quade 4 #1 April 22, 2002 Interesting article - HERE.It doesn't really matter where you come down on this issue, the article is worth a look.quadehttp://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChromeBoy 0 #2 April 22, 2002 I was hoping this was going to be about Faith Hills bush. I guess not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #3 April 22, 2002 nice.http://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheMarshMan1 0 #4 April 22, 2002 "This man now seems to have an enormous difficulty separating his personal religious commitment from his public policy positions." -Rev. Barry LynnIndeed he does..."If I could be like that, I would give anything, just to live one day, in those shoes..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bbarnhouse 0 #5 April 22, 2002 "All religions under the Almighty God" Umm excuse me but did he really mean to exclude folks.....because the way I interpreted it, it certainly does!UHG....religion and politics.......my Mother warned me.....It only takes a little pixie dust...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #6 April 22, 2002 >"All religions under the Almighty God" Umm excuse me but did he really mean >to exclude folks.....because the way I interpreted it, it certainly does!Sadly, I doubt it. I have a feeling he doesn't _know_ that there are some religions that do not have one all-powerful god. I find myself in the odd position of hoping for simple ignorance over intolerance.-bill von Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bbarnhouse 0 #7 April 22, 2002 Well Bill....I think you stated that better than I did. *sigh*Don't make me have to pull out my dictionary!LOLIt only takes a little pixie dust...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james1010 0 #8 April 22, 2002 "We feel our reliance on the creator who made us," he said. "We place our sorrows and cares before him, seeking God's mercy."WOW! The Faith it takes to generate a public statement like that, is the type of Faith you can't expect him to separate from any part of his life, whether it be public policy or not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schroeder 0 #9 April 22, 2002 hmm. You know, I'm not a reglious guy myself anymore (oh! I lost my faith.), but I pray you guys aren't headed down a bad road. when's this guy's term up?forgive me, I'm canadian."and if her "lawyer" friends don't like it, f*ck'em, let em riot.......we're Sonic f*ck'n Death Monkey..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JDBoston 0 #10 April 22, 2002 Talk about a slippery slope... whoa... if we start mixing religion and policy-making, then either we give all religions a say, including crap like Scientology which we have tolerantly classified as a religion, and which has a LOT of money to spend on lobbying... Or we privilege Christianity. For historical comparison, does anyone know of any sizeable country that was ever run by a government with an explicit connection to a specific religion, without creating divisiveness, intolerance, and violent repression? I'd be interested to hear of any.It's just flat out dangerous to govern people according to a system that they can't argue with or question, whether that's organized religion or the Communist Manifesto. You cater to the human instinct for groupspeak and aggression towards outsiders. The reason secular democracy works is because we as citizens can debate things, question the rules, and change our collective minds. It also gives everyone the opportunity to be a citizen, regardless of culture or creed.Not saying Bush is trying to put the Church in charge, I just think this is an interesting discussion to have.Joe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #11 April 22, 2002 QuoteI was hoping this was going to be about Faith Hills bushLMAO!!!Now that's what I call "cuntry"Such an interesting monster with such an interesting hairdo.Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james1010 0 #12 April 22, 2002 Quote I'm not a reglious guy myself anymore (oh! I lost my faith.), but I pray you guys aren't headed down a bad road. So, to whom or what are you praying? . . . just curious James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #13 April 22, 2002 Man, you are really on an anti-religion and anti-Bush campaign. I take anything that the 'New York Times' says with a grain of salt. They are one of the most left wing liberal newspapers I have ever read. I'm sure they only printed 'facts' but I'm also sure they presented it in a way that supports their liberal views. I agree with separation of church and state but I also understand that a person in office is not required to denounce his religion just because he is elected to public office. The intent of 'separation of church and state' was to prevent the government from dictating how, when, and whom the people worship. It does not mean that religious people cannot make decisions based on their religious beliefs. I respect Bush for at least holding to his principles even if they are not the most popular. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schroeder 0 #14 April 22, 2002 Who am I praying to? The collective whole, since I myself am unable to effect change regarding these matters."and if her "lawyer" friends don't like it, f*ck'em, let em riot.......we're Sonic f*ck'n Death Monkey..