Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

There should be a "don't ask - don't tell" policy on religion.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 03:36 AM
Original message
There should be a "don't ask - don't tell" policy on religion.
Some things I don't know won't hurt me - this is one of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
progdonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 03:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. Article VI, US Constitution
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
__Inanna__ Donating Member (246 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 05:10 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. Maybe not
The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004 (which is under consideration promotes federalism and here is the scary part....

`Sec. 1260. Matters not reviewable
`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

Please note the implications of the last sentence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. that
is fucking scary

why are they seeking limit/eliminate rights we already have?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ogradda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 03:45 AM
Response to Original message
2. i'm not quite sure what you're saying here.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KT2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 03:45 AM
Response to Original message
3. Sounds good!
I wonder when someone tells me their religion what the point really is - what is it supposed to mean to me?

I have noticed that there is more religion is regular discourse on TV - lots of people blessing each other, mentioning God and their blessings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 03:49 AM
Response to Original message
4. Good idea. Unlike sexual orientation, some religious beliefs can be...
...downright offensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 03:51 AM
Response to Original message
5. Interesting
I don't have an issue with knowing a person's religion. I DO have a problem when that person tries to say my way of believing is flawed or wrong and then tries to make their beliefs the law!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
telamachus Donating Member (279 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
13. "tries to make their beliefs the law"
I agree %100 this is a big problem. If a person can't support legislation without religious beliefs then it should not be allowed.

Didn't we try to stamp out a theocracy in Afghanistan?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. So true!
Isn't it interesting that we try to "stamp out" religious fundamentalism in Muslims, but fundamentalism in Christianity is acceptable?! It is wrong for the Afghani government to tell their women how to dress, but it is OK for our government to tell a woman how to control her reproductive rights? It comes down to those who feel their religion is superior to others, and if you do not follow it, you will be left in its wake!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Thug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 04:33 AM
Response to Original message
6. I'll go along with that...
The minute someone tells me that they are a devout <insert religion of your choice here>, I become jaded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sukie1941 Donating Member (463 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 04:40 AM
Response to Original message
7. I totally agree--religion is destroying the US
Here is what we need to worry about. I wanted to post it as a new topic but haven't been on the forum long enough. This was a Yahoo! headline about an hour ago

This article about China on the way to being No. 1 is something I have been saying for the past two years. My ex-husband spends alot of time in China with his company. He says China is merrily surpassing the U.S. in alot of areas.

While Americans are screaming over abortion and gay marriage, which affect probably less than one percent of our population, we are working toward being a third world nation. I can't IMAGINE this! We are in big trouble, folks!

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/18/internat...artner=rssyahoo

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bad Words Donating Member (23 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 04:58 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. How about neutrality?
Gay marriage affects more than one percent... what percent of the nation is gay? I don't think the government should endorse one religion, but neither should they discourage it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
telamachus Donating Member (279 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Oh really?
you are offensive! go read the rules for posting on DU "no bigoted comments" You must be the type of democrat that beleives that the party would be better off without religious types around. Get a clue the democrattic party would be hard pressed to pull 10% of the votes if you got rid of all religious members.

Go find another scapegoat to whip!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sukie1941 Donating Member (463 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. Speaking of offensive
Just wait and see how things turn out in four years.

While the US is fighting over religion in government, we are going to become insignificant as a world power, because we are losing sight of the bigger picture(s).

I didn't say anything that should throw me off this forum.

If the moderators want to throw me off for agreeing with other posters that religion can be caustic WITHIN our government, then they can do so. There are other forums.

IMO, you are the one being intolerant. You read an awful lot into one subject line sentence.

I didn't say anything against religion. I believe that it can be the ruin of our nation. That is because the religious right is working hard and publicly (if you watch tv) to make sure we all live by their beliefs and rules. Look at what they are doing to the senator from PA (Specter), who is one of them and made a simple comment that it could be hard to confirm supreme court justices because of abortion beliefs. Abortion beliefs are mostly religiously inspired. So is gay marriage.

IMO this is why we have in our Constitution the separation of church and state and I will die to defend that. Whose religion is going to be the one that governs our nation? Yours or mine? It shouldn't even be a consideration, thanks to our Constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. Hi Sukie1941!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 06:47 AM
Response to Original message
10. Prosletizing should be limited
If I tell you to stop, you stop. Or you go to jail. Let's start with the Xian cable TV channels. Shouldn't these, like all pronography, be of limited circulation?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
telamachus Donating Member (279 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Ahh the democratic value of limiting free speech
now that is progressive!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. yes
christian proselytizing is as offensive to me as pornography is to a christian.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. I have a feeling
the porn industry might go belly up without xtians.

My bests friend's granddad is a pentacostal preacher, and he has a serious addiction to porn movies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sukie1941 Donating Member (463 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. My cousin in Queens
is a staunch Republican and anyone else who doesn't agree with everything he says is not even welcome in his house.

I saw for myself that he is a porn enthusiast. He pays money to get porn online. I asked him how that fits into his political beliefs and he says he sees no conflict.

My cousin also makes no apologies for having a passion for porn. In the room I was staying in on top of the dresser were photos of three young nude teens posing on a beach (aged 13-14). Cousin says that the pics were taken at a nudist colony so that makes the pictures non-porn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-04 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. there sure as hell
Edited on Thu Nov-18-04 05:20 PM by datasuspect
wouldn't be as much paedophilia
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC