We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith

[Texas_tea]

Can't find a credible source, huh?

You PLC1 can continue to post childish school boy come backs ....

I will continue to post current events related to this topic ....

 

[PLC1]

‘Under God’ Atheist Family’s Pledge Battle That Could Have Nationwide Implications Heads to Mass. Supreme Court

While some might dismiss the case as similar to past unsuccessful efforts to remove “under God,” the family, led by their attorneys, is taking a very different strategic approach. Rather than using the U.S. Constitution as their basis, the plaintiffs are going after the state’s use of “under God,” claiming that it is, instead, a violation of the Massachusetts Constitution.

“This is the first time a legal challenge to government use of ‘under God’ is based on the equal protection rights in a state constitution instead of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment,” the law center said in a statement Tuesday.

‘Under God’ Atheist Family’s Pledge Battle That Could Have Nationwide Implications Heads to Mass. Supreme Court

While some might dismiss the case as similar to past unsuccessful efforts to remove “under God,” the family, led by their attorneys, is taking a very different strategic approach. Rather than using the U.S. Constitution as their basis, the plaintiffs are going after the state’s use of “under God,” claiming that it is, instead, a violation of the Massachusetts Constitution.

“This is the first time a legal challenge to government use of ‘under God’ is based on the equal protection rights in a state constitution instead of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment,” the law center said in a statement Tuesday.

So, the atheists are making another try, this time using the Massachusetts Constitution.

Which does not mean that "This is happening in schools across America even without a Court Order", not if "this" refers to children not being allowed to recite the pledge.

Which, I believe, was the original contention, was it not?

 

[Texas_tea]

So, the atheists are making another try, this time using the Massachusetts Constitution.

Which does not mean that "This is happening in schools across America even without a Court Order", not if "this" refers to children not being allowed to recite the pledge.

Which, I believe, was the original contention, was it not?

And, here we are back to my favorite image for you. Despite all the links I have posted, despite the fact that anyone with a child's IQ can do a google search on this topic and find endless examples of "the original contention", you still choose to remain in complete and utter ignorance and denial.

Can't help you PLC1 ....

I will continue to post examples ...... you can continue your campaign of denial. However, I must say .... responding to your comments of ignorance and denial on this topic and others is loosing it's entertainment value .......

 

[TheJPRD]

So, the atheists are making another try, this time using the Massachusetts Constitution.

Which does not mean that "This is happening in schools across America even without a Court Order", not if "this" refers to children not being allowed to recite the pledge.

Which, I believe, was the original contention, was it not?

PLC1, I'm getting into this somewhat late, and I may be misunderstanding both you and Tex. The links that Tex posted supported the fact that atheists are continually bringing legal suits to ban God from every government-involved institution.... which in today's world means virtually everywhere! He's made that point sufficiently. However, you and he seem to be arguing his use of the phrase that God and Religion banning is "happening in schools across America"??? If so, your apparent disagreement may be the result of miscommunication.

On the one hand, you're right that the actual banning of God from the classroom has not occurred through any legal decision. I believe, and Tex will correct me if I'm wrong, that he didn't mean that legal banning of God and Religion was "happening in schools across America". Unless I'm mistaken, he was stating the facts that (1) suits to ban God from schools occur regularly, and continue to occur, and (2) because of what is probably "political correctness", many US schools and school administrators are banning God and Religion as standard-operating procedure, effectively negating the need for a legal ruling that would justify such a ban. Perhaps Tex could make his point with you better if he linked to articles about students being disciplined for wearing tees with a picture of Christ on them, for wearing a cross, for giving pro-religious speeches at commencements, etc??

 

[PLC1]

I will continue to post examples .........

Thank you for that.

I'll continue to tell you why your examples are not relevant, not typical of what is really happening, or from a totally not credible source.

I have 38 years of experience to fall back on.

You have????

