Moderator: Nicole Marie
Just thought of a way that vending machine owners don't have to retool. Provide a relatively small machine that will convert the new dollar into quarters.
analog wrote:I took separation to mean respectful coexistence, not one trying to dominate (or eradicate) the other.
[rant]Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or [prohibiting] the free exercise thereof. ....
.......It seems like proclaiming trust in something you can't even define is not a good thing.[/rant]
''Probably,'' Story also wrote, ''at the time of the adoption of the constitution and of the amendment to it, now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.'' 8 The object, then, of the religion clauses in this view was not to prevent general governmental encouragement of religion, of Christianity, but to prevent religious persecution and to prevent a national establishment. 9
This interpretation has long since been abandoned by the Court, beginning, at least, with Everson v. Board of Education, 10 in which the Court, without dissent on this point, declared that the Establishment Clause forbids not only practices that ''aid one religion'' or ''prefer one religion over another,'' but as well those that ''aid all religions.'' Recently, in reliance on published scholarly research and original sources, Court dissenters have recurred to the argument that what the religion clauses, principally the Establishment Clause, prevent is ''preferential'' governmental promotion of some religions, allowing general governmental promotion of all religion in general. 11 The Court has not responded, though Justice Souter in a major concurring opinion did undertake to rebut the argument and to restate the Everson position. 12
analog wrote:But I think individuals who are above religion ought to show consideration for those children of lesser gods who are not. It doesn't hurt to respect somebody's need for a brief school prayer first thing in the morning.
analog wrote:TheAA'ers handle it nicely with their phrase "God as you understand Him". It allows any definition from simple authority figure to Einstein's complex Mother Nature view, or beyond.
analog wrote:The explosive growth of twelve step programs tells me nihilism is failing an awful lot of people. Old time religion survives because it works better than nothing. And there's improved varieties around.
analog wrote:There's more to life than laws and science.
Especially when you feel personally let down by both.
Doesn't hurt for government to remind itself of that. After all, "they" is us.
analog wrote:Founders realized it too, but we've since moved away.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/cons ... /01.html#3
There is some threshold beyond which I too would bristle. I was raised with a brief morning school prayer hence am accustomed to it. Perhaps we have different trip points. I could not handle being diected to kneel on a rug five times a day, and would vigorously protest...I have a problem with someone telling someone else when, where, and how to pray, particularly when that someone else is not a volunteer.
So perhaps that's what should be printed on the currency?
I recognize the fact that many people need crutches to get around the confusion that comes from being an evolved animal in a civilized environment. That doesn't mean everyone should have the government preaching at them on every piece of legal tender.
I'm not sure where such a limitation crept into my concerns. I've been let down by religion, so I don't find it a useful element in my existence. So perhaps the government (us) shoud keep in mind that belief does not necessarily lead to anything useful.
Of course, the term "Christianity" isn't even universally agreed on as to its meaning. And it, along with many other concepts, have evolved with time.
jamiebk wrote:Oh great, but not necessarily superior, being who dwells beyond this plane of existence and who is accessible only through prayer, meditation or crystals, we salute you without thereby acknowledging that you are entitled to greater respect than that accorded any other endangered species
analog wrote:Well, Barfle - your logic is as always, impeccable.
There is some threshold beyond which I too would bristle. I was raised with a brief morning school prayer hence am accustomed to it. Perhaps we have different trip points. I could not handle being diected to kneel on a rug five times a day, and would vigorously protest...
I'd be a lot happier if instead that became the generally accepted concept of "a higher power" and the rigor of fundamentalism were relaxed so it quit turning people off altogether.
There are people who can get through life with just their internal moral compass, is that what we call "autonomous"? They are the lucky ones.
I was aiming at the thought of keeping government humble. Admission that a higher power might exist is a first step toward humility. A simple statement by government on their currency affirms intent.
Again, I see nothing wrong with government putting out a small signpost "spiritual help that-a-way", even though there's no one size fits all.
I too felt let down by a hardcore fire & brimstone type. My personal higher power is Mother Nature. I find it takes constant effort to keep my narcissistic side at bay, and it still leaks out sometimes. Unaided, my internal compass was inadequate.
Human thought is evolving. The pendulum will continue to swing.
Thank you for taking me to task. It helps me form my thoughts.
But we discovered that cooperation with our fellow tribesmen affords advantages to all of us, far exceeding the immediate gratification we get from taking whatever we feel the desire for. In a nutshell, that's morality and sin and why they exist.
The thing is that the "higher power" is not demonstrated. And is therefore not trustworthy, particularly by those who write and enforce the laws I live under.
The Congress, by Public Law 100-307, has called on our citizens to reaffirm annually our dependence on Almighty God by recognizing a "National Day of Prayer."
Now, Therefore, I, William J. Clinton, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 2, 1996, as a National Day of Prayer. I encourage every citizen of this great Nation to pray, each in his or her own manner, seeking strength from God to face the challenges of today, requesting guidance for the uncertainties of tomorrow, and giving thanks for the rich blessings that our Nation has enjoyed throughout our history. "Do not pray for easy lives," said John F. Kennedy in 1963, "Pray to be stronger . . . ." May it be so with each of us.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this second day of April, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and ninety-six, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twentieth.
William J. Clinton
[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 11:10 a.m., April 3, 1996]
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]