Group Wants to Secede

[numediaman]

I think this group needs to be supported:

ChristianExodus.org has been established to coordinate the move of 50,000 or more Christians to a single conservative state in the U.S. for the express purpose of reestablishing constitutional governance. It is evident that our Constitution has been abandoned under our current federal system. The efforts of Christian activism have proven futile over the past five decades and, whereas desperate times require desperate measures, we are now in the most desperate of times. The federal government is considering whether marriage, the foundation of civilization since Creation, should be reserved solely to a man and a woman. Christians must now draw a line in the sand and unite in a sovereign state to dissolve our bond with the current union comprised as the United States of America.

The success of ChristianExodus.org will lead to an independent Christian nation where people may once again worship God under the protection of a friendly government. In addition, such a nation will be free of burdensome taxation and federal meddling in local affairs. Matter of factly, the liberties we have lost to liberalism over the past century will be restored in one fell swoop.


The Problem

Christians have actively tried to return our entire land to its moral foundation for more than 20 years. We can categorically say that absolutely nothing has been achieved. If you disagree, consider this:


• Abortion continues against the wishes of many States

• Children may not pray in our schools

• The Bible is not welcome in schools except under strict FEDERAL guidelines

• The 10 Commandments remain banned from public display

• Sodomy is now legal AND celebrated as “diversity” rather than perversion

• Preaching Christianity will soon be outlawed as “hate speech”

• Gay marriage will be foisted upon us in the very near future


All these atrocities continue in spite of the fact that we now have the “right” people in places of power. Indeed, the occupant of the White House is a professing Christian. The U.S. Attorney General is believed to be a devout Christian. “Conservatives” control both Houses of Congress, and Republican presidents appointed seven of the nine Supreme Court justices. Christian activists placed the right party in power, but are we now witnessing the return to moral and constitutional government that we have demanded for so long?

No, we are not, and we never will. More than fifty-three million people voted for pro-abortion, pro-gay candidates in the 2000 presidential election. That number will undoubtedly grow each year as Hollywood, MTv and universities turn out liberals faster than our churches can produce converts. Redemption of all 50 American States and their general government is totally impossible.


The Solution

So what can be done? ChristianExodus.org offers the opportunity to try a strategy not yet employed by Bible-believing Christians. Rather than spend resources in continued efforts to redirect the entire nation, we will redeem States one at a time. Millions of Christian conservatives exist, but we are geographically spread out and diluted at the national level. Therefore, we must concentrate our numbers in a geographical region with a sovereign government we can control through the electoral process.

ChristianExodus.org is orchestrating the move of 50,000 or more Christians to one of three States for the express purpose of dissolving that State’s bond with the union. The three States under consideration are Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina. The exact destination will be chosen by vote of our membership. Our move will commence when the federal government forces sodomite marriages on our local communities or once we reach the 50,000-member mark, whichever comes first.

[zimv20]

Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina
can't say i'd miss 'em. i vote they take texas, too.

how long do we think until they nuke something?

[mactastic]

Great, just take one of those red states and secede with it before November! :eek:

[dopefiend]

i vote they take texas, too.

how long do we think until they nuke something?


And what is your problem with Texas?

[blackfox]

I hear Iraq is nice this time of year...they could be an independent 'peacekeeping' force...and help build a theocracy from the ground up...provide an example of cooperation and tolerance for the whole Middle East...

[Neserk]

I was going to suggest they pool all there money together and buy and island somewhere. Groups who want to adjust the constitution according to their own personal beliefs can go elsewhere. :P

[Frohickey]

Sounds like a group has been reading about the FreeStateProject website.

[Neserk]

how long do we think until they nuke something?

If they obtain WMD they will be invaded and taken over by the US :p

[IJ Reilly]

"Here's your hat, what's your hurry?" -- Anon

"Just when I tell you to go, you leave me!" -- Groucho Marx

[bousozoku]

can't say i'd miss 'em. i vote they take texas, too.

how long do we think until they nuke something?

They could all move to Texas and the rest of the country could close the borders. There is plenty of room for separatists there. Besides, would it be so much different?

[dopefiend]

Besides, would it be so much different?

Uh, yea.

Never been to Texas have you?

