Discussion:
Supreme Court to hear case on prayer in public meetings this fall
(too old to reply)
Craig Zimmerman
2013-07-31 04:13:04 UTC
Permalink
SALT LAKE CITY — Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.

In a public setting, allowing for multiple forms of prayer and religious
discourse can serve as a vehicle for fellowship, camaraderie, respect and
love, Rev. Koucos said.

"It's a good way to start a day," he said, "or any kind of meeting."

The U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday that it will hear such a case this
fall. Town of Greece v. Galloway questions a tradition of beginning town
board meetings with prayer in the upstate New York town of Greece, where
city officials have regularly opened government meetings with prayers.

The city found itself in trouble — and in court — last year, when a pair
of residents brought complaints against the city — not because the
meetings began with prayer, but because city officials had asked
representatives of Christian denominations to offer those prayers, to the
exclusion of other faiths.

From 1999 to 2010, city officials began nearly every meeting with a
Christian-oriented prayer. The only exception to the rule, according to
the The Washington Post, was in 2008, when prayers were offered by a
Jewish layman, a Wiccan priestess, and the chairman of the local Baha’i
congregation following complaints.

Last year, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that requesting
Christian prayers the majority of the time had the effect of affiliating
the town government with a specific religion in direct violation of the
First Amendment, according to Lyle Denniston of SCOTUSblog.

"The Supreme Court’s agreement to review the decision might be interpreted
as an indication that the Justices could be preparing to make a major
pronouncement on religion in the public sphere," Denniston wrote, "but it
also might be understood as an intent to focus solely on the specific
facts of the practice as it unfolded in this one community."

The Circuit Court ruling stressed that its decision was not based on the
constitutionality of prayer at public meetings in general, but instead
addressed the Greece town board's bias toward Christian-oriented prayers.
It also stated that it was not adopting a specific test for when prayers
are appropriate, according to SCOTUSblog's Denniston.

The Supreme Court's ruling is expected in 2014. This fall will be the
first time the Supreme Court has heard a case on the constitutionality of
opening public meetings with prayer since 1983.

Regardless of the case's outcome, it stands to impact believers and
community leaders in Utah.

Members of the audience are regularly invited to share a prayer, thought
or reading at the opening of weekly commission meetings in Utah County,
County Commissioner Doug Whitney said.

"I don't think you could put a finger on what religion is represented,"
Whitney said. Rather, he said, inviting religious thought into public
meetings reminds him that "we all need help."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865580396/Supreme-Court-to-hear-case-
on-prayer-in-public-meetings-this-fall.html
Jeanne Douglas
2013-07-31 04:53:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Craig Zimmerman
SALT LAKE CITY — Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-07-31 05:00:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY — Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
Jeanne Douglas
2013-07-31 07:28:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY ‹ Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-07-31 15:09:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY ‹ Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
WangoTango
2013-07-31 17:16:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Because it is a government meeting, not a fucking prayer circle.
Peter Franks
2013-07-31 17:29:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by WangoTango
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Because it is a government meeting, not a fucking prayer circle.
Correct.

Are prayer circles prohibited? No.

Are they permitted? Depends on local law.

So, what's at issue here?
unknown
2013-07-31 18:31:49 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 02:26:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by WangoTango
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Because it is a government meeting, not a fucking prayer circle.
Correct.
Are prayer circles prohibited? No.
They most definite ARE as part of a government function.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 03:40:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by WangoTango
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Because it is a government meeting, not a fucking prayer circle.
Correct.
Are prayer circles prohibited? No.
They most definite ARE as part of a government function.
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 04:04:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by WangoTango
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt
Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's
ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Because it is a government meeting, not a fucking prayer circle.
Correct.
Are prayer circles prohibited? No.
They most definite ARE as part of a government function.
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
If done as part of a government meeting, of course it is.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 16:27:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by WangoTango
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt
Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's
ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Because it is a government meeting, not a fucking prayer circle.
Correct.
Are prayer circles prohibited? No.
They most definite ARE as part of a government function.
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
If done as part of a government meeting, of course it is.
And if it does, so what.

It is a practice, not a law. Amendment I applies to /laws/, not practices.
unknown
2013-08-01 20:24:04 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by WangoTango
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt
Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's
ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Because it is a government meeting, not a fucking prayer circle.
Correct.
Are prayer circles prohibited? No.
They most definite ARE as part of a government function.
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
SkyEyes
2013-08-01 08:48:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
Most definitely, it's establishing religion in preference to no religion,
which the Supreme Court has ruled is not to be done. No governmental
agency, body or entity has *any business at all* holding any kind of prayer
service.
--
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 16:44:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by SkyEyes
Post by Peter Franks
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
Most definitely, it's establishing religion in preference to no religion,
which the Supreme Court has ruled is not to be done. No governmental
agency, body or entity has *any business at all* holding any kind of prayer
service.
What a childish game you play. Fiddling with follow-ups demonstrates
your immaturity and inability to conduct yourself with decorum in a
conversation.

Reposted for the benefit of others:

A) It is not a prayer service that we are talking about.

B) We are talking about the /practice/ of opening some governmental
meetings with prayer.

C) There is no law (that I'm aware of) that dictates that a prayer (of
any form) must be offered.

D) Amendment I prohibits Congress (subsequently government from the
state level and up via XIV) from /legislating/ religion.

E) Amendment I has no prohibition against the practice or prayer or
religion in any forum, governmental or otherwise.
unknown
2013-08-01 20:25:40 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by SkyEyes
Post by Peter Franks
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
Most definitely, it's establishing religion in preference to no religion,
which the Supreme Court has ruled is not to be done. No governmental
agency, body or entity has *any business at all* holding any kind of prayer
service.
What a childish game you play. Fiddling with follow-ups demonstrates
your immaturity and inability to conduct yourself with decorum in a
conversation.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 23:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by SkyEyes
Post by Peter Franks
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
Most definitely, it's establishing religion in preference to no religion,
which the Supreme Court has ruled is not to be done. No governmental
agency, body or entity has *any business at all* holding any kind of prayer
service.
What a childish game you play. Fiddling with follow-ups demonstrates
your immaturity and inability to conduct yourself with decorum in a
conversation.
A) It is not a prayer service that we are talking about.
B) We are talking about the /practice/ of opening some governmental
meetings with prayer.
C) There is no law (that I'm aware of) that dictates that a prayer (of
any form) must be offered.
D) Amendment I prohibits Congress (subsequently government from the
state level and up via XIV) from /legislating/ religion.
E) Amendment I has no prohibition against the practice or prayer or
religion in any forum, governmental or otherwise.
Would you be happy with a Muslim prayer to open meetings?
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
ConɀRConɀ
2013-08-02 00:54:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 03:59:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by SkyEyes
Post by Peter Franks
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
Most definitely, it's establishing religion in preference to no religion,
which the Supreme Court has ruled is not to be done. No governmental
agency, body or entity has *any business at all* holding any kind of prayer
service.
What a childish game you play. Fiddling with follow-ups demonstrates
your immaturity and inability to conduct yourself with decorum in a
conversation.
A) It is not a prayer service that we are talking about.
B) We are talking about the /practice/ of opening some governmental
meetings with prayer.
C) There is no law (that I'm aware of) that dictates that a prayer (of
any form) must be offered.
D) Amendment I prohibits Congress (subsequently government from the
state level and up via XIV) from /legislating/ religion.
E) Amendment I has no prohibition against the practice or prayer or
religion in any forum, governmental or otherwise.
Would you be happy with a Muslim prayer to open meetings?
Why not.

