It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FortAnthem
Originally posted by evil incarnate
What law are you speaking of? I asked a question about the people who were apparently prevented from praying. What law are you talking about?
*sigh*
Doesn't anyone read the OP anymore?
It was posted right in the OP, please pay attention next time.
I did not call anyone a hypocrite, did I? I also do not recall saying no one had a right to do anything. I am simply asking why a very personal private moment with your savior needs to be a public spectacle?
Originally posted by evil incarnate
Yeah um...the thing is. I read that just fine. I do not see how it has anything to do with anything I asked in my post though so I am asking what that law might be, thanks.
Are you being prevented from praying in church, or better yet in private where you can really concentrate on your thoughts?
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
No one accused you of calling anyone a hypocrite, and if you were careful to read my post you would have understood that I was calling those Christians hypocrites, and certainly Jesus had suggested it was hypocrisy, and I am now advocating hypocrisy, (in terms of suggesting that both Fort Anthem and I go to D.C. and openly pray as Christians), in the name of freedom. Get it?
Originally posted by FortAnthem
OK, I see what you were talking about. There is no law that prevents people from worshiping in church or in private.
The issue here is that the Constitution clearly prohibits the government from restricting religious expression. People shouldn't be force to go hide in the catacombs (figuratively speaking) in order to pray. Being free to express our religion in public is one of the fundamental rights upon which this country was founded.
Just because you feel you have the right to do something, does it mean you should? I would not let a group of people gather in my yard to pray either.
Do you really feel it both should be legal, and seems appropriate to take these things to public buildings where people are trying to do the work of running the country? Would it make more sense to go pray on the steps of your local state run medical center? How about an aircraft carrier? Would these be places you are willing to fight for the right to do something that is really only beneficial when it is sincere and not being used as a political football?
Originally posted by whatukno
Last time I checked there was a separation between church and state.
Last time I checked, you could not block the right of way.
Last time I checked, you still do have the freedom of speech.
Originally posted by FortAnthem
Your yard is YOUR private property. You have every right to tell people not to pray there.
The Supreme Court is PUBLIC PROPERTY. Being as that the Constitution prohibits the government from inhibiting the right of religious expression, it is just and proper to protest that unjust law.
And, no, just because I have a right to do something does not mean that I should do it. It means that the government has no standing to prevent me from acting within my rights whenever I choose to exercise those rights though.
Originally posted by whatukno
Last time I checked there was a separation between church and state.
Last time I checked, you could not block the right of way.
Last time I checked, you still do have the freedom of speech.
Originally posted by FortAnthem
It should definitely be legal, the Constitution clearly states so. Whether it would be appropriate is another matter. I too don't like to see people use their religion for "political football" as you put it. Still, they have the right to do so if they so choose.
The people in the article weren't even trying to make a statement or disrupt anything with their prayers. They mad it a point to say their prayers out of the way and were in no way being disruptive. They were simply praying quietly when the police officer approached and threatened them.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Prove those people were blocking other peoples right of way, and then you will have an argument. Merely assuming a right of way was being blocked is not enough.
You are telling me that you understand Jesus wanted us to pray in private or at least not make it a show. So, you want to defy Jesus to make the point that you have the legal right to defy Jesus?
To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
Just because you feel you have the right to do something, does it mean you should? I would not let a group of people gather in my yard to pray either. When should I be expecting you to come defy Jesus just to protest me?
Is it enough to just assume this cop can read minds and is walking around pin-pointing only people speaking to god in their heads?
The Alliance Defense Fund sent a letter to U.S. Supreme Court officials Thursday that urges them to stop their police officers from prohibiting people from quietly praying outside the court building. Christian teacher Maureen Rigo, her students, and a few adults were told by a court police officer that they must stop praying there because it was against the law.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Originally posted by whatukno
Last time I checked there was a separation between church and state.
Last time I checked, you could not block the right of way.
Last time I checked, you still do have the freedom of speech.
The last time you checked, you must have checked some other source than the Constitution. Separation of Church of State is not a Constitutional mandate, and is a phrase Thomas Jefferson used to politely tell the Danbury Baptists that he would not argue on their behalf in Establshing the Baptist religion in their state.
All I am saying is, if you give that favor to those people talking with their invisible friend, next thing you know, you have to give the Westboro Baptist Church time to scream "God Hates Fags!" to everyone in earshot.
If they were allowed to do that, then it would be establishment of that faith over any other.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
When Jesus fed his followers he would bless the food. Was he being hypocritical in openly thanking God for that food?
When Jesus offered up The Lord's Prayer as the only way to pray, was he not in public?
Jesus was a teacher of the Old Testament, that book offers Ecclesiastes 3:
When it is time to speak, then those who know that time should speak. If that speech is best communicated by prayer, then it should be so. If you declare this a defiance of Jesus, you should also know that Jesus warned against false prophets. If you do not see it as a time to speak, then remain silent. I am not your prophet, or are you mine.
Your yard is your private property, and you have the right to dictate what goes on in your own private property. You do not have the right to dictate what goes on in public, unless what goes on in public is crime.
Praying in public is not a crime. Any statute or ordinance that would declare it so, is in direct defiance of The Constitution for The United States of America, which is The Supreme Law of the Land. Let my open prayer on the steps of The Supreme Court be judged by God, not you, or would you defy Jesus and judge me too?
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
You are making an assumption. The letter posted in the O.P. states:
This letter is merely hearsay, but hearsay is not prima facie evidence it is a lie. Are you privy to some other information that contradicts the statement made in this letter?