[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: As I've already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical laws. You were wrong and so were your sources. LOL! What a smug asshole. He's only smug and an asshole if he's wrong. IMO, there was more than enough smugness and assholiness to go around, on all sides of this silly exercise in I'm right and you're wrong. :-) MDixon is right that Christianity was pretty much the only religion that the framers of the Consti- tution had in mind. At the time they wrote that document, if there were any Muslims in the country, they were probably slaves, and the small number of Jews were probably irrelevant to mainstream thinking. The nearest Hindu or Buddhist was probably thousands of miles away. That said, others were right that the framers of the Constitution were driven more by a desire for freedom *from* religion than they were by freedom of religion. They had just come, after all, from Europe, where humans had just demonstrated clearly the idiocy of governments declaring a state religion or religions *becoming* the government or government getting involved in religion in any way. They wanted nothing to do with that, and...uh...God bless 'em for thinking that way. IMO, spiritual beliefs just don't mix with govern- ment. Bad Idea all around, whether it's English kings inventing a church and imposing it on its citizens or Maharishi feeling all warm and fuzzy about mandating TM for citizens of a country for their own good. Read what the Inquisitors of the past or the Islamic fundamentalists and Christian fundamentalists of today have to say and you'll find the same message -- We know better than you do what is best for you, and we're so confident that our 'knowing' equates to 'truth' that we're willing to impose it on you whether you want it or not. Yeah, right. May they all turn out to be wrong about what happens in the afterlife and wind up in the *same* place, thus inventing Hell. :-) Me, I'll stick with those who feel (as the founding fathers of America did) that the only thing that can relate to a religion or a set of spiritual beliefs is an individual human being. They should be free to do that, preferably in private, and *certainly* not in front of a governmental body, grandstanding and imposing their individual take on spirituality on people who would be better served by being left to investigate their own take on such things. The whole *idea* of opening a session of Congress with a prayer is offensive to me, and to America, and to the founders of America, and to the ideas they stood for. It doesn't matter whether it's a Catholic prayer or a Protestant prayer or a Hindu prayer or an Islamic prayer or a Voodoo prayer or a Jewish prayer or a Native American one. That's irrelevant. The fact that some politicians are so eager to win votes by appearing to either support one religion or be against it is all that's relevant. America is NOT a Christian nation. It is a nation founded as a *reaction to* and *rejection of* the idea of any state religion, and as an experiment to see whether such idiocy could be prevented in the future. Clearly it cannot. The most that those of us who have read some history and the writings of the framers of the Constitution and thus what they had in mind can do is to remind people what that was. The idea was simple -- Believe whatever you want. Evangelize all you want, if you're given to that kind of embarrassing behavior. But DO NOT attempt to sway the government of the United States into evangelizing for you, or into mandating your beliefs for others. That is inappropriate in our country, and will not be tolerated. Several good quotes were posted, but not the one that describes what one of the main architects of America thought of Christians who try to use the government to promote their beliefs. It was in a letter to a friend, provoked by an attempt by Christians to take over a school system and promote their ideas in its curriculum. You can still read it today carved into the Jefferson Memorial, although few today remember its context, and *who* Tom was referring to as tyrants: I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: As I've already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical laws. You were wrong and so were your sources. LOL! What a smug asshole. He's only smug and an asshole if he's wrong. IMO, there was more than enough smugness and assholiness to go around, on all sides of this silly exercise in I'm right and you're wrong. :-) MDixon is right that Christianity was pretty much the only religion that the framers of the Consti- tution had in mind. At the time they wrote that document, if there were any Muslims in the country, they were probably slaves, and the small number of Jews were probably irrelevant to mainstream thinking. The nearest Hindu or Buddhist was probably thousands of miles away. That said, others were right that the framers of the Constitution were driven more by a desire for freedom *from* religion than they were by freedom of religion. They had just come, after all, from Europe, where humans had just demonstrated clearly the idiocy of governments declaring a state religion or religions *becoming* the government or government getting involved in religion in any way. They wanted nothing to do with that, and...uh...God bless 'em for thinking that way. IMO, spiritual beliefs just don't mix with govern- ment. Bad Idea all around, whether it's English kings inventing a church and imposing it on its citizens or Maharishi feeling all warm and fuzzy about mandating TM for citizens of a country for their own good. Read what the Inquisitors of the past or the Islamic fundamentalists and Christian fundamentalists of today have to say and you'll find the same message -- We know better than you do what is best for you, and we're so confident that our 'knowing' equates to 'truth' that we're willing to impose it on you whether you want it or not. Yeah, right. May they all turn out to be wrong about what happens in the afterlife and wind up in the *same* place, thus inventing Hell. :-) Me, I'll stick with those who feel (as the founding fathers of America did) that the only thing that can relate to a religion or a set of spiritual beliefs is an individual human being. They should be free to do that, preferably in private, and *certainly* not in front of a governmental body, grandstanding and imposing their individual take on spirituality on people who would be better served by being left to investigate their own take on such things. The whole *idea* of opening a session of Congress with a prayer is offensive to me, and to America, and to the founders of America, and to the ideas they stood for. It doesn't matter whether it's a Catholic prayer or a Protestant prayer or a Hindu prayer or an Islamic prayer or a Voodoo prayer or a Jewish prayer or a Native American one. That's irrelevant. The fact that some politicians are so eager to win votes by appearing to either support one religion or be against it is all that's relevant. America is NOT a Christian nation. It is a nation founded as a *reaction to* and *rejection of* the idea of any state religion, and as an experiment to see whether such idiocy could be prevented in the future. Clearly it cannot. The most that those of us who have read some history and the writings of the framers of the Constitution and thus what they had in mind can do is to remind people what that was. The idea was simple -- Believe whatever you want. Evangelize all you want, if you're given to that kind of embarrassing behavior. But DO NOT attempt to sway the government of the United States into evangelizing for you, or into mandating your beliefs for others. That is inappropriate in our country, and will not be tolerated. Several good quotes were posted, but not the one that describes what one of the main architects of America thought of Christians who try to use the government to promote their beliefs. It was in a letter to a friend, provoked by an attempt by Christians to take over a school system and promote their ideas in its curriculum. You can still read it today carved into the Jefferson Memorial, although few today remember its context, and *who* Tom was referring to as tyrants: I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. Interesting post, thanks. The Jefferson quote prompted me to google it. Here is the paragraph in the letter you allude to in which the quote appears. It is from http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/lit/jeff04.htm : I promised you a letter on Christianity, which I
