 |
It's there JOB, that's what they are supposed to do. Empowered by the people they represent, but some want that power deluted so they can legally do as they please with impunity.
The result is a stagnant economy, and more and more poor people, stuck in debt, and joblessness, and a rising child poverty rate.
Evidently the powers this administration takes in the name of the people is to impose the President's ideas of what he thinks a religion is ;but also his pseudo-Christianity ;on all the people even despite the clear unconstitutionality of his dictates.
What I see is a fair balance between the church, state, and the people that are affected. It's the republicans especially at a state level that's pushing the religious argument, and many of the local, and regional religious organization are fine with his accommodations.
Its just the right thinks we are so dumb not to recognize the end run around settled law that affirms the right of a woman to have a legal abortion. Its obvious and absurd, and the push back has been eye opening. But the right would rather we go back to the days of abortions done in a dark kitchen. They cannot recognize that the best ways to reduce abortions is with contraception, and NOT aspirin.
As crazy a notion as giving more loot to the robber corporations and rich guys to create jobs. That's why they have trillions and the number of poor grows everyday. Republicans have proved to be the party of RAPE, PILLAGE, and PLUNDER. None of which has a darn thing to do with religious freedom, the constitution, or freedom to practise. If the states statues have held up, the federal ones probably will too.
The state deciding what a "fair balance " is between the state's power and the free exercise clause is an unconstitutional role for the state to assume. Who is running the country ? King Henry VIII ?
The states are the ones whoo have the exemptions for religious institutions already, many stricter than what the president has proposed and its already passed constiutional muster, and so will the federal version.
Nothing has changed except the noise on the right, you know, the ones who always feel attacked and persecuted, and outraged by one thing or another. And for the last four years that's all we hear is how this Christian president isn't really a Christian. Now Santorium is railing against the liberal college snobs, while holding 3 freakin degrees himself! Unreal!
I mean it never ends with the right wing gloom, and doom and end of the world rhetoric. They are afraid of themselves I think.
I have not read the details of the constitutions of all 50 states . All I know is what is unconstitutional at the national level. It may well be that the people of some of the states have given the states that power. It is a fact that the people of the United States have not given that authority to the national government .
Speaking of churches, Santorum is being criticized for his comments on JFK's remarks on separation of church and state, "where the separation of church and state is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote..."
Apparently it's absolute for thee but not for me to the left these days. Obama has his "congregational captain program" to drum up votes for him.
I think it would be fun to organize a Caucasians for Santorum or Romney campaign and put our our own "congregation captains" to work. Whaddya think?Quote:
Congregation Captain Program
Congregation captains will take the lead on educating others about the importance of participating in this campaign and how to get involved. Working in your individual capacity, you’ll reach out to key community members and mobilize your personal networks with house parties and other outreach activities, as well as provide assistance in conducting voter registration drives.
Yea, that doesn't belong; Obama should delete that page.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Why don't you just hire the KKK, they are probably looking for something to do
Actually, the KKK is busy. They took their hoods off, and are running for public office. They caught one in Arizona, and recalled him. More to come.
Shucks foiled again!
The left never believed in the separation. Politics conducted from the pulpit in the 1960s was instrumental in the Civil Rights movement. Before that ,the abolition movement was originally a religious movement . As you recall there was a lot of discussion in the 2008 about liberation theology which breaches that wall . AND just last month ;the President went to the National Prayer Breakfast and used pseudo-Christian justifications for his domestic policies. There is only a selective 'Wall of Separation' .
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hi Tom,
Historically you can make exactly the same types of claims about the right.
Tut
That is because there is no such thing as a "wall of separation" . It's a term Jefferson used in a letter to a Baptist church that a black robed oligarch took out of context and applied it to a court decision . Now most Americans ,who have not studied the history think there is some line in the Constitution that establishes a separation .
For the record.. . The State can't establish a church ;and the state can't make laws that interfere with the free exercise of religion . THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS on the churches and there are no restrictions on politicians who wish to profess their faith. The reason the President's mandate is wrong ,and unconstitutional ,is because he forces the churches to act in a manner their faith says is immoral .
In fact, the most prominent KKK member I know of served in Congress as a Democrat for 57 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
It's really simple. You guys don't LIKE it simple, but it is. I've been saying it for quite some time... Tom, my right wing friend, you're absolutely right. The state cannot restrict a church. But, it can DEFINE a church. It does that when it grants them a tax exemption - or not... I know. I applied for one, and the government told me I WASN'T a church...
That same government has defined a hospital AS a hospital, and NOT a church. I promise you, the hospitals in question are NOT tax exempt like a church is.
excon
Yeah and those same hospitals have been taking care of sick people long before the government complicated it.
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Yeahhh... Hospitals do good work. But, they're NOT churches. Therefore, this is NOT 1st Amendment issue. It's a labor law issue.
Look. We cannot do EVERYTHING we'd like under the guise of freedom of religion... I PROMISE you, the government won't let me smoke pot no matter HOW many times I see God when I'm high.
Now, if you want to make the First Amendment ABSOLUTE, then we can talk business.
excon
Big difference between prohibitting activity and mandating activity .
So if the hospitals connected to a church body invited me to come in, treated me, then asked only for a donation which I could give or not, would that make them churches?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Mandating rules for businesses to follow is the governments job. Has nothing to do with the church, just when the church does business in the realm of the government regulation.
