Religion
Forums › General Discussion › Religion-
Angel of Blades wrote:
DaGod abandoned us a long time ago.
-
My religious take - If it rises from the dead then it must be a zombie and should be handled appropriately... Multiple shotgun blasts
-
HydroChaz wrote:
your lord, keep it in the church!! Dumb game!!!!!!!!!!!!!Jesus is Lord and that's all that matters
-
j punchclock wrote:
0Here's one:
How many times did Jesus mention abortion or homosexuality in the bible? -
Angel of Blades wrote:
How many times is abortion or homosexuality mentioned in the constitution?j punchclock wrote:
0Here's one:
How many times did Jesus mention abortion or homosexuality in the bible? -
Brown Note👊🔨💀 wrote:
0 as well, I know.Angel of Blades wrote:
How many times is abortion or homosexuality mentioned in the constitution?j punchclock wrote:
0Here's one:
How many times did Jesus mention abortion or homosexuality in the bible? -
Angel of Blades wrote:
Yet it still applies, doesn't it?Brown Note👊🔨💀 wrote:
0 as well, I know.Angel of Blades wrote:
How many times is abortion or homosexuality mentioned in the constitution?j punchclock wrote:
0Here's one:
How many times did Jesus mention abortion or homosexuality in the bible? -
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...
Read it. It is simple and unambiguous. It it the first enumerated right of the people. Why is it first? What were they trying to do? To think that in any way it is to exclude religion, or deminish it is simply ridiculous. It was partially important that the federal government not supersede or interfere with the various official state religions that existed at the time.
-
This clause of the first amendment, like the remainder of the bill of rights, specifies what rights of the people or states may not be infringed upon by the federal government. It was only later that these protections applied to the states... Actually it was just recently completed with the second amendment this year.
-
The constitution defines the federal government as of the states. It has all the moral authority over the states as NATO has over the U.S.
It is not the religious right vs. The atheist left. It is constitutional federal republicans vs. the monolithic government democrats. Guess what? There never existed a monolithic, mobocracy controlled government in the UNITED STATES. And let's all hope that it doesn't happen to thier plans, because wherever it is tried, it fails.
-
Brown Note👊🔨💀 wrote:
Point about this as well - since so many immigrants to the colonies fled religious prosecution (leading to many differ practices in the colonies) and since the war for independence was against a monarchy whose power was based partially on the medieval concept of "Divine Right" it makes total sense that freedom of (and from) religion would be a major part of the Constitution.Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...
Read it. It is simple and unambiguous. It it the first enumerated right of the people. Why is it first? What were they trying to do? To think that in any way it is to exclude religion, or deminish it is simply ridiculous. It was partially important that the federal government not supersede or interfere with the various official state religions that existed at the time.
-
But I would not use the term, "state religion" because the Constitution clearly is against the concept of a state religion because it was seen as a path to tyranny.
-
Brown Note👊🔨💀 wrote:
This was true in 1790 but it certainly isn't the case today. Foreign policy, federal land management, interstate trade enforcement, national police and agency creation/enforcement as well as funding a standing army are just a few things that have brought the Fed to supremacy... Not to mention a little event called The Civil War. Believe me, I'm all about states rights (let them do what they want and folks can move to another state if they disapprove or have a negative effect on quality of life to individuals). Unfortunately, there isn't a strong states rights movement and the left and right only parrot the issue when it serves their own agendas.The constitution defines the federal government as of the states. It has all the moral authority over the states as NATO has over the U.S.
-
whitey bulger wrote:
Actually, I mean state religion as in "Massachusetts retained an official state religion until 1833." until 1868, the federal constitution did not forbid official state religion, nor even state mandates to be a member of it. Not that states wanted that, but the federal constitution certainly did not apply.But I would not use the term, "state religion" because the Constitution clearly is against the concept of a state religion because it was seen as a path to tyranny.
-
1868? I thought the required toen congregation system in Massachusetts was abolished in the early 1800s. Also, I don't equate congregationalist as an organized religion (and I'm sure many of them wouldn't either LOL!).
-
whitey bulger wrote: This was true in 1790 but it certainly isn't the case today. Foreign policy, federal land management, interstate trade enforcement, national police and agency creation/enforcement as well as funding a standing army are just a few things that have brought the Fed to supremacy... Not to mention a little event called The Civil War. Believe me, I'm all about states rights (let them do what they want and folks can move to another state if they disapprove or have a negative effect on quality of life to individuals). Unfortunately, there isn't a strong states rights movement and the left and right only parrot the issue when it serves their own agendas.