[Desertrat]

Yeah, zim; I, also, think Texas oughta get kicked out of the Union. It'd serve us right!

Don't throw this ol' rabbit into that briar patch! Please, please don't!

:D:D:D

'Rat

"$100 oil? I'd smile, all the way to the bank."--Midland-Odessa workforce.

[mactastic]

Yeah, zim; I, also, think Texas oughta get kicked out of the Union. It'd serve us right!

Don't throw this ol' rabbit into that briar patch! Please, please don't!

:D:D:D

'Rat

"$100 oil? I'd smile, all the way to the bank."--Midland-Odessa workforce.

Just take Dubya with you.... that's all I ask.

[bousozoku]

Uh, yea.

Never been to Texas have you?

Yes, I have. I'd be glad to never have to return there too. In fact, i've been to 40+ states now.

[dopefiend]

Yes, I have. I'd be glad to never have to return there too. In fact, i've been to 40+ states now.

K, then don't :p

I love it and wouldn't want any kind of people like that inside my beautiful state. ;)

[IIvan]

I thought that the conservative media labeled liberals as factionists. Damn- Im sure this would be ok with them though.

And me too...I vote for Mississippi- they can have it.

[zimv20]

I love it and wouldn't want any kind of people like that inside my beautiful state. ;)
1) you can have it
2) please secede

[dopefiend]

2) please secede

Would if I could, just for you. ;)

[Backtothemac]

Is it just me or is this conversation a little insulting to people that were born and raised in one of those states? It is also a little troubling that some ultra right wing group, actually radical would propose this. It will never happen. It is BS, and like I said, they are insulting those states, and you guys are going along with it. Unreal. :(

[zimv20]

seriously, i think the US is too big w/ too many competing interests to survive. some kind of split is inevitable, imo. the biggest divisions i see occur between the cities and the country, but division along such lines would be a gerrymandering debacle.

so the idea that a large group of idealists would migrate and secede is a great idea, imo. especially if it means christian fundamentalists heading south, seceding, and ending their influence on my politics. glorious!

[Backtothemac]

seriously, i think the US is too big w/ too many competing interests to survive. some kind of split is inevitable, imo. the biggest divisions i see occur between the cities and the country, but division along such lines would be a gerrymandering debacle.

so the idea that a large group of idealists would migrate and secede is a great idea, imo. especially if it means christian fundamentalists heading south, seceding, and ending their influence on my politics. glorious!

So, could I say the same thing about all the liberals heading north, seceeding, and then no longer influencing my politics. Man, that is tollerance. That is open mindedness.

I thought the foundation of this country was for us to listen, and learn from one another. I thought it was to grow as a country through diversity.
;)

[zimv20]

Is it just me or is this conversation a little insulting to people that were born and raised in one of those states?
no, you're right to be insulted. and though i slacked off on alabama, i do have friends there who wouldn't be terribly happy w/ such an arrangement.

i've the "luxury" of living in illinois, which i don't think any large group of fundamentalists would put on their top 25, so it's easy for me to sit here and decide which states are leaving. it's all tongue in cheek, though, my first paragraph above excepted.

[zimv20]

So, could I say the same thing about all the liberals heading north, seceeding, and then no longer influencing my politics. Man, that is tollerance. That is open mindedness.

I thought the foundation of this country was for us to listen, and learn from one another. I thought it was to grow as a country through diversity.
;)
yes, you're right on both counts.

however, i think there are movements in this country to stop tolerating and stop growing. being anti-gay and anti-gay marriage are just two examples.

when i say that there are fundamental (no pun intended) differences in how americans think the country should be run, and i don't think it's possible to overcome them, i'm serious.

and to put a fine point on it, anyone who really wants the US gov't to merge church and state are living in the wrong country.

[Backtothemac]

yes, you're right on both counts.

however, i think there are movements in this country to stop tolerating and stop growing. being anti-gay and anti-gay marriage are just two examples.

when i say that there are fundamental (no pun intended) differences in how americans think the country should be run, and i don't think it's possible to overcome them, i'm serious.

and to put a fine point on it, anyone who really wants the US gov't to merge church and state are living in the wrong country.