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: As I've already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical laws. You were wrong and so were your sources. LOL! What a smug asshole. He's only smug and an asshole if he's wrong. IMO, there was more than enough smugness and assholiness to go around, on all sides of this silly exercise in I'm right and you're wrong. :-) MDixon is right that Christianity was pretty much the only religion that the framers of the Consti- tution had in mind. At the time they wrote that document, if there were any Muslims in the country, they were probably slaves, and the small number of Jews were probably irrelevant to mainstream thinking. The nearest Hindu or Buddhist was probably thousands of miles away. That said, others were right that the framers of the Constitution were driven more by a desire for freedom *from* religion than they were by freedom of religion. They had just come, after all, from Europe, where humans had just demonstrated clearly the idiocy of governments declaring a state religion or religions *becoming* the government or government getting involved in religion in any way. They wanted nothing to do with that, and...uh...God bless 'em for thinking that way. IMO, spiritual beliefs just don't mix with govern- ment. Bad Idea all around, whether it's English kings inventing a church and imposing it on its citizens or Maharishi feeling all warm and fuzzy about mandating TM for citizens of a country for their own good. Read what the Inquisitors of the past or the Islamic fundamentalists and Christian fundamentalists of today have to say and you'll find the same message -- We know better than you do what is best for you, and we're so confident that our 'knowing' equates to 'truth' that we're willing to impose it on you whether you want it or not. Yeah, right. May they all turn out to be wrong about what happens in the afterlife and wind up in the *same* place, thus inventing Hell. :-) Me, I'll stick with those who feel (as the founding fathers of America did) that the only thing that can relate to a religion or a set of spiritual beliefs is an individual human being. They should be free to do that, preferably in private, and *certainly* not in front of a governmental body, grandstanding and imposing their individual take on spirituality on people who would be better served by being left to investigate their own take on such things. The whole *idea* of opening a session of Congress with a prayer is offensive to me, and to America, and to the founders of America, and to the ideas they stood for. It doesn't matter whether it's a Catholic prayer or a Protestant prayer or a Hindu prayer or an Islamic prayer or a Voodoo prayer or a Jewish prayer or a Native American one. That's irrelevant. The fact that some politicians are so eager to win votes by appearing to either support one religion or be against it is all that's relevant. America is NOT a Christian nation. It is a nation founded as a *reaction to* and *rejection of* the idea of any state religion, and as an experiment to see whether such idiocy could be prevented in the future. Clearly it cannot. The most that those of us who have read some history and the writings of the framers of the Constitution and thus what they had in mind can do is to remind people what that was. The idea was simple -- Believe whatever you want. Evangelize all you want, if you're given to that kind of embarrassing behavior. But DO NOT attempt to sway the government of the United States into evangelizing for you, or into mandating your beliefs for others. That is inappropriate in our country, and will not be tolerated. Several good quotes were posted, but not the one that describes what one of the main architects of America thought of Christians who try to use the government to promote their beliefs. It was in a letter to a friend, provoked by an attempt by Christians to take over a school system and promote their ideas in its curriculum. You can still read it today carved into the Jefferson Memorial, although few today remember its context, and *who* Tom was referring to as tyrants: I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. Interesting post, thanks. The Jefferson quote prompted me to google it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They are right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our legal/moral system. Horseshit. Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have? Try reading it, then read this link _RE-TAKING AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United States_ (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html) The Supreme Court as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and carvings of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or Mohammed and the Koran. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/12/07 4:25:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The founding fathers were mostly Deists, not Christians. Yes, you are correct if you narrow the founding fathers down to one or two persons. The overwhelming majority that signed the Declaration of Independence were devout Christians, some even ordained preachers. _RE-TAKING AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United States_ (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html) ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They are right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our legal/moral system. Horseshit. Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have? Try reading it, then read this link _RE-TAKING AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United States_ (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html) The Supreme Court as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and carvings of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or Mohammed and the Koran. Well, let's see: You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in history to debunk the claim you just need to look at the Commandments themselves. If the basis of our laws originated from the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious we could look at the Ten Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions. The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens. * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws against this? Strike one. * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws against this? Strike two. * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in vain. Any laws against this? Strike three. * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws mandating this? Strike four. * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws mandating this? Strike five.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: They are right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our legal/moral system. Horseshit. Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have? Try reading it, then read this link _RE-TAKING AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United States_ (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html) The Supreme Court as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and carvings of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or Mohammed and the Koran. Well, let's see: You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in history to debunk the claim you just need to look at the Commandments themselves. If the basis of our laws originated from the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious we could look at the Ten Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions. The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens. * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws against this? Strike one. * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws against this? Strike two. * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in vain. Any laws against this? Strike three. * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws mandating this? Strike four. * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws mandating this? Strike five. Are we off the hook for getting stoned for adultery yet? I am inquiring for a...um...a friend. I mean if she's totally eyeballing you, I mean him, my friend, and she is crazy hot. (MILF)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 4:25:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The founding fathers were mostly Deists, not Christians. Yes, you are correct if you narrow the founding fathers down to one or two persons. The overwhelming majority that signed the Declaration of Independence were devout Christians, some even ordained preachers. And this whole line of argument is pretty funny. This worship of 250 year old authority figures seems so odd -- given that the founding fathers main message seemed to be: Go think for yourselves. We have provided a reasonable start, but let every generation adopt laws that synch with the condtions and meet the needs of that age. We are a bunch of tabacco growing, land-holding, elitist, slave holding, mysoginist white males. We see our limitations. We expect, we hope, we even demand, that future generations take this foundation and DO BETTER. If you try to be JUST like us, you will have a society ruled by and for a bunch of tabacco growing, land-holding, elitist, slave holding, mysoginist white males. Clearly no one in their right mind wants that for future generations. I don't know much about christian fundamentalists. But do they have an abnormal desire to seek approval from past authority figures? If the bible says it it must be true. If the founding fathers said it, it must be true. I know two data points don't establish a trend, but ...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 4:25:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The founding fathers were mostly Deists, not Christians. Yes, you are correct if you narrow the founding fathers down to one or two persons. The overwhelming majority that signed the Declaration of Independence were devout Christians, some even ordained preachers. _RE-TAKING AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United States_ (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html) Your Christian Right website is something I would expect from you, bwana. Somehow I'm not surprised to see that you appear to have sympathy for bigotry and nationalistic xenophobia. The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion. The Treaty of Tripoli, passed by the U.S. Senate in 1797, read in part: The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion. The treaty was written during the Washington administration, and sent to the Senate during the Adams administration. It was read aloud to the Senate, and each Senator received a printed copy. This was the 339th time that a recorded vote was required by the Senate, but only the third time a vote was unanimous (the next time was to honor George Washington). There is no record of any debate or dissension on the treaty. It was reprinted in full in three newspapers - two in Philadelphia, one in New York City. There is no record of public outcry or complaint in subsequent editions of the papers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:32:56 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion. I never said it was founded on the Christian religion. It was founded on Christian principles which are common to the Christian/Judaic culture. I see very little, if any, Islamic, Hindu,Buddhist influence in our laws and government. Yet our laws and morays are saturated with Biblical values. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 9:32:56 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion. I never said it was founded on the Christian religion. It was founded on Christian principles which are common to the Christian/Judaic culture. I see very little, if any, Islamic, Hindu,Buddhist influence in our laws and government. Yet our laws and morays are saturated with Biblical values. No. They are not. ---Forty-one law professors and legal historians weighed in on a lawsuit challenging Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore's display of the Ten Commandments in the state Judicial Building in Montgomery. The scholars were brought together by Steven K. Green, former legal director at Americans United and now law professor at Willamette University College of Law in Salem, Oregon. The friend-of-the-court brief, filed April 28, musters ample historical evidence to debunk claims by Moore's attorneys that the judge has the right to display the Ten Commandments because they are the foundation of American law. Nothing in the nation's legal history supports Moore's view, the legal scholars and historians say. Aside from a failed attempt in the seventeenth century to establish a biblically based legal system in the Puritan colonies, American law is generally viewed as having secular origins, asserts the brief. The brief notes that various documents and texts figured in the development of American law, among them English common and statutory law, Roman law, the civil law of continental Europe and private international law. American law, they point out, was also influenced by the writings of William Blackstone, John Locke, Adam Smith and others as well as the Magna Carta, the Federalist Papers and other sources. Each of these documents had a far greater influence on America's laws than the Ten Commandments, asserts the brief. Indeed, the legal and historical record does not include significant and meaningful references to the Ten Commandments, the Pentateuch or to biblical law generally. The brief notes that the U.S. Constitution lacks even a perfunctory or formalistic reference to God and says during the debate over ratification of that document, delegates discussed Roman law, British law and the laws of other European nations but as can best be determined, no delegate ever mentioned the Ten Commandments or the Bible. [...] http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3944/is_200306/ai_n9283024
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:39:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Supreme Court as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and carvings of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or Mohammed and the Koran. Well, let's see: You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in history to debunk the claim — you just need to look at the Commandments themselves. If the basis of our laws originated from the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious — we could look at the Ten Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions. The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens. * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws against this? Strike one. * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws against this? Strike two. * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in vain. Any laws against this? Strike three. * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws mandating this? Strike four. * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws mandating this? Strike five. Sorry, you missed the point. Over your head I guess. Our legal system is *Based* on Biblical laws and teachings and there really are more than just the Ten Commandments.The Laws of Moses had 613 commandments That is why I have challenged you to try reading the book of Deuteronomy. The Constitution does allow for the free exercise of religion and that included any religion. Federal law was supposed to be limited and allow the states to create the laws they wanted to live by since in the beginning most states held majorities of different denominations and would reflect their values accordingly. Blue laws, laws observing the Sabbath, were very common in the states up until the '70s. You conveniently left out murder, stealing, adultery, false witness, and coveting,( see conspiring). ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:50:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Are we off the hook for getting stoned for adultery yet? I am inquiring for a...um...a friend. I mean if she's totally eyeballing you, I mean him, my friend, and she is crazy hot. (MILF) Not totally. It is grounds for divorce, which could include the payment of alimony and child support and dividing your property with your ex- spouse. You might wished you could have been stoned. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 9:39:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Supreme Court as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and carvings of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or Mohammed and the Koran. Well, let's see: You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in history to debunk the claim â you just need to look at the Commandments themselves. If the basis of our laws originated from the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious â we could look at the Ten Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions. The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens. * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws against this? Strike one. * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws against this? Strike two. * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in vain. Any laws against this? Strike three. * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws mandating this? Strike four. * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws mandating this? Strike five. Sorry, you missed the point. Over your head I guess. Our legal system is *Based* on Biblical laws and teachings and there really are more than just the Ten Commandments.The Laws of Moses had 613 commandments That is why I have challenged you to try reading the book of Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy describes a theocracy. The USA is not a theocracy or anything like the system in Deuteronomy - by any stretch of the imagination. The Constitution does allow for the free exercise of religion and that included any religion. Federal law was supposed to be limited and allow the states to create the laws they wanted to live by since in the beginning most states held majorities of different denominations and would reflect their values accordingly. Blue laws, laws observing the Sabbath, were very common in the states up until the '70s. You conveniently left out murder, stealing, adultery, false witness, and coveting,( see conspiring). Those are common laws in just about any legal system. They did not necessarily originate from the Bible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 10:02:08 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And this whole line of argument is pretty funny. This worship of 250 year old authority figures seems so odd -- given that the founding fathers main message seemed to be: seems is the key word here. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 10:02:08 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't know much about christian fundamentalists At least we can agree on something. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 11:42:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It was founded on Christian principles which are common to the Christian/Judaic culture. I see very little, if any, Islamic, Hindu,Buddhist influence in our laws and government. Yet our laws and morays are saturated with Biblical values. No. They are not. ---Forty-one law professors and legal historians weighed in on a lawsuit challenging Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore's display of the Ten Commandments in the state Judicial Building in Montgomery. The scholars were brought together by Steven K. Green, former legal director at Americans United and now law professor at Willamette University College of Law in Salem, Oregon. Moore lost his case based on a false assumption of a separation of church and state which was perpetuated since the late 1940's by the then Supreme Court. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: They are right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our legal/moral system. Horseshit. Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have? Try reading it, then read this link _RE-TAKING AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United States_ (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html) The Supreme Court as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and carvings of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or Mohammed and the Koran. Well, let's see: You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in history to debunk the claim you just need to look at the Commandments themselves. If the basis of our laws originated from the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious we could look at the Ten Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions. The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens. * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws against this? Strike one. * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws against this? Strike two. * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in vain. Any laws against this? Strike three. * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws mandating this? Strike four. * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws mandating this? Strike five. Whether the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not relevant. You don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the founding fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the constitution and bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that they intended this country to be a haven for freedom of religious practice. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: They are right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our legal/moral system. Horseshit. Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have? Try reading it, then read this link _RE-TAKING AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United States_ (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html) The Supreme Court as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and carvings of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or Mohammed and the Koran. Well, let's see: You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in history to debunk the claim you just need to look at the Commandments themselves. If the basis of our laws originated from the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious we could look at the Ten Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions. The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens. * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws against this? Strike one. * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws against this? Strike two. * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in vain. Any laws against this? Strike three. * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws mandating this? Strike four. * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws mandating this? Strike five. Whether the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not relevant. You don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the founding fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the constitution and bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that they intended this country to be a haven for freedom of religious practice. Yes, but not limited to 'Christian' religious practice. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 11:59:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Deuteronomy describes a theocracy. The USA is not a theocracy or anything like the system in Deuteronomy - by any stretch of the imagination. Try reading the laws of Moses and see if our laws, both civil and criminal are not very similar. I'll grant you we have evolved above stoning, casting out people based on skin disease etc . We now have prisons, hospitals and other ways of dealing with certain social problems. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:19:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Whether the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not relevant. You don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the founding fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the constitution and bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that they intended this country to be a haven for freedom of religious practice. Yes, but not limited to 'Christian' religious practice. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson I have never said the founding fathers ever intended to prevent the practice of any other religion in the United States. But neither did they establish a secular government devoid of religious ideals and values. The overwhelming majority just happened to be Christian which influenced their values and the laws created. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:09:57 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Whether the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not relevant. You don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the founding fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the constitution and bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that they intended this country to be a haven for freedom of religious practice. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson I have no argument against this. I agree. But it is not a government founded on secularism and freedom from religion. Had the population of the colonies been from the middle east and Islamic we would all probably be living under Shirria Law. But they weren't. Our founding fathers were overwhelmingly Christians of various denominations and our laws and culture reflected that. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 11:59:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Deuteronomy describes a theocracy. The USA is not a theocracy or anything like the system in Deuteronomy - by any stretch of the imagination. Try reading the laws of Moses and see if our laws, both civil and criminal are not very similar. I'll grant you we have evolved above stoning, casting out people based on skin disease etc . We now have prisons, hospitals and other ways of dealing with certain social problems. As I've already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical laws.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 11:42:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It was founded on Christian principles which are common to the Christian/Judaic culture. I see very little, if any, Islamic, Hindu,Buddhist influence in our laws and government. Yet our laws and morays are saturated with Biblical values. No. They are not. ---Forty-one law professors and legal historians weighed in on a lawsuit challenging Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore's display of the Ten Commandments in the state Judicial Building in Montgomery. The scholars were brought together by Steven K. Green, former legal director at Americans United and now law professor at Willamette University College of Law in Salem, Oregon. Moore lost his case based on a false assumption of a separation of church and state which was perpetuated since the late 1940's by the then Supreme Court. Wrong. In effect, the US Constitution essentially upheld the idea of the separation of church and state from the outset. Nowhere in the Constitution does it contradict the following statements by Jefferson and Madison. In fact, later Supreme Court decisions, except for the Pledge of Allegience case, also upheld those ideas. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and State. ~~ Thomas Jefferson AND, If all men by nature are equally free and independent, they are to be considered as retaining an equal right to free exercise of religion, according to dictates of conscience. While we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess, and to observe, the religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us... Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution... 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 instance have they been seen the guardians of liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not. ~~ James Madison
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 12:19:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Whether the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not relevant. You don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the founding fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the constitution and bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that they intended this country to be a haven for freedom of religious practice. Yes, but not limited to 'Christian' religious practice. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson I have never said the founding fathers ever intended to prevent the practice of any other religion in the United States. But neither did they establish a secular government devoid of religious ideals and values. The overwhelming majority just happened to be Christian which influenced their values and the laws created. No specific laws were created by the founding fathers that were specifically based only on Christian laws.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:56:24 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Moore lost his case based on a false assumption of a separation of church and state which was perpetuated since the late 1940's by the then Supreme Court. Wrong. In effect, the US Constitution essentially upheld the idea of the separation of church and state from the outset. Nowhere in the Constitution does it contradict the following statements by Jefferson and Madison. In fact, later Supreme Court decisions, except for the Pledge of Allegience case, also upheld those ideas. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and State. ~~ Thomas Jefferson The Constitution does contradict the separation of Church and state as it is currently applied. Try reading the first amendment. The congress shall make no law establishing nor prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Clearly this means the Government can not establish by law an official state Church or religion as was the custom in Europe. However the government can not pass a law prohibiting the elected from expressing the religious values of the people they represent through legislation. Laws regarding the Sabbath, Sodomy, Adultery as well as laws regarding financial restitution are or were very common in state governments since their inceptionThe quote of Jefferson's you refer to is not in any government document. It is a personal letter to the Baptists of Danbury Connecticut who feared the Government might establish a State Church such as Anglican or Presbyterian and the Federal government would be controlled by that denomination. Jefferson's letter was meant to reassure him that was not the intent. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:56:24 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If all men by nature are equally free and independent,If all m be considered as retaining an equal right to free exercise of religion, according to dictates of conscience. While we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess, and to observe, the religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us... Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.se 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 instance have they been seen the guardians of liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not. ~~ James Madison They key to this entire quote is in the second to the last sentence. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient axillaries. Exactly what Jefferson was describing to the Baptists of Danbury. No state established religion or denomination but freedom for all to practice any religion they choose. Which means the people can elect representatives to reflect their values and if they are Biblically based or based on the Koran or Gita or on secularism so be it. This is Democracy and it reflects the will of the people. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I've already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical laws. You were wrong and so were your sources. Also realize I'm not saying every law we have is found in the Bible. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 1:05:10 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No specific laws were created by the founding fathers that were specifically based only on Christian laws. only is the only thing you have going here. Thou shalt not Steal, thou shalt not Murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not bare False witness. I'm sure these values exist within other cultures, but I guarantee you they are taught as Divine Law given to Moses by God for all men to follow and that is how our for fathers learned them. Our country also had laws observing the Sabbath,and making sodomy illegal. Many of our civil codes regarding Financial restitution are also Biblically based. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] The Constitution does contradict the separation of Church and state as it is currently applied. Try reading the first amendment. The congress shall make no law establishing nor prohibiting the free exercise of religion. [snip] ...just to change the subject a bit: I've always wondered: the first amendment refers to The Congress that shall make no law etc. The prohibition is applied to the U.S. Congress, no? If so, what about the STATE governments...it seems that they are NOT prohibited from making laws regarding religion according to this text. So why can't state governments make such laws regarding religion just as long as Congress doesn't?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: only is the only thing you have going here. Thou shalt not Steal, thou shalt not Murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not bare False witness. Thou shalt not get so out of control defending Christians that thou postest 52 times.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 3:09:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: only is the only thing you have going here. Thou shalt not Steal, thou shalt not Murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not bare False witness. Thou shalt not get so out of control defending Christians that thou postest 52 times. I know , but somebody had to do it and since I was the only one, I took the Liberty. I apologies for going over my quota, whatever it is. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/13/07 2:54:17 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Constitution does contradict the separation of Church and state as it is currently applied. Try reading the first amendment. The congress shall make no law establishing nor prohibiting the free exercise of religion. [snip] ...just to change the subject a bit: I've always wondered: the first amendment refers to The Congress that shall make no law etc. The prohibition is applied to the U.S. Congress, no? If so, what about the STATE governments.Congress, no? I that they are NOT prohibited from making laws regarding religion according to this text. So why can't state governments make such laws regarding religion just as long as Congress doesn't? Nice point, but I think Federal law trumps state law. So if the federal government can't do it neither can the State government. Freedom of religion is taken as a guaranteed right. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 12:56:24 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Moore lost his case based on a false assumption of a separation of church and state which was perpetuated since the late 1940's by the then Supreme Court. Wrong. In effect, the US Constitution essentially upheld the idea of the separation of church and state from the outset. Nowhere in the Constitution does it contradict the following statements by Jefferson and Madison. In fact, later Supreme Court decisions, except for the Pledge of Allegience case, also upheld those ideas. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and State. ~~ Thomas Jefferson The Constitution does contradict the separation of Church and state as it is currently applied. Try reading the first amendment. The congress shall make no law establishing nor prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Clearly this means the Government can not establish by law an official state Church or religion as was the custom in Europe. However the government can not pass a law prohibiting the elected from expressing the religious values of the people they represent through legislation. Laws regarding the Sabbath, Sodomy, Adultery as well as laws regarding financial restitution are or were very common in state governments since their inception. Those kinds of laws are not exclusive to Christianity. The quote of Jefferson's you refer to is not in any government document. It is a personal letter to the Baptists of Danbury Connecticut who feared the Government might establish a State Church such as Anglican or Presbyterian and the Federal government would be controlled by that denomination. Jefferson's letter was meant to reassure him that was not the intent. Here's what you snipped: If all men by nature are equally free and independent, they are to be considered as retaining an equal right to free exercise of religion, according to dictates of conscience. While we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess, and to observe, the religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us... Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution... 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 instance have they been seen the guardians of liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not. ~~ James Madison
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I've already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical laws. You were wrong and so were your sources. LOL! What a smug asshole. Also realize I'm not saying every law we have is found in the Bible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 1:05:10 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No specific laws were created by the founding fathers that were specifically based only on Christian laws. only is the only thing you have going here. Thou shalt not Steal, thou shalt not Murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not bare False witness. I'm sure these values exist within other cultures, but I guarantee you they are taught as Divine Law given to Moses by God for all men to follow and that is how our for fathers learned them. Our country also had laws observing the Sabbath,and making sodomy illegal. Many of our civil codes regarding Financial restitution are also Biblically based. Again, those types of laws are not exclusive to Christianity.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time, do.rflex@ writes: As I've already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical laws. You were wrong and so were your sources. LOL! What a smug asshole. He's only smug and an asshole if he's wrong. If he's right, it's YOU that is the smug asshole. Actually you'd then be a WRONG smug asshole...considerably worse. So, who's right? Also realize I'm not saying every law we have is found in the Bible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
