PsychGuy London
05/09/20 1:35 pm
It’s not worded as the separation of church and state, however, it does say in it’s entirety:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
That first part of: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...” means that the government cannot create laws that are based around any church, mosque or temple. While individuals do have the freedom to worship however they please, they cannot force religious beliefs into law.
PsychGuy London
05/09/20 1:39 pm
Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter in 1802 that addressed this matter and he stated:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."
Suzan Hawaii
05/08/20 1:51 am
The mail should have every right to declare the child reported to him and has zero responsibility and zero contact ever. I love the story of the gentleman who had custody of his baby what’s the birth mother said he had been dead.
PsychGuy London
05/09/20 5:03 pm
My beliefs are not based on religion. My beliefs are based on pragmatic empirical evidence. There is no evidence the Judeo-Christian/Muslim God exists. Nor is there any tangible proof for any other god or gods. If I became an elected official, then my decisions would be based on evidence and fact. Not spirituality.
Jefferson specially talks about the wall dividing the church from the state. A clear separation. You may try to twist his words for your own religious dogma, however, he is clearly stating that the two are separate in its entirety.
Also, why would the first amendment be “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...” if they were only talking about the freedom of the church and individual to worship as they please. They say specifically they will not make any law that is from the perspective of any religious institution. That is a clear indication of a separation of church and state.
PsychGuy London
05/09/20 5:06 pm
It does make sense to know this, as this allows us to make informed decisions. We no longer have to trust religious dogma. We know the facts. Just because you say it’s not needed does not make it so. It is very important as it is a medical procedure preformed for a number of reasons. Including medical and quality of life. You can’t dismiss empirical evidence backed science because it doesn’t suit your agenda.
PsychGuy London
05/09/20 5:10 pm
Your choice of words are frankly ignorant. It is never pedantic to know the development of the foetus. It is important for many reasons, even outside of abortion. Science and knowledge are important, and far out way emotional responses and spiritual beliefs within society as a whole.
If you are against abortion don’t have one. You have no right to tell women that their bodies should be controlled by your thoughts on the matter. When their decision, if they choose to abort the foetus, is backed by scientific and medical evidence.
sarahgo US
05/09/20 11:44 am
Your scientific response doesn’t nullify my spiritual belief that life begins at conception. As a pro-lifer, I also support the health of the mother. If they were both to die without termination, save one out of two instead of letting them both die. That is not what is happening in this country though. 60 million unborn babies were not killed to save their mothers. The reality is, it’s not fair to let the mother choose “because it’s her body,” because she isn’t the one who dies. It’s not just her body. I don’t expect you to agree with me, but you can’t convince me that it’s right.
sarahgo US
05/09/20 3:29 pm
I’m aware of the first amendment. That means that Congress has to stay out of the Church’s business. That is not a two-way separation. In the letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, Jefferson assured the congregation that the federal government could not interfere with their church. It does not say that decisions will never be made based on religious beliefs. That would be impossible. Everyone has beliefs that are based on religion of some sort, even if it looks nothing like mine.
PsychGuy London
05/08/20 3:13 am
I think we must do everything we can to avoid the violence, such as diplomacy and getting international organisations, such as the UN, involved. If they refuse to cease then everything should be ready for defensive manoeuvring, to avoid allowing the country to be attacked, but preemptive strikes themselves I would say would be maybe a bridge too far, or absolutely a last resort.
Acebeardman14 Tennessee
05/09/20 6:05 am
Background checks in the sense of checking for any felonies. Banning things such as bump stocks and high capacity magazines though is a violation of the second amendment in my eyes.
Show of Hands
Comments: Add Comment