This is more than a little scary

[rerstad]

It's one thing to believe that business should win over the environment or that the war in Iraq was necessary to stop some then-believed weapons program.

[Mameotron]

I only read the first article you posted because everything Bill Moyers says is so jaded and leftist that it is not even possible to try and see his point of view.

Everything he says about the "Left Behind" series and the Bible is simply not true.

[fredster]

rerstad,

I read the articles. It's nothing new, and these are pre-election rethoric articles written by people with an agenda.

Sure there are ultra religious people. (I'm not) and sure, they believe that with all their heart. But that doesn't mean it drives the policy of the US to war.  There were lots of reasons for the war, and if I remember correctly, they were all sounded out by about every politician that holds office on the news during the time, every night on every channel and in every newspaper.

These 2 articles are just some way to diminish and minimize the policymakers and a government they don't agree with.  It makes them feel better to catagorize the other side as zealots and crackpots.

Bill Moyers and the publication the second article come from, salon.com and tompayne are all from the same perspective. These sob's must be crazy and here's why. 

Bill is retired now.  Salon and tompayne are out for the fringe to read. Bush won.  We have work to do.  We have to come together and finish the job at hand.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Sure there are ultra religious people. (I'm not) and sure, they believe that with all their heart. But that doesn't mean it drives the policy of the US to war.

Bush thinks God chose him to be president. That doesn't prove it drives his policy on iraq, but it sure doesn't help when it proves he's a nutjob.

To me, it also tells me exactly what he thinks of Democracy.


mrC

[shmokes]

You mean.....

...Jesus...........


......isn't coming soon?   

[fredster]

Nice closed logic MrC.

Explains it all in a tight little package. 

[DrewKaree]

You mean.....

...Jesus...........


......isn't coming soon?   

LMAO @ you!

That's jebus to YOU, mister!

And all the first ladies talked to dead people....I think I may run in the next election for local office on the "Magic 8 Ball" ticket.

[Dexter]

Bush thinks God chose him to be president.

Wow! God was rigging the election machines too?? I thought it was just diebold!

[Goz]

You mean.....

...Jesus...........


......isn't coming soon?   

No worries my son, I am right here   

[RayB]

Watch a documentary called "The World According to Bush". It contains lots of interviews with very intelligent, rational people (some of them who were high-ranking members of CIA and other parts of government under Bush until last year). And part of it covers the religious angle to the Bush administration.

Did you know the top administration often start their day with bible study at the whitehouse? How does that fit in with running the country?!

Imagine your employer and all his/her top executives having a bible study meeting every morning. How would that make you feel about how they run the company and how they makes some of their corporate decisions?

And I love this line: "...believe that environmental destruction is not only to be disregarded but actually welcomed -- even hastened -- as a sign of the coming apocalypse". It's the kind of thinking, like, I can call myself psychic, announce your death is imminent, and then I stab you. It's a little too easy to make something come true if you decide to make it so. Sheesh.

-------------------
PS: Is there a direct link to page 2?

[Stingray]

Jesus is coming. Everyone try to look busy.

-S

[ChadTower]

Did you know the top administration often start their day with bible study at the whitehouse? How does that fit in with running the country?!

Does it have to?  What if they watch a football game?  Does that fit in with running the country?  What if they wipe their ass from the back rather than the front?  Does that fit in with running the country?

[RayB]

Does it have to?

[Sephroth57]

Did you know the top administration often start their day with bible study at the whitehouse? How does that fit in with running the country?!

Does it have to?

[ChadTower]

It sure is a problem if they do it as part of how they decide their policies. Imagine deciding foreign policy on whether or not the Patriots make it to the superbowl! The Reagans consulted with psychics. Were you ok with that??

Have they told you that they make policy decisions based on their bible studies, or are you assuming that? 

I think foreign policy SHOULD be based on the Patriots.  They're PATRIOTS.  Besides, considering that I live within throwing distance of Gillette Stadium and in the same community as pretty much all of the Patriots players, you're asking the wrong guy that question.     Tom Brady for President!

