Judge Roy Moore a Hero---well at least to some!

[Elite1]

A good history lesson that we all should read.



Patrick Henry is not quoted properly in our present day school texts.

"Give me liberty or give me death" is not exactly all that he said or

why!



Did you know that 52 of the 55 signers of the Declaration of

Independence were orthodox, deeply committed Christians? The other

three all believed in the Bible as the divine truth, the God of

scripture, and His personal intervention.

It is the same Congress that formed the American Bible Society.

Immediately after creating the Declaration of Independence, the

Continental

Congress voted to purchase and import 20,000 copies of scripture for

the people of this nation.



Patrick Henry, who is called the firebrand of the American Revolution, is

still remembered for his words, "Give me liberty or give me death". But

in current textbooks the context of these words is deleted. Here is what

he

said: "An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But

we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides

over

the destinies of nations. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone. Is

life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains

and

slavery? Forbid it Almighty God. I know not what course others may

take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death. "



These sentences have been erased from our textbooks. Was Patrick Henry a

Christian? The following year, 1776, he wrote this: "It cannot be

emphasized

too strongly or too often that this great Nation was founded, not by

religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the Gospel of

Jesus Christ. For that reason alone, people of other faiths have been

afforded

freedom of worship here. "



Consider these words that Thomas Jefferson wrote on the front of his

well-worn Bible: "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of

the doctrines of Jesus. I have little doubt that our whole country will

soon

be rallied to the unity of our Creator and, I hope, to the pure doctrine

of

Jesus also. "



Consider these words from George Washington, the Father of our Nation, in

his farewell speech on September 19, 1796: "It is impossible to govern

the

world without God and the Bible. Of all the dispositions and habits that

lead to political prosperity, our religion and morality are the

indispensable supporters. Let us with caution indulge the supposition

that

morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both

forbid us to expect that our national morality can prevail in exclusion

of religious principle. "



Was George Washington a Christian? Consider these words from his personal

prayer book: "Oh, eternal and everlasting God, direct my thoughts, words

and work. Wash away my sins in the immaculate blood of the lamb and purge

my

heart by thy Holy Spirit. Daily, frame me more and more in the likeness

of thy son, Jesus Christ, that living in thy fear, and dying in thy

favor, I

may in thy appointed time obtain the resurrection of the justified unto

eternal life. Bless, O Lord, the whole race of mankind and let the world

be filled with the knowledge of thee and thy son, Jesus Christ. "



Consider these words by John Adams, our second president, who also served

as chairman of the American Bible Society. In an address to military

leaders

he said, "We have no government armed with the power capable of

contending

with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our

Constitution

was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate

to the government of any other. "



How about our first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay? He stated that when

we select our national leaders, if we are to preserve our Nation, we must

select Christians. "Providence has given to our people the choice of

their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of

our

Christian Nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers. "



John Quincy Adams, son of John Adams, was the sixth U. S. President. He

was also the chairman of the American Bible Society, which he considered

his

highest and most important role. On July 4, 1821, President Adams said,

"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: it connected in

one

indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles

of Christianity. "



Calvin Coolidge, our 30th President of the United States reaffirmed this

truth when he wrote, "The foundations of our society and our government

rest so much on the teachings of the Bible that it would be difficult to

support them if faith in these teachings would cease to be practically

universal

in our country. "





In 1782, the United States Congress voted this resolution: "The Congress

of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in

all

schools. "



William Holmes McGuffey, author of the McGuffey Reader, was used for over

100 years in our public schools with over 125 million copies sold, until

it was stopped in 1963. President Lincoln called him the "Schoolmaster of

the Nation. "



Listen to these words of Mr. McGuffey: "The Christian religion is the

religion of our country. From it are derived our notions on the character

of God, on the great moral Governor of the universe. On its doctrines are

founded the peculiarities of our free institutions. From no source has

the author drawn more conspicuously than from the sacred Scriptures. From

all

these extracts from the Bible I make no apology. "



Of the first 108 universities founded in America, 106 were distinctly

Christian, including the first, Harvard University, chartered in 1636.

