Partly cloudy with a stray thunderstorm.
Partly cloudy with a slight chance of thunderstorms overnight. Low near 80F. Winds SSE at 10 to 15 mph. Chance of rain 30%.
Updated: September 19, 2017 @ 7:52 pm
September 19, 2017
Not so sure that GOD is always in the equation; Religion however, in some form or another, is probably inevitable in societies – and that is great.
In a democracy however, folks should have the ability to practice (or not) any religion which they wish. Across the world there is a plethora of “supreme beings” which people recognize and the easier we make it for them to do so, the better our society in the US will be.
Clifford James Geertz (August 23, 1926 – October 30, 2006) - According to Geertz, religion is "(1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic"C. Geertz, "Religion as a Cultural System," in Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion , ed. M. Banton (London: Tavistock, 1966): 1-46
As long as we don't take the notion of God within our nation too far, I'm OK with calling us "One Nation Under God". Having a guiding spirit is not a bad thing. However, taking that notion and telling those coming here that MY guiding spirit is better than YOUR guiding spirit is bad. Let's not lose sight of the fact that, at least with respect to the God of Christians, people are His primary concern. Good people in bad families or nations will likely ascend to the Kingdom of Heaven, while bad people, even in the most righteous of families or nations will descend to the depths of Hades.
In this, One Nation Under God, we have the responsibility to ensure that, under our Constitution, and within the laws and tenets of our society, people of all beliefs should have the right to pursue the sense of righteousness that fits their spiritual beliefs.
There is no single right in our constitution that is designated as being granted solely to any one religious belief, nor denied specifically to any. Whether I believe in 0, 1, or 1 million gods has no bearing on my rights within this country. As members of a once-oppressed faith, it would behoove us to use our position within this country as an oppressive one. Our guiding Christian principles require us to let people of other faiths find their ways, just as we let people of our own faith find their own way.
Oops, left out a word....
...it would behoove us to NOT use our position within this country as an oppressive one.
Amen to the authors of the article.The only thing we've improved by becoming a more secular nation is...well...Never mind...I can't think of a single thing it's improved...
Have we become a more secular nation over the past 200+ years? If so, what has it made worse? I'm struggling to identify any of the problems we have today that I'd attribute to secularism. I certainly can't attribute bad behavior to secularism.
Nature abhors a vacuum. We have removed prayer and references to Jesus and God from public schools. And people wonder why there is more violence, more profanity, more bullying and less education in public schools.kevjlang cannot attribute bad behavior to secularism. As a public school teacher I can and I do. I have noticed the violent, the swearing and the bullies do not have religion in their lives. And the courts say we cannot convey it in the classroom. Notice that school killings started when "Thou shall not kill" was removed from public schools.
Discipline is not rejected by secularism. Discipline does not need to be under fear of God's retribution to exist. If you think that there's no way to teach discipline without the use of God and Jesus, then I think you're just in a tantrum. Frankly, I had you pegged as being intelligent and clever enough to find ways to enforce discipline.
I do understand that the schools can't do it alone. Even if you have God and Jesus at your disposal in the classroom, if the discipline--secular or clerical--is non-existent at home, you're at a significant disadvantage.
The loss of discipline, to me, is two-faceted. The schools have given up, and the parents have become uninvolved. About the same indictment for the decline in education as a whole.
Atheist and devout children are equally adept at discipline, as long as discipline is enforced at both home and school. I just think that blaming it on the loss of "religion" in the public schools is either an attempt at oversimplifying or a total cop out.
Don't shoot me I'm only the messenger! This country prospered under a shared set of mores called the Judeo - Christian set of values. Even when not taught at home, everyone was expected to follow them in our society. Remove them from government, schools and otherwise you see what has happened. "Discipline is not rejected by secularism." Yes but then each person has their own definition of "discipline". You say, "If you think that there's no way to teach discipline without the use of God and Jesus, then I think you're just in a tantrum." Funny, that is the theme in the movie "Time Changer" - a movie that stars Gavin MacLeod, Paul Rodriguez and Hal Linden. The year is 1890 and Bible professor Russell Carlisle has written a new manuscript entitled 'The Changing Times', which promotes good morals without mentioning Christor or religion. An inventor played by Hal Linden sends Professor Carlisle to the 21st Century to see what the world would be like in such a future. Arriving in the early 21st century, Carlisle is shocked to find that half of all marriages end in divorce (instead of 5% in 1890), teenagers talk openly about deceiving their parents, movies contain blasphemous language and people who go to church are so bored by the sermons that they need extra activities. Returning to 1890, Carlisle is convinced to teach morality without religion, Christ in particular, would be futile. I suggest you view the movie.
