Possible win for God?

[Bob Dole]

God doesn't care if the ten commandments are in a courtroom

How do you know this?

Because the bible doesn't tell us to post the ten commandments in courtrooms?

[undone]

God doesn't care if the ten commandments are in a courtroom

How do you know this?

Because the bible doesn't tell us to post the ten commandments in courtrooms?

This is actually breaking the third commandment.

[JIME]

Bob,

The truth of the fact is, we live in a nation today, that is covering up our Christian heritage. If you check out the "Mayflower Compact," (written by the way this day in history) you will see that this country was founded on Christian principles. The following is the Mayflower Compact.

The Mayflower Compact

We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God of Great Britain, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, etc.

Having undertaken, for the Glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith and Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the First Colony in the Northern Parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of another, Covenant and Combine ourselves together into a Civil Body Politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute and frame such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cape Cod, the 11th of November, in the year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France and Ireland the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini 1620.

For more information on the founding of our country and what our forefathers believed, go to www.wallbuilders.com

Here is a link also to a news paper clipping from 1789 where George Washington is issuing the Proclaimation of Thanksgiving.

Edited November 11, 2006 by JIME

[Bob Dole]

undone, is it breaking the third commandment because I'm posting it on Saturday?

Bob,

The truth of the fact is, we live in a nation today, that is covering up our Christian heritage. If you check out the "Mayflower Compact," (written by the way this day in history) you will see that this country was founded on Christian principles. The following is the Mayflower Compact.

The Mayflower Compact

We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God of Great Britain, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, etc.

Having undertaken, for the Glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith and Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the First Colony in the Northern Parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of another, Covenant and Combine ourselves together into a Civil Body Politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute and frame such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cape Cod, the 11th of November, in the year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France and Ireland the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini 1620.

For more information on the founding of our country and what our forefathers believed, go to www.wallbuilders.com

Here is a link also to a news paper clipping from 1789 where George Washington is issuing the Proclaimation of Thanksgiving.

The people who wrote the Mayflower Compact weren't the founders of this country, they're loyal to the king. Also, George Washington was probably a deist, not a Christian. Most of the founding father's (the real ones, that wrote the declaration of independence, the constitution, bill of rights, that stuff that made America what it is today) were deists.

[JIME]

The people who wrote the Mayflower Compact weren't the founders of this country, they're loyal to the king. Also, George Washington was probably a deist, not a Christian. Most of the founding father's (the real ones, that wrote the declaration of independence, the constitution, bill of rights, that stuff that made America what it is today) were deists.

Deists, now that's funny!!

If you were to actually read the articles themselves instead of quoting what other people have said about them, you will find that they weren't "deists," but Christian.

The definition of Deism is as follows according to Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

deism

: a movement or system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe

Here is the article about the Thanksgiving Proclamation:

By THE PRESIDENT

OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me

[Bob Dole]

The people who wrote the Mayflower Compact weren't the founders of this country, they're loyal to the king. Also, George Washington was probably a deist, not a Christian. Most of the founding father's (the real ones, that wrote the declaration of independence, the constitution, bill of rights, that stuff that made America what it is today) were deists.

Deists, now that's funny!!

If you were to actually read the articles themselves instead of quoting what other people have said about them, you will find that they weren't "deists," but Christian.

The definition of Deism is as follows according to Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

deism

: a movement or system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe

Here is the article about the Thanksgiving Proclamation:

By THE PRESIDENT

OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me

[Bob Dole]

Bob Dole said

Shouldn't judges have some right to say what they'll allow in courtrooms?

No. It is the judges job to enforce existing laws on the books, and not rewrite the laws

My Web Blog

You mean the laws that say the government should not show preference to one religion over another? The kind of stuff that would prohibit putting the 10 commandments in a courtroom (which would show government preference of a particular religion.)

[JIME]

Bob Dole said

Shouldn't judges have some right to say what they'll allow in courtrooms?

No. It is the judges job to enforce existing laws on the books, and not rewrite the laws

My Web Blog

You mean the laws that say the government should not show preference to one religion over another? The kind of stuff that would prohibit putting the 10 commandments in a courtroom (which would show government preference of a particular religion.)

Show me where THAT law is please.

I think you are referring to the 1st Amendment which states the following:

Amendment I: Freedom of speech, religion, press, petition and assembly.

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.

It says NOTHING about separation of church and state!

IT SAYS "CONGRESS" NOT THE SUPREME COURT, which made the law of separation of church and state. The supreme court is to interpret the constitution not MAKE NEW LAWS!!!!

That peace of Judicial garbage came from a private letter written by Thomas Jefferson to some preachers.

Here it is:

Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 to answer a letter from them written in October 1801. A copy of the Danbury letter is available here. The Danbury Baptists were a religious minority in Connecticut, and they complained that in their state, the religious liberties they enjoyed were not seen as immutable rights, but as privileges granted by the legislature - as "favors granted." Jefferson's reply did not address their concerns about problems with state establishment of religion - only that on the national level. The letter contains the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," which led to the short-hand for the Establishment Clause that we use today: "Separation of church and state."

The letter was the subject of intense scrutiny by Jefferson, and he consulted a couple of New England politicians to assure that his words would not offend while still conveying his message: it was not the place of the Congress or the Executive to do anything that might be misconstrued as the establishment of religion.

Note: The bracketed section in the second paragraph had been blocked off for deletion, though it was not actually deleted in his draft of the letter. It is included here for completeness. Reflecting upon Jefferson's knowledge that his letter was far from a mere personal correspondence, he deleted the block, he says in the margin, to avoid offending members of his party in the eastern states.

This is a transcript of the letter as stored online at the Library of Congress, and reflects Jefferson's spelling and punctuation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. President

To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem & approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful & zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more & more pleasing.

