National Day of Prayer is no more...

[WB9YZU]

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/loc...1-22ef-55c5-b99c-8d6c6c4679a6.html?mode=story

Barbara Crabb's decision was well written http://media.journalinteractive.com/documents/prayer041510.pdf, and an interesting historical perspective on the day. But somehow, it seems that these twits have done us a disservice.

Ron

 

[joe_peters]

A very well written decision, and appropriate.

We don't need a "National Day of Prayer"--people are free to pray whenever and wherever they want. Hell, I pray every day: "Lord, give me the strength not to strangle the life out of those that disagree with me!" See, I just did it again, what a country!

We also need to get government out of the religion business--no more involvement in marriage. Marriage is a religious act. The government should require civil unions for legally binding contracts, and all laws should be "religion" neutral. No more IRS rulings based on religious acts.

If you want a religious service, go to a church. Want a legally binding civil union, go to a courthouse. Want the best of both worlds--do both.

 

[ZomBrady]

A very well written decision, and appropriate.

We don't need a "National Day of Prayer"--people are free to pray whenever and wherever they want. Hell, I pray every day: "Lord, give me the strength not to strangle the life out of those that disagree with me!" See, I just did it again, what a country!

We also need to get government out of the religion business--no more involvement in marriage. Marriage is a religious act. The government should require civil unions for legally binding contracts, and all laws should be "religion" neutral. No more IRS rulings based on religious acts.

If you want a religious service, go to a church. Want a legally binding civil union, go to a courthouse. Want the best of both worlds--do both.

x2!!

While we're at it, can we withdraw the 'tax-exempt' status that churches have going for them?

 

[xcm]

x2!!

While we're at it, can we withdraw the 'tax-exempt' status that churches have going for them?

now we're talkin!

 

[ECKSJAY]

x2!!

While we're at it, can we withdraw the 'tax-exempt' status that churches have going for them?

How about making everyone tax exempt?

Just sayin'...

 

[Boatwrench]

Hell, I pray every day: "Lord, give me the strength not to strangle the life out of those that disagree with me!"

I guess I'm keeping ya busy. :laugh:

 

[joe_peters]

I guess I'm keeping ya busy. :laugh:

Yes, I have prayed for you on occasion! :roflmao:

 

[joe_peters]

How about making everyone tax exempt?

Just sayin'...

ECKSJAY for Congress!

 

[GrimmJeeper]

ECKSJAY for Congress!

i was going to second that motion, but I talk to him on a regular basis... I'm not so sure about giving him any power :gag:

 

[WB9YZU]

We also need to get government out of the religion business--no more involvement in marriage. Marriage is a religious act.

Marriage is not a religious act, Marriage is 1st and formost a legally binding partnership between a Man and a Woman. You take out a license to get married (and pay a fee), which stipulates that this is a legally binding contract you are entering into. You then have your choice, either the Justice of the Peace takes your oaths, or you can go to a minister who is allowed by law to take your oaths ( infront of all your relatives: Read- Witnesses). Either way, a signed copy of the license gets returned to the State and your Marriage is recorded. You and your partner now have legal obligations to meet, to each other, and to any offspring you may have. This has nothing to do with religion and everthing to do with making sure your spouse and your kids are taken care of.

Back to the decission...

Yah, this was always a meaningless law, but, setting asside a day of prayer ( any prayer by any religion or non-religion,no prayer? ) is harmless. However, I find the success of this suit ( and the effort put into it by the FFRF ) to be disturbing because the next targets will be things we actually care about.

I find it amaizing that these folks have absolutely nothing better to do with their lives than to make sure that we become a totally secular society because they choose not to believe in a God.

Feedom of Religion and Separation of Church and State does not have a thing to do with this law, that has been on the books since 1952, allowing the President to say a few words in a prayer context.

Few people realise that "Separation of Church and State" has to do with making sure the Church does not become the State (as was the case with most Euopean nations at the time). The State is made of People, religious and otherwise, and will always reflect their views and values. To try and take religion out of the State is an impossible task without making religion itself illegal, which is also against the Constitution.

Ron

 

[Darky]

Actually, if you really want to get into it, marriage has been around a hell of a lot longer than our government, than any government on this Earth. Marriage was a means of committing to a man committing to one woman, before God and family, for the rest of his life. Government got involved somewhere down the line. Rather than creating a new system to cover what they wanted to cover, they just usurped marriage.

I've been saying the same as Joe for a long time now. Marriage is in the church/mosque/synagogue/witch's coven/whatever, meant as a symbolic gesture showing that you are now committed to this person for the rest of your life. To receive the tax breaks, rights of succession, etc, you should have to apply for a civil union. This would get government out of marriage entirely, and solve the gay marriage debate. If you're gay and want a church marriage, find a church that supports homosexuality and have at it. Then get your civil union and everyone has the same benefits and rights, and no church is being asked to recognize something they don't believe to be right.

On topic, I really don't care that the gov't killed the Nat'l Day of Prayer. Having it didn't require anyone to pray nor will not having it restrict anyone from praying.

 

[kastein]

I have to say, "National Day of" "National Year of" "International Month of" stuff just makes things seem trite in my eyes. If something has worth it does not need to be commemorated by some committee arbitrarily dedicating some period of time to it. Picturing said committee squabbling over what particular cause to dedicate the next month to also completely ruins it. In this case it's a law created by Congress it seems... which is a committee of 435 people, or at least seems to operate/fail to operate as one.

I've been saying the same as Joe for a long time now. Marriage is in the church/mosque/synagogue/witch's coven/whatever, meant as a symbolic gesture showing that you are now committed to this person for the rest of your life. To receive the tax breaks, rights of succession, etc, you should have to apply for a civil union. This would get government out of marriage entirely, and solve the gay marriage debate. If you're gay and want a church marriage, find a church that supports homosexuality and have at it. Then get your civil union and everyone has the same benefits and rights, and no church is being asked to recognize something they don't believe to be right.

