I don't think we ignored it. I think we are aware of that gratefulnesss. So, it's the native born who are the problem, huh? Or is it the illegal aliens?
OK 3 points here: 1) How does a seasonal nativity scene in the park establish a national religion? Would it be the Catholic States of America? Or the Baptist States?? Or maybe the Lutheran States? THAT is what the Establishment Clause is about. If you disagree read the Amendment coupled with the Federalist Papers surrounding its drafting. 2) A nativity scene can be classified as symbolic speech. It is speech just the same as anything uttered at a gay pride rally. To refuse to see that is holding ideology over logic. 3) Assuming that this IS an establishment issue, how does the governement estrablish a religion by allowing its citizens to use the public land for a nativity scene? That no more establishes a religion than allowing a gay pride rally on the same park establish Congress as gay.
Fine would you be willing to allow public displays from the Scientologists? the Church of Satan? or are only Chrisitan ones acceptable?
I don't see why family values has to equate with "Christian values", but it seems lately it's either all or nothing for many people around the nation. While I don't neccessarily enjoy gay days at Disneyland, it's a really strong gesture of equal rights in the face of overreacting conservative right-wing groups. By evil coorporate Disney nonetheless...
Not my point. My point was that there seems to be the assumption that those who migrate to the US simply refuse to adopt American traditions and that simply isn't true. I was just stating that, often times, they are as much if not more patriotic than the rest of us. I wasn't talking about our lack of patriotism or suggesting that those who are here illegally are better or worse than the rest of us. RM95 & outlaw: We won't get an answer. Refman: You obviously have a good grasp of the legal issues here (damn lawyers! ) and I respect that. Frankly, I agree with you. I think the concern by those who are not religious or who practice a religion outside of Christianity or Judeo-Christian practice is that the influence is subtle and pervasive. I'll admit that I overreact a lot myself. I think it could be equated to conservatives saying that we don't have enough family values in America because of music or movies or whatever. If it FEELS like a threat, whether or not it REALLY IS, we all have a tendency to react strongly to that.
Okay, I'll stir the pot. They should not get equal treatment because they are false religions. This should be fun....
giddyup: Instead of quibbling over whether or not Scientology or the Church of Satan qualifies as a religion, let's replace them with Hinduism, Islam and/or Buddhism. Those are all legitimate religions recognized by everyone as part of the world's big 5 religions: Christianity, Judiasm, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. So, for now, let's ignore the one's we might not agree on. We can all agree that these are legitimate religions.
I would allow those displays provided that they are not obscene, lude or inflammatory, and that the only role government would have is in providing the land. We all do. The fact of the matter is that this nation was founded in the Judeo-Christian tradition. I don't think that the minority who do not subscribe to these beliefs should be penalized, but I don't think they should be alllowed to squelch the practices of the majority. The reason they can do this is because we are so afraid of being stigmatized as being "insensitive." They can simply pass by and "know" in their hearts that they are right and the rest of us are just silly. But like they say...when in Rome....
actually i think this question was particularly directed at me...and i recognized some time later that i didn't answer it. it certainly wasn't because i don't have an answer...but since you're being snooty about it, i'm STILL not gonna answer..na na na na na nah!!!
<b>Jeff</b>: I just answered the question as posed... Are you saying those religions (Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism specifically) are being patently denied public expression? This is a Judeo/Christian nation fundamentally and has a right to remain so. The symbols and the language and the values in various ways have been part and parcel of this country since it's founding. Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism come along later. Fine. They are welcome to exist... to flourish even... but that doesn't change the fact that <b>in spirit</b> we are a Judeo/Christian nation. We don't compel membership in Judeo/Christian houses of worship and we don't prevent membership in Islamic, Hindu, or Buddhist places of worship. I don't see a problem in reality. There is a bunch of rabble roused by the occasional filer of a lawsuit but most are without serious merit. The US is a place of significant tolerance yet still manages to hold to its roots. That is not an easy task to pull off. This is just more social change rammed down our throats via the Court system. I will continue to stand against it. That doesn't mean I don't respect the rights of other legitimate believers to worship in the manner that they see fit. Just don't try to change the character of my nation.
They might as well get redesign their money and replace it with the motto, "In your divine supreme being or leader (for the insecure atheists) we trust." I can see potential hidden watermarks for the Mint to hide in those lengthy lines. Give the Secret Service an easier job finding those counterfeiters. And correct that to every Federal Building with God in their motto. No honest to non-God atheist citizen is gonna spend their tax money etchin that offensive word into buildings... I doubt it's subversive to the atheist cause. For the most part, it'll only either make them hate religion even more or turn them into Agnostics... As for claims of a fascist loyalty pledge, sometimes people live in this country for so long that they don't realize the freedoms they do have and take them for granted. The irony here is that many citizens willingly choose to give up their other and larger rights in the wake of the recent insecurity and paranoia. Americans are so twisted at times.
Yeah, thats it. Those of us that think it's wrong to physically discipline a teenager for refusing to pledge his loyalty to the flag are just taking our freedoms for granted. So atheists hate religion....hmmmm thats interesting. I guess not believing in something equates to hate now. I think this type of thinking is a big part of the problem here. Any attempt at change made by an atheist is just a smokescreen to hide their true agenda, the complete destruction of the church. That has to be it right, because dep down they "hate" the church, right?
the perception is that they do...not that that's totally correct for every atheist...but there was a pretty good editorial in the paper last week from an atheist discussing the pledge...he talked about how the hatred and personal vendettas (there is no way i spelled that right!) for the church among many atheists gives other atheists a bad name...it was an interesting read. everyone is different..but i think i've seen some hatred for the church on these boards.
Those few who hate the church on this board are rank amateurs compared to these guys. Count your blessings: I've never said how I really feel about Christianity here, for example, because it would make people upset...
How you really feel about Christianity is irrelevant. This thread is about physical discipline for not saying the pledge, not why dimsie thinks Christians are foolish.
