Conservative VS Liberal

[ariscus99 1]

BJ and CM, you talk about the separation of church and state, and thats great, it's needed, however in the context of the constitution and bill of rights, "state" is referred to as the US in it's entirety, and each individual state, believe it or not, until 1947 was allowed to have it's own official religion, and many did. This is still a topic that supreme court views regularly and still has not made a definitive decision on, tho currently individual state supported religion are not allowed, states can have official religions, they just cannot be ran nor funded by the state.

[LeighaMason 19]

When I speak of the Constitution I speak of it in its entirety including amendments (and supreme court interpretations of those amendments). Separation of church and state is a descriptive term for the first amendment Establishment clause. (If you say "first amendment Establishment clause" most people don't know what you are talking about) Its like calling a cotton tipped swab a tip, it just makes naming of the thing easier.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, non-religion over religion, or religion over non-religion.

Can you please point out in the following letter where Jefferson said the "wall" was one directional?

January 1, 1802

Gentlemen,

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist Association, give me the highest satisfaction. My duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State. [italics added] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.

Thomas Jefferson

President of the United States

( letter copy and pasted from Wikipedia)

As far as your "we were founded as a christian nation" theory goes...

In 1797, the United States Senate ratified a treaty with Tripoli that stated in Article 11:

... the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; ...

[35]

Supporters of the separation of church and state believe this article confirms that the government of the United States was specifically intended to be religiously neutral, and that Article VI, clause 2 of the United States Constitution renders it "the supreme Law of the Land".

(Copy and paste from Wikipedia)

[katklaws 0]

Conservative ideology is usually fraught with inaccuracies. Love this. No, we're not a Xtian nation. Our founding fathers were not angels descending from the sky. They had mistresses, smoked weed and grew hemp.

In 1797, the United States Senate ratified a treaty with Tripoli that stated in Article 11:

... the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; ...

[35]

Supporters of the separation of church and state believe this article confirms that the government of the United States was specifically intended to be religiously neutral, and that Article VI, clause 2 of the United States Constitution renders it "the supreme Law of the Land".

(Copy and paste from Wikipedia)

[katklaws 0]

Yup, I saw that. VERY DISTURBING, because all text books are based on Texas textbooks because it's the largest consumer. God forbid we should all think like Texas and think that Columbus discovered America. We would have Chuck Norris running the show. (I would prefer Steven Segal myself, if we must have a movie icon).

Much like the neocons who are trying to rewrite the history of the bush administration to say that 9/11 didn't happen under his watch, the neocons in texas are rewriting history in the school's curriculum to eliminate all the great things the liberals and progressives did for this country, for working people and the middle class and instead stack the deck in favor of the conservative movement, the contract with america, phyllis schlafly, the heritage foundation, the moral majority, the NRA and the religious right. :wub:

They don't want the students to learn about unions, the ACLU, Brown v Board of Education, Roe v Wade, Moveon.org, Michael Moore, civil rights, worker's rights the women's movement, anti-discrimination laws, social security, medicare, etc..

[BJean 16]

I think that Awnold Schwartznegger trumps Chuck Norris or Steven Segal, even though he's a Republican. I think maybe he's a Democrat in Republican clothing. He's conservative, but not like Chuck Norris. Who, btw, I believe was originally from Oklahoma. But Oklahoma v. Texas, that's another ugly debate.

People like patty should be very afraid for Americans to embrace the idea that the U.S. is a Christian nation and that we include religious teachings in our public schools.

Do they have any idea how many Islamic folks have been migrating to the U.S. as a result of our war in Iraq? One day, they might have enough clout to cause their religion to be taught in public schools not only in their homeland, but also here in the good old U.S. of A. Not too far fetched when you consider the militant posture many religious fanatics from that part of the world embrace.

When you argue for a cause, it is incumbent upon you to understand the potential change and the result of that change, to its' logical end.

Many people who go along with the argument of the U.S. being a theocracy are ignorant of the potential for creating something they would be totally against. They are often intimidated by the promise of hell, fire and damnation if they do not support the arguments of the extremist right wingers, who as we all know, insert fear, bigotry and satan in nearly all their arguments. They know that guilt and fear is the foundation of religion because they have had it heaped on them in abundance by their ministers and priests on a weekly, sometimes daily, basis.

[BJean 16]

This is the first I've heard of Texas having the biggest influence over the content of historical textbooks.

And teaching creationism and Christianity in the public schools here in Texas, if true, is an extremely good argument for me and my family to move as far from it as we can.

The religious right are totally against teaching children about sex education, something that is biologically imperative for every person to know. They say that they are against it because they believe that it is the parents' job to do that. Nevermind that those very parents do not seem to have a solid sexual education themselves which would ensure that their children are as well educated on the topic as they need to be. The bad repercutions from no sex ed, or poor sex ed is felt throughout our society.

