How do you align politically?

[Bouncer]

as i said, i don't follow any of this shit. but i do agree with chris on one thing. religion has no place in government. hell, religion has no place anywhere IMO but that is a different discussion.

[NewbieChris]

Have you read the constitution, the federalist papers, the writings of Madison or even Franklin or the Declaration of Independence ? God or Providence as they often called God was not left out, He is the whole basis of your " rights" It is your God given rights the constitution and the Bill of Rights seek to protect !

People like you make me so angry. Where is there any mention of God? Please, quote it in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence in specific regards to a quote of God or his rule through government. People whose minds are so small that they cannot distinguish between certain rights that are God given versus right that are inalienable to humanity. You are correct that the 'rights' that we were bestowed came from people whom were extremely religious. HOWEVER, your understanding of the situations seems to fall off there. There was SPECIFICALLY no mention of a certain type of God or religion. The writers were Christian, and they put the beliefs they thought were important in the Constitution, the Constitution being document we have chosen to govern our state. Not the Declaration of Independence and certainly not the Federalist papers.

What these men believed, and their ability to separate certain aspects of that religious out is what you should be focusing on. Their ability to remove their own religious ETHOS from a national document that was meant to control a government is something people like you have trouble comprehending. THERE IS A REASON THAT THE DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY MENTION RELIGION.

Personally, I don't understand how people like you chose to be so disrespectful of the choices the writers made. They clearly made certain choices, regardless of their belief system, to aid the development of our country. Doing this by separating organized religious beliefs from governmental rule. Something our current Republicans would have you believe is blasphemous.

The derivations of our rights from a Biblical belief system is correct. However a biblical belief system is not far off of a Muslim belief system. People don't realize that the Bible is the route of every European belief system. And that most religions are designed to teach us humility and respect for others.

[3v1lj03]

People like you make me so angry. Where is there any mention of God? Please, quote it in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence in specific regards to a quote of God or his rule through government. People whose minds are so small that they cannot distinguish between certain rights that are God given versus right that are inalienable to humanity. You are correct that the 'rights' that we were bestowed came from people whom were extremely religious. HOWEVER, your understanding of the situations seems to fall off there. There was SPECIFICALLY no mention of a certain type of God or religion. The writers were Christian, and they put the beliefs they thought were important in the Constitution, the Constitution being document we have chosen to govern our state. Not the Declaration of Independence and certainly not the Federalist papers.

What these men believed, and their ability to separate certain aspects of that religious out is what you should be focusing on. Their ability to remove their own religious ETHOS from a national document that was meant to control a government is something people like you have trouble comprehending. THERE IS A REASON THAT THE DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY MENTION RELIGION.

Personally, I don't understand how people like you chose to be so disrespectful of the choices the writers made. They clearly made certain choices, regardless of their belief system, to aid the development of our country. Doing this by separating organized religious beliefs from governmental rule. Something our current Republicans would have you believe is blasphemous.

The derivations of our rights from a Biblical belief system is correct. However a biblical belief system is not far off of a Muslim belief system. People don't realize that the Bible is the route of every European belief system. And that most religions are designed to teach us humility and respect for others.

I debated for some time as whether or not to respond to your original statement. Because I expected to get insulted and belittled as a response. But, then I thought no I read where he was tiring to engage Shibby in an intelligent debate about his signature statement and I thought he will engage me in a thoughtful and intellectual debate of viewpoints. I see I was mistaken. You assume a great deal about me and insult me in the first few sentences. You don't know anything about the kind "people" I am, my belief system or lack thereof. Your insults prove your inability to engage in an intellectual exchange of ideas. I will be happy to give my home address so you can come and insult me to my face.

[NewbieChris]

I debated for some time as whether or not to respond to your original statement. Because I expected to get insulted and belittled as a response. But, then I thought no I read where he was tiring to engage Shibby in an intelligent debate about his signature statement and I thought he will engage me in a thoughtful and intellectual debate of viewpoints. I see I was mistaken. You assume a great deal about me and insult me in the first few sentences. You don't know anything about the kind "people" I am, my belief system or lack thereof. Your insults prove your inability to engage in an intellectual exchange of ideas. I will be happy to give my home address so you can come and insult me to my face.

I'm sorry for the extreme reaction, but asking if I have read the Constitution is insulting to me. The point still stands that the writers of the United States Constitution were able to separate their personal belief systems from the power they gave the national government. Besides if the creators of the document wanted us to live by a biblical God's rule that would have been far more specific about it. They gave the federal government a small amount of power because the did not want tee federal government strong holding its citizens into rules of certain belief systems. That was, at the very least, something they wanted the states to decide.