Those mores are still a part of the fabric of we the people. Taking prayers and the like out of the schools is not what has wrought the problems. The schools only have the kids 6-8 hours a day, 5 days a week. The schools certainly have a role in enforcing our mores, but the families and the communities have the kids under their supervision more than the schools.
There's no reason for the schools to believe that they're not allowed to hold kids to society's standards. Who knows, maybe that 20-25% of their lives might actually carry forward. Aristotle, Socrates, and Plato seemed to do all right at teaching ethics despite not having Christianity to back them up.
Well, I've been on the fence with this type of thing, and I watch the pendelum swing in regard to acknowledgment that the forefathers truly believed in a higher power that guides societies into greatness. There are those who think that without faith, then humankind is on the road to downturn and eventual demise.
Do we need a nationally recognized faith-based entity to move our country into a better path? Maybe we do. One question I ask is where are our congressional leaders in all of this? If our US Senators and Represenatives were to acknowledge God's message and truly act on their service to our country, would the roadblocks be lifted? Would deficits and stalemates be a thing of the past?
How about our millions of citizens who are without work, especially those who "play the system" and refuse to work? Will a more faith-based mentality on their part help them pick themselves up and contribute to society? Maybe the saying "with God all things are possible" is a good one to live by.
Maybe that inability to see the forest for all the trees in the way is one reason WHY too many people act bad...they have the same eyesight troubles...In the meantime, anybody opposed to 'God' and willing to walk their talk is free to send me all their 'faith based' money that has 'In God We Trust' on it.I'll see to it that it's put to good use...Imagine that...wise use of money... very 'un-progressive'...[beam]
Lars is starting to sound like a republican.
or a Christian.
I'm glad this come up!!! Yes!!! I know one thing,........ first let me go wet my "TOAT" (East Texas for Throat )... I'll be "rat" back! This is going to be a long one,...and I might pass the hat on this one!!!
As these are listed under "Columns", should we assume that these 3 are now employed by the GCDN?
Response to carlosrponce posted at 3:08 pm on Mon, Apr 7, 2014:
I think we also need to realize that a large part of our country "prospered" under the veil of Christianity with the utilization of slaves. Couple that with decades-earlier acts of deceiving and killing the Native Americans.
I think we need to be careful when we say that Christianity is the "make it or break it" yardstick of morality. Wars are fostered through religious and cultural fears and differences. Although the basic tenets of virtually all religions are to be good to others and to forgive, we must remember that it's not a "chicken or the egg" concept. That is, let's say that the chicken (religion) was first. That doesn't mean the first chicken caused such blissful result as having an egg (moral behavior and great human characteristics).
In other words, I don't believe that religion and morality is a "cause and effect". The practice of religion does not necessarily cause good behavior. If the US became a "godless" country, we still could "go under" (or maybe not), just as much as our country could meet its demise through unbridled religious persecution(s).
I am not a religious person myself, though I certainly believe in God, and pray every day.
That said, I agree with gecroix that not a single thing has improved as we've become a more secular nation (Except things that are outside the secular/spiritual discussion, like cell phones and the Internet. Those are improvements.)
I can hardly wait for jbg's next post...
Response to carlosrponce posted at 4:57 pm on Mon, Apr 7, 2014:
Well, carlosrponce, I don't think the pendulum is going to swing the other way where folks who hold deep Christian religious views will be "tarred and feathered". Now, back in the Salem days, that was definitely a "burn at the stake", or tar and feather period, if you will. No, I don't think our Christians here in the US have to worry about that.
I happen to believe that there is a "happy medium", where the religious and the non-believers can hold respect for each others' views. Let's face it, not everyone is going to adhere to Judeo-Christian values in this country. Now, as I mentioned before, I do think (and hope) that all religions can find common ground as opposed to the concepts of hope for immortality, love toward one another, fairness. I like what you said about the "nominal" versus the "Living Word" Christians.
My hope is that a true Living Word Christian will pray for the non-believers who don't adhere to public school praying. As for folks who at once were against "same sex" marriage then, but changed over to support it now. Well, that is a perfect illustration as to how our society is evolving. More folks are realizing that you can be a wonderful individual even if you are gay/lesbian, non-Christian, do not pray, et cetera.
