PDA

View Full Version : Religion Houston VA Bans Mention of God at Funerals for Vets


ROYC75
07-13-2011, 11:49 AM
<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sgY5ej-9kSg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

It's sad that our country is headed down the wrong path.

ROYC75
07-13-2011, 11:51 AM
<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DuoctBx92oM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Garcia Bronco
07-13-2011, 01:38 PM
Isn't this really something that should be up to the family?

mikey23545
07-13-2011, 01:43 PM
The story you are referring to is not really an accurate statement of what's going on in Houston. Read this article for a little clarification.


VA: 'God' Allowed at Cemetery

Updated: Friday, 01 Jul 2011, 9:41 AM CDT
Published : Thursday, 30 Jun 2011, 9:45 PM CDT

SALLY MACDONALD
Reporter

HOUSTON - The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is responding for the first time to complaints the Houston National Cemetery director has gone rogue.

Three separate organizations have come forward complaining the director and other government officials are censoring prayer. They include the Veterans of Foreign Wars, The American Legion and the National Memorial Ladies.

All accuse director Arleen Ocasio of banning the words "God" and "Jesus," requiring government approval for prayers and forbidding honor guards from talking to families about what kind of service they wish to have.

They also say Ocasio turned the chapel into a meeting room shortly after her arrival two years ago.

"I want to know why Arleen Ocasio, director of Houston National Cemetery, who to my knowledge is not a veteran, can come in and tell us we can not say 'God Bless You' to these families who have just buried a veteran," said Marilyn Koepp, a volunteer with the National Memorial Ladies.

VA Press Secretary Josh Taylor issued the following statement:

"Invoking the name of God or Jesus is not only allowed, it is common at VA National Cemeteries across the country. However, VA's policy is that VA-sponsored honor guards should not make recitations at commital services unless requested to do so by the deceased's survivor(s.)'

Taylor also directed FOX 26 to a little known policy dated 2007. It says Honor Guards "shall not provide texts of any such recitations to the deceased's survivors for consideration."

"This is the first time we've found out about this national policy. It's absolutely shocking that the government is stepping in and telling private citizens what they can and can not say," said Hiram Sasser with the Liberty Institute.

Attorneys with the Liberty Institute began investigating last month after a local pastor won the fight to say his Jesus prayer at the cemetery's Memorial Day ceremony.

"When we investigated we determined the government and director are discriminating based upon religious viewpoint," said Jeff Mateer, General Counsel for Liberty Institute.

Lawmakers are beginning to call for the firing of the cemetery's director.

"Oh yes she's got to go and anyone else on her staff who's carried out such similar conduct," said Rep. Ted Poe (R)-TX.

Congressman Michael McCaul (R)-TX agrees.

"This is shocking and really abhorrent to our veterans that they can't have a proper military burial and can't refer to God or Jesus Christ," he said.

Our calls to Ocasio have still not been returned. The U.S. Attorney's Office told a judge earlier this week it's investigating the claims and will report its findings next month.

Read more: http://www.myfoxhouston.com/dpp/news/local/110630-va-god-allowed-at-cemetary#ixzz1S12a7dWN

ClevelandBronco
07-13-2011, 04:24 PM
I don't see any good reason to begin with for a believer to serve in this nation's armed forces. I guess it's unfortunate for them that some have served anyway.

|Zach|
07-13-2011, 04:25 PM
"Invoking the name of God or Jesus is not only allowed, it is common at VA National Cemeteries across the country. However, VA's policy is that VA-sponsored honor guards should not make recitations at commital services unless requested to do so by the deceased's survivor(s.)'



Sounds completely reasonable but of course some people are stupid enough to go where ever Fox News wants them to go.

Keep trying to peddle that bullshit Roy.

ROYC75
07-13-2011, 04:44 PM
Sounds completely reasonable but of course some people are stupid enough to go where ever Fox News wants them to go.

Keep trying to peddle that bullshit Roy.

Some people are stupid enough to discredit God or refuse to believe.

You keep peddling your crap to the atheist.

|Zach|
07-13-2011, 05:06 PM
Some people are stupid enough to discredit God or refuse to believe.

You keep peddling your crap to the atheist.

Swing and another miss.

I am not trying to discredit god.

Keep reaching. I am trying to discredit the lies you try and spread.

Jaric
07-13-2011, 05:08 PM
Some people are stupid enough to discredit God or refuse to believe.

You keep peddling your crap to the atheist.

Why do you believe Roy? (if you don't mind me asking)

EDIT: Also, if the Vet/Vets family want God mentioned, then whoever is in charge had better fucking mention it. If they don't, then they shouldn't. It's really that simple.

|Zach|
07-13-2011, 05:15 PM
I come out and explain that people have the freedom to bring God into their services and get called an atheist by Roy.

Some people really do believe every little thing Fox News tells them. What a sad existence.

listopencil
07-13-2011, 05:32 PM
Persecution Complex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecutory_delusions

RIF

blaise
07-13-2011, 05:33 PM
Sounds completely reasonable but of course some people are stupid enough to go where ever Fox News wants them to go.

