Freedom of religion?

[Drasken]

How many in the state of OK? If there are so many why are the ones living in OK not leading the way to get this done?

Because being openly non Christian, ESPECIALLY Satanist can be bad for one's health and financial well being. By asking for representation from their temple, they bring it to the attention of the Satanist community and don't risk being put in the newspapers personally, leading to harrassment, termination of employment, bodily harm etc.

 

[ballen0351]

Not disagreeing with you on the a-hole thing.
It's a moon fest. A-hole against A-hole. Someone ought to break out a belt and make them pull up their pants.

Not sure who your other ahole is in your post but 10 commandments are all over the place in many court houses this NY group has no reason to mess with OK I'm sure there are plenty of places in their own state to "take a stand".

 

[ballen0351]

Because being openly non Christian, ESPECIALLY Satanist can be bad for one's health and financial well being. By asking for representation from their temple, they bring it to the attention of the Satanist community and don't risk being put in the newspapers personally, leading to harrassment, termination of employment, bodily harm etc.

That's what happens when you live in a christian country. Try being a Christian in a non christian country. At least here your not jailed and murdered

 

[granfire]

Not sure who your other ahole is in your post but 10 commandments are all over the place in many court houses this NY group has no reason to mess with OK I'm sure there are plenty of places in their own state to "take a stand".

Like I said, the ten commandment issue has been pushed by what I consider A-holes who do not do it for it's historical value.

It's done to garner attention, defy whatever they call the 'authority' and it is especially tasteless when a sworn officer of the court does it.
Same thing, same type of player.

 

[ballen0351]

Like I said, the ten commandment issue has been pushed by what I consider A-holes who do not do it for it's historical value.

It's done to garner attention, defy whatever they call the 'authority' and it is especially tasteless when a sworn officer of the court does it.
Same thing, same type of player.

Well again no matter how much you try to deny it we take oaths before god. The president swears on a Bible you swear in a bible to testify in courts you pledge allegiance to a nation under God. Pretending its not true didn't make it not true.

 

[Drasken]

That's what happens when you live in a christian country. Try being a Christian in a non christian country. At least here your not jailed and murdered

Actually there have been cases of bodily harm and murder for being non Christian. Which is interesting since it is against preached Christian values to do so.
And there are cases of police harrassment against non Christians, and legal harrassment in general. It is not as bad as some countries,
n fact in some countries people are still accused of witchcraft and burned by angry mobs. But to say nothing happens here is ignorant.
And you are right, this is a predominently Christian country. So keep that in mind next time I call you guys on the bullcrap "Christian persecution" arguments.
All I'm saying is that is valid reason to work through your religious temple rather than stand up locally. You brought up the fact that the temple was out of state and I'm explaining their interest in the matter and their valid reasoning for their actions. It's not just being aholes and butting their heads in where it doesn't belong.

 

[ballen0351]

Actually there have been cases of bodily harm and murder for being non Christian. Which is interesting since it is against preached Christian values to do so.
All I'm saying is that is valid reason to work through your religious temple rather than stand up locally. You brought up the fact that the temple was out of state and I'm explaining their interest in the matter and their valid reasoning for their actions. It's not just being aholes and butting their heads in where it doesn't belong.

We then we will just agree to disagree they are in fact targeting a deeply Christian state that they have no interest in and are only trying to cause trouble like I said I hope OK tells them to pack sand. Or let them build it and I hope its torn down every night by vandals

 

[Drasken]

We then we will just agree to disagree they are in fact targeting a deeply Christian state that they have no interest in and are only trying to cause trouble like I said I hope OK tells them to pack sand. Or let them build it and have its torn down every night by vandals

Disagree all you want, they have as much interest in this as the Vatican does putting pressure on various issues in the world on behalf of Catholics. You can disagree all you want, but your opinion is wrong.

 

[ballen0351]

you can disagree all you want, but your opinion is wrong.

Lol ok

 

[granfire]

Well again no matter how much you try to deny it we take oaths before god. The president swears on a Bible you swear in a bible to testify in courts you pledge allegiance to a nation under God. Pretending its not true didn't make it not true.

and if the president were inclined to do so, he could swear on something else, like the constitution (yes, I know Irony when I see it), a religious book of a different religion, as in Quran, Thora. (that they would likelly not get elected is another matter, not to mention they all need to be struck down for committing perjury....but that is another matter.

