@ Undersea - exactly...
@ tater - I answered that challenge about God in the constitution already in this thread. Also - your saying that the Declaration of Independance has no legal force? Excuse me - it is THE document that founded this country - NOT the Constitution. The Constitution defines HOW the nation that was founded in the Declaration of Independance will operate. Nice try to twist it - but withou the DoI - the Constitution cannot exist - because the United States of America cannot exist.
Quote:
|
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth.
|
So even the signatories note in the document that the US of A was and had been in existence for 12 years - so the Constitution is not the founding document. SHEESH!
@ Sailor Steve - Ms. Dunbar can claim to be whatever faith she wants, and want whatever she wants to be taught. I made the point that the statement that was quoted say "under God" - which is accurate. I also stated had they said "under the Xtian God" they would be wrong. I don't see us as disagreeing on what they may or may not have meant - but what was stated - was accurate.
Also - Steve, I have great respect for you - but I posted the links directly to the material in question for debate - and you reply with a link from a week old newspaper source in the UK? I would think the actual material is better source data for discussion than what some newspaper across the pond thinks when its doubtful they have looked at it in depth. If we are going to debate whether changes are good or bad, religious or not, etc - then lets use the actual stuff being changed - instead of some overseas news article.....
I have not at all said that there is no "seperation of church and state" - what I have done is state that people take the term freedom of religion and have tried for decades to make it freedom from religion - freedom from having to allow others to practice it as they see fit, freedom from having others promote it as they wish provided it does not violate another persons rights, etc. I have not said that religion needs to be part of government - and in the cases of MOST of the laws Skybird posted - I think they are unconstitutional and should be abolished. No man can be constrained to worship outside the dictates of his conscience - I agree - but I also agree that no man should be constrained to NOT worship in ways he sees fit provided that no rights of another are trampled. And sorry - an elected representitive who wants to put the ten commandments in his office - or an elected judge wants them in his courtroom - well - vote em out if you don't like em - but if you stop them - your stopping them from worshipping as they see fit - and that violates the freedom of religion clause.