Moderator: Community Team
Hologram wrote:How was that at all relevant to anything? Does Congressman Forbes have nothing better to do than grandstand about useless theories? I mean it's not like there's laws to be signed or anything.
captain.crazy wrote:Hologram wrote:How was that at all relevant to anything? Does Congressman Forbes have nothing better to do than grandstand about useless theories? I mean it's not like there's laws to be signed or anything.
Oh... so when someone does or says something that offends you, you should just suck it up?
Hologram wrote:captain.crazy wrote:Hologram wrote:How was that at all relevant to anything? Does Congressman Forbes have nothing better to do than grandstand about useless theories? I mean it's not like there's laws to be signed or anything.
Oh... so when someone does or says something that offends you, you should just suck it up?
Yes. It's called not being a bitch and growing some goddamn thick skin. The House has more important things to do than listen to a man whine about whether the country is Judeo-Christian or not.
Hologram wrote:captain.crazy wrote:Hologram wrote:How was that at all relevant to anything? Does Congressman Forbes have nothing better to do than grandstand about useless theories? I mean it's not like there's laws to be signed or anything.
Oh... so when someone does or says something that offends you, you should just suck it up?
Yes. It's called not being a bitch and growing some goddamn thick skin. The House has more important things to do than listen to a man whine about whether the country is Judeo-Christian or not.
captain.crazy wrote:Hologram wrote:captain.crazy wrote:Hologram wrote:How was that at all relevant to anything? Does Congressman Forbes have nothing better to do than grandstand about useless theories? I mean it's not like there's laws to be signed or anything.
Oh... so when someone does or says something that offends you, you should just suck it up?
Yes. It's called not being a bitch and growing some goddamn thick skin. The House has more important things to do than listen to a man whine about whether the country is Judeo-Christian or not.
So you don't like the things that the Congressman said about his sore feelings regarding comments made by Obama, and yet, you think that he shut the f*ck up... I see a circle of hypocrisy here!
Hologram wrote:I didn't say that I didn't like them, I just know that I'm paying my Senators and Congressmen to legislate laws, not to say how butthurt they are about what someone said.
Now if he were trying to pass some bill into law that declared the US a Judeo-Christian state or some bullshit, then sure, why not. I don't agree with that thanks the the First Amendment, but let him fail. At least he'd be trying to do his job. All I saw on that clip was a Congressman wasting the House's time talking about an inconsequential statement when they could have been debating an actual bill.
Lord+Master wrote:don't you guys (ie americans) have something about separation of state and church written into your constitution?
Should someone point this out to your politicians
captain.crazy wrote:Lord+Master wrote:don't you guys (ie americans) have something about separation of state and church written into your constitution?
Should someone point this out to your politicians
It is a separation of church and state, not God and state. It simply says that the government cannot force its people to subscribe to a single church, like they used to do in England... or like the do today all over the middle east.
Lord+Master wrote:don't you guys (ie americans) have something about separation of state and church written into your constitution?
Should someone point this out to your politicians
Lord+Master wrote:captain.crazy wrote:Lord+Master wrote:don't you guys (ie americans) have something about separation of state and church written into your constitution?
Should someone point this out to your politicians
It is a separation of church and state, not God and state. It simply says that the government cannot force its people to subscribe to a single church, like they used to do in England... or like the do today all over the middle east.
I see, I thought it meant something like keep religion out of politics and vice versa, obviously nothing means what it first seems to!
captain.crazy wrote:But our government was founded on Jeudao-Christian values. Of that, there is no question.
Lord+Master wrote:don't you guys (ie americans) have something about separation of state and church written into your constitution?
Should someone point this out to your politicians
muy_thaiguy wrote:Lord+Master wrote:don't you guys (ie americans) have something about separation of state and church written into your constitution?
Should someone point this out to your politicians
Not quite like that. Mainly, it says that the Federal Government cannot set up a main church, like the Church of England over in Britain.
Frigidus wrote:captain.crazy wrote:But our government was founded on Jeudao-Christian values. Of that, there is no question.
We already know that...why do you have to point that out in congress? A high school U.S. History class can tell you that, why push forward a freaking bill to affirm something best affirmed in a textbook?
Edit: Also, what do you mean our government was founded on those values? Country, sure, but government? What foundational legislature links us to Christianity, exactly? The "our creator" bit aside, of course, as that is a quite neutral term.
thegreekdog wrote:Michigan seems the most problematic. I suppose we need to interview Serbia and Tripitaka to find out the details.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users