29 Nov 04
Originally posted by StarValleyWy
I understood Joe perfectly. To him his religion is not a thing to try and hide. He is a christian. So he interchanged it with the broad concept of "Religion".
The truth is as true for christianity as for any religion.
Marxists just need control of all "religious institutions". They never discriminate between christians and buddhists. All were/ ...[text shortened]... e. You are just as entiteled to an opinion as any of the brain wiped knuckle heads on this site.
Thanks Mike ..... 😀
29 Nov 04
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou are welcome. Even if all I do is offer you the basic rights of freedom of speech that our world so loudly proclaims and silently suppresses.
Thanks Mike ..... 😀
You know what is weird, Joe?
I am so damned naive.
I used to come down hard on religion. Then I finally re-evaluated why I was doing it. Ok. I'm an atheist. I'm totally devoted to my scientific point of view. But why... as a true liberal, was I spouting hate against religion?
I was able to cast aside all my ideas and beliefs.
This is what having to "learn" human nature can do for you, instead of having been taught as a kid.
I discovered a prejudice. Not a pretty thing. I was against religion because it was an idea owned by the other tribe of chimps.
I am a superior chimp. I know what is true and what is not. So I fought you.
You remember? I think you do.
Well. Sorry. I now realize that I was just a parrot.
I still think I'm right about religion. But you have every right to be as religious as you want.
Anyway... You have contributed mightily to me becoming a bigger and (hopefully) better person.
Mike
30 Nov 04
Originally posted by StarValleyWySVW: "Anyway... You have contributed mightily to me becoming a bigger and (hopefully) better person."
You are welcome. Even if all I do is offer you the basic rights of freedom of speech that our world so loudly proclaims and silently suppresses.
You know what is weird, Joe?
I am so damned naive.
I used to come down hard on religion. Then I finally re-evaluated why I was doing it. Ok. I'm an atheist. I'm totally devoted to my scientific point ...[text shortened]... ... You have contributed mightily to me becoming a bigger and (hopefully) better person.
Mike
That's nice of you to say Mike ...... shall we go on a diet .... together ? ..... 😀
30 Nov 04
Originally posted by ivanhoeNo. The current constitution in Rome puts me off.
SVW: "Anyway... You have contributed mightily to me becoming a bigger and (hopefully) better person."
That's nice of you to say Mike ...... shall we go on a diet .... together ? ..... 😀
"diet" joke. Snark.
09 Jan 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeI've read the Declaration of Independence again, and I still cannot find any references to the Christian faith.
Should the Declaration of Independence be banned from schools because there is a reference in it to the Christian faith ?
What's your opinion on this issue ?
In the matter of the controversy that provoked this question, I suspect we need to get behind the headlines and learn more about what Williams did to provoke the principal. Here's an editorial to the local newspaper from a group of parents:
Teacher has a right, but
publicity got it wrong
Over seventy families from Stevens Creek Elementary School, Cupertino, have already agreed to this letter in support of the principal, Ms. Patricia Vidmar. This is in connection with a widely publicized lawsuit being brought against her and the Cupertino Union School District by the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, acting on behalf of Mr. Stephen Williams.
We fully respect the right of Mr. Williams, or any other teacher, to hold religious and/or political convictions. Teachers, however, bear a special responsibility to exercise discretion when expressing their views to students, particularly at elementary school level.
A number of complaints were raised by parents over a period of time, alleging proselytizing in the classroom. Whether these complaints were justified is now a matter for the courts to determine. But Ms. Vidmar had a responsibility to investigate such complaints, in order to protect the interests of the school, students, parents and staff, and not least those of Mr. Williams himself.
We would expect similar treatment for any teacher persistently alleged to be promoting their personal views, whether for example about Christianity, Islam, or atheism, or about the Republican or Democratic parties.
It is regrettable that Ms. Vidmar eventually felt compelled to vet lesson plans for the kind of material that Mr. Williams was liable use in a way to cause complaint. Knowing Ms. Vidmar to be a fair and reasonable person, we are certain that this is not an action she took lightly.
We respect the right of Mr. Williams to appeal to the courts in this matter. But we are dismayed at the way in which this local dispute has been whipped up into a national political circus. We find it astonishing to read frequent and false assertions that "the Declaration of Independence has been banned" from the school.
