I'm just trying to figure out whatever happened to separation of church and state?

Grammar-Nazi Wrote:I'm just trying to figure out whatever happened to separation of church and state?

It's a made up phrase.

RebelKev Wrote:

Grammar-Nazi Wrote:I'm just trying to figure out whatever happened to separation of church and state?

It's a made up phrase.

Whatever that means. The phrase "wall of separation between church and state" predates the constitution by about 50 years and was clearly influential in drafting the "The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom" and the bill of rights. The phrase itself does not appear in the bill of rights, though.

Protestations that the founders did not intend separation of church and state are simply delusional.

Didn't your mommas tell you never to argue about religion? it cant be argued rationally because it isnt based on anything rational. that is exactly why religion should be in your private life and out of any meaningful political or governmental debate. i go to church every sunday, i do my daily office twice a day...long story short, im probably more religious than most......but i still dont want to have my nephews learning about Jesus in their public kindergarten class. we have sunday schools for that, and our family teaching them about morals and the word of God and his only begotten son. Furthermore, I love to talk about my faith with those around me, and I like to hear from others....but i dont like to hear my congressman talk about them on the floor of the house.....that isnt why he is there. he is there to ensure that our nation is safe, my property is protected from government and private instrusion, and to secure the blessings of liberty for his constituents. anything else, he can do on his own time. just my two cents.

I45owl Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:

Grammar-Nazi Wrote:I'm just trying to figure out whatever happened to separation of church and state?

It's a made up phrase.

Whatever that means. The phrase "wall of separation between church and state" predates the constitution by about 50 years and was clearly influential in drafting the "The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom" and the bill of rights. The phrase itself does not appear in the bill of rights, though.

Protestations that the founders did not intend separation of church and state are simply delusional.

Well, that depends upon what you mean by separation. T
hey OBVIOUSLY felt that we are a "Christian Nation". What they MEANT was that while men are driven by their beliefs system, which is CLEARLY derived from their religious beliefs (or lack thereof), they did not want a government driven by a SINGLE, or NATIONAL religion. The Church of England separated from the Catholic church because the King would not be subordinate to the Vatican. The King of England claimed divine authority, thus infallible. His word was law, and law changed with his whims. Our representatives wanted to avoid this dichotomy... that they were NOT infallible, but simply DRIVEN by their personal belief system.

There is a difference between having and expressing your belief system, and mandating that your system is the one and only, and punishing those who do not believe. The majority expressing its will does not, by its definition, supress the minority. It is the basis of our Government. You do not have to pray a Christian prayer, or pray at all... but the majority MAY do so if it sees fit.

GGniner Wrote:ok, how is Science(from the Scientific Method) possible if your worldview says that everything is here by pure chance and randomness, etc. If everything was always evovling why aren't the laws of Logic and Science not evolving? Christians have the presupposition that the world/universe is uniform and therefore science is possible. So it does not have the atheist problem for 2 reasons:

- God sovereignly controls the universe to make science possible.
- He commands us to think like Him which is logical.

And this is the pressupositions that Sir Francis Bacon had that guided him to his discovery of the Scientific Method....read Psalm 19
from which all real scientist are working from today.

Well, let's look at all the scientific acheivements that occurred before Christianity, much less the "discovery" of the scientific method. The discovery & mastery of fire, domestication of plants & animals, physics & astronomy, mathmatics & geometry, medicine & surgery, the invention of boats & navigation, structural & civil engineering, chemistry & materials science, and the list goes on. Pretty much everything we are studying now has roots that predate Christianity (or even Judaism) and all of these things depend on an orderly universe.

The reason most people, whatever their faith, believe that the universe is orderly is because it is and because we are intimately intertwined with it. Long before I could understand the concepts of gravity or god, I knew that if I threw a rock up in the air it would come back down. Why? Because everytime I did, it did.

Jewish would make more sense, there are jewish members of congress, there is one Islamic member, the first ever(Keith Ellison) and he's an absolute disgrace(9/11 Truther apparently).