The deal is that government provides a separation from church and state. And when the religious folk try to sneak their believes (usually of the radical kind) into public life, there have to be some checks and balances.

The premise of the display of the ten commandments is religious based.

 

[Drasken]

Lol ok

Sorry for sounding argumentative on this, but I fail to see how a religious organization representing their members in that state would be wrong or saying they have no right. While it is ok for Christian churches doing the same is ok. A little hypocritical there my friend.

 

[Carol]

and if the president were inclined to do so, he could swear on something else, like the constitution (yes, I know Irony when I see it), a religious book of a different religion, as in Quran, Thora. (that they would likelly not get elected is another matter, not to mention they all need to be struck down for committing perjury....but that is another matter.

The deal is that government provides a separation from church and state. And when the religious folk try to sneak their believes (usually of the radical kind) into public life, there have to be some checks and balances.

The premise of the display of the ten commandments is religious based.

And they can chose to not swear their oath but affirm it. Franklin Pierce affirmed his oath on a law book. Funny, for as much attention NH gets during the political silly season, he's been the only one so far to actually be from here.

 

[ballen0351]

and if the president were inclined to do so, he could swear on something else, like the constitution (yes, I know Irony when I see it), a religious book of a different religion, as in Quran, Thora. (that they would likelly not get elected is another matter, not to mention they all need to be struck down for committing perjury....but that is another matter.

The deal is that government provides a separation from church and state. And when the religious folk try to sneak their believes (usually of the radical kind) into public life, there have to be some checks and balances.

The premise of the display of the ten commandments is religious based.

He could swear in on anything else but he doesn't WHY because they have all been Christian and WHY because we are a Christian nation. Always have been. Frindge religions trying to impose their beliefs will be met with resistance.

 

[crushing]

That's what happens when you live in a christian country. Try being a Christian in a non christian country. At least here your not jailed and murdered

Sikhs have murdered. It's possible the murderer had mistaken them for Muslims.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/18/us/ramadan-violence/

Ah, the 'this is a Christan country' meme again. That is a frequent meme among evangelists. People may or may not swear on bibles to affirm something; some out of religious faith, others maybe out of a sense of tradition and ceremony including many president. Not unlike saying "bless you" when someone sneezes. The Pledge of Allegiance was changed fairly recently to include 'under God.' This was a response to the Red Scare and to inspire tribalism and a more of a willingness to accept and support wars mongering against all various incarnations of godless enemies. Curious traditions and ceremonies aren't proof of a theocracy.

Not all presidents have used the bible for their oath. Although none could get away with not swearing on the bible these days. Can you imagine how ape **** crazy some religious extremists would get if a president instead did something more reasonable and swore on a copy of The US Constitution as John Quincy Adams intended?

 

[ballen0351]

Sorry for sounding argumentative on this, but I fail to see how a religious organization representing their members in that state would be wrong or saying they have no right. While it is ok for Christian churches doing the same is ok. A little hypocritical there my friend.

It has to do with numbers. I could go out tomorrow and claim I started a new religion all to my self should I then get the same treatment as Catholics or Muslims or Jews that have 100s if millions of followers? There are hundred of thousands if not millions of small frindge religions out there some as small as one person. If yours doesn't even have enough people in that area to say they even want this monument then you have no say in that area to build it. At some point we need to draw a line. Which is why I said if they have the numbers on NY put it up there. If there is a large group of satanists in OK then they need to speak up Or should everyone that claims to be a religion no matter how small get to build whatever they want?

 

[ballen0351]

Sikhs have murdered. It's possible the murderer had mistaken them for Muslims.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/18/us/ramadan-violence/

Yes there are some crazy loons in the US. But the Govt isn't out hunting nonchristians down. Try speaking about the bible in other countries and see what happens.

Ah, the 'this is a Christan country' meme again. That is a frequent meme among evangelists. People may or may not swear on bibles to affirm something; some out of religious faith, others maybe out of a sense of tradition and ceremony including many president. Not unlike saying "bless you" when someone sneezes. The Pledge of Allegiance was changed fairly recently to include 'under God.' This was a response to the Red Scare and to inspire tribalism and a more of a willingness to accept and support wars mongering against all various incarnations of godless enemies. Curious traditions and ceremonies aren't proof of a theocracy.

