Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 05-17-2011, 08:59 AM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 148 | Kudos: +11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
It's very telling that you made the distinction between their religion and your own. Frankly, your arbitrary distinction is of no importance to me as we're discussing our nation's heritage, and not your own. While you may not consider certain southerners to be Americans, the constitution is the highest authority on that issue, and disagrees with your personal opinion. Read the citizenship clause of the 14th amendment again.
Amendment XIV

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

For the record I am from the South. I have ancestors on both sides of my family who were settlers in the Jamestown Colony. One ancestor was a shareholder in the Virginia Company, a settler in the colony and a government official in the colony in the early 1620s.

I have at least 5 great-great-great grandfathers who served in Lee's army. But I pay them no homage because they were traitors to my country. The fact that you express support for southern traitors shows that you have no respect for my country and thus cannot possibly understand its heritage.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 12:45 PM  
mohel
 
blucher's Avatar

Keizer, OR
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,383 | Kudos: +123
Images: 99
10 characters


Quote:
but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
---End Quote---
When Evolution stubs it's toe-gfsm.jpg 

__________________

__________________
I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one.: LBJ's Ghost
Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 01:01 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 148 | Kudos: +11
Quote:
Originally Posted by blucher View Post
10 characters
So? This simply means nobody can be told to stay out of politics because of their religion. This clause does not prevent elected officials and judges from making decisions based on their religious beliefs- contrary to what the Left believes the Constitution actually means.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 01:27 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by flaja View Post
Amendment XIV

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.


For the record I am from the South. I have ancestors on both sides of my family who were settlers in the Jamestown Colony. One ancestor was a shareholder in the Virginia Company, a settler in the colony and a government official in the colony in the early 1620s.

I have at least 5 great-great-great grandfathers who served in Lee's army. But I pay them no homage because they were traitors to my country. The fact that you express support for southern traitors shows that you have no respect for my country and thus cannot possibly understand its heritage.
The section of the amendment you just cited states that those 5 great-great-great grandfathers you mentioned are unworthy of holding public office. It does not say they are no longer Americans. Again, we are speaking of American heritage, not your personal heritage, nor the cherry-picked fantasy world you think you live in. Americans have done a lot of good things throughout history, but we have hardly been perfect. We don't get to declare a perfect, glorious heritage by ignoring the things we aren't proud of.

Quote:
So? This simply means nobody can be told to stay out of politics because of their religion. This clause does not prevent elected officials and judges from making decisions based on their religious beliefs- contrary to what the Left believes the Constitution actually means.
Strawman. Nobody is being asked to go against their religious beliefs. The nature of separation of church and state is that only the state can regulate law, only the church can regulate religious belief, and neither can compel a person to obey or disobey the other's regulations.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 01:50 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 148 | Kudos: +11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
The section of the amendment you just cited states that those 5 great-great-great grandfathers you mentioned are unworthy of holding public office.
Actually, according to the 14th Amendment my ancestors would be disqualified to hold public office only if they had taken an oath to support the U.S. Constitution prior to joining the south?s rebellion. Of the 5 ancestors that I know about one was a lieutenant and the rest were all privates in the rebel army, and none of them had been in the U.S. armed forces or held public office before the rebellion, so it is not likely that any of them had taken an oath to support the U.S. Constitution.

But none of this matters. I wouldn?t have wanted them or any other traitor to have any say in running my country. Anyone who was disqualified to hold public office in the U.S. based on the 14th Amendment did not have the full rights that an American would have had. The most they could claim after the rebellion and the 14th Amendment is the status of hyphenated American, meaning that they, like Obama, were not full Americans.

Quote:
Americans have done a lot of good things throughout history, but we have hardly been perfect.
When have I said otherwise?

Quote:
Strawman. Nobody is being asked to go against their religious beliefs.
If you tell a Christian that he can hold public office only if he doesn't let his Christian faith influence his official actions, you are telling him to go against his religious beliefs. If both houses of Congress had a Judeo-Christian majority and this majority wished to ban sodomy because their religions prohibit sodomy, you libs would be screaming "separation of church and state" at the top of your lungs.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 02:23 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 148 | Kudos: +11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
Nobody is being asked to go against their religious beliefs.
Examples of libs telling Robert Bentley that he cannot practice his religion and serve in public office at the same time:

Congress.org - Letter to Governor Robert Bentley (R-Alabama): Resignation Requested

Robert Bentley - California Bytes


Examples of libs telling Roy Moore that he cannot practice his religion and serve in public office at the same time:

Hundreds Rally to Call for Resignation of Roy Moore

Topica Email List Directory

So don?t tell me that you libs aren?t telling people who hold public office to give up their religion.

Christians have a faith obligation to spread the Gospel of Christ (Matthew 28:18-20). You cannot tell them they must give up this obligation in order to hold public office without telling them that they cannot practice their religion.

Jews have an obligation to enforce Mosaic Law on their society (Leviticus 19:17).
You cannot tell them they cannot enact civil laws to prevent their neighbors from doing evil in the sight of the Lord without telling them that they cannot practice their religion.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 04:00 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by flaja View Post
A
If you tell a Christian that he can hold public office only if he doesn't let his Christian faith influence his official actions, you are telling him to go against his religious beliefs. If both houses of Congress had a Judeo-Christian majority and this majority wished to ban sodomy because their religions prohibit sodomy, you libs would be screaming "separation of church and state" at the top of your lungs.
If the exercise of his religious contradicts his oath of office, he cannot exercise both. He's free to resign if he doesn't want to violate his religious beliefs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flaja View Post
Examples of libs telling Robert Bentley that he cannot practice his religion and serve in public office at the same time:

Congress.org - Letter to Governor Robert Bentley (R-Alabama): Resignation Requested

Robert Bentley - California Bytes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Bentley
"Now I will have to say that, if we don't have the same daddy, we're not brothers and sisters," he added, according to the paper. "So anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother."
Governor Bentley, acting in an official government capacity, declared preferential treatment of a religious practice. This violates his oath of office:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alabama Constitution
SECTION 279

Required of members of legislature and executive and judicial officers; form; administration.

All members of the legislature, and all officers, executive and judicial, before they enter upon the execution of the duties of their respective offices, shall take the following oath or affirmation:

"I, ?, solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Alabama, so long as I continue a citizen thereof; and that I will faithfully and honestly discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter, to the best of my ability. So help me God."

The oath may be administered by the presiding officer of either house of the legislature, or by any officer authorized by law to administer an oath.
(One side note: The statement "So help me god" isn't mandatory - there's a long list of legal precedent supporting this)

As the governor is required to support the constitution, he cannot offer greater support to people of one faith over those of another. His statement gave the appearance of preferential treatment toward Christians. If he can't refrain from offering preferential treatment toward people of one faith, he can't fulfill his oath of office, and should resign.
Quote:
Examples of libs telling Roy Moore that he cannot practice his religion and serve in public office at the same time:

Hundreds Rally to Call for Resignation of Roy Moore

Topica Email List Directory
Former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore insisted on displaying the 10 commandments in a State courthouse. He did this despite the orders of superior judges. The Alabama Court of the Judiciary unanimously removed him from his position, demonstrating how wrong he was.

Moore's actions violated his oath of office. He was - and is - free to practice his own religion however he wants, but he cannot exercise his authority in violation of the Alabama and US constitutions.
Quote:

So don?t tell me that you libs aren?t telling people who hold public office to give up their religion.
They weren't told to give up their religion. They were both asked to resign their public offices. There is a BIG difference.
Quote:

Christians have a faith obligation to spread the Gospel of Christ (Matthew 28:18-20). You cannot tell them they must give up this obligation in order to hold public office without telling them that they cannot practice their religion.

Jews have an obligation to enforce Mosaic Law on their society (Leviticus 19:17).
You cannot tell them they cannot enact civil laws to prevent their neighbors from doing evil in the sight of the Lord without telling them that they cannot practice their religion.
Lending government support to an entirely religious practice is a clear violation of the first amendment. They can practice their religion in their private lives all they want, but they may not use their office to support religion any more than they may take away guns from law-abiding citizens, in violation of the second amendment.

These aren't leftist opinions, these are constitutional opinions.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 04:33 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 148 | Kudos: +11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
If the exercise of his religious contradicts his oath of office, he cannot exercise both. He's free to resign if he doesn't want to violate his religious beliefs.
For a legitimate Christian, God takes precedence over the ways of man. So you are saying that, by your (erroneous) interpretation of the Constitution, Christians have no right to seek or hold public office.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 05:14 PM  
mohel
 
blucher's Avatar

Keizer, OR
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,383 | Kudos: +123
Images: 99
Quote:
These aren't leftist opinions, these are constitutional opinions.
To disagree with the Religious Right is to instantly become an atheistic communist.

Not calling Flaja a Religious type since I have no handle on that part of him. (I do know he hates Willie staining that blue dress)
__________________
I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one.: LBJ's Ghost
Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 06:06 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by flaja View Post
For a legitimate Christian, God takes precedence over the ways of man. So you are saying that, by your (erroneous) interpretation of the Constitution, Christians have no right to seek or hold public office.
You defined "legitimate Christian" in that fashion, not me. You implied that a "legitimate Christian" is someone who cannot fulfill an oath to men. I did not define "legitimate Christian" this way. I did not make this argument - YOU did. Personally, I think that most people - regardless of their religion - can balance their private religious obligations with their public service obligations, including the duty to keep government from interfering with the religious practices of others.

Your religious power and authority may be derived from god, but as an elected official, your worldly power and authority is derived from the consent of the governed. That consent is granted in accordance with all applicable law, including the Constitution.

If your religious obligations require you to use the worldly power and authority of your worldly office to interfere with the human rights of the governed, you cannot completely fulfill an oath to support and defend the Constitution and you are unqualified for any position that requires you to take such an oath. A shorter way of saying that is "don't make promises unless you can keep them".
__________________

__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.