Whoops, that last paragraph should have read:
The U.S. cannot survive as a divided country. We will eventually go one
way or the other, but not before a great deal of grief and anguish
judging from what has occurred in Iraq. We should not deny the role
religion has played in politics ever since the Reagan
Administration. We need to accept that Religion in America is seeking
political power, so the question about whether we are to remain a
Democracy as conceived by the founding fathers, who embodied their system
of government within the U.S. Constitution, will long prevail. I believe
the creators of our great form of government intended that government
should be separate form church to allow each man the freedom to worship a
God of their own understanding, while still respecting the beliefs of
others. With a doctrine of separation between church and state the
country can return to its roots as a much stronger nation unified by a
people who's common denominator is Americans.
Regards,
LelandJ
Leland F. Jackson, CPA wrote:
> At some point the American people are going to need to come to terms
> with the role the religious right played in taking the country to war
> with Iraq. The most basic question is to what extent religious moral
> values play a role in the political arena. Should the long established
> precedent of separation of church and state continue, or should the
> country move more towards a Theocratic form of government.
>
> The move towards a more Theocratic form of government has been very
> divisive, because there are so many religious beliefs in America, even
> within various branches of Christianity. In the 2000 and 2004 elections
> states were classified mostly along the lines of whether the state was
> strongly made up of members affiliated with the Religious Right
> movement, or made up of more open minded citizen who keep their
> religious faith in God a personal matter. The former were classified
> as Red States and the latter were classified as Blue States.
>
> The U.S. cannot survive as a divided country. We will eventually go one
> way or the other, but not before a great deal of grief and anguish
> judging from what has occurred in Iraq. We should not deny the role
> that religion has played in politics ever since the Reagan
> Administration. We need to accept that Religion in America is seeking
> political power, so the question about whether we are to remain a
> Democracy as conceived by the founding fathers who embodied their system
> of government within the U.S. Constitution will long prevail. I believe
> the creators of our great form of government intended that government
> should be separate for church to allow each man the freedom to worship a
> good of their own understanding, while still respecting the beliefs of
> others. With a doctrine of separation between church and state the
> country can return to its roots as a much stronger nation unified by a
> people who's common denominator is Americans.
>
> Regards,
>
> LelandJ
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> LelandJ
>
> Bill Arnold wrote:
>
>> Why is it that every single time Christianity is mentioned by our
>> information supply, it's in terms of "evangelicals" and the "religious
>> right"? Seems to me that if the Christian position on the ME has any
>> use whatsoever, that someone, anyone, might have the bright idea to ask
>> what the Pope or his counterparts in other denominations have to say,
>> and maybe talk about that instead of what the "TV evangelists" are
>> saying.
>>
>> Do you know what the Pope's position is on Iraq? Did you hear about it
>> on TV? How about the other branches of Christianity? Betcha nobody even
>> knows if they have a Pope or who their leaders are. But we hear
>> continuously of the "evangelicals". That's at least curious, isn't it?
>>
>> Personally, I have a very low regard for TV evangelists. I see them as
>> con artists who have discovered "sales opportunities" to fill the void
>> created by disappearing priests. Most people are born with an innate
>> need for religion (the "God image" in the collective unconscious), and
>> that sets them up as fodder for this ilk. There are only a handful of
>> them, not counting freaks like Jim Jones and David Koresh. It's the
>> publicity ("puff job") just makes them far more prominent and larger
>> then life.
>>
>> And their "millions" of followers is another "puff job", as they include
>> anyone who ever sent a dollar intending to help the poor through their
>> various fund raisers, only to become a "member" forever. I know
>> something about this because back in the mainframe days I worked with a
>> company that had software installed at Jimmy Swaggert Industries, which
>> used a farm of mainframes to fleece the flock.
>>
>> How about we take a look at what the world's major religions really are
>> saying about that invasion?
>>
>> >From http://www.beliefnet.com/story/121/story_12194_1.html
>>
>>
>> Evangelical Lutheran Church of America
>> The ELCA opposes unilateral military action against Iraq
>>
>> Eastern Orthodox Churches
>> A joint statement from leaders of several Orthodox churches urged peace
>>
>> Episcopal Church
>> the council "opposes unilateral military action against Iraq for the
>> sole purpose of overthrowing the regime of Saddam Hussein
>>
>> Mormons - Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
>> As a Church, we must 'renounce war and proclaim peace.'
>>
>> Presbyterian Church (USA)
>> "urges the United States government to exercise restraint in its
>> contemplated military action against Iraq."
>>
>> Quakers - American Friends Service Committee
>> The AFSC has been actively antiwar and is a member of Win Without War
>>
>> Southern Baptist Convention
>> a substantial majority of Southern Baptists support Bush's stance on
>> Iraq.
>>
>> United Methodist Church
>> The United Methodist Church has been very involved in antiwar activity
>>
>> United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
>> The Pope has come out strongly against war with Iraq
>>
>> United Church of Christ
>> "We firmly oppose this advance to war"
>>
>> Union of American Hebrew Congregations
>> Rabbi Eric Yoffie, wrote that his group would support unilateral U.S.
>> action if these four conditions were met ...
>>
>> Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations
>> "While it is preferable for this threat to be neutralized through
>> diplomacy, should these efforts fail, the United States has every right
>> and obligation under the United Nations Charter and International Law to
>> take firm and appropriate action."
>>
>> United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
>> The major Conservative Judaism body issued a short statement in November
>> supporting President Bush's policies on Iraq
>>
>> Council on American-Islamic Relations
>> CAIR is against war in Iraq
>>
>> Unitarian Universalist Association
>> Unitarian congregations have been active in antiwar protests
>>
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> You left out the influence the Religious Righters played both in
>>> bringing support to the Bush Administration to protect Israel, and in
>>> going to the poles on election day to keep the supporters of
>>> the war in
>>> office. The neocons may have been the primary force behind
>>> driving the
>>> country to war, but there success in large measure was a
>>> direct result
>>> of their ability to complete control the Religious Righter via
>>> manipulation. The Religious Righters turned the war into a struggle
>>> between right and wrong, Christian and Zionist versus Muslim;
>>> a present
>>> day Religious Crusade; a Religious war.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> LelandJ
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