So adding God isn't a proof of theocracy huh? Lol OK

Not all presidents have used the bible for their oath. Although none could get away with not swearing on the bible these days. Can you imagine how ape **** crazy some religious extremists would get if a president instead did something more reasonable and swore on a copy of The US Constitution as John Quincy Adams intended?

again the proof is out there. Speeches writings beliefs of the founders ect. God is mentioned 5 times in the declration of independance

 

[Tgace]

This John Quincy Adams???

July 4, 1821 "The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.

Although to be honest, that quote is a summation and not a direct quote of JQA.

http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/David-Barton-Retracts-11-Unconfirmed-Quotes-by-NewtonStein.html

This quote has had wide circulation for decades and can be traced back to an 1860 work by John Wingate Thornton, The Pulpit of the American Revolution, which reprinted a number of sermons preached during the Revolution. In the overview of that work, Thornton explained:The church polity [form of government] of New England begat like principles in the state. The pew and the pulpit had been educated to self-government. They were accustomed “TO CONSIDER.” The highest glory of the American Revolution, said John Quincy Adams, was this: it connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity. 33

Thornton, an attorney and historian, grew up during the lifetime of John Quincy Adams and held many interests in common with him. His above statement in connection with Adams is Thornton's summation of part of a lengthy speech delivered by John Quincy Adams during an 1837 Fourth of July celebration at Newburyport, Massachusetts (a speech which Thornton may well have heard in person, but which he certainly later read).

In that address, Adams observed that Christmas and the Fourth of July were the two most-celebrated holidays in America, and that both were interrelated.
As Adams began his speech, he queried:

"Why is it that, next to the birth day of the Saviour of the World, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [July 4th]? . . . Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birth-day of the Saviour?"

"That it forms a leading event in the progress of the gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the corner stone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity. . ? 34

Comparing Adams' original 1837 exact quotation with Thornton's 1860 summary of the quote, one immediately sees the similarities. Significantly, in his 1860 work, Thornton accurately related the essence of Adams' message and never presented that phrase as being an exact quotation from Adams;

nevertheless, those who used Thornton's work in subsequent generations and writings incorrectly cited Thornton's summary as if it were a direct quotation from John Quincy Adams. Therefore, the "unconfirmed" quote attributed to Adams can be replaced with his exact quotation given above from his 1837 speech.

 

[granfire]

He could swear in on anything else but he doesn't WHY because they have all been Christian and WHY because we are a Christian nation. Always have been. Frindge religions trying to impose their beliefs will be met with resistance.

I would hardly call Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc fringe religions.
The intend was while the majority of the founding fathers where of Christian tradition, they were also much more enlightened than the majority of people seem to be these days. They understood the implementations if one denomination should gain the upper hand in politics. The Colonial history is full of this strife.

 

[Drasken]

It has to do with numbers. I could go out tomorrow and claim I started a new religion all to my self should I then get the same treatment as Catholics or Muslims or Jews that have 100s if millions of followers? There are hundred of thousands if not millions of small frindge religions out there some as small as one person. If yours doesn't even have enough people in that area to say they even want this monument then you have no say in that area to build it. At some point we need to draw a line. Which is why I said if they have the numbers on NY put it up there. If there is a large group of satanists in OK then they need to speak up Or should everyone that claims to be a religion no matter how small get to build whatever they want?

Actually Satanism is rather large. They have hundreds of thousands of followers, and that is just the openly Satanist members of various Satanic Churches. They are also recognized as a valid religion by our government. Same as Wiccans, Asatru, and other various Pagan groups who are also rather sizable.
As for the size of the Christian church worldwide, yes it dwarfs the numbers of these "fringe religions" as you say. But any religion that has a history of conversion by force and murder throughout its early history would likely have those numbers.
Also note that these other religions are growing, and Christians have been fighting it in various ways. Not all of those ways legal or moral.
People today still believe in the Satanic sacrifice and ritual abuse scare from years back, even though EVIDENCE has shown it to be a well constructed lie. It didn't happen, there is no evidence to show it ever did and in fact evidence shows the "victims" were brainwashed and conditioned to beliieve that it happened to them when in fact it didn't. It was a scam.

So I think these people deserve a little understanding when it comes to not standing in the open waiting to get shot for a asking for fair religious and legal treatment and representation.

 

[crushing]

This John Quincy Adams???

Yes, as opposed to any of the other John Quincy Adams' that may have intended to swear on things other than the constitution.

Although to be honest, that quote is a summation and not a direct quote of JQA.

Thanks for the correction.