You call it "evolution", I call it an acceptance of sin. As Christians we love the sinner but hate the sin. I would rather follow God than man. Acceptance on this world is fleeting. Heaven is eternity. So is Hell."The Lord has promised good to me. His word my hope secures. He will my shield and portion be, As long as life endures."The Bible has prophecised these days would come.
Most of the ethics of Christianity are shared with other world religions. Even atheists and agnostics recognize that killing, stealing, etc. are bad actions. Respect for elders, obeying laws, etc. are not just Christian traits. That is my point. If people aren't respecting those ethical rights, you can throw Jesus, God, Satan, and whatever Christian foundations you want at them, and they still won't change their ways. The degeneration of behavior is rooted well before the courts started saying you can't pray in class. The moral decay is due to people not demanding ethical behavior of themselves and their children. Perhaps people straying from their churches is very significant, but that's their personal behavior, not what Government has stripped away. If you say that more secularism is the cause, then you're letting people off the hook with respect to their personal responsibility.
The kids who fight, curse, steal and bully don't call themselves "atheists". They and their families just don't go to church and have no religious background. We call them "amoral". They emulate their parents, their homies, their music, their movies, their television programs without assigning a value to it. Religion assigns value to actions which we call "right" and "wrong". "My favorite Rapper calls girls a blankety blank blank so I'll call girls a blankety blank blank" is their rationale. Anyone who "disses" their role model gets slammed to the ground so they'll slam anyone who "disses" them. Their comrades take what they want so they take what they want. Your role models act like a "brute" and gains "hood respect" so you act like a "brute". No values here, just parroting behavior.John Lennon asked us to "Imagine no Religion" - it's not a pretty sight.
What do you propose? That we become a religious state like Iran? No thanks. The Soviet Union maintained very strict discipline for years despite being a devoutly secular society. Secularism wasn't their downfall. The loss of economic value and the increasing difficulty (and increasing oppression while trying) of preventing pictures of the outside world from getting in were much more responsible.
You don't have to work at convincing me that we do have a problem of amorality and immorality. But I think it's because somewhere along the line someone got the bright idea that you can't teach morality without going to church on Sundays or praying in the classroom.
I'm sure we can solve the morality and respect issues, and I believe we can do it without electing a Christian Ayatollah and putting priests in everyone's home and classroom.
You get credit for moral and respectful behavior by being ethical and respectful. Merely saying a prayer or attending a church service means nothing. If people are disciplined enough to where they don't need a minister beating reasons for being good into their heads, that's fine. If some people feel better with divine guidance, so be it, too. However, that's not government's decision. Punishing bad behavior is a role of government, and I have no problem with the schools and society being more strict about people's behavior.
No.The secularization of America is because people make the choice to do so, and/or others too lazy to resist them sit out. They are responsible for taking that course, because it's a personal choice, not a command.The government is a reflection of the people, for better or worse.More secular voters, more secular people voted in. And vice versa.The more secularization, the more people get elected who believe foremost in government, and less in faith, which manifests itself in less faith in the folk to care for themselves.I'm old enough to remember when the courts got into the classrooms.It was back when the vast majority of students at all levels still had manners, showed respect for the teachers, acted like human beings, and would never have dreamed of tossing MF's around in the classroom.Been downhill since.Coincidence?No.Of course, I could be wrong.But, I'm not....