Keep trying to peddle that bullshit Roy.

Well, there's not enough information. That could be their policy, but this woman could be wrongly acting outside of that policy locally in Houston.

That quote isn't from her.

ROYC75
07-13-2011, 06:55 PM
I come out and explain that people have the freedom to bring God into their services and get called an atheist by Roy.

Some people really do believe every little thing Fox News tells them. What a sad existence.

Wrong,wrong, wrong and wrong.

Where did I spread any lies ? I merely posted a link, it's up to the people to view it and take what they can out of it. Now if you want my opinion about it, I can only say that liberals and atheist want God & Jesus removed from our lives, this much we know is true.

My comment in the OP was correct, it is sad that the country is going down the wrong path. So prove it or just shut up about it. You are making more out of a comment than what is there.

I did not call you an atheist. I told you to peddle it to them if you feel that way.

And no, I do not believe everything Fox News says. Again, you will be on here soon claiming you know me better than I know myself.

And what is a sad existence is you, always trying to discredit anything I say, or in this case,type.

Better get your fingers fired up, you were just proved wrong on many claims here, I know you just can't stand for that to happen.

ROYC75
07-13-2011, 06:57 PM
Why do you believe Roy? (if you don't mind me asking)

EDIT: Also, if the Vet/Vets family want God mentioned, then whoever is in charge had better ****ing mention it. If they don't, then they shouldn't. It's really that simple.

Believe ? As in what ?

listopencil
07-13-2011, 07:11 PM
My comment in the OP was correct, it is sad that the country is going down the wrong path.


Actually, it's great that the country is finally headed down the right path. It's nice to see my Federal government living up to promises made in our founding documents.

stevieray
07-13-2011, 07:20 PM
Actually, it's great that the country is finally headed down the right path. It's nice to see my Federal government living up to promises made in our founding documents.
ya, especially that part about firm reliance on Divine providence.

the fact that you are battling against/trying to remove it, proves that it is/was the norm.

listopencil
07-13-2011, 07:22 PM
ya, especially that part about firm reliance on Divine providence.

the fact that you are battling against/trying to remove it, proves that it is/was the norm.


The fact that it is slowly being removed, if anything, proves that it was wrong for it to be added in the first place.

stevieray
07-13-2011, 07:27 PM
The fact that it is slowly being removed, if anything, proves that it was wrong for it to be added in the first place.

First you try to tell us what the Founders REALLY meant, but then say they were wrong.

:spock:

the country never would've happened without "it"

listopencil
07-13-2011, 07:29 PM
First you try to tell us what the Founders REALLY meant, but then say they were wrong.

:spock:




Nope. It was plain what the Founders meant. American society, dominated by an evangelical Christian majority, slowly eroded their wise foundation. That is in the process of being repaired.

stevieray
07-13-2011, 07:31 PM
Nope. It was plain what the Founders meant. American society, dominated by an evangelical Christian majority, slowly eroded their wise foundation. That is in the process of being repaired.

BS. 'it"(God) IS the foundation.

listopencil
07-13-2011, 07:34 PM
BS. 'it"(God) IS the foundation.


No, human rights are the foundation of this country.

stevieray
07-13-2011, 07:40 PM
No, human rights are the foundation of this country.

...rights are self evident truths, that are inalienable... given to us by WHOM?

listopencil
07-13-2011, 08:00 PM
...rights are self evident truths, that are inalienable... given to us by WHOM?


It doesn't matter what you or I believe the origin of those rights to be. All that matters is that those rights are respected. When those rights are not respected, then and only then is the government involved. Anything else would be contrary to our Constitution.

Jaric
07-13-2011, 08:27 PM
Believe ? As in what ?

In God.

You had said: Some people are stupid enough to discredit God or refuse to believe
I was wondering what experience lead you to believe. If you feel that's too personal, don't answer. I'm just curious.

Jaric
07-13-2011, 08:31 PM
...rights are self evident truths, that are inalienable... given to us by WHOM?

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

listopencil
07-13-2011, 08:43 PM
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.


Yep. Good for us that our entire justice system is based upon the Constitution and not the Declaration of Independence.

Jaric
07-14-2011, 06:52 AM
Yep. Good for us that our entire justice system is based upon the Constitution and not the Declaration of Independence.

For the record, I wasn't attempting to suggest otherwise.

However, at the same time, the founders of this country obviously did not have a problem making references to a divinity (even a generic one which I believe to be the case with the DOI) in an incredibly important legal document that (I believe) founded our country.

Which makes me think some of the hysteria revolving around trying to ban any and all aknowledgement that religion exists from the state to be a bit outside of what was intended. Now, I'm not suggesting that we make the 10 commandments federal law (aside from the ones already there of course) or that we need to switch from a constitutional republic to a theocracy.

Just that everyone on both sides of the issue might benefit from calming the fuck down and try to be reasonable. This issue with the VA is a perfect example. This could be resolved with a 2 minute conversation with the deceased family. If they want a religious ceremony, give it to them. If not, then don't. End of discussion.

Ugly Duck
07-14-2011, 08:04 AM
Isn't this really something that should be up to the family?

