I hope he does.
I think it would be an improvement to USA society for Trump to demonstrate that he doesn't believe in personal freedom or states rights, just before the 2020 election.
Tom
Uh huh, and you wonder why the Dems lost in 2016...
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I hope he does.
I think it would be an improvement to USA society for Trump to demonstrate that he doesn't believe in personal freedom or states rights, just before the 2020 election.
Tom
Personally, don't see a nearly century old object as a big deal.or, today's people's make mountains out of a mole hill and its making me loose hair. Where has all my hair gone?
So,Uh huh, and you wonder why the Dems lost in 2016...
Or how much "In God We Trust" irritates the extremists. You would think their whole world depended on not seeing a phrase.Personally, don't see a nearly century old object as a big deal.
But I can't help but notice how much religious people needed to have "In God We Trust" on cash.
You'd think that symbolism was important to them.
Tom
You must be younger than I thought. My mom was a teacher and religious decorations were allowed.Again, false. "No-- technically, religious decorations are not allowed in public school classrooms under federal law in the United States." [Google "Are religious symbols allowed in public schools" + there's numerous links]
Since I taught in public education for 36 years, including a poli sci course for 25 years, I went through this entire routine.
I, personally don't care about the printing on the cash.Or how much "In God We Trust" irritates the extremists. You would think their whole world depended on not seeing a phrase.
How naive. I suggest you read up on the history of Christianity's involvement in our government, or what many Christians think about their religion and its entanglement in the US government.No... if it were illegal because of the First Amendment, they wouldn't have put that there in the first place.
Why did the anti-religious extremists insist on taking it to the Supreme Court. You would think that their whole world depended on not seeing a phrase.I, personally don't care about the printing on the cash.
Why did religious extremists insist on taking this to the Supreme Court? You would think that their whole world depended on seeing a phrase.
A phrase that is demonstrably false. The reason for the federal government issuing currency is because you can't trust God. You need something tangible. Gold is excellent, paper backed up by the government usually works, but nobody trusts God.
Tom
How lacking in history you seem to be.How naive. I suggest you read up on the history of Christianity's involvement in our government, or what many Christians think about their religion and its entanglement in the US government.
.
It's actually the state that determines the full parameters of public school property. However, the state has to abide by federal guidelines based on federal court decisions, and the parameters dealing with separation of church & state in regards to religious displays has already been established by them. They could be changed in the future, but today they are what they are.It does unfortunately. It's up to the local community to decide though whether it's for them or not.
Nice try, but it's the Constitution as interpreted by the SCOTUS and other federal courts that makes the determination-- not your opinion nor mine.Now if you guys wanna be sticklers about federal law overriding states or local govt laws. Then you are giving Trump permission to shutdown states that decriminalized marijuana and start locking folks up according to Federal law.
Hair today, goon tomorrow.or, today's people's make mountains out of a mole hill and its making me loose hair. Where has all my hair gone?
So,
You're favorite candidate for president might trump personal freedom and states rights.
And you think this is about political partisanship.
Tom
Nice try, but it's the Constitution as interpreted by the SCOTUS and other federal courts that makes the determination-- not your opinion nor mine.
Because the Constitution suggests differently.Why did the anti-religious extremists insist on taking it to the Supreme Court. You would think that their whole world depended on not seeing a phrase.
You said that Trump should invoke Federal power over pot smokers.I'm not the one imposing federal law over local law.
I'm so pleased that you consider 74 to be "younger". It's no wonder I like you so much!You must be younger than I thought. My mom was a teacher and religious decorations were allowed.
As far as I can see, dividing the country into warring factions is the whole point of keeping that on the currency.Or how much "In God We Trust" irritates the extremists. You would think their whole world depended on not seeing a phrase.
Actually, you are reading the Constitution wrong. It is the byproduct of today's rewriting of history of which, apparently, you are one of the casualties.Because the Constitution suggests differently.
Not that a Christian cares what the Constitution says. They've gotta keep their privilege.
Tom
I'm so pleased that you consider 74 to be "younger". It's no wonder I like you so much!
This issue was a biggy in the 1980's, which is also the decade so many of these cases went to court. Because of the nature of the courses I taught, namely anthropology, political science, and comparative religions, it very much affected me. However, I already had been in compliance because of the diversity of my students and because I felt that students needed a variety of exposures.
With my comparative religions students, we "church-hopped", thus they were exposed to numerous denominations. And then I would bring in spokespeople from synagogues and mosques to cover those areas.
In my anthropology course, I covered the five major religions plus various forms of animism, especially since religion is considered to be one of the "five basic institutions" all societies have (the others are family, economic, political, and education).
IOW, they just couldn't shut me up.
It wasn't dividing until extremists and history rewrites, infiltrates the societal strata. That's why it wasn't an issue for hundreds of years.As far as I can see, dividing the country into warring factions is the whole point of keeping that on the currency.
Dividing people into warring factions seems to be the conservative Christian way of doing things.
And always has been. Christians like divisions that they can exploit.
Tom