Sure they do good works, and when they charge for them, or pay workers for their services, then they have to follow the law, or not do it. Just like everyone else. They should have gone further and mandated child molesters be turned over to the law, but whose perfect?
But I guess churches are people too?
Hello tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
It's true.. The government tells us how to behave.. I don't like it either.
But, as an employer, I am prohibited by law from discriminating against women. It seems to me, that not covering women's health care, while covering men's is a violation of LOTS of laws, including the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment...
Plus, how can you support the government interfering with MY religious liberty by NOT allowing me to smoke MY sacrament?
excon
Ex ,I already stated that I would support that .It is no different than the exemption for peyote.
The answer to your original question is yes, according to... Michelle Obama.
But wait, her husband and his HHS Secretary ruled that only what happens within the confines of “the four walls of the church” is all Jesus should be concerning himself with, not getting out into the world and ministering to "the least, the last and the lost" - that's the government's job. Maybe they should talk more and get their message straight.Quote:
“It’s kind of like church,” Obama said. “Our faith journey isn’t just about showing up on Sunday for a good sermon and good music and a good meal. It’s about what we do Monday through Saturday as well, especially in those quiet moments, when the spotlight’s not on us, and we’re making those daily choices about how to live our lives.
“We see that in the life of Jesus Christ. Jesus didn’t limit his ministry to the four walls of the church,” she said. “He was out there fighting injustice and speaking truth to power every single day. He was out there spreading a message of grace and redemption to the least, the last, and the lost. And our charge is to find Him everywhere, every day by how we live our lives.”
I thought I am the government. It's my tax dollars at work doing some of that ministering to the "least among us."Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
No ,if you compel others to do what you define as their share of good works then you are not doing God's work .When Mary M poured expensive perfumes on Jesus' feet Judas was outraged and made a judgement on the social injustice of the waste of the expensive perfumes. Jesus did not take his bait . He told Judas what many would consider and inconsiderate ,and uncompassionate statement . He told him that there would always be poor people .
You see human definititions of injustice really don't cut it. I think as an example that the government allowing the systematic slaughter of babies by the 100s of thousand a year is NOT social justice.. Yet I find that progressive Christians who speak loudest about social justice rarely agree with me .
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Tom, human definitions of justice and injustice have to cut it-we have no choice in the matter.
We all know virtue has its own rewards. Following the moral law defines the character of the person, but when we apply the moral law to specific social situations we are forced to implement secular solutions.
Age old problem going back to the Ancient Greeks.
Tut
Yes ,however Jesus did not teach to society or to government . He taught to the individual .He gave individuals a blueprint for their own salvation.Quote:
Originally Posted by TUT317
You're not going to have us believe that you follow the teachings of Jesus are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I certainly don't follow your 'humans are god 'views.
I think the quote goes something like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Give unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and give unto God the things that are God's.
That would include taxes.
Yes ,taxes are a legitimate function of government. Being taxed by the government for charity does not make that person virtuous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
But, the government isn't a person- is it?
Hang on, Or do you mean the person paying the taxes is not acting in a virtuous manner?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Tut
Governments are given authority to establish laws that govern humans on earth. Jesus' message was for individual salvation .Being taxed to contribute to a top down redistribution doesn't encourage giving from the heart out of love. It replaces the savior with the government as the savior. We individually give charity and await the return of the savior ;where only then perfect justice will be restored.
But that's exactly what ALL taxes do.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
And ? Yes that is true and completely irrelevant .The issue is this notion that taxing authority at any level can be justified as a Christian act.
The President and the First Lady have both invoked it recently .Speechless linked to Michelle Obama's comments .
The President went to the National Prayer Breakfast and claimed he would raise taxes on the rich because rich should pay more not only because “I actually think that is going to make economic sense, but for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,”
So in his view ,forcing the rich to pay more is the Christian thing to do . He thinks it's a WWJD thing to compel charity. Well no where in the scriptures do I read Jesus forcing anyone to do anything. As much as the President thinks he is doing the Christian thing ;he is wrong.
No it isn't - you're just picking and choosing the taxes you don't like and finding some excuse for it. Which is basically the very definition of Cafeteria Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I don't think you fairly represent his views, nor do I agree that being forced to pay more taxes is accurate either. I think a good person in position of authority would govern for ALL the people and not just the few.
We sure don't want one church or another to govern people, but we don't want the people to be separated from the church of their choice. Charity comes as the spirit moves you, and is self defined, but governance comes from the collective consensus of all the people.
Taxes are but a vehicle to work for the collective good, and when circumstances change the taxes must change, and when things are good taxes should be lowered, but in times of crisis or need, they must go higher to meet the need.
It's the inflexibility that slows down the need to make proper adjustments that benefit us all. And its in times of need that the church plays its greatest role. The church can't govern, but it can administer good. The government can't minister, but they can govern equally to its people. It's the balances that are out of wack!
That's where the president sits as he weighs the needs of the few, against the needs of the many.
The social justice Christians aren't ? I'd say they are worse because they distort the scriptures. But primarily my stance on taxes comes from the Constitutional restraints ,and that to me is the indicator if a tax is valid. As for me being a cafeteria Christian... maybe I am... but not on this issue.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:25 AM. |