ATTENTION Patriots / Birthers / Teabaggers / Whomever - If you did get your Revolution, Then What?

Remember everyone, it is freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

One thing that a lot of the religious component is getting really pissed about, is the removal of everything religious. We need to remove all of the Federal Government from everything it does not belong in. Then let each state decide its own path. Removing everything religious from government when government is involved in everything abolishes religion. Kind of the point the religious are kind of making!

Individual and State Sovereignty-people.

It was worth fighting for then and it is worth fighting for now.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


What a horrible Straw Man argument to deflect facts.

Stop living in the past and enter the now. I lived through those times you speak of. The past is the past. Take a look at right now. Take a close look if you dare. Is your life improving or getting worse?

I assure you the Democrat and Republican leaders are best buddies off camera. They have us arguing and hating each other just as they planned. As long as we are immersed in Bigotry against each other, they can do as they please.

The new Racists call themselves Partisans, Democrats and Republicans. There is no difference. It is still driven by hatred of those who are different. Whether you hate someone based on skin color or based on political affiliation it is the same.

My beliefs are simple. A well educated free people without government control and interference can do anything. A controlled people marching in lock step with corrupt Partisan Leaders can do nothing but self-destruct. The facts are with me.

The corrupt Banks, the corrupt Unions, the corrupt Political Parties control us because we allow it. They know on election day you will vote without knowing or caring who the person is as long as they have a D or an R following their names. Only we can force good people on those ballots and as long as we continue to foolishly believe we must be either Democrats or Republicans to matter we are lambs headed to slaughter. As long as we let them lie about us and use arguments like you just did we are screwed.

Originally posted by endisnighe
Remember everyone, it is freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

One thing that a lot of the religious component is getting really pissed about, is the removal of everything religious. We need to remove all of the Federal Government from everything it does not belong in. Then let each state decide its own path. Removing everything religious from government when government is involved in everything abolishes religion. Kind of the point the religious are kind of making!

Individual and State Sovereignty-people.

It was worth fighting for then and it is worth fighting for now.

So Religion only has value if it is influencing politics?
The constitution states "Make no respecting a religion, or practicing the free excercise thereof".
This means no laws to benefit, no laws to punish. It means neutrality. And it must remain so.
Agreed the Fed needs to be removed from everything it does not belong in. Religion also, should also be removed from everything it does not belong in.

reply to post by OldDragger


If you don't know the difference between the Militias and what is going on with us Independents who have had enough of the Partisan nonsense and watching our country go downhill, I don't know what to say.

I post one thing, you read another.

reply to post by endisnighe


Freedom in all things is worth any effort no matter how daunting.

Freedom of Religion is about far more than Religion. It is about being free to think as we wish and to be who we wish to be.

Governments only job should be to protect us and maintain the infrastructure. Anything else is just a way to control us.

Thanks for your comment on an earlier page.

reply to post by dereks


Whatever man if you want to keep your half-assed government that arrests children and imprisons people for carrying bags of plants on them then that is not my problem. I'll be out there fighting for your rights while you sit here screaming why the world should take me down.

reply to post by lordtyp0


Yes, you quoted the Constitution, good for you.

Except you forgot to mention the new mantra instituted my(edit by) the Supreme Court.

Seperation of Church and State.

That is what I am referring to.

Do you disagree with my supposition? That if government is involved in everything that religion must be removed from it?

With the new acquisition of the health care field, will religious hospitals need to be closed down? The government is now involved with all health care so is this not a necessity?

[edit on 1/2/2010 by endisnighe]

reply to post by lordtyp0


I think you stated that perfectly. Both sides of that particular argument have gone out of bounds. Live and let live is not just an interesting idea, it is the path to real freedom.

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by lordtyp0

 

Yes, you quoted the Constitution, good for you.

Except you forgot to mention the new mantra instituted my(edit by) the Supreme Court.

Seperation of Church and State.

That is what I am referring to.

Do you disagree with my supposition? That if government is involved in everything that religion must be removed from it?

With the new acquisition of the health care field, will religious hospitals need to be closed down? The government is now involved with all health care so is this not a necessity?

[edit on 1/2/2010 by endisnighe]

Actually Thomas Jefferson coined that Mantra. And, your slippery slope argument is unfounded and proven wrong by history.

Public schools = Government run = no religion is allowed.
Private schools = private run: The government has not closed Catholic school down or any of the others.

Medicaid, Medicare etc. are all payable to religious hospitals. Given the whackos are trying to get payables to Faith Healers.. there is no danger of what you describe-at all.