Well, I agree up to a point. Personally, I think the gay marriage thing should be a state issue. I think the Fed's have no right to define the marriage laws of the states. As for church and state. I think that is the most overplayed phrase in the world. I want God in the pledge, and if people want to pray for the safety of kids at a football game, big deal. So, I agree with your premise, but not all examples.

[Neserk]

Never been to Texas have you?

I have. It is scary. I would *never* live there and when I had to drive through it 2x I wanted to get through it as fast as possilbe. *shivers*

[Neserk]

Well, I agree up to a point. Personally, I think the gay marriage thing should be a state issue. I think the Fed's have no right to define the marriage laws of the states.


Actually, it used to be that if you were married in one state you were married in all states. That makes sense otherwise my parents who have been married for almost 39 years would become newlyweds when they move this summer to a new state. Think about it ;)


As for church and state. I think that is the most overplayed phrase in the world. I want God in the pledge, and if people want to pray for the safety of kids at a football game, big deal.

And since when did your wants become what happens? It would be fine to have "under God" in the pledge if minors weren't required to say it every morning. *that* is why it violates the Constitution. Personally, I think it would be easier simply to not have them say the pledge. Problem solved. Pray for safety at a football game? That is an excellent example of stupid praying. So where was God when player X became paralyzed during last weeks football game? Didn't listen, huh? :rolleyes: Christians should all be against public prayer it is against Jesus' teachings. But then again most "Christians" don't know squat about Jesus or what he taught... And if you are anything but Protestant it is a big deal. Those prayers are Protestant prayers and exclude everyone else. And to be quite honest, I don't think God cares.

[Neserk]

So, could I say the same thing about all the liberals heading north, seceeding, and then no longer influencing my politics. Man, that is tollerance. That is open mindedness.


Return to the orginal post. As I understood it the group of Fundies want to go. No one was asking them to.

[Neserk]

And me too...I vote for Mississippi- they can have it.

I vote for Florida. I've been pissed at them for 3+ years now :p

[Backtothemac]

Actually, it used to be that if you were married in one state you were married in all states. That makes sense otherwise my parents who have been married for almost 39 years would become newlyweds when they move this summer to a new state. Think about it ;)


I can understand that point, but I don't thinks states should be forced to do anything with regard to personal privacy matters.



And since when did your wants become what happens? It would be fine to have "under God" in the pledge if minors weren't required to say it every morning. *that* is why it violates the Constitution. Personally, I think it would be easier simply to not have them say the pledge. Problem solved. Pray for safety at a football game? That is an excellent example of stupid praying. So where was God when player X became paralyzed during last weeks football game? Didn't listen, huh? :rolleyes: Christians should all be against public prayer it is against Jesus' teachings. But then again most "Christians" don't know squat about Jesus or what he taught... And if you are anything but Protestant it is a big deal. Those prayers are Protestant prayers and exclude everyone else. And to be quite honest, I don't think God cares.

Wow, you are lonely aren't you. May I suggest the teachings of out lord.......
;)

I understand, but the notion of church and state is skewed. Those words do not appear in the Constitution. I personally read it to say that Congress cannot establish a national religion. But it doesn't say the word God has to be outlawed. Much to the contrary. Look how many times God is invoked in the Constitution.

[Frohickey]

when i say that there are fundamental (no pun intended) differences in how americans think the country should be run, and i don't think it's possible to overcome them, i'm serious.

and to put a fine point on it, anyone who really wants the US gov't to merge church and state are living in the wrong country.

I think that you meant, "anyone who really wants the US govt to merge church and state are living in the wrong century".

That might have been okay in Queen Elizabeth's England, or Napoleon's France, but the US has never had a state-sponsored, or state-endorsed religion. One thing the US did have is a state-persecuted religion, just ask the Mormons.

Having said this, I think that there are marked differences in how Americans think the country ought to be run, and its really getting worrisome to me that there might not be any room for compromise. The last time we ran out of room for compromise was in the late 1800s, and we had the first draft ever, and half a million deaths to show for it. :eek:

[Neserk]

Wow, you are lonely aren't you. May I suggest the teachings of out lord.......
;)


Not at all. I'm quite well versed in Scripture, thank you. I have a Master's Degree in New Testament Theology from an accredited Seminary in Pennsylvania (Baptist, in case you were wondering). I'm still amazed at how few Christians have a clue about what the bible has to say...


