Dr. James Dobson: "We're Not Going To The Back of The Bus"

FoxNews

[f.Christian]

They persecute, kill, ostracize, condemn and bicker over snippets of sectarian dogma with each other... and they do it to the DEATH. Historically speaking.


193 posted on 08/28/2003 4:33 PM PDT by Robert_Paulson2

to the death ...

amazing !

[Ginosko]

"So having the government promote your religious beliefs is a right now?"

At the heart of this debate is the fact that the U.S. Constitution does NOT prohibit government from acknowledging God nor from acknowledging the role of Christianity in its founding documents. The stone monument in question is not in violation of the U.S. Constitution but those who ordered its removal are.

[f.Christian]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/972219/posts?q=1&&page=101

To: lugsoul

Jusge Moore is standing up for the rights of all. Religious freedom is for all.
Free speech is for all. The first amendment is for all. The ACLU is trying to
restrict our freedoms to only what they approve (atheism).



129 posted on 08/28/2003 3:18 PM PDT by Jim Robinson

(Conservative by nature... Republican by spirit... Patriot by heart... AND...
ANTI-Liberal by GOD!)

[Robert_Paulson2]

If we look back into history for the character of present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practised it on one another.

The first Protestants of the Church of England, blamed persecution in the Roman church, but practised it against the Puritans: these found it wrong in the Bishops, but fell into the same practice themselves both here and in New England.

[f.Christian]

The constitutional wall the founders did build was ...

to protect state and individual rights from a national govt - religion ---

that WALL has been breeched - demolished by liberals - EVOLUTIONIST !

"The real object of the [First] [A]mendment was not to countenance, much less to advance, Mahometanism, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity; but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects, and to prevent any ... national ecclesiastical establishment --- which should give to a hierarchy the exclusive patronage of the national government * * ."

"It thus cut off the means of religious persecution (the vice and pest of former ages), and of the subversion of the rights of conscience in matters of religion, which had been trampled upon almost from the days of the Apostles to the present age. . . ." (Footnotes omitted.)

Check out the link above !

Old wall constitutionalist ... keep govt out ---

new wall constitutionalist (( sharia )) --- keep God - truth - science out !

... * * ... guess who --- rag heads - liberals !

' trampled upon ' ... do you know what this means ?

[Ginosko]

Don, I note that many of your arguments are seemingly filled with speculation and unfounded assertions.

For example, you state "...just whether the judges (or even one of the judges) would treat them fairly even if their religion did not use Judge Moore's version of the Ten Commandments."

That statement is nothing more than unsubstantiated speculation. Can you cite even a single instance of anyone in any court anywhere in this country who ever felt disadvantaged because a judge embraced concepts espoused in the Ten Commandments? Of course you can not!

"Ten Commandments differ, in numbering and sequence, between Christians and Jews, between Catholics and Protestants, and even between various Protestant denominations"

All of these religious groups use the same documentary source for all Ten Commandments. Their sequence and enumeration is of little no consequence.

"So Judge Moore's monument differs from most of the religions that revere the Ten Commandments..."

Do you know of a single denomination that objects to Moore's listing? I certainly do not. Perhaps you would care to list the denominations that do.

[foreverfree]

bump

[F.J. Mitchell]

"It's that type of hyperbold that hurts your cause, not helps it."

You are saying that the truth is hurtful to the cause of Christianity?

[mysonsfuture]

I hope Dobson challenges President Bush in the primaries. Dobson would clearly take South Carolina.

[Ginosko]

"The whining, wailing, and crys of persecution over something as foolish as a monument in a courthouse is not only childish and decidedly liberal in its tenor, it is a betrayal of our faith.

Your remarks regarding the events in Montgomery reflect little understanding of the magnitude of the real issue underlying the concern of many thoughtful Americans over the latest federal court decision. I suspect your attitude would be far less cavalier were you to understand them.

[f.Christian]

The waterloo ...

The states pre existed the constitution ... it was written to put limits on the national govt --- not people - associations !

Rights -- freedom ... are state govts redundant --- servile ?

NOT the federal osama taliban ussc mullahs --- liberal atheist ragheads AYATOLLAS !

