News-Record.com

"Then I suppose the architects of the Constitution, men of faith and profound intellect, got it all wrong when they insisted on separation of church and state?"

*Sigh*

Let's give her credit and believe Ms. Adams is aiming for Jefferson's "Wall of Separation" letter with this shot, or maybe even letters by Tyler and/or Madison. But I'm guessing she hasn't recently read this part of what IS actually in the First Amendment:

"(make no law)... prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

It doesn't seem to get much play.

I love how we've become a society that finds things that aren't written there while disregarding things that are. Won't the police department's policy, which I'm sure is being updated/written as we speak, establish or renew a governmental law restricting at least one officer's rights?

Ah, but that's not important.

Roger

P.S.- "Jesus force," Ms. Adams? You only bring Him out when needed for insults, eh?

Ms Adams said:
(Would they be so approving were they to encounter Buddhas and prayer rugs in their next ride to the pokey?)
Does this mean she thinks everyone will have a next ride to the pokey?
As I have said before, the point of breaking the law was missed. Don't break the law and place yourself in this position.

I must agree with Roger on the part about people reading what's not written as well as not reading what's written.
I'm affraid too many people fell prey to that idiot O'Hare's reading of the constitution, not what it really says.

While it is likely that Cynthia has never actually read the Constitution, she got it right about the architects thereof "men of faith and profound intellect".

But, I went back and took another look, and I still can't find the clause "when they insisted on separation of church and state". I just can't find it.

Cynthia, if you are out there, show us the clause.

Oak I have never found a reference that requires that we separate church and state as it it being interpreted by our present day politically correct group either. It simply isn't there. But these Godless ones and the liberal judges that took the Bible and God out of the schools and other public places seem to make their own rules where all laws are concerned, especially the Constitution. What the framers admonished against was a state sponsored and regulating religion which brought on such horrors as the Spanish Inquisition and Catholic Bloody Mary's reign and the on again off again persecution of religious groups in England. Or, the modern day Mullahs governing the Middle Eastern countries according to their views of the Koran.

We decent thoughtful and fair minded and peace loving humans allowed this to happen and once we left that void then evil moved in and took it's place giving us the troubles we have now. I remember a prayer starting my day in school but I do not recall any of my teachers having to scream to be heard and the class not paying attention anyhow. Morals are taught to the young by their elders and handed down from generation to generation; we missed a couple generations of these teaching. BB

Calling someone godless is uncalled for. Just as you have a right to practice your religion, others have the right NOT to practice any religion whatsoever. In today's politcal culture, one is a considered a heathen for not buying into the conservative religious base?

Brenda,

As I have pointed out before, it is physically impossible to take "the Bible and God out of the schools and other public places....." It would seem, therefore, that all of us misinterpret at times and change things to suit our own agenda. I agree with Fielder on this one. I am not Godless and I am a "decent thoughtful and fair minded and peace loving" human being. Disagreeing with your POV does not make me or anyone else otherwise. Your choice of words and their interpretation makes you sound rather unchristian. Just because you think you are telling it like it is does not mean it is like you are telling it.

speaking as an atheist, entirely concerned about the breakdown of "separation of church and state", I couldn't give a damn about some cop displaying a Jesus sign in his cruiser.

if you want to get technical, it is (ultimately) unconstitutional and wrong - for very good reasons. the N&R recently ran an editorial on the subject, which I entirely agreed with. but after all that, this issue is basically irrelevant and stupid.

worse than the painting of Jesus in a high school (remember that?) this one is a loser from the start. it seems (and is) so petty and antagonistic. I don't think I would prefer a world where the cop or school was sanctioned, or fired for such a grevious infringement upon my unchristian rights.

yes, the state cannot endorse any religion (or non-religion) above any other. great! let's keep it that way. but a cop-car sticker is less than the thin end of the wedge: it's not wedgy in the slightest. getting all hot under the collar about it is a distraction. it just makes us anti-theocrats look bad.

we have many more important encroachments on our religious (or whatever) freedoms to worry about. for god's sake - they are still trying to teach creationism in schools.

eDan,
as an atheist you have spoken with a voice of reason, which i (as a Christian) find refreshing. it seems as though every (little) issue concerning religious right is blown out of proportion these days.
i don't care one way or the other about a sticker on someones car - if i need a sticker to 'show' the world i'm a practicing Christian, then perhaps i ought to examine my manner of life !