Hindu Prayer in Senate Disrupted By CHARLES BABINGTON Associated Press Writer July 12,2007 | WASHINGTON -- A Hindu clergyman made history Thursday by offering the Senate's morning prayer, but only after police officers removed three shouting protesters from the visitors' gallery. Rajan Zed, director of interfaith relations at a Hindu temple in Reno, Nev., gave the brief prayer that opens each day's Senate session. As he stood at the chamber's podium in a bright orange and burgundy robe, two women and a man began shouting this is an abomination and other complaints from the gallery. Police officers quickly arrested them and charged them disrupting Congress, a misdemeanor. The male protester told an AP reporter, we are Christians and patriots before police handcuffed them and led them away. For several days, the Mississippi-based American Family Association has urged its members to object to the prayer because Zed would be seeking the invocation of a non-monotheistic god. Zed, the first Hindu to offer the Senate prayer, began: We meditate on the transcendental glory of the Deity Supreme, who is inside the heart of the Earth, inside the life of the sky and inside the soul of the heaven. May He stimulate and illuminate our minds. As the Senate prepared for another day of debate over the Iraq war, Zed closed with, Peace, peace, peace be unto all. Zed, who was born in India, was invited by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Speaking in the chamber shortly after the prayer, Reid defended the choice and linked it to the war debate. If people have any misunderstanding about Indians and Hindus, Reid said, all they have to do is think of Gandhi, a man who gave his life for peace. I think it speaks well of our country that someone representing the faith of about a billion people comes here and can speak in communication with our heavenly Father regarding peace, said Reid, a Mormon and sharp critic of President Bush's Iraq policies. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the protest shows the intolerance of many religious right activists. They say they want more religion in the public square, but it's clear they mean only their religion. Capitol police identified the protesters as Ante Nedlko Pavkovic, Katherine Lynn Pavkovic and Christan Renee Sugar. Their ages and hometowns were not available. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bush's religious right friends say Hinduism is not the kind of religion the Founding Fathers had in mind for America The group publishing this slur on Hindus is none other than the American Family Association, one of the biggest religious right groups and a big supporter of the Republicans. The AFA is made up of equal opportunity bigots: they slur gays, Catholics, Hindus and just about everyone else who isn't a conservative Christian fundamentalist. Their vision of America is a country made up of Southern Baptists, or at least a nation in which everyone has to live under laws that conform to Southern Baptist preachings. From the American Family Association: Hindu to open Senate with prayer Send an email to your senator now, expressing your disappointment in the Senate decision to invite a Hindu to open the session with prayer. On Thursday, a Hindu chaplain from Reno, Nevada, by the name of Rajan Zed is scheduled to deliver the opening prayer in the U.S. Senate. Zed tells the Las Vegas Sun that in his prayer he will likely include references to ancient Hindu scriptures, including Rig Veda, Upanishards, and Bhagavard-Gita. Historians believe it will be the first Hindu prayer ever read at the Senate since it was formed in 1789. WallBuilders president David Barton is questioning why the U.S. government is seeking the invocation of a non-monotheistic god. Barton points out that since Hindus worship multiple gods, the prayer will be completely outside the American paradigm, flying in the face of the American motto One Nation Under God. TAKE ACTION Call your Senators at 202-224-3121 In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods, the Christian historian explains. And certainly that was never in the minds of those who did the Constitution, did the Declaration [of Independence] when they talked about Creator -- that's not one that fits here because we don't know which creator we're talking about within the Hindu religion. TAKE ACTION Click here to send your E-mail today! Barton says given the fact that Hindus are a tiny constituency of the American public, he questions the motivation of Senate leaders. This is not a religion that has produced great things in the world, he observes. You look at India, you look at Nepal -- there's persecution going in both of those countries that is gendered by the religious belief that is present there, and Hindu
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
There you go again, Judy, copying and pasting from uber-librul Associated Pravda. Next time, try posting a less biased story, ok? Like this one, for example: http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/575363635.html Theology Moved to the Senate and was Arrested Theology has moved from the church house onto the floor of the United States Senate, and has been arrested. WASHINGTON, July 12 /Christian Newswire/ -- Ante Pavkovic, Kathy Pavkovic, and Kristen Sugar were all arrested in the chambers of the United States Senate as that chamber was violated by a false Hindu god. The Senate was opened with a Hindu prayer placing the false god of Hinduism on a level playing field with the One True God, Jesus Christ. This would never have been allowed by our Founding Fathers. Not one Senator had the backbone to stand as our Founding Fathers stood. They stood on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! There were three in the audience with the courage to stand and proclaim, 'Thou shalt have no other gods before me.' They were immediately removed from the chambers, arrested, and are in jail now. God bless those who stand for Jesus as we know that He stands for them. Rev. Flip Benham, Director, Operation Save America/Operation Rescue --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hindu Prayer in Senate Disrupted By CHARLES BABINGTON Associated Press Writer July 12,2007 | WASHINGTON -- A Hindu clergyman made history Thursday by offering the Senate's morning prayer, but only after police officers removed three shouting protesters from the visitors' gallery. Rajan Zed, director of interfaith relations at a Hindu temple in Reno, Nev., gave the brief prayer that opens each day's Senate session. As he stood at the chamber's podium in a bright orange and burgundy robe, two women and a man began shouting this is an abomination and other complaints from the gallery. Police officers quickly arrested them and charged them disrupting Congress, a misdemeanor. The male protester told an AP reporter, we are Christians and patriots before police handcuffed them and led them away. For several days, the Mississippi-based American Family Association has urged its members to object to the prayer because Zed would be seeking the invocation of a non-monotheistic god. Zed, the first Hindu to offer the Senate prayer, began: We meditate on the transcendental glory of the Deity Supreme, who is inside the heart of the Earth, inside the life of the sky and inside the soul of the heaven. May He stimulate and illuminate our minds. As the Senate prepared for another day of debate over the Iraq war, Zed closed with, Peace, peace, peace be unto all. Zed, who was born in India, was invited by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Speaking in the chamber shortly after the prayer, Reid defended the choice and linked it to the war debate. If people have any misunderstanding about Indians and Hindus, Reid said, all they have to do is think of Gandhi, a man who gave his life for peace. I think it speaks well of our country that someone representing the faith of about a billion people comes here and can speak in communication with our heavenly Father regarding peace, said Reid, a Mormon and sharp critic of President Bush's Iraq policies. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the protest shows the intolerance of many religious right activists. They say they want more religion in the public square, but it's clear they mean only their religion. Capitol police identified the protesters as Ante Nedlko Pavkovic, Katherine Lynn Pavkovic and Christan Renee Sugar. Their ages and hometowns were not available. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: Bush's religious right friends say Hinduism is not the kind of religion the Founding Fathers had in mind for America The group publishing this slur on Hindus is none other than the American Family Association, one of the biggest religious right groups and a big supporter of the Republicans. The AFA is made up of equal opportunity bigots: they slur gays, Catholics, Hindus and just about everyone else who isn't a conservative Christian fundamentalist. Their vision of America is a country made up of Southern Baptists, or at least a nation in which everyone has to live under laws that conform to Southern Baptist preachings. From the American Family Association: Hindu to open Senate with prayer Send an email to your senator now, expressing your disappointment in the Senate decision to invite a Hindu to open the session with prayer. On Thursday, a Hindu chaplain from Reno, Nevada, by the name of Rajan Zed is scheduled to deliver the opening prayer in the U.S. Senate. Zed tells the Las Vegas Sun that in his prayer he will likely include references to ancient
