Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mobilehaathi, Jan 29, 2012.
I believe it passed 193-0.
I am a Christian and I find this ridiculous.
Church and state should ALWAYS be separate! I do not want someones false, hate riddled interpretation of the Bible pushed on me.
If someone wants religion mixed with politics then they can move to Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or numerous other countries.
Not to mention I'm sure this will somehow be used to further delay things like legalizing gay marriage, you know the thing that uninformed Christians think is a sin.
Not even a single dissenting voice? Hello theocracy!
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
The only problem I have with Christians is stuff like this. I mean really go to your church worship your god but leave those of us who'd prefer a secular life out of it.
I thought it was remarkably brazen of them to pass such a resolution!
But what does this actually mean? I'm an atheist - but having read through the motion I find it difficult to get worked up as I'm not sure what they're proposing.
Is that 2012 is the (Drum roll!) 'Year of the Bible' because in the past it was a formative influence (and they're going to issue some special stamps, hold a celebratory dinner (at which I trust, Kosher, vegan etc etc options are also available) and perhaps get a few special editions printed up or is that they're trying to do something else that as a UK resident thinking 'what's the harm, really" would escape me?
Hopefully thats all this is, but I think it is probably more of a "testing the waters" type of deal to see what they can get away with as far as mixing politics and religion.
Reagan did it in 1983. And that's National.
That being said the government should stay out of it. It's good to see they recognize the importance of the Bible (IMO), however, church (religion) and state should be entirely separate with the exception of the state protecting the rights of the church just as they should protect the rights of every other religion and belief/non-belief out there.
It doesn't matter. It is a needless and illegal promotion of religion by the state. More subtly, it can serve to ostracize others in the community. While I'm not a big fan of getting upset over every little thing that might offend someone, it is not the government's job to actively promote divisions among the populace.
It's ironic that they even acknowledge that freedom from state sponsored religious tyranny is what drove people to form the US and a guiding principle of its founding documents. Yet here we are 236 years later, making laws with deference to religious beliefs.
The Amish are packing their wagons. Even they have a problem with this one.
I love how they say, "This nation now faces great challenges that will test it as it has never been tested before." Hasn't every generation said that? Isn't it a kind of egotism to think that your generation's problems are worse than any other's?
Anyway. Highly inappropriate, for obvious reasons. Just let someone try to declare 2013 to be the Year of the Koran and see what happens.
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 4s: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Par for the course, IMO. Puritanism isn't very self-aware... "let's leave because we're being persecuted for our religious beliefs. Hey, this place is full of pagans, let's kill them. Oh snap, someone told me this woman might possibly not worship the same god I do. I can't prove it, but let's kill her anyway just to be sure."
You need to put Jon Stewart's Thursday show on your must-view list.
"Muslim's are scary..."
Easily the best show of a lacklustre week.
Although the runner, jogging for the Senate, was nicely animated. A real person. OMG!!
It's silly, but I'd rather they pass a worthless bill declaring 2012 the "Year of the Bible" than legislature that strips people's rights away.
In a way this does strip away rights. I thought I had freedom of any particular religion? But now (if I lived in PA) my year has to be the "year of the bible"? Bullpoopy.
What exactly are/should be the rights of a church/religion? Should they have a tax advantage? Should they be able to retain closed books (accounting)? Should any of the existing avenues for abuse of the system be closed?
Well, since you asked, for one, they are exempt from the Americans With Disabilities Act. How's that for openers?
Source: The aforementioned Jon Stewart show.
I'll go one step further: If you say something like that and you aren't a contemporary of Lincoln, you're full of crap.
You need to remember that the Puritans were also "End Timers" they really, truly believed that the end was just around the corner.
One of my 10th great grandmothers was the 4th person to be hung as a witch (in 1650) in what would become the USA. The Puritans were adamant that government should be separated from religion but were even more adamant that public morals should be dictated by their own repressive religion. It was in many ways a very unpleasant time in history.
Well... its a good thing there's no one around like that these days.
Nothing but laws grounded in reason and liberty as far as the eye can see!
He's a witch!