• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A huge lie that has been told so many time people think it is true.

BTW is a cross or a six pointed star anything more than a geometric shape? How about people that hide under their beds when they see an octagon??????
 
Show me the words-------------------Separation of church and state-------------------in the Constitution.


That was my point. YOU believe others don't know this.
 
That was my point. YOU believe others don't know this.

Can you prove to me they dont? That BS as I say has been pounded into their heads for so long, they believe it is true.
 
That was Goebbels. You can't even Godwin a thread right.

Being a student of history, you are right. But I was in a hurry, and Hitler was easier to spell, but it got the point across.
 
Can you prove to me they dont? That BS as I say has been pounded into their heads for so long, they believe it is true.


Yes, poor ignorant "they."
 
Being a student of history, you are right. But I was in a hurry, and Hitler was easier to spell, but it got the point across.

You're a "student of history" and you couldn't be bothered to attribute a quote correctly or look up the spelling of Goebbels?

You: "Italy is on the Pacific Ocean."
Me: "No, Italy is on the Mediterranean Sea."
You: "Sure, but I didn't know how to spell 'Mediterranean" and as a student of geography I think I made my point anyway."
 
Hitler was right about one thing. Tell a huge lie over and over, and in time people will begin to think it is true.

Look at the statement -----------separation of church and state. It is NOT in the Constitution. But I bet if a large number of people were polled, they would say it is.

What that the Constitution actually says is-----"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion". And it goes on to say--------"or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging he freedom of speech.

Now let actually look at what the founding fathers wanted and were saying. Because of their recient separation from England they did not want Congress naming an official national religion like England did with the Church of England.

Therefore when a local city puts up a cross or the Star of David anywhere in their town, it IS NOT Congress naming some particular church such as Lutheran or any other as the official church of the country. When some fools such as the ACLU claims that a cross or what ever needs to be torn down, they are flying in the black and white statement in the first amendment. "or prohibiting the free exercise there of"!!!!!!!!!!!! It is simply the people of that town exercising the free exercise thereof. Again it is not Congress naming an official state religion. Did Congress come to that town and demand that the city should put up a cross or a Star of David and name a specific church the official church of the United states.

The fools on the left will hate this, since they have been brain washed with the huge lie of separation of church and state for so long, they think it is true.

Ok now let the hate towards me and the arguments begin. BTW before you do read the First Amendment.

I actually never met anyone who thought the words "separation of church and state". That argument is just a strawman; take it away and you really have no argument.

Either way you are arguing for majority law. I say this since no matter the US town not every citizen will want a religious symbol being shown in a government facility. This indicates that you support the majority dictating to the minority. Which is no surprise coming from a religious argument. Every church dictates the personal beliefs of its followers. Hence the need to separate religion from government. No matter the church they will all end up like the Church of England did in the US; authoritarian dictatorships. Take the Catholic church for example: Catholics are not allowed to believe anything but what the church allows. If the Vatican gained the majority of voters in the US they would have most definitely move to give the Vatican more power in the US (or worse).

But if we follow your logic we would have religious controlled sections of the US where anyone not in the official local religion would be discriminated against. But that is the goal of the Religious Right. As it stands the Religious Right is bigger threat to the US Constitution than even far left scum, since they are actually in our government. There may be a handful of far left there are well but they really have no power. We still need to keep an eye on the far left to be sure, but they are nowhere near the threat that religions pose to our liberties and freedoms.

No before you freak out about "the free exercise" part; All American have the liberty to belong to whatever religion that they want or believe whatever they want. Taking religious symbols off of public land will not change that at all. In fact it helps keep your liberties intact and tacks away the threat of localized government dictating what you can or cannot believe in.
 
BTW is a cross or a six pointed star anything more than a geometric shape? How about people that hide under their beds when they see an octagon??????

Cool lets hang those crosses upside down then, since they are only geometric shapes!
 
Show me the words-------------------Separation of church and state-------------------in the Constitution.

