George W. Bush Justifies Off-The-Cuff Bigotry

[Archmonarch]

Its not Yahweh. Thats a bastardisation of the Hebrew. The correct translation is Adonai.

[Dakoth]

I have not even seen paganism out lawed, the native Americans are still free to worship their gods, muslims can still worship Allah.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Are you trying to say Islam is paganistic in nature?

 

 

Also, Id say the problem lies in the term witch. Id say when most hear that term they either think of the evil Halloween version or devil-worshippers. Wicca would not be the first thought of many.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

No I have tried to convey the point that religions other than christian are still safe and have not been limitted by our government.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

Its not Yahweh. Thats a bastardisation of the Hebrew. The correct translation is Adonai.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't actually CARE what the exact translation is. The point I was making stands.

[Judge Hades]

As usual tolerance with exceptions, I am tolerant unless.  How has the majority of the christian law makers not been?  I have not even seen paganism out lawed, the native Americans are still free to worship their gods, muslims can still worship Allah.  Your problem is that Bush spoke his mind and it differs from what you think, he is just as entitled to his opinion as you are yours.  Now if he acts on that opinion then that is where the problem comes in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I still see that gays don't have the right to marry.

[Dakoth]

Bush is in favor of gay unions he said so himself. I will say it again marraige was a religious ceremony long before it had anything to do with the government. So you will have to forgive the very deepseated feelings most religious people have concerning marriage.

[Nick_i_am]

What the hell LOL

 

If I said for example... That all Jews are greedy money hungry pigs I wonder if I'd get into trouble off the mods.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, but if you called your self a goth furry emo everyone would laugh.

 

Just because wicca is a religion doesn't mean you don't get angsty teenage hangons who call themselves witches and start putting curses on the rest of their class.

 

Again, the stupid minority has given the majority a bad view, but I live in Britan were there are very few 'actual' wiccans as far as I have ever seen.

[Judge Hades]

Bush is in favor of gay unions he said so himself.  I will say it again marraige was a religious ceremony long before it had anything to do with the government.  So you will have to forgive the very deepseated feelings most religious people have concerning marriage.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If Marriage is a religious issue then the government has no place to govern it, yet they do.

[Commissar]

that is supposed to be separate from satate BTW, calling religions invalid and backing another religion.

 

The only thing protected by the constitution is that there will be no laws made governing what is a religion and what is not. Bush is still entitled to his opinion it only becomes wrong if he tries to act on it.

 

Comissar can you ever have a debate without insulting someone, or telling everyone how intelligent you are?

 

I feel it is funny that The military was brought up again. Why are people who believe religion has no part in our governmetn even supporing it in our military, after all no relgion belongs there it being a part of our government and all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course I can, Dakoth. I did it with you quite a bit in that other thread. But Taks and I have our own unique style of debate; he takes it pretty seriously, and I amuse myself.

 

The military is not part of the policy-making government, Dakoth. I have no problems with chaplains being assigned to military units. Helps with morale and cohesion, and most military chaplains I've met aren't really the hellfire and brimstone types - they're almost more like counselors.

[Dakoth]

The military is not part of the policy-making government, Dakoth. I have no problems with chaplains being assigned to military units. Helps with morale and cohesion, and most military chaplains I've met aren't really the hellfire and brimstone types - they're almost more like counselors.

 

Ah but neither is the public school system that is some thing that is a catch 22. If you believe religion has no place in public schools then naturally it has no place in the military. So if a priest of moderate tone wanted to be a crisis counselor in a public school that is ok, as long as the childeren were given a choice if they wanted to talk to him/her or not?Unfortunatly if you remove religion from the military every person who believes something then must be given a weekend pass other wise the government is limiting their ability to worship.

 

While you made posts you still couldn't refrane from an attack of intelligence.

[Dakoth]

If Marriage is a religious issue then the government has no place to govern it, yet they do.

 

You studied religion you tell me when was the first union done by the church? The first done by the government? You see the government only stuck their nose in it because they saw a way to make money.

[Commissar]

The military is not part of the policy-making government, Dakoth. I have no problems with chaplains being assigned to military units. Helps with morale and cohesion, and most military chaplains I've met aren't really the hellfire and brimstone types - they're almost more like counselors.