I'd be happy with any prayer that appealed for wisdom, truth, and
justice for the benefit of the citizens of the United States.
unknown
2013-08-02 04:05:43 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================


On 8/1/2013 8:59 PM, Peter Franks wrote:
unknown
2013-08-01 20:26:21 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Are you suggesting that a /practice/ of prayer establishes religion?
Gunner Asch
2013-07-31 18:00:54 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:16:53 -0400, WangoTango
Post by WangoTango
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Because it is a government meeting, not a fucking prayer circle.
Anyone being forced to pray?


--
""Almost all liberal behavioral tropes track the impotent rage of small
children. Thus, for example, there is also the popular tactic of
repeating some stupid, meaningless phrase a billion times" Arms for
hostages, arms for hostages, arms for hostages, it's just about sex, just
about sex, just about sex, dumb,dumb, money in politics,money in
politics, Enron, Enron, Enron. Nothing repeated with mind-numbing
frequency in all major news outlets will not be believed by some members
of the populace. It is the permanence of evil; you can't stop it." (Ann
Coulter)
unknown
2013-07-31 18:31:26 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Gunner Asch
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:16:53 -0400, WangoTango
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
unknown
2013-07-31 18:32:14 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY =3F Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
unknown
2013-07-31 18:32:43 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY ‹ Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 02:25:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 03:42:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.

Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 04:06:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
If done as part of a government meeting of any kind, of course it is.
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 16:40:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
David Johnston
2013-08-01 16:49:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 19:50:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.

Have you read it lately?
David Johnston
2013-08-01 20:06:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
No, it doesn't.
Post by Peter Franks
Have you read it lately?
I have.
unknown
2013-08-01 20:29:04 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 21:30:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
No, it doesn't.
Then what serves as the foundation?
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Have you read it lately?
I have.
unknown
2013-08-01 23:11:57 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 23:51:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
No, it doesn't.
Then what serves as the foundation?
The Constitution.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
unknown
2013-08-02 00:56:31 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 04:03:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
No, it doesn't.
Then what serves as the foundation?
The Constitution.
No. The Constitution establishes the government. The government must
rest on a foundation. That foundation is the concept outlined in the
Declaration of Independence.

The Constitution is dependent on the Declaration of Independence.
unknown
2013-08-02 04:06:07 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-02 05:59:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
No, it doesn't.
Then what serves as the foundation?
The Constitution.
No. The Constitution establishes the government. The government must
rest on a foundation. That foundation is the concept outlined in the
Declaration of Independence.
The Constitution is dependent on the Declaration of Independence.
Of course, it's not.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 16:57:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
No, it doesn't.
Then what serves as the foundation?
The Constitution.
No. The Constitution establishes the government. The government must
rest on a foundation. That foundation is the concept outlined in the
Declaration of Independence.
The Constitution is dependent on the Declaration of Independence.
Of course, it's not.
Explain how you establish a new government when you aren't independent
of the existing government.
David Johnston
2013-08-02 00:36:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
No, it doesn't.
Then what serves as the foundation?
That would be the American Constitution.
unknown
2013-08-02 00:56:08 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 04:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
No, it doesn't.
Then what serves as the foundation?
That would be the American Constitution.
No. See reply elsewhere.
unknown
2013-08-02 04:05:23 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================


On 8/1/2013 9:03 PM, Peter Franks wrote:


Path: not-for-mail
From: Peter Franks <***@none.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.journalism,misc.survivalism,can.politics,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Supreme Court to hear case on prayer in public meetings this
fall
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 21:03:47 -0700
Organization: .
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <ktfamp$71b$***@dont-email.me>
References: <***@0.0.0.0>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<kta594$vsi$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktb8vg$f1v$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktcl3o$pt6$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<kte2m7$rlg$***@dont-email.me> <kte365$ueu$***@dont-email.me>
<ktedpu$tkf$***@dont-email.me> <kteenp$1gh$***@dont-email.me>
<ktejle$vpg$***@dont-email.me> <kteui3$m2a$***@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 03:57:13 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="78e69d38d67baf454af3f2b04afe5756";
logging-data="7211"; mail-complaints-to="***@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18c7RcmgMt9w+mpsW356ZbQFxNTFKz+OxA="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620
Thunderbird/17.0.7
In-Reply-To: <kteui3$m2a$***@dont-email.me>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:r591pPEfqXgYaFR+Z9OjZpI57VI=
X-Received-Bytes: 2705
Xref: e alt.atheism:5185380 alt.journalism:60620
misc.survivalism:1122446 can.politics:1479978
alt.politics.usa.constitution:198898
unknown
2013-08-01 20:29:24 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 23:51:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
Have you read it lately?
It is the foundation for nothing.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
unknown
2013-08-02 00:55:38 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 04:07:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
Have you read it lately?
It is the foundation for nothing.
So then what is the founding concept?
unknown
2013-08-02 04:09:13 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================


On 8/1/2013 9:07 PM, Peter Franks wrote:


spammed - gone
unknown
2013-08-02 04:10:46 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================

On 8/1/2013 9:07 PM, Peter Franks wrote:


I am such an idiot.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-02 05:58:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
Have you read it lately?
It is the foundation for nothing.
So then what is the founding concept?
The Constitution .
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 16:57:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by David Johnston
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
Heck the people founding your country didn't agree with everything in
the Declaration of Independence.
Nevertheless it serves as the foundation.
Have you read it lately?
It is the foundation for nothing.
So then what is the founding concept?
The Constitution .
"concept"

What is the /concept/ on which our government is based.

I'm guessing you have no idea which would explain a lot about your prior
responses.
unknown
2013-08-02 17:54:09 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================


On 8/2/2013 9:57 AM, Peter Franks wrote:


Path: not-for-mail
From: Peter Franks <***@none.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.journalism,misc.survivalism,can.politics,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Supreme Court to hear case on prayer in public meetings this
fall
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 09:57:54 -0700
Organization: .
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <ktgo27$742$***@dont-email.me>
References: <***@0.0.0.0>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<kta594$vsi$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktb8vg$f1v$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktcl3o$pt6$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<kte2m7$rlg$***@dont-email.me> <kte365$ueu$***@dont-email.me>
<ktedpu$tkf$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktfau7$9o3$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 16:51:20 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="78e69d38d67baf454af3f2b04afe5756";
logging-data="7298"; mail-complaints-to="***@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+WwJK6nnZrBSR729tMCIocsmM2JRfoy0M="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620
Thunderbird/17.0.7
In-Reply-To: <hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AmmVPoQTLVss7Ssw6oeWoZ/z/PQ=
X-Received-Bytes: 2888
Xref: e alt.atheism:5185801 alt.journalism:60642
misc.survivalism:1122508 can.politics:1480043
alt.politics.usa.constitution:198943
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 23:50:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
I LOVE the DoI, but it has absolutely no legal basis for anything that
happens in this country. It's nothing but a declaration of war.

The Constitution is the ONLY thing that counts.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
unknown
2013-08-02 00:55:12 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 04:09:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
I LOVE the DoI, but it has absolutely no legal basis for anything that
happens in this country.
The law is not the foundation. The law is built on a foundation...
Post by Jeanne Douglas
It's nothing but a declaration of war.
The Constitution is the ONLY thing that counts.
... and that foundation is found in the DoI, specifically:

"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 of 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.

THAT is the foundation upon which the Constitution rests. Remove that
and the Constitution is worthless and pointless.
unknown
2013-08-02 04:12:24 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================


On 8/1/2013 9:09 PM, Peter Franks wrote:


spam
unknown
2013-08-02 04:52:20 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
I LOVE the DoI, but it has absolutely no legal basis for anything that
happens in this country.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-02 05:58:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
I LOVE the DoI, but it has absolutely no legal basis for anything that
happens in this country.
The law is not the foundation. The law is built on a foundation...
Post by Jeanne Douglas
It's nothing but a declaration of war.
The Constitution is the ONLY thing that counts.
"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 of 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.
THAT is the foundation upon which the Constitution rests. Remove that
and the Constitution is worthless and pointless.
Nonsense.

Why would you say something so silly?
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 16:58:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
By telling you that that's one of the silliest statements I've seen this
week.
Why? Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately?
I LOVE the DoI, but it has absolutely no legal basis for anything that
happens in this country.
The law is not the foundation. The law is built on a foundation...
Post by Jeanne Douglas
It's nothing but a declaration of war.
The Constitution is the ONLY thing that counts.
"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 of 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.
THAT is the foundation upon which the Constitution rests. Remove that
and the Constitution is worthless and pointless.
Nonsense.
Why would you say something so silly?
Then what is that foundational concept?
unknown
2013-08-02 17:53:33 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================


On 8/2/2013 9:58 AM, Peter Franks wrote:


X-Received: by 10.180.9.41 with SMTP id w9mr1336487wia.2.1375463029681;
Fri, 02 Aug 2013 10:03:49 -0700 (PDT)
Path: not-for-mail
From: Peter Franks <***@none.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.journalism,misc.survivalism,can.politics,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Supreme Court to hear case on prayer in public meetings this
fall
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 10:03:48 -0700
Organization: .
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <ktgod9$94f$***@dont-email.me>
References: <***@0.0.0.0>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<kta594$vsi$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktb8vg$f1v$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktcl3o$pt6$***@dont-email.me>
<***@4ax.com>
<fFyKt.140304$***@fx01.iad> <ktee3r$j4$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktfbkg$c6p$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 16:57:14 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="78e69d38d67baf454af3f2b04afe5756";
logging-data="9359"; mail-complaints-to="***@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+PISCMs0G9J1F8k6mJU2DIQP8xBNd8JM0="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620
Thunderbird/17.0.7
In-Reply-To: <hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9Z9331KojkeTJR3K6nFFYWqGB58=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Received-Bytes: 2575
Xref: e alt.atheism:5185806 alt.journalism:60644
misc.survivalism:1122511 can.politics:1480046
alt.politics.usa.constitution:198948
walksalone
2013-08-01 08:07:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt
Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will
initiate dialogue about the role prayer can play in government
meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of
religion into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
In the appropriate venue, you can pray to
68
Kaikara
Age
Diang
Nyakaya
Nyavirezi
Tule
Chikara
Chiuke
Deng
Mawu
Mugasa
Ndjambi
Orisania
Sodza
Soko
Sore-Gus
Topoh
Yayu
Jok
Ngunuwo
Nommo
Vodu
Akongo
Alatangana
Amma
Aondo
Apap
Arebati
Ataa Naa Nyongmo
Bumba
Cagu
Cghene
Fidi Mukullu
Hao
Kalisia
Imana
Kalunga
Ka Tyeleo
Kwoth
Kyumbe
Lesa
Libanza
Lisa
Mbomba
Mbongo
Mbotumbo
Mkulumncandi
Mungu
Ngai
Niamye
Nyame
Nzambi
Oduduwa
Osanobua
Pemba
Raluvimbha
Rubanga
Sa
Suku
Toro
Tororut
Tsunigoab
Umvelinkwangi
Unumbote
Waka
Wed Kumbamb
Yaro
Yemekonji
Gaunab
Itonde
Na Ngutu
Ogiuwu
Legba
Orunmila
Edeke
Enundu
Gibini
Ndaula
Oi
Shankpana
Tar
Abonsam
Ma Kiela
Ala
Asase Yaa
Atete
Muso Koroni
Obatala
Seta
Soului
Wamala
Avrikiti
Behanzin
Huvi
Rang
Ikenga
Ketua
Adro
Ayaba
Eji Ogbe
Fe
Mombo Wa Ndhlopfu
Mulindwa
Nesu
Nosenga
Osande
Ryangombe
Lianja
Jokinam
Mugizi
Lubanga
Eshu
Mlentengamunye
Musisi
Sogblen
Arawa
Gleti
Mawu
Nsongo
Nze
Jakomba
Dzivaguru
Mbombe
Akonadi
Esu
Lomo
Kangalogba
Banga
Col
Hara Ke
Ilat
Mujaji
Yemoja
Lubangala
Sajara
Buk
Faro
Isa
Kianda
Mmlambo
Nai
Nzapa
Olokun
Opo
Osun
Wu
Dongo
Inkanyamba
Shango
Sogbo
Asis
Iruva
Kazyoba
Loba
Wai
Mukasa
Sango
Xewioso
Loko
Ajalamo
Modimo
Kibuka
Muhingo
Ogun
Sakumo
Wiu
Aje
Ashiakle
Bagba
Munume
So
Buadza
Teliko
Ifa
Ori
Perende
Prende
Verbti
Kitanitowit
Manitu
Rubanga
Milkom
Molek
Aserah
Kubaba
Sipylene
Lau
Morva
Koyote
Abgaledit
Aglibol
Almaqh
Allat
Amm
Anbay
A'ra
Arsu
Asar
Asira
Atarsamain
Azizos
Baltis
Basamum
Datin
Haubas
Haukim
Hilal
Hubal
Kahilan
Malakbel
Malik
Manat
Mandah
Marnas
Orotalt
Qos
Quzah
Ruda
Salm of Mahram
Sams
Singala
Ta'lab
Theandros
Wadd
Sahar
Menechen
Aray
Astlik
Barsamin
Meher
Nana
Spandaramet
Tir
Tork
Vahagn
Asase Yaa
Anjea
Thuremlin
Mahrem
Acadla
Centeocihuatl
Chicomecohuatl
Chicomexochitl
Chiconahui Itzculntli-Chantico
Huehuecoyotl-Coyotlinahual
Ixnextli
Nappatecuhtli
Coyolxauhqui
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli
Tonaleque
Xiuhtecuhtli
Acolmiztli
Chalmecacihuitl
Acolnahuacatl
Chalmecatl
Ixpuztec
Micapet1acoli
Mictecacihuatl
Mictlantecuhtli
Nextepehua
Tepeyollotl
Tlalchitonatiuh
Tlaltecuhtli
Tlazolteotl (Ixcuiname)
Tzontemoc
Yacahuiztli
Atl
Ce Acatl
Chiconahuiehecatl
Cihuacoatl-Quilaztli
Cipactonal
Citlalatonac
Citlalicue
Ehecatl
Ipalnemoani
Nahui Ollin
Nanahuatl
Ocelotl
Quiahuitl
Tloque Nahauque
Tonatiuh
Yoalli Ehecatl
Yoaltecuhtli
Itztapal Totec
Izquitecatl
Matlalcueye
Mayahuel
Ome Tochtli
Pahtecatl
Tepoztecatl
Tezcatzoncatl
TIaloque- Tepictoton
Tomiyauhtecuhtli
Totoltecatl
Tezcatzoncatl
Tlaloque-Tepictoton
Tomiyauhtecuhtli
Totoltecatl
Xilonen
Xipe Totec
Xochiquetzal
Xochiquetzal-Ichpuchtli
yauhqueme
Huehuetotl
Inta
Ixcozauhqui
Teteo Innan
Opochtli
Chantico
Chiconahui
Itzcuintli
Nagual
Itztli
Ixquimilli-Itzlacoliuhqui
Huehuecoyotl
Ixtlilton
Teteoinnan
Teteoinnan-Toci
Tezcacoac Ayopechtli
Tozi
Zapotlantenan
Co(co)chimetl
Yacacoliuhqui
Yacapitzahuac
Xolotl
Xolotl Nanahuatl
Metztli
Tecciztecatl
Coatlicue
Itzpapalotl
Itzpapalotl-ltzcueye
Kundalini
Moyocoyanl
Telpochtli
Titlacahuan
Yaotl
Chalchiuhtotolin
Cipactli
Ehecatl-Quetzalcoatl
Ometeotl
Tonacacihuatl
Tonacatccuhtli
Omacatl
Huitzilpochtli
Tezcatlipoca
Ometecuhtli
Tezcatlipoca-Itzlacoliuhqui
Mexitli
Mixcoatl-Camaxtli
Painal
Teicauhtzin
Tetzahauteotl
Tetzahuitl
Teuhcatl
Tlacahuepan
Amimitl
Atlahua
Chalchiuhtlatonal
Chalchiuhtlicue
Nahui Ehecatl
Tlaloc
Dagan
Dumuzi
Kus
Sakka(n)
Sirtur
Kulla
Ninegal
Nin-Ildu
Ninkarnunna
Siduri
A-a
Igigi
Mes An Du
Samas
Sin
Ennugi
Hani(s)
Ilabrat
Kakka
Sullat
Belet-Seri
Birdu
Enmesarra
Ereskigal
Galla
Lugal-Irra
Manungal
Nammu
Nergal
Neti
Ninkigal
Sulman(u}
Bel
Beltiya
Ninsun(a)
Antu
Anu
Marduk
Ama-arhus
Amasagnul
Asnan
Baba
Gatumdug
Istar
Nanaja
Ningal
Ningikuga
Nin-Imma
Nin'insinna
Sarra Itu
Ua Ildak
Gerra
Isum
Alad Udug Lama
Anunnaki
Assur
Ningirsu
Pa-bil-sag
Sirsir
Tispak
Tutu
Gestu
Hendursaga
Mamitu
Mandanu
Ningis Zi Da