Mr. Williams is not the only devout Christian teacher at Stevens Creek, so reports that he has been singled out for scrutiny solely because of his Christianity seem implausible. And we certainly cannot condone the hate mail that Ms. Vidmar and other staff members have been receiving from all over the country.
The very public way in which the Alliance Defense Fund has pursued this case does nothing to serve the interests of the children, parents and staff of Stevens Creek School. We have every confidence that Ms. Vidmar will continue to represent these interests, and wish to thank her for her service in running such an excellent, open and tolerant school.
Richard Crouch
and 70-plus other
Stevens Creek Parents
09 Jan 05
Here's more news that casts doubts on the veracity of the statements made by Williams' attorney:
"The principal at Stevens Creek Elementary School in Cupertino simply became a little alarmed when Williams distributed a handout entitled “What Great Leaders Have Said About The Bible,” which quoted a handful of Republican presidents (all pro!) alongside Jesus himself. She became more alarmed still when he asked his class to read a chunk of St. Luke’s Gospel to help them understand the meaning of Easter. So, at the end of the last school year, she asked him to submit his lesson plans to her in advance to make sure his classes didn’t violate the separation of church and state.
When Williams edited down the Declaration of Independence to include only its references to a higher being, or when he reproduced chunks of George Washington’s prayer journal to the exclusion of the Father of the Nation’s more obviously political reflections, the principal drew the line and told him to take the discussion in a different direction."
http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=1466&IssueNum=80
09 Jan 05
Originally posted by no1marauderHe can't because the references are not there.
Don't take my word; I'm a lawyer for cripes sake!! Just go to: http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm and then maybe Ivanhoe will show us where the DOI makes "reference to the Christian faith".
Sometimes even a lawyer can get tell it straight.
11 Jan 05
Originally posted by TinorangatiratangaThe Declaration of Independence was a letter to King George III from a group of leaders in thirteen British colonies. They explain their reasons for separating from England and starting a process of forming a new nation. The letter lists the abuses of power they alleged against the King and his deputies.
I understand the Declaration of Independence was the founding document ofAmerica, could someone briefly explain the tenets to me thanks...interested 🙂
The document was written about a year into the armed conflict that, because it was ultimately successful, is now called the American Revolution.
Thomas Jefferson was the principle author, but a committee made some changes. The president of the assembled leaders--they called themselves the Continental Congress--was John Hancock. His signature is the first and largest at the bottom of the document.
The date of the letter was July 4, 1776. It's anniversary has become the most sacred patriotic holiday in the United States.
The Constitution, the basic foundation of the US government, was written more than a decade later. It contains no references to G-d.
11 Jan 05
"Laws of Nature and of Nature's God ", "endowed by their Creator" and "with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence," seem to refer to a higher power.
Reading the letter defending the principal, it seems that he could have been focusing on mainly those portions.
There is more to this story and it seems mainly that a teacher was trying to use source material to back his POV, even though he had been warned not to before.
12 Jan 05
2 edits
Originally posted by builderWarned not to before, what is that the thought police white washing
"Laws of Nature and of Nature's God ", "endowed by their Creator" and "with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence," seem to refer to a higher power.
Reading the letter defending the principal, it seems that he cou ...[text shortened]... l to back his POV, even though he had been warned not to before.
the history of the country to fit their PC views of the way they want
it now, by denying the past? Boy I hope they don't treat science the
same way they treat our founding documents, we would be in a
world of PC hurt if that ever happened! Oh wait....
🙄
Kelly
13 Jan 05
Originally posted by KellyJayWell I would have thought you could pretty much misrepresent the DOI by focusing on those few phrases to much and not paying attention to the rest of it.
Warned not to before, what is that the thought police white washing
the history of the country to fit their PC views of the way they want
it now, by denying the past? Boy I hope they don't treat science the
same way they treat our founding documents, we would be in a
world of PC hurt if that ever happened! Oh wait....
🙄
Kelly
Doesnt seem like the head banned it though.
13 Jan 05
Originally posted by builderwanna bet that that "history" lesson didnt include this quote..
Well I would have thought you could pretty much misrepresent the DOI by focusing on those few phrases to much and not paying attention to the rest of it.
Doesnt seem like the head banned it though.
"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
George Washington