Thats the way it is: "VA's policy is that VA-sponsored honor guards should not make recitations at commital services unless requested to do so by the deceased's survivor(s.)"

At Faux News that translates to: "VA bans God from funerals cuz the Obama admin persecutes Christians!"

ROYC75
07-14-2011, 09:50 AM
In God.

You had said:
I was wondering what experience lead you to believe. If you feel that's too personal, don't answer. I'm just curious.


Why do I believe in a sovereign supreme power from above. Many reasons, most of which come from the personal relationship I have with him from within. Unless you really know him, one does not understand.

Best way to tell others is, if you have a spouse you love unconditionally, it is somewhat along the the same feeling on a spiritual side.

I remember in a Sunday school class this question was asked. This response was given by the teacher at the time.
~~~~~~~~~~
I believe in God for seven reasons. The following evidences testify of God’s existence. Consider the evidence of:

1) Design - The tremendous complexity, order and synchronization of nature testify of its Designer.
Study the circuitry of a computer or a bolt and nut whose threads matched perfectly. Do you believe that these objects were formed by chance? Why not? Who designed the living cell, a bee’s eye or the human brain with far greater complexity and synchronization? God did.

2) Beauty - Nature not only testifies of functional design, but it speaks of a Creator with an aesthetic appreciation for beauty. View a beautiful painting. Do you believe that this work of art work fell together by chance? Why not? Who created nature with its colours and aesthetic beauty? God did.

3) Morality - The innate sense of right and wrong in all people testifies of their righteous Creator.
Watch a toddler touch a forbidden object or a young child tell a lie. Do you believe that this boy or girl does not know that this action is wrong? Why not? Who formed this child with an innate sense of right and wrong? God did.

4) Perfection - The longing of all people for perfection and eternal meaning speaks of a need to know and love their perfect and eternal Creator.
Observe people’s desires. Are they ever fully satisfied? Do they ever attain perfection and eternal meaning by their efforts or human relationships? Why not? Who implanted this deep-seated need for a perfect and eternal relationship? God did.

5) Religion - The religious beliefs and practices of people from every continent on earth proclaim the universal consciousness of God and a deep need to live in communion with our Creator.
Study primitive to advanced cultures from every tribe, nation or language on earth. Do you find any group of people with no religious beliefs and practices? Why not? Who placed these innate spiritual needs and desires in all people? God did.

6) Personal Assurance - Experiencing a loving relationship with God convinces a person of God’s reality.
Witness a person who loves another. Does he or she doubt the reality of love, or the love of the other? Why not? Who personally communicated the reality of His love? God did.

7) Word of Truth - The Bible’s ability to inerrantly speak to the spiritual needs of all people throughout history regardless of age, culture, or education and its communication of the perfect answer for man’s sin by the gracious gift and death of God’s Son Jesus Christ testifies that it is the Word of God. Study the Bible. Do you find any error in its spiritual, practical, historical, scientific or prophetical truths, or any lack in its ability to speak truth to all cultures, ages and types of people? Why not? Who proclaimed such infallible and heart-renewing truths? God did.

To not believe in God requires faith that goes against reason. It requires illogical faith. When, however, we observe the design of creation and beauty of nature; the universal sense of morality, desire for perfection and consciousness of God; and the witness of personal testimony and power of the Bible, then we know that believing in God is supported by reason. Faith in God is logical faith.

So Yes, I believe in God. Do you?

BigCatDaddy
07-14-2011, 10:48 AM
For the record, I wasn't attempting to suggest otherwise.

However, at the same time, the founders of this country obviously did not have a problem making references to a divinity (even a generic one which I believe to be the case with the DOI) in an incredibly important legal document that (I believe) founded our country.

Which makes me think some of the hysteria revolving around trying to ban any and all aknowledgement that religion exists from the state to be a bit outside of what was intended. Now, I'm not suggesting that we make the 10 commandments federal law (aside from the ones already there of course) or that we need to switch from a constitutional republic to a theocracy.

Just that everyone on both sides of the issue might benefit from calming the **** down and try to be reasonable. This issue with the VA is a perfect example. This could be resolved with a 2 minute conversation with the deceased family. If they want a religious ceremony, give it to them. If not, then don't. End of discussion.

This is no place to apply common sense.

Jaric
07-14-2011, 11:02 AM
So Yes, I believe in God. Do you?

First off, thank you for the in depth response. I'll respond a little bit more specifically when I'm not on a break at work and can really digest it all.

Did want to answer this question immeditately though. If I had to sum up my religious views in one sentence it would be this:

I believe that the world of the divine is beyond human comprehension and therefore I don't believe we can claim to "know" what it outside of the observable world.

I do assume that there is some power guiding in some form or fashion the world or at least it's creation. I make this assumption because I can not come up with a rational explaination to explain our existance without at some point having to refer back to an unknown. It is that unknown that I refer to when I say the world of the divine.

When attempting to reason it out, I invariably get to a point where I am asking "well how did God get here?" and then my brain locks up like an engine with no oil in it. The concept of infinity is far easier to digest in a theoretical sense than it is putting it into actual practice.