Nusku
Ningirama
Gula
Isara
Zarpanitu(m)
Asalluha
Ninsubur
Papsukkal
Aya
Belet-Ili
Damgalnuna
Mami
Ninhursaga
Ninkurra
Ninmah
Nintu
Nunbarsegunu
Ansar
Kisar
Lahmu
Tiamat
Enzu
Gunura
Hahanu
Lulal
Mulliltu
Ningilin
Tasmetu(m)
Erra
Mes Lam Taea
Pap-nigin-gara
Sara
Sala
Sebitti
Zababa
Apsu
Ea
Enbilulu
Sirara
Adad
Im
Ninurta
Wer
Nabu
Lubangala
Ma Kiela
Nzambi
Pekko
Triglav
Faro
Muso Koroni
Pemba
Teliko
Arebati
Jakomba
Libanza
Nsongo
Maju
Mari (2)
Unumbote
Mbotumbo
Niamye
Raluvimbha
Alk'unta'm
Anaulikutsai'x
Lalaia'il
Qamai'ts
Senx
Snulk' ulxa'ls
Toa'lalit
Fidi MukuIlu
Bonchor
Bhagavan
Kuntu bXan Po
dMu-bDud Kam-Po Sa-Zan
gSan Sgrub
gShen-Lha-Odkhar
gShen-Rab
Sipe Gialmo
Thab-Iha
Mahaprabhu
Bumba
Akasagarbha
Budha
Marici
Myoken-Bodhisattva
Ajaya
Durjaya
Kamini
Karini
Kesini
Mahayasa
Mahodadhi
Manidhara
Ostaraki
Priyadarsana
Rupini
Srivasumukhi
Srivasundhara
Subhaga
Subhamekhala
Sumalini
Sundara
Suraksini
Upakesini
Vadali
Varahmukhi
Vasumatisri
Vasusri
Vikalaratri
Pancamukha-Patradeva
Abhimukhi
Adhimukticarya
Arcismati
Dharmamegha
Prabhakari
Pramudita
Sadhumati
Samantaprabha
Sudurjaya
Vimala
Amoghapasa
Arapacana
Avalokitesvara
Gaganaganja
Hevajira
Jalinprabha
Khasaparna
Ksitigarbha
Kwannon
Maitreya
Mamaki
Manjusri
Mi-Lo Fo
Padmapani
Pratibhanakuta
Sagaramati
Sitapatra
Surangama
Vajragarbha
Vasudhara
Bhumi
Bodhisattva
Dharani
Dhyanibuddha
Dhyanibuddhasakti
Lokesvara
Maharaksa
Mahavidya
Sakti
Tara
Ghantapani
Mahasthama(prapta)
Ratnapani
Samantabhadra
Sarvanivaranaviskambhin
Sarvapayanjaha
Sarvasokatamonirghatamati
Buddhakapala
Candarosana
Dhanada
Dhvajagrakeyura
Grahamatrka
Heruka
Jambhala
Jnanadakini
Mahamayuri
Mahapratyamrga
Mahasri- Tara
Manjughosa
Mayajalakrama-Kurukulla
Nairamata
Namasangiti
Rakta-Yamari
Sadbhuja-Sitatara
Sukla-Tara
Ucchusma
Vac
Vajracarcika
Vajradaka
Vajramrta
Vajrapani
Vasya-tara
Vighnantaka
Aksobhya
Amitabha
Amoghasiddhi
Kun-Rig
Prasannatara
Ratnasambhava
Vairocana
Chattrosnisa
Dhrtarastra
Isa (l)
Dhvajosnisa
Mahabala
Padmantaka
Padmosnisa
Prajnantaka
Ratnosnisa
Sumbha
5umbharaja
Takkiraja
Tejosnisa
Tiksnosnisa
Vajraghanta
Vajrasphota
Vajrosnisa
Vayu (2)
Virudhaka
Virupaksa
Visvosnisa
Mara
Ekajata
Saubhagya-Bhuvanesvari
VidyujjvalakariJi
Buddha
Dadimunda
Dharmapala
Mahamantranusarini
Mahapratisara
Mahasahaspramardani
Mahasitavati
Mucalinda
Natha
Nliladanda
Pancaraksa
Patadharini
Samvara
Vidyraja
Hayasya
Pararnasva
Dharmadhatuvagisvara
Pradipatara
Ratnolka
Taditkara
Karai-Shin
Aksayajnana -Karmanda
Anantamukhi
Cunda
Mari (2)
Parna-Savari
PraJnavardhani
Prajnaparamita
Prajnavardhani
Sarvabuddhadharma-Kosavati
Sarvakarmavaranavisodhani
Sumati
Yamaduti
Kotisri
Maya(devi)
Yogesvari
Muraja
Vina
Arthapratisamvit
Balaparamita
Danaparamita
Jnanaparamita
Niruktipratisamvit
Paramita
Prajnaparamita
Pratibhanapratisamvit
Pratisamvit
Ratnaparamita
Silaparamita
Upayaparamita
Viryaparamita
Hariti
Halahala
Adibuddha
Amida
Suddhodana
Usnisavijaya
Vajradhara
Arya-Tara
Citrasena
Ganapatihrdaya
Kurukulla
Locana
Medha
Pandara
Prajna
Vajradhatvisvari
Vajrasrnkhala
Vagisvara
Dombi
Gauri
Ghasmari
Bhutadamara
Camunda
Candesvari
Carcika
Dhupatara
Dipa Tara
Gandha Tara
Garuda
Jayakara
Kakasya
Kaladuti
Karttikeya
Kulisesvari
Madhukara
Mahakapi
Mahaparinirvanamurti
Maha-Sarasvati
Puspatara
Sakra
Trailokyavijaya
Vajragandhari
Vajravidarani
Yamari
Yasodhara
Adhimuktivasita
Ayurvasita
Buddhabodhiprabhavasita
Cittavasita
Dharmavasita
]nanavasita
Karmavasita
Pariskaravasita
Pranidhanavasita
Riddhivasita
Upapattivasita
Dipankara
Sakyarnuni
Lha
Khen-Ma
Khen-Pa
Sri(devi)
Saraddevi
Avalokitesvara
Bi-har
Chos-Skyon
Gur-Gyi·Mgon-Po
Mahakala
Sadaksari (Lokesvara)
San-Dui
Yama
Yamantaka
Hayagriva
Dipa
Khyung-Gai mGo-Can
Bhrkuti- Tara
Dhupa
Gandha
Gita
Lasya
Mala
Nrtya
Puspa
Abhijnaraja
Asokottamasri
Bhaisajyaguru
Dharmakirtisagaraghosa
sMan-Bla
Sikhin
Sinhanada
Suparikirtitanamasri
Survarnabhadravimalaratnaprabhasa
Svaraghosaraja
Adidharma
Digambara
Grismadevi
Hemantadevi
Vasantadevi
Candali
Cauri
Mahacinatara
Pukkasi
Savari
Vetali
Nan-Sgrub
Phyi-Sgrub
Sitatara
Syamatara
Beg-Tse
Kibuka
Mukasa
Kaikara
Lubanga
Mugizi
Muhingo
Mulindwa
Munume
Ndaula
Ruhanga
Wamala
Imana
Anat
Arsay
Aserah
Asertu
Asratum
Athirat
Attar
Baal
Dagan (2)
El'eb
Elkunirsa
Haurun
Il
Kades
Mot
Pidray
Resep( A )mukal
Sapas
Sasuratum
Ma
Aphrodisias
Bugid Y Aiba
Faraguvol
Loa
Yocahu
Zemi
Caelestis
Gad
Tanit
Lamaria
Mirsa
Amaethon
Belenus
Govannon
Llew Llaw Gyffes
Lug
Ogmius .
Aine
Mor
Gobniu
Aed
Anu
A.rianrhod
Donn
Gwynn Ap Nudd
Herne
Midir
Pen Annwen
Pwyll
Rhiannon
Tuatha de Danann
Andarta
Banba
Bres Macelatha
Brigit
Divona
Cernunnos
Eriu
Macha
Morrigan
Onuava
Cocidius
Arvernus
Dagda
Flaitheas
Maponos
Epona
Ceridwen
Diancecht
Lenus
Aufaniae
Don
Maeve
Modron
Sheela Na Gig
Danu (I)
Aengus
Lir
Yspaddac
Tailtiu
Badb
Camulos
Belatucadros
Cathubodua
Esus
Gwydion
Morvran
Neit
Nuadu
Smertrios
Boann
Condatis
Iccovellauna
Manannan (Mac Lir)
Manawyddan
Nantosuelta
Tegid Voel
Cailleach Bheur
Mabon
Maheo
Lendix - Tcux
Ni
Si
Ba
Chang Fei
Chang Hs'ien
Chi Sung Tzu
Chu Jung
Erh Lang
Feng Po
Fu Shen
Huang Ti
Hung Sheng
Kuei Shing
Lu Pan
Ma-zu
Men Shen
Nu Kua
Pao Kung
San Chou Niang Niang
Sao Ching Niang Niang
Shen Nung
Shou Lao
Sun Hou-Shi
T'ai Shan
Tai-Sui-Jing
T'ai Shan
Tai-Sui-Jing
T'ai Yi
Tam Kung
T'ao Hua Hsiennui
Tien Mu
Tou Mou
Tsai Shen
Tu (l)
Tzu Sun Niangniang
Wong Taisin
Yen Kuang Niang Niang
Yu-Chiang
God
Kavra'nna
Kere'tkun
Ku'urkil
Lietna'irgin
Na' chitna'irgin
Mratna'irgin
Nu'tenut
Picvu'cin
Tenanto'mni
Tne'sqan
Va'irgin
Wu'squus
Sisyphos
Dictynna
Wakan Tanka
Nerthus
Deng
Amma (2)
Nommo
Amma (l)
Ammavaru
Ankalamman
Bala-Sakti
Cankilikkaruppan
Cenkalaniy
ammal
Ellaman
Gajavahana
Gal Bapsi
Kamaksi
Korravai
Mal
Manmatha
Mari (I)
Mariyamman
Mayon
Munisvara
Murukan
Muttalamman
Napp~nnai
Nediyon

