At War With Terror & The Devil?

[HARDCORE]

Apparently, the United States is at war with more than one enemy!?

The wars of old, with their well-defined foreign enemies, may just have become things of the past, at least for now? Today?s enemies slip into our midst, and often assault us from within, as was evident by the sabotage of World War II, as well as the attacks of September 11, 2001!

But apparently, there is another, far more stealthy and sinister enemy among us. A foe with the ability to move about unseen, anywhere that he wishes, to infect and injure, to decay and to destroy! He comes not with a rifle or a bomb, but rather with a corrupting ideology, and a hatred of all that made this nation great to begin with!

More and more these days, and purely loved by those who wish us harm and ill will, a scant minority, backed by judicial interpretation, is seeking to weaken us from within. To chomp away at our core, and to devour (like the coward), all that went into the matrix of our foundation.

This is not an attack of state against religious beliefs alone, as here in America, the separation of both has been well defined for many decades. It is rather an assault by the few against the many, using our own laws to befuddle and thereby attempt to overcome! And could this relentless onslaught turn us into either a Godless state, or an entity where, like in the Middle East, that state is under the despotic rule of a rigid, all controlling religion?

?Maybe that is the whole idea that is being put forth by those who totally lack religious tolerance, or who seek to disrupt the rights of others using subterfuge, spin, and the demand that there view be, not only paramount, but indeed the only view!?"

Let?s face it - everything these days that even mentions a ?Divine Being or an Almighty?, is being attacked by some individual, or group thereof, that finds offense in the very mention of God Himself! Hell, I even know of a couple that accepted money from a church, attended services occasionally, and in private conducted Satanic worship in their own home, while living a private life-style that would make even a Billy-goat puke! (But that?s another story for another day!)

Still, and all, the way that these people conduct their lives is of no concern to me, but when they demand, and government concurs, that my (or your) rights be restricted to a point where our personal beliefs are denigrated to the catacombs of government-sanctioned oblivion, then like Roger Williams of the old Rhode Island (Providence) Colony, I draw the line!!

Although I tolerate and accept every person?s right to worship (or not) as they please, I ?WILL NOT? tolerate that person destroying my rights in the process, and with the approval or sanction of government at that!

Case in point:

The removal of the ?Ten Commandments? from an Alabama Court House a time back, is now being followed by a banning of ?Nativity Scenes? from public places. And these Nativity Scenes have been part of our culture since before our (under-attack) ?Constitution? became the ?Law of the Land!?

There is nothing offensive, in my opinion, about displaying a manger and the figures of one?s belief in public! No more so in fact, than I find it objectionable seeing the ?Star of David? or even the symbols of other faiths so exhibited! In fact, it is a warmth and unity that I feel when I see these symbols in public, and a sense that we are indeed a great and tolerant society!

So what is next - will those who object to one symbol being displayed and not another, be satisfied with their judicial triumph over a particular religion. ?Or is this just the beginning?? For this is, in my opinion, just a giant step toward stripping religion altogether from our way of life, and it is working too!

With the ?Supreme Judicial? selectively outlawing portions of that which we were founded upon, they have taken a giant leap into a Godless existence, and those who fear not, or love not a God, fear not and love not anything! (opinion)

?Could it be that what we have gone to war to preserve, is now being stripped from us by our very own representation - By those sworn to protect the will of the majority!!?

I care not who, what, or what not, a person in our great nation opts to worship or respect, but that respect has to be carried forth and shared with all other religions and lawful ways of life!

I do not see Halloween being protested, even with its devils, ghouls and goblins!? Also, the same people who now seek to decimate the icons of one particular religion seem to find it acceptable to display others - is this not religious hypocrisy! ?And ignore it you dare not, for no perceived evil is ever content with but a single victory!?

?These are my opinions, what are yours!? I rest my case!!!?



VERITAS

[39mto39g]

This is just a nother case where religous things should not be on "PUBLIC" land or property. The local government in that city should have never let that candle holder be put on public property. Either that or they let ALL religons put there stuff on the land. What a mess that would be. Keep religon out of the government, Keep it in your house, your church, and your heart.

Ron

[phuloi]

It`s SPIRITUAL WARFARE,and by GOD,I know exactly what side I`m on!

[HARDCORE]

GENTS -

There is, in some cases, a fine line between "Church and State Separation!"

The whole idea, I think (?), was to prevent any powerful church establishment from controlling a nation's governmental processes, as is the case in places like the Middle East today, or the (so-called) Holy Wars of yore!

I do not, however, feel that a religious showing like the menorah, the manger, or any other recognized and majority accepted symbols (within reason), "SIDE BY SIDE", are a danger to "Liberty, the Constitution, or anyone else's delicate sensitivities!?

I do not advocate any particular stance on this issue, nor am I championing any particular religion over another - save for common sense! "But for a minority (any minority) to preach to the choir, has never set well with me!"

It bothers me not to see the symbols of various religions on display. And as a matter of fact again, I find them quite cheerful! As long, that is, as the views and beliefs behind those religions are not being forcefully shoved down my throat!

"In a word, TOLERANCE!"

We are a nation of (supposedly) tolerant people, one of our many splendid virtues. And I definitely do agree that if "ONE" religious symbol is accepted in "PUBLIC" places, so must all be acceptable, "within reason of course!"

Again, I think that the "Separation of Church and State" was wise and essential, but to carry this issue to an extreme, or but to allow but a few to dictate to the majority with the blessings (Oops), of an often vested power or ideology, is in itself, a slap to the face of the "Founders!"

"But then, these are just my opinions!"

VERITAS

[Andy]

I don?t think a lot of people spend much times reading history books, that includes lawyers and judges. At the time the Constitution was ratified some states had, State sponsored religions, Massachusetts and Virginia included. These states required that tax payers money be spent to support a specific religion, Congregational, Episcopal, Methodist. The separation of church and state meant if you were a Quaker you didn?t have to pay tax dollars to support another denomination. In one very enlightened state, Maryland, you could even practice being Jewish or Roman Catholic, you couldn?t vote or own land but you could practice your religion without fear of much persecution.

On the flip side if it could be proven that you were an atheist, your testimony would not be accepted in a court of law. If you were punched in the face, had your money stolen or your house burned, someone who believed in God had to testify for you. An atheist could not vote or run for office or sit on a jury. The constitution ?understood? that it?s people believed in the Bible, at least the Old Testament. (Muslims also believe in the Old Testament but I doubt there were any of them around in 1789.)

Now in all honesty there were no Nativity Scenes in New England back then, that was actually sort of a Roman Catholic thing. But for someone, even someone who signed the Constitution to say, ?You can?t use public lands for religious purposes.? Well, he probably would have been placed in a mental institution.

The constitution has been twisted, turned and misused as only the legal profession can do. And please remember all this new age separation of church and state has taken place in the last 50 years. After his retirement President Eisenhower was asked if he made any serious mistakes while president. Ike said yes, ?And they are both sitting on the Supreme Court!?

Stay healthy,
Andy

[Seascamp]

The concept of separation of Church and State has ranged far and wide from its beginnings and is more or less now being used as an ?in your face? expression for some social cause or another. And of course we out in the West have the totally radical 9th circuit that have forgotten about the interpretation of law and the over watch of due process in favor of some weird form of social engineering, political one upsmenship or activism for some uncommon and whacked-out cause. Maybe some call this social progress, but I just see it for what it is; ternary by the few at the expense of the many is about all it amounts to.

Scamp

[HARDCORE]

"WELL PUT GENTS!"

VERITAS