I also have little patience for organized religion and it's dogmatic traditions. I say that merely to inform not to insult. Your beliefs are your beliefs and I would no more tell you what to believe than I would accept you telling me what to believe. That is a question we must all answer for ourselves. I personally enjoy hearing from people all over the spectrum to get their perspective. It also requires me to think about my own views and beliefs which I feel is a positive thing overall.

Frankie
07-14-2011, 12:20 PM
Isn't this really something that should be up to the family?

Yep.

I didn't watch the video clips, but with all due respect to our atheist friends, where is the harm in the tradition of praying to God in a funeral? Just let it go if you don't believe in God.

jiveturkey
07-14-2011, 12:22 PM
Yep.

I didn't watch the video clips, but with all due respect to our atheist friends, where is the harm in the tradition of praying to God in a funeral? Just let it go if you don't believe in God.
What if the person being buried is an atheist?

Frankie
07-14-2011, 12:24 PM
What if the person being buried is an atheist?

Still harmless. A bunch of people who are his/her friends are praying to THEIR God on his behalf. What does it hurt?

listopencil
07-14-2011, 12:27 PM
Yep.

I didn't watch the video clips, but with all due respect to our atheist friends, where is the harm in the tradition of praying to God in a funeral? Just let it go if you don't believe in God.

I don't believe there is any harm in praying to God at a funeral. Anyone acting as an agent of our government is required to abide by our Constitution however, which would include not endorsing any religious beliefs in an official capacity.

ROYC75
07-14-2011, 12:33 PM
I don't believe there is any harm in praying to God at a funeral. Anyone acting as an agent of our government is required to abide by our Constitution however, which would include not endorsing any religious beliefs in an official capacity.

You really do have a problem with believing in God ?

You calm no harm, but yet if it's a military funeral, it shouldn't be allowed ?

listopencil
07-14-2011, 12:35 PM
I don't believe there is any harm in praying to God at a funeral. Anyone acting as an agent of our government is required to abide by our Constitution however, which would include not endorsing any religious beliefs in an official capacity.


I should point out that there are specific instances where this isn't true. Someone serving in the armed forces as a Chaplain for example. I don't understand why a Chaplain isn't assigned to this duty instead of involving honor guards.

Jaric
07-14-2011, 12:36 PM
I don't believe there is any harm in praying to God at a funeral. Anyone acting as an agent of our government is required to abide by our Constitution however, which would include not endorsing any religious beliefs in an official capacity.

What part of the constitution are you refering to in this case?

listopencil
07-14-2011, 12:37 PM
You really do have a problem with believing in God ?

You calm no harm, but yet if it's a military funeral, it shouldn't be allowed ?

A problem with it? No. I'm agnostic. I don't think one can actually know if a god exists.

listopencil
07-14-2011, 12:39 PM
What part of the constitution are you refering to in this case?


Do you honestly not know or are you being facetious?

Bump
07-14-2011, 01:23 PM
Some people are stupid enough to discredit God or refuse to believe.

You keep peddling your crap to the atheist.

it doesn't make anybody stupid for not believing. Some people would like maybe just a tiny bit of proof or some facts. If you read the bible, it sounds pretty ridiculous honestly.

listopencil
07-14-2011, 01:34 PM
Some people are stupid enough to discredit God or refuse to believe.

You keep peddling your crap to the atheist.

Wow, I missed this post earlier. You asked me if I had a problem with believing in God. Actually, You have a problem with people who don't believe in the same thing that you do. This attitude is one of the things that turn people away from your beliefs.

frankotank
07-14-2011, 01:43 PM
Can't we all just get along? :shrug:

ROYC75
07-14-2011, 02:19 PM
Wow, I missed this post earlier. You asked me if I had a problem with believing in God. Actually, You have a problem with people who don't believe in the same thing that you do. This attitude is one of the things that turn people away from your beliefs.

No, I do not, it's your choice.

My response was sarcastic to Zach's sarcastic remark. But I should have been a better person and just over looked his stupid remark.

Jaric
07-14-2011, 03:10 PM
Do you honestly not know or are you being facetious?

I have an idea, but I wanted to make sure before responding. I assume you are refering to the first amendment.

Dave Lane
07-14-2011, 03:13 PM
Sounds completely reasonable but of course some people are stupid enough to go where ever Fox News wants them to go.

Keep trying to peddle that bullshit Roy.

Roy is an epic idiot. And I apologize to idiots throughout this great land.

Dave Lane
07-14-2011, 03:16 PM
...rights are self evident truths, that are inalienable... given to us by WHOM?

Secular humans.

listopencil
07-14-2011, 03:27 PM
I have an idea, but I wanted to make sure before responding. I assume you are refering to the first amendment.


Yes I was.

Dave Lane
07-14-2011, 03:32 PM
it doesn't make anybody stupid for not believing. Some people would like maybe just a tiny bit of proof or some facts. If you read the bible, it sounds pretty ridiculous honestly.

That's the understatement of the millennium.

go bowe
07-14-2011, 03:33 PM
Roy is an epic idiot. And I apologize to idiots throughout this great land.

hey, dave, whassup?

have you gotten any good photos of the universe lately?

the ones that i have seen are beyond beautiful and thought-provoking at the same time...

looking forward to more pics like those...

and go easy on roy, he means well and he's a pretty cool guy in person...

Jaric
07-14-2011, 03:33 PM
Yes I was.