or any other god that makes you blissful. Or gives you a woody as the case
may be. Your nom de plume indictes a damp spot is not likely.
OTOH involving people at a business meeting in pacifying your god, well
it's not just rude, but in the US, can be illegal. Such as when only one
god is represented.
Post by Peter Franks
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment
of religion?
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving
the prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator then you don't support the
foundation of this country. Have you come to grips with that?
I don't support the foundations of this country. I'm of first nation
ewxtractrion & it was founded on land theft, murder, & not only religion.
In no particular order. Yet I spent 20 years of my life helping insure
those like yourself, could make a public specticle of themselves. True to
form, you are not letting me down.

& come to grips with what. I don't share your need of a pacifier, so I
elect not to embarrass ,yslf by acting like you do. IOW, I live my own
life, & have been amused by being called xian by people that don't know any
better. Though the smart ones figure it out by the smile I leave behind.

walksalone who would ot be mortified were the confused OP believe that the
Mass. colony was the first one, or that they actually gracefully lived in
peace with the peoplee that kept them alive.

Christianity: The understanding that God is the name we give to the answer
(which we do not know) to the question, Why is there anything at all? And
that Christ is the self-expression of God; the view that, against the
appearances, we are loved in the universe.
Author unkown to me.
Christopher A. Lee
2013-08-01 18:26:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
You know perfectly well it is unconstitutional when it is endorsed or
imposed by the government it is, pathological liar.
Post by Peter Franks
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
When it's done by the government at any level, imbecile.
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator
WHAT FUCKING CREATOR IN THE REAL WORLD OUTSIDE THE FAIRY TALES OF YOUR
RELIGION, moron?
Post by Peter Franks
then you don't support the
foundation of this country.
Once again you lie through your teeth.

What's wrong with you?
Post by Peter Franks
Have you come to grips with that?
You're insane.

That's what's wrong with you.
Ray Keller
2013-08-01 19:26:14 UTC
Permalink
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 19:55:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Oh the irony that atheism requires just as much faith as theism.
unknown
2013-08-01 20:27:04 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 23:48:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Oh the irony that atheism requires just as much faith as theism.
What do you think we have faith in?
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
unknown
2013-08-02 00:54:16 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================

On 8/1/2013 4:48 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:


Path: not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 18:47:52 -0500
From: Jeanne Douglas <***@NOSPAMgmail.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.journalism,misc.survivalism,can.politics,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Supreme Court to hear case on prayer in public meetings
this fall
References: <***@0.0.0.0>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<kta594$vsi$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktb8vg$f1v$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktcl3o$pt6$***@dont-email.me>
<***@4ax.com>
<fFyKt.140304$***@fx01.iad>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 16:47:52 -0700
Message-ID: <hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 13
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace:
sv3-Czb5RP2lhfSAqJROJ33t0/OWQr1dcSBY72Ni8BZSgT0uDQtNlm14f7I1VdaWIk1IsqlMQMx110WrNUS!tHr+RI3u6K6zzTmg75DY/L6ZA2DHvlEoQ41etuHUsop2Pg7d/Ner/qp3hvv3FDbDAzn/oAYkzHhu!/SH2VQ==
X-Complaints-To: ***@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your
complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 1715
X-Original-Bytes: 1654
X-Received-Bytes: 1795
Xref: e alt.atheism:5185194 alt.journalism:60599
misc.survivalism:1122422 can.politics:1479943
alt.politics.usa.constitution:198868
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 04:19:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Oh the irony that atheism requires just as much faith as theism.
What do you think we have faith in?
That there is no god.
unknown
2013-08-02 04:21:07 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
I know, I'm not too bright . . . .
unknown
2013-08-02 04:51:37 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Oh the irony that atheism requires just as much faith as theism.
What do you think we have faith in?
That there is no god.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-02 05:57:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Oh the irony that atheism requires just as much faith as theism.
What do you think we have faith in?
That there is no god.
But that's NOT atheism for the vast majority of atheists.

Certainly not I.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 17:03:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Oh the irony that atheism requires just as much faith as theism.
What do you think we have faith in?
That there is no god.
But that's NOT atheism for the vast majority of atheists.
Certainly not I.
a·the·ist (³“th¶-¹st) n. One that disbelieves or denies the existence of
God or gods. AHD, 3rd ed.
unknown
2013-08-02 17:53:08 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================


On 8/2/2013 10:03 AM, Peter Franks wrote:


X-Received: by 10.180.9.41 with SMTP id w9mr1336487wia.2.1375463029681;
Fri, 02 Aug 2013 10:03:49 -0700 (PDT)
Path: not-for-mail
From: Peter Franks <***@none.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.journalism,misc.survivalism,can.politics,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Supreme Court to hear case on prayer in public meetings this
fall
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 10:03:48 -0700
Organization: .
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <ktgod9$94f$***@dont-email.me>
References: <***@0.0.0.0>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<kta594$vsi$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktb8vg$f1v$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktcl3o$pt6$***@dont-email.me>
<***@4ax.com>
<fFyKt.140304$***@fx01.iad> <ktee3r$j4$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktfbkg$c6p$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 16:57:14 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="78e69d38d67baf454af3f2b04afe5756";
logging-data="9359"; mail-complaints-to="***@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+PISCMs0G9J1F8k6mJU2DIQP8xBNd8JM0="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620
Thunderbird/17.0.7
In-Reply-To: <hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9Z9331KojkeTJR3K6nFFYWqGB58=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Received-Bytes: 2575
Xref: e alt.atheism:5185806 alt.journalism:60644
misc.survivalism:1122511 can.politics:1480046
alt.politics.usa.constitution:198948
unknown
2013-08-01 20:27:24 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 23:47:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
What do you think we have faith in?
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
unknown
2013-08-02 00:53:41 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Ray Keller
Atheism, just another faith based religion
Path: not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 18:47:52 -0500
From: Jeanne Douglas <***@NOSPAMgmail.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.journalism,misc.survivalism,can.politics,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Supreme Court to hear case on prayer in public meetings
this fall
References: <***@0.0.0.0>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<kta594$vsi$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktb8vg$f1v$***@dont-email.me>
<hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
<ktcl3o$pt6$***@dont-email.me>
<***@4ax.com>
<fFyKt.140304$***@fx01.iad>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 16:47:52 -0700
Message-ID: <hlwdjsd2-***@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 13
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace:
sv3-Czb5RP2lhfSAqJROJ33t0/OWQr1dcSBY72Ni8BZSgT0uDQtNlm14f7I1VdaWIk1IsqlMQMx110WrNUS!tHr+RI3u6K6zzTmg75DY/L6ZA2DHvlEoQ41etuHUsop2Pg7d/Ner/qp3hvv3FDbDAzn/oAYkzHhu!/SH2VQ==
X-Complaints-To: ***@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your
complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 1715
X-Original-Bytes: 1654
X-Received-Bytes: 1795
Xref: e alt.atheism:5185194 alt.journalism:60599
misc.survivalism:1122422 can.politics:1479943
alt.politics.usa.constitution:198868
Uncle Steve
2013-08-01 18:55:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY � Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
You know perfectly well it is unconstitutional when it is endorsed or
imposed by the government it is, pathological liar.
Post by Peter Franks
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
When it's done by the government at any level, imbecile.
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator
WHAT FUCKING CREATOR IN THE REAL WORLD OUTSIDE THE FAIRY TALES OF YOUR
RELIGION, moron?
I keep telling you people this, and like everything else that doesn't
fit in your stupid little fantasy narrative, you ignore it and the
reality that follows. Assholes like this pretend they are God, and
what they do under that standard constitutes acts of 'creation'.
Being a religious activity, they insist that some bullshit similar to
the "divine right of kings" supseseeds civil law.

