Religion -- Not an Arguement -- A CONCEPT

W

www.abileneinfo.com

Inactive
This Post is not to fight over religion...only to fight for freedom.

I do question why so many people see this current supreme court action as ok. I am a firm believer that the government has just as much say in religion as it does in RKBA. None.

If the first amendment can be "FIXED"
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Then so can the Second
the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

Maybe, sometimes, we need to pay attention to protecting all Freedoms or they will be eaten one at a time. And once one is compromised then the all are.


On this forum I believe someone has a saying that I believe is right on.
Something Like:
"If you will give up freedom for temporary safety, then you deserve neither freedom or safety" Ben Franklin i believe

Thats about all for know
Happy Hunting
Scott
 
Ooooff.

This is going to be an ugly one.

I'll chime in though. Nobody has prohibited the free exercise of anything. You can flop down at a HS football game and pray all you want. The issue is mandated prayer.

Now before anyone jumps on me, I'm not sure a prayer led at a football game is mandatory. Can't you just opt out? Don't have the answers and the SC really doesn't either.

I'm non-commital on this one.
 
Well I am not noncommital on this one. First, the government at federal, state and local levels has no business in saying anything about prayer and where it can and cannot be uttered. The ONLY thing they have the capacity to do is to disallow a national religion - you know, like the Saudis do: you are Islam and Islam is you. There is no other acceptable religion within the boundaries of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. All references to and practice of any other religion are very punishable by the Sharia (religious court) because there is no civil or any other court in Saudi Arabia. Punishment is meted out swiftly and there is no appeals process. This is NOT what prayer means. And if you are Christian, then you better adhere to the word of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob urging us to pray always, prayer being the "fruit of our lips," not some silent thought.
 
Let's drop this one.

It leads to all kinds of proponents of the RKBA shifting gears to force me to listen to them pray to their specific religion in schools and other governmental settings.

This is wrong.

A telling story: In the TX incident, a young lady was interviewed and asked why she wanted a specific Christian prayer to be read at the game. She said it was because as an Amercian
at her right to religion was being abridged if the school did not have the prayer.

She was then asked if a Muslim could lead his co-religionists at prayer at the game also.
She said: NO! Asked why she said it was because this was America.

We don't need government choosing our prayers and making folks who don't believe in them having to listen to them.

Free exercise does not mean that you are free to make me be part of your religion.
 
If you want to pray before the big game, huddle up and pray. It shouldn't be boomed from the PA system, forcing it on everyone.
 
Nancy, if people are going to use public property (school stadium) and public equipment (the PA system) to promote their religion, then they are in violation of the Establishment clause. No one is saying they can't pray. They just can't use public facilities paid for with taxpayer's dollars to broadcast their prayer to people who didn't ask to hear it.

I am not a Christian. Why should my tax dollars subsidize the promotion of a religion in which I do not believe?
 
I'm not a Christain either, but a highschool football game without a prayer is just sad.

I believe that anyone who would like to offer a prayer before a game should be allowed to do so, using the schools equipment. After all the school belongs to the community, NOT the Federal Government.

Are we so intolerant now that if we even hear someone elses prayer, we'll turn to dust.

If you don't want to hear the prayer, plug your ears, stay home, or don't get there until after kick-off.
 
This post was not about what religion you are or are not. The simple question is "Does the Government have the right to stop any mass of people to do what has been granted to them by the laws of the land?" I am Christian, however, I find it disturbing the choice of topics of prayer and the manor of prayer that is displayed in certain public events. In any event my problem is not with the government for allowing things to occur and not allowing things its with the people that facilitate these events. And if it comes down to a disagreement in beliefs and a struggle for truth then so be it. My, then, is with the local administrator or who ever. I think its high time to realize that freedoms can be reversly taken away as well. The next think you will here is that seeing a rifle or case offends someone so its against the law to carry a rifle in public unless its inside a file cabinet or something that is impossible to depict that a gun exists. My opinion is now and will probably always be that everyone has an opinion, some are right and some are wrong, but the Government has not right taking away any freedom that has been or is currently ineffect unless the freedom is abused in such a way that causes a NATIONAL problem. I have been to Texas football games and surveyed the stands. Out of every 10,000 people maybe, just maybe, 10 are not standing or bowing or something. Maybe a solution would be to have a time that was silent for a minute or two. Time for peace and prayer before the game. then those that find it not in there best interest to pray my just enjoy the peace.

All in all my point is does the Gov even have a say?
 