This looks like a stunt by Reid to piss off Christians, because they've always had Christian prayer since the days of the founders.

If the wingnuts didn't have their heads so far up their rear ends and realize it's simply an opening prayer and not prostelitizing; those that profess to follow Jesus Christ wouldn't look like complete morons to the rest of society that is either non religiious or follows another faith.

Fanatical Wrote:Science does not claim that all things are random, in fact, says quite the opposite. These are called laws of nature. Planetary motion is not random; planets move due to gravity, and in precise ways. If everything was random then nothing could be repeated, which again, is a basis for scientific acceptance of theory.

The Scientific Method used today and all modern Science is based on did not come about until Sir Francis Bacon in the 1500's, it paved the way for everything that is real "science" that has been discovered in the last 500 years. And was not discovered for how ever long before you want to say Man existed, whether 10's of thousands or millions or billions of years...

the rest of your point is my point actually, the worldview that Bacon had that lead him to discover it. And how a worldview that thinks we came into existence by pure chance/randomness with everything constantly evolving. With that world view you would start with the laws of science also 'evolve' yet they do not, as Sir Francis Bacon knew.

http://www.sirbacon.org/farrington.htm

all modern atheist scientist are using a biblical worldview whether they realize it or not in their science.

jh Wrote:Well, let's look at all the scientific acheivements that occurred before Christianity, much less the "discovery" of the scientific method. The discovery & mastery of fire, domestication of plants & animals, physics & astronomy, mathmatics & geometry, medicine & surgery, the invention of boats & navigation, structural & civil engineering, chemistry & materials science, and the list goes on. Pretty much everything we are studying now has roots that predate Christianity (or even Judaism) and all of these things depend on an orderly universe.

The reason most people, whatever their faith, believe that the universe is orderly is because it is and because we are intimately intertwined with it. Long before I could understand the concepts of gravity or god, I knew that if I threw a rock up in the air it would come back down. Why? Because everytime I did, it did.

Science found discoveries but was never self-sustaining in ancient cultures. It was nothing compared to what came out of Europe and up until today after the reformation, i.e. Modern Science which has paved the way for the advanced lives we live today. What I'm getting into is the philosophical underpinnings of Science, paticularly modern Science and the worldview that created. It should be of no suprise that occassionally a discovery was made in ancient cultures, since they are humans, unique and special, and created in the image of the Triune God. Knowledge is not possible without that, so they naturally appeal to it.....anyway, here is a pretty good summation of the philosophical underpinnings of modern science as well as what went into ancient science which will save me alot of typing

http://www.meaningfulscience.com/files/C...cience.doc


http://www.meaningfulscience.com/philoso...ience.html

one of the major flaws of Atheism is it says everything is of Material or energy, they are 'materialist'. The Laws of Science and the Laws of Logic are both two examples of things that are not Material, rather immaterial and how we are able to accumulate Knowledge. Which by themselves debunk the materialist worldview.

Scientific laws and other ideas are not material? Then how did we find out about them? They must exist somewhere or we wouldn't be able to use or study them. Are you actually saying that knowledge comes into our brains from some non-material source?

Laws do not just poof into existence, we study the phenomenon and then devise these laws to explain how they are working.

Our coming back to using human reason, and observed reality to attempt to understand our world was not the result of Christianity. It was the result of finding and studing the scientists of ancient cultures and mimicing their methods. Most of their books were destroyed by their contemporary mystics and the religious political powers that came after; keeping our western society stagnant with censorship and persecution for over a millenium. Only after rebelling against religious control and superstition were we able to re discover the ideas of the atom, evolution, and the laws our universe is bound to.

Science does not work well with religions because of the basis of accepting theory is not who said it, but what was said. Simply because one man says something does not make it truth. Everything must be carefully scrutinized; this is why Plato wasn't a fan of his scientific counterparts, and tried to erase all their works.

