Author Topic: Trump’s presidency was prophezized by a book in the 1800s and the Bible!  (Read 1031 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4655
Freedom from (and of) religion means the government cannot promote any religion, or religion generally. Otherwise, those not subscribing to religion, or the particular religion being promoted, are necessarily being oppressed by being forced to subsidize the promotion of views with which they disagree. (This is also why automatic tax exemptions for religious organizations should be unconstitutional--they aren't, but as far as I'm concerned that's completely incorrect, and the millions of atheists in the US should be very rightly aggrieved at the fact that religions are freeloading off their backs.)

As for the US not being a Christian nation, if it wasn't founded on Christianity (which it wasn't) nor has established some form of Christianity as a national religion (which it hasn't and cannot), it's not a Christian nation. It's a secular one, whatever the religious demographics of its populace.

As for the bits about immigration, it still commands that said wanderers be treated well, which is exactly not the case with what we see in the US right now. Turning them back at the border would be one thing (though in some cases a particularly atrocious one, given that many are fleeing violence between gangs empowered by the criminalization of various drugs, largely pushed for by the US); locking them up and separating families (in some cases beyond any realistic hope of reuniting them) is another entirely. (Especially when they deny them due process* and attempt to deport them while they're fighting a court case to remain.)

*You may object that this applies only to citizens, and maybe permanent residents and legal immigrants, but if that's what they'd meant, they'd have said that. Both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments apply their due process clauses to "persons", in contrast to, say, that same Fourteenth Amendment, which specifically only includes citizens in its provision regarding voting rights and reduction in House representation (never enforced, unfortunately; its enforcement was one of the demands presented by Bayard Rustin at the March on Washington).
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline Jacob Harrison

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1045
  • Gender: Male
  • The person who discovered England's true monarch
Freedom from (and of) religion means the government cannot promote any religion, or religion generally. Otherwise, those not subscribing to religion, or the particular religion being promoted, are necessarily being oppressed by being forced to subsidize the promotion of views with which they disagree. (This is also why automatic tax exemptions for religious organizations should be unconstitutional--they aren't, but as far as I'm concerned that's completely incorrect, and the millions of atheists in the US should be very rightly aggrieved at the fact that religions are freeloading off their backs.)

As for the US not being a Christian nation, if it wasn't founded on Christianity (which it wasn't) nor has established some form of Christianity as a national religion (which it hasn't and cannot), it's not a Christian nation. It's a secular one, whatever the religious demographics of its populace.

As for the bits about immigration, it still commands that said wanderers be treated well, which is exactly not the case with what we see in the US right now. Turning them back at the border would be one thing (though in some cases a particularly atrocious one, given that many are fleeing violence between gangs empowered by the criminalization of various drugs, largely pushed for by the US); locking them up and separating families (in some cases beyond any realistic hope of reuniting them) is another entirely. (Especially when they deny them due process* and attempt to deport them while they're fighting a court case to remain.)

*You may object that this applies only to citizens, and maybe permanent residents and legal immigrants, but if that's what they'd meant, they'd have said that. Both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments apply their due process clauses to "persons", in contrast to, say, that same Fourteenth Amendment, which specifically only includes citizens in its provision regarding voting rights and reduction in House representation (never enforced, unfortunately; its enforcement was one of the demands presented by Bayard Rustin at the March on Washington).

1. It means that the government cannot interfere with religious practices, meaning that it is actually in violation of religious freedom to not allow teachers and students to pray in public schools, or prevent towns and cities from having nativity scenes on public property. The promotion of Christianity does not violate non Christians freedoms because they are not being forced to convert.

2. The treaty specifically said that the form of government was not founded on Christianity. However that does not mean that the nation was not founded on Christianity. In fact as I said before the Declaration of Independence says that the concept of inalienable rights comes from God.

3. As I said, Ancient Israel did not have border enforcement like countries do today so the wanderers back then were not breaking any laws. Trump ended the policy of separating families. Today there is border enforcement and Immigration laws so Immigrants must come to the US LEGALLY. You have to put the Bible verses into proper context. It said to give strangers food and clothes.

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3261
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
By that logic the USSR was a Christian Nation because the majority of its citizens were Christian!

Online dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4655
1. Nothing stops students from praying in school. That is absolutely still allowed and if you say it isn't, you're at best uninformed. What it does mean is that public property (money, lands, etc) cannot be used to endorse religion, which means public school teachers, being government employees and paid out of the public purse, cannot endorse religion while in their role as teachers. It also means public lands cannot be used for nativity scenes unless all religious and nonreligious displays are allowed. While I will concede that non-Christians are not being forced to convert, they are nonetheless being imposed upon by being forced to subsidize views with which they disagree.

2. Which is what matters. The government (not the "form of government" as you claimed) is secular, whatever the religious views of the populace.

3. Trump also started the policy of zero-tolerance family separation and only stopped after a few months because the courts ripped him (and Jefferson (as in Davis) Beauregard Sessions III) a new one.

Not only are you trying to defend factual errors and reprehensible actions, you're not even doing it well.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline Jacob Harrison

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1045
  • Gender: Male
  • The person who discovered England's true monarch
1. Nothing stops students from praying in school. That is absolutely still allowed and if you say it isn't, you're at best uninformed. What it does mean is that public property (money, lands, etc) cannot be used to endorse religion, which means public school teachers, being government employees and paid out of the public purse, cannot endorse religion while in their role as teachers. It also means public lands cannot be used for nativity scenes unless all religious and nonreligious displays are allowed. While I will concede that non-Christians are not being forced to convert, they are nonetheless being imposed upon by being forced to subsidize views with which they disagree.

2. Which is what matters. The government (not the "form of government" as you claimed) is secular, whatever the religious views of the populace.

3. Trump also started the policy of zero-tolerance family separation and only stopped after a few months because the courts ripped him (and Jefferson (as in Davis) Beauregard Sessions III) a new one.

Not only are you trying to defend factual errors and reprehensible actions, you're not even doing it well.

1. Nothing stops students from praying in school. That is absolutely still allowed and if you say it isn't, you're at best uninformed. What it does mean is that public property (money, lands, etc) cannot be used to endorse religion, which means public school teachers, being government employees and paid out of the public purse, cannot endorse religion while in their role as teachers. It also means public lands cannot be used for nativity scenes unless all religious and nonreligious displays are allowed. While I will concede that non-Christians are not being forced to convert, they are nonetheless being imposed upon by being forced to subsidize views with which they disagree.

2. Which is what matters. The government (not the "form of government" as you claimed) is secular, whatever the religious views of the populace.

3. Trump also started the policy of zero-tolerance family separation and only stopped after a few months because the courts ripped him (and Jefferson (as in Davis) Beauregard Sessions III) a new one.

Not only are you trying to defend factual errors and reprehensible actions, you're not even doing it well.

1. But that is violating the teacher’s freedom of religion. Teachers leading students in prayers and promoting Christianity does not violate other people’s freedoms because prayer can be optional. And usually other religious displays are allowed, it is just that the towns that have nativity scenes are majority Christian, so there aren’t many people of other religions that display their religions in the public square.

2. But that does not ban members of the government from promoting religion as long as one sect does not dominate over another.

3. Well the reason why there was the unfortunate family seperation is because it was Trump’s only choice because when arresting the illegal immigrants, the adults are put into the American justice system and are therefore put into adult detention centers. It wouldn’t make sense and would be crueler  to put children into adult detention centers. To reunite the families, the solution is to speed up the detention process so that the families are reunited upon deportation. And from Brietbart news

“Obama and Democrats Incentivized This ‘Family Separation’
Until Obama came along, illegal border crossings primarily involved young, single men. Obama incentivized the idea of dragging minor children along on this dangerous journey (where many children are sexually assaulted) through his policy of  “catch and release.”

Once word got out that illegals with small children would be let loose into America, the number of children crossing the border exploded.

Again, the last thing decent people want is for the American government to further incentivize the cruel act of bringing small children along on this brutal trip across the border, which is exactly what Trump is hoping to stop with his zero tolerance policy.”

So again, his policy stopped the incentive for illegal aliens to drag them dragging them on a brutal dangerous journey walking them across miles and miles of desert where they could die on the way. So it is the illegal aliens who are the ones that are guilty of child abuse for bringing the children on a cruel brutal journey across the desert.

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3261
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
It's not violating freedom of religion, you can be whatever religion you please. It's called being professional. If you're there to bloody teach, you teach. You aren't being paid to proselytise. If you are a teacher you are being paid to do a very specific job, teach the curriculum. Teacher's are also in a position of unique power, you are creating a textbook hostile environment for students who don't share the teacher's views if they use their job as a soap box. The "freedom not to participate" is just the freedom to know that you'll be excluded, at best, if you don't share the teacher's religion.

Offline Jacob Harrison

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1045
  • Gender: Male
  • The person who discovered England's true monarch
It's not violating freedom of religion, you can be whatever religion you please. It's called being professional. If you're there to bloody teach, you teach. You aren't being paid to proselytise. If you are a teacher you are being paid to do a very specific job, teach the curriculum. Teacher's are also in a position of unique power, you are creating a textbook hostile environment for students who don't share the teacher's views if they use their job as a soap box. The "freedom not to participate" is just the freedom to know that you'll be excluded, at best, if you don't share the teacher's religion.

But it violates the right of public prayer. It is a greater violation of rights for the teacher to not be allowed to pray, than it is for a student not participating in a classroom prayer because at worst they will have to wait throughout the prayer.

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3261
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
It's not violating freedom of religion, you can be whatever religion you please. It's called being professional. If you're there to bloody teach, you teach. You aren't being paid to proselytise. If you are a teacher you are being paid to do a very specific job, teach the curriculum. Teacher's are also in a position of unique power, you are creating a textbook hostile environment for students who don't share the teacher's views if they use their job as a soap box. The "freedom not to participate" is just the freedom to know that you'll be excluded, at best, if you don't share the teacher's religion.

But it violates the right of public prayer. It is a greater violation of rights for the teacher to not be allowed to pray, than it is for a student not participating in a classroom prayer because at worst they will have to wait throughout the prayer.
You OK with a Muslim leading a class of American kids to prayer?

Still OK if the teacher is well liked and charismatic enough that a majority of kids in the class ditch Christianity to become Muslims and pray with their teacher towards Mecca?
« Last Edit: August 13, 2018, 05:22:34 pm by Tolpuddle Martyr »

Offline Jacob Harrison

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1045
  • Gender: Male
  • The person who discovered England's true monarch
It's not violating freedom of religion, you can be whatever religion you please. It's called being professional. If you're there to bloody teach, you teach. You aren't being paid to proselytise. If you are a teacher you are being paid to do a very specific job, teach the curriculum. Teacher's are also in a position of unique power, you are creating a textbook hostile environment for students who don't share the teacher's views if they use their job as a soap box. The "freedom not to participate" is just the freedom to know that you'll be excluded, at best, if you don't share the teacher's religion.

But it violates the right of public prayer. It is a greater violation of rights for the teacher to not be allowed to pray, than it is for a student not participating in a classroom prayer because at worst they will have to wait throughout the prayer.
You OK with a Muslim leading a class of American kids to prayer?

Still OK if the teacher is well liked and charismatic enough that a majority of kids in the class ditch Christianity to become Muslims and pray with their teacher towards Mecca?

Well it isn’t that likely that a Muslim teacher would convert the students to Islam. I would be ok with the Muslim teacher leading Muslim students in prayer.

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3261
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
Maybe you haven't noticed but Christianity is declining, particularly in the west but Islam is growing worldwide. Still down with that?

Online dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4655
Once again, Jakey-boy proves that he has no fucking clue what freedom from religion, or freedom of religion, means.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2995
It's not violating freedom of religion, you can be whatever religion you please. It's called being professional. If you're there to bloody teach, you teach. You aren't being paid to proselytise. If you are a teacher you are being paid to do a very specific job, teach the curriculum. Teacher's are also in a position of unique power, you are creating a textbook hostile environment for students who don't share the teacher's views if they use their job as a soap box. The "freedom not to participate" is just the freedom to know that you'll be excluded, at best, if you don't share the teacher's religion.

But it violates the right of public prayer. It is a greater violation of rights for the teacher to not be allowed to pray, than it is for a student not participating in a classroom prayer because at worst they will have to wait throughout the prayer.
You OK with a Muslim leading a class of American kids to prayer?

Still OK if the teacher is well liked and charismatic enough that a majority of kids in the class ditch Christianity to become Muslims and pray with their teacher towards Mecca?

Well it isn’t that likely that a Muslim teacher would convert the students to Islam. I would be ok with the Muslim teacher leading Muslim students in prayer.

No, the Muslim teacher is praying in public leading his students in prayer. The other students are free to participate or not participate in the prayer, whether muslim or otherwise.

Offline Jacob Harrison

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1045
  • Gender: Male
  • The person who discovered England's true monarch
Maybe you haven't noticed but Christianity is declining, particularly in the west but Islam is growing worldwide. Still down with that?

Well the parents of the students will be able to prevent their kids from converting to Islam.

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3261
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
Maybe you haven't noticed but Christianity is declining, particularly in the west but Islam is growing worldwide. Still down with that?

Well the parents of the students will be able to prevent their kids from converting to Islam.
You mean petition the school board to prevent the Mullah from converting their kids? Yeah that's what I thought. Hypocrite.

Offline Jacob Harrison

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1045
  • Gender: Male
  • The person who discovered England's true monarch
Maybe you haven't noticed but Christianity is declining, particularly in the west but Islam is growing worldwide. Still down with that?

Well the parents of the students will be able to prevent their kids from converting to Islam.
You mean petition the school board to prevent the Mullah from converting their kids? Yeah that's what I thought. Hypocrite.

The parents can tell their kids that Islam is a horrible religion that treats women horribly and has a bunch of horrible rules, and that will dissuade the kids from converting.