In the original Harvard Student Handbook, rule number 1 was that students

seeking entrance must know Latin and Greek so that they could study the

scriptures:



"Let every student be plainly instructed and earnestly pressed to

consider

well, the main end of his life, and study to know God and Jesus Christ,

which is eternal life, John 17:3; and therefore to lay Jesus Christ as

the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning. And seeing the

Lord

only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in

secret to seek it of him (Proverbs 2:3). "



For over 100 years, more than 50% of all Harvard graduates were pastors!



It is clear from history that the Bible and the Christian faith, were

foundational to our educational and judicial system. However, in 1947,

there was a radical change of direction for the Supreme Court. It

required

ignoring every precedent of Supreme Court ruling for the past 160 years.

The Supreme Court ruled in a limited way to affirm a wall of separation

between church and State in the public classroom.



In the coming years, this led to removing prayer from public schools in

1962. Here is the prayer that was banished:

"Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence on Thee. We beg Thy

blessings upon us and our parents and our teachers and our country.

Amen. "



In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled that Bible reading was outlawed as

unconstitutional in the public school system. The court offered this

justification: "If portions of the New Testament were read without

explanation, they could and have been psychologically harmful to

children. "



Bible reading was now unconstitutional, though the Bible was quoted 94

percent of the time by those who wrote our Constitution and shaped our

Nation and its system of education and justice and government.



In 1965, the Courts denied as unconstitutional the right of a student in

the public school cafeteria to bow hi head and pray audibly for his food.

In

1980, Stone vs. Graham outlawed the Ten Commandments in our public

schools. The Supreme Court said this:



"If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments were to have any effect at

all, it would be to induce schoolchildren to read them. And if they read

them, meditated upon them, and perhaps venerated and obeyed them, this is

not a permissible objective. "



Is it not a permissible objective to allow our children to follow the

moral principles of the Ten Commandments? James Madison, the primary

author of

the Constitution of the United States, said this: "We have staked the

whole

future of our new nation, not upon the power of government; far from it.

We have staked the future of all our political constitutions upon the

capacity of each of ourselves to govern ourselves according to the moral

principles of the Ten Commandments. "



Today, we are asking God to bless America. But, how can He bless a Nation

that has departed so far from Him? Prior to September 11, He was not

welcome in America. Most of what you read in this article has been erased

from

our textbooks. Revisionists have rewritten history to remove the truth

about

our country's Christian roots. You are encouraged to make copies, and

share

with others, so that the truth of our nation's history will be told.

=========================================================================

 

[dalton4]

Elite 1, a well stated reply and on the mark.

 

[athompson]

I think that many are missing the point.

It is the parents' responsibility to teach their children the moral lessons. This responsibility is not that of the Government or even the Church. The parents', alone, bear this responsibility. If you want your children to learn and embrace the Ten Commandments, the fact they are not on display, doesn't prevent you from teaching them. I'm sure that you have several copies of them in your home. Sit your children down and teach them.



It seems that, too often, parents pass the responsibility to teach their children off on other. But, then they complain that the schools are failing or the Church is failing, when in fact, it is the parents that are failing. Thus the parents are teaching their children to blame everyone else for their problems.



Frankly, I would rather not have the Government telling me what morals my children should or should not learn. There are even those that are members of my church that don't exhibit the morals I want my children to learn and practice.



While it may be true that the Founding Fathers were Christians of Faith, they had good reason to not want the Government meddling in the affairs of Faith. The posting of the Ten Commandments amounts to the Government "respecting an establishment of religion. " The Government is bound by the Constitution to be neutral in religious matters; therefore, the Ten Commandments do not belong in any Government building any more than passages from the Koran, Book of Mormon, or any other religions' Holy Books.

