JackC 0 #151 December 18, 2008 My irony-o-meter just imploded, but the laugh you just gave me was totally worth it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #152 December 18, 2008 QuoteMy irony-o-meter just imploded I'm sure it did - now, run along and let the grownups work. Who knows, you may even stumble across that 'gain' to Christianity that you seem to think the holidays are.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #153 December 18, 2008 QuoteSide note: I find it quite funny that those who are so vehemently in support of 'the majority rules' in regards to voting are so vehemently against 'the majority rules' in regards to days off work. And I find it quite funny that you are so vehemently in support of the Constitution and the Supreme Court in regards to the second amendment but are so vehemently against the Constitution and the Supreme Court in regards to the first amendment."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #154 December 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteSide note: I find it quite funny that those who are so vehemently in support of 'the majority rules' in regards to voting are so vehemently against 'the majority rules' in regards to days off work. And I find it quite funny that you are so vehemently in support of the Constitution and the Supreme Court in regards to the second amendment but are so vehemently against the Constitution and the Supreme Court in regards to the first amendment. Where have I indicated an opinion in one direction or the other, pray tell? I am saying 'show me PROOF, not your opinion'.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #155 December 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteSide note: I find it quite funny that those who are so vehemently in support of 'the majority rules' in regards to voting are so vehemently against 'the majority rules' in regards to days off work. And I find it quite funny that you are so vehemently in support of the Constitution and the Supreme Court in regards to the second amendment but are so vehemently against the Constitution and the Supreme Court in regards to the first amendment. Where have I indicated an opinion in one direction or the other, pray tell? I am saying 'show me PROOF, not your opinion'. I ALREADY SHOWED YOU PROOF. DO YOU NEED ME TO BREAK THE PROOF DOWN TO A LEVEL THAT THE MENTALLY HANDICAPPED CAN UNDERSTAND? I'M BEGINNING TO THINK SO ... PS: I'LL GIVE YOU A HINT, THINK ABOUT VACATION LEAVE AND WHO HAS TO USE VACATION LEAVE TO OBSERVE A RELIGIOUS HOLIDAY AND WHO DOESN'T ..."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #156 December 18, 2008 QuoteSide note: I find it quite funny that those who are so vehemently in support of 'the majority rules' in regards to voting are so vehemently against 'the majority rules' in regards to days off work. It's the difference between pure democracy and republican democracy. Pure democracy in electing members of the government is the cornerstone of the principle that those who would rule The People are ultimately hired and fired by The People. But republican democracy in the enactment of laws helps counter-balance the effect of a tyrrany of the majority unfairly subjugating the rights of a minority. This distinction, especially with respect to caution about a tyranny of the majority, is discussed by Plato, James Madison, Alexis de Toqueville and John Stuart Mill. ***Among the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. ..... By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community. James Madison, Federalist 10 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #157 December 18, 2008 QuoteI'm sure it did - now, run along and let the grownups work. Who knows, you may even stumble across that 'gain' to Christianity that you seem to think the holidays are. For a man who complains about PAs at the drop of a hat, you sure like to play dirty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #158 December 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteWhere have I indicated an opinion in one direction or the other, pray tell? I am saying 'show me PROOF, not your opinion'. I ALREADY SHOWED YOU PROOF. DO YOU NEED ME TO BREAK THE PROOF DOWN TO A LEVEL THAT THE MENTALLY HANDICAPPED CAN UNDERSTAND? I'M BEGINNING TO THINK SO ... A bit testy today? Try the decaf. QuotePS: I'LL GIVE YOU A HINT, THINK ABOUT VACATION LEAVE AND WHO HAS TO USE VACATION LEAVE TO OBSERVE A RELIGIOUS HOLIDAY AND WHO DOESN'T ... Ah, so NOW the 'aid' is to individual people, and not religions? Why are you still arguing about the 1st, then? Oh, and here's a hint for YOU: flex time.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #159 December 18, 2008 QuoteOh, and here's a hint for YOU: flex time. Oh, and here's a hint for YOU: Preschool"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #160 December 18, 2008 QuoteI'm sure it did - now, run along and let the grownups work. Who knows, you may even stumble across that 'gain' to Christianity that you seem to think the holidays are. Funny thing Mike, when it suited you to do so you quoted a court decision (which you indicated matched your opinion) which included "preferring" one religion over another as something the Fed Gov't cannot do. It's quite obvious that having Federal holidays matching christian holidays is a preference of christianity. But since you don't want to admit that, you've conveniently forgotten what your own source says, and have moved the standard to that which is a positive aid to any particular christian church. Redefining the goalposts whenever it suits you just makes you look desperate.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #161 December 18, 2008 QuoteRedefining the goalposts whenever it suits you just makes you look desperate. I don't think he's desperate, I think he's trolling ... which is against the rules."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #162 December 18, 2008 QuotePlease read This: http://www.tencommandments.org/heathens.shtml Damn! Whoever wrote that genuinely belongs in an asylum. Surely it's not safe for that level of angry insanity to be walking the streets?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #163 December 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteI'm sure it did - now, run along and let the grownups work. Who knows, you may even stumble across that 'gain' to Christianity that you seem to think the holidays are. Funny thing Mike, when it suited you to do so you quoted a court decision (which you indicated matched your opinion) which included "preferring" one religion over another as something the Fed Gov't cannot do. It's quite obvious that having Federal holidays matching christian holidays is a preference of christianity. But since you don't want to admit that, you've conveniently forgotten what your own source says, and have moved the standard to that which is a positive aid to any particular christian church. Redefining the goalposts whenever it suits you just makes you look desperate. I've moved no goalposts. The argument started over drug laws that interfered with religious rites. Once that was disproven, the argument shifted to holidays (since we're discussing desperate tactics to try to 'win' the argument). If the US government deciding to not work on days coinciding with Christian holidays is a "benefit" to Christianity (still unproven - show me how the Christian religion is 'benefiting' from it), then the MLK holiday is a "benefit" to the Black community. So - show me proof. Show me court cases - SOMETHING other than opinions.