When the Reagans were consulting psychics I was not only in elementary school but I lived in Canada.  I wouldn't have any problem with that anyway, seeing as how it's not the sole determinant in a decision. 

[shmokes]

Did you know the top administration often start their day with bible study at the whitehouse? How does that fit in with running the country?!

What if they wipe their ass from the back rather than the front?  Does that fit in with running the country?

Am I to take from this that you WOULD[/i] trust someone who starts in the back to run the country ?!!!!!!!!!   WTF?

[Mameotron]

Did you know the top administration often start their day with bible study at the whitehouse? How does that fit in with running the country?!

Imagine your employer and all his/her top executives having a bible study meeting every morning. How would that make you feel about how they run the company and how they makes some of their corporate decisions?

The US constitution specifically allows people religious freedom.

[shmokes]

Whadya mean?  We don't ignore religion.  We attack it.

[fredster]

Imagine your employer and all his/her top executives having a bible study meeting every morning. How would that make you feel about how they run the company and how they makes some of their corporate decisions?

My company does that. They hand out a nice bonus every year, they take care of people if they have problems, they donate to charities all over the community.  They are very very nice people. The company grows every year and hires more people and makes more money.

In the late '70's the union that was in their shop voted themselves out.  Our company pays as much as any other around, and people from the shop floor move to management. We have over 500 people now.  The founder of the company is a very nice man who bought the bank that refused him his first loan.  He made sure that I qualified for a loan to build my house.

So no, I don't mind, not one bit. I am not by any means a religious person, I've always been an atheist, but I don't mind people expressing themselves that way. It doesn't get in my way at all.  After all, they are as free to believe as I am to dis-believe.  That's what it's all about.

After all, We won't know if we are right until we are dead.

[Ravant]

Whadya mean?

[shmokes]

Holy mother of god, you are slaughtering your facts. 

The enormous 10 commandments sculpture was IN the courthouse, not in a church by the courthouse. 

Nobody wants churches to be required to marry gay people.  They want county clerk offices to issue marriage licenses to gay people.  They want gays to have the legal rights that go along with marriage such as custody and visitation, etc.  Nobody thinks that gays have an inherent right to be allowed into a Mormon temple.  WTF?

And, of course, the President is allowed to read the bible.  He just isn't allowed by the constitution to require it or have an official bible reading session at work.   He could, perhaps, have a "do what you want" time in which many people chose to read the bible, but he could still run afoul of the constitution if it was in reality just a thinly veiled bible study that created a hostile atmosphere for people who did not want to participate in the religion stuff.

[Ravant]

"The enormous 10 commandments sculpture was IN the courthouse, not in a church by the courthouse. "

I wasn't talking about the national issue. I'm referring to a local incident where a church, across Route 24 from the court complex in Riverhead, NY, was forced to take down their statue because a group of people decided the church placed it there to purposely influence the courts' judgements. It was a BS call though, because the church and the statue were there for about 30 years longer than the court complex.

"Nobody wants churches to be required to marry gay people.  They want county clerk offices to issue marriage licenses to gay people.  They want gays to have the legal rights that go along with marriage such as custody and visitation, etc.  Nobody thinks that gays have an inherent right to be allowed into a Mormon temple.  WTF?"

Actually... I was pulling the "forcing churches to marry" from another local leftist group that actually attempted to take a friend's pastor to court because he refused to perform the marriage. Instead of going elsewhere, and peacefully getting the legal rights via other means, they decided to attempt to have the pastor nailed for discrimination against homosexuals.