You are correct -- however, to more fully comprehend what the Founding Fathers thought about the matter, would require that you do a bit - actually a lot - of reading. Not from clowns like David Barton but the actual words of the guys who were around back in the day.

We do have a few well-known (to the educated) references that should help one determine the intent of the Founders. Obviously, we should start with Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists. Oh, one might wish to read Article 6 of the Constitution to get another hint. Then there is a little essay written by James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, in which one might read

"A just Government instituted to secure & perpetuate it needs them not. Such a Government will be best supported by protecting every Citizen in the enjoyment of his Religion with the same equal hand which protects his person and his property; by neither invading the equal rights of any Sect, nor suffering any Sect to invade those of another."​
My bolding.

We also have the Treaty of Peace and Friendship, Signed at Tripoli November 4, 1796 in which one may read

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Six weeks before he died, Benjamin Franklin wrote a letter to Ezra Stiles, president of Yale College, who had asked about Franklin's religious beliefs.
"Here is my Creed, I believe in one God, Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His Providence. That he ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable Service we render to him, is doing Good to his other Children. That the Soul of Man is immortal, and will be treated with Justice in another Life respecting its Conduct in this ... As for Jesus of Nazareth ... I think the system of Morals and Religion as he left them to us, the best the World ever saw ... but I have ... some Doubts to his Divinity; though' it is a Question I do not dogmatism upon, having never studied it, and think it is needless to busy myself with it now, where I expect soon an Opportunity of knowing the Truth with less Trouble."
 
Hitler was right about one thing. Tell a huge lie over and over, and in time people will begin to think it is true.

Look at the statement -----------separation of church and state. It is NOT in the Constitution. But I bet if a large number of people were polled, they would say it is.

What that the Constitution actually says is-----"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion". And it goes on to say--------"or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging he freedom of speech.

Now let actually look at what the founding fathers wanted and were saying. Because of their recient separation from England they did not want Congress naming an official national religion like England did with the Church of England.

Therefore when a local city puts up a cross or the Star of David anywhere in their town, it IS NOT Congress naming some particular church such as Lutheran or any other as the official church of the country. When some fools such as the ACLU claims that a cross or what ever needs to be torn down, they are flying in the black and white statement in the first amendment. "or prohibiting the free exercise there of"!!!!!!!!!!!! It is simply the people of that town exercising the free exercise thereof. Again it is not Congress naming an official state religion. Did Congress come to that town and demand that the city should put up a cross or a Star of David and name a specific church the official church of the United states.

The fools on the left will hate this, since they have been brain washed with the huge lie of separation of church and state for so long, they think it is true.

Ok now let the hate towards me and the arguments begin. BTW before you do read the First Amendment.

The state is all of governement. Large and small. National and local.
 
Hitler was right about one thing. Tell a huge lie over and over, and in time people will begin to think it is true.

Look at the statement -----------separation of church and state. It is NOT in the Constitution. But I bet if a large number of people were polled, they would say it is.

What that the Constitution actually says is-----"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion". And it goes on to say--------"or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging he freedom of speech.

Now let actually look at what the founding fathers wanted and were saying. Because of their recient separation from England they did not want Congress naming an official national religion like England did with the Church of England.

Therefore when a local city puts up a cross or the Star of David anywhere in their town, it IS NOT Congress naming some particular church such as Lutheran or any other as the official church of the country. When some fools such as the ACLU claims that a cross or what ever needs to be torn down, they are flying in the black and white statement in the first amendment. "or prohibiting the free exercise there of"!!!!!!!!!!!! It is simply the people of that town exercising the free exercise thereof. Again it is not Congress naming an official state religion. Did Congress come to that town and demand that the city should put up a cross or a Star of David and name a specific church the official church of the United states.

The fools on the left will hate this, since they have been brain washed with the huge lie of separation of church and state for so long, they think it is true.

Ok now let the hate towards me and the arguments begin. BTW before you do read the First Amendment.