No you are not Mr. gecroix! You are as right as rain. Every man is responsible,...and will be held accountable for his decisions and choices in this life. There is an old song which said,.."Don't put off until tomorrow what you can do today!" -The moral of the song is you don't own tomorrow! You could die tonight,...and what if DEATH came tonight and found you with a rebellious soul toward GOD? You would be locked into that state of being! Which means to HELL you go,...along with the demonic hounds who will escort you there!-There you will see great men and women of knowledge,...high stationed in life, and arrogant to the bone, who thought they knew more than the ALMIGHTY GOD. There is only one way out of HELL,..and that will be when HELL's dead is summoned to the Great White Throne Judgement!! After sentence is pronounced,..( a mere formality.....because if you were innocent you would not be in HELL in the first! ). Every soul who is presented in the Great White Throne Room for judgement is ALREADY GUILTY! There will be no trial,...only sentencing! WHERE?The LAKE OF FIRE,...where the fire is not quenched and the WORM DIES NOT!!!!!-Revelation 20:11-15"And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire". -John 5:22-23"For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: That all [men] should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him". -Joshua 24:15
15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.-"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity; There is none that doeth good."-Psalms 53:1-Psalms 14:1-Lastly, I want to say this, I don't care what others believe,....and as far as religion goes,...the Pharisees and Sadducees of Jesus' time were religious. Besides that I cannot find where Christ said it was okay to be divided like religion divides. I do respect others right to decide for themselves which road they will take where eternity is concerned. I'm heard many say there are many ways to heaven, and God says there is only one ( John 14:6 ) Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.-It is people in prison tonight because of choices and decisions! There are people in the graveyards tonight because of choices and decisions! I would be the last person to insist that an individual's ability to choose is taken away,....I'm just not going to agree with that person's decisions or choices which are contrary to what God says in His word. People are POOR tonight because of choices,...SICK because of choices made years before the final harvest showed up in their lives. -I will leave yall with this. JUST BECAUSE A PERSON CALLS HIMSELF A CHRISTIAN, DOES NOT MEAN HE IS ONE! I don't give a &*% if he has a WHITE collar around his neck and packs a bible everywhere he goes! Jesus says....WATCH THE FRUIT THAT COMES FROM AN INDIVIDUAL AND BY THAT,...AND THE LOVE HE SHOES FOR OTHERS,...YOU WILL KNOW . ( John 13:34 -35 ).
John 13:34-35:34) "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye alove one another; as I have loved you, that ye also blove one another."
35) "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have alove one to another."-Matthew 7:16-20:16) You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17) So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18) A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19) Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20) So then, you will [c]know them by their fruits.-Some might say I don't believe that JBG!!!! Well, Have it your way,...you have been told the GOSPEL and the WORD,...and it has been recorded in heaven,...I could care less. I've done what I have been told to do.
Well, I was not disappointed! Mr. Jbgood said his piece and said it well.
I chose a more subtle path, but one I consider just as valid. I was raised a Christian, but I don't adhere to that faith as strongly as Mr. Jbgood -- though the morals I learned as a youngster in that faith guide my actions today, because they're just as relevant now as when Moses accepted them and Jesus preached them.
But I find some of the the tenets and practices of other religions as soothing as those of Christianity, so I adopt them as I find them useful. I believe God can sort out the good practices from the bad, and provide the rewards and penalties He (or She) sees fit. I trust my Christian heritage will guide me not to choose any practices or techniques that God would find offensive. (For example, God would not find yoga offensive -- it is a spiritual practice, a gift to us from our Hindi and Buddhist friends.)
But what I do isn't the issue. The issue is whether this nation is better off as a secular state or one which openly and proudly allows itself to be associated with God, as a guiding light and protector.
Personally, I've never understood how our dependence and reliance on God could be questioned. Agnostics and atheists should be benevolently ignored, while granted the same rights as the rest of us -- which include freedom of speech and religion. The vast, vast, vast majority of Americans believe in God. More than 90%. Seems like God should "officially" be a part of our lives in America. He (or She) is certainly a part of our lives unofficially -- guiding and protecting -- and over 90% know it.
Mr. Buckner,As I said before, I would never disagree with an individual's right to choose his pathway to eternity, and where that individual will spend it. Eternity is a longggggg time. To make that choice is a personal thing. -This I know, the road to damnation is wide and many will travel it,...the road to salvation is narrow and few will choose it! I've met people who just don't care about this one way or the other. The enemy has done a most effective work of blinding them to the importance or the gravity of the situation. ( II Corinthians 4:4 ).-"Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don't believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don't understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God."
