Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: NOTICE: I do not pray! [View all]jeff47
(26,549 posts)143. Again, you just don't like the implications of your argument
I'm not arguing in favor of majority rule. I'm simply pointing out that most of the people in this country are religious, so first and foremost, people shouldn't feel all whiny and ass-sore whenever there is a public expression of it
Just like most people in this country were against interracial marriage, so that stupid Loving couple shouldn't have been all whiny when there was public expression against it.
And that Martin Luther King Jr. guy should have not been all whiny about civil rights - the majority liked Jim Crow.
Religion is part of our culture. I am an atheist but I accept this fact. I pick battles that MATTER.
All of them matter. Because when you make an exception here, you have to explain why it's OK here and not OK when it's in a classroom, or any other place where you do care about freedom of religion.
My ex went to school in the 80s in TN. The practice at that school was for a student to read a "saying of the day" over the intercom every morning. The student got to read any saying that was on a strip of paper in a particular box. Totally by coincidence, all of the sayings were from the bible. Students could not bring in their own sayings, even if they sought pre-approval.
This was LOOOOOONG after the SCOTUS had ruled many times that such behavior violated the separation of church and state, yet it continued because the majority of the parents felt it was wonderful to bring the bible into the school.
I bring that up for two reasons: First, this battle against constant violations of separation of church and state is still very much on-going. And second, when you say it's OK to break that separation here, you say it's OK to break that separation anywhere else. Because our laws must be applied consistently.
Secondly, its a RIGHT for people to be able to peacefully and publically express their religion.
Sure, as long as it doesn't appear that the government is endorsing one religion. The inauguration failed that test, in that it had official Christian prayers for the opening and closing of the ceremony.
People here who are trying to shut down notions of religious freedom are anti-progressive.
You're free to practice any religion you want. You are not free to have the government endorse your religion by including your religion's prayers in a government function. If you want to talk about anti-progressive, talk about the phrase "we're a Christian country".
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
174 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Who is the Holy Ghost the ghost of???? Someone holy? A particularly nice white bird?
Walk away
Jan 2013
#112
I do not see the obviousness you claim. Perhaps he genuinely likes going to services.
msanthrope
Jan 2013
#36
He does. But that doesn't make HIM the problem. Thank you for your concern.
kestrel91316
Jan 2013
#78
Thats a disgusting insult to the people that had to endure slavery on your part.
phleshdef
Jan 2013
#124
That's only because you're trying really, really hard to protect your lame argument.
jeff47
Jan 2013
#128
I don't have to protect it. Its a valid argument and one you are completely unable to rebuttal...
phleshdef
Jan 2013
#133
I LOVE the implications of my argument, and you are clueless on separation of church and state
phleshdef
Jan 2013
#164
They don't. In any case, any God/ess worth their salt places responsibility squarely on human beings
Hekate
Jan 2013
#32
I mind if it 's part of a national public ceremony. I don't care that you don't mind.
HERVEPA
Jan 2013
#6
And I don't care that you do mind. Isn't America wonderful that way?
The Velveteen Ocelot
Jan 2013
#10
Rick Warren wanted Gays killed , those praying yesterday didn't want atheists killed
JI7
Jan 2013
#151
So if Warren only wanted them to continue to be second-class citizens, that would be OK? (nt)
jeff47
Jan 2013
#157
not ok, but not as bad as wanting them killed, but those praying didn't call for atheists to be 2nd
JI7
Jan 2013
#159
so your saying Chuck Schumer was treated as 2nd class citizen at the inauguration because he is
JI7
Jan 2013
#163
Why shouldn't national public figures have the freedom to celebrate their religion as much as...
phleshdef
Jan 2013
#40
I think you missed my point. I don't care what the President chooses as a necessary ritual.
msanthrope
Jan 2013
#50
The video of Michelle Obama rolling her eyes at something said to her in a social setting is popular
Fumesucker
Jan 2013
#13
Well, there's that. Always conveniently ignored for 2000 years. But Matthew 6:6 is not
kestrel91316
Jan 2013
#91
Yep!!! The collective energy concept is quite interesting. Also ... I wish the
RKP5637
Jan 2013
#171
Yep, he's got some time, the final exam isn't 'till the end of the semester. n/t
RKP5637
Jan 2013
#173
Hey, you never know, the leisure suit and big lapels could be making a comeback,
MadHound
Jan 2013
#68
I've testified in court on a few occasions and there was never a bible in sight.
kestrel91316
Jan 2013
#101
That's okay. This country was founded on Freedom of Religion. You're in the clear. I do wonder how
judesedit
Jan 2013
#105
I do pray and don't care that you don't. It is sort of like I am straight and am perfectly happy
appleannie1
Jan 2013
#109