 

[Mike Ellis]

athompson,



I believe you are telling only part of the story, sir. You left out the part about "Congress shall make no law". Specifically, the correct text is:



Amendment I



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.



RESPECTING (Webster's 1913 Dictionary)

Pronunciation: ri'spekting

Definition: \Re*spect"ing\, prep.

With regard or relation to; regarding; concerning; as,

respecting his conduct there is but one opinion.





Judge Moore did not make any law respecting religion by placing the 10 Commandments statue on the grounds, no more than high school football coaches establish law by praying with their teams before a football game. There is nothing in the Constitution whatsoever that says a government official cannot endorse, display, quote, or live according to the tenets of Scripture. There is nothing that says the populace has to be protected from such displays either.



In fact, the entire concept of "separation of church and state" is incorrect. In the genesis of the United States of America, religion was a huge influence on the Founding Fathers and God is referenced in many of our state and federal documents. Revisionists would like to argue this away somehow, but the facts of history are sometimes resistant to erasure.

 

[athompson]

#ad

 

[Mike Ellis]

Nice cartoon, but the Constitution still doesn't say what the Justices "interpret" it to say. Like many of their rulings, they have created law out of thin air. They can get away with it because it so hard for the Legislative branch to agree on something as important as amending the Constitution to limit the SC's free-wheeling interpretations. So, while the Lege dithers and thumbs, the Court creates law from thin air and the Executive branch (President) creates de facto law with a slew of Executive orders that aren't even subject to scrutiny. What a crock.



Sure is going to be interesting when one of these "separation of church and state" folks gets around to visiting Arlington National Cemetary or even their own local cemetary for that matter. All those taxpayer-funded tombstones for military veterans that have crosses and Stars of David on them. Oh my, what a horrible infringement of religious freedom to have the state actively endorsing particular religions that way, it probably costs an extra $0. 50 to etch in that religious symbol. How has our freedom survived such brutally relentless assault?



Of all the things that people should be concerned about improperly influencing their legislators, the 10 Commandments should be last on the list. Of course those Commandments are pretty doggone radical though, where would we be if people actually tried to follow them?

 

[loncray]

What sort of God do you worship that needs the government anyhow? Is your God really so weak that not having prayer in school or a statue in the courthouse is really going to hurt? I mean, now that Roy's Rock is out of the rotunda, will millions of Alabama schoolchildren be forced to switch to Islam?

Besides, why aren't all those people protesting in the Alabama Supreme Court rotunda using their energy for something important? They could be putting together care packages for flood victims, or sending reading material to soldiers in Iraq, or helping poor churches send missions to Africa. Instead they're screaming about a rock that wasn't where it belonged. If they want to see the Ten Commandments, why can't they go to church, or have a display in their own homes, or even their own front yards? Why do they need to force this display on the people of Alabama, not all of whom are Christian? Can you imagine the furor if somebody came, in the middle of the night, and installed an ark with a Torah in it there? Or a Koran?

I'm one of those Separation of Church and State folks - and it doesn't bother me a bit to have gravestones in Arlington Cemetary etched with religious symbols. Each soldier is accorded a symbol in accordance with their stated religious views. It also doesn't bother me that Moses and the Ten Commandments are on the Supreme Court building. They're Hebrew characters, and there are other lawgivers up there too. As to "In God We Trust" on the money, that appeared in 1864, not during the founding of our country. I don't think our Founding Fathers were evangelistic, fundamentalist Christians like we have today.

 

[Mike Ellis]

loncray,



The God I worship does just fine whether people pay attention to the 10 Commandments or not. We are told that it saddens Him when people sin, but there is no intimation that such sin in any way is emblematic of weakness on His part. The display of the Commandments is for the benefit and guidance of humanity, not God himself. Since God was the author of those Commandments, it might be conjectured that he has reasonable knowledge of them already.