Main Entry: ser·vile
Pronunciation: 's&r-v&l, -"vIl
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin servilis, from servus slave
Date: 15th century
1 : of or befitting a slave or a menial position
2 : meanly or cravenly submissive : ABJECT
synonym see SUBSERVIENT
- ser·vile·ly /-v&(l)-lE, -"vIl-lE/ adverb
- ser·vile·ness /-v&l-n&s, -"vIl-/ noun
- ser·vil·i·ty /(")s&r-'vi-l&-tE/ noun

[madison10]

Yes, I do consider you do be at variance, but that's not to say that I'm never at variance with them. What is Sabbath, is it Sunday? Or what ever day you set aside as "holy?" Just believing in the Ten Commandments does not make one "prejudiced."

As Jesus said, the commandments are cut down to two statements---"Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself." (paraphrase mine) Hard to follow, huh?

[Denver Ditdat]

Near instantaneous and typically flinging charges of 'intolerant bigot' or somesuch, totally oblivious to the irony.

I think you misusderstood me, though upon rereading my post I can see that in my haste I definitely didn't make my thoughts very clear.

What I meant to say is that hate directed towards Christians isn't confined to evengelicals. I've noticed the same intolerance on any thread mentioning the Pope or the Catholic Church, and it typically surfaces while the thread is still in single digits.

[Tench_Coxe]

"In the early 60s, I believe that "the good doctor" Dobson was getting his M.D. degree at USC, raising his family, doing a residency in pediatrics, and teaching at Children's Hospital so that he could help cure kids from diseases and other ailments. What were you doing then to better the state of mankind?"

Since there wasn't an internet, Palpatine was probably writing crank letters to the local newspaper deriding 'the fundies'.

[Robert_Paulson2]

Listen pal
I didn't write that.

Benjamin Franklin did. So if you really think it's baloney... take it up with him... please.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Seems I am reading the rantings of a pompous self righteous ass, here. The south wasn't the only place where segregation was practiced. It wasn't until after WWII that the Military de-segregated. Many areas in northern cities are nearly 100% black, to this very day-Areas that once were called slums that were re-named ghettos.

At least in the south, the sign's said "white only" and everyone knew what to expect. Unlike the north, where the signs read, "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" but left off the final two words, "not White."

We in the south can't deny our past sins, but that doesn'd mean we have to sit in silence as we are condemned by hypocrites from northern states.

[atlaw]

I understand the issues perfectly. My attitude is not cavalier. Neither is the attitude of the seven conservative Alabama justices who ruled against Judge Moore.

The presumption that only people of "true" faith understand the issues, and that the only appropriate response to this bit of theatrical nonsense is to collapse in mawkish and feigned agony and to loudly proclaim persecution, is precisely the problem. This display of juvenile behavior over a golden calf is embarrassing and demeaning to our faith and destructive to our efforts to draw others to our faith. I think we should seriously examine the motives here, and we should seriously question the methodology being employed.

[f.Christian]

I didn't say anything ...

using civil authority for religious purposes - persecution ---

is the definition of the anti christ - tyranny !

see revelations chap 13 !

[Robert_Paulson2]

A one-sided wall would be a neat feat of engineering, but it is a bad image of the Founders’ intent.

One of Madison’s main arguments against a tax in support of all Christian religions in Virginia was that state support of religion endangered the state. He stated this idea in 1785 during the Virginia church/state controversy in his epic “Memorial and Remonstrance,***” which set forth the principles and reasons behind the wisdom of keeping state and church separate.

Madison wrote, “What influences in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instances have they been seen the guardians of the liberty of the people.”

"Only a two-way wall, one that both keeps government out of religion and religion out of government, can truly protect religion. If some religious groups are allowed to legislate religious morality or use taxes for church activities, then religious groups too small to influence the legislature will be forced either to live according to the dictates of another religion, and/or to pay money to support activities of other religions. "

"Either way, these minority religious groups will have lost freedoms."

As one constitutional scholar put it: “The wall of separation ensures the government’s freedom from religion and the individual’s freedom of religion. The second probably cannot flourish without the first.”

***James Madison, “Memorial and Remonstrance” (1785), reprinted in Edwin S. Gaustaud, Faith of Our Fathers (1987), appendix A.

[Robert_Paulson2]

EVOLUTIONIST

actually I am a creationist...