Thank you, I like to make sure before I respond. I like to think I know the constution fairly well, but if I'm going to respond to a consitutional argument, I'd rather not make assumptions.

The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Would you mind explaining how the VA having a religious ceremony at a funeral would constitute a violation of the 1st amendment? In fact, I dare say that not allowing religious ceremonies (if the family so chooses) would be a violation of the 1st amendment as they have prohibited the free exercise of religion.

Are you aware of case law that states otherwise? (I'm not up to date on my case law, sorry)

go bowe
07-14-2011, 03:36 PM
it's all bush's fault...
Taylor also directed FOX 26 to a little known policy dated 2007. It says Honor Guards "shall not provide texts of any such recitations to the deceased's survivors for consideration."

:) :) :)

Dave Lane
07-14-2011, 03:41 PM
hey, dave, whassup?

have you gotten any good photos of the universe lately?

the ones that i have seen are beyond beautiful and thought-provoking at the same time...

looking forward to more pics like those...

and go easy on roy, he means well and he's a pretty cool guy in person...

Gobowe if you say so I'll believe you. He is so uneducated, and ignorant of simple things like facts vs fiction its frankly frightening he has spawned. I'll back off a bit.

I got some pics but Ive been working on the coolest project in the universe, or at least Leawood.

Mr. Flopnuts
07-14-2011, 03:41 PM
If you've ever advocated someone else losing their rights in regards to anything you didn't "agree with" don't expect a lot of sympathy when it happens to you. Because it inevitably will.

listopencil
07-14-2011, 03:42 PM
Thank you, I like to make sure before I respond. I like to think I know the constution fairly well, but if I'm going to respond to a consitutional argument, I'd rather not make assumptions.

The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Would you mind explaining how the VA having a religious ceremony at a funeral would constitute a violation of the 1st amendment? In fact, I dare say that not allowing religious ceremonies (if the family so chooses) would be a violation of the 1st amendment as they have prohibited the free exercise of religion.

Are you aware of case law that states otherwise? (I'm not up to date on my case law, sorry)


That depends on the situation, of which we know little. If members of the family or representatives of the family are leading a religious ceremony for the funeral of a deceased service member on Federal property than I see no breach. If a Chaplain (or equivalent) is leading the ceremony than I see no breach. If members of the honor guard are sitting down with the family and planning the ceremony then I see a possible breach. If members of the honor guard are making religious statements to or about the family while in official capacity then then I see a possible breach. There really isn't enough information in the article to understand what's going on in this specific scenario.

go bowe
07-14-2011, 03:47 PM
Thank you, I like to make sure before I respond. I like to think I know the constution fairly well, but if I'm going to respond to a consitutional argument, I'd rather not make assumptions.

The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Would you mind explaining how the VA having a religious ceremony at a funeral would constitute a violation of the 1st amendment? In fact, I dare say that not allowing religious ceremonies (if the family so chooses) would be a violation of the 1st amendment as they have prohibited the free exercise of religion.

Are you aware of case law that states otherwise? (I'm not up to date on my case law, sorry)

i can't cite any cases for you, but the supremes have interpreted that language for the last 500 years or so as prohibiting government from endorsing any religion in it's official capacity...

that interpretation sometimes results in extreme cases like the guy who had to take the ten commandments off the courthouse lawn...

but it has been the law of the land for quite some time...

personally, i don't agree with it in cases like these, but the supremes haven't asked me for my opinion...

go bowe
07-14-2011, 03:50 PM
Gobowe if you say so I'll believe you. He is so uneducated, and ignorant of simple things like facts vs fiction its frankly frightening he has spawned. I'll back off a bit.

I got some pics but Ive been working on the coolest project in the universe, or at least Leawood.

we'll be looking forward to seeing what you're up to...

go bowe
07-14-2011, 03:50 PM
If you've ever advocated someone else losing their rights in regards to anything you didn't "agree with" don't expect a lot of sympathy when it happens to you. Because it inevitably will.

spot on...

Jaric
07-14-2011, 05:01 PM
That depends on the situation, of which we know little. If members of the family or representatives of the family are leading a religious ceremony for the funeral of a deceased service member on Federal property than I see no breach. If a Chaplain (or equivalent) is leading the ceremony than I see no breach. If members of the honor guard are sitting down with the family and planning the ceremony then I see a possible breach. If members of the honor guard are making religious statements to or about the family while in official capacity then then I see a possible breach. There really isn't enough information in the article to understand what's going on in this specific scenario.

i can't cite any cases for you, but the supremes have interpreted that language for the last 500 years or so as prohibiting government from endorsing any religion in it's official capacity...

that interpretation sometimes results in extreme cases like the guy who had to take the ten commandments off the courthouse lawn...

but it has been the law of the land for quite some time...

personally, i don't agree with it in cases like these, but the supremes haven't asked me for my opinion...
I hope you guys don't mind me lumping your two posts together but my response is pretty much the same to both of you.

