No Gays Allowed?

[TxHoops]

​And I guess PAM studied the Constitution under Thurgood Marshall, that other notable conservative.  LOL!

Wright was a staunch Republican, even representing Nixon during the Watergate scandal.  You are welcome to use Google to read about him.  I had him for Con Law in the Spring of '94.  Probably the most impressive professor I ever studied under.  But if you find this too amusing, you are welcome to read the quotes above from Mr. Madison, the primary drafter of the Constitution.  I suppose he was just another liberal trying to put a slant on the document he actually wrote...  LOL!

[smitty]

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."

 

James Madison, "Father of the Constitution"

​My original statement was that the Constituion says nothing about the strict wall of "separation of church and state."  If it does please direct this forum to it.

[TxHoops]

​My original statement was that the Constituion says nothing about the strict wall of "separation of church and state."  If it does please direct this forum to it.

​My point, I suppose, is that Mr. Madison's interpretation of the document is more relevant than Mr. Smitty's.  You certainly implied that the "separation of church and state" is a concept super-imposed on the document by liberals.  I have merely provided multiple examples of why that is not the case. 

[smitty]

​My point, I suppose, is that Mr. Madison's interpretation of the document is more relevant than Mr. Smitty's.  You certainly implied that the "separation of church and state" is a concept super-imposed on the document by liberals.  I have merely provided multiple examples of why that is not the case. 

​I more than implied: I stated that there is nothing in the Constitution that states "separation of church and state."  With that being said I am well aware of Mr. Madison's thoughts on the subject.  But, I am also well aware of something that he did that might give thought to the fact that he wasn't really that strong in his thoughts on the subject.  Hummm -- what could that be?  PS -- PAM is awful quite about this.  This was originally directed towards him since he first brought it up. 

[smitty]

Wright was a staunch Republican, even representing Nixon during the Watergate scandal.  You are welcome to use Google to read about him.  I had him for Con Law in the Spring of '94.  Probably the most impressive professor I ever studied under.  But if you find this too amusing, you are welcome to read the quotes above from Mr. Madison, the primary drafter of the Constitution.  I suppose he was just another liberal trying to put a slant on the document he actually wrote...  LOL!

​The present day liberal uses the "separation of church and state" to push and promote their anti-religious bigotry.  Mr. Madison's thoughts on the subject were not anti-religious.  His concerns were different.  The present day liberal would not/does not understand Madison thoughts on the subject.   Again -- there is something that Madison did that proved he wasn't against religion in government.  Hummmmmmm...  

 

[TxHoops]

​The present day liberal uses the "separation of church and state" to push and promote their anti-religious bigotry.  Mr. Madison's thoughts on the subject were not anti-religious.  His concerns were different.  The present day liberal would not/does not understand Madison thoughts on the subject.   Again -- there is something that Madison did that proved he wasn't against religion in government.  Hummmmmmm...  

 

You constantly put down the "present day liberal's" intellect.  You know, those dummies from Harvard, Yale, etc.  The most laughable part of this is your own posts which clearly demonstrate a lack of knowledge on issues where you mock other's understanding.  Madison's writings are vast on the subject.  In fact, he wanted much stronger language in the Constitution but settled on the verbiage which is contained in the final text.  

While you assert that liberals would not/could not understand Madison's position on the subject, I am convinced you are better suited to discuss "Green Eggs and Ham" than our Constitution.

[smitty]

You constantly put down the "present day liberal's" intellect.  You know, those dummies from Harvard, Yale, etc.  The most laughable part of this is your own posts which clearly demonstrate a lack of knowledge on issues where you mock other's understanding.  Madison's writings are vast on the subject.  In fact, he wanted much stronger language in the Constitution but settled on the verbiage which is contained in the final text.  

While you assert that liberals would not/could not understand Madison's position on the subject, I am convinced you are better suited to discuss "Green Eggs and Ham" than our Constitution.

​So, you think Madison was a anti-religious bigot?   BTW -- there's no future in taking up for liberals.   Unless one is one!      

PS -- I only mock liberal understanding.  It is highly mockable. 

PSS -- I guess you studied under the Green Eggs And Ham author also!    LOL!!

