Political Crossfire Forums

[Clara Listensprechen]

psholtz wrote: Clara Listensprechen wrote: Heh. An error-filled Word of God means God's not all that followable as a moral example or anything else.
The Bible is not the Word of God.

Deal w/ it.
You're preachin' to the choir, sweetie. That doesn't make the literalists go away, ya know.

[sLiPpY]

psholtz wrote: Clara Listensprechen wrote: Heh. An error-filled Word of God means God's not all that followable as a moral example or anything else.
The Bible is not the Word of God.

Deal w/ it.

:woo:

btw...I think Clara would be the first to say it.

[Clara Listensprechen]

Thank you very much.

He's preachin' to the choir. The problem with our nation and our planet = those people who claim that it IS the Inerrant Word of God. Deal with THAT.

[John]

Clara Listensprechen wrote: Thank you very much.

He's preachin' to the choir. The problem with our nation and our planet = those people who claim that it IS the Inerrant Word of God. Deal with THAT.

But you see...you can hoop and holler all day long....it doesn't change the fact that it IS the word of God and you WILL be held personally accountable for every idle word you speak.

[Clara Listensprechen]

Sure, we can't change what you believe, but we sure as shootin' can yank your power plug before you damage the planet any more than your guys already have.

[John]

Clara Listensprechen wrote: Sure, we can't change what you believe, but we sure as shootin' can yank your power plug before you damage the planet any more than your guys already have.

You? You've proven to be lacking in understanding the subject.

I'm not sure what damage you think I'm doing? Why don't you explain?

[Clara Listensprechen]

People who don't believe as you do can see the damage quite plainly, all the way from the corruption of our own government to the tinderbox that is the middle east. Political power should be yanked from your likes YESTERDAY.

[cap'n queasy]

So your idea is certain people should be banned from participating in our government because of their religious beliefs.

Very nice. Glad we got that out in the open.

You obviously hate the Constitution, which bans the government from discriminating against people because of their religion, and so go around trying to make it look like that's what they are doing to you with all your dumb theories.

All to promote some radical political agenda.

[cap'n queasy]

Lord help us when freaks like you become the majority and are able to dismantle the Constitution.

[psholtz]

cap'n queasy wrote: You obviously hate the Constitution, which bans the government from discriminating against people because of their religion, and so go around trying to make it look like that's what they are doing to you with all your dumb theories.
Strictly speaking, the Constitution only forbids Congress from passing laws which infringe upon the free exercise of religion.

Whether the executive branch has the power to restrict people of certain religious persuasions from holding office (or positions) w/in the federal government seems to me to be a separate issue entirely. It seems to me that the executive would have the power to structure the apparatus of the federal government however it sees fit, and moreover, I don't see how excluding people of a certain religious persuasion from holding jobs in the government is infringing upon the free exercise of religion.

If your religion isn't on the list, then just don't work in the federal government. Simple enough. But I don't see how that's interfering w/ your right to "practice" religion.

Moreover, I don't think that's point she's making. What you and John post has - to a first approximation - nothing to do w/ religion. Your rhetoric is cloaked in religious jargon, true, and you certainly seem to "believe" the things you are saying, but you are only fooling yourselves if you believe that these ideologies of yours have the power to draw you any closer to God. Rather, they seem to me to be little more than very thinly veiled political convictions.. hence, why the issue of government came up in the first place.

[psholtz]

cap'n queasy wrote: Lord help us when freaks like you become the majority and are able to dismantle the Constitution.
The Constitution has long since been dismantled, and those parts that are still standing are more or less entirely ignored today.

Grab a ride on the Clue Train..

[sLiPpY]

psholtz wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Lord help us when freaks like you become the majority and are able to dismantle the Constitution.
The Constitution has long since been dismantled, and those parts that are still standing are more or less entirely ignored today.

Grab a ride on the Clue Train..

Which reminds me, I like to refer to it as being, "the framework for an adhocracy" vs. the Constitution. Historically it seems to me the aforementioned perception might be a little more accurate. :-D