Posted by Shelly on 09/18/07 12:20

"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:6Z6dnZEIv9iJMnLbnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Shelly wrote:
>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:JoWdneE7j9ChsHLbnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>>> Hey, I'd much rather have a God-fearing President than an atheist.
>>
>> ...and I'd much rather have a President! (That means someone who doesn't
>> mix religion with politics - see the Bill of Rights for information).
>
> The Bill of Rights says nothing about whether the President may be
> religious or not. All it says is that government can't pass laws telling
> YOU how you must/must not worship.
>
> In fact, the Bill of Rights doesn't even say you can't display the 10
> Commandments in a courthouse. But the courts have expanded the first
> amendment far beyond it's original purpose. The Federalist Papers by
> Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison is quite interesting
> reading. It should how far we have strayed from the original intent.
>
> And BTW - atheism is a religion, also. This is conveniently "overlooked"
> by those espousing it in the name of "freedom". But many atheists are
> trying to force their religion on the rest of the country.
>
> The first amendment had to do with TOLERANCE. You worship your way and I
> worship mine. You don't try to tell me what I can and cannot do, and I
> don't try to tell you the same.

Exactly! I don't give a damn whether the president is religious or not.
That is exactly my point. I just don't want him to mix religion with
politics. And, yes, atheism is also sort of a religion. It is the belief
that there is no god. It doesn't matter to me what anyone in office
believes about God, just so long as it doesn't enter the political
considerations. That is what I have against the "Christian Wrong". If they
want to confine their religious beliefs to their churches and to how they
conduct their morality for themselves, that is great. When they try to
impose those beliefs or what they consider their morality on me, that is
where I draw the line. That was why I have always been against Blue Laws,
why I am for a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body
[until viability] (BTW, I am male. My name is Sheldon), and why I am
against ANY funding for ANY ***private*** school -- parochial or secular,
vouchers or otherwise.

My entry into this was when you said "Hey, I'd much rather have a
God-fearing President than an atheist.". I disagree -- not that I would
rather have an atheist than a "God-fearing" man as President; just that I
think that the distinction should be irrelevent when it comes to carrying
out the duties of the Presidency OR ANY OTHER POLITICAL OFFICE.

A little note to you Jerry: This country is the one country that has in its
founding document a separation of religion and politics. It is also the one
western nation that has the highest attendence rate at
church/sysnagogue/mosque and has the most religious buildings per capita.
This is even above such Christian countries as Italy (Catholic), France
(Catholic) and Britain (Church of England). What does that imply to you
about the need to impose religion via politics?

--
Shelly

[Back to original message]