I understand, but the notion of church and state is skewed. Those words do not appear in the Constitution. I personally read it to say that Congress cannot establish a national religion. But it doesn't say the word God has to be outlawed. Much to the contrary. Look how many times God is invoked in the Constitution.

God can not be outlawed. :rolleyes: The fact you think God can be outlawed is quite scary.

[Frohickey]

Actually, it used to be that if you were married in one state you were married in all states. That makes sense otherwise my parents who have been married for almost 39 years would become newlyweds when they move this summer to a new state. Think about it ;)

And since when did your wants become what happens? It would be fine to have "under God" in the pledge if minors weren't required to say it every morning. *that* is why it violates the Constitution. Personally, I think it would be easier simply to not have them say the pledge. Problem solved. Pray for safety at a football game? That is an excellent example of stupid praying. So where was God when player X became paralyzed during last weeks football game? Didn't listen, huh? :rolleyes: Christians should all be against public prayer it is against Jesus' teachings. But then again most "Christians" don't know squat about Jesus or what he taught... And if you are anything but Protestant it is a big deal. Those prayers are Protestant prayers and exclude everyone else. And to be quite honest, I don't think God cares.

In another thread, we got ahold of a Supreme Court decision, one about a divorce proceeding, and the gist of it was that each state can determine what marriage and divorce are. I forget the thread and the case number, so your anecdotal evidence of your parents marriage being valid in different states is not adequate proof. It may finally gotten to the point that the definition of marriage (or what other state issue being discussed) is similar in the different states that it is considered valid in both.

I think that *under God* is just fine. But the only reason that we are having this type of discussion is because of federal/state funding of education. Just make it all privately funded, and the *under God* types can have their prayers in school, and the heathens can have something else. :p

[bousozoku]

Is it just me or is this conversation a little insulting to people that were born and raised in one of those states? It is also a little troubling that some ultra right wing group, actually radical would propose this. It will never happen. It is BS, and like I said, they are insulting those states, and you guys are going along with it. Unreal. :(

I was only picking on Texas. :D

I've been to South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi and find them to be quite nice.

Neserk:

Was that the Baptist Seminary school just outside Philly on City Line Avenue?

[Neserk]

I was only picking on Texas. :D

I've been to South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi and find them to be quite nice.

Neserk:

Was that the Baptist Seminary school just outside Philly on City Line Avenue?

Yup :eek:

[Neserk]

I think that *under God* is just fine. But the only reason that we are having this type of discussion is because of federal/state funding of education. Just make it all privately funded, and the *under God* types can have their prayers in school, and the heathens can have something else. :p

Nope. As a person who believes in God I consider the "under God" part of the Pledge to be a fine example of taking God's name in vain.

[Frohickey]

Nope. As a person who believes in God I consider the "under God" part of the Pledge to be a fine example of taking God's name in vain.

If you think so, then if you have a controlling interest in the administration of the school, then you can effect a change. Otherwise, you would need to convince enough to change policy.

Or, you can found your own school that considers the "under God" part of the Pledge to be blasphemy.

That is the beauty of the market system. It doesn't have to be one size fits all, as it would be under a government system. If you don't like it, you can make your own, and succeed or fail on your own merits.

[bousozoku]

I vote for Florida. I've been pissed at them for 3+ years now :p

Imagine having to live with them. :D There are good people here, as there are everywhere, even in Texas. :D

If you were at that seminary, does that make you my mother's brother's friend's son's ex-roommate? ;)

[Sayhey]

Folks, we settle the issue of secession in 1865. It is never going to happen again. If folks want to try to carve out a little bit of our nation where the Constitution doesn't apply, then they have rocks in their pointed little fundamentalist heads. The lunatic fringe of the right may want to bring about a theocracy in their own little corner of the world, but no President, Democrat or Republican, will ever allow it. Neither will any sizable number of members of Congress or the Supreme Court support such lunacy. All this is is the utopian fantasies of the far, far right.

[Neserk]

If you think so, then if you have a controlling interest in the administration of the school, then you can effect a change. Otherwise, you would need to convince enough to change policy.

Or, you can found your own school that considers the "under God" part of the Pledge to be blasphemy.