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schroeder 0 #15 April 22, 2002 "It does not mean that religious people cannot make decisions based on their religious beliefs."I don't quite think I agree with that. Well at least not with how I think you meant it. I would think that a person, Bush in this case, who is religious and of one faith, should not make _any_ decisions based on his individual religious beliefs for the entire country which clearly holds a broad spectrum of belief systems. How can that one man be speaking and acting on behalf of his nation, if he makes decisions like that?"and if her "lawyer" friends don't like it, f*ck'em, let em riot.......we're Sonic f*ck'n Death Monkey..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james1010 0 #16 April 22, 2002 Quote How can that one man be speaking and acting on behalf of his nation, if he makes decisions like that?So, if he ignored God and his faith and made his decisions based solely on more liberal ideals, would he then be speaking for the entire nation? I'll answer that . . NO. One man cannot speak for an entire nation, the best that one man can do is speak from his heart and the ideals that heart holds. President Bush is doing just that. His belief in God warrants his belief that that God is this nations best hope.James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
schroedera 0 #17 April 22, 2002 liberal shmiberal, I think that is a moot-point, the larger one here is that of religion. sure, I can sorta see where you're coming from, but what about the citizens of 'his' country that don't share his beliefs? Don't you think he should be more impartial, one way or another in order to better represent his citizens? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #18 April 22, 2002 QuoteHis belief in God warrants his belief that that God is this nations best hope.James, let's flip that around.Let's say that somebody other than bush had been elected and didn't believe in Jesus.Would you want him making his choices based on his beliefs?quadehttp://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james1010 0 #19 April 22, 2002 Quote but what about the citizens of 'his' country that don't share his beliefs? But, what about the many that do? . . you could go around and round with this point and get nowhere.As far as being impartial goes . . I have alot more respect for someone whose beliefs dictate thier actions than I do for someone who can be blown around by whatever wind comes along.James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james1010 0 #20 April 22, 2002 read the above reply . . that goes for anyone, not just President bush, regardless if I agree with them or not.James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #21 April 22, 2002 James --I can understand your feelings. I do not agree with them.While I too may respect someone for acting on his beliefs, I would have far more respect for someone that could see past his own personal beliefs and acted on facts.quadehttp://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JDBoston 0 #22 April 22, 2002 James, I can kind of see your point, but what I would say is this: People who let religious beliefs guide ALL of their actions, and cannot compromise, or be swayed by unexpected facts into changing what they previously believed, should NOT be in positions of great responsibility. Bush can put on the simple front all he wants, if that helps the American people trust his judgment and believe, however erroneously, that he has principles and always sticks to them. Trust in a leader is important. But when it comes down to it, he has a very real, very messy, and very complicated job to do, and faith will not help him do it properly.Joe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schroeder 0 #23 April 22, 2002 Hey, I'm not saying I don't respect the guy. That'd take some cahones to get up infront of everyone and make statements like that, and a person with faith as strong as his and as willing to voice it is impressive. BUT, that being said, I also respect the dude preaching in the street in rags. Hell I respect that dude more. But I wouldn't want him making decisions regarding national affairs based on what he believes."and if her "lawyer" friends don't like it, f*ck'em, let em riot.......we're Sonic f*ck'n Death Monkey..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #24 April 22, 2002 >One man cannot speak for an entire nation, the best that one man can do >is speak from his heart and the ideals that heart holds. I agree. Whether he is Catholic, Buddhist, or Jewish, he is entitled to express his opinions, as is everyone in the US. And as long as he doesn't enact anything that recognizes one religion over another, he is doing nothing wrong. I just worry that he may extend his beliefs into the government - like funding only religions that agree with his ideas of religion (i.e. only religions that are "under one almighty god.") That would be a pretty blatant misuse of his power as president, to specifically aid only the religions he believes in. Even though he has said he is going to do just that, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he just misspoke.-bill von Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james1010 0 #25 April 22, 2002 Quote I would have far more respect for someone that could see past his own personal beliefs and acted on facts.That would, ofcourse, depend upon the supposed facts in question and your subsequent view of those facts. You no doubt hold some things to be factual that I myself do not and vice versa. Fact is personal belief, no matter what the belief, plays a vital role in everything.James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