 

Ah but neither is the public school system that is some thing that is a catch 22. If you believe religion has no place in public schools then naturally it has no place in the military. So if a priest of moderate tone wanted to be a crisis counselor in a public school that is ok, as long as the childeren were given a choice if they wanted to talk to him/her or not?Unfortunatly if you remove religion from the military every person who believes something then must be given a weekend pass other wise the government is limiting their ability to worship.

 

While you made posts you still couldn't refrane from an attack of intelligence.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

A weekend pass? Are we in 1942 or something?

 

The difference, as I see it, is that you volunteer to go into the military, while attendance at a grade school is pretty much mandatory. And I know a lot of schools in my area have Bible study and all of that garbage after school. I have no problem with a school building being used for prayer meetings or anything like that, as long as it's not during normal school hours and not being taught to the kids.

[Commissar]

If Marriage is a religious issue then the government has no place to govern it, yet they do.

 

You studied religion you tell me when was the first union done by the church? The first done by the government? You see the government only stuck their nose in it because they saw a way to make money.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Either way, a marriage is only legal today if the government licenses it. That means that marriage has become province of the government.

[Dakoth]

Either way, a marriage is only legal today if the government licenses it. That means that marriage has become province of the government.

 

Legal yes binding no, the only reason to get a marriage liscence is to enjoy the benifits government gives you. If you don't care about those then the church is indeed a good alternative.

 

 

The difference, as I see it, is that you volunteer to go into the military, while attendance at a grade school is pretty much mandatory. And I know a lot of schools in my area have Bible study and all of that garbage after school. I have no problem with a school building being used for prayer meetings or anything like that, as long as it's not during normal school hours and not being taught to the kids.

 

Thats quite funny because last I noticed I never said taught or manditory I said if there was a crisis councelor that was a priest that the children could

elect to go to or not if they wanted

. Schools offered all sorts of classes as electives that I never took. Now wich is it in the other threads you were for total seperation of church and state, if that is true it means the military too.

[Commissar]

Either way, a marriage is only legal today if the government licenses it. That means that marriage has become province of the government.

 

Legal yes binding no, the only reason to get a marriage liscence is to enjoy the benifits government gives you. If you don't care about those then the church is indeed a good alternative.

 

 

The difference, as I see it, is that you volunteer to go into the military, while attendance at a grade school is pretty much mandatory. And I know a lot of schools in my area have Bible study and all of that garbage after school. I have no problem with a school building being used for prayer meetings or anything like that, as long as it's not during normal school hours and not being taught to the kids.

 

Thats quite funny because last I noticed I never said taught or manditory I said if there was a crisis councelor that was a priest that the children could

elect to go to or not if they wanted

. Schools offered all sorts of classes as electives that I never took. Now wich is it in the other threads you were for total seperation of church and state, if that is true it means the military too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Total separation. I outlined why I don't think military chaplains violate total separation; I also outlined why I don't think an after-school program would violate it. If a priest was a crisis counselor, fine...as long as he was there as a crisis counselor, not as a priest moonlighting as a crisis counselor. What I mean by that is, if he kept religion out of his counseling, I have no problems with it. But if he was trying to save souls, then I would.

[Dakoth]

Total separation. I outlined why I don't think military chaplains violate total separation; I also outlined why I don't think an after-school program would violate it. If a priest was a crisis counselor, fine...as long as he was there as a crisis counselor, not as a priest moonlighting as a crisis counselor. What I mean by that is, if he kept religion out of his counseling, I have no problems with it. But if he was trying to save souls, then I would.

 

He can not save what does not want to be saved, as I said going to him would be their choice, if you don't believe then don't go simple as that. Then you really don't believe in total seperation, just seperation where you deem it necessary, like I said before others feel differently.

[Commissar]

Total separation. I outlined why I don't think military chaplains violate total separation; I also outlined why I don't think an after-school program would violate it. If a priest was a crisis counselor, fine...as long as he was there as a crisis counselor, not as a priest moonlighting as a crisis counselor. What I mean by that is, if he kept religion out of his counseling, I have no problems with it. But if he was trying to save souls, then I would.