That is the beauty of the market system. It doesn't have to be one size fits all, as it would be under a government system. If you don't like it, you can make your own, and succeed or fail on your own merits.

I prefer to let the Supreme Court recognize that it is a violation of the COnstitution and just do away with the pledge in public schools.

[Neserk]

Imagine having to live with them. :D There are good people here, as there are everywhere, even in Texas. :D

If you were at that seminary, does that make you my mother's brother's friend's son's ex-roommate? ;)

Indeed there are.

I never lived on campus (except for one January while I was learning Greek)but I probably know your mother's borther's friend's son's ex-roomate!

[zimv20]

I think that there are marked differences in how Americans think the country ought to be run, and its really getting worrisome to me that there might not be any room for compromise. The last time we ran out of room for compromise was in the late 1800s, and we had the first draft ever, and half a million deaths to show for it. :eek:
yeah, that's what i'm on about.

the country is sorely divided over:
- the role of religion in gov't
- abortion
- gun control

i don't think there's a one-size-to-fit-all for these issues, even when passed on to the states (e.g. gun laws in chicago don't work for the rest of illinois, and vice versa).

i wonder if "the south" seceding is actually the start of a final resolution to some of these matters.

[bousozoku]

Indeed there are.

I never lived on campus (except for one January while I was learning Greek)but I probably know your mother's borther's friend's son's ex-roomate!

You should have gone to the Greek Festival at the Greek church in Upper Darby. I think that I was the only one speaking something other than modern Greek and it didn't sound anything like the ancient Greek I had read.

To other matters:

Isn't the trouble that we're all separatists? We can't find common ground because we're so selfish. I suppose I've lived too long. When I grew up, we weren't really concerned about whether someone said a little prayer in school because they kept it to themselves. The Fellowship of Christian Athletes met every other week just like the other clubs like the Joy of Gospel choir.

Of course, at that time, it was okay to exclude anyone who wasn't white.

I don't think that we're going to find more than people traveling to join a commune, in order to support their "pure" religious environment. Good luck to them, if Kool-Aid is on the menu.

[Sun Baked]

Isn't there a spaceship due soon to pick up a bunch of religious nutballs?

It's been awhile since any have given up their worldly goods for a ticket to leave this material plane behind.

[Macco]

Look how many times God is invoked in the Constitution.

Once. Exactly once. And this is just as a formal way of saying what year it is.

"done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,"

[Frohickey]

yeah, that's what i'm on about.

the country is sorely divided over:
- the role of religion in gov't
- abortion
- gun control

i don't think there's a one-size-to-fit-all for these issues, even when passed on to the states (e.g. gun laws in chicago don't work for the rest of illinois, and vice versa).

i wonder if "the south" seceding is actually the start of a final resolution to some of these matters.

Dunno about those issues you mentioned. I think its more along the lines of taxation and size of government. Since the Civil War, the federal government had taken a lot of power away from the states, and this brings us to the problem at hand where we are in a one-size-fits-all scenario. If we can stem and reverse this tide of burgeoning federal usurpation of powers, we could retain this union of states for another 200 years, maybe more. :)

It could be 50-sizes-fits-all scenario. For gun laws, it could be more, if some larger municipalities sees fit to infringe on their citizens rights and others do not. People can vote with their feet, and move to the next town over, or the next county over. Its getting tough though if you have to move the next state over, and you certainly can't move the next country over, where would the Canadians go? :p ;) :D

[IIvan]

I vote for Florida. I've been pissed at them for 3+ years now :p

HEY- not our fault we got screwed! take the conservatives, and just leave us the beautiful land- which btw- is being destroyed at an incredible rate :(

[pseudobrit]

Yeah, zim; I, also, think Texas oughta get kicked out of the Union. It'd serve us right!.

We could give you back to Mexico.

[Krizoitz]

As a Christian I have to say that these guys are off their rockers. While I agree that religion is sometimes discriminated against, I hardly think its gotten to the extreme point that they are talking to. Not to mention I don't think religion is supposed to function as government in the way they wish it to.

Take sodomy for example. Personally I think its wrong on a moral level so I choose not to do it. I think that religious groups should have the freedom to continue to preach it as a sin and try and convince people not to do it. But there is this thing that God gave us called free will. As long as the immoral behaviour does not present a clear and present danger to society (If a man wants to have carnal relations with a man, thats there problem) then it should be between them and God whether its wrong or not.

