I'm voting Republican.

[T2A`]

Maybe it's because I'm much older than most of you that I have a different mindset when it comes to socio-political issues.

GET OFF MY LAWN.

Religion is supposed to be a personal thing. When it becomes more than that is when I have a problem. But I have resigned myself from care for the most part because I know that religion is interwoven into our government and there's nothing I can do about it. Don't try to tell me I'm wrong and I won't call you a churchfag.

I mean, religion is on our money, for f**k's sake, as if some imaginary white guy in the sky is going to prevent us from paying too much money at the pump. D:

As for the ten commandments, I'm with Carlin. They are artificially padded and unnecessary, especially in the context of using them for governmental laws and whatnot. I think it should be pretty obvious that killing someone isn't cool. Keep your imaginary friends out of it.

More people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason.

 

[Crotale]

F.O. I'm not a churchgoing person, so get off my arse. I never said religion HAS to be a part of our Government.

 

[TomWithTheWeather]

GET OFF MY LAWN.

Religion is supposed to be a personal thing. When it becomes more than that is when I have a problem. But I have resigned myself from care for the most part because I know that religion is interwoven into our government and there's nothing I can do about it. Don't try to tell me I'm wrong and I won't call you a churchfag.

I mean, religion is on our money, for f**k's sake, as if some imaginary white guy in the sky is going to prevent us from paying too much money at the pump. D:

As for the ten commandments, I'm with Carlin. They are artificially padded and unnecessary, especially in the context of using them for governmental laws and whatnot. I think it should be pretty obvious that killing someone isn't cool. Keep your imaginary friends out of it.

More people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason.

See, I tend to agree with what you are saying but not how you are saying it. While there is a place for your level of harshness, it'll never get you taken seriously by any religious person. A little bit of calm debate works a bit better if you're trying to convince the other side.

 

[Grobut]

About the whole ten commandments thing, perhabs we should actually take a look at them and compare them to law?

ONE: 'You shall have no other gods before Me.'

There is no law against that, infact such a thing would be unconstitutional.

TWO: 'You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.'

Not illegal.

THREE: 'You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.'

Not illegal.

FOUR: 'Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.'

You dont see people go the jail or get fined for working on a Sunday, do you? not illegal.

FIVE: 'Honor your father and your mother.'

There's no law against beeing a spoiled brat.

SIX: 'You shall not murder.'

Finally, one that actually is illegal!

SEVEN: 'You shall not commit adultery.'

Not illegal, its considdered immoral, certainly, but not illegal.

EIGHT: 'You shall not steal.'

Another one! yay!

NINE: 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'

Not really illegal either, unless you are sworn under oath.. shall we call it a half then?

TEN: 'You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.'

Not illegal.


So out of the ten, only 2½ are actually US law, and they are not even unique to Judeo/Christian belief, infact they are universal in any other relegion i can think of, and any non-relegious philosophy aswell.

 

[Crotale]

I don't believe anyone stated the Ten Commandments should be used as laws. Except for the first three, the Commandments are basically Golden Rules that most people try to live by, no matter where they live, race, economic status, religion or political affiliation. But, I'm with TWTW on this, as it is better off that the Commandments NOT be displayed in Government buildings. But, I also do feel that it is not a Constitutional offense to display it either, as the Government is of the people and by the people, and the people should be able to display religious symbology if they wish. If not, the Government really isn't "of the people." Yeah, it's a tricky and fine line, which is why it is so controversial.

AFAIK, most of the controversy surrounding the Commandments has not been in Federal offices but in state and local buildings, such as local courthouses.

 

[Neddaf]

The sad thing about this is, America is so ****ing far behind on the times culturally and socially. We sit here and have these retarded debates about gay marriage, abortion, wars, and education (and many other things at that).

Gay marriage - who cares really? Why the hell does it matter if its two men or two women? Honestly. Answer me that question, and dont give me some bull**** response about religious ceremonies and how it's really supposed to be between a man and a woman. Can we not change as a country?

Abortion? Well I won't touch that.

War? Money. If republicans are supposed to be these amazing business men, well then im ****ing lost.

