Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by HallGator, Dec 13, 2013.
Christianity as it is a Christian symbol.
That's not what I'm asking
What are you asking?
I asked six exactly what religion is the state sanctioning.
I don't think six is online now. As for me, I don't think the cross should be removed. It's a lovely thing; I've seen it up close and personal. But its presence is seen by some as government endorsement of Christianity. I understand and can appreciate their contention but don't agree with it. Sometimes these rulings go too far.
Wikipedia has got you covered. I was wrong...it's not Hinduism. Turns out it's this little known religion called "Christianity". But honestly, since it's obviously such an obsucre symbol (I mean neither you or I knew right?), I don't see what the big deal is.
"Legislating from the bench" mainly boils down to those whose rulings are against the person making the clam. Both sides do it.
Exactly. Like 'political correctness' it's just a synonym for 'stuff i don't like.'
Government already endorses Planned Parenthooding, who are about as religious as you can get.
That is why I said I wish it was on Federal land... Yes, I read the highlighted part.
Christianity covers a plethora of religions, so again when you've got this figured out let me know.
Good grief, such ridiculous nitpicking.
Every denomination of Christianity recognizes the cross as the signature symbol of their religious faith. It's likely you were attempting to pressure fastsix to substitute 'faith' or 'relationship' for 'religion' but each word is acceptable. Use the one you prefer but as the links above illustrate, Christianity is, indeed - a religion.
Courts errect a false world by removing religious icons.
I'm afraid you're incorrect lacuna and have been absorbed into the progressive abyss. You might want to look into why exactly this amendment confirmed into our constitution. I'll say it again, our government is not sanctioning a state religion. This judge I guilty of practicing progressivism from the bench.
"This judge I guilty"? Do you ever proof read, gatorman?
You disengenuously inquired what 'religion' the cross symbolized.
You got an answer that you didn't like, replying "Christianity covers a plethora of religions."
I came back with a post that included multiple illustrations that Christianity is indeed, a religion. That you didn't like the answer doesn't make the answer "incorrect.'
I don't think you want to participate in a reasonable discussion as it seems many of your posts are not much more than contentious obfuscating snipes.
seems a bit silly, but put it on private lands
and you can keep your insurance...
LMAO..I received no answer at all. In terms of proof reading, I simply don't have the time on my hands that you have. I'm still waiting to hear something remotely logical to justify the activism that's taking place on the bench. Obviously you can't provide it.
You've shown no proof that the activism exists other than your disagreeing with the ruling.
Geez , the ruling is a smack in the face of activism. Maybe you should do a little research on this Judge to find out about his activism. He's a progressive hack.