|
Post by stoney on Dec 6, 2009 12:32:55 GMT -5
You're right, Clip: There is no "heresy" in my letter. BUT, there are many people who believe that pointing out religion should not be mixed with government indicates that person is an atheist, which is not the case. And we leaned the former is the case back in grammar school!
Clip, if I lived where you are I'd have to hide for safety in your cellar.
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Dec 6, 2009 13:09:33 GMT -5
hahaha! You would be a little cramped down there, as we only have a crawl space. Ya see, here in Tennessee, many houses are built with only a crawlspace to access plumbing etc, because our heat and AC sources are normally a heat pump that sets on a small concrete pad in the back yard with a fan unit in the attic to move the air around, summer AND winter. No cellar for a furnace necessary. LOL. If you and JT REALLY feel it necessary to escape, you are welcome to the crawlspace. I will even cut a hatch in the kitchen floor so you can come up for the bathroom, coffee and meals. Hell, we can even drop an extension of my high speed internet cable down there, haha. ;D You might be more comfortable in the fifth wheel in the driveway though. When we go camping, you can either go with us or stay in the house until we get back.
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Dec 6, 2009 13:17:41 GMT -5
As for hiding for you safety Stoney, I have learned that I just let them observe whatever they wish to observe, and I simply put their good points ahead of their desire to bring their exuberant faith in their beliefs to others.
One is much better off to have people that go overboard in their desire to be "good" than to have neighbors that are true heathens with no regard for the rights or property of others.
I can defend myself against a neighbor with a bible, much easier than one with a 9mm pistol and high on Meth. LOL The bruises of from being "thumped" with a bible are much less critical than the holes left by a handgun or knife.
|
|
|
Post by stoney on Dec 6, 2009 17:50:21 GMT -5
It's funny you should mention the Bible. A politician down in NY (Diaz?) who voted 'no' on Patterson's gay marriage proposal said that all his fellow NY cronies should always carry the Bible with them.
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 7, 2009 23:57:25 GMT -5
Is that where the term "throw the book at um came from. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 8, 2009 7:16:30 GMT -5
You're right, Clip: There is no "heresy" in my letter. BUT, there are many people who believe that pointing out religion should not be mixed with government indicates that person is an atheist, which is not the case. And we leaned the former is the case back in grammar school! Clip, if I lived where you are I'd have to hide for safety in your cellar. There is a fine line, I think where government and religion can co-exist without offending the first amendment or taking over government actions. For example, I see nothing wrong with government workers decorating their workstations with Christmas decorations to celebrate their beliefs. However, in your later post about the state legislator telling his colleagues they all should carry the bible, that is a major breach of the first amendment. Don't forget, America is still very much a Puritan-based society. We have laws still on the books dictating when you can purchase alcohol and when bars have to close. We have laws still on the books for adultery. We have the FCC telling us what we can watch/listen/read because some things may offend others and rather than trust them to not pay attention, the FCC bans it. In most states, including our own, gambling is still illegal, with some obvious exceptions. Don't get me going on DSS. In New York, you're still required to find "grounds" before the state will grant you a divorce because Catholicism frowns upon divorce. Most of these laws and regulations have no basis for existence other than it's not Christian to allow otherwise. And while our founding fathers may have been fearful of religion, most every household had a bible and read from it daily. Lastly, there is a difference between separation of church and state and the first amendment ("Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."). And the Constitution only requires the latter. Having a Manger on the front lawn of a fire department does not offend the first amendment. Congress passed no law demanding it be presented, nor did it pass a law prohibiting it being presented.
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 8, 2009 7:20:15 GMT -5
Now Clipper, never had a problem being short. Actually, I always saw it as having a huge advantage.....................this way when the "bigger they are, the harder they fall" guys (kind of like you) did fall, I was right there to enjoy the splat. ;D That, and by being small, the bigger ones underestimate you, making it easier for you to accomplish what you're trying to accomplish.
|
|
|
Post by stoney on Dec 8, 2009 7:43:12 GMT -5
"And while our founding fathers may have been fearful of religion, most every household had a bible and read from it daily."
I guess you can say MANY did, but I don't know if the FFs did. Also, many of those laws still on the books you mentioned are man-made laws NOT incorporated when this country was founded.
There is a good piece in the OD today on the Op-Ed page written by Charles Haynes.
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 8, 2009 9:01:38 GMT -5
Adultery comes from English common law, where it was a felony. The crime of adultery predated the US and was certainly incorporated into American laws when this country was founded, along with most of English common law. The recognition of Sunday as a day of worship stemmed from colonial times and carried over into the US. Interestingly, to this day in New York, you cannot serve someone with a lawsuit on Sunday or on Saturday the Sabbath if the person to be served recognizes the Sabbath. Many of the alcohol laws I mentioned were established during the colonial times and incorporated into this country's laws.
However, regardless when these laws were created, our founding fathers ran the country when these laws were established. It is no surprise that many of these laws have since been declared unconstitutional or the governments have since stopped enforcing many of them. But our puritan country still has them and still tries to pass laws like them.
|
|
|
Post by stoney on Dec 8, 2009 11:57:40 GMT -5
Ans puritan we are! This country is very uptight when it comes to nudity, sexuality, etc.
"Adultery comes from English common law, where it was a felony." Are you thinking of Canon law?
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 8, 2009 12:08:31 GMT -5
Nope. English common law. Before the legislature began taking away judicial powers, most of English law developed through the courts, known as common law. See also wikipedia's page on Common law.
|
|
|
Post by stoney on Dec 8, 2009 12:24:47 GMT -5
Thanks, Swimmy. Thank God the FFs didn't enforce it.
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 8, 2009 13:31:05 GMT -5
Thanks, Swimmy. Thank God the FFs didn't enforce it. Stoney, I think you are misunderstanding me. The founding fathers allowed these laws to pass. It is only recently, within the last 40 years that these laws have come off the books, been declared unconstitutional, or no longer enforced. For a long time, a man could sue another man for enticing his wife to cheat on him. It was a common law action that has since been repealed in NY.
|
|
|
Post by stoney on Dec 9, 2009 11:32:24 GMT -5
But when did the laws go into effect? It wasn't in 1776 was it? Didn't others come up with them later on, especially in the individual states??
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 9, 2009 14:36:09 GMT -5
I can't say for certainty when they were enacted without doing a great deal of research I'm just not interested in doing. Most of these laws I've mentioned pre-dated the United States during colonial times and carried over into the United States. The laws declaring Sunday a day of rest were passed on the basis that people should be in church and recognizing the Sabbath were passed during the founding fathers' time.
|
|