Things not found in the Constitution:

The Air Force
Congressional Districts
The Electoral College
Executive Order
Executive Privilege
Freedom of Expression
(Absolute) Freedom of Speech and Press
"From each according to his ability..."
God
Immigration
Impeachment means removal from office
Innocent until proven guilty
It's a free country
Judicial Review
Jury of Peers
"Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"
Marriage
Martial Law
No taxation without representation
Number of Justices in the Supreme Court
"Of the people, by the people, for the people"
Paper Money
Political Parties
Primary Elections
Qualifications for Judges
The right to privacy
The right to travel
The right to vote
The separation of church and state
The Separation of Powers Clause
Slavery

You're welcome.
 
Easier to believe than the universe suddenly appeared from nothing.

First, why would it be easier to believe an all powerful god suddenly appeared out of nothing, or always existed, than atoms appeared out of nothing, or always existed? We know atoms exist. We do not know that all powerful gods exist.

Second, science does not say the Universe suddenly appeared from nothing. You've been listening to preachers who want your money, instead of taking the time to learn things for yourself. Like you do with Trump.
 
There is no safe place for freedom in the leftist utopia.

Funny, according to the conservative Cato institute, many of the more liberal Western nations have more freedom than the USA. Seems like if you like freedom, maybe you should look at more liberal policies.


From Cato Institute Human Freedom Index You're way down in 17th place.

The jurisdictions that took the top 10 places, in order, were New Zealand, Switzerland, Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands and Denmark (tied in 6th place), Ireland and the United Kingdom (tied in 8th place), and Finland, Norway, and Taiwan (tied in 10th place). Selected countries rank as follows: Germany (13), the United States and Sweden (17),
 
Uh--------------Are you aware this is a public political forum open to all ideas and opinions?

Yes I am aware of that, I am also aware of all the threads you are putting up every day with misinformation, with short comments that say nothing and prove nothing, with opinions not factually based and with all kinds of topics that are not current or of interest.

Like I said before, it looks like the work of a person all alone that is seeking attention and confirmation. It is sad.
 
Yes I am aware of that, I am also aware of all the threads you are putting up every day with misinformation, with short comments that say nothing and prove nothing, with opinions not factually based and with all kinds of topics that are not current or of interest.

Like I said before, it looks like the work of a person all alone that is seeking attention and confirmation. It is sad.
I will show your post to my morning coffee group tomorrow morning.
 
You're only looking at the original wording of the Constitution, rather than considering to be a living document. We have had hundreds of years now of court interpretation setting precedence through jurisprudence and high level interpretation of meaning. That's where the separation comes into play.

Religious symbols being present on government buildings or property has not really been an issue because historically the majority of the U.S. has been Christian. Technically the religious symbols are not a dignified example of Church and State separation, but because nobody really challenged it, it never mattered. However, we are, on paper, a plurality, and therefore the challenges to these symbols have real validity according to the courts.
 
Hitler was right about one thing. Tell a huge lie over and over, and in time people will begin to think it is true.

Look at the statement -----------separation of church and state. It is NOT in the Constitution. But I bet if a large number of people were polled, they would say it is.

What that the Constitution actually says is-----"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion". And it goes on to say--------"or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging he freedom of speech.

Now let actually look at what the founding fathers wanted and were saying. Because of their recient separation from England they did not want Congress naming an official national religion like England did with the Church of England.

Therefore when a local city puts up a cross or the Star of David anywhere in their town, it IS NOT Congress naming some particular church such as Lutheran or any other as the official church of the country. When some fools such as the ACLU claims that a cross or what ever needs to be torn down, they are flying in the black and white statement in the first amendment. "or prohibiting the free exercise there of"!!!!!!!!!!!! It is simply the people of that town exercising the free exercise thereof. Again it is not Congress naming an official state religion. Did Congress come to that town and demand that the city should put up a cross or a Star of David and name a specific church the official church of the United states.

The fools on the left will hate this, since they have been brain washed with the huge lie of separation of church and state for so long, they think it is true.