I guess my point is that I could write a document that outlines the power of a government and gives people the right to live free, peaceful lives where they can strive to do what ever I want and I can do it without mentioning or forcing people to live by the Episcopalian Church doctrine that I believe in. The fact that my religious belief system influenced some of the things I put in that document are voided when said government takes control. It is the governments job to take that document and rule to protect its citizens as much as it can, as close as it can to that document.

The belief that American will lose its Christianity if we do such a thing disgusts me.

[Bouncer]

I'm sorry for the extreme reaction, but asking if I have read the Constitution is insulting to me. The point still stands that the writers of the United States Constitution were able to separate their personal belief systems from the power they gave the national government. Besides if the creators of the document wanted us to live by a biblical God's rule that would have been far more specific about it. They gave the federal government a small amount of power because the did not want tee federal government strong holding its citizens into rules of certain belief systems. That was, at the very least, something they wanted the states to decide.

I guess my point is that I could write a document that outlines the power of a government and gives people the right to live free, peaceful lives where they can strive to do what ever I want and I can do it without mentioning or forcing people to live by the Episcopalian Church doctrine that I believe in. The fact that my religious belief system influenced some of the things I put in that document are voided when said government takes control. It is the governments job to take that document and rule to protect its citizens as much as it can, as close as it can to that document.

The belief that American will lose its Christianity if we do such a thing disgusts me.

you took 2 seconds to apologize and then went on with your rant again. take a step back and look at how many times you insulted him in your post.

its funny, you are a smart guy, i don't think anyone will debate that. but for as smart as you are, you are absolutely stupid when it comes to human interaction. you just don't have a clue how to talk to people and how you come across in the process.

if you were to say the things that you said to 3v1lj03 in person i would put money on it that you would have gotten hurt. its obvious that you have never been in a situation like that and have never learned that lesson.

[Shibby]

Not only that, it doesn't prove you are more intelligent by talking down to people. Your intelligence will prove itself, if it's there, but respecting others is what gets them to listen.

[Nekrawulf]

I too believe in seperation of church and state. But here is the issue we deal with here...

Most moral issues, such as: Marriage, gay rights, stem cell research, abortion, etc... etc..
are seeded in religous beliefs for many people. Thus is is hard for many people to see that their own religous beliefs are not the core source of moral compassing for other people.

For instance, I am agnostic, and hold no solid religous base; but I still have a strong moral compass not seeded in theological beliefs. Many people I know, including family, think that I am confused and hope that I will "find my way". To me, this takes us back to the old premise that "faith is blind", and this old saying hold true in even this situation. People may have good in their heart and the best intentions, but our egos tend to filter out alot of empathy we could have toward opposing beliefs.

That being said,my argument for seperation of church and state is as follows: never allow anyone or any entity pass laws seeded with a religous moral compass, because other people beliefs will get repressed instead of expressed with the ideals of the majority(or those in power) taking priority.

America is not as free as people think it is.

[gymratin]

i share newbie's views

[NewbieChris]

you took 2 seconds to apologize and then went on with your rant again. take a step back and look at how many times you insulted him in your post.

its funny, you are a smart guy, i don't think anyone will debate that. but for as smart as you are, you are absolutely stupid when it comes to human interaction. you just don't have a clue how to talk to people and how you come across in the process.

if you were to say the things that you said to 3v1lj03 in person i would put money on it that you would have gotten hurt. its obvious that you have never been in a situation like that and have never learned that lesson.

Being asked the question if I have read the Constitution is insulting to me, since I'm discussing it. Stating his opinion as fact in a demeaning tone is also insulting to me. I'm not saying that I was right, but my reaction was based on the tone that his post gave my original statements. His short post did not make a point, but rather insult my own intelligence by stating a single point. A point that is not fact, but rather facts molded into an opinion about the Constitution.

Having said that, was my post supposed to be ridden with apologies as I continue to try and make a point? Since my first post was so insulting I tried restating what I had to say in a less demeaning way.

[NewbieChris]

I was just thinking about what you said about this conversation being in person Bouncer. Were this conversation taking place in person, I believe this mis-communication would never have happened. I would have heard his tone or, I would hope, his post would have had some sort of reference outside of his own opinion. Even then, I've always seemed to have trouble communicating via the internet. Given the fact that I have a dry sarcastic sense of humor and that a simple statement can be completely mis-interpreted by anyone.

Given that I tend to have less respect online now that I think of it, but only when confronted in what I see as a demeaning tone.

[Nekrawulf]

I was just thinking about what you said about this conversation being in person Bouncer. Were this conversation taking place in person, I believe this mis-communication would never have happened. I would have heard his tone or, I would hope, his post would have had some sort of reference outside of his own opinion. Even then, I've always seemed to have trouble communicating via the internet. Given the fact that I have a dry sarcastic sense of humor and that a simple statement can be completely mis-interpreted by anyone.

Given that I tend to have less respect online now that I think of it, but only when confronted in what I see as a demeaning tone.

no wai


(that was sarcasm)