I think there is a huge difference from the state endorsing a specific religion and having a person acting on behalf of the state engaging in an activity that might or would be considered religious. As I mentioned in my previous post, it could be argued (in fact, I would argue) that to prevent the families from having a religious ceremony for the deceased would certainly constitute a violation of the first amendment regardless of what involvement the state takes in assisting with that ceremony.

Ultimately though, the issues comes down to how a person defines "respecting an establishment of religion." Reasonable people can certainly disagree on what that definition means, however, I would argue that short of Congress passing actual legislation establishing a national religion, the first amendment would not be violated.

I don't believe it was ever intended for a complete and total abolition of religion from the public realm. I cite as exhibit A the Declaration of Independence. There are 4 references in that document to the realm of the divine. Now, those are generic references despite what the Christians might want to tell you, but they are in fact references to what would be considered the area of religion in what is (IMO) the second most important document in our country (The Constitution being the first) If it truly was intended to have the two areas completely separated, I don't think they would have made 4 different references.

The catch though is at what point to religious involvement in the world of the secular start to infringe upon the rights of others to practice different religions or no religion at all? Again, reasonable people can disagree on where to draw that line.

And it's a hard line to draw, because you have to balance between not endorsing a religion, while not prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

ROYC75
07-14-2011, 05:14 PM
Roy is an epic idiot. And I apologize to idiots throughout this great land.

Really? Is this the best you got? BTA, I didn't expect much from you.

|Zach|
07-14-2011, 05:15 PM
Really? Is this the best you got? BTA, I didn't expect much from you.

Well its no punching a guy at a bar because he is gay Roy style. But I suppose it will have to do.

ROYC75
07-14-2011, 05:15 PM
Gobowe if you say so I'll believe you. He is so uneducated, and ignorant of simple things like facts vs fiction its frankly frightening he has spawned. I'll back off a bit.

Your proof is, where ?

ROYC75
07-14-2011, 05:16 PM
Well its no punching a guy at a bar because he is gay Roy style. But I suppose it will have to do.

So this one comes in from left field, for what purpose?

|Zach|
07-14-2011, 05:20 PM
So this one comes in from left field, for what purpose?

Thought I would drop to speak about your compassionate Christian fraud persona you try to convey.

Jaric
07-14-2011, 05:34 PM
1) Design - The tremendous complexity, order and synchronization of nature testify of its Designer.
Study the circuitry of a computer or a bolt and nut whose threads matched perfectly. Do you believe that these objects were formed by chance? Why not? Who designed the living cell, a bee’s eye or the human brain with far greater complexity and synchronization? God did.If my understanding of natural selection is accurate (and full disclosure, it might not be) then the reason those things you mentioned seemed designed is because if they were not functional, those traits would not have been passed on to future generations.

Science is still pretty much as the "well this is what happens" stage of figuring that out. As far as I know, they are still working on the why part.

That alone however does not disprove the existence of a Creator. Of course I admit freely that it's impossible to prove that God does not exist.


2) Beauty - Nature not only testifies of functional design, but it speaks of a Creator with an aesthetic appreciation for beauty. View a beautiful painting. Do you believe that this work of art work fell together by chance? Why not? Who created nature with its colours and aesthetic beauty? God did.Personally, I think this is your strongest argument. These are certainly the times where I want to believe in a God more than any other.

3) Morality - The innate sense of right and wrong in all people testifies of their righteous Creator.
Watch a toddler touch a forbidden object or a young child tell a lie. Do you believe that this boy or girl does not know that this action is wrong? Why not? Who formed this child with an innate sense of right and wrong? God did.Morality is something completely confined to mankind. Animals have no concept of morality. This logically means one of two things. The first is your explanation. The second is that morality is one of mankind's most subjective creations. I'd like to think that reasonable people can disagree there. My thoughts on the matter have changed several times during my lifetime and I expect (and hope actually) that they will continue to change.

4) Perfection - The longing of all people for perfection and eternal meaning speaks of a need to know and love their perfect and eternal Creator.
Observe people’s desires. Are they ever fully satisfied? Do they ever attain perfection and eternal meaning by their efforts or human relationships? Why not? Who implanted this deep-seated need for a perfect and eternal relationship? God did.
Funny you mention perfection. I was watching this fascinating program on the science channel with Steven Hawking. There was a part where he was explaining how the Big Bang occurred (If you don't believe in that just skip this part.) and I'll summarize briefly to avoid ****ing it up but the basic point, what that because of the way gravity works with matter that was floating around at the time, if there were not slight imperfections in the universe, things would have never joined up the way they did and the universe would essentially be just completely evenly spaced and ordered atoms.

If that's true, I think there is something to that.

5) Religion - The religious beliefs and practices of people from every continent on earth proclaim the universal consciousness of God and a deep need to live in communion with our Creator.
