I just read that in 2000, Governor George W. Bush signed a memorandum proclaiming June 10th to be "Jesus Day" in Texas, a day that "challenges people to follow Christ's example by performing good works in their communities and neighborhoods."
What are your thoughts on this?
2006-09-21 08:32:05 · 31 answers · asked by DougDoug_ 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
As governor he is head of state. As head of state he should not be promoting one religious belief over another. He should have kept quiet and represented all of his constituents not just a select handful.
2006-09-21 08:34:59 · answer #1 · answered by genaddt 7 · 4⤊ 4⤋
I am unhappy to confirm this unfortunate declaration. The exact wording follows.
"Throughout the world, people of all religions recognize Jesus Christ as an example of love, compassion, sacrifice and service. Reaching out to the poor, the suffering and the marginalized, he provided moral leadership that continues to inspire countless men, women and children today.
To honor his life and teachings, Christians of all races and denominations have joined together to designate June 10 as Jesus Day. As part of this celebration of unity, they are taking part in the 10th annual March for Jesus in cities throughout the Lone Star State. The march, which began in Austin in 1991, is now held in nearly 180 countries. Jesus Day challenges people to follow Christ's example by performing good works in their communities and neighborhoods. By nursing the sick, feeding the poor or volunteering in homeless shelters, everyone can play a role in making the world a better place.
I urge all Texans to answer the call to serve those in need. By volunteering their time, energy or resources to helping others, adults and youngsters follow Christ's message of love and service in thought and deed.
Therefore, I, George W. Bush, Governor of Texas, do hereby proclaim June 10, 2000, Jesus Day in Texas and urge the appropriate recognition whereof, in official recognition whereof, I hereby affix my signature this 17th day of April, 2000."
This is a clear example of church and state mingling when the Constitution of the United States plainly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …" ; of course Mr. Bush wasn't representing the Congress.
I am a Roman Catholic, a democrat, a liberal and a resident of Travis County - the only county in Texas that didn't vote for Mr. Bush.
I believe in Jesus and the right of Mr. Bush to practice his faith and even declare a Jesus Day. It is, however, highly offensive to me as a Christian, a tax payer, a citizen and a Texan.
Like the Dixie Chicks, I am ashamed that Mr. Bush claims to be a Texan and am further ashamed that Texas overwhelmingly voted this ne'er do well to the Presidency.
Our nation continues to pay dearly for this travesty of political malfesance.
2006-09-21 16:10:49 · answer #2 · answered by Temple 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am sick to death of politicians using religion in their campaigns. Especially Bushy boy... He swung an election on religious moral double speak. Seems like his campaign couldn't do anything without screaming abortion, gay marriage, etc... Those are moral non-issues that are devisive by nature. People feel stongly one way or the other, but it is a personal distinction and has nothing to do with running the country. I can just see some guy whose brother died in Iraq, who is out of work because his job got outsourced, whose parents had to move back in with him because their pensions went bankrupt, whose baby is sick becaue of inadequate child health care... I can just see this guy so happy with life and smiling that everything is right in the world cause Suzie can't get an abortion and Todd and Steve can't get married.
Clouding the issue with hot button moral issues does not remove the issue. I think it was a disgusting campaign and think that unless people wake up, we are slowly moving towards a state or national endorsed religion, that will validate whatever the leader they want.
So much for freedom of religion or separation of church and state.
Here comes the revolution....
(edit) And for the people saying that Separation of Church and State is not in the constitution, they are right those words are not in there. However, courts have found that the principle of a "religious liberty" exists behind the First Amendment, even if those words are not actually there:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
The point of such an amendment is twofold. First, it ensures that religious beliefs - private or organized - are removed from attempted government control. This is the reason why the government cannot tell either you or your church what to believe or to teach. Second, it ensures that the government does not get involved with enforcing, mandating, or promoting particular religious doctrines. This is what happens when the government "establishes" a church - and because doing so created so many problems in Europe, the authors of the Constitution wanted to try and prevent the same from happening here.
Can anyone deny that the First Amendment guarantees the principle of religious liberty, even though those words do not appear there? Similarly, the First Amendment guarantees the principle of the separation of church and state - by implication, because separating church and state is what allows religious liberty to exist.
2006-09-21 15:54:05 · answer #3 · answered by jac4drac 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Lets see can anybody perform these feats of strengths
Cleansing of a Leper
Feed 5000 with 2 bread sticks
Turning Water to Wine
Healing Two Blind Men
Walking on Water
and many more
Jesus wasn't the Savior he was a superhero, The first comic book was the bible, Why don't we have a Green Lantern day or a Spider man Day
2006-09-22 09:16:38 · answer #4 · answered by stocketrader24 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's really not that bad an idea if you really think about it. I may not really compel anyone to do good deeds, but if the thought is there someone might really do something good on that day. The few people who do good works on a daily basis will be joined by those who NEED the name of jesus to be invoked for them to actually get off of their asses and do something.
The point is he could have called it anything as long as people are doing good things on that day its worth it. And this really isn't a forced religion issue, it isn't like he called it "convert day".
2006-09-21 15:40:48 · answer #5 · answered by evillyn 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think it's great that for once a state will challenge it's people to do good works in their communities. I'm really shocked that the Democrats allowed it though because they're so afraid they'll offend someone. No one ever seems to worry about offending Christians though. Go George!
2006-09-21 15:53:47 · answer #6 · answered by vanhammer 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What we need now is a day that challenges people to follow the example of Gandhi. A day to follow the example of John Lenin. A day to follow the example of Timothy Leary. Better yet, A day to follow the teachings of L.Ron Hubbard.
2006-09-21 16:17:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'm in favor of encouraging people of all faiths and philosophies to perform good works in their communities and neighborhoods.
2006-09-21 15:42:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
That Austin is an island of saneness in the sea of crazy fundies that is Texas, and I'm glad I live here and not anywhere else in the state, because though I've lived in Texas my whole life, I've never heard of this "Jesus day," probably because most Austinites would just laugh at it.
And just to clear things up before someone says it, GW is not a Texan. He was born, I believe, in Massachusetts, though don't quote me on that. But he is most definitely not a native Texan.
People should not do good works because it's a pre-set quasi-holiday for religious dogma, but because it is the human thing to do. Designating a day for charity takes the meaning out of it.
2006-09-21 15:41:30 · answer #9 · answered by Girl Wonder 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
...Many heads of state, including past Presidents, have declared days of prayer, etc. So what's the difference? If you don't want to learn from Jesus's example, and it's quite clear some of you don't, who is making you participate?
...Please tell me who has been harmed by Governor Bush's action?
...Please read your Constitution. The "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the U.S. Constitution; it was in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists. And Jefferson was in France when the U.S. Constitution was written.
2006-09-21 15:47:59 · answer #10 · answered by carson123 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Religion and politics are never a good mix and not everyone in Texas or the USA is a Christian, another bad idea George W :(
2006-09-21 15:35:28 · answer #11 · answered by IslandAngel64 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