-There are still many who will never find the time to go to a house of God. This is the very reason it is incumbent and imperative for God's people to come out of the houses of God and go to the fields,...or the Harvest of God,...which is the world of non believers. -Satan never wants a man to get save and attend the House of God for training! However if he fails to stop that,.....he then focuses on deceiving him into not coming out or getting fit for service OUTSIDE of the house of God! This is why Jesus said:-Matthew 9:37Then saith he unto his disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few.....-This indicates the people of God who are not fit to handle duty in the HARVEST,...or those who are just to selfish to care. This is why the same Jesus said:-Matthew 22:14"For many are called, but few are chosen."-Simply put,...EVERY man is called,...but every man sinner, or Christian is not going to choose to ascertain the things necessary to grow their faith to the point they can be effective in the HARVEST of God! That is why the laborers are few!-A sinner is not going to do it, and a babe in Christ is not mature enough to care. I don't want to get long winded on this one so I'm going to shut it down and digress. Most folks are going to believe what makes them feel good anyway or what will facilitate their life-styles. If you take a look,..it is becoming more and more like the times Jesus said it would be before he comes back for the church. Just look around you. A few years ago, child molesters use to hang around the perimeter of schools trying to get at children. Now you can find many sitting behind the desks in front of the classes! -The morals and integrity of this country has tanked to the point where society here has evolved and we are doing things our forefathers would turn over in their graves and throw-up,.. if they could see us now!-You mentioned God as a He/She. Really? Do you believe Jesus was a female? Do you believe his FATHER is a female? Do you believe in the inspired Word of God? Did it call Jesus a female? Did it call the FATHER a female? I'm just asking,...I'm not calling you out. I'm just trying to get a fix on where you are coming from with this He/She thinggy.-Lastly,...I will reemphasize what I said earlier. When they fold our arms across our chests and lay us out in a casket,....EVERYONE will know beyond a doubt what was and WAS NOT the truth! However,...like the rich man who knew the Word of God before he died but refused to pray it until he was looking up from HELL,.....it will be to late for many. Yall have a good day. See down the line on another thread.
Going back to the title of this teamed writing, if we make it a law that everyone accept that we are "one nation under God", will that cure many of the ills our nation has?
Let's say that both Houses in Congress got their act together and actually passed a bill saying that every American must vow that he/she acknowledges our "one nation under God". A nation-wide movement ensues, and the vast majority of our country is on the bandwagon. Schools allow prayer (not just a moment of silence) again. We will all be allowed to hang a cross with the Lord Jesus on all of our workplace office doors.
Will the non-working be inspired to join the workforce in our new godly nation? Willl schoolchildren cease to use profanity, stop fighting, and will their parents make sure the children do their homework and have an adult home to make sure each child will prepare for the next school day?
If these things can be accomplished, then by all means, let's form a campaign to make the USA a country of God. Now, about tht "separation of church and state" thing in the Constitution. So that we don't establish that "one" religion, I think we can get around that by saying that we're all able to "freely exercise" our religion in our workplace, at the courthouse, and at the schools. The only negative is that someone might be excercising a religion that could make others feel uncomfortable. I ask in all seriousness...how can we handle the Wiccas and perhaps any religion that could be disruptive to the business days at hand?
I like what JBG said about "rebellious soul toward God". However, one thing perplexes me. There are quite a few folks who had always felt a strong tie with God, yet they did henous things. First example in my mind are the organized crime "mobs". Many of them were deeply religious. So, my question is, because of their religiosity, were they forgiven by God once they died because they were devoted to God, despite their crimes toward the human race?
Correction to the column: The United States WAS one Nation under God. We drift away from God in Roe v Wade. The drift widens with tossing out prayer from schools and public assemblies. God used to grant His Grace on this great land but we have long forgotten to give Him thanks and praise for these blessings. Long forgotten is the fourth verse of "The Star Spangled Banner " as penned by Francis Scott Key:"O thus be it ever, when freemen shall standBetween their loved home and the war's desolation.Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n rescued landPraise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation!Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall waveO'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
Roe v Wade did not FORCE anyone to do anything immoral. If you consider abortion to be immoral, it was done all too frequently BEFORE Roe v Wade. People just didn't talk about or hear about it. A secular government does not absolve people from the responsibility of moral behavior. There is no law on the books that can prevent people from doing wrong, no matter how many times you invoke God or Jesus in the text of it.
Government doesn't need to have a role in HOW people develop their morals. Families are responsible for that. Government does have a role if people decide not to accept moral responsibility.
If you don't go around killing, robbing, assaulting, raping, or whatever, I don't care whether it's because God told you to behave or because of some other inner power. Your job is to act in a moral manner. How you achieve that is YOUR business, not the government's.
Roe v Wade did not force force anyone to do anything immoral but it did remove any stigma associated with that act. Government sanctification of abortion has legitimized it in the eyes of many although it is still immoral." There is no law on the books that can prevent people from doing wrong" - Problem is that people no longer consider certain acts "wrong" although their grandparents did .
Being as I've never had an abortion, and, I presume, neither have you, I have no basis for a belief that the stigma is gone. Generally, the number of people that know a woman is having an abortion is pretty low. It's not something you advertise. I'd bet the biggest source of stigma is that narrow realm of people that know about it, and the one that matters the most is probably from the woman herself.