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
It's interesting that a Mormon, Reid, would invite the Hindu to open the session. Have they had a Muslim invocation yet? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There you go again, Judy, copying and pasting from uber-librul Associated Pravda. Next time, try posting a less biased story, ok? Like this one, for example: http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/575363635.html Theology Moved to the Senate and was Arrested Theology has moved from the church house onto the floor of the United States Senate, and has been arrested. WASHINGTON, July 12 /Christian Newswire/ -- Ante Pavkovic, Kathy Pavkovic, and Kristen Sugar were all arrested in the chambers of the United States Senate as that chamber was violated by a false Hindu god. The Senate was opened with a Hindu prayer placing the false god of Hinduism on a level playing field with the One True God, Jesus Christ. This would never have been allowed by our Founding Fathers. Not one Senator had the backbone to stand as our Founding Fathers stood. They stood on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! There were three in the audience with the courage to stand and proclaim, 'Thou shalt have no other gods before me.' They were immediately removed from the chambers, arrested, and are in jail now. God bless those who stand for Jesus as we know that He stands for them. Rev. Flip Benham, Director, Operation Save America/Operation Rescue --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Hindu Prayer in Senate Disrupted By CHARLES BABINGTON Associated Press Writer July 12,2007 | WASHINGTON -- A Hindu clergyman made history Thursday by offering the Senate's morning prayer, but only after police officers removed three shouting protesters from the visitors' gallery. Rajan Zed, director of interfaith relations at a Hindu temple in Reno, Nev., gave the brief prayer that opens each day's Senate session. As he stood at the chamber's podium in a bright orange and burgundy robe, two women and a man began shouting this is an abomination and other complaints from the gallery. Police officers quickly arrested them and charged them disrupting Congress, a misdemeanor. The male protester told an AP reporter, we are Christians and patriots before police handcuffed them and led them away.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have they had a Muslim invocation yet? Yes, back in 1993.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
The Mormon Church owned TV station in Seattle used to always send a reporter to TM center events like phone calls from MMY where the press were invited. They were usually the only station to show up. I noted they also covered Iskon events too. I think it had something to do with their church being a victim of religious oppression. Anyway the wacky neo-Christians disrupted the ceremony: http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jul/12/christian_right_activists_disrupt_hindu_chaplain_in_the_senate Patrick Gillam wrote: It's interesting that a Mormon, Reid, would invite the Hindu to open the session. Have they had a Muslim invocation yet? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There you go again, Judy, copying and pasting from uber-librul Associated Pravda. Next time, try posting a less biased story, ok? Like this one, for example: http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/575363635.html Theology Moved to the Senate and was Arrested Theology has moved from the church house onto the floor of the United States Senate, and has been arrested. WASHINGTON, July 12 /Christian Newswire/ -- Ante Pavkovic, Kathy Pavkovic, and Kristen Sugar were all arrested in the chambers of the United States Senate as that chamber was violated by a false Hindu god. The Senate was opened with a Hindu prayer placing the false god of Hinduism on a level playing field with the One True God, Jesus Christ. This would never have been allowed by our Founding Fathers. Not one Senator had the backbone to stand as our Founding Fathers stood. They stood on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! There were three in the audience with the courage to stand and proclaim, 'Thou shalt have no other gods before me.' They were immediately removed from the chambers, arrested, and are in jail now. God bless those who stand for Jesus as we know that He stands for them. Rev. Flip Benham, Director, Operation Save America/Operation Rescue --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Hindu Prayer in Senate Disrupted By CHARLES BABINGTON Associated Press Writer July 12,2007 | WASHINGTON -- A Hindu clergyman made history Thursday by offering the Senate's morning prayer, but only after police officers removed three shouting protesters from the visitors' gallery. Rajan Zed, director of interfaith relations at a Hindu temple in Reno, Nev., gave the brief prayer that opens each day's Senate session. As he stood at the chamber's podium in a bright orange and burgundy robe, two women and a man began shouting this is an abomination and other complaints from the gallery. Police officers quickly arrested them and charged them disrupting Congress, a misdemeanor. The male protester told an AP reporter, we are Christians and patriots before police handcuffed them and led them away.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
In a message dated 7/12/07 11:53:04 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Capitol police identified the protesters as Ante Nedlko Pavkovic, Katherine Lynn Pavkovic and Christan Renee Sugar. Their ages and hometowns were not available. Don't sound Baptist to me, but who knows? Could be or could be Eastern Orthodox. And how do we know they are Christian right? Aren't there a lot of good 'ol Catholic Democrats? I agree interrupting the prayer or invocation was tacky and rude, but at least the Hindu wasn't murdered like so many Christian missionaries in India. ** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 10:35:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bush's religious right friends say Hinduism is not the kind of religion the Founding Fathers had in mind for America They are right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our legal/moral system. The founding fathers were mostly Deists, not Christians.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 10:35:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bush's religious right friends say Hinduism is not the kind of religion the Founding Fathers had in mind for America They are right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our legal/moral system. Horseshit.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/12/07 10:35:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bush's religious right friends say Hinduism is not the kind of religion the Founding Fathers had in mind for America They are right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our legal/moral system. Deuteronomy certainly explains America's violent bloodlust: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/dt/intro.html