Government run programs must be devoid of any religious interference. Religious programs must be devoid of any government interference.

You know I strayed away from this thread because of how the Title of it is framed. I see it as a thread for people with intelligent thought and reasoning to lay down some ideas under the guise of reasoned debate, but once those are laid down, the wolves will come in as the trap was set. Why place the prefixes on the title of (ATTENTION Patriots / Birthers / Teabaggers / (and then my favorite as if to make it seem like an all inclusive thread) Whomever). Why not just ask the simple question of "If the Revolution Happened, Then What?" You see though...asking it in that manner won't bring out the chain-gang to levy its attack.

As seen in the last 2-3 pages. Fascist, little-dictator, racist, um...whatever else people have been called. I would call that a total lack of decorum on the very people trying to sound intelligent in their remarks.

In regards to the religion thing, that has been blown out of proportion for a long time now. So much as we are neglecting the other part of the Amendment that also tells government they are not allowed to trample on the rights of any religion to practice how they see fit.

In regards to public buildings....does it really matter if they have the Ten Commandments posted? Are we so thin-skinned and ready to break tradition of a building and culture to exclude something that is just words? Mind you, not bad words of advice and I do not prescribe to that religion.

So let us continue the debate and discussion to the real question. If revolution occurred, how will the vacuum of power be filled and what will be in place?

reply to post by lordtyp0


Okay agreement reached. But I will stand by that the Federal Government should get out of the school system. Either that or give people the choice of the money paid to their public school be given to the parent(in full) for their use in home schooling, private school or whatever the parent wants to do.

That I will not back off on.

Those with military power would rule, they'd have to because of the chaos.
Our enemies would attempt to attack us in our weakened state.
It would be every person for themselves.
Until we returned to some form of enforced government, and alot of people died.
Period, end of story.

reply to post by lordtyp0


You are speaking more of religious institutions correct? To separate religion, a cultural aspect of a people, from a supposed self-governing people is impossible.

Cannot Man seek their God(s) in way they see fit? Even while maintaining a political position? Thus once in that position they will undoubtedly seek the guidance of their God(s), thus the religious interference will always be a factor in government.

Allowing to go unchecked, in both directions is what the problem is. Religion, no matter which one, holds, to this day, (EDIT ADD)NO seat in government. They may persuade it and lobby it, just as you and I can persuade and lobby. There is also a growing fervor in regards to religion to where it is being stifled quietly and under the guise of Separation of Church and State.

As you have put: Public School = Government Run = No Religion, but we cannot pick and chose which parts of the First Amendment to follow and ignore the other parts.

To be able to exercise your first amendment rights means that I shall be allowed to exercise my right to practice my religion freely, without persecution and in a respectful manner while in a public school. If it doesn't interfere with instruction, why does it bother people to hold a prayer session on school grounds?

[edit on 2-1-2010 by ownbestenemy]

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
In regards to the religion thing, that has been blown out of proportion for a long time now. So much as we are neglecting the other part of the Amendment that also tells government they are not allowed to trample on the rights of any religion to practice how they see fit.

In regards to public buildings....does it really matter if they have the Ten Commandments posted? Are we so thin-skinned and ready to break tradition of a building and culture to exclude something that is just words? Mind you, not bad words of advice and I do not prescribe to that religion.

As for the 10 commandments, how would you feel if instead of the 10 commandments, it was aspects of the Islamic code? Buddhist or Zoroastrian?

The laws of the land are what any court should be concerned about. Many of the 10 commandments are not in anyway illegal in the U.S. (No God before, coveting neighbors wife... Only Illegal to lie under certain conditions.). Otherwise that part is important because the Courts must absolutely be neutral. If you have a judge who is presiding over a case between: An Atheist and a Priest similar paring... Well history has shown time and time that unless there is extreme vigilance too enforce neutrality, it tends to slant.


Religion is an integral part of the discussion. Most of the movement advocating the behavior of revolt etc. are very religious and want to 'take the country back for Jesus'. Prayers and Hymns are commonplace at many of the tea-bag party gatherings. One must examine the intent of those leading and what they profess to see what would happen if they got power.