A prayer to God is a prayer to God. It is not a command to join one organized religion or another. The people who live in the school district have paid their taxes to finance their schools and buy their equipment, and the feds have NO business telling them they may or may not pray. Now if that school district was ordering everyone to join an organized religion or leave, that is intermingling church with state. Whether or not you believe in God or are/are not a Christian does not have any effect on God's being God. He always was, is and ever shall be no matter how many people deny His existence how many times. And since He IS God, no power, principality, no darkness, no dominion can keep Him from being where He wishes to be and when He wishes to be. That includes what, in the eyes of mere mortals, passes today for morally acceptable people and their leaders.
 
Nancy,
One thing we all have to remember is that just because I believe something so firm that I know its a fact doesn't mean that everyone does. For Example because I know that there is a cat that lives in my neighborhood doesn't mean that all of my nieghbors believe the same thing. I have seen the tracks, have seen the hairballs, have even seen the offspring -- but some don't. The same is with God. Some see His existance, His creations, and even His son and have a faith in the fact that ALL the writen prophetic works are absolutly true. Others don't see it that way. That doesn't mean they are lessor people, nor does it mean that they cannot be our friends and neighbors. They just see it differently.
---------------------------------------------
Many people, especially in the US, think that Christianity is the only religion that is mentioned in the First Ammendment. That is not true. If the Gov pushed one religion on everyone then we would be in the same positoin as most of our founding fathers were in before they were founding fathers. Also, if there was only one religion then where would disernment and faith fall in. It would disappear because everyone would be "forced" into this Gov religion.

It seems to me that people don't see what the Gov and the Media are doing with RKBA's, as well as Religion, unreasonable searches and seizures, impartial jury's, nor cruel and unusual punishments.....What Am I talking about -- Were luck we still have the first two. :)

Because of my respect for the rules that Rich and others have set on this Forum I will not go into detail. Many of you understand what I'm saying. Some do not. That does not mean that we can't be neighbors -- and yes even friends...

With Much Respect
Scott

[This message has been edited by www.abileneinfo.com (edited June 24, 2000).]
 
1. If you don't like public prayer, ignore it as you would ignore something else you didn't like hearing. I attend a church where concert prayer is the rage, but I don't participate--my private prayers to God are between me and Him, and I don't have to say prayers aloud to be heard.

2. If prayer at a football game is what a majority of the taxpaying citizens wants, let them pray. I agree with Lonestar's premise that the community determines its fate, not the government.

3. Was anyone denied his basic Constitutional rights by hearing, HEARING, someone else pray? I doubt it. No Constitutional rights violated? No problem.
 
Glenn made the point quite clearly, “...We don't need government choosing
our prayers and making folks who don't believe in them having to listen to
them.” Others agree they will be offended if they are “forced” to hear a prayer.

Sorry, I can’t buy it. If a person’s opinions, attitudes, or beliefs are so fragile
that he is offended, degraded, or confused by a short prayer, then he needs
Glenn’s professional services.

My religious beliefs (or lack thereof) are not so fragile or narrow that I must
prohibit any conversation or moderate exercise of another’s belief. If you
want to have a short prayer - go for it. I don’t care if it is Christian, Jewish, or
praying to the Great Pumpkin. Just don’t make it a sermon and don’t attack
or denigrate others or their beliefs.

Permitting a short, non-denominational prayer at a public event shouldn’t
offend ANYone who is “forced” to listen. If it does, then the HCI advocates
could claim to be offended by any defense of the Second Amendment “forced”
upon them.

Should Christians (or other “believers”) have the right to prohibit atheists
from voicing their NON-beliefs? Obviously not. A little understanding,
common sense, and simple courtesy could go a long way here.

Were this aspect of free speech not so dangerous, it would be laughable.
-----

Another point. If you want to read Thomas Sowell’s opinions, read his
articles. If you don’t want to read his opinion, skip his articles.

And so it is with threads on TFL.

If the mere subject or topic of a thread is so offensive to your fragile beliefs
that you believe the thread should be closed, e-mail a member of the TFL
staff and skip the thread.

Contrary to the shenanigans in the Suggestions Forum, there will be no test
on material presented. Read what you want. Stay civil. Please try to keep it
related to firearms and/or civil rights. Do not advocate illegal or dangerous
acts, etc. Skip the subjects which cause you grief - don’t read them - but do
not tell members not to discuss a subject appropriate to TFL because you
want to concentrate your personal attention on something else.

For further or complete guidance, see “Forum policies” (above) or ask a
member of the staff.
 
May I suggest that some of you actually read the Constitution? Also it may be helpful to peruse the Federalist Papers. The Bill of Rights was meant as a constraint on the Federal government. Read it.

"Congress shall make no law..." Whatever you think about the wisdom of prayer at a high school football game, it in no way involves an act of Congress, it is also in no way a federal(central) government issue.