Agreed. But you know us conservatives... Change is fine. Too much change isn't. A conservative has a very different idea of what amounts to "too much" change. Most of us think that line was crossed 100 years ago, and we want to put it back! 😄😄😄 -
Toen = town :)
-
whitey bulger wrote:
Yes, the self-abolished state religion in 1833 when the adopted a new state constitution. But the federal constitution did not require it. The point is: what was the intent of the 1st amendment? Partially to protect a state's right to have an official religion. The intent no longer applies, yet we haven't repealed it. We have changed it's meaning without going through the proper process. That's bad. Damn politicians...1868? I thought the required toen congregation system in Massachusetts was abolished in the early 1800s. Also, I don't equate congregationalist as an organized religion (and I'm sure many of them wouldn't either LOL!).
-
Well, the djinni is way out of the bottle and whoever is at the (elected) reigns of the Fed gets their 3 wishes be it Conservatives or Liberals. The wishes usually entail expansion of the Fed over the lives of all but a privileged few.
-
whitey bulger wrote:
But it's for your own good! Don't you know that the federal government knows best? I bet more than half of the people in this game think of the federal government as "THE government." THE government is in charge of the states and people. This is what breeds big government: The assumption that they are in charge, and are our keepers.Well, the djinni is way out of the bottle and whoever is at the (elected) reigns of the Fed gets their 3 wishes be it Conservatives or Liberals. The wishes usually entail expansion of the Fed over the lives of all but a privileged few.
-
Scroobius Pip wrote:
Ha! Just thought it was an insightful statement comming from someone that is obviously anti-Christian.Arboc wrote:
If Dan Brown says it, it must be true;)Science and religion are not at odds. Science is simply too young to understand. -Dan Brown (Angels & Demons)
-
HydroChaz wrote:
Jesus is Lord and that's all that matters
-
Turf🐑Warrior wrote:
👍👍👍👍 go TWChristianity is based on faith. You either believe or you don't. I'm not going to convince you on a turf wars forum that He exists and you're not going to convince me that he doesn't exist. That's why this thread is pointless and doesn't need to be on the forums. Nick has already stated to leave the religion debates off the forums
-
p s i wrote:
dude...people are allowed to believe what they want. You can even consider a mill jug as a god. Your still allowed to.I've long ago stopped trying to use logic on religious folks. There is seriously no point. Many years ago I use to use the very same example you just sited. The religious folks would simply state 'yes' or 'no' without giving it any thought. They would answer 'yes of course he can. He can do anything'. They would do this without realizing how ludicrous (really botched that word whitey) they are. I've read 50+ times in the past few days (since quitting tw I've gone back to reading political blogs 24/7) the religous right state the 'indentions' of the founding fathers. Shannon Angle actually said that seperation of church and state is not constitutional!
-
Turf🐑Warrior wrote:
Woooh Tuna Flake. Read what I posted? My only intention is to make the reasonable people in this game aware that tea party members are dressing up like George Washington and having him proclaim 'his' religious faith. If u r not offended by that, u must b a christian. If something offends the compliment of any particular creed or part of society, then the statement must b offensive.I know that Jesus Christ died for my sins. I know that he was raised on the third day. I know that when I die on this earth I'm going to heaven. If you don't like people making posts saying "If you're not a Christian you're going to he'll" on a thread (which I agree is inappropriate) then making threads saying that christianity is a farce is equally offensive to us Christians. Both are inappropriate for a turf wars forum IMO
-
Brown Note👊🔨💀 wrote:
the only way to understand the intents of the statement is by studying the life of the writer. You are a fucking idiot if you read Thomas Jefferson as a whole and come to the conclusion that he didn't mean that 'religion and politics don't mix'.Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...
Read it. It is simple and unambiguous. It it the first enumerated right of the people. Why is it first? What were they trying to do? To think that in any way it is to exclude religion, or deminish it is simply ridiculous. It was partially important that the federal government not supersede or interfere with the various official state religions that existed at the time.
How many prayers did he lead while in the white house??
Answer the question or shush.
-
Turf🐑Warrior wrote:
that is part of your problem. This isn't a religous debate. It's a discussion about the intents of our founding fathers.Christianity is based on faith. You either believe or you don't. I'm not going to convince you on a turf wars forum that He exists and you're not going to convince me that he doesn't exist. That's why this thread is pointless and doesn't need to be on the forums. Nick has already stated to leave the religion debates off the forums
-
I'm religious and a member of the left. It's not that I don't care, I just have some values that I care about more than others
-
I'm a Christian. I rep the father, son and holy spirit. This thread won't change my views. Keep your opinions to yourself psi. We got about 5 other threads on this same thing. Dead it already.
-
First off to whoever it was that tried to use the argument about God creating a rock that he couldn't lift....it merely shows how little u know.... I have watched plenty of debates between leading atheists and Christians (representing a general deist side) and none even bother to bring up this topic. Perhaps u are smarter then them? Or perhaps it is a simple word game, I will let u figure it out.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC