03 Oct 05
OK, if I may change the topic a little. I distinctly remember John Roberts during his confirmation hearings telling senators that the rule of law and the constitution and not his faith would be his guiding factors in ruling from the Supreme Court. Today I was looking at the news and I saw Roberts leaving a Catholic church with Bush and somebody who looked like the Pope (though I know it wasn't) by his side. This service had a name which I do not recall but the theme was "asking God to direct his decisions."
03 Oct 05
1 edit
Originally posted by kirksey957Do you see any contradiction ? If you were to be appointed wouldn't you as a religious person ask God to "direct your decisions" ?
OK, if I may change the topic a little. I distinctly remember John Roberts during his confirmation hearings telling senators that the rule of law and the constitution and not his faith would be his guiding factors in ruling from the Supreme Court. Today I was looking at the news and I saw Roberts leaving a Catholic church with Bush and somebody who lo ...[text shortened]... rvice had a name which I do not recall but the theme was "asking God to direct his decisions."
03 Oct 05
Originally posted by Moldy CrowYour tax dollars are in a common pool of money mixed with
I don't believe you . Send a link showing me that their govt is trying to eliminate all religious schools .
KellyJ - Let me ask you this , if America was predominantly muslim , and you as a christian had christian children attending these schools how would you feel about your tax dollars going to support schools in which islam was fostered ? For examp ...[text shortened]... s ? That christians should have a greater voice and influence than the nonbelievers in society ?
mine, and I do not care if they are used to support a Jewish
school, a Muslim school, all of our atheistic/godless state
controlled public schools, or even Christian schools. If I lived
in a Muslim nation I do believe if I didn’t like the schools
there, I’d either teach at home, move, or send my kids to a
private school that I agreed with. I actually do think tolerance
is best, I may not agree with the Muslim faith, but I’m not
going to rail against their schools within this country if they
get some state support. I’m not going to be disgusted that
another’s faith that is foundational to them gets taught in a
school that get some support from the state, nor am I going to
be unhappy enough to sue someone if I or my kids my get
exposed to some one else’s faith.
I think Christians are just people like anyone else, if we are
equal what does it matter?
Kelly
03 Oct 05
Originally posted by kirksey957Here are two different things that could be meant by "asking for guidance":
Do you not see a contradiction? He made a public display of a position that contradicts a public display of religion.
1) Roberts wants God to direct his decisions such that his decisions cohere with Roman Catholic dogma.
2) Roberts wants God to direct his decisions such that his decisions result from doing his job as Chief Justice wisely and well.
While (1) may contradict Roberts' earlier assurances, (2) doesn't seem to result in any contradiction. Of course, (2) is a very sympathetic interpretation, and may not be borne out by future facts.
03 Oct 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeNo, but that is not the issue. No Justice is asked to give up their political or religious affiliations. They are asked not to be unduly influenced in their decisions by these affiliations. Whether this is a distinction that survives scrutiny is a tough question.
If a liberal would be appointed is he supposed to stop being a liberal ?
03 Oct 05
Originally posted by bbarrBbarr: " ... and may not be borne out by future facts"
Here are two different things that could be meant by "asking for guidance":
1) Roberts wants God to direct his decisions such that his decisions cohere with Roman Catholic dogma.
2) Roberts wants God to direct his decisions such that his decisions result from doing his job as Chief Justice wisely and well.
While (1) may contradict Roberts' earl ...[text shortened]... Of course, (2) is a very sympathetic interpretation, and may not be borne out by future facts.
I can see some very interesting discussions in the near and not so near future ......
03 Oct 05
2 edits
Originally posted by ivanhoeThis is nonsense ivan. I have attempted, in vain apparently, to point out to you the fallacy of your presentation/position. This was not an attack on "you" (the person). This was taking issue with your "behaviour" (presentation/position).
Omnislash: "It has nothing to do with the Jews in France, the Muslims in the Netherlands and Germany, and absolutely nothing to do with the general awareness of the users of this site about the situation in other countries."
I have to disagree. .... and please do not narrow the discussion into a discussion about me. Limiting the scope of the discussion ...[text shortened]... erstand what is happening you cannot approach this matter solely from an American point of view.
Your behaviour patter clearly shows a propensity to ignore the substance of my posts. An apparent affinity to consistently draw the discussion away from my points, manufacturing tenuous conjecture based on small portions of my statements.
As I have stated many times as of late in the spiritual forum, one can not make another person understand. Thusly, I shall take my own advice and abandon my endeavor to un-obfuscate your perception.
Vae Victus,
Omnislash
03 Oct 05
Originally posted by OmnislashOmnislash: " ...... There are more constructive ways to deal with such problems "
This is nonsense ivan. I have attempted, in vain apparently, to point out to you the fallacy of your presentation/position. This was not an attack on "you" (the person). This was taking issue with your "behaviour" (presentation/position).
Your behaviour patter clearly shows a propensity to ignore the substance of my posts. An apparent affinity to co ...[text shortened]... y own advice and abandon my endeavor to un-obfuscate your perception.
Vae Victus,
Omnislash
Ivanhoe: "Let's hear them."
It's a pity you will not be adressing the constructive ways you are talking about.
03 Oct 05
Originally posted by ivanhoe..........being that your response to my post about your ignoring the substance of my posts itself ignores the substance of that post....😕
Omnislash: " ...... There are more constructive ways to deal with such problems "
Ivanhoe: "Let's hear them."
It's a pity you will not be adressing the constructive ways you are talking about.
Feel free to PM me when you have attained the capacity for self evaluation. Untill then, I will save my proverbial breath.
Pax Vobiscum,
Omnislash