"And, of course, the President is allowed to read the bible.  He just isn't allowed by the constitution to require it or have an official bible reading session at work.   He could, perhaps, have a "do what you want" time in which many people chose to read the bible, but he could still run afoul of the constitution if it was in reality just a thinly veiled bible study that created a hostile atmosphere for people who did not want to participate in the religion stuff."
I agree with you on that. The moment he starts requiring bible studies, or otherwise forcing his religion into other people's lives is the moment he oversteps his bounds. He doesn't require them. They happen on everyone's own choice. This kind of goes along with the "moment of silence" in public schools. What is so bad about it that leftists have to fight it? I mean, granted, I haven't actively participated in any religion since Junior High School, and think they're all farsical, I still see no wrong with a moment of silence. Here's what digs at me the most. Back when I was in junior high school, I nearly got expelled for taking a day off to get my Confirmation. Now granted, it wasn't all that important to me, and I WAS using it as an excuse to get out of class that day, doesn't mean they have to threaten to expell me. My parents were the ones who wanted me to get my confirmation... so I did. I'm going to be penalized by the system for my religion? I mean, when my family spoke up and threatened to take it to court for religious discrimination, they shut up REAL quick about expelling me, but still. The fact that they even discussed trying annoys me.

[ChadTower]

He could, perhaps, have a "do what you want" time in which many people chose to read the bible, but he could still run afoul of the constitution if it was in reality just a thinly veiled bible study that created a hostile atmosphere for people who did not want to participate in the religion stuff.

A "do what you want" time?  What is this, second grade?  ALL work is a "do what you want" time, but if what you want isn't work, you get fired.

As for the Democrats attacking a President for reading the Bible, they are not attacking a President.  They are attacking a Republican.  If Clinton had been a Bible studier it would never have become an issue nor would anyone have ever heard about it.

[DrewKaree]

He could, perhaps, have a "do what you want" time in which many people chose to read the bible, but he could still run afoul of the constitution if it was in reality just a thinly veiled bible study that created a hostile atmosphere for people who did not want to participate in the religion stuff.

What if he called that "do what you want" time a different name, though?  What if he called it "Winter break" or "Spring break" instead? 

Those terms are used and some here have said those are "thinly veiled" religious celebrations.  Why don't they run afoul of the constitution?  Aren't those terms used to disguise a hostile atmosphere for people who don't want to participate in the religion stuff?

  

[mr.Curmudgeon]

What if he called that "do what you want" time a different name, though?  What if he called it "Winter break" or "Spring break" instead?

What I don't understand is why you need everyone else (including public institutions) to constantly validate your religion? As long as they aren't stopping you from practicing outside of their property, what's the problem? We live in a country with many different faiths, what makes you so comfortable with ignoring others?

Is it just a coincidence that "Winter Break" and/or "Spring Break" occur at time that allows you to celebrate the two largest Christian holidays? Has it stopped you from getting your kids Christmas presents now that it's called it "Winter Break?"

Would it make you happier to call them "Christians Are Better Than You Break" and "All Other Religions Worship a False God Break?"

My preference, just for the record, is "Get Off The Cross, We Need The Wood Break"....

[DrewKaree]

What I don't understand is why you need everyone else (including public institutions) to constantly validate your religion? As long as they aren't stopping you from practicing outside of their property, what's the problem? We live in a country with many different faiths, what makes you so comfortable with ignoring others?

Somewhere you read a post and mistook it for mine.  It's ok.  I can forgive you.  

Is it just a coincidence that "Winter Break" and/or "Spring Break" occur at time that allows you to celebrate the two largest Christian holidays? Has it stopped you from getting your kids Christmas presents now that it's called it "Winter Break?"

Would it make you happier to call them "Christians Are Better Than You Break" and "All Other Religions Worship a False God Break?"

My preference, just for the record, is "Get Off The Cross, We Need The Wood Break"....

I guess reading and comprehension of the points put forth is asking a bit much.  I'll come back after you've had a chance to read it, digest it, and put forth an intelligent response.  Oh, and to listen to everyone else re: religion, it's not celebrating a Christian holiday, it's celebrating a pagan holiday that the Christians adopted. 

For the record, you didn't really answer the question you quoted.  You simply made a tired attempt at sarcasm.  I understand the question kinda leaves you in a pickle.

I'm wondering how long it'll take Dexter to jump in to this discussion and speak of the low level of intelligence that requires "resorting" to sarcasm....oops....there's more of it.  Mebbe Dex locked the double-standard door.

