Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
  1. #121
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Coffeh View Post
    What law is that? Should we adopt Sharia law? Obama seems far more interested in protecting the rights of Muslims than Christians. Also, I'm pretty sure a coin doesn't say 'In Creator we trust'. Look, I don't want to see us return to the ultra-religious ignorant times of a hundred years ago, but stepping on peoples' beliefs to appease a bunch of oversensitive crybabies isn't a good thing either.
    How is Obama more interested in protecting Muslims than Christians? Within the US, he seems perfectly fine with protecting both. Outside the US, he's blowing up Muslims en masse, though that's not because they're Muslim. Still, I think the whole idea that he seems more interested in protecting Muslims than Christians laughable given the circumstances. Besides, your who comment stinks of "I think the US government should favor my group over others."

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Coffeh View Post
    Look, this is a Christian country, founded on Christian principles. Most people have no idea what the separation of Church and State means. It means this: the government can't force you to worship any particular religion. That's it. It doesn't mean that the principles of Christianity aren't prevalent in our government and laws. Just look at a coin. But people have taken this 'separation of church and state' too far, where any symbol of any religion is immediately an offense to your sensibilities! Grow up. Looking at a monument of the Ten Commandments has no affect on you other than what you allow. Learn a bit of tolerance.
    Also, that's not what the separation of Church and State means. It means that "government entanglement" in religion should be avoided. Meaning the government shouldn't mess with religion, and religion shouldn't be considered in government. That's the whole reason churches are tax exempt. Also, the Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld Jefferson's idea of a "wall of separation between church and state" as being the authoritative interpretation of that segment of the First Amendment.
    Last edited by Reeve; 2013-10-23 at 04:35 PM.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  2. #122
    Quote Originally Posted by ragemv View Post
    No, the US was much more divided during the civil war, and while Britain was in power; but in recent time, yeah sure [corrected, hope you don't mind]
    Well it wasn't the United States as we know it today back then ... so I would argue that the *civilized* US never has been more divided.
    Then again according to the Pledge of Allegiance, we're indivisible

  3. #123

  4. #124
    Merely a Setback Adam Jensen's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sarif Industries, Detroit
    Posts
    29,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Coffeh View Post
    Look, this is a Christian country, founded on Christian principles. Most people have no idea what the separation of Church and State means. It means this: the government can't force you to worship any particular religion. That's it. It doesn't mean that the principles of Christianity aren't prevalent in our government and laws. Just look at a coin. But people have taken this 'separation of church and state' too far, where any symbol of any religion is immediately an offense to your sensibilities! Grow up. Looking at a monument of the Ten Commandments has no affect on you other than what you allow. Learn a bit of tolerance.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli

    As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries
    Sorry mate, we are not, and are not meant to be, a Christian nation. That's a treaty that has been ratified by Congress, affirming the US is NOT a Christian nation, and that was back in the days the original founders were still alive and kicking.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Twichy View Post
    Honestly.. where did you learn this?
    In a catholic high school actually.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Bonsaii View Post
    And a mosque near the site of the twin towers is offensive?
    No.

    But a mosque near a strip club? Damn, I don't need to be watching some girl take her tits out a block away from where some imam is preaching how I'm sinning.
    Putin khuliyo

  5. #125
    oooo yeah


    /10char

    Infracted for Minor Spam.
    Last edited by Nerph-; 2013-10-24 at 04:55 AM.

  6. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Jensen View Post
    Sorry mate, we are not, and are not meant to be, a Christian nation. That's a treaty that has been ratified by Congress, affirming the US is NOT a Christian nation, and that was back in the days the original founders were still alive and kicking.
    Got a reference other than a treaty that was being used to stop Muslims from attacking American ships due to their belief that they were killing Christians?

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Twichy View Post
    Got a reference other than a treaty that was being used to stop Muslims from attacking American ships due to their belief that they were killing Christians?
    Holy Hell - what kind of history book are you writing from!? (I can't say reading... because nobody is that stupid)

    Saying today that "Muslims are attacking American Ships in the past" is about as rediculous as saying in the 1980s that Russians were trying to take out Christopher Columbus!

  8. #128
    Quote Originally Posted by mvallas View Post
    Holy Hell - what kind of history book are you writing from!? (I can't say reading... because nobody is that stupid)

    Saying today that "Muslims are attacking American Ships in the past" is about as rediculous as saying in the 1980s that Russians were trying to take out Christopher Columbus!
    Not sure how to reply to that. umm.. click the link?

    He is referencing the Treaty of Tripoli signed in 1796 between the US and Tripoli to protect American ships from privateering.

    I understand that you have an issue with me for some reason, but you may want to follow the conversation before making an ass of yourself.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •