O'Donnell Intends to Make You All Convert to her Religion

Originally posted by Target Earth
there is no " separation of church in state" It only means that the Government can not have a Church of America
Nationalized Religion, She only asked a question... Why can't they teach both Evolution and Creationism?

And why not Thoughtism, Matrixism? and every other ism I can think of from now till the end of time?

I think that this is a dream...I demand everyone in the country teach their children that everything and everyone is all part of SaturnFX's dreamworld...it should be taught equal with creationism and evolution!

And, if you personally think this world is your dream, then yes...all schools should spend a day teaching that also...equal time..make sure to get your name in.

Matter of fact, lets just call school "random stoner thoughts of the universe" and cut out all the other stuff...we won't have time to teach anything else considering we will be dealing with every single fruit loop creationist myth on the planet..(and I damn sure will be creating new theories daily and demanding equal time for my latest intelligent design thoughts)

Ms O'Donnell has a lot to learn about America. If she wins the election she will begin to learn. The first thing that she will learn is that she has to be able to argue her ideas using the real US Constitution as a guide, not the constitution she though she knew.

Watching her will be very entertaining. It will be better than ordinary daytime TV.

tt

I disagree, I think O'Donnell sums up the tea party very well. I don't see why they should be offended seeing that many of those involved in the tea party also share her views.

In fact, if it wasn't for the tea party support, we wouldn't even know who Christine O'Donnell is.

The tea party and Christine O'Donnell are one in the same. People who want to implement a specific brand of faith values and christian principles under the guide of less government.

reply to post by inforeal


Though I hold myself nuetral or in a "no mans land" politically and this has to do with only a small portion of your post. I counted and the Democrats have started 16 wars(not to mention our longest and most unprovoked, pointless war) and the Republicans are accountable for 10.
***note I may have missed some so you are more then welcome to correct me on this***

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by whatukno

 

Yeah, and what I fail to figure out is this. If she was a Witch, then that means she knows a lot more than Christians do, then why convert to Christianity? I am a Wiccan, and would never do that, no way, no how. Once you know the truth of the church and the history of religion, you just cannot go back to being brainwashed again. So either she never was a "witch" and just said that to get publicity, or, she was and is just saying she is a Christian to get elected. I say don't let her near Capital Hill. Send he packing back to where she came from.

Edit to say this: I would like, just once, if a politician of either sex were to say, "I am a Wiccan, so deal with it." It seems like if you are anything but Christian, you don't get the job, and that, friends, is just wrong. Freedom of Religion means all religions, not just one.

edit on 10/19/10 by autowrench because: (no reason given)

She wasn't a witch and has never claimed to be, its the usual cra* from the MSM. Years ago on an old comedy TV show she said she looked into it ..thats all. Obviously she didn't look very deep.But then she said she was at the time checking out lots of religions. Anyway the sad thing here has nothing to do with religion but the way people take a stupid ball and run with it.

Wow,Just, Wow!!!!

Some of you liberals will bite on anything. What about when Obama stated that he had visited all 48 states.

This is really getting silly.

I do want to say that seperation of church and state is not in the constitution, it is part of the bill of rights. There is a distinction there whether you want to admit to yourself or not.

I also want you to understand that seperation of church and state does not mean a state without church. It does not mean that children can't pray in schools. It does not mean that children or adults can not openly carry a bible. You athiest have become bigots against religious people.

Originally posted by russ212
You athiest have become bigots against religious people.

Hear hear!!!!
Yeah!
Alll yous athiests is bigots!

I think ATS could use an "ironic" font.

reply to post by inforeal


I refuse to be content with the lesser of two evils. While I would never claim Bush to be any better, Obama has done so much harm to this country he should be put on trial for treason. You do realize he has committed tens of thousands more troops to these "Bush" wars that he had promised to bring our troops home from. The guy is a liar, and a son of the father of lies.

This whole "Christian Theocracy" issue saddens me greatly. The only government that could be ruled in a completely Christian manner would be one ruled by Christ himself.

Christianity thrived the most when it was being persecuted. Christianity does not require any specific political stance or form of government in order to function. It breaks the boundaries of race, language and nation. Having a nation where people are forced to be Christian goes against one of the very foundations of Christianity, that God gave us the choice to love Him, because that is the only way the love is genuine.

Sure, you are going to continue seeing seeing Christians fight against things they see as being moral failures in our society (whether it be gay marriage, abortion, unjust wars, poverty, alcohol and drug abuse, etc.) because we feel these things are important. Any person that claims to stand by a moral conviction but does nothing about it is simply apathetic and lazy. I'm all about living at peace with my neighbors, but not at the expense of my conscience.

If the government tried to establish some form of "christian" theocracy, watch out. It will not be true to the faith and will only be a way to deceive the people and cause further harm to the true faith. It will lead the weaker followers away from the true path and it will turn the unbelievers against all Christians, even though the real Christians themselves would be fighting the so-called theocracy.

reply to post by pirhanna


Groovy! I'm diggin' the witchcraft deal, it's almost Halloween!!! Woooooooooooooooo!!!

"Lighten up Francis!"

Has anyone actually heard the audio from this debate?? I have and the laughter, cajoling and chatter after she made her statement was pathetic. It was pathetic because what she said was TRUE. We have determined in this thread that the specific language in question does not exist in the Constitution.

That is the issue!! Not sure how she plans to convert everyone to "Her Religion"

Give me a break. This is going to be a fun couple of weeks.

Originally posted by frimilden
Well whatever chance she had at winning just got tossed out with those comments. This woman is ignorant and dangerous to our country if ever in power. Bible thumper that would try to force her religion onto everyone else VIA legislation.

I wish it was that easy. Too many "sheeple" either don't pay attention to this type of thing or are so immersed in Christianity that they agree with her. One thing I've learned (sadly) over the last ten years is to never underestimate the ignorance of the general public.

reply to post by Royzer

One thing I've learned (sadly) over the last ten years is to never underestimate the ignorance of the general public.

I'm not trying to pick on you but this statement is direct reflection of how the White House and those on The Hill view the average American. In the past couple of weeks Biden and Obama have both alluded to the notion that they honestly believe that people just don't understand what goes on in Washington. It is all just to "complex" for us to comprehend. This elitist esoteric mentality in DC has to end and the people of this country are in dire need of true representation.

Originally posted by russ212
Wow,Just, Wow!!!!

Some of you liberals will bite on anything. What about when Obama stated that he had visited all 48 states.

This is really getting silly.

I do want to say that seperation of church and state is not in the constitution, it is part of the bill of rights. There is a distinction there whether you want to admit to yourself or not.

I also want you to understand that seperation of church and state does not mean a state without church. It does not mean that children can't pray in schools. It does not mean that children or adults can not openly carry a bible. You athiest have become bigots against religious people.

Still rung up on Obama making a human error after exhausting touring nation wide? He's a human being, not my favorite, but he's still a person that makes mistakes. Get over it.

But back on topic. There is no need for combining religious ideologies with political policies. You want to live in a world like that? Go to the Middle East.

Thanks buddy.

I still don't know who invited the southern Bible thumpers to take over the tea party movement.

Out here in calif the tea party started as a anti tax anti spend and anti insurance company written health care bill movement.
Since the bible thumpers took control many of us republicans have left the tea party and moved back to the republican party.

As for the bible thumpers they can stick it where the sun don't shine.
As for them trying to force us to into there religion that will never happen there is not enough of them and we have guns to stop any stupid things like that.

i am a Christen Deist and that type BS is why i no longer belong to a organized religion.

reply to post by ANNED


Agreed!

AND.....so excited to see someone identify themselves as a "Christian Deist."

I thought I was the only one that realized "Deism" is what most of us are practicing. I think most of the Christians in the country fall under that definition, but they would never admit to it.

Let's start our own church! I hear it is the quickest way to fame and fortune!

reply to post by pirhanna


That's just crap. In fact, she was right in what she said. The Constitution doesn't explicitly say "seperation of Church and State". What is does say is that there shall not be an establishment of religion. The separation is implied in that the United States does not officialy recognize one religion for its citizens. We, the PEOPLE, have the freedom to chose how we wish to worship and that this shouldn't be impeded upon.

However, court cases have leaned in the direction of this separation when it comes to religion and education. How many times have you heard the phrase "separation of church and state" and that it was being applied to a court case involving some school district?

What is ironic is the blatant attempt at schools to discriminate against Christian practices (such as bible studies, Christmas plays/concerts, prayer) but at the same time allowing many other religious practices to take place on its grounds.

By saying that the Constitution does not say "separation of church and state", she was technically correct. And the implied separation has been widely misused in my opinion. She was also right when she mentioned "Intelligent Design" as being a permissible teaching concept. Of course, Coons would rather use the term "Creationism" to highlight the Christian viewpoint.

Intelligent design does not necessarily indicate that God created or was responsible for the universe or our existence. (at least for me is doesn't) For those those who believe in other life in the universe, wouldn't intelligent design suggest that our existence could have been a result of life from another planet coming to Earth and aiding our evolution?

But to make the leap that because the Constitution does not explicityly state "separation of church and state" means she wants a theocracy is just plain nuts.

Originally posted by russ212
Wow,Just, Wow!!!!

Some of you liberals will bite on anything. What about when Obama stated that he had visited all 48 states.

This is really getting silly.

what about obama...but obama...waaa, obama!...heh

actually, he said 57 states...come on man, this is your grand ace in the hole, at least get that right...
and incidently, a gaff is a gaff, but a scary philosophy is very different...if you think someone gaffeing on 57 states = the same as showing a theocratic desire, then, well, I guess I don't have much more to say.

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by pirhanna

 

That's just crap. In fact, she was right in what she said. The Constitution doesn't explicitly say "seperation of Church and State".
What is does say is that there shall not be an establishment of religion. The separation is implied in that the United States does not officialy recognize one religion for its citizens. We, the PEOPLE, have the freedom to chose how we wish to worship and that this shouldn't be impeded upon.

This is what is known as splitting a hair. correct, the words are not present in the first amendment in that specific order, however, the intent is very clear. No established religion shall take place in the US...be it christianity, islam, satanism, etc...the government shall remain, in all intensive purposes, agnostic.

What is ironic is the blatant attempt at schools to discriminate against Christian practices (such as bible studies, Christmas plays/concerts, prayer) but at the same time allowing many other religious practices to take place on its grounds.

bible studies with my tax dollars? I think not...thats what church sunday schools or private schools are for.

Christmas plays? Frosty and Santa are independent of religion..are you talking specifically about the mythical story of christ? again, why should my tax dollars go into furthering a specific religion? Should I also be responsible for paying a play about islam once islam becomes the majority religion in the US? ya...didn't think so.

And care to define what other religious practices public schools have implemented (oh, the making national headlines because some twit teacher did something dumb doesn't count...talking policy here, not individual morons)

By saying that the Constitution does not say "separation of church and state", she was technically correct.

Technically we are also allowed slaves if we use the non-amended constitution..amendments have altered the constitution
Technically, she is a twit.

And the implied separation has been widely misused in my opinion. She was also right when she mentioned "Intelligent Design" as being a permissible teaching concept. Of course, Coons would rather use the term "Creationism" to highlight the Christian viewpoint.

Then you agree I am right that students should be also taught every single theory anyone can come up with to explain how we are here, be it evolution, creationism, dream matrix, the great tree, hyperdimensional impressions, illusionary universe, etc etc etc.

All equal time, right? because there are thousands of variations that are neither evolution or "I.D."

bet you wont answer that question.

Intelligent design does not necessarily indicate that God created or was responsible for the universe or our existence. (at least for me is doesn't) For those those who believe in other life in the universe, wouldn't intelligent design suggest that our existence could have been a result of life from another planet coming to Earth and aiding our evolution?

and THAT is the actual problem..
how do you even teach it? how can you possibly teach such a thing.
No evidence, just speculation and some old books from cavemen to build an argument..thats it.
you honestly think that deserves the same timeframe as a scientific discussion showing mountains of evidence on evolution?

And then the philosophy comes up in a science class (philosophy and science should never mix.)
Well, who created the creators? well, it must all be magic then.
bah.

But to make the leap that because the Constitution does not explicityly state "separation of church and state" means she wants a theocracy is just plain nuts.

It means she has been thinking about just that...and why do people think about it to begin with? She read the constitution and took notes that there was no wording in the original document..why...think for just a half second why someone would seek out that whom is also seeking power to rule..not some academic curiousity, but a subject matter that is literally running her life as she quests for power over the masses.

time to engage in critical thinking.

reply to post by russ212

I also want you to understand that seperation of church and state does not mean a state without church. It does not mean that children can't pray in schools. It does not mean that children or adults can not openly carry a bible. You athiest have become bigots against religious people.

A little more prayer wouldn't hurt any of us, ask the Chilean miners,

I am starting to really take into consideration, faith is a survival mechanism.