I agree that a lot of people excuse more of their immoral activity than previous generations did. I just don't think that putting God on all of our government buildings and 30 seconds of prayer after reciting the Pledge of Allegiance every day in school is going to fix it. I think it will take more than that to get people to judge the Risk/Reward equation on bad behavior to steer them in the right direction. Something with more immediate teeth than "Judgment Day" might help.
"Generally, the number of people that know a woman is having an abortion is pretty low." Perhaps for women but not so for teen age girls in school - everyone on campus knew. And try teaching class after a young lady has started talking about her abortion step-by-step. I got her to stop talking but did I really get the kids' minds back on topic? Makes you long for the days when the biggest problem was chewing gum in class.
I'm not around teens much, so I'm not sure how much of that is isolated versus general behavior. I certainly hope it's isolated. Hopefully those that have gone through the process don't paint too rosy of a picture. From what I understand, although clinically controlled, my understanding is that it's still not a pleasant experience.
Trust me kevjlang, if you have seen the downward trends teens have displayed over the last few decades your posts on these forums would be skewed more to the right. Most people remember the way things were when they were in school and the way their peers behaved. Things have changed. And its not the entire fault of the teens. I place more blame on their parents and the media.
What show did I miss that espoused the beauty of abortion? I can't remember seeing it portrayed as anything other that a personally, and socially, divisive, emotional, and painful decision. I don't doubt that there are people out there that keep the neighborhood clinic on speed-dial, but I'd be terribly surprised if it's a pervasive situation. Or, maybe I have been out of school too long. I don't doubt that the social tone has softened over the years, but I'm not sure that many kids would resist the urge to label a girl that's had an abortion as being "easy" and promiscuous, and I can't imagine that many would take those as badges of honor.
Jbgood -- No, I don't think Jesus was a woman, and I don't think his father was either. But I think God just might be...
Mr. Buckner,I'm just an Old Plow Boy from East Texas, so forgive me if I ask you the difference between God the Father,....and God of the Universe? If you are talking about a god, then normally people would let others know by listing it as "god"...but you have me a little confused. Money can be a "god!" "Dragon" is god to some people as is "Satan!" Also it is highly recognized that God the Father is the Father of Christ Jesus,...so you got me.-Sverige1,Be careful about people who list themselves as Godly or Christians. I cannot count the times I've read where you are using that as an example. An apple can call itself an orange, but that does not make it so! I can go around and sing "THIS IS YOUR NIGHT" and tell folks I'm Mayor Hocking but that does not make it so! What's hard about understanding that? I say let God be God,...He can do that ALL BY HIMSELF WITH NO HELP FROM YOU OR JBG. In his Word he made note that JUDGING is part of his job description,..so HE needs no help with that! It is plenty HIS people can partner with HIM and do while they are here. ( The Harvest is great!).-In the Christian faith, there is room for mistakes if a person repent of sin and turn from their wickedness. That is one of the basic foundations of "All GRACE and forgiveness!" It is supported by the blood of Jesus,... his death on the cross and his resurrection from the dead.-If a man is assured of his salvation, death has no sting,...because he knows where he is going,...and is not afraid. Karla Faye Tucker who was put to death in Huntsville Texas on February 3, 1998 for heinous murders, was punished for her crimes by man's law, but she converted to Christianity while on death row before she became the first woman to be executed in Texas in 135 years. Before she died,..she wrote a letter to the Christian Evangelist Jesse Duplantis, who she watch regularly on TV and asked him is he would come to Huntsville and minister to her friends in the women prisons after she was executed.-Now,...she repented to GOD as a Christian,...through the blood of the Son for what she did wrong, and that qualified her as forgiven by GOD the Father,...but not the laws of this country. I don't know why I'm wasting my time here because I know you are not going to accept this explanation.-Mr. Lang,I don't care anything about the Government of the United States when I'm talking about God and Jesus Christ. It is nothing I can do about the Government but vote when the right time come for that to happen,...and pray for those who end up being elected, that somehow God will guide their directions in office. ( I Tim.2:1-6 ).-"Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." -I agree with Mr. gecroix ....i think government is a reflection of the people pool it draws from,...."IMMORALITY IN" ...."IMMORALITY OUT!" Now,...that is it for me. Good bye,...see you down the line, next time.
Jbgood -- To me, God is God. Doesn't matter what the terminology is.