In this case it is almost certain to begin as a Christian Dictatorship with pretense of being free from corruption-then the money will buy them all and... as Aristotle said:

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side.
--Aristotle

Most of the ways listed in this thread to fix things require larger federal government you just cant fix things any more with small government there are 300 million Americans and sit back and think about that number that is more people than you could ever meet in your entire life. a large federal government is required to keep order as much as it pains me to say state government is not something we can have any longer. to make america strong we have 50 small governments under one large one if we get rid off the oversight all the things we count on for modern life would be non existent mainly our safety removal of the government is a much larger things than many of you can comprehend

reply to post by lordtyp0


If the tenets of those religions were to have played a large part of our tradition I would see no problem in it. I do not condone any new monuments pertaining to religiousness to be erected, I am solely speaking of monuments we already have in place and for many, have been in place for over a century.

I do understand we need to look at who exactly is pushing ideas and understand that their end game is probably to institute some sort of strict Christian law......this I would not like to see. Freedom to practice how we see fit, in a God(s) or no God(s), is the very nature of life and should be protected at all costs.

reply to post by Dillion


A lot of it has to do with a large power shift to a Central Government. I do not believe people wish to abolish the Federalism part of our system, but rather reign it in. (generally speaking and my own opinion)

Swinging power back to the States in no way weakens us as a Nation.

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by lordtyp0

 

You are speaking more of religious institutions correct? To separate religion, a cultural aspect of a people, from a supposed self-governing people is impossible.

Cannot Man seek their God(s) in way they see fit? Even while maintaining a political position? Thus once in that position they will undoubtedly seek the guidance of their God(s), thus the religious interference will always be a factor in government.

I was meaning more the institutions themselves. I tend to differentiate between "Faith" and "Religion". The former is belief, the latter is membership to an institution much like a Guild or Union. The very fact it will be a factor in the government is IMO part of the reason of three branches and the constitution. To halt any interest in getting too much sway or special laws pushed through. This is the most important reason for neutrality in the supreme court. They are supposed to literally interpret the Constitution and knock down such pro/con laws. I say "Supposed to" but, yeah, we all know how that usually goes.

As you have put: Public School = Government Run = No Religion, but we cannot pick and chose which parts of the First Amendment to follow and ignore the other parts.

Not at all, if it is Government run, it falls under those rules. No for or against. To allow recognition of religion as faith (as opposed to a history or social class) shows a pro slant.

To be able to exercise your first amendment rights means that I shall be allowed to exercise my right to practice my religion freely, without persecution and in a respectful manner while in a public school. If it doesn't interfere with instruction, why does it bother people to hold a prayer session on school grounds?

There is a time and place for everything. You could use that same argument on why married couples should be allowed to copulate on the City Hall steps

The distinction is this in regards to prayer.

The bulk of people are Christian, to discuss Christian values in school, or to pray before a class. Is not only recognition in a pro slant (They would never allow a Satanist to pray openly before class) but it is also an expression of faith.

Whereas a class discussing the Jewish or Islamic holidays: This is a topical discussion. The students do not regard it as spiritual truth. It is just information on how others do things.

Personally I don't agree that such actions should be barred from school grounds, I just don't think it should be allowed in/before class by the school. Consider it a compartmentalization. Time and place for everything. If one is faithful they should not need to wear it on their sleeves.

In the book of Mathew, chapter 6: (paraphrased)Do not be as the hypocrites and pray in the synagogues and streets, when you pray in private, god shall reward you openly.

The public forum is for things that include all the people involved. To allow one group to do special acts requires all groups to do special acts. Before you know it, the whole schoolday is gone.

reply to post by ownbestenemy



I think we should look to the first revolution in order to answer that. But We are in a very sticky situation, there are very few (if any) nations that would help support us during this revolution. I know China might take interest because they want there money, but that would be making a deal with the devil in my book. I think what we should do is hold immediate public elections in order to put leaders in place of the overthrown ones. When we revolted against britain we had the convenience of already having elected officials who worked on our side. We do not have that now, and that is the biggest problem we face. The only people we will have will be Republicans with right-wing agendas corporate backed liberals and Ron Paul. I suppose a proto-government of sorts would have to be put in place in order to manage the military. Leaders would have to step forward from the general public, ideally common everyday people who have actually lived in america, people from all walks of life, middle class, lower class, no class.

Either way things would be a mess since we do not really have another nation we can compare ourselves to or to draw guidance from.

reply to post by lordtyp0


I agree with you and Ill end my side on this: I do not suggest school giving time during instruction hours but merely if a group of students wish to hold a prayer service (regardless of religious affiliation) during non-instructional hours, as in lunch time or right before class, where does the school have the legal authority to stop such an action.

I know we are arguing semantics here and through the back and forth I will say that I believe a lot of our thoughts on the issue are the same.

Thank you for the time and civil discussion!

[edit on 2-1-2010 by ownbestenemy]