As far as the millions of school children, unless they are in the legislature where they would see the "Rock" every day, it is doubtful its removal will affect them on a personal level, although if it stimulated them to switch to Islam it might be a good thing for all I know - their personal religious views (or lack thereof) being completely open to conjecture. On the other hand, if the "Rock" had stayed, and exerted some positive influence on the legislators, there might have been a positive effect on those millions of children. Who knows?



As to the people protesting in the rotunda, if they are members of mainstream American churches, they most likely ARE participating in those specific relief activities you mention - either directly or by financial support of their ministries. Protesting does not mean that all other activities are precluded.



Would there be a furor if somebody came in and installed an Ark containing Torah, or a Koran? Might be. Of course, this would be more analogous to Judge Roy sneaking in the entire BIBLE instead of the 10 Commandments (uh-oh, there are already Bibles in there for swearing people in and such). If they brought in similar expressions from the Koran as the 10 Commandments, some folks might object. I am religious, but it wouldn't bother me a whit. Maybe others feel the same way, don't know. Kind of a moot point in view of the Court rulings. ANY expression of religion is considered to violate the establishment clause, and that is plain and simple hokum.



I don't see much difference between Moses on the SC building and the "Rock", only difference in the Commandments was the language they were inscribed in. Lots of folks in the nation can read Hebrew, is it OK to violate the rulings as long as the majority of people don't know it's happening?



My point about the tombstones was made to show the irrational lengths the struggle over the establishment clause can be brought to. There are already people pushing to have the mottos on our money changed, and they WILL get around to the tombstone religious symbols sooner or later. The hard core separationists will not be satisfied until all religious symbols and references are wiped from the face of government.



Personally, I am not particularly distressed by the removal of the "Rock", we can't even get people to obey the speed limits and display common civil courtesies so expecting them to adhere to the 10 Commandments may be a real stretch. BUT, I think the Supreme Court rulings on this are bogus so I argue the point. The Constitution does not say "separation of church and state" anywhere. Nobody is forced to participate in high school football game prayers, or to read the 10 Commandments on a monument, and no laws have been passed to this end either. Claiming these things represent "establishment" is utter hogwash on the part of the courts IMHO.

 

[baby.driver]

athompson says many are missing the point and then completely misses it himself.

The ENTIRE point rests on whether Jesus acknowledges you as one of HIS when you stand before the throne of the Most High.

There is no other point.

 

[athompson]

Originally posted by baby. driver

athompson says many are missing the point and then completely misses it himself.

The ENTIRE point rests on whether Jesus acknowledges you as one of HIS when you stand before the throne of the Most High.

There is no other point.

You have missed the point. It is not the Governments responsibility to ensure that we are counted as His. It is our responsibility, and ours alone. If we fail to be counted as His, we can only blame ourselves. We cannot blame the government for not displaying the Ten Commandments. We cannot blame our parents (though I believe He will hold parents accountable for what they teach their children). I cannot blame you. You cannot blame me.



Becoming His is a personal journey. No matter how much you preach, if His Spirit doesn't touch the souls of those who hear, they will not understand. "They who have ears, let them hear. " was uttered may times by Him. Even He, being the Perfect Teacher, acknowledged that not everyone was ready for His message. Surely, you can acknowledge that, too.

 

[Champane Flight]

Yea!

Yea, some of us have to go to he11, or how would anyone know what to compare heaven with!

 

[lpearson]

Loncray

Originally posted by loncray

What sort of God do you worship that needs the government anyhow? Is your God really so weak that not having prayer in school or a statue in the courthouse is really going to hurt?



I know this is all "coincidence", but thought it made for interesting reading of some facts. After prayer and God were taken out of the schools in 1963 some things began to happen in our society.



1. Sexually transmitted diseases, ie. Gonorrhea from ages 15-16 went up 226% (1963-1990).



2. Scholoastic Aptitude Test Scores declined almost 11%. (1963-1990).



3. Violent Crime Offenses went up 995%. (1963-1990. )



4. Unwed Birth Rates were up 325% and pregnancies to Girls 10-14 was up 553% (1963-1990)



5. Divorce Rates up 111% (1963-1990)



6. Unmarried Couples up 536% (1963-1990)



I don't have figures for abortion, so I can't comment on it.