Response to Jake Buckner posted at 11:28 am on Tue, Apr 8, 2014,Response to Jbgood posted at 1:15 pm on Tue, Apr 8, 2014:
God a man? A woman? I thought neither. God is a manifestation of all mankind, womankind, and all living beings on earth. As scripture mentions, "Woman or man, gentile or Jew, slave or free." Therefore, God is "man, woman, child, and ______ (fill in the blank).
I admit it, my post was bit tongue-in-cheek. I agree: neither...
I actually see God as the spirit of all things -- past, present, and future; living, dead, and yet to be born; animate and inanimate -- everything. I see God this way because it makes sense to me intellectually as well as spiritually. I'm not saying this is a new way of viewing God, or that I invented it. But it's what I choose.
Jesus taught his followers to pray " Our FATHER, who art in Heaven...." In the original Greek it is written as "Abba" which translates as "Daddy'. Jesus always refers to God as "Father" -the Masculine form. So Christians should do the same. When we baptize in a Christian rite we baptize " In the name of the FATHER and of the SON and of the HOLY SPIRIT". "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." - refers to the FOLLOWERS of Christ, not GOD.
Let me elaborate on my last sentence , not God Himself.
Response to carlosrponce posted at 3:30 pm on Tue, Apr 8, 2014:
Yes, yes. Now, I'm thinking of the "One Bread, One Body" hymn. As the followers receive Jesus' body and blood we are "one" in the Lord. Neither Gentile nor Jew, nor woman, nor man.
Ah, yes...Roe v Wade.The REAL 'War on Women'.While conservatives get blasted as 'warlike' for not wanting to pay for a woman's recreational sex BC pills that can be had for 10 bucks a month, the REAL killers have snuffed out the lives of some 25 million females, that's snuffed as in DEAD, not just PO'd, in the last 40 million. And, who are these female killers? Why, other females!! The real warriors. Because, you see, in a war, people die, they don't just get their sensitivities hurt.
No, no, no...not '...in the last 40 million', Mr. Lousy Typist/write...that's the last 40 YEARS.
Has anyone heard the Up With People group's song "What Color is God's Skin"? I think they still perform.
Response to gecroix posted at 7:30 pm on Tue, Apr 8, 2014:
The women's "recreational sex" to which you refer also involves the roughly half of the male population, who aid and abet in regard to the women's ultimate quandry regarding pregnancy. WIth help of wikipedia, there are 138 million men who can potentially help the 143 million women who could get pregnant.
The problem with us men telling women about their "recreational sex" is that men's recreational sex (barring the contraction of an STD) is over and done with. Women might have to contend with getting pregnant. So, it's easy for us to say, "Oh, well, you 'made your bed' now lie in it".
Now, the questions I have to ask gecroix and supporters of breaking the means for birth control to women: 1) Who will take care of their unwanted babies that come to term? 2) Are we willing to foot the bill as taxpayers for more potential welfare checks and more potential Affordable Care insurance for these babies who ultimately came to term after our nation finally strikes down the rulings that currently allow the attainment of abortions?
I would think that a proponent of striking down Obamacare would be more than willing to want to keep up the opportunity for abortion. More abortions would mean less potential "freeloaders" on the governmental doles.
sverige1, I'm not sure how you can say that we should be for more abortions in order to be for fewer freeloaders. That seems a bit off the wall.
I do, however, think that all of those women participating in "recreational sex" had to have someone with equally "recreational" morals of the opposite sex helping to put them into the "Roe v. Wade" fray.
If those women with unwanted babies are morally inept, they had a morally inept sexual partner that produced half of the chromosomes required to make that baby.
Now, you must know, kevjlang, that I said the "more abortions = less freeloaders" as a thinking point for many of the dichotomous-thinking anti-abortionists who, for some reason simultaneously drone on about how all of these freeloaders are getting more numerous. Especially, with many more folks climibng on the dole due to the now 2-termed Obama presidency "debacle".
Now, a good question would be, if we outlaw abortions this decade (and given that no one does the back alley clotheshanger procedure), won't there likely be more young persons by the mid 21st century emerging as young adults, climbing on the dole bandwagon?
The loss of 50,000,000 Americans to abortion has led to a decrease in overall income, therefore income taxes, therefore Social Security "contributions". I hope there is someone there to care for you in your old age. Social security will dry up by then. I did not "contribute" to the SS fund so I'm not worried unless the Proglibs steal our TRS fund.If Roe v Wade wasn't there am I saying there would not have been 50,000,000 abortions? Yes, yes I am.