 

[PLC1]

PLC1, I'm getting into this somewhat late, and I may be misunderstanding both you and Tex. The links that Tex posted supported the fact that atheists are continually bringing legal suits to ban God from every government-involved institution.... which in today's world means virtually everywhere! He's made that point sufficiently. However, you and he seem to be arguing his use of the phrase that God and Religion banning is "happening in schools across America"??? If so, your apparent disagreement may be the result of miscommunication.

On the one hand, you're right that the actual banning of God from the classroom has not occurred through any legal decision. I believe, and Tex will correct me if I'm wrong, that he didn't mean that legal banning of God and Religion was "happening in schools across America". Unless I'm mistaken, he was stating the facts that (1) suits to ban God from schools occur regularly, and continue to occur, and (2) because of what is probably "political correctness", many US schools and school administrators are banning God and Religion as standard-operating procedure, effectively negating the need for a legal ruling that would justify such a ban. Perhaps Tex could make his point with you better if he linked to articles about students being disciplined for wearing tees with a picture of Christ on them, for wearing a cross, for giving pro-religious speeches at commencements, etc??

It's entirely possible that I have misinterpreted his points. When the thread is entitled " We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith", a comment attributed to, but not made by, the current administration in Washington, and the point is being made that god is not welcome in our institutions of "liberal indoctrination" (yes, I know that is from another thread), then it seems to me that the points must be that our liberal schools are somehow anti god, anti Christian, or something.

Maybe that's all wrong.

And yes, I realize that nutter atheistic groups are fighting to get "under god" out of the pledge, and "in god we trust" off of the currency. It's just that they haven't been very successful.

 

[Cruella]

It's just that they haven't been very successful.

What? Have you not followed the thousands of lawsuits by the ACLU? And there are hundreds of other groups doing the same thing. Have you not seen how military chaplins aren't allowed to use religious symbols or even use the word Jesus in military funerals?

It's the drip, drip, drip method of removing Christianity from America.

 

[dogtowner]

What? Have you not followed the thousands of lawsuits by the ACLU? And there are hundreds of other groups doing the same thing. Have you not seen how military chaplins aren't allowed to use religious symbols or even use the word Jesus in military funerals?

It's the drip, drip, drip method of removing Christianity from America.

they have had some success in the military mainly because the military is primarily a federal function. they have had little success in the schools. the most they have gotten is the right to not participate. cranks file suits all the time and if we would institute 'loser pays' we could put a sharp curb on that nonsense.

 

[Texas_tea]

What? Have you not followed the thousands of lawsuits by the ACLU? And there are hundreds of other groups doing the same thing. Have you not seen how military chaplins aren't allowed to use religious symbols or even use the word Jesus in military funerals?

It's the drip, drip, drip method of removing Christianity from America.

Not just the ACLU .... Check out the Freedom From Religion Foundation's website and see the thousands of lawsuits they boast about being successful with. Church events, schools, universities, town Christmas displays the list is endless.

To deny this is happening in our country is a level of ignorance I do not understand.

 

[PLC1]

What? Have you not followed the thousands of lawsuits by the ACLU? And there are hundreds of other groups doing the same thing. Have you not seen how military chaplins aren't allowed to use religious symbols or even use the word Jesus in military funerals?

It's the drip, drip, drip method of removing Christianity from America.

Your statement really piqued my interest, so I cut the statement, "military chaplins aren't allowed to use religious symbols or even use the word Jesus in military funerals" into my google window. I came up with this:

I got another chain letter from my evangelical mother and step-father and felt the need to respond to it. The letter claimed that the ACLU was trying to deny people in the military the right to pray as well as preventing people in the Navy from mentioning Jesus in their prayers. I instantly recognized this as an issue that a little research on snopes or urban legend would shed light on. Not surprisingly, the chain letter was part of more than one that has been circulating since 2005.

My response to the chain letter is included below the fold

:

This email is an urban legend and is patently false. Whether it is crosses on headstones or prayer in the military, the ACLU does not oppose such religious displays.

Interesting.

Do you have another link showing that military chaplins aren't allowed to use religious symbols or even use the word Jesus in military funerals? It appears that one is based on an urban legend.