I could not agree more.

 

[MoparManiac]

Actually, if you really want to get into it, marriage has been around a hell of a lot longer than our government, than any government on this Earth. Marriage was a means of committing to a man committing to one woman, before God and family, for the rest of his life. Government got involved somewhere down the line. Rather than creating a new system to cover what they wanted to cover, they just usurped marriage.

I've been saying the same as Joe for a long time now. Marriage is in the church/mosque/synagogue/witch's coven/whatever, meant as a symbolic gesture showing that you are now committed to this person for the rest of your life. To receive the tax breaks, rights of succession, etc, you should have to apply for a civil union. This would get government out of marriage entirely, and solve the gay marriage debate. If you're gay and want a church marriage, find a church that supports homosexuality and have at it. Then get your civil union and everyone has the same benefits and rights, and no church is being asked to recognize something they don't believe to be right.

On topic, I really don't care that the gov't killed the Nat'l Day of Prayer. Having it didn't require anyone to pray nor will not having it restrict anyone from praying.

My exact thoughts on this matter. Couldn't have summed it up better.

This is also my first post in here...

 

[ZomBrady]

. . . I've been saying the same as Joe for a long time now. Marriage is in the church/mosque/synagogue/witch's coven/whatever, meant as a symbolic gesture showing that you are now committed to this person for the rest of your life. To receive the tax breaks, rights of succession, etc, you should have to apply for a civil union. This would get government out of marriage entirely, and solve the gay marriage debate. If you're gay and want a church marriage, find a church that supports homosexuality and have at it. Then get your civil union and everyone has the same benefits and rights, and no church is being asked to recognize something they don't believe to be right.
. . .

I would totally support this. Too bad not many people have your ability for rational thought.

 

[XJEEPER]

x2!!

While we're at it, can we withdraw the 'tax-exempt' status that churches have going for them?

Only those that pay their clergy.....

National __________ Day seems to be a great way to give folks a paid day off at the expense of the tax-payers, while the rest of us work.

 

[ZomBrady]

Only those that pay their clergy.....

Too many loop holes. I personally believe that everyone and every organization should be taxed equally. If a church collects tithes, then that should be taxed as income.

 

[Shorty]

Too many loop holes. I personally believe that everyone and every organization should be taxed equally. If a church collects tithes, then that should be taxed as income.

agreed^^ and they can give to the needy/charities and receive tax credits like anyone else.

 

[kastein]

Only those that pay their clergy.....

National __________ Day seems to be a great way to give folks a paid day off at the expense of the tax-payers, while the rest of us work.

Fortunately, most of them aren't real holidays. I don't think I'd ever be in the office if all the National ____ Days/weeks/months/years were real holidays!

 

[WB9YZU]

Actually, if you really want to get into it, marriage has been around a hell of a lot longer than our government, than any government on this Earth. Marriage was a means of committing to a man committing to one woman, before God and family, for the rest of his life. Government got involved somewhere down the line. Rather than creating a new system to cover what they wanted to cover, they just usurped marriage.

I've been saying the same as Joe for a long time now. Marriage is in the church/mosque/synagogue/witch's coven/whatever, meant as a symbolic gesture showing that you are now committed to this person for the rest of your life. To receive the tax breaks, rights of succession, etc, you should have to apply for a civil union. This would get government out of marriage entirely, and solve the gay marriage debate. If you're gay and want a church marriage, find a church that supports homosexuality and have at it. Then get your civil union and everyone has the same benefits and rights, and no church is being asked to recognize something they don't believe to be right.

On topic, I really don't care that the gov't killed the Nat'l Day of Prayer. Having it didn't require anyone to pray nor will not having it restrict anyone from praying.

That seems awful etho-centric. Marriage has been around a lot longer than current main stream religions, but not longer than the concept of "government" in general (including Tribal Governments). The concept of marriage exists in all cultures. I already stated the reason for marriage, so I won't repeat myself.

This won't solve any "Gay Debate", go back to my assertion that you can not remove religion from Government. Gays are in two camps, some want property rights, etc. Some want "legitimize" their lifestyle. The two issues are not reconcilable as long as there is a strong feeling in society that this is wrong.

You folks seem to purposely misrepresent the idea of a "National Day of Prayer". You folks would like to scrap all the "days". How about Veteran's Day, we can still remember our Vets the other 364 days also. How about Memorial Day, surely we don't need a special day to remember our war dead. What about MLK day, or Presidents Day, or any of the other fine "days" we put on the calendar to remind us about who we are and where we came from.

The secular holiday I was thinking of is Christmas. It certainly sounds to me like you folks are willing to follow the path of the FFRF, so why not crap the Federal Holiday of Christmas, after all, it certainly could be said that Christmas, as a Federal Holiday is Un-Constitutional.

Ron

 

[Darky]

Well, deciding what's been around longer really depends on your view of history/religion, and I'm not going to get into that debate.

Marriage existing under a tribal government for the purpose of taxes, property rights, etc makes no sense in a nomadic tribe with a government existing largely to organize for war, distribution of food, etc as you see to be asserting. I'm not asserting that marriage is solely a Christian thing here. If you look at ancient tribes, marriage existed to aid in procreation, you would be guaranteed a partner to bear your children and she would be guaranteed someone to care for her and support her and the children. It was also used as a diplomacy tool. Chief A gives his daughter to Chief B's son to ensure peace between the two tribes.

Again, the gov't usurped marriage to tie in taxes, property rights, health care, etc, when a civil union would've likely worked better.