Subject:
|
Re: Mormon bashing again
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 18 Mar 2000 22:00:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
620 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
>
> Bill Farkas wrote:
> > I will state yet again, they currently are on the
> > wall of the Supreme Court and have no effect on what takes place there.
>
> I've not been there, so I can't say what the circumstances are. But if
> they're posted in a way that implies primacy, rather than as one of many
> examples of laws, that's wrong.
And my point is only this, don't read anything else into it: If this one
example of historic law had a major influence, where others didn't, I don't
think it's wrong. The constitution forbids legislating in favor of or against
any religion - my point is that posting them is not legislating them. I agree
that church organizations like the Southern Baptist Convention or the Vatican
should keep out of politics in the sense of directing or manipulating what and
how things get done. Yet if groups of religious citizens band together and try
to affect those same matters that is their right. I think the matter of posting
them in schools or anywhere else should be left to a consensus of those who
live in a particular community. As long as it is not federally legislated then
I don't see it as a violation of anything.
>
> > As I said above, I've never advocated that. I'm simply speaking to the
> > matter
> > of benignly putting them on public display as a tribute to their
> > contribution
> > to our way of life.
>
> Feel free to do so on your private property,
Excellent point. In the past (pre-Carter), schools belonged more to the
community and less to the federal gov't.
> but there's a reason for
> the separation of church and state being in the constitution.
>
> > There is no harm in that in a country of religious freedom,
> > and especially freedom of speech. Posting them does not impose any penalty
> > if they are not adhered to.
>
> So why do it?
Strictly as a tribute or memorial, for lack of a better word, *if* a community
so desired. Subject to majority rule.
Bill
> Larry Pieniazek - lpieniazek@mercator.com - http://my.voyager.net/lar
> http://www.mercator.com. Mercator, the e-business transformation company
> fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
>
> Note: this is a family forum!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | The 10 Cs in schools (was Mormon...)
|
| I know this is a big snip but I want to make room for my rant... (...) And therein lies the flaw with Democracy. I have done nothing to deserve the penalty of being a subject of the majority rule. If 51% of the people insist that 2+2=5, that doesn't (...) (25 years ago, 19-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
| (...) I've not been there, so I can't say what the circumstances are. But if they're posted in a way that implies primacy, rather than as one of many examples of laws, that's wrong. (...) Feel free to do so on your private property, but there's a (...) (25 years ago, 18-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
541 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