Study primitive to advanced cultures from every tribe, nation or language on earth. Do you find any group of people with no religious beliefs and practices? Why not? Who placed these innate spiritual needs and desires in all people? God did.Again, there are two explanations for this. It could be as you said. By design. It could also simply be a side effect of being self aware. It's hard to tell because human beings are again unique in that respect. So we have nothing to compare to. Again, I'd like to think reasonable people can disagree, or that one could even remain unaffiliated and accept that both explanations are possible without showing disrespect to either viewpoint.

6) Personal Assurance - Experiencing a loving relationship with God convinces a person of God’s reality.
Witness a person who loves another. Does he or she doubt the reality of love, or the love of the other? Why not? Who personally communicated the reality of His love? God did.Now this is interesting. I know this wasn't your point, but I'm going to bring it up because I think it applies here.

The argument could be made that God existence is proven because of the influence that God has had on the world. Whether you believe in a particular religion's idea of what "God" is or not, it doesn't matter. Name one person, product, idea, or concept that has influenced this world more than the idea of God. The impact of God on this world cannot be denied, even if one only believes in the idea of God.

Does that alone not prove that God "exists?" For if it did not exist, then how could you and I be discussing what it means?

One of the beauties of language and one of mankind's secret special skills, is the ability to express abstract ideas through language. Love for example. I doubt too many would deny that love exists, but "love" has no physical form. You can't see "love." You can see people in love. You may have been able to feel it at some point.

I actually think it's more appropriate to think of God as an abstract idea because of how closely other abstract ideas are associated with God. Love. Caring. Truth.



7) Word of Truth - The Bible’s ability to inerrantly speak to the spiritual needs of all people throughout history regardless of age, culture, or education and its communication of the perfect answer for man’s sin by the gracious gift and death of God’s Son Jesus Christ testifies that it is the Word of God. Study the Bible. Do you find any error in its spiritual, practical, historical, scientific or prophetical truths, or any lack in its ability to speak truth to all cultures, ages and types of people? Why not? Who proclaimed such infallible and heart-renewing truths? God did.Practical: Pretty much all of Leviticus. Science: Pretty much all of Genesis.

ROYC75
07-14-2011, 05:35 PM
Thought I would drop to speak about your compassionate Christian fraud persona you try to convey.

Fraud ? Please show proof ! I'll save you the hassle, What I did back then was forgiven. I know that is hard for you to accept.

LiveSteam
07-14-2011, 05:45 PM
I bet Dave Lane & Zach,got all the good toys on Xmas morning.

ROYC75
07-14-2011, 05:46 PM
If my understanding of natural selection is accurate (and full disclosure, it might not be) then the reason those things you mentioned seemed designed is because if they were not functional, those traits would not have been passed on to future generations.

Science is still pretty much as the "well this is what happens" stage of figuring that out. As far as I know, they are still working on the why part.

That alone however does not disprove the existence of a Creator. Of course I admit freely that it's impossible to prove that God does not exist.


Personally, I think this is your strongest argument. These are certainly the times where I want to believe in a God more than any other.

Morality is something completely confined to mankind. Animals have no concept of morality. This logically means one of two things. The first is your explanation. The second is that morality is one of mankind's most subjective creations. I'd like to think that reasonable people can disagree there. My thoughts on the matter have changed several times during my lifetime and I expect (and hope actually) that they will continue to change.

Funny you mention perfection. I was watching this fascinating program on the science channel with Steven Hawking. There was a part where he was explaining how the Big Bang occurred (If you don't believe in that just skip this part.) and I'll summarize briefly to avoid ****ing it up but the basic point, what that because of the way gravity works with matter that was floating around at the time, if there were not slight imperfections in the universe, things would have never joined up the way they did and the universe would essentially be just completely evenly spaced and ordered atoms.

If that's true, I think there is something to that.
Again, there are two explanations for this. It could be as you said. By design. It could also simply be a side effect of being self aware. It's hard to tell because human beings are again unique in that respect. So we have nothing to compare to. Again, I'd like to think reasonable people can disagree, or that one could even remain unaffiliated and accept that both explanations are possible without showing disrespect to either viewpoint.

Now this is interesting. I know this wasn't your point, but I'm going to bring it up because I think it applies here.

The argument could be made that God existence is proven because of the influence that God has had on the world. Whether you believe in a particular religion's idea of what "God" is or not, it doesn't matter. Name one person, product, idea, or concept that has influenced this world more than the idea of God. The impact of God on this world cannot be denied, even if one only believes in the idea of God.

Does that alone not prove that God "exists?" For if it did not exist, then how could you and I be discussing what it means?

One of the beauties of language and one of mankind's secret special skills, is the ability to express abstract ideas through language. Love for example. I doubt too many would deny that love exists, but "love" has no physical form. You can't see "love." You can see people in love. You may have been able to feel it at some point.

I actually think it's more appropriate to think of God as an abstract idea because of how closely other abstract ideas are associated with God. Love. Caring. Truth.