Edited July 3, 2015 by smitty

[TxHoops]

​So, you think Madison was a anti-religious bigot?   BTW -- there's no future in taking up for liberals.   Unless one is one!      

PS -- I only mock liberal understanding.  It is highly mockable. 

This is why you clearly do not understand the issue/discussion.  One can be a Christian and believe in separation of church and state.  There are many of us who do.  On the other hand, there are Islamic countries who would support the opposite. 

Of course Madison was not "a (sic) anti-religious bigot."  Although there is a lot of evidence suggesting he was more of a deist.  But let's not get you more confused introducing that subject.  

In the meantime, keep mocking.  Irony can be quite entertaining.  ;)

 

[TxHoops]

 

PSS -- I guess you studied under the Green Eggs And Ham author also!    LOL!!

You don't believe I studied under Charlie Wright?  That's a pretty random assertion for one to make out of the blue.  But I can easily prove that one, obviously.  One of my classmates (same law school class) was Michael Berry.  He and I have many opposing viewpoints (obviously) but respect each other's opinions and remain friends.  If you don't listen to him on the radio, you should start.  He will provide you with many thoughts and arguments for you to regurgitate. 

[smitty]

You don't believe I studied under Charlie Wright?  That's a pretty random assertion for one to make out of the blue.  But I can easily prove that one, obviously.  One of my classmates (same law school class) was Michael Berry.  He and I have many opposing viewpoints (obviously) but respect each other's opinions and remain friends.  If you don't listen to him on the radio, you should start.  He will provide you with many thoughts and arguments for you to regurgitate. 

​I listen to Mr. Berry.  A GOOD conservative.  Where did you go wrong?   

Edited July 3, 2015 by smitty

[smitty]

It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant.  It's just that they know so many things that aren't so!   

[Hagar]

Let me preface this with saying I've never "studied" the Constitution, but it's my understanding that virtual all the Founders believed in God (confirmed by the large number of Masons).  The efforts in the Con. on this was to prevent a theocracy, and that effort is being used by the far left to take as much relegion out of our lives as possible.  

What should concern a normal liberal (and scares the feces out of conservatives) is why is it so important so these ultra leftist to remove ALL reference to religion?

What's on their agenda that makes this such a high priority?  

Wish I had more answers than questions, but I doubt anyone would believe the answers if I knew them.  

[baddog]

Let me preface this with saying I've never "studied" the Constitution, but it's my understanding that virtual all the Founders believed in God (confirmed by the large number of Masons).  The efforts in the Con. on this was to prevent a theocracy, and that effort is being used by the far left to take as much relegion out of our lives as possible.  

What should concern a normal liberal (and scares the feces out of conservatives) is why is it so important so these ultra leftist to remove ALL reference to religion?

What's on their agenda that makes this such a high priority?  

Wish I had more answers than questions, but I doubt anyone would believe the answers if I knew them.  

Religion is the fabric that binds this nation. It is part of the communist manifesto to remove it.

 

People really need to read about separation of church and state. We have discussed this before and it is not exactly what it sounds like. Of course the communists (left) use this as the guise to strip every religious reminder from the earth.

[PAMFAM10]

Religion is the fabric that binds this nation. It is part of the communist manifesto to remove it.

 

People really need to read about separation of church and state. We have discussed this before and it is not exactly what it sounds like. Of course the communists (left) use this as the guise to strip every religious reminder from the earth.

You know out of everything that's wrong with America it's stuff like this that is the most troubling we love to judge every detail about some one race gender sexuality clother hairstyle etc. How bout everyone learn that just because someone disagree with your view on life doesn't make them any less American than you. I believe at least 98% or all politicians regardless of party is doing what they believe is right for america. We need to find a common ground or we truly will be lost. A house divided cannot stand. Congress wouldn't even agree that the sky is blue.

[baddog]

You know out of everything that's wrong with America it's stuff like this that is the most troubling we love to judge every detail about some one race gender sexuality clother hairstyle etc. How bout everyone learn that just because someone disagree with your view on life doesn't make them any less American than you. I believe at least 98% or all politicians regardless of party is doing what they believe is right for america. We need to find a common ground or we truly will be lost. A house divided cannot stand. Congress wouldn't even agree that the sky is blue.