Anyway, this is all accidental and remarkable occurrences of events that coindide with the aforementioned. No conclusions here!!!





Lowell

 

[lpearson]

Re: Yea!

Originally posted by Champane Flight

Yea, some of us have to go to he11, or how would anyone know what to compare heaven with!

CF. Is your point kind of like someone having to die so they could compare that to living?

 

[loncray]

Well, interesting figures. How much did population go up in the same period? Also, wasn't that about the time that women started becoming politically active? And wasn't that the time the Civil Rights movement started really marching? But you wouldn't dream of (accidentally, coincidentally) linking any of those figures to those events, would you?

Also, 1963 was NOT the year they took God and prayer out of school. After all, don't you believe that God is everywhere? If it takes prayer to bring God into a place, then he's probably spending a lot of time in casinos ("If I can just get that Ace, I'll give half my winnings to the church!"). And what the Supreme Court did was stop public schools from forcing Christian prayer down children's throats - if you think students stopped praying - especially around test time - you have lost touch with reality. And there are still plenty of religious-affiliated private schools and churches that provide plenty of religious education. I'm kind of surprised at the religious right on this subject - after all, if you don't trust public school teachers to teach your children sex education, why on earth would you insist on having public school teachers teach them religion?

 

[lpearson]

You're right.

Originally posted by loncray

Well, interesting figures. How much did population go up in the same period? Also, wasn't that about the time that women started becoming politically active? And wasn't that the time the Civil Rights movement started really marching? But you wouldn't dream of (accidentally, coincidentally) linking any of those figures to those events, would you?

Also, 1963 was NOT the year they took God and prayer out of school. After all, don't you believe that God is everywhere? If it takes prayer to bring God into a place, then he's probably spending a lot of time in casinos ("If I can just get that Ace, I'll give half my winnings to the church!"). And what the Supreme Court did was stop public schools from forcing Christian prayer down children's throats - if you think students stopped praying - especially around test time - you have lost touch with reality. And there are still plenty of religious-affiliated private schools and churches that provide plenty of religious education. I'm kind of surprised at the religious right on this subject - after all, if you don't trust public school teachers to teach your children sex education, why on earth would you insist on having public school teachers teach them religion?

You're right---I wouldn't link the civil rights movement and women's politics with the 226% increase in Gonorrhea among 15-16 yr olds, the 995% increase in Violent crime, the unwed birth increase of 325%, or the 553% increase in 10-14 year old pregnacies.



I really can't believe you would either if you thought about it more. I will concede that the population increased somewhat and could have something to do with the stats, but I don't think it had that much to do with the staggering % amounts.



The point I am making is that I think our society has increasingly lost it's moral compass; and it seems to me that it has something to do with America becoming more and more anti-God, anti-Bible, and anti-rules (His rules).



You're right about the parents responsibility in all this; ultimately this is where morals and right living should begin to be taught. Most parents and teachers right now, were in school during the rebelious 60's and 70's; where "do your own thing" was in vogue, (anti establishment); again, my feelings, from pushing Godliness out of the homes, schools and society in general.



Lastly, you're right again, I wouldn't want a school teacher of now day's teaching my child about God. I only know just a few that even believe in Him and they are hardly qualified to teach about him, seeing they don't have a clue as to what doctrines are in the Bible.



It seems like everything is kind of backwards. Children running the schools, the prisons being dictated to by the prisioners. The politicians running everything without much input from the people and even if we do, they still do what they want. What ever happened to "WE the People, -- by and For the People. " type government? Satanism, homosexualism, atheisim, humanism and other isms are all tolerated in our schools and courts; -----but Christianity --- no!



Chances are that most people on this forum who would agree with you about parents teaching their children about God and his Book-------------------- have never even read all of his book let alone studied it so as to be qualified to teach and answer questions from their children. It's a nice thought, but it isn't going to happen.