 

He can not save what does not want to be saved, as I said going to him would be their choice, if you don't believe then don't go simple as that. Then you really don't believe in total seperation, just seperation where you deem it necessary, like I said before others feel differently.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, as I said, I'm in favor of total separation. If a counselor happens to be a priest in his off hours, that's fine, as long as he doesn't bring that role into the school. If religion never enters into it - which I'm stating as a condition of separation - then separation isn't violated.

 

I'm not going into this argument again, since I doubt we can agree on it, but I will just refer you to the fact that most of the founders of this country, most of the framers of the Constitution, were deists. I'll let you look up on your own what that involves, but to go over the basic talking points, deism advocates a natural morality, based on the principles of enlightenment, the ascendancy of reason and logic, the division of civil power from religious. They disavowed the interference of any creator with the natural workings of the universe - from human affairs, basically. TJ, Madison, and Ben Franklin were deists, just to name a couple names that a modern audience would recognize.

 

It's a thorny issue, to be sure. The military chaplains are, as you stated, something that's there more convenience than for anything else. Being on station in a ship off the coast of Iraq for six months without a chaplain would leave the crew without the option of attending a church service.

 

Here's all I'm asking; if Christianity weren't the dominant religion in the US, would you still be in favor of religious interference in government?

[deganawida]

What I was taught was christianity was about acceptance and tolorance and love.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Emphasis mine.

 

Okay, pet peeve time. Tolerance is not a Christian virtue. No where in the Bible is it preached. It amazes me how many people misconstrue Jesus' actions as being motivated by tolerance. He certainly wasn't tolerant when he drove the moneychangers out of the Temple with a whip, now was he? Nor did he tell the thief hanging beside him who chided the other thief, "Hey, you're okay, your beliefs have equal validity, let me get you off of that cross." If you doubt me, read the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) again, and what you will find that the behavior Jesus exhibits is forgiveness. When presented with behavior that went against his concepts of right and wrong, Jesus offered forgiveness and called the individual exhibiting said behavior to change his or her life. The only exception to this rule is the moneychanger episode. To me, though, his message of forgiveness is more powerful than today's message of tolerance; tolerance is, at its core, a passive activity, akin to apathy, while forgiveness is an active process, requiring real effort on the part of the one doing the forgiving. Of course, I'll freely admit that many Christians do not practice the forgiveness that they've received, and for anyone who has suffered as a result, I ask your forgiveness on their behalf.

 

edit: Good grief, what is wrong with Quote lately? This is the second time this has happened to me.

[Rhomal]

What the hell LOL

 

If I said for example... That all Jews are greedy money hungry pigs I wonder if I'd get into trouble off the mods.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, but if you called your self a goth furry emo everyone would laugh.

 

Just because wicca is a religion doesn't mean you don't get angsty teenage hangons who call themselves witches and start putting curses on the rest of their class.

 

Again, the stupid minority has given the majority a bad view, but I live in Britan were there are very few 'actual' wiccans as far as I have ever seen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So then by your logic you must condom ALL xians for the fact a few go into a abortion clinics and murder the doctor and his staff.

 

And you must think all jews are hateful and ignorant for the fact a few in the military have abused their power on the palistianians to the extreme of murder.

 

Its a very slippery slope when you dont treat everyone as a indivual and you just start lumping people togeather under titles because of a handful of idiots.

[Commissar]

If you doubt me, read the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) again, and what you will find that the behavior Jesus exhibits is forgiveness.  When presented with behavior that went against his concepts of right and wrong, Jesus offered forgiveness and called the individual exhibiting said behavior to change his or her life. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hmm. Sounds to me like tolerance would be better than forgiveness, as what you're describing is the belief that Christianity is superior to everything else. So, essentially, you'll forgive poor little agnostic me and exhort me to change my life, and to accept Christ, the lamb of hosts? You'll be cool with us as long as you become like us?

 

Hell, maybe Christianity really is appropriate for America. That's our current foreign policy in a nutshell right there.

[Dakoth]

No, as I said, I'm in favor of total separation. If a counselor happens to be a priest in his off hours, that's fine, as long as he doesn't bring that role into the school. If religion never enters into it - which I'm stating as a condition of separation - then separation isn't violated.