Feel "FREE" to point out any discrepancies in my post. Also, doesn't the "other side" have the right to disagree? You want your cake and eat it too.

 

I believe God and Country is the cry of a "True American". Take one away, you lose both.

 

back on topic....if you are in a restaurant with your wife and kids and a gay man with those assless chaps happens by, what do you tell your kids?

Edited July 3, 2015 by baddog

[westend1]

Feel "FREE" to point out any discrepancies in my post. Also, doesn't the "other side" have the right to disagree? You want your cake and eat it too.

 

I believe God and Country is the cry of a "True American". Take one away, you lose both.

​Which God?  Who gets to choose?

[PAMFAM10]

Feel "FREE" to point out any discrepancies in my post. Also, doesn't the "other side" have the right to disagree? You want your cake and eat it too.

 

I believe God and Country is the cry of a "True American". Take one away, you lose both.

 

back on topic....if you are in a restaurant with your wife and kids and a gay man with those assless chaps happens by, what do you tell your kids?

If I'm out with my family I don't wanna see ass at all. Thats what they have Hooters for.

[PAMFAM10]

And I wasn't talking about us all having to agree on this issue. Just saying. I don't want my cake and eat it. I just think people can agree on other issues more but to agree with a Republican as a Democrat or agreeing with a Democrat as a Republican is taboo nowadays.

[baddog]

​Which God?  Who gets to choose?

I expect better from you. I believe in a supreme being. I believe we all worship the same God since he is the creator. No matter what name he is worshipped by, we all seek the same goal. You have no problem watching Christians being persecuted, yet you defend the Muslims. Like I said before, the communist manifesto calls for the destruction of religion as we know it.

[baddog]

If I'm out with my family I don't wanna see ass at all. Thats what they have Hooters for.

Total misdirection. If your kid saw that and asked, what would you say. Very valid question to one who defends gays.

[baddog]

And I wasn't talking about us all having to agree on this issue. Just saying. I don't want my cake and eat it. I just think people can agree on other issues more but to agree with a Republican as a Democrat or agreeing with a Democrat as a Republican is taboo nowadays.

Ah, so there were no discrepancies. You seem to have a level head about you. Why is it that we are always on opposite sides of the fence?

[smitty]

This quote has been attributed to G.K. Chesterton:  "It's the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense.  Also:  "When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing — they believe in anything."  Sorta what we are seeing now.  Take religion out of schools and now, trying to force it out of government.  We end up with -- right becomes wrong.  Dog becomes cat.  Man becomes women.  And gay becomes normal.  Societies that have ran down this path has never ended good.   Look at all the communist/socialist nations around the world past and present:  They do not allow religion in.  Hummm, I wonder why

[smitty]

And I wasn't talking about us all having to agree on this issue. Just saying. I don't want my cake and eat it. I just think people can agree on other issues more but to agree with a Republican as a Democrat or agreeing with a Democrat as a Republican is taboo nowadays.

PAM, I have a question for you:  If someone is right on an issue -- why would you compromise?   Let's look at a few issues:  If one is a Constitutionalists, why compromise?  If you are drowning in debt, and have an answer, why would you compromise?  If Iran was about to lob a nuke towards America, and you have an answer for it, why would you compromise.  The point I'm making is, contrary to popular beliefs, there are absolutes in life.  So, why would anyone compromise their principles?

[PAMFAM10]

PAM, I have a question for you:  If someone is right on an issue -- why would you compromise?   Let's look at a few issues:  If one is a Constitutionalists, why compromise?  If you are drowning in debt, and have an answer, why would you compromise?  If Iran was about to lob a nuke towards America, and you have an answer for it, why would you compromise.  The point I'm making is, contrary to popular beliefs, there are absolutes in life.  So, why would anyone compromise their principles?

You don't have to bend your beliefs. To compromise.  

Gun law: every gun has to be registered pass background checks can have your gun on hip everywhere you go no extended clip or assault rifles in public. 

Immigration: better path to citizenship. Secure borders 

Those are my ideas of compromise everybody basically got what they wanted. Both parties can claim victory. 

[PAMFAM10]

Total misdirection. If your kid saw that and asked, what would you say. Very valid question to one who defends gays.

I'll tell him that" boy if you ever(15 curse words) you hear me son" as honest as it gets.