But that is according to your opinion. And we all know what would happen
if you had your way. There would be no separation of church and state in
America. You would have the Christian religion established in our schools,
our courts, our businesses. You would have the church being a part of the
government and included in all governmental decisions. In short, you would
have turned us into a theocracy. Even the founding fathers would have
fought against you on that. So every one from the founding fathers to
modern legal experts would oppose your idea of religion and government.
All we can do is thank our lucky stars that people with antiquated ideas
like yours are widely opposed by the majority of Americans. None of whom
would want to see what you want. In Iran they would think your ideas are
very good.

Hawke

I don't think we should have a church ran state or a state ran church. What
I disagree with is the changing the constitution to mean what it never meant
in the past. If a day of prayer wasn't unconstitutional from 1775 until
2010 then it isn't unconstitutional in 2010 but a judge needs fired.

Well, what about the Pledge of Allegiance? When it was written it didn't
have the words "under god" in it. Then in the 1950s it was added. By
your logic that was wrong because having "under god" in the Pledge
wasn't the original way. But I bet your happy it's in there now, right?
Also, do you believe that the constitution isn't going to have changes
made to it over time? I mean slavery was specifically mentioned in the
constitution and it was legal and accepted. So shouldn't that be changed
either? The constitution was made so it could be changed. That wasn't a
mistake. The founders knew in time it would need changing.



But
instead religious freedoms are taken away from the majority because someone
claims a nativity scene is offensive to them. I've never heard of the
constitutional right to not be offended but those in charge act like it's
there. The Ten Commandments could be posted and those who are offended by
them don't have to look at them.

How about if we posted the commandments of the Koran or the Holy Books
of India? You just don't get it. You think that YOUR religion should be
treated as if it's OUR religion. You put up your rules and we don't have
to look at them if we don't want to? That's your idea of freedom? How
about we do it my way and put nobody's religious scriptures up in public
and you can do anything you want in private? That's a lot more fair than
your way where we all have to see what your particular faith says.


I think it would be cool though to have a Christian community where the kids
were allowed to take a Bible in their school. We have Christian schools but
we are forced to pay for antichristian schools with our tax dollars, so most
people can't afford for their kids to go to a private school. Why isn't
there a voucher system so the people have a choice where they send their
kids to school?

No vouchers because we believe in small government. We already provide a
good public and non religious education for everybody. If that isn't
good enough for you then buy your kids your own religious education.
Can't afford it? Then be happy we have a free public education system.
You're lucky we still have it at all.



Because the "Pro-Choice" crowd doesn't want parents to have
a choice to send their kids to a private school.

Sure we do. We're just not going to pay for it. People like me with no
kids already pay for yours. I'll be darned if I'm going to pay for your
private religious schools too. You ask for too much from the government.


But then again I don't think anyone should have religion shoved down their
throats, that isn't the way Jesus did it either. In fact the "sinners"
wanted to be with Jesus but the religious folks of the day wanted Jesus
killed.

That is what you say but then you also want me to have to be exposed to
your religious ideas. In fact you want the government to put your
religion's scriptures up in schools filled with people who don't believe
in your religion. People like you have been doing this for years. You
say all you want is religious freedom but the minute you get power the
next thing you know everybody has to abide by your religion. Be happy
being free to practice your religion all you want but don't ask the
government to treat your religion like it's the only one. Many of us
look at your beliefs just like we do at primitive people who believe in
magic or witchcraft. We think it's unfounded superstition. So why should
our government be connected in any way to those kinds of things?

Hawke