 

I'm not going into this argument again, since I doubt we can agree on it, but I will just refer you to the fact that most of the founders of this country, most of the framers of the Constitution, were deists. I'll let you look up on your own what that involves, but to go over the basic talking points, deism advocates a natural morality, based on the principles of enlightenment, the ascendancy of reason and logic, the division of civil power from religious. They disavowed the interference of any creator with the natural workings of the universe - from human affairs, basically. TJ, Madison, and Ben Franklin were deists, just to name a couple names that a modern audience would recognize.

 

It's a thorny issue, to be sure. The military chaplains are, as you stated, something that's there more convenience than for anything else. Being on station in a ship off the coast of Iraq for six months without a chaplain would leave the crew without the option of attending a church service.

 

Here's all I'm asking; if Christianity weren't the dominant religion in the US, would you still be in favor of religious interference in government?

 

No we don't have to agree with all the argueing all I want you to relise is that for every one person like you there is a person that thinks the opposite. To answer your question if an Islamic cleric wants to be that same counselor, or a wicca, or a druid so be it, if I don't go to see them their views can not reach me. All the things I pointed out were only pointed out to show there really is no compromise on either side, both sides want it their way and thats the only thing that will make them happy. As you stated you have no problem with religion in the military so you really don't have a problem with all religion in government only the nut jobs that force it down your throat. That I can agree with you on, ever try and talk to a Jahova's witness?

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

No, but if you called your self a goth furry emo everyone would laugh.

 

Interesting asumption, but quite incorrect.

 

Just because wicca is a religion doesn't mean you don't get angsty teenage hangons who call themselves witches and start putting curses on the rest of their class.

 

I am not wicca, I wouldn't know what they get upto, but if that is how some teenagers feel that they must empower themselves then so be it. It is a path and thus a way of life.

 

Again, the stupid minority has given the majority a bad view, but I live in Britan were there are very few 'actual' wiccans as far as I have ever seen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I live in the UK, I don't associate with Wiccans, lest that I know of, but I am Heathen. A Pagan.

 

I would say the same about a majority of monotheists, but they are infact a stupid majority.

[Commissar]

No we don't have to agree with all the argueing all I want you to relise is that for every one person like you there is a person that thinks the opposite.  To answer your question if an Islamic cleric wants to be that same counselor, or a wicca, or a druid so be it, if I don't go to see them their views can not reach me.  All the things I pointed out were only pointed out to show there really is no compromise on either side, both sides want it their way and thats the only thing that will make them happy.  As you stated you have no problem with religion in the military so you really don't have a problem with all religion in government only the nut jobs that force it down your throat.   That I can agree with you on, ever try and talk to a Jahova's witness?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, that wasn't my question. My question was, if Christianity was not the dominant religion in America, would you still want religion to play a role in government? If Islam was the dominant religion in America, would you, as a Christian, want the president enacting government policies based on his understanding of Islam? I really, really doubt it, but what you and millions of people on the same side are saying is that it's all good because it's Christianity that's doing the dominating.

 

I know there are a lot of people who see no harm in little hints of religion here and there - they see Christianity as a good religion, the best religion, and that we'd probably think so too if only we knew the light of Jesus' love - or something. For the most part I do agree - I attend Catholic mass more often than anyone who could be called an agnostic has a right to, just because I enjoy the pageantry, the pomp and circumstance and the sense of the holy, however artificial - but there are certainly parts of it that are very, very hateful, and I believe, as the founders did, that its place is separate from the civil government.

 

And I said I have no problem with military chaplains because the military is such a special case it almost doesn't bear examination.

[deganawida]

If you doubt me, read the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) again, and what you will find that the behavior Jesus exhibits is forgiveness.  When presented with behavior that went against his concepts of right and wrong, Jesus offered forgiveness and called the individual exhibiting said behavior to change his or her life. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hmm. Sounds to me like tolerance would be better than forgiveness, as what you're describing is the belief that Christianity is superior to everything else. So, essentially, you'll forgive poor little agnostic me and exhort me to change my life, and to accept Christ, the lamb of hosts? You'll be cool with us as long as you become like us?