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #164 December 18, 2008 QuoteI've moved no goalposts. The argument started over drug laws that interfered with religious rites. Once that was disproven ... Disproven? It wasn't disproven. Show me the proof."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #165 December 18, 2008 If atheism is unbelief, then why should there be any "holy day" for it at all ? Even the solstices and equinoxes only have meaning to pagans, witches, or druids. Have the courage of your disbelief and suck it up - no holiday. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #166 December 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteI've moved no goalposts. The argument started over drug laws that interfered with religious rites. Once that was disproven ... Disproven? It wasn't disproven. Show me the proof. Re-read the thread, the public laws and cases are mentioned. I don't know if there have been any further cases in regards to Rastafarianism. What is listed is what a basic Google search brought up.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ion01 2 #167 December 18, 2008 Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There is no law in regards to federal holidays. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You haven't been reading the thread have you ... Federal law (5 U.S.C. 6103) establishes the following public holidays for Federal employees. My bad....however, the point remains the same in that it only says that they don't work on these days not that they must perform certain religious things or something. They simply don't have to work and can, therefore do whatever they want that day whether it is worship satan or nothing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #168 December 18, 2008 QuoteRe-read the thread, the public laws and cases are mentioned. Take your own advice. Re-read the thread, the public laws and cases are mentioned."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #169 December 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteRe-read the thread, the public laws and cases are mentioned. Take your own advice. Re-read the thread, the public laws and cases are mentioned. Public law in regard to the creation of holidays? So, MLK Day is a 'benefit' to the Black community, then? Show me how the government taking a day off work is a 'benefit' to the Christian religion, then.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #170 December 18, 2008 Quote My bad....however, the point remains the same in that it only says that they don't work on these days not that they must perform certain religious things or something. They simply don't have to work and can, therefore do whatever they want that day whether it is worship satan or nothing. The point is that Christians don't have to use Vacation Leave, Flex Time, etc... to observe their religious holiday ... Is it really that hard to understand? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #171 December 18, 2008 QuoteThe argument started over drug laws that interfered with religious rites. Once that was disproven ... You know why you didn't disprove it ... because the court in the case you cited was a state court but the laws I cited are federal laws. So, when are you going to prove it?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #172 December 18, 2008 Quote Quote My bad....however, the point remains the same in that it only says that they don't work on these days not that they must perform certain religious things or something. They simply don't have to work and can, therefore do whatever they want that day whether it is worship satan or nothing. The point is that Christians don't have to use Vacation Leave, Flex Time, etc... to observe their religious holiday ... Is it really that hard to understand? No, it's not - but, not every business gets those holidays - that is the FEDERAL GOV'T taking those days off. Some businesses, I'm sure, celebrate the Muslim holidays or Jewish holidays (try buying from B&H photo on a Saturday). So, the Christian RELIGION doesn't gain any advantage from it, only Christians that work for the federal gov't or those businesses that ONLY observe the Christian holidays. That is where your argument breaks down.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #173 December 18, 2008 QuoteSo - show me proof. Show me court cases - SOMETHING other than opinions. I'm using the document that you brought into the thread in a mistaken attempt to support your position. If you'd like to admit that you were just bullshitting, then please, go ahead. The amendment itself says nothing about benefiting a religion, it says 'respecting' a religion. I think that the onus is on you to show that a law must be a positive benefit to religion in order to be unconstitutional. In the meantime, I'll stick with the text of the constitution, and the interpretation that you supplied, and say that Federal Holidays on Christian dates both respects and prefers Christianity over other religions.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #174 December 18, 2008 QuoteSo, the Christian RELIGION doesn't gain any advantage from it, only Christians that work for the federal gov't or those businesses that ONLY observe the Christian holidays. So you admit that Christians working for the federal government have an advantage (thus, there is an advantage to being Christian) ... you're making progress."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ion01 2 #175 December 18, 2008 Okay, lets make this simple. "Congress shall make no law RESPECTING an ESTABLISHMENT of religion......" Respecting is defined as: regarding; concerning Establishment is : 1. the act or an instance of establishing. 2. the state or fact of being established. 3. something established; a constituted order or system. So lets look at the definition of establish: 1. to found, institute, build, or bring into being on a firm or stable basis: to establish a university; to establish a medical practice. 2. to install or settle in a position, place, business, etc.: to establish one's child in business. 3. to show to be valid or true; prove: to establish the facts of the matter. 4. to cause to be accepted or recognized: to establish a custom; She established herself as a leading surgeon. 5. to bring about permanently: to establish order. 6. to enact, appoint, or ordain for permanence, as a law; fix unalterably. 7. to make (a church) a national or state institution. So how does allowing people to not work on a particular day go against the consitution by "establishing a religion"? Does it prove christianity to be true or enact it or cause it to be accepted or found it as an establishment like a university ect...... Does having the 10 commandments at a court house do any of these things? Does having a prayer to open congress do any of these things? Its not about giving aid to one religion or another or even seperation of church and state. Its about "respecting the establishment" of a religion as defined above and nothing more no matter how one want to stretch or twist it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