Something tells me you fell off the wrong side of the bed this morning, C.  Clear those cobwebs from the ol' noggin and let us know when you've figured out what you're reading. 

[ChadTower]

I don't really have anything to say, but I think it's my turn, so I'll try to fit in with the pattern that has developed.

Religion, Bush, Christianity should not be tolerated by anyone, snotty remark snotty remark, snotty remark.

Winky face.

[shmokes]

Well...first of all, a "break" doesn't automatically have religious conotations.  A break that is deliberately scheduled to fall on a christian event does.  I get two fifteen minute breaks at work, for example, in addition to my lunch hour every day.  If I want to read the bible (and there is at least one lady here to does every day) during that break I can.  More than one employee can head over to the breakroom and do it together if they want.  But as soon as it becomes apparent that people in authority postitions at my work are expecting or encouraging the employees to read the bible (I work for the government remember) it becomes unconstitutional (even if they continue calling it just a "break", which is what I meant by a thinly veiled blah blah blah...

I didn't really think they would call it, "Do what you want" time, Chad.  Please, for the love of god, be more charitable with my arguments and respond something of substance in them.  My point is that reading the bible at work is not prohibited.  As soon as someone is punished for not participating it's unconstitutional.  It's also unconstitutional for G.W. to have official bible study groups, e.g., he's prohibited from doing things such as sending out a memo on Whitehouse letterhead to all the employees inviting them to the bible study.

As for the end, that's quite a revelation.  Democrats are acting like partisans  OMG!!!  Republicans never do that.  Gimme a break.  Anyway, you're only part right.  Many democrats in congress, though I wouldn't say most would attack the practice even if it were Clinton.  And you can bet your ass the ACLU would attack.

[fredster]

Exactly what article of the constitution prevents the state from having religious items in it?

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

I have gone over this document several times, I really don't see it.

Shmokes, being that you are so smart and all, can you find the exact passage that prevents people from having religion in school, church, or in public building?

I bet your momma is so proud of you doing so good in class and being so smart.

[Stingray]

As for the Democrats attacking a President for reading the Bible, they are not attacking a President.  They are attacking a Republican.  If Clinton had been a Bible studier it would never have become an issue nor would anyone have ever heard about it.

Obviously I'm not going to attempt to speak for the entire Democratic party here, only myself. I voted for Clinton twice. I would not have voted for him either time if he thumped the bible and claimed that god wanted him to be president in the manner that Bush does. I do indeed find that kind of behavior to be "more than a little scary".

-S

[ChadTower]

Maybe Bush meets with Terrell Owens.

[Dartful Dodger]

BUSH WON!!!

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Still doesn't make you any smarter... or your point any more salient.

[ChadTower]

Dude, seriously.  This time ALL you included was the insult to his intelligence.  What was that, the abridged version?

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Dude, seriously.  This time ALL you included was the insult to his intelligence.  What was that, the abridged version?

Intelligence?? wha?

[ChadTower]

Eh, just go back to your cowbell.   

[DrewKaree]

...snotty remark snotty remark, snotty remark.

Winky face.

*edit* this woulda been funnier if I got it right the first time 


OMG Chad, I can't believe you just directed that snotty remark at me!  How do you live with yourself after saying such things as that!

Winky face, Big Grin smiley

[jbox]

Dude, seriously.  This time ALL you included was the insult to his intelligence.  What was that, the abridged version?

Nah, he was counting on getting triple word score for using the word "salient".

[Ravant]

Exactly what article of the constitution prevents the state from having religious items in it?

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

I have gone over this document several times, I really don't see it.

Shmokes, being that you are so smart and all, can you find the exact passage that prevents people from having religion in school, church, or in public building?

I bet your momma is so proud of you doing so good in class and being so smart.

It's a separation of church and state issue. In order to further distance them from eachother, all religious items from any religion, are usually kept out of governmental buildings. It's an interpretation of the constitution. Just like people have many interpretations of poetry, from the bible, from anything literary, there will be interpretations of the constitution.

[ChadTower]

My religion uses the fire exit as the symbol of our devotion.  I want all fire exits removed from all government facilities.