Thomas Jefferson: “The Bible is the cornerstone of liberty. . . . Students’ perusal of the sacred volume will make us better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands.”


Andrew Jackson: “That Book [the Bible] is the rock on which our Republic rests.”
Dread let me ask you, how many different religions do you think were seriously being practiced in the US at the time these men spoke?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-19-2004, 01:02 PM   #40
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 11:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox



That does not change that "separation of church and state" meant something different for 150 years.


The wall of separation was meant to keep governement out of religion and people's lives......not the other way around.
Isn't that the beauty of the Constitution though? It was designed to change and evolve. The drafters of this document knew they weren't perfect.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-19-2004, 01:22 PM   #41
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 09:28 AM
The First Amendment:


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 01:23 PM   #42
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 09:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


And yes, many government bodies take a pluralistic approach, inviting people of different faiths and beliefs.
So you would be okay with my example? At a high school graduation?
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 01:56 PM   #43
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Dread let me ask you, how many different religions do you think were seriously being practiced in the US at the time these men spoke?
That argument is moot. The wall of separation is supposed to keep Government out of religion. Not the other way around. People practicing their religion have every right to try and make laws, or amendments to the constitution. Nowhere does it say that they cannot. If the voters are against it....then let the voters decide. Unfortunately the people do not get to decide.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 02:01 PM   #44
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Isn't that the beauty of the Constitution though? It was designed to change and evolve. The drafters of this document knew they weren't perfect.
It was not designed to have courts throw out 150 years of judicial rulings....consistent judicial rulings. The Court, based on what I know, is supposed to be ruling based on past rulings and decisions. I am not a lawyer....NB?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-19-2004, 02:04 PM   #45
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 09:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


It was not designed to have courts throw out 150 years of judicial rulings....consistent judicial rulings. The Court, based on what I know, is supposed to be ruling based on past rulings and decisions. I am not a lawyer....NB?
Didn't Brown vs The Board throw out Dred Scott? Weren't the rulings determining black Americans to be fractions of people consistent?
__________________

__________________
martha is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com