Education? No Child Left Behind has utterly failed. Not only did I try and find the exact copy of this bill but the website about it is extremely vague, directs you to all of these other sites when you try and find specifics, and the overall objective, you cant really find much. Now I must have a bias because I come from a high school with 50% black population and less white and even less hispanic/asian. My old high school is currently going under. The art and drama department shut down, and the music department is being underfunded and money starved. Thank you no child left behind, thank you for realizing the arts have never done anything good for our culture and society. Please, lets keep making T-Pains, Lil waynes, and 50cents, these people really do have something to say about our society.

 

[Neddaf]

And speaking on the religious end of things - I come from a fairly hardcore Catholic and Christian family. I even have a TV Evangelist in my family. But I have so much distaste for that bull****, that I dont even associate myself with them. And I definitely dont think of it as a sin, I just have nothing in common with people like that.

 

[SkaarjMaster]

I agree we need to quit killing people in the name of religion and just chill. Besides, we're going to have more important things to worry about in the future like the Resource Wars! This will happen and it's absolutely inevitable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=za7xpU8oEA0
oops.....so much for the first google link. I thought I'd add some bright and cheery to my doom and gloom.

 

[Grobut]

I don't believe anyone stated the Ten Commandments should be used as laws. Except for the first three, the Commandments are basically Golden Rules that most people try to live by, no matter where they live, race, economic status, religion or political affiliation. But, I'm with TWTW on this, as it is better off that the Commandments NOT be displayed in Government buildings. But, I also do feel that it is not a Constitutional offense to display it either, as the Government is of the people and by the people, and the people should be able to display religious symbology if they wish. If not, the Government really isn't "of the people." Yeah, it's a tricky and fine line, which is why it is so controversial.

AFAIK, most of the controversy surrounding the Commandments has not been in Federal offices but in state and local buildings, such as local courthouses.

Well as you noted, the whole controversy really sparked around having the commandments displayed infront of local court houses, and it seems to have been going on and off ever since that issue was first raised.

Alot of people still like to make rather bold statements like saying US law is basically derived directly from them and therefor they should be on display! but when you look at it and actually compare the law to the Ten, that argument doesen't really hold water, points 1, 2, 3 and 4 actually clash with the consitution, freedom of relegion, freedom of expression, and the pursuit of happyness (lots of people make good money working Sundays), only 2 of them (items 6 and 8) can really be said to compare favorably, whilst item 9 is a bit on the verge.. the rest are just "guidelines" for the Judeo/Christian way of thinking, living humble and all that, and that's not really for everyone.

And thus, when twice the content is actually unconstitutional than the content that is actually reflected in US law, how can people really claim thease commandments govern US law or has formed the backbone thereof? the argument falls flat if you just look at it

 

[Mr. UglyPants]

That is one great vid. Glad i'm in Canada.

 

[Iron Archer]

Better a Republican than a Republican't

 

[Lizard Of Oz]

...But, I also do feel that it is not a Constitutional offense to display it either, as the Government is of the people and by the people, and the people should be able to display religious symbology if they wish...

So you're okay with people displaying Islamic, Hindu, Wiccan, Satanist, Buddhist, Scientology, Great Spaghetti Monster, symbols in our government buildings?

 

[Armagon917]

Nice piece of work you are. What I meant by that is that we have freedom guaranteed to practice or not to practice religion, but I hear and read from a great many liberals that it should be "freedom FROM religion" as though religion should be banned. Too bad I'm the idiot, huh?

Whats screwed up is that if Bush violated any other religion other then christianity in some way he would get slammed by those exact same people. We all know that.

Crotale haven't posted much because you are making the points I would've. Well done.

 

[Armagon917]

Gay marriage - who cares really? Why the hell does it matter if its two men or two women? Honestly. Answer me that question, and dont give me some bull**** response about religious ceremonies and how it's really supposed to be between a man and a woman. Can we not change as a country?[/QUOTE]

Because if its legal then adoption comes into the picture. You want to **** up a kid there a good way to do it. Also people can take advantage of tax breaks for married couples. If its called marriage then it comes with all the other legal privlages. It also destroys the family unit. I think our government should recognize civil unions instead. Cut back on the rights to adoption. I'd like to see an argument that two gay people are better equipped to raise a child. Thats one of the major reasons why the majority of Americans oppose it. It isn't a matter of we just don't like gays. It completely destroys culture in America.