It's scarecely more than a justification for slavery, but they pretend
otherwise. That the imposition of 'fate' on their chosen people-
objects is much more important than reality.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
then you don't support the
foundation of this country.
Once again you lie through your teeth.
What's wrong with you?
Post by Peter Franks
Have you come to grips with that?
You're insane.
That's what's wrong with you.
That's why you go along with it.


Regards,

Uncle Steve
--
"Suddenly he put his hand on her cheek. The cock's spur rested
lightly on her lower lip. ``You and I,'' the Butcher said. He moved
his face close to hers. ``Nobody else is here. Just you and I. But
which is which?''" Samuel R. Delaney, "Babel 17"
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 19:54:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
You know perfectly well it is unconstitutional when it is endorsed or
imposed by the government it is, pathological liar.
There is no legal endorsement nor legal imposition, and is therefore
outside of the bound of Amendment I.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
When it's done by the government at any level, imbecile.
No. Incorporation only applies to the State, not local or other
sub-state governments.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator
WHAT FUCKING CREATOR IN THE REAL WORLD OUTSIDE THE FAIRY TALES OF YOUR
RELIGION, moron?
Ask Jefferson, et al.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
then you don't support the
foundation of this country.
Once again you lie through your teeth.
What's wrong with you?
Post by Peter Franks
Have you come to grips with that?
You're insane.
That's what's wrong with you.
This country was founded on the precept of a Creator:

"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.
Jeff M
2013-08-01 20:17:02 UTC
Permalink
On 8/1/2013 2:54 PM, Peter Franks wrote:
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but has
been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
regards to the topic:

"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."

In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28, in
his own (J. Adams) handwriting we have the following:

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."

Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above was
changed to the following:

"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.
. . ."

http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 21:33:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff M
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but
has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28,
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above
"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.
. . ."
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
The document that we have on file (i.e. at the Rotunda) uses "Creator".
That is what I'm basing my discussion on. Until it is removed and
replaced with something else, that is what I will continue to base my
discussion on.
Jeff M
2013-08-01 21:43:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but
has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28,
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above
"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.
. . ."
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
The document that we have on file (i.e. at the Rotunda) uses "Creator".
That is what I'm basing my discussion on. Until it is removed and
replaced with something else, that is what I will continue to base my
discussion on.
That is the text they agreed to and used, after all.

But the document does nothing but set forth the grounds for the
revolution then already underway. It doesn't actually found, establish
or recognize the existence of a United States of America, and it was
signed under the authority of the individual colonies, declaring that
they were and "ought to be Free and Independent States," nothing more.
Peter Franks
2013-08-01 23:42:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff M
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but
has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28,
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above
"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.
. . ."
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
The document that we have on file (i.e. at the Rotunda) uses "Creator".
That is what I'm basing my discussion on. Until it is removed and
replaced with something else, that is what I will continue to base my
discussion on.
That is the text they agreed to and used, after all.
But the document does nothing but set forth the grounds for the
revolution then already underway. It doesn't actually found, establish
or recognize the existence of a United States of America, and it was
signed under the authority of the individual colonies, declaring that
they were and "ought to be Free and Independent States," nothing more.
But it sets the foundation on which the government is based, that being
one of rights that have been endowed by a Creator.
Jeff M
2013-08-01 23:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but
has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the
preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28,
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above
"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.
. . ."
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
The document that we have on file (i.e. at the Rotunda) uses "Creator".
That is what I'm basing my discussion on. Until it is removed and
replaced with something else, that is what I will continue to base my
discussion on.
That is the text they agreed to and used, after all.
But the document does nothing but set forth the grounds for the
revolution then already underway. It doesn't actually found, establish
or recognize the existence of a United States of America, and it was
signed under the authority of the individual colonies, declaring that
they were and "ought to be Free and Independent States," nothing more.
But it sets the foundation on which the government is based, that being
one of rights that have been endowed by a Creator.
You should take a look at this. I believe you'll like the author's POV.