I've been too busy to read the decision but a friend who is more knowledgeable on these matters claimed that in most of these cases the court appears to be talking about the 1st amendment but if you carefully read the decision the appeal to the 14th amendment as giving them authority to make a ruling. Anyone know if this is the case?

I bring this up because I am of the opinion that limiting the unconstitutional expansion of the central government's power is the best hope we have of preserving the freedom to keep and bear arms.
 
I was going to post but Dennis said everrthing I was goign to say and said it better then I could possibly say it.
Thanks Dennis.Saves me some typing.

------------------
beemerb
We have a criminal jury system which is superior to any in the world;
and its efficiency is only marred by the difficulty of finding twelve men
every day who don't know anything and can't read.
-Mark Twain
 
Don't buy it.

You can pray at home or silently. Have a moment of silence. Prayers of a specific faith are impositions of majority religions and
if you are a member of such a faith you should realize that you offend people with such.

Does that fit in to your ethical scheme?

No one has dealt with the clear point of my example in TX, that it was clearly the imposition of a specific faith as a Muslim prayer was seen as unAmerican. Oops.
 
Prayers of a specific faith are impositions of majority religions only if they
represent a majority religion.

Regardless of the census count for a given religious or non-religious belief, a
person has no reason to be “offended” (or offensive) if the prayer does not
advocate one religion over another or disparage others’ beliefs (or non-beliefs).

I have heard prayers of many beliefs: Christian, Jewish, Moslem, Hindu, Native
American, and several I never identified. I believe it would have been
overbearing and childish to say such prayers offended me - and tyrannical to
prevent their harmless expression of faith.

As for your example, it is a foregone conclusion that there are bigots of every
belief: religious, atheistic, political, even in preference of one brand of vehicle
over another. When we become so offended by another’s non-threatening
practice of their Right to speak for their beliefs, we have violated the spirit of
our Constitution, we show a great personal weakness, and we attempt to force
others to comply with *our* beliefs (or non-beliefs).

I am adequately secure that someone else’s prayers or comments which do not
limit or disparage my beliefs can not offend me.

And that, sir, is my “ethical scheme”.



------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
 
Nancy Siebern, I'm with you on this. Thanks. Jerry

------------------
Ecclesiastes 12:13  ¶Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14  For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.
 
To answer a specific question above the girl in question was ignorant in her comments about a muslim prayer. Simple as that. She was wrong.

That does not, however, render moot the fundamental issue which is the federal government has NO place in 'establishing' or 'prohibiting' any of this. This was one student, making one prayer at one event. It is entirely likely that another student, at another time will exhort the teams with something completely non-religious or secular. Even this is banned as a result because of the 'possibility' it could be abused. Farcical.

I have been at a public event, (local Community College commencement) where the the valedictorian openly prayed to a particular goddess. Now, alot of folks weren't too happy about but she had the mike and she was free to exress herself, pray, as she wished. The event was opened by a chaplain's prayer. Two diametrically opposed viewpoints openly alive at the same event. Religious freedom. And if a Muslim, Shinto, Buddist et. al prayer were offered I wouldn't have minded. It would certainly have elongated the cerememony! but I wouldn't have minded. I say this as a born again christian. Religious liberty means liberty for all. And while the initial prayer at the Texas school may have been christian prayer, a subsequent prayer offered by another student may have been of another religion or a non-religious exortation from an atheist. And that would be freedom. But we'll never know, will we? Because, apparently, the people cannot be trusted.

Yes, the Supreme Court has protected us from ourselves for some of the very reasons Dennis has so eloquently laid out.

Respectfully, Chris..
 
Personally, I am a Christian (Mormon to be exact). I have shown respect while people of other religions have prayed and will always do so. I see nothing wrong with a Muslim or Jew praying in public and I do not see anything wrong with a Christian praying in public either. One of the things about the Military that I appreciate is that before any ceremony, we still have a prayer and invoke the blessings of God. Publicly and unashamedly, even proudly. As a Christian, I don't care who prays. If an Atheist wanted his turn for a moment of silence, I'd respect that, too. The great majority of Americans are Christians and a minority are other religions, but regardless of who is praying, I think the issue is one of showing respect. If you don't believe in a God (whether he be referred to as Heavenly Father, Allah, or Jehovah) then you can at least be respectful of something millions of others hold sacred.

Anyone against public prayer who cites the constitution has never read it. The constitution itself states "...shall make no law respecting an ESTABLISHMENT of religion..." If my understanding of the English language is right, it only has to do with establishing a religion, nothing more. Further you read "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." It sounds to me that the Government is sticking its' nose in where it doesn't belong. It's none of the Federal Government's business. It is a local issue. Take it up with your school board or local officials if you can't show some degree of respect and appreciate another's faith.

Regards,
Chuck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top