Practical: Pretty much all of Leviticus. Science: Pretty much all of Genesis.

An interesting take, I really like this take / read by Marilyn Adamson.


She covers the Big Bang Theory pretty well and has some insightful takes on 6 reasons God is real . I think you will find it interesting.
http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

Dave Lane
07-14-2011, 06:13 PM
Dude there is no proof of god, not of a historical jesus's existence either. There is voluminous proof the big bang did occur, you can actually see the background radiation left over from said big bang.

There are no reputable astrophysicists that deny the big bang.

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence

Jaric
07-14-2011, 06:17 PM
Dude there is no proof of god,

If you're responding to me here Dave, then you missed my point.

Dave Lane
07-14-2011, 06:25 PM
An interesting take, I really like this take / read by Marilyn Adamson.


She covers the Big Bang Theory pretty well and has some insightful takes on 6 reasons God is real . I think you will find it interesting.
http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

That is the stupidest article I have ever wasted 10 minutes on.

I'll pick on one quick thing because I have heard this stupidity too many times to not retort.

The eye: the eye is FAR from perfect. We have a blind spot in our eye where the optic nerve attaches to the back of the eye. Our brain just fills in data there, even though we can't see a thing there. We see all images upside down. Why would a "perfect designer" fuck that up?

Now add seeing issues like, near sightedness, astigmatism, glaucoma and hundreds of other defects and this is the best god can do? Pretty poor work in my judgement. Just because her site "looks" pretty doesn't mean any of the information there contained has any meaningful value.

Dave Lane
07-14-2011, 06:26 PM
If you're responding to me here Dave, then you missed my point.

Not you Jaric you and I agree.

LiveSteam
07-14-2011, 06:53 PM
Big bang. Sweet!
I threw a M-80 in the toilet & started a hole civilization.I call them Gods bacteria.
No one can prove the big bang or god. If you can bring me some worm holes & black holes to my house? I might believe in the big bang. But you cant.
What I find funny,are atheist who have children, & then have them baptized. Just in case.LOL

Dave Lane
07-14-2011, 07:03 PM
Big bang. Sweet!
I threw a M-80 in the toilet & started a hole civilization.I call them Gods bacteria.
No one can prove the big bang or god. If you can bring me some worm holes & black holes to my house? I might believe in the big bang. But you cant.
What I find funny,are atheist who have children, & then have them baptized. Just in case.LOL

The big bang is proven. It's beyond doubt. You can say god caused it of course but it can't factually or reasonably be denied.

stevieray
07-14-2011, 07:28 PM
It doesn't matter what you or I believe the origin of those rights to be. All that matters is that those rights are respected. When those rights are not respected, then and only then is the government involved. Anything else would be contrary to our Constitution.

...and the word was God. I'll explain.

your first statement is true and false in context. it doesn't matter, because these truths were self evident and inalienable before us and will be after us.

....it does matter that those truths came from God, because otherwise man(as he is now) could claim they came from man, and therefore taken away by man...it reminds of the story of Moses and the Exodus...which the founders modeled our situation after, to the point of offering it up as the Seal of the Country. Moses was the favored son of Pharoah, and God could've easily freed the Jews through that channel..but he didn't.. why not? because then man, not God, would've recieved the glory for their freedom.

I agree with your last two statements. but I disagree with putting the cart before the horse. The Constitution sits on the foundation of the DOI, and essentially reaffirms it...not only by protecting the freedom of expressing reilgion, but telling man (government) what it can't do, because it would fly directly in the face of the DOI, and infringe on those rights.

listopencil
07-14-2011, 10:21 PM
...and the word was God. I'll explain.

your first statement is true and false in context. it doesn't matter, because these truths were self evident and inalienable before us and will be after us.

....it does matter that those truths came from God, because otherwise man(as he is now) could claim they came from man, and therefore taken away by man...it reminds of the story of Moses and the Exodus...which the founders modeled our situation after, to the point of offering it up as the Seal of the Country. Moses was the favored son of Pharoah, and God could've easily freed the Jews through that channel..but he didn't.. why not? because then man, not God, would've recieved the glory for their freedom.

I agree with your last two statements. but I disagree with putting the cart before the horse. The Constitution sits on the foundation of the DOI, and essentially reaffirms it...not only by protecting the freedom of expressing reilgion, but telling man (government) what it can't do, because it would fly directly in the face of the DOI, and infringe on those rights.



Yes, I see what you mean, but the DOI is not what our laws are built upon. It is a declaration meant to rationalize our split with England. Basically a declaration of war against what was our own country up to that point. It had a very specific purpose.

The Constitution is our legal foundation as a country. It defines us as Americans, a legal contract with our own government. We have to use it rather than the DOI. Otherwise, for instance, I think the US would have had to concede to a secession by the South instead of going to war.

Frankie
07-14-2011, 11:30 PM
Secular humans.

:clap:

ClevelandBronco
07-14-2011, 11:34 PM
I'm beginning to understand why you libtards are fine with theft and other crimes against your fellow citizens. I don't respect any "rights" that are granted by humans either.

kstater
08-25-2011, 05:01 PM
The sad part is there will be Liberal Loons everywhere believing all of this. :rolleyes:
LMAO