100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: North Carolina State Religion? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I think if the religion thing was going to fly, Mormon would have been the State religion of Utah long ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you honestly think that the democratic party of back then is the exact same now? That the people who hate Obama because he's black are the democrats? Really? So. You are against them praying before their meetings? Nobody is saying that elected public officials can't have private prayer outside of an official government meeting. That is not what is being argued about. Here is an excerpt from a news report published by WRAL in North Carolina: A resolution filed by Republican lawmakers would allow North Carolina to declare an official religion, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Bill of Rights, and seeks to nullify any federal ruling against Christian prayer by public bodies statewide.
The resolution grew out of a dispute between the American Civil Liberties Union and the Rowan County Board of Commissioners. In a federal lawsuit filed last month, the ACLU says the board has opened 97 percent of its meetings since 2007 with explicitly Christian prayers. Overtly Christian prayers at government meetings are not rare in North Carolina. Since the Republican takeover in 2011, the state Senate chaplain has offered an explicitly Christian invocation virtually every day of session, despite the fact that some senators are not Christian. In a 2011 ruling on a similar lawsuit against the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners, the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not ban prayer at government meetings outright, but said prayers favoring one religion over another are unconstitutional. "To plant sectarian prayers at the heart of local government is a prescription for religious discord," the court said. "Where prayer in public fora is concerned, the deep beliefs of the speaker afford only more reason to respect the profound convictions of the listener. Free religious exercise posits broad religious tolerance." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think if the religion thing was going to fly, Mormon would have been the State religion of Utah long ago. someone has to be first, perhaps montana will follow there is no real explanation of what an 'official religion' would entail after all, in countries with official languages, people are still free to speak whatever language they wish,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you honestly think that the democratic party of back then is the exact same now? That the people who hate Obama because he's black are the democrats? Really? So. You are against them praying before their meetings? Nobody is saying that elected public officials can't have private prayer outside of an official government meeting. That is not what is being argued about. Here is an excerpt from a news report published by WRAL in North Carolina: A resolution filed by Republican lawmakers would allow North Carolina to declare an official religion, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Bill of Rights, and seeks to nullify any federal ruling against Christian prayer by public bodies statewide.
The resolution grew out of a dispute between the American Civil Liberties Union and the Rowan County Board of Commissioners. In a federal lawsuit filed last month, the ACLU says the board has opened 97 percent of its meetings since 2007 with explicitly Christian prayers. Overtly Christian prayers at government meetings are not rare in North Carolina. Since the Republican takeover in 2011, the state Senate chaplain has offered an explicitly Christian invocation virtually every day of session, despite the fact that some senators are not Christian. In a 2011 ruling on a similar lawsuit against the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners, the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not ban prayer at government meetings outright, but said prayers favoring one religion over another are unconstitutional. "To plant sectarian prayers at the heart of local government is a prescription for religious discord," the court said. "Where prayer in public fora is concerned, the deep beliefs of the speaker afford only more reason to respect the profound convictions of the listener. Free religious exercise posits broad religious tolerance." the problem I see there is a conflict between tolerance and free religious exercise I would think, if noone is being forced to pray, an individual or individuals who desire to pray should be able to,,,, the only drawback I really see is the fear of being 'outed' indirectly for those who may not be of the same religion,,but again, whatever consequence may come from that is already covered by discrimination laws,,,, I do think it would be a state decision though, since there is no explicit language against STATES decisions on the matter, only congress and then , as I said before, there is ironing out what an 'official' religion would entail and whether an official religion would even be required to enforce the freedom of speech which should allow individuals, wherever they are employed, freedom of their individual religious expression,,, should be interesting,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you honestly think that the democratic party of back then is the exact same now? That the people who hate Obama because he's black are the democrats? Really? So. You are against them praying before their meetings? Nobody is saying that elected public officials can't have private prayer outside of an official government meeting. That is not what is being argued about. What does this say? The legislation was filed in response to a lawsuit to stop county commissioners in Rowan County from opening meetings with a Christian prayer, wral.com reported. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you honestly think that the democratic party of back then is the exact same now? That the people who hate Obama because he's black are the democrats? Really? So. You are against them praying before their meetings? I don't really care who prays and who doesn't. I don't see the need to make an official state religion, though. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Thu 04/04/13 08:18 AM
|
|