The majority does not want it leagal and so we let the democratic process take its course. When enough people support it then it will happen. Sorry if that sounds harsh to you. We can evolve as a country but it can't be forced on the majority either.

 

[T2A`]

Gay people: Destroying America's culture since 1776.

You heard it here (via Armagon) first!

 

[SkaarjMaster]

Gay people: Destroying America's culture since 1776.

You heard it here (via Armagon) first!

 

[Crotale]

So you're okay with people displaying Islamic, Hindu, Wiccan, Satanist, Buddhist, Scientology, Great Spaghetti Monster, symbols in our government buildings?

I get your point, but why do you guys have to be jerks about religion? To answer your question, I would take less issue with it in local Government buildings in small, tight-knit like minded communities. Most people ignore the fact that the Constitutional Amendment granting us Americans freedom of religion was not intended to prevent any mention of religion in a Government building, but was to ensure that there would be no similar breach in authority as committed by the Church of England. In studying the Constitution and the original Bill of Rights, the authors of those documents were not trying to keep any and all forms of religion out of Government buildings. You must keep in mind that most of the Founding Fathers came from Puritan roots; they broke away from the mold of a church that had so much power and influence.

With the checks and balances we have in our Government, I hardly see a display of the Judeo-Christian Ten Commandments as being a threat to our way of life. Additionally, it is a fact of matter that we have to swear to God when we testify in a Court of Law and has been this way since the inception of our court system. It isn't that we are required to BELIEVE in a deity, but is a show of respect to something greater than ourselves, which can be summed up in the ideals of our society.

 

[Grobut]

With the checks and balances we have in our Government, I hardly see a display of the Judeo-Christian Ten Commandments as being a threat to our way of life.

It can be a threat to people's sense of security and trust in the legal system though, how do you think a Christian would feel if he was put on trial, and when he arrives at the courthouse there's a big tablet with the 9 satanic statements out front, and the Judge is wearing an inverted cross around his/her neck?

It's not hard to see why people can be worried about bias, and beeing judged unfairly because of their relegion/faith, it makes perfect sense to just take that element out of the equation, and display no symbols of such a nature at all.
There's no good reason for them to be there anyway, why does a courthouse need relegious symbols? it does not, it is not a relegious institution but a legal one, and obviously they bother alot of people, so why put them there? its just creating a problem that doesen't need to exist in the first place.

As for the swearing on the bible thing, you can actually request to swear on something else if you really want to i belive.

 

[Lizard Of Oz]

Additionally, it is a fact of matter that we have to swear to God when we testify in a Court of Law and has been this way since the inception of our court system.

One need not "Swear" or "Affirm" to God in court. You need only promise to tell the truth. No mention of God is necessary. It is just as legally binding.

Interesting side note: Bible swearing dates back to old England, where only Christians could testify in court—a rule enforced by making witnesses swear before God and kiss the Bible. This is a fine example of what happens when you let the church infiltrate the state; all other religions or beliefs are ostracized and marginalized for not conforming to the popular belief.

 

[Crotale]

It can be a threat to people's sense of security and trust in the legal system though, how do you think a Christian would feel if he was put on trial, and when he arrives at the courthouse there's a big tablet with the 9 satanic statements out front, and the Judge is wearing an inverted cross around his/her neck?

Yeah, okay. You got me. My give up. Like I said before, it is a fine line between preventing religious influence in any level of Government/Government influence into religion and allowing/disallowing any religion in regards to Government property.

Heck, if you want to technical about it, any and all churches located on military bases should be removed. Also, there should be no use of the word "god" in any form or function in ANY Government building or property. While you're at ridding all religion from the Government, you'd better start suing the Congress for when they have their prayer before each session.

One need not "Swear" or "Affirm" to God in court. You need only promise to tell the truth. No mention of God is necessary. It is just as legally binding.

Stating "I do" is still swearing to god, whether your hand is held palm forward or resting on a bible. Most persons give the "I do" answer and move on.

Interesting side note: Bible swearing dates back to old England, where only Christians could testify in court—a rule enforced by making witnesses swear before God and kiss the Bible. This is a fine example of what happens when you let the church infiltrate the state; all other religions or beliefs are ostracized and marginalized for not conforming to the popular belief.

This was one of the reasons for an Amendment that grants freedom of religion to prevent such things.