[dopefiend]

I have. It is scary. I would *never* live there and when I had to drive through it 2x I wanted to get through it as fast as possilbe. *shivers*

What part of Texas scared you? :confused:

And why so much bashing on Texas in general in this thread, lol.

We are friendly people :D

As a Christian I have to say that these guys are off their rockers.

I think religious or not, everyone will agree, these people are a couple peices short of a full puzzle!

[mactastic]

I think that *under God* is just fine. But the only reason that we are having this type of discussion is because of federal/state funding of education. Just make it all privately funded, and the *under God* types can have their prayers in school, and the heathens can have something else. :p

There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness.
George Washington,
address to Congress, January 8, 1790

How about we listen to what the Founding Fathers said, OK? ;)

[bousozoku]

...
And why so much bashing on Texas in general in this thread, lol.
...


There was a mention of Texas but no mention of France. :D

[mactastic]

What part of Texas scared you? :confused:

And why so much bashing on Texas in general in this thread, lol.

We are friendly people :D



I think religious or not, everyone will agree, these people are a couple peices short of a full puzzle!

Some people like to bash on other places. I get stupid 'left coast' comments all the time. In fact there was on in the 'Where to Move' thread just the other day.

I don't see whats wrong with Texas, and one of these days I'll get to see some of it. I'm particularly looking forward to Austin. :D

[Voltron]

Once. Exactly once. And this is just as a formal way of saying what year it is.

"done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,"
Wouldn't that be a violation of church and state? Oh wait maybe they never originally intended for there to be a seperation of church and state. Maybe they came up with freedom of religion to protect religion from government not to protect government from religion?

Like freedom of speech isn't to protect the government from the press. Ooooo seperation of government and the press.

[Voltron]

How about we listen to what the Founding Fathers said, OK? ;)
If you insist

I now make it my earnest prayer, that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in his holy protection, that he would incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field, and finally, that he would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all, to do Justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility and pacific temper of mind, which were the Characteristicks of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy Nation.

George Washington, circular letter of farewell to the Army, June 8, 1783

http://www.foundingfathers.info/

The blessed Religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best Institution may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even, in some instances be made subservient to the vilest purposes. Should, hereafter, those incited by the lust of power and prompted by the Supineness or venality of their Constituents, overleap the known barriers of this Constitution and violate the unalienable rights of humanity: it will only serve to shew, that no compact among men (however provident in its construction and sacred in its ratification) can be pronounced everlasting an inviolable, and if I may so express myself, that no Wall of words, that no mound of parchm[en]t can be so formed as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other.

George Washington, fragments of the Draft First Inaugural Address, April 1789

[Thanatoast]

• Abortion continues against the wishes of many States

• Children may not pray in our schools

• The Bible is not welcome in schools except under strict FEDERAL guidelines

• The 10 Commandments remain banned from public display

• Sodomy is now legal AND celebrated as “diversity” rather than perversion

• Preaching Christianity will soon be outlawed as “hate speech”

• Gay marriage will be foisted upon us in the very near future

sigh. the only one of these issues that has any merit, as far as i can see, is the first. some states, given the choice, would ban abortion. i don't have a solution to that, except for these fundies to move to some represssive theocratic nation where it is outlawed. like iran.

children *may* pray in schools. no one is stopping them, they just can't require everyone to pray with them.

i find their emphasis on federal guidelines interesting. would it be okay for state guidelines to be instituted? and what's wrong with learning about the bible as a historical document rather than as "the word"?

the ten commandments are *not* banned from public display. any church that wishes to display them is free to do so. federal courthouses, however, may not.

i don't know if i'd say sodomy is "celebrated", but it is no longer persecuted (under the law, anyway). guess that's one of the bummers of living in a "free and equal" society.

and finally, gay marriage is not being foisted upon anyone. none of these fundies are being required to marry same sex partners.

on an interesting side note, i heard a guy on the radio the other day refer to gay marriages as homo-erotic relationships. i thought, "how much you wanna bet he's never referred to straight marriage as a hetero-erotic relationship?"

as for texas, i just spent two years there going to school and yes it is full of friendly people. which makes it all the more confusing that a clear majority there believe bush is the best thing that has ever happened to this country.

