Mythos_Ruler
-
Posts
14.941 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
58
Posts posted by Mythos_Ruler
-
-
In any case, despite what the Founding Fathers said outside the Constitutional Convention, it's the actual document itself that matters!
Wrong. The document is the most important part but the courts are to look to evidence surrounding it for proof too. Ever heard of the pen (or letter) AND spirit of the constitution?? The Spirit is referring to this and is quite often used as precedents by courts (especially supreme court) and used to intepret the meaning of the documents..
Sure, you say that in defense of the Supreme Court of the past (ex: the ruling cited above regarding Blasphemy), but you now complain when the interpretation changes from time to time? I will stand up and say right now, that the Supreme Court has many times, including that ridiculous "blasphemy" case cited, gotten it wrong, just like I believe they got it wrong when they legalized at-will-abortions.
First and foremost, we are to look at the document as written. The "spirit" of the law is to be used in absence of direct statement by said document, not in substitution. It is plain that those judges in the example cited used their own religious bias in that ruling when the Constitution prohibits the government from making any law that shall be "... an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Apparently those justices felt the letter of the Constitution, not to mention even the "spirit," didn't apply to them! They effective ruled against over half of the First Amendment, letter and spirit as in this important clause: "...or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press."
These are the types of abuses that occur when you infuse government with religion.
-
To whom are you referring Steve? Quacker or Mythos?
In any case, despite what the Founding Fathers said outside the Constitutional Convention, it's the actual document itself that matters!
Plus, I also interpret Madison's statement much differently than Quacker does. His statement says to me that he, and perhaps some of the other Founding Fathers, personally govern themselves according to the "Ten Commandments of God." I don't see his statement as an indictment against a secular Constitution/government one bit. James Madison may have governed himself according to the Ten Commandments of God, but the government he helped create sure didn't. And that's what made these men great. Despite their personal religious beliefs, they created a wonderfully far sighted (designed so that future generations can alter and correct it!) and inclusive secular document to govern the laws of this vast and varied country. They couldn't, in good conscience, create a government that forced its citizens what to believe and how to believe it; and that's why it is the secular document and government it is.
Again: James Madison may have governed himself according to the Ten Commandments of God, but the government he helped create sure didn't.
-
@Quacker: All those quotes are all well and good, but luckily those men didn't decide our form of government; and that form of government is secular democracy, not Christian theocracy. As for the Supreme Court ruling, they were wrong. The Supreme Court is there to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, not to uphold the Ten Commandments or the Bible or the Koran.
Your statistics, while they factually may be correct, are quite misleading as presented by you. You automatically equate the rise of crime and divorce rates with the lack of Ten Commandments posted in school classrooms, when logically there is none. If there would be any connection at all, it'd be the lack of the Ten Commandments posted at HOME, rather than in a public place. One doesn't need the Ten Commandments (or Bill of Rights for that matter) posted at school, or in a public park, if such things were taught at home. And in there lies the rub. There are many tenets of Christianity to which I have no opposition; the sancitiy of life and the family would be a few; but these social ills to which you refer start in the home, and not within our secular form of government (which has served us so well until now).
The place of public institutions is not to force moral codes on citizens. Such things are for parents to instill. So then, the fault with children lies with their parents. Wouldn't you agree?
-
Know why Google's good? Their index page doesn't have a bunch of CRAP on it.
-
Yes, the honking of the car horn for *hesitating* at a green light. Always irritates. It never happens *to* me, but I feel bad for people it happens to.
People cutting me off is okay. I do it a lot on the highway, but people who cut you off and then slow down... what is that about? Or people that cut you off, then give you the finger. WTF
-
America is not great because of its "Christian Founding." The Constitution makes no mention whatsoever about Christ. You think democracy was invented by Christians? You think seperation of church and state is Christian ideology? You think slavery was abolished because it was the Christian thing to do? I defy anyone to state (and give supporting arguments) that the Bill of Rights has foundations in the Bible. It simply doesn't.
Many of these things came to pass despite Christianity - despite what the Bible says.
What made the United States a great country was because for the first time ever a group of people put down their personal religious prejudices to create the world's first truly secular country. Never before had such a thing occured. The world's first ever democracy, Athens, was also a sort of Theocracy. But America... America was truly something different... unique. Whether it still is, I still haven't decided. I do know, that if our Founding Fathers had not subordinated their religious beliefs to the greater humanist good, then our country would be quite different than it is today (for good or ill depends on your personal brand of beliefs). We'd have a theocracy, not a democracy, and the Bill of Rights would be replaced with the Ten Commandments (which I'm sure quite a few people wish would come to pass). But that wouldn't be America. That would be just another (then) European country with an, albeit, elected King.