Lowell

 

[loncray]

Part of the problem is that YOUR view of religion is different from MINE, and everybody elses - no two people would have it taught exactly alike. I think modern public school teachers are doing a pretty good job, but I wouldn't want them teaching MY child religion any more than you would - what if I got a Bible-thumper with a different view than me? Or a Wiccan spiritualist?

I disagree about all your 'ism's. Give me an example of Satanism being taught in public schools! Or homosexuality, aside from being noted in Human Sexuality as an existing thing. Atheism isn't taught either, except being noted as an existing thing. Of course, not teaching ANYTHING about it won't make it go away; atheists feel just as strongly about their lack of religion as you do about your faith. And THAT, in my humble opinion, is the absolute best reason for separation of Church and State. Because it's such an important thing, everybody feels fairly strongly one way or the other, there's no way I want my government to be involved in any way with religion. I don't want Roy's Rock in the rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court (not the legislature) any more than I want a Satanist symbol there. Exaggeration? Of course, but if the religious right can equate homosexuality with beastiality in the ongoing debate on sodomy law, I'm allowed a little exaggeration too.

 

[lpearson]

Loncray, please re-read my post.

If you would re-read my post, I didn't say that the "isms" were being taught in the schools per say. I said they are tolerated where as Christanity is not.



This is true in the school systems here on the front Range of Colorado, and I've read about it in other school systems in other states too. I don't know about where you live.



I am not part of the religious right and disagree with positions they take. I have spent a great deal of time in the study of all the worlds major religions, so my views came about with much diliberation; In my own mind, I don't know how a person can make an important decision without taking the time to search it out. --- Anyway,I also agree with you that I don't want government dictating any part of religious life. But they have, and are slanted in their bias against Christianity.



I believe life is more than working, eating, sleeping, going to the bathroom day in and day out till we die. For what reason then? This is why religion is such a big part of most people around the world. They have a need to understand their existance in the part of all this.



Interesting couple of side notes, (1) even atheism fits the broad definition of a religion. (2) You said that you didn't want government to place any Satanic symbols either, but our government has placed one on the one dollar bill, (look on the backside where the "great seal is" ANNUIT COEPTIS--NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM (latin, why not in English?) = "Announcing the birth of the New World Order" is what it says. The "eye" over the Pyramid is the all seeing eye of the illuminised one, LUCIFER (Satan).



Lowell

 

[loncray]

I'm not sure what you mean by tolerated - I don't recall any Church of Satan meetings in my high school, and I'm pretty sure schools haven't changed THAT much in 20 years! I believe absolutely that homosexuality should be treated the same as heterosexuality - there's no reason two gay guys should be allowed to kiss in the halls when the rules say a guy and a girl can't do it either. However, if somebody wants to hold a gay and lesbian club after school - and follows the same rules as every other such club - why shouldn't they be allowed? I don't think I agree that there is a bias against Christianity, except that every time somebody tries to put out evangelical pamphlets (for example) they are stopped - as they probably should be, that sort of thing belongs in church. Of course, nowadays email can be used very efficiently to get out that sort of thing, and it leaves the schools out of it! I do believe Christian clubs should be allowed after school - so long as the school district also allows gay and lesbian clubs, atheist clubs, even Satanist clubs if somebody's so bold as to announce such an affiliation.

As to my own affiliation, I consider myself a Deist. A lot of Deist literature is very anti-Christian (and anti every other religion), but I try to limit my own biases to the extremists - both right and left - in whatever religion. I believe that most of the Founding Fathers, contrary to an earlier post, were actually more Deist than Christian, but I leave it to each individual here to form his or her own opinion on THAT controversy.

 

[Mike Ellis]

Let's Tell the Truth Now...

How many of you guys "in the old days" had any actual religious coursework in a public school? Do you feel like it damaged you? If your kids went through the same, would it damage them (whether they are Christian or not)?