Pretty strong argument in favor of same-gender sexual activity...
Yes, Jake...I think many people have considered that as a plus. Not only that, there's quite a few females who simply match much better emotionally with another female.
Mrs. Gump was right.
Mr. Buckner, you may have a point, there...10 bucks is 10 bucks...[smile]
In the meantime, I note that we became the greatest nation the world has ever known by being mostly one nation under God, and we've begun to slide ever downward as we 'fundamentally change' that nation, by too many people who consider themselves above God.I'll stick with under Him...
Response to carlosrponce posted at 8:43 am on Thu, Apr 10, 2014:
Now, I'm curious as to why you would think the "progLiberals" would take away your TRS retirement. Don't most teaching stock come from rather liberal and free-thinking origins? After all, liberals believe in broadening the mind, which portends to teaching.
I would venture to say that a preponderance of TRS recipients are middle of the road to liberal in thought. They and their liberal friends wouldn't dare support taking away TRS from professors, teachers, etc.
There is a plan led by Proglibs to take the money invested in IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, and personal retirement accounts to bailout Social Security. Sounds preposterous but it has been recommended by Professor Teresa Ghilarducci.
You take one person with a wacky idea and label it as a "ProgLib" plan. If that idea has any backers that actually have IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, or other retirement programs, I'd be surprised if it numbered even into the hundreds.
I can see ideas such as tiered Social Security benefits based on other retirement income. Or, perhaps some modifications to the tax status of retirement plan contributions, with those tax dollars earmarked for Social Security and Medicare sustainability. But, I doubt that even things like these would be able to gain any wings. The only thing I can see having any chance at flying any time soon would be significant cuts in discretionary spending with the surplus directed toward the trust funds.
It's the absolute absurdity of anyone even having such an 'idea' that is in the issue.Besides, have we not seen in living color what just one person can accomplish if they ignore the laws and the Constitution, and use the powers of government to their personal ideological ends.Anyone looking has seen it...
Professor Teresa Ghilarducci has testified before Rep. George Miller’s committee in support of a plan to nationalize private pension plans.Rep. George Miller is a member of the Democratic Party who served as chairman of the Education and Labor Committee. Teresa Ghilarducci is a labor economist and nationally-recognized expert in retirement security and is the Irene and Bernard L. Schwartz Chair of Economic Policy Analysis and director of the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis in the Department of Economics at The New School's New School for Social Research. She may be "wacky" but she has the ear of many Democrats. Remember, in the 1990's Hillary Clinton's plan for National Health care was considered "wacky" but now we're stuck with a "wacky" health care plan - at least for now.
Appearing before a congressional panel means nothing about the support a far out idea might have. I think it's great that our country lets wacky ideas see the light of day. I'll bet that if we scratch around enough we can find some wacky ideas that have been heard in front of GOP led panels, too.
Social Security could soon become one of the biggest issues affecting this country. The solution will not be painless. All options should at least be put out there to have the pros and cons evaluated. While I doubt this option will get any serious consideration, it's possible that some other wacky idea will become part of the eventual solution. After all, there are some out there that believe we should just let it die, which many would consider to be a wacky idea, too.
Social Security?I'll give 'em this...the 'choicers' have certainly done their part to minimize the burden on Social Security system with the trashing of 50 million or so lives, at least on the benefits receiving end. Not so much on the paying into the system part...It's unclear how much of that ultimate solution was painless...to the recipient, probably none of it...But, I digress...Wacky idea? Here's one. How about re-instating the Clinton-signed-into-law, and Obama-executive-ordered-out requirement that people at least TRY to work for their own living.Of course, that would require a wacky idea like actually adopting policies that promote business and jobs growth, rather than dependency on government, itself a wacky idea, when one considers where the money to be dependent on must come from...Catch 22 of 'progressivism"...everything should be free or low cost, as long as somebody else pays for it, as long as they have any money to do so...[rolleyes]
Looks like the Administration's IRS has been working for about 3 years on minimizing that Social security shortfall issue, if just a tad.Wacky?I guess it's not much different from the death tax taxing your inheritance, if any, to the point you lose it...this is just a newer wrinkle...I believe this would qualify as one of the successes, not failures.In the Subcategory of 'all we need to do is sucker the middle-class into believing we're on their side, then stick it to them...and others, too...Again...
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism
that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness
accounts, the history behind an article.