GGniner Wrote:the rest of your point is my point actually, the worldview that Bacon had that lead him to discover it. And how a worldview that thinks we came into existence by pure chance/randomness with everything constantly evolving. With that world view you would start with the laws of science also 'evolve' yet they do not, as Sir Francis Bacon knew.

Let me explan something about the universe we live in. If we lived in a completely ordered universe, nothing would change and we would have no impetus to figure things out, and why something occurs. If we lived in an ever-changing universe then we would simply be unable to figure things out. As a result we live in an in-between universe, where random events do happen and things do change, but according to precise laws that can be understood.

blah Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:What the **** is a Hindu doing in there?

+1

There are no Hindu members of Congress. Why would you open with a Hindu prayer? I could see Islamic or Jewish, but this just seems like pandering for a disruption.

The Congress does not belong to Senators and representatives.

It belongs to the people.

There are millions of Hindu Americans that contribute positively to and love this country, and they have every much a right to have their invocation heard in their capital as you or I do.

Your comment is very naive.

OUGwave Wrote:The Congress does not belong to Senators and representatives.

It belongs to the people.

There are millions of Hindu Americans that contribute positively to and love this country, and they have every much a right to have their invocation heard in their capital as you or I do.

Your comment is very naive.

Now, keep in mind, I have no problem with the prayer itself, but the political posturing from a guy I think is a POS. However, the prayer in Congress isn't FOR the American people. It's for Congress. If you think we should have the state sponsor prayers on television, let us know.

blah Wrote:I am not against people of other faiths practicing their religion. I am against people stirring crap up for the sole purpose of getting people mad. Who was served by having a Hindu pray? That is the question I would like answered...

Hindu-Americans were served.

The Congress belongs to the people! NOT its members!

This is American Democracy 101, high school level stuff really.

Hindus have every right to give an ecumenical prayer in Their House as Christian or Jewish or Muslim Americans do.

What about Hindu Americans in the gallery? Watching on C-Span? What about the DOZENS of Hindu staffers that work on capitol hill EVERY F*ing day! There are Hindu Americans serving in this country's armed forces, potentially sacrificing their lives for it. These are THE PEOPLE'S proceedings, and Hindu Americans have A RIGHT to their turn in line for an ecumenical prayer.

To declare otherwise is asinine.

The people who were "stirring things up" were the radicals conducting their right to civil disobedience -- who traveled from across the country JUST for the purpose of getting thrown in jail and attracting media attention for their radical organization and its bigotry.

Blaming Hindu Americans for hatefulness spewed towards them in prayer is a new low, even for this board.

RebelKev Wrote:

OUGwave Wrote:The Congress does not belong to Senators and representatives.

It belongs to the people.

There are millions of Hindu Americans that contribute positively to and love this country, and they have every much a right to have their invocation heard in their capital as you or I do.

Your comment is very naive.

Now, keep in mind, I have no problem with the prayer itself, but the political posturing from a guy I think is a POS. However, the prayer in Congress isn't FOR the American people. It's for Congress. If you think we should have the state sponsor prayers on television, let us know.

Congress represents the American people. It quite literally belongs to them. It is their house. Thats why the gallery exists.

OUGwave Wrote:Congress represents the American people. It quite literally belongs to them. It is their house. Thats why the gallery exists.

I understand that it belongs to the people, OU. However, who in the hell actually knows what kind of prayer goes on in the halls of Congress unless they are actually there? Yes, the Capitol belongs to the people, however, I see the prayer as meant for Congress, not the people. It really is a non-issue for me as I don't give a damn what kind of prayer they have. I care about that fool Reid using it for political posturing. If it was something comparable coming from the right, you'd be incensed as well.

It is unfortunate that a simple prayer is being made political. Yet another reason that religion should not be made present in our government.

OUGwave Wrote:

blah Wrote:I am not against people of other faiths practicing their religion. I am against people stirring crap up for the sole purpose of getting people mad. Who was served by having a Hindu pray? That is the question I would like answered...