Ok now let the hate towards me and the arguments begin. BTW before you do read the First Amendment.




"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" is how back when were words used that effectively separated church and state by the Constitution. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” are words used back when to mean the government could make no law that would impose a restriction on the rights and privilege of religious practice.

Apparently, the meaning of these words not in your vocabulary. But you could have looked up their definition and hopefully then understood their meaning regarding the separation of church and state. Having refuted the premise of your OP, I need not reply to the rest of your diatribe.
 
I'll answer, but I would appreciate you answer my earlier question: Do you believe in the Loch Ness monster, Zeus, or Ra?

Yes, of course I "believe" in evolution, it is a fact.

I don't not believe. There isn't evidence but there isn't proof of no existence, either. For example if someone were to say there is life on other planets I'd say there may or not be because there's a good chance.
I'd also point out, for instance, if someone were to say they could turn any common metal into gold, that is hogwash because there is literally no proof of that existing. Not to say that couldn't be done in the future with further scientific developments.

When mentioning the Loch Ness monster, there has been numerous sightings of the creature but no evidence. If, for example, if the Loch Ness monster were sighted in a tree in my back yard, I'd be highly skeptical.

If someone believes in evolution but not religion, I'd ask where evolution began and how that beginning was achieved. Mebe Ra created that beginning point of the universe. Mebe it was Zeus or God. It was something, though, and science hasn't proven otherwise.

Side note: After at least 2 years of intensive investigations into the Trump campaign 'cavorting' with the Russians to meddle in the 2016 election, I'd say there is no chance of that happening.
 
What a bunch of generalized, meaningless claptrap. All's you are doing is saying anyone who doesn't think exactly like you is a SJW and a racist. You can't prove anything so you just start throwing labels around loosely.

I voted for Ralph Nader in 2008.

Why did you vote for Nader? Did you think he'd win over Obama or McCain?

BTW, if you want meaningless claptrap, listen to a racist SJW tell a person who is for securing the borders they are racist. That would be like the leopard calling the person with measles covered in spots. Or the pot...
 
Last edited:
Why did you vote for Nader? Do you think he'd win over Obama or McCain?

Because he matched closest to the policies I wanted to see.
 
Are you an environmentalist?

Why are you drilling down like this? And what does the environment have to do with anything about your claims of me? You already made the assertion that I'm a racist. Were you just guessing and trying to figure it out now or am I a definitely a racist cabse?
 
Hitler was right about one thing. Tell a huge lie over and over, and in time people will begin to think it is true.

Look at the statement -----------separation of church and state. It is NOT in the Constitution. But I bet if a large number of people were polled, they would say it is.

What that the Constitution actually says is-----"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion". And it goes on to say--------"or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging he freedom of speech.

Now let actually look at what the founding fathers wanted and were saying. Because of their recient separation from England they did not want Congress naming an official national religion like England did with the Church of England.

Therefore when a local city puts up a cross or the Star of David anywhere in their town, it IS NOT Congress naming some particular church such as Lutheran or any other as the official church of the country. When some fools such as the ACLU claims that a cross or what ever needs to be torn down, they are flying in the black and white statement in the first amendment. "or prohibiting the free exercise there of"!!!!!!!!!!!! It is simply the people of that town exercising the free exercise thereof. Again it is not Congress naming an official state religion. Did Congress come to that town and demand that the city should put up a cross or a Star of David and name a specific church the official church of the United states.

The fools on the left will hate this, since they have been brain washed with the huge lie of separation of church and state for so long, they think it is true.

Ok now let the hate towards me and the arguments begin. BTW before you do read the First Amendment.

But Pelosi can invoke God and praying all day long.
 
Why are you drilling down like this? And what does the environment have to do with anything about your claims of me? You already made the assertion that I'm a racist. Were you just guessing and trying to figure it out now or am I a definitely a racist cabse?

You said you voted for Nader. Did you think he'd win against Obama or McCain? Nader was an environmentalist. Is that why you voted for him?
 
Back
Top Bottom