 

Hell, maybe Christianity really is appropriate for America. That's our current foreign policy in a nutshell right there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

No superiority at all. On the contrary, Christianity espouses that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" and that Christians are "saved by grace through faith", meaning that even Christians are sinners (especially Christians, in my opinion), and that salvation comes not from being a good person, or following some law, but through an undeserved gift from God. As far as Christianity "superior to everything else", how is that any different than Islam, Judaism, or virtually any other major world religion? Each religion is predicated on the belief that this sole system is the route to everlasting life (or the cessation of individual life, in the case of Buddhism), and are, by their very nature, exclusive. This is, in fact, no different than your expressed views on "the stupid", religious individuals, and Republicans.

[Dakoth]

No we don't have to agree with all the argueing all I want you to relise is that for every one person like you there is a person that thinks the opposite.  To answer your question if an Islamic cleric wants to be that same counselor, or a wicca, or a druid so be it, if I don't go to see them their views can not reach me.  All the things I pointed out were only pointed out to show there really is no compromise on either side, both sides want it their way and thats the only thing that will make them happy.  As you stated you have no problem with religion in the military so you really don't have a problem with all religion in government only the nut jobs that force it down your throat.   That I can agree with you on, ever try and talk to a Jahova's witness?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, that wasn't my question. My question was, if Christianity was not the dominant religion in America, would you still want religion to play a role in government? If Islam was the dominant religion in America, would you, as a Christian, want the president enacting government policies based on his understanding of Islam? I really, really doubt it, but what you and millions of people on the same side are saying is that it's all good because it's Christianity that's doing the dominating.

 

I know there are a lot of people who see no harm in little hints of religion here and there - they see Christianity as a good religion, the best religion, and that we'd probably think so too if only we knew the light of Jesus' love - or something. For the most part I do agree - I attend Catholic mass more often than anyone who could be called an agnostic has a right to, just because I enjoy the pageantry, the pomp and circumstance and the sense of the holy, however artificial - but there are certainly parts of it that are very, very hateful, and I believe, as the founders did, that its place is separate from the civil government.

 

And I said I have no problem with military chaplains because the military is such a special case it almost doesn't bear examination.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I don't see christianity as the best its leaders tend to be hypocrites. Even though the Jews were Gods chosen people and have a covenent with him their entrance into heaven is blocked because they don't believe in Jesus. Interesting. See all your arguements point to one thing and that is that the secular government relised the need for a compromise without each other they would have had a difficult time of things. I bring your quote up about the declaration of independants (An official document of the US government if I remember correctly) they compromised and added creator so the country could fight as a whole. You need us because we are the majority if there is a fight the army is bigger with us than with out us, you keep religions grounded calling foul when there is one present with out you we become zealots bent on killing all who don't believe. See the middle east for example. As for your question on Islam well if they were the dominant religion chances are I would be Islamic no?

 

Edit: When I say us I mean religious people in general not just christians.

[Commissar]

I don't see christianity as the best its leaders tend to be hypocrites.  Even though the Jews were Gods chosen people and have a covenent with him their entrance into heaven is blocked because they don't believe in Jesus.  Interesting.  See all your arguements point to one thing and that is that the secular government relised the need for a compromise without each other they would have had a difficult time of things.  I bring your quote up about the declaration of independants (An official document of the US government if I remember correctly) they compromised and added creator so the country could fight as a whole.  You need us because we are the majority if there is a fight the army is bigger with us than with out us, you keep religions grounded calling foul when there is one present with out you we become zealots bent on killing all who don't believe.  See the middle east for example.  As for your question on Islam well if they were the dominant religion chances are I would be Islamic no?

 

Edit:  When I say us I mean religious people in general not just christians.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Declaration of Independence has nothing to do with our current government; it contains no laws. The Constitution does, and the Constitution separates the church from the state. There is no compromise there. I don't know what the hell you're trying to prove, but you've got nothing to back it up. I'm not attacking you, I'm just trying to make you understand that, as deists, the founders tried to separate civil government from religious institutions as much as they possibly could. Any lessening on that point means falling short of the way our country was meant to be governed.

 

And you are still avoiding my question. You're a Christian. If Islam were the dominant religion in America, would you agree that religion should be allowed to influence government policies? And just so you can't talk around it anymore, I'm saying that you remain a Christian in an America where Islam is the dominant religion.