I am a product of the 1960's and 1970's Texas public schools, a small rural one no less, and there wasn't a single religious class or class assignment that I can recall from those years which taught Christian doctrine or used the Bible.



On the other hand, we did have a CHRISTMAS holiday, and an EASTER break. We did have a THANKSGIVING holiday, and in elementary school we drew pictures of Pilgrims and Indians eating dinner, and of Santa Claus and reindeer. We even had a Christmas play where we sang Christmas carols - it was held in the evenings so the parents could come watch. Every year at Christmas we had a class party, put together by the parents and PTA, where kids would exchange gifts before the Christmas break. Those who were too poor to participate, or who weren't Christian, weren't forced to, and in fact I recall they had some kind of mechanism to help the poor kids participate by buying them some sort of gift, the kids who didn't want to participate (or weren't allowed to by their parents due to religious views) were taken to the auditorium and allowed to watch a film as I recall. (There were several kids in our class whose family, although Christian, did not believe in any celebration of Christmas).



Every morning in elementary school, a student would say a prayer over the PA system. We said the Pledge of Allegiance in the mornings, and at football games they would have someone give a prayer for the boy's safety over the PA system. In the locker room, the coach would have a prayer with all of us on bended knee, that no one would be hurt and that we and our opponents would have a good game and play with good sportsmanship.



Did these things damage us? Not in any way that I can see. How about people who didn't believe, were they forced to feel bad or participate? I don't know if they felt bad or left out, but my own kids have been in public school here all through the 90's and they have had to sit through lots of non-Christian religious stuff... and SOMEHOW their tender psyches survived. They have had African-Americans come in to talk about Kwanzaa. Hispanics talking about The Day of the Dead. Native Americans talking about the nature spirits. They have had class assignments that involved the above topics. Meanwhile, the only viewpoint that is completely banned is the Christian one.



Personally, I think the "separation of Church and state" crowd are talking out of both sides of their hat. They think that having a prayer before a ball game, or the 10 Commandments at a public building, is equivalent to government establishing or sponsoring a religion and accordingly vigorously oppose it. And yet you never hear anybody clamoring to do away with their government recognized Thanksgiving or Christmas holidays.



I think it would be great if all the Christian folk got together to have government recognition of those two holidays banned immediately. We Christian types could take vacation to celebrate (wouldn't bother me a bit), and all the Grinches could happily stay at work and leave the rest of us to enjoy our holidays in peace.



After folks lost those cherished days off, they might decide that pre-game prayer wasn't really so bad after all.

 

[Champane Flight]

Cause and effect

There is nothing wrong with any religion. I attended five years of parochial school when I was a child. Some of the the Nuns would beat the he11 out of the kids who acted out, but I CAN remember the difference between right and wrong. I went to public school after fifth grade and did OK, went to church at the local protestant non-denominational church for a longtime as a child. Attended their summer camps, bible studies, and other functions. I hold no bad memory's from these times.



There are religions all around us everyday, we see it on our money, advertisements for Church's, some businesses, and on our TVs. I really don't see a problem with the ten commandments being in the courthouse. I think the problem lies in the way it was done and the persons motive for doing it.



Religion can bring the best and the worse out in everyone. It has been and is a motive for war, protest, crusades, famine, and death. It has also been a motive for understanding, tolerance, peace, and love. However, the latter takes real faith. I think a problem does exist in the Christian faith, as it is always trying to "spread the word". This doctrine has alienated many people and brings the hackles out on most when these types of actions come out.



I believe the government has enough religion, I think the people founding our government were god-fearing (don't really like that statement) and put god in our constitution for lack of something else to put there. When I say the highest power available, what do I mean? Of course, God. Not Omalla of the seven moons. They meant well, but are now misquoted by our Christian brethren to mean THERE God. I don't think they could have got the same effect from "One nation under the highest power"... ...



Are more morals needed in America right now? No, just some of the old ones will work fine... ...