That noted Christian organization the Pennsylvania legislature wants to remind us that that we can look only to the Christian God and Christian Holy Scripture to provide us with what we need to deal with things. Of course this is being pushed by a member of the Republican faction. "Must never be forgotten." Somehow I doubt that there is much danger of that happening. Just more evidence of the deeply seated need of so many Christians to have Caesar endorsing and enforcing their religion. All by himself God is apparently too weak and ineffectual to take care of those who have chosen to believe in Him. He needs the force and validation of the government behind him. That's what's normally called theocracy. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/...al-assembly-names-2012-the-year-of-the-bible/
For God's sake, pun intended, are these idiots so blind that they cannot see what mixing religion and government has done to any number of countries around the world? But of course, THEY are the ones under attack by those non-Christians which is basically the rest of us. Can people really be this stupid and superstitious in this day and age? The more people like these try to turn this country into some kind of theocracy, the more anti-Christian I become. We had a name for them back in the 60's, we called them Jesus freaks and nobody paid any attention to them much less let them run for office.
IMO it's a manifestation of either.... a) massive insecurity regarding the way others view their religion, that they might not see it as the best and greatest ever b) a lack of faith which they hope to offset by getting validation from secular society c) a desire to remind those of other religions or no religion just whose country this really is d) a genuine desire to establish some sort of Christian theocracy
Or maybe they have a persecution complex because there are many people who are becoming more and more anti-Christian. Which begs the age old question...which came first, the Bigot or the Jesus Freak? As an aside, I wonder why Muhammad Freaks has never caught on?
Appeal to tradition. It's always been like this (in your opinion) therefore it should continue to be like this. Even you should know that that doesn't fly. The fact that something is, is of itself no justification for it continuing to be.
Sorry but clearly we aren't, no matter what the sentiments of that little 1950s addition to the Pledge.
What in the hell constitutes a Christian these days? Is it someone that says "I believe in God"? Is it "I go to church"? Is it Jimmy Swaggart? Is it Jim Baker? Is it the guy that molests little boys but belongs to the church? Is it the guy who's wife is in a nursing home so he has a girlfriend while still married to her? Is it the lady that calls herself a Christian but is more than happy to label all blacks as niggers? I personally know the last two examples and have met many more like them in my life. I could go on but why waste my time? The point here is that many that declare themselves Christians disgust me as human beings. It's easy for people like this to justify their behaviour though. Thump the Bible, declare yourself a sinner, quote some scripture but you worship God. You're a good Christian! Damn! I think I just described a politician! Sure, there are many truly good Christians out there. Ones that endevour to practice what they preach. A lot of folks are jumping on the "Christian nation" bandwagon. Think before you leap folks.
I'm not sure that the Constitution allows an elected governmental body the members of which are on the public payroll to resolve that the nation must look to one particular religion above all others for support and strength. But then we don't have a Constitution in force anymore so any discussion of religion in a Constitutional context is purely academic.
Here is a great story. Apparently, some Republican in Indiana wanted to teach creationism in schools. The Democrats amended the bill to include the teaching of all religions including Scientology. The law is going to be struck down anyway but go Democrats. These rabid bible thumpers should know that our government is not in the business if pushing their exclusive superstitions. On January 31, 2012, the Indiana Senate voted 28-22 in favor of Senate Bill 89. As originally submitted, SB 89 provided, "The governing body of a school corporation may require the teaching of various theories concerning the origin of life, including creation science, within the school corporation." On January 30, 2012, however, it was amended in the Senate to provide instead, "The governing body of a school corporation may offer instruction on various theories of the origin of life. The curriculum for the course must include theories from multiple religions, which may include, but is not limited to, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Scientology." The Senate spent less than twenty minutes considering the bill, with its sponsor Dennis Kruse (R-District 14) defending it. Kruse acknowledged that the bill would be constitutionally problematic but, he told the education blogger at the Indianapolis Star (January 31, 2012), "This is a different Supreme Court," adding, "This Supreme Court could rule differently." The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana's legal director Ken Falk was previously quoted in a story from the Associated Press (January 26, 2012) as saying that the bill is clearly unconstitutional and invites lawsuits: moreover, he added, "when lawmakers propose legislation they clearly know will end up in the courts, it wastes time and resources."
The idea of all religions receiving equal treatment under the law in this way stops the Fundiebots right in their tracks doesn't it. This is not their idea of freedom of religion at all. In their world religion equals Christianity end of story full stop and freedom of religion is Christianity and Christianity only (preferably their version) being promoted pushed recognized taught and genuflected to both socially and politically. No other paths may apply.
Is the concept of self-interest foreign to you two? Virtually every bill presented or piece of legislation passed comes from someone's beliefs or ideals, right? If the people don't want it, it gets voted down (unless unethical/illegal tactics are employed like the Obamacare fiasco).