Hindu-Americans were served.

The Congress belongs to the people! NOT its members!

This is American Democracy 101, high school level stuff really.

Hindus have every right to give an ecumenical prayer in Their House as Christian or Jewish or Muslim Americans do.

What about Hindu Americans in the gallery? Watching on C-Span? What about the DOZENS of Hindu staffers that work on capitol hill EVERY F*ing day! There are Hindu Americans serving in this country's armed forces, potentially sacrificing their lives for it. These are THE PEOPLE'S proceedings, and Hindu Americans have A RIGHT to their turn in line for an ecumenical prayer.

To declare otherwise is asinine.

The people who were "stirring things up" were the radicals conducting their right to civil disobedience -- who traveled from across the country JUST for the purpose of getting thrown in jail and attracting media attention for their radical organization and its bigotry.

Blaming Hindu Americans for hatefulness spewed towards them in prayer is a new low, even for this board.

Settle down...

1. I never blamed the Hindu people who live in the U.S. They have every right to worship how ever they want. This issue has nothing to do with them. It has everything to do with the members of Congress, who serve the people.

2. I blamed Reid (who is not Hindu). Having an opening prayer of a religion that is not represented in Congress makes no sense. C-SPAN isn't a reality T.V. show. It is video of Congress in action. They should not be pandering to the audience. They should be doing their jobs.

3. The prayer is for the benefit of the members of Congress, not the people of the United States. Are you arguing that there should be a government prayer for its people? Yeah, I thought not. In which case it has to be a localized prayer, which again goes back to why you would have a prayer of a religion that isn't present in the population served (and not that population is not the entire U.S., it is the member of Congress only).

4. I already stated that I thought that the people who interrupted the prayer were even more disrespectful than what Reid did in setting the prayer up.

Here is an example of a House prayer...

Quote:Lord God of hosts, God of the nations: By your grace and in Your patience You have allowed this our land once again to celebrate its birth, its primal guest for liberty, justice, and equity. And we are grateful.

And once again by Your grace and in Your patience You have called this House-- responsible men and women who are equally faithful and unfaithful, righteous and unrighteous before You, each other, and the people-- You have called this House to the exercise of its solemn task of the legislation of law and the formation of the Nation.

Remind these Your servants that liberty, justice, and equity remain ahead of this Nation as tasks yet to be fulfilled and not as goals already reached.

Maintain before us a clear dedication to the needs of those in our midst who are on the outside because of age, ill health, race, sex, poverty, and urban or rural degredation.

And consecrate anew this Nation to the exercise of imaginative and sacrificial leadership in a restless and violent world which still struggles for authentic justice, peace, and a safe home in Your creation.

Accept now, O God, the labors of this day and the frail lives of Your servants in this House. To You be all honor and glory, world without end. Amen.

Can you honestly tell me that this is directed at anyone outside of the House? I don't think so.

Fanatical Wrote:It is unfortunate that a simple prayer is being made political. Yet another reason that religion should not be made present in our government.

Mission accomplished by Reid. This is exactly the type of response that he was looking for by having a Hindu pray.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:Scientific laws and other ideas are not material? Then how did we find out about them? They must exist somewhere or we wouldn't be able to use or study them. Are you actually saying that knowledge comes into our brains from some non-material source?

Laws do not just poof into existence, we study the phenomenon and then devise these laws to explain how they are working.

What I'm getting at is the Laws of Logic are Immaterial, Universal, and invariant. We appeal to them because we are created in the image of the Triune God. If they are not immaterial then answer these questions:

Logic is _________________________.
I think logic tastes like__________________.
I should be logical because______________________.



the Laws of Logic or Science for that matter, aren't anything you can see or touch, you just Know they exist. This gets into Epstimology a good bit if you go further("How are you able to Know"), if you take it further it gets pretty interesting and has always been a big Philosophical question...Empericism. If it wasn't for the laws of logic and science mankind wouldn't be able to accumulate Knowledge.