On the other hand, they believe that the Christian religion should be taught in schools, including the theory of creationism. It makes absolutely no sense. One is actually the biological and anatomical functioning of the human body. The other is a faith in the Bible and God, which is a personal belief that changes from household to household and does not impact society if it is withheld from a child's education.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

I know there are some states, like California, where they use the same textbooks throughout the state. Maybe Texas is like that. There are only a few textbook publishers left so they salivate at getting a state wide contract.

Fortunately, my state is not like this. When I was a teacher, when it was time to purchase new books, the publishers would come and peddle their wares and the teachers would vote on their choice and of course the school board would have to approve it.

[pattygreen 5]

I don't see why the problem. Noone ever had a problem with it from the time this country began up until only the past 40 -50 years.

[BJean 16]

It is really scary to think that white knuckle conservatives can re-write history via control of the textbooks our schools use.

Maybe they'll use Carl Rove's book as a reference point when they write the school books, eh?

[BJean 16]

What are you talking about, patty? They've had trouble writing facts since the beginning of writing.

And if they've had trouble with it during the past 40 to 50 years, isn't that a reason for concern?

Edited March 16, 2010 by BJean

[pattygreen 5]

{bjean quoite}People like patty should be very afraid for Americans to embrace the idea that the U.S. is a Christian nation and that we include religious teachings in our public schools.

I did say that this is a Christian Nation because it was and is , but I never said we should include religious teachings in our public schools. I feel that we should not have to remove what was there since the beginning. Christianity and its teachings are this countries heritage and roots. If you don't like our history and heritage, then you should live elsewhere. It's what this country was founded upon, and I am proud of it! I'm not saying that we should have bible study in school or anything like that. But we should not remove God from the public arena anywhere. To take Christmas out of all the textbooks is crazy. This country has been celebrating the birth of Christ since it was formed. Why should the minority who live here have their agenda catered to? When the muslim, buddhist, etc. person came to America, a Christian nation, they knew full well that

we were rooted in Christianity here. They should be content to have their freedom to worship whom they choose. They should not try to remove the God that this country was founded upon, namely Jesus Christ, from the public eye.

[pattygreen 5]

teaching creationism and Christianity in the public schools here in Texas, if true, is an extremely good argument for me and my family to move as far from it as we can.

Many people are taught evolution in the public school. This is just a theory. It's not a proven fact, any scientist will tell you it's just a guess. If THAT can be taught, then why not creation. Many feel that it is a guess as well. Why not give the children an oportunity to decide which guess is right. What I don't like is when they teach evolution as fact. I have no problem with a teacher telling her students the "theory" of evolution, so long as she points out that it's just that. A theory.

[pattygreen 5]

The religious right are totally against teaching children about sex education, something that is biologically imperative for every person to know. They say that they are against it because they believe that it is the parents' job to do that.

I have always been one to believe that teachers should teach academics and nothing more, but since they don't, I put my foot down at sex ed. That is a parents job because there are soooo many differing view points on that subject, and a teacher has no clue as to what the parents desire to be taught and what they don't.

Nevermind that those very parents do not seem to have a solid sexual education themselves which would ensure that their children are as well educated on the topic as they need to be.

Who says? You? Give us parents a little credit, huh? Before the days of sex ed, back when standards of morality were upheld a little more than they are now, parents were teaching their daughters to stay away from boys till they were married. For the most part, they listened. Back in the 30's and 40's and 50's, there were far, far, far fewer premarital pregnancies.

The bad repercutions from no sex ed, or poor sex ed is felt throughout our society.

These 'repercussions' wouldn't be there if parents would tell their kids the importance of abstiance until marriage, and why God set it up that way in the first place. Maybe if that were taught in schools, there would be less repercussions.

[BJean 16]

If YOU don't like the fact that this is not a theocratic nation, then YOU should live elsewhere, she muttered.

The science behind the theory of evolution is compelling. The science behind the theory of creationism is non-existent. The schools teach science, not things that require faith to explain.

That's the trouble with you right wingers, you think that if people don't agree with you that they should go live someplace else. This is my country, land of the free and the brave. Not land of the Baptists or Disciples of Christ or Catholics or (fill in the blank) other denomination. It is the home of all people, religious nor non-religious, and we are guaranteed that we will not enact laws that require the worship of any God or Budda or Allah or Thor or Zeus. If you make this a Christian nation, you've gone against all the things that make this country great.

I have no problem with you worshipping your religion or even trying to win people over to your religion or belief system. But I do have a problem with you telling me that this is a Christian nation because that presumes that Christianity is the law of the land. No religion rules this land.

[btrieger 21]

I don't see why the problem. Noone ever had a problem with it from the time this country began up until only the past 40 -50 years.

The same can be and was said about segregation a few decades ago.

People grow up and realize the errors of their ways and try to fix them.