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, and 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 and state. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] 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.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

(signed) Thomas Jefferson

Jan.1.1802.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you see that "separtation of church and state" was NOT THE INTENDED INTERPRETATION of the 1st Amendment!!!!

To further elaborate about it, here is an article from Wallbuilders.com

Edited November 14, 2006 by JIME

[Akabu]

I have no choice but to cry out to God for mercy whenever I see someone claiming to be a Christian siding with those who wish to bring Christianity to its knees. Those who want us Christians to go back to secret meetings and hiding who we are so we can further the spread of God's word at the price of our lives.

The simple facts of the article are this, and NEVER forget it:

Congress does not have the right to make any law concerning the way any person practices, or does not practice, their religion with the notable exceptions of breaking standing laws such as murder (sacrifice of a living human), theft of property, or such. It is a fact that most of the founding fathers were Christian, and all did acknowledge God.

The fact is, this judge knows and understands what the first amendment says and means. As such, he has left the decision up to the people. It is for the people that this law will affect to decide. It is up to the Christians of the area to work to keep God from being trampled under the feet of heathens and unbelievers.

History shows us one thing. We as Christians lose our rights to worship slowly buy taking little things away from us at a time. First we lose the right to display in "designated" places or to pray in public (take note of government buildings, schools,). Next will be limitations on where churches can be built. Next it could be as simple of legislation of times when services can be held under the auspices of traffic, or noise controls. The inevitable ending is that the church is legislated out of existance. Think it sounds unreal, and cant happen? Look at smoking, 30 years ago who would have thought that there would be debate, let alone laws against, smoking in public places.

[Bob Dole]

Bob Dole said

Shouldn't judges have some right to say what they'll allow in courtrooms?

No. It is the judges job to enforce existing laws on the books, and not rewrite the laws

My Web Blog

You mean the laws that say the government should not show preference to one religion over another? The kind of stuff that would prohibit putting the 10 commandments in a courtroom (which would show government preference of a particular religion.)

Show me where THAT law is please.

I think you are referring to the 1st Amendment which states the following:

Amendment I: Freedom of speech, religion, press, petition and assembly.

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.

It says NOTHING about separation of church and state!

IT SAYS "CONGRESS" NOT THE SUPREME COURT, which made the law of separation of church and state. The supreme court is to interpret the constitution not MAKE NEW LAWS!!!!

You have to understand the history behind the first amendment to understand what it means. Preferential assistance to a church would have fallen under establishment of religion in the United States back in 1791. That's why today the government won't post the ten commandments in a courthouse, it'll obviously show preference to a particular religion. It was originally going to forbid establishment of a national church, but in forbidding that you allow the government to still give preference to a church, they wanted to make sure that wasn't possible.

The supreme court interpreted the first amendment correctly and made no new laws.

That peace of Judicial garbage came from a private letter written by Thomas Jefferson to some preachers.

Here it is:

Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 to answer a letter from them written in October 1801. A copy of the Danbury letter is available here. The Danbury Baptists were a religious minority in Connecticut, and they complained that in their state, the religious liberties they enjoyed were not seen as immutable rights, but as privileges granted by the legislature - as "favors granted." Jefferson's reply did not address their concerns about problems with state establishment of religion - only that on the national level. The letter contains the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," which led to the short-hand for the Establishment Clause that we use today: "Separation of church and state."

The letter was the subject of intense scrutiny by Jefferson, and he consulted a couple of New England politicians to assure that his words would not offend while still conveying his message: it was not the place of the Congress or the Executive to do anything that might be misconstrued as the establishment of religion.

Note: The bracketed section in the second paragraph had been blocked off for deletion, though it was not actually deleted in his draft of the letter. It is included here for completeness. Reflecting upon Jefferson's knowledge that his letter was far from a mere personal correspondence, he deleted the block, he says in the margin, to avoid offending members of his party in the eastern states.

This is a transcript of the letter as stored online at the Library of Congress, and reflects Jefferson's spelling and punctuation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. President

To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem & approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful & zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more & more pleasing.

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, and 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 and state. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] 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.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

(signed) Thomas Jefferson

Jan.1.1802.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you see that "separtation of church and state" was NOT THE INTENDED INTERPRETATION of the 1st Amendment!!!!

To further elaborate about it, here is an article from Wallbuilders.com

I don't see how that letter shows "Separation of church and state" was not the intended interpretation of the first amendment. I don't see any mention of the first amendment at all, but I might not be looking in the right spots.

I have no choice but to cry out to God for mercy whenever I see someone claiming to be a Christian siding with those who wish to bring Christianity to its knees. Those who want us Christians to go back to secret meetings and hiding who we are so we can further the spread of God's word at the price of our lives.

The simple facts of the article are this, and NEVER forget it:

Congress does not have the right to make any law concerning the way any person practices, or does not practice, their religion with the notable exceptions of breaking standing laws such as murder (sacrifice of a living human), theft of property, or such. It is a fact that most of the founding fathers were Christian, and all did acknowledge God.

The fact is, this judge knows and understands what the first amendment says and means. As such, he has left the decision up to the people. It is for the people that this law will affect to decide. It is up to the Christians of the area to work to keep God from being trampled under the feet of heathens and unbelievers.

History shows us one thing. We as Christians lose our rights to worship slowly buy taking little things away from us at a time. First we lose the right to display in "designated" places or to pray in public (take note of government buildings, schools,). Next will be limitations on where churches can be built. Next it could be as simple of legislation of times when services can be held under the auspices of traffic, or noise controls. The inevitable ending is that the church is legislated out of existance. Think it sounds unreal, and cant happen? Look at smoking, 30 years ago who would have thought that there would be debate, let alone laws against, smoking in public places.

Smoking isn't a right given to us in the first amendment, freedom to practice any religion we'd like is.