Ok I just saw the headline on yahoo about the cross being on government property. Do you guys think that people abuse the constitution a equal rights? I mean if crosses were put in a public place for 70 years its almost a tradition and not so much a religious statement. The U S Constitution was based on morals which were supposed to keep us free, not argue about who has more landmarks in public places. Am I the only one who thinks this way or can you guys back me up on this? ( I know I didnt really make sense but I hope you get my point)
2007-09-06 16:37:43 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I see your guys points about seperation of church and state. I do how ever believe that if you dont believe in god you should not believe in the foundation upon which this very country was built. "When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of NATURES GOD entitle them, a DECENT RESPECT to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separations". We separated from England to avoid the clash of opinions so why must we fight amongst ourselves? I did not mean for this to be insulting but rather to see if you guys dont think we as Americans are getting a little too petty.
2007-09-06 16:54:59 · update #1
"AND for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of DIVINE PROVIDENCE, we mutually pledge to each other our lives , our fortunes , and our sacred honor" Our country was founded relying on the help of God, so why cant the government continue this tradition?
2007-09-06 17:02:29 · update #2
Speak English said lynching was going on for 70 years which is 100% true BUT that wasn't in the Declaration of Independence was it??????????
2007-09-06 17:04:53 · update #3
The cross was placed there as a landmark. It has no religious significance at all. It's just the ACLU and the atheist whackjobs that are screaming about it.
In other words, I think like you. It's not damaging anything, either tangible or intangible. People just want to force their beliefs on others, so that's why they complain about a cross and call it religious. It's called the "Oppression of the majority by the minority".
2007-09-06 16:47:51 · answer #1 · answered by THE Answer 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I am a Christian, but it is clear in this case the government is favoring one religion over another. It is trying to sell a hole in its land to private people so they can have a cross there. It is favoring on established religion over another.
In this case, I have to agree with the judges. Who put it there? Why was it allowed to be there so long? These are the questions.
2007-09-06 16:50:10 · answer #2 · answered by Philip McCrevice 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its government property. The cross was kept there to avoid the 1st Amendment. That was wrong and still violates it.
I don't agree with the position that because it was there 70 years, its OK.
A budhist asked for the same consideration and was told to go stuff his karma in a sack.
Point is: the government made a law which favored one religion above others. That was wrong.
2007-09-06 16:42:33 · answer #3 · answered by krollohare2 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS PART OF THE CHURCH POLICY OF SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE--THIS STARTED IN ENGLAND WITH KING HENRY VIII, ANN BOLIN WAS HIS WIFE HE WANTED A DIVORCE TO MARRY JANE SEYMORE AND BISHOP THOMAS ABECKETT OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH REFUSED TO GRANT THE DIVORCE UNDER CANNON LAW OF THE CHURCH--THE KING GOT MAD-SEVERED HIS TIES TO THE POPE, BANISHED HIS WIFE TO A TOWER, BEHEADED THOMAS ABECKETT AND MARRIED JANE SEYMORE-THIS THEN STARTED THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND RUN BY THE KING AND AN ARCHBISHOP OF HIS CONTROL OR A PAWN--SINCE THEN THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE--*OH BY THE WAY A NEW NOTE OF INTEREST INTO THIS POLICY NOW HAS APPEARED WITH THE NEW DOLLAR COIN--THE NEW DOLLAR COIN DO NOT TAKE IT IN TRADE REFUSE IT--THE INSCRIPTION IN GOD WE TRUST IS MISSING FROM THE COIN AND THIS IS JUST A START BY NON BELIEVERS-
2007-09-06 16:52:10 · answer #4 · answered by ahsoasho2u2 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Lynchings were put in public places for over 70 years too. By your stupid logic those should be allowed too.
Seperation of church and state. Doesn't get much clearer than that. So get your cross off my taxpayer funded parkland.
2007-09-06 16:42:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
The cross does not belong on government property unless it's a military cemetery. Sorry, separation of church in state. Don't impose your religion on other tax payers.
2007-09-06 16:42:11 · answer #6 · answered by 354gr 6 · 3⤊ 4⤋
I am one of the folks who realize that all these fine christian people in govt are scary....keep religion in church.
Keep god out of my government, and I won't think in your church.
Yah hoo, I'm gonna have to change my name.
2007-09-06 16:43:06 · answer #7 · answered by curious115 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yeah. It's a damn shame when something that enhances the aesthetics goes just because it may have religous connotations that MAY offend somebody.
2007-09-06 16:44:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Yes, the USA was once a Christian nation.
2007-09-06 16:44:07 · answer #9 · answered by sorry sista 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I absolutely agree. I wouldn't care if I saw Buddha statues around or crosses or pentacles, whatever. This country is turning very competitive with its own people. "ooh look, they have one more cross than we have buddhas. Lets complain!" Whiners!
2007-09-06 16:42:24 · answer #10 · answered by CindyRELLA 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