[numediaman]

Daily Kos picked up this story (doesn't he know it already was in Macrumors?). He is voting to let Mississippi go. His reasoning is that Mississippi receives $1.89 back for every dollar it contributes to the Federal coffers. (Alabama and South Carolina also receive way more federal money than they contribute, unlike Texas.)

Which led me to ask this: if you are a Republican state versus a Democratic state, in general, do you receive more federal grants or less?

Turns out, no surprise, that Republican states receive more money than they contribute (on average $1.30 for every $1.00), than Democratic states ($1.04).

So, if every state that voted for George Bush seceded and formed a new country, they would start out with a massive Federal debt. The new nation made up of those states that voted for Gore would pretty much start out with a balanced budget.

Source: Tax Foundation

[mactastic]

If you insist

http://www.foundingfathers.info/

Ah you didn't get that I was pointing out the futility of trying to argue points via ancient quotes, did you? For the very reason that you have just discoverd yourself, there are plenty of quotes that can be used for many different agendas. And you really have no idea of what any of the FF would have thought about today's issues. To pretend otherwise is to claim clairavoyance.

[Frohickey]

As a Christian I have to say that these guys are off their rockers. While I agree that religion is sometimes discriminated against, I hardly think its gotten to the extreme point that they are talking to. Not to mention I don't think religion is supposed to function as government in the way they wish it to.

Take sodomy for example. Personally I think its wrong on a moral level so I choose not to do it. I think that religious groups should have the freedom to continue to preach it as a sin and try and convince people not to do it. But there is this thing that God gave us called free will. As long as the immoral behaviour does not present a clear and present danger to society (If a man wants to have carnal relations with a man, thats there problem) then it should be between them and God whether its wrong or not.

Back in the 1800s, another group of people thought that they were being persecuted, enough so that they went and all moved into a different territory. So, it can work. Oh, the name of the group? The Mormons.

Well, for certain religions there is free will, as it is in Judaism and Christianity. But there is one religion where there is no free will, and everything is predestined... one guess as to that religion. :eek:

[Frohickey]

How about we listen to what the Founding Fathers said, OK? ;)

Okay.

Thats why we already spend millions on the United States Patent Office. :p

[Sayhey]

Back in the 1800s, another group of people thought that they were being persecuted, enough so that they went and all moved into a different territory. So, it can work. Oh, the name of the group? The Mormons.

I wasn't aware that the Constitution of the US or the authority of the three branches of the Federal government no longer applies in the state of Utah. If the US Supreme Court orders that the equal protection clause means that Gay couples can marry it will apply in all states including Utah and whichever state these crazies try to "colonize."

[IJ Reilly]

It took over 50 years for Utah to achieve statehood, in no small part due to concerns over church-state entanglements.

[Desertrat]

I've never understood "fear" in references in travelling through Texas. But, I've yet to be afraid, anywhere, insofar as a state or country. That includes such examples as redlight/off-limits areas in Asia, and the waterfront of Marseilles...(Some places didn't like "Yanquis", but I said I ain't no yankee, I'm from Texas, and they thereafter bought the booze while I told cowboy and Indian tall tales. :D )

mac, as cities go--and I don't like cities--I rate Austin up near neat places like Hong Kong, Paris and San Francisco. If your tastes in music are varied, Austin is one of the top in the world. Tex-Mex conjunto, symphony, rock, folk, bluegrass, both traditional and new country, acid rock, you name it. On any given night there will be a dozen of each.

Where else but something like the first Willie Nelson July 4th picnic outside of Austin would you have the rednecks and hippies smoking together, listening to Roy Acuff and Jerry Jeff Walker? :D

If you drive, peel off I-10 at Van Horn and take US 90. There's more stuff that's interesting. Heck, if the timing works, peel off south at Alpine and I'll show you around Terlingua--but summer's not the best time; it was hitting 108 last week. "But it's a dry heat".

Religion? You got yours, I got mine, and after that it's Budweiser time.

:), 'Rat

[zimv20]

Religion? You got yours, I got mine, and after that it's Budweiser time.

i don't get religious _until_ the beer talk starts. and it ain't budweiser i'm talking about!

:-)