http://cornell.lawreviewnetwork.com/files/2013/02/Tsesis-final1.pdf
Dakota
2013-08-02 03:54:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff M
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but
has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the
preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28,
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the
preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above
"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.
. . ."
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
The document that we have on file (i.e. at the Rotunda) uses "Creator".
That is what I'm basing my discussion on. Until it is removed and
replaced with something else, that is what I will continue to base my
discussion on.
That is the text they agreed to and used, after all.
But the document does nothing but set forth the grounds for the
revolution then already underway. It doesn't actually found, establish
or recognize the existence of a United States of America, and it was
signed under the authority of the individual colonies, declaring that
they were and "ought to be Free and Independent States," nothing more.
But it sets the foundation on which the government is based, that being
one of rights that have been endowed by a Creator.
You should take a look at this. I believe you'll like the author's POV.
http://cornell.lawreviewnetwork.com/files/2013/02/Tsesis-final1.pdf
I agree. He probably likes the POV of anyone who considers the DoI to
be tangentially relevant to the founding of our nation.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-02 02:27:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but
has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28,
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above
"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.
. . ."
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
The document that we have on file (i.e. at the Rotunda) uses "Creator".
That is what I'm basing my discussion on. Until it is removed and
replaced with something else, that is what I will continue to base my
discussion on.
That is the text they agreed to and used, after all.
But the document does nothing but set forth the grounds for the
revolution then already underway. It doesn't actually found, establish
or recognize the existence of a United States of America, and it was
signed under the authority of the individual colonies, declaring that
they were and "ought to be Free and Independent States," nothing more.
But it sets the foundation on which the government is based,
No, it does nothing of the sort.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 04:22:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but
has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28,
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above
"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.
. . ."
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
The document that we have on file (i.e. at the Rotunda) uses "Creator".
That is what I'm basing my discussion on. Until it is removed and
replaced with something else, that is what I will continue to base my
discussion on.
That is the text they agreed to and used, after all.
But the document does nothing but set forth the grounds for the
revolution then already underway. It doesn't actually found, establish
or recognize the existence of a United States of America, and it was
signed under the authority of the individual colonies, declaring that
they were and "ought to be Free and Independent States," nothing more.
But it sets the foundation on which the government is based,
No, it does nothing of the sort.
Then on what concept is government based?
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-02 05:56:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeff M
[snip]
Post by Peter Franks
"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.
The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but
has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with
"We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are
created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive
in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28,
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created
equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in
rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of
life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . ."
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above
"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.
. . ."
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm
The document that we have on file (i.e. at the Rotunda) uses "Creator".
That is what I'm basing my discussion on. Until it is removed and
replaced with something else, that is what I will continue to base my
discussion on.
That is the text they agreed to and used, after all.
But the document does nothing but set forth the grounds for the
revolution then already underway. It doesn't actually found, establish
or recognize the existence of a United States of America, and it was
signed under the authority of the individual colonies, declaring that
they were and "ought to be Free and Independent States," nothing more.
But it sets the foundation on which the government is based,
No, it does nothing of the sort.
Then on what concept is government based?
The Constitution.

You seem to be having difficulty understanding this.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
unknown
2013-08-01 20:26:43 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme
Court's
ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
You know perfectly well it is unconstitutional when it is endorsed or
imposed by the government it is, pathological liar.
There is no legal endorsement nor legal imposition, and is therefore
outside of the bound of Amendment I.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
When it's done by the government at any level, imbecile.
No. Incorporation only applies to the State, not local or other
sub-state governments.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator
WHAT FUCKING CREATOR IN THE REAL WORLD OUTSIDE THE FAIRY TALES OF YOUR
RELIGION, moron?
Ask Jefferson, et al.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
then you don't support the
foundation of this country.
Once again you lie through your teeth.
What's wrong with you?
Post by Peter Franks
Have you come to grips with that?
You're insane.
Jeanne Douglas
2013-08-01 23:46:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's
ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
You know perfectly well it is unconstitutional when it is endorsed or
imposed by the government it is, pathological liar.
There is no legal endorsement nor legal imposition, and is therefore
outside of the bound of Amendment I.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
When it's done by the government at any level, imbecile.
No. Incorporation only applies to the State, not local or other
sub-state governments.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator
WHAT FUCKING CREATOR IN THE REAL WORLD OUTSIDE THE FAIRY TALES OF YOUR
RELIGION, moron?
Ask Jefferson, et al.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
then you don't support
the
foundation of this country.
Once again you lie through your teeth.
What's wrong with you?
Post by Peter Franks
Have you come to grips with
that?
You're insane.
That's what's wrong with you.
"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.
The DoI has absolutely nothing to do with the founding of the country;
it's nothing more than our declaration of war against King George.

The ONLY thing on which this country was founded is the Constitution,
which quite explicitly excludes any religion as the basis for the
country.
--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
unknown
2013-08-02 00:52:49 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's
ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
You know perfectly well it is unconstitutional when it is endorsed or
imposed by the government it is, pathological liar.
There is no legal endorsement nor legal imposition, and is therefore
outside of the bound of Amendment I.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
When it's done by the government at any level, imbecile.
No. Incorporation only applies to the State, not local or other
sub-state governments.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creator
WHAT FUCKING CREATOR IN THE REAL WORLD OUTSIDE THE FAIRY TALES OF YOUR
RELIGION, moron?
Ask Jefferson, et al.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
then you don't support
the
foundation of this country.
Once again you lie through your teeth.
What's wrong with you?
Post by Peter Franks
Have you come to grips with
that?
You're insane.
That's what's wrong with you.
unknown
2013-08-01 20:28:16 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
You know perfectly well it is unconstitutional when it is endorsed or
imposed by the government it is, pathological liar.
Post by Peter Franks
Or are you suggesting that the practice of prayer is an establishment of
religion?
Post by Jeanne Douglas
is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
If you don't believe in the Creatorthen you don't support the
foundation of this country.
Jeff Strickland
2013-08-02 17:52:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
Not only is it not unconstitutional, it is expressly protected.

It's astounding to me that anybody would object to the panel of leaders we
elect asking for wisdom to lead us in the right direction! Indeed, it seems
like we should demand that our leaders take every opportunity they can fine
to seek wisdom to lead us in the right direction.
Peter Franks
2013-08-02 20:57:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff Strickland
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
Not only is it not unconstitutional, it is expressly protected.
It's astounding to me that anybody would object to the panel of leaders
we elect asking for wisdom to lead us in the right direction! Indeed, it
seems like we should demand that our leaders take every opportunity they
can fine to seek wisdom to lead us in the right direction.
Asking for wisdom is an affront to the ignorant.

Consider that.
unknown
2013-08-02 21:01:28 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeff Strickland
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY Ð Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake
City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme
Court's
ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Which religion?
ANY religion, of course.
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer
Prayer is not unconstitutional.
Not only is it not unconstitutional, it is expressly protected.
It's astounding to me that anybody would object to the panel of leaders
we elect asking for wisdom to lead us in the right direction! Indeed, it
seems like we should demand that our leaders take every opportunity they
can fine to seek wisdom to lead us in the right direction.
SkyEyes
2013-08-01 08:50:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
It's more basic than that, even. It's demonstrating a preference for
religion over no religion, which the Supreme Court has ruled governmental
agencies can't do.
--
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
unknown
2013-08-01 20:25:03 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Peter Franks
How is it forcing religion?
Are you serious? An unconstitutional prayer is forcing the religion on
those in the chamber who don't share the beliefs of the one giving the
prayer by establishing a religious ritual as part of a government
meeting.
unknown
2013-07-31 18:33:06 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY ‹ Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
unknown
2013-07-31 18:33:27 UTC
Permalink
==========================================================

KEEP IT OUT OF CANADIAN NEWSGROUPS, THANKS

==========================================================
Post by Jeanne Douglas
SALT LAKE CITY — Rev. Father Elias Koucos, chairman of the Salt Lake City
Interfaith Roundtable, looks forward to hearing the Supreme Court's ruling
on prayer in public meetings next year. He hopes a ruling will initiate
dialogue about the role prayer can play in government meetings.
What is there to discuss. It's an unconstitutional forcing of religion
into a government arena.
Loading...