What are the real issues of the U.S?Follow

^
|
|
|

I'm with him. The second post I've tried to read today that physiclly hurtmy eyes to attempt to read it.

As for the religious debates:

We don't need more of the christian god in our society. If you're a believer, go worship. But trying to inject more of your god into business and politics is just going to **** people off.

Regardless of the fact that 85% of the US is christian, the minority religions have an equal say. We have a freedom to practice all religions. And a seperation of church and state for a reason.

Yeah, I'd have a hard time believing that 85% of Americans are devout Christians.

Why should a store selling ipods and shampoo be black mailed into supporting any religion? Seems contrary to want to disenfranchise any of their shoppers.






Edited, Fri Nov 25 12:31:09 2005 by Elinda

" I rated you down, not for content, but for presentation. You just ruined any Canadian claim to a good education system. Think of your countrymen and learn what a paragraph is before you post again.

Better yet, go back and clean up that mess of a post you already made. Knock out the typos, space the thing a bit and just tidy it up in general. Then maybe someone will read it and rate you down for content instead"

Firstly, i have to appoligise for my lack of paragraphs....I wrote that in a rant before work and was in a hurry i will edit it. As for typos i shall do that as well, however i am not the worlds greatest speller, and as such cannot guarantee anything in that area. I appreaciate your kindness.....ohh and that was sarcasm...


"I'm with him. The second post I've tried to read today that physiclly hurtmy eyes to attempt to read it.

As for the religious debates:

We don't need more of the christian god in our society. If you're a believer, go worship. But trying to inject more of your god into business and politics is just going to **** people off.

Regardless of the fact that 85% of the US is christian, the minority religions have an equal say. We have a freedom to practice all religions. And a seperation of church and state for a reason."

You have just recapped my entire point, but thank you for agreeing.

Once again I am going to edit my post, hopefully making it more readable.

p.s. how do you do the fancy quotes???



Edited, Fri Nov 25 20:34:46 2005 by fadedaway

I'm always the sucker for answering questions, so here goes:

Two easy ways to quote others. First, if you want to quote a single person, click the "Reply to This" link at the top of their post. This will open a page for your reply post. Then click "Quote Original." You will now have the original post quoted. Pay attention to the tags and you'll see how they work.

Second, you can type in the tags manually. [quote'] and [/quote'] are the opening and closing quote tags, just drop the ' out of them and they work. Anything between the two will be listed as a quote.

Also, for more info, click on the "Markup Help" link when you have the post form open.

Finally, if you see someone do something and you want to know how, simply reply to their post, quote the original, and look at the tags. Note: You don't actually have to finish the post at this point. Just back out of it.

Actually I rather they not be drunk. I like my men to be able to get hard.

Let me refrain more clearly: there are no exact sciences. See, for example, http://skepdic.com/science.html

You often claim 85% of America is Christian. How many believe in social sciences? But even if we disregard the social sciences, it is biology that we are after: namely is there a genetic correlation to homosexuality. The reason the APS is so confident in their proclamation is due to studies like the one I cited. They are biological in origin.



I find your reasoning strikingly broad since *any* conflict with *anything* from *anywhere* in the bible would be akin to breaking a commandment. This is generally not what people mean when they say a commandment was broken.

And this leads us to:



Eat pork? Most christians do. Clearly a really big no-no with God of the old testiment. Most feel that some specific statements of Jesus make it OK.

Then again, slavery is fine, so is beating one's wife with a stick, so is polygamy, so is genocide...

I think if you wish to use your 85% figure you take a more mainstream line on this issue. Otherwise one half of your post argues against the other.

My God is forgiving. My God loves.



I know God works in mysterious ways, and thus direct contradiction is, perhaps, the ultimate test of faith: can you hold two totally opposing views in your mind at once.

My God loves. My God forgives. My God encourages giving, not hording. In internet parlance, My God, for the win :)



Must be the latter. I quoted your entire paragraph on the subject of minority rights. There is no further context for me to add.



First of all, the minority are within their rights to ask for separation of Church and State. That means the fact anti-gay laws happen to coincide with christianity has absolutely no relivance. That's separation. Constitution, your agrument. Pick one.

Second, no one wants to change the behavior of christians. They can still exclude gays, not marry them, etc. All anyone is talking about is allowing the state to grant the exact same license (with all the same words) to any mutually consenting adults.

If your argument consist of: the bible says homosexuality is a sin, then you can see why:



seems a rather bizzare line of reasoning to take.

Perhaps you could threaten us with eternal damnation and hellfire instead. Since this is the Assylum, you could have Satan give us all transorbital lobotimies or electroshock therapy.

We seem to be at an impass, so let me end all chance of returning to the original intent of this thread and do what we *always* do in the Assylum: create a fictional nation.

The proud Republic of Vanelrtopia, in which the constitution explicitly ensures the separation of Scinece and State. This is a big, important principle which the society agrees is fundamental. Nonetheless, many of the laws are consistent with scientific fact. And one of these laws is called into question.

Any argument concerning science would not hold any weight: even if the previous law was actually based on it.