I dont think 'official' things have much point, but we still have them
what is the point of an 'official state bird', or an 'official state flower',,,,etc,, its just a reflection of the culture, seems like to me, to let those who are there or coming there have an idea of what is important or historically significant in that region,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Religion is a personal thing. There's no need to make an official religion. It's not quite in the same category as the state bird or flower.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mightymoe
on
Thu 04/04/13 08:25 AM
|
|
Do you honestly think that the democratic party of back then is the exact same now? That the people who hate Obama because he's black are the democrats? Really? So. You are against them praying before their meetings? I don't really care who prays and who doesn't. I don't see the need to make an official state religion, though. more liberalness... whats it to you what North Carolina does before it's meetings? your always telling me about how i should accept gaydom, but you cannot accept something that has nothing whatsoever to do with you? true liberal, do as i say, not as i do... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you honestly think that the democratic party of back then is the exact same now? That the people who hate Obama because he's black are the democrats? Really? So. You are against them praying before their meetings? I don't really care who prays and who doesn't. I don't see the need to make an official state religion, though. more liberalness... whats it to you what North Carolina does before it's meetings? your always telling me about how i should accept gaydom, but you cannot accept something that has nothing whatsoever to do with you? true liberal, do as i say, not as i do... The atheist is all for official religions as long as it's the conservative thing to do, right? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you honestly think that the democratic party of back then is the exact same now? That the people who hate Obama because he's black are the democrats? Really? So. You are against them praying before their meetings? I don't really care who prays and who doesn't. I don't see the need to make an official state religion, though. more liberalness... whats it to you what North Carolina does before it's meetings? your always telling me about how i should accept gaydom, but you cannot accept something that has nothing whatsoever to do with you? true liberal, do as i say, not as i do... I have often been labeled liberal, but I believe people should be free to pray and express their religion as long as that expression doesnt involve 'harmful' behaviors to others I think that argument should hold up as much as the argument that sexual relationships between same sex dont 'harm' anyone else that is being used to force same sex marriages,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
more liberalness... whats it to you what North Carolina does before it's meetings? your always telling me about how i should accept gaydom, but you cannot accept something that has nothing whatsoever to do with you?
Liberal logic is an oxyMORON. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am all for someone praying if that's what they want to do. What I am against is pushing it on others and making it a requirement for anyone. If that happens, there goes someone's freedom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
more liberalness... whats it to you what North Carolina does before it's meetings? your always telling me about how i should accept gaydom, but you cannot accept something that has nothing whatsoever to do with you?
Liberal logic is an oxyMORON. Same could be said about logic and conservatism, willing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am all for someone praying if that's what they want to do. What I am against is pushing it on others and making it a requirement for anyone. If that happens, there goes someone's freedom. I agree, I dont think it should ever be MANDATED to folow a religion, nor should following a religion be restricted except in the event that it requires anyone to be 'harmed' (boy I hate that vague term,, but oh well) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am all for someone praying if that's what they want to do. What I am against is pushing it on others and making it a requirement for anyone. If that happens, there goes someone's freedom. isn't that what your doing by saying they can't have a christian prayer before meetings? or should they have to "pray in the closet"? think about it... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think about it, Moe. Making an official religion is forcing it on others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think about it, Moe. Making an official religion is forcing it on others. not really, most people wouldnt even know it was an official religion an official language is not directly affecting the speaking of any other languages same sex marriage is allegedly not affecting anyone who doesnt want to have a same sex marriage,,,, whats the difference? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think about it, Moe. Making an official religion is forcing it on others. i don't see where you get that from... they want to pray to their god, and others can pray to theirs... that's a problem for you? i didn't see in that article that Jews, Mormons, or muslims have to join the prayers... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dodo_David
on
Thu 04/04/13 12:12 PM
|
|
Do you honestly think that the democratic party of back then is the exact same now? That the people who hate Obama because he's black are the democrats? Really? So. You are against them praying before their meetings? Nobody is saying that elected public officials can't have private prayer outside of an official government meeting. That is not what is being argued about. What does this say? The legislation was filed in response to a lawsuit to stop county commissioners in Rowan County from opening meetings with a Christian prayer, wral.com reported. Re-read that decision made by the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The Rowan County commissioners have been including in their official government meetings prayers that favor one particular religion. If the prayers were non-sectarian, then the ACLU wouldn't have a case. |
|
|
|
|