 

[Cruella]

Your statement really piqued my interest, so I cut the statement, "military chaplins aren't allowed to use religious symbols or even use the word Jesus in military funerals" into my google window. I came up with this:



:



Interesting.

Do you have another link showing that military chaplins aren't allowed to use religious symbols or even use the word Jesus in military funerals? It appears that one is based on an urban legend.

Military chaplains told to shy from Jesus

Pentagon retreats from Bible ban in U.S. military hospitals

Veterans BANNED from saying 'God' or 'Jesus' at military funerals
I'm not sure how you search, but when I put in God, banned, military, I got over 4 million hits.

 

[TheJPRD]

Military chaplains told to shy from Jesus

Pentagon retreats from Bible ban in U.S. military hospitals

Veterans BANNED from saying 'God' or 'Jesus' at military funerals
I'm not sure how you search, but when I put in God, banned, military, I got over 4 million hits.

The present administration adheres to the concept that people will believe any lie you tell them, as long as the lie is Big enough and Bold enough. Our buck-passer-in-chief provided another blatant example of that this week. Having specifically said in 2012 that if the Syrian government used chemical weapons, that would cross a "red line", and would change HIS "calculus", he now tells us that HE didn't set the red line, the world did!

Although our Bill Of Rights clearly guarantees "Freedom OF Religion", the left tells us it really means "Freedom FROM Religion". Although our Bill Of Rights clearly states that the right of the people to "keep and bear arms" "SHALL NOT be abridged", the left and their judicial activists tell us that it doesn't really mean what it says!

It's much like a wayward husband who, when caught by his wife in bed with another woman claims, "What woman, hon', there's nobody here.... your eyes are playing tricks on you". Like the left in our country, that husband isn't just a liar, he's a Bold-Face LIAR! Divorce from such liars is often the best solution!

 

[Texas_tea]

The present administration adheres to the concept that people will believe any lie you tell them, as long as the lie is Big enough and Bold enough. Our buck-passer-in-chief provided another blatant example of that this week. Having specifically said in 2012 that if the Syrian government used chemical weapons, that would cross a "red line", and would change HIS "calculus", he now tells us that HE didn't set the red line, the world did!

Although our Bill Of Rights clearly guarantees "Freedom OF Religion", the left tells us it really means "Freedom FROM Religion". Although our Bill Of Rights clearly states that the right of the people to "keep and bear arms" "SHALL NOT be abridged", the left and their judicial activists tell us that it doesn't really mean what it says!

It's much like a wayward husband who, when caught by his wife in bed with another woman claims, "What woman, hon', there's nobody here.... your eyes are playing tricks on you". Like the left in our country, that husband isn't just a liar, he's a Bold-Face LIAR! Divorce from such liars is often the best solution!

Only the sheeple and the deliberate ignorant don't see reality of what is going on in this Country today.

 

[PLC1]

Only the sheeple and the deliberate ignorant don't see reality of what is going on in this Country today.

Correct again.
And one thing that is going on is the spread of urban legends and hoaxes via the internet. One of them is the "chaplains can't say Jesus" hoax, spread mostly via email, but also found in blogs.

Here's what a religious site has to say about this hoax:

Miracles and Moments of Grace
Navy chaplains banned from saying Jesus?
December 3, 2010


Have you gotten the following e-mail message from a friend?

Navy Chaplains can no longer mention Jesus' name in prayer thanks to the retched ACLU and our new administration.

We all like to get riled up with righteous anger, and if this ban were true, it would certainly be something to get riled up about.

But, of course it's not.

Let's forget for the moment about our outraged sender's wretched spelling. It's a simple matter to check out these kinds of rumors. I love the websitesSnopes and Urban Legends.

Yup, our supposed ban on Navy chaplains saying Jesus' name in prayer is there. So, before you pass along an e-mail message like this and spread the panic, take a moment to check it out.

You'll be doing all our hearts a favor.

 

[PLC1]

Here's a good site to use to check out urban legends and hoaxes to see if they're true or not:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/marines.asp