EDIT: Wow, 5 members are reading this topic at once. LOL
-
Um, so the dealine is 4 days old. Who won?
-
I'm of the mind that Iraq should be split. The old Impperial boundaries were foolish back in 1930 and they are foolish now. Give the Kurds a country, the Sunnis a country, and the Shiites a country. I am of the mind that the smaller the political unit, the better for the people living in that unit.
The larger the political unit, the less influence citizens have in its workings, which goes against everything I believe about government and democracy. I don't believe in a unified Iraq where the constitution says "this %" of governmental positions must go to "this minority group," etc., which I suspect is what's going to happen. If there is to be a unified country, government leaders should be elected to positions based on their talents, rather than cultural background. Otherwise, if they are going to go with the "divide the government positions along ethnic lines" route, then they might as well split the country and let each ethnicity decide its own leaders.
That's the only hesitation I have about the U.N. and expanding its powers. The people of this world have no direct say in what the U.N. does. That is the frightening thing among some Americans that oppose the UN. Historically the larger the political unit, the less personal and civic freedoms the people living under that unit enjoy.
-
Wijit, I seriously have to take issue with you assertion that the reason good jobs are leaving American shores is because Americans are lazy. Americans put more hours into their careers than all of our "1st world" counterparts, save Japan. There are many millions of working class people that once worked in factories making a decent amount of money to support their families (and consequently, the econamy) that now no longer have those jobs because the factories were closed down and reopened in China (or some other place where they pay the workers 1/5 the wages). This is not due to laziness or the unwillingness to work difficult jobs when generations of Americans have been the ones performing (well, I might add) at these jobs! American productivity is amazingly high given the many demands placed on today's worker. I think you sell your fellow Americans short.
-
Greece or Kenya.
-
I agree Enarwaen. That's a great commentary track! He expresses deep interest in doing a 3rd movie too. Alas, it'll have to be postponed now.
-
I'd hate to say this, because I'm American, but most Americans distrust "intellectuals," hence, the popularity of Bush. Interesting, huh?
-
"Mad Max Beyond the Thunderdome" was one of my childhood favorites.
-
I like my Atari 2600 just fine.
-
Here's a bit of advice for everyone:
If you don't know anything about the poll choices ( in any poll, not just this one ), then don't vote. Your votes skew the results. Just ask before you vote. For instance, if you don't know 75% of the women on this poll, just ask me to post a picture. Not too difficult. This advice goes for every other poll in in these discussion forums.
This particular poll is trivial, but people just keep on voting nonsense in this forum's polls when they don't know anything about the subject at hand or the poll choices.
That's all. Rant over.
-
Hmmm... first off: What's "lim" stand for?
-
I'd spend that hour with my son... as he was at 6 months of age.
-
My comp:
1.4 GHz P4
640 MB RDRAM
I might go with Brian and get a Radeon.
-
"We don't need another hero" by Tina Turner blares over the loud speakers...
Mad Max rumbles into the stadium in his ethanol fueled, 1980s chop shopped, post-apocalyptic dune buggy.
John McClane, freshly retired from "the force," limps into the venue with no shirt and his feet bandaged and bleeding.
"I'll eat a whole can of rotten dog food before I let you out of this ring alive, mate!" says Max.
"Oh yeah?" replies McClane in his best Roy Rogers accent, "Yippy kai yay mother%$@#$!"
And the death match is on!
This is Barter Town - two go in, one comes out!
-
Okay, which one of these guys is the best actor + action hero?
-
I am using Rachel Wiesz as the model for a character in my "Athens" screenplay: Harmonia - Ephesean hetaerae, concubine of Aristides (model: Jude Law).
For some reason I think Cate Blanchett is one of the most beautiful women in the world. It's not like she has that great of a bussom, curves, legs, or anything. Don't know what it is about her... she's so ethereal. Maybe it's her voice or the way she carries herself. She's my model for Athena in the same screenplay.
Ashley Judd's got that small town beauty queen charm.
Claire Forlani has those exotic eyes and quiet sophistocation. The model for Delphic Oracle.
I've had a thing for Winona Ryder since her "Beatlejuice" and "Heathers" days. The petite features. The pixie haircut.
Edit @King Tut: Sorry dude. I think Cameran Diaz looks like an anorexic froglet; acts like one too. I can supply pics for the rest of the ladies to help you make up your mind though.
-
LOL @ Thatcher. She certainly had a "stiff upper lip" and "all that sort of thing."
-
I'm sick of talking about the teenie pop-corn chickies that pass for "celebrity" women these days.
-
Well, my comp CAME with an MX card.
:PI just found a GeForce FX 5200 128MB on www.pricewatch.com for $55.00. Woowoo!
George W. Bush
in Hall of Intellectuals
Posted
And my obvious belief is to the contrary.