• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

Which is more crucial


  • Total voters
    40
  • Poll closed .
Been thinking about this, (have not been reading the thread, mind you... not that interested), and the only way the OP makes ANY sense is if he is asking this: "Would it be cool to use the coercive might of government to suppress religion in the name of societal evolution?"

IE a Totalitarian/Authoritarian/Fascist like repression of religion, punishing people for believing or speaking of it.


The only answer any true American could give: "Oh HELL no!!"












 
But you don't tell how anyone can measure the system to obtain proof. I got a voltmeter, some probes, and an oscilloscope. What can I measure that proves gods?
Your level of faith. Got some?

Your knowledge base is corrupt. Defrag and try again.
You're not a computer. Stop trying to be one.
 
I don't know who you are referring to when you say "people."

In general, humans, i.e. YOU. Did that really have to be explained?
 
i am against government using force also.

But your link was about school curriculum. Teaching children that gay people are normal is not force. Home school your kids take them to private school, move to a different school district. There are three ways around it, now of your kid was mandatedto learn this regardless of your choice of school that would be force.

You choose to put your kids in public school, nothing at all regarding school curriculum is force. If you feel that strongly about it home school.

if school would teach being gay is not a crime, and that being gay does not mean a person is bad, ..that's fine.

However for a school in tell children, that homosexuality is fine and good, conflicts with other teachings which the child may have received.

Why is the school undermining other teachings...my point is the schools should not be engaged in such activity at all ...its not governments place.

The other avenues you mentioned are fine, and solve the problem, however the state will not give the parents there tax money, and mandate their children attend public schools.
 
Last edited:
Your tools aren't faith. Try again.

Indeed they aren't. My tools are voltmeters and oscilloscopes and atoms and light and spectroscopy and a plethora of other devices for measurement. So where is your measurable value. Proof is in the measurement.
 
you're still just ranting. The trouble with not being a scholar is that you only have a superficial understanding. I gave you good information. You should read it.

that's all you have?........i see, nothing in your court thats supports you argument.

Again for you....... Education is not a delegated power listed in the constitution, your fantasy land ideas, of government can do as it will is ridiculous, and it looks bad for you showing you don't know the constitution.
 
In general, humans, i.e. YOU. Did that really have to be explained?

For sometime who claims to be intelligent you sure do jump to stupid conclusions an awful lot. I read doodle's nonsense, dismissed it for being nonsense and explained the stupidity in your question.

Two occasions I have made a single post to you and you became extremely rude.
Are you really so petty?... Wait dint answer that, I heard all your nonsense and posturing before, when it comes to religion I am your superior.
 
For sometime who claims to be intelligent you sure do jump to stupid conclusions an awful lot. I read doodle's nonsense, dismissed it for being nonsense and explained the stupidity in your question.

Two occasions I have made a single post to you and you became extremely rude.
Are you really so petty?... Wait dint answer that, I heard all your nonsense and posturing before, when it comes to religion I am your superior.

I have a low tolerance for stupid. You should know this by now.
 
Indeed they aren't.
Very good, Ikari! You're beginning to see already! ;)

My tools are voltmeters and oscilloscopes and atoms and light and spectroscopy and a plethora of other devices for measurement.
My tools are just faith and scriptures. See how difficult you're trying to make this?

So where is your measurable value. Proof is in the measurement.
It's in my daily activities. We were put here to love God and keep His commandments. Which tool do you use to measure your love and obedience, a voltmeter?
 
that's all you have?........i see, nothing in your court thats supports you argument.

Again for you....... Education is not a delegated power listed in the constitution, your fantasy land ideas, of government can do as it will is ridiculous, and it looks bad for you showing you don't know the constitution.

I can see you have read the link close enough. But maybe you'll do better with the next links:

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution granted Congress the power to lay and collect taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States. It is under this “general welfare” clause that the federal government has assumed the power to initiate educational activity in its own right and to participate jointly with states, agencies and individuals in educational activities.

http://www.lwv.org/content/history-...on-where-have-we-been-and-how-did-we-get-here

The U.S. Constitution and Education.
Levin, Betsy
1986-Apr
Although education is primarily a state function, its importance to our society makes it fertile ground for litigation. The Constitution--by authorizing the Congress to enact legislation--constrains and prescribes what happens in schools. Legislative histories, especially since the early 1960s, are outlined here. The major topics include: constitutional limits on the inculcation of religious, political, and moral values; freedom of expression for teachers and students in the school environment; the free exercise of religion; the requirements of fair procedures in the school environment; and the obligation to provide equal educational opportunity. (BZ)

http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED270346
 
Last edited:
if school would teach being gay is not a crime, and that being gay does not mean a person is bad, ..that's fine.
Just as long as they dint use the word normal?, same thing.
However for a school in tell children, that homosexuality is fine and good, conflicts with other teachings which the child may have received.
So what that teachings conflict, if you don't have the ability to tell your kids that the school is wrong put them in private school.
Why is the school undermining other teachings...my point is the schools should not be engaged in such activity at all ...its not governments place.
Schools aren't undermining anything. What activity are you talking about? The schools are operated by the government.
The other avenues you mentioned are fine, and solve the problem, however the state will not give the parents there tax money, and mandate their children attend public schools.
No government can't mandate you attend public school. I had to pay taxes for the 35 years I had no children in school. Everybody pays taxes.
 
Very good, Ikari! You're beginning to see already! ;)

My tools are just faith and scriptures. See how difficult you're trying to make this?

It's in my daily activities. We were put here to love God and keep His commandments. Which tool do you use to measure your love and obedience, a voltmeter?

Faith and scriptures are not proof, those are wishful thinking. You said proof, proof means measurement. I want the measurement. You got it, or can you admit to your fib?
 
You don't tolerate yourself? That is an issue you may need a shrunk to resolve.

A "shrink"? Maybe, but I'll have to wait till you're done.
 
Faith and scriptures are not proof, those are wishful thinking.
So are "voltmeters and oscilloscopes and atoms and light and spectroscopy and a plethora of other devices for measurement" unless you know how to use them. I don't know how to use those things, so they're just wishful thinking. Do you know how to use faith and scriptures?

You said proof, proof means measurement. I want the measurement. You got it, or can you admit to your fib?
You don't have the right tools to gauge my faith and obedience. How can I help you when you have the wrong equipment?
 
So are "voltmeters and oscilloscopes and atoms and light and spectroscopy and a plethora of other devices for measurement" unless you know how to use them. I don't know how to use those things, so they're just wishful thinking. Do you know how to use faith and scriptures?

You don't have the right tools to gauge my faith and obedience. How can I help you when you have the wrong equipment?

I know that things people claimed to have happen thousands of years ago without proper proof or documentation cannot be shown beyond the fiction they represent. Do you have a measurement, or do you have no proof. That's it.
 
I can see you have read the link close enough. But maybe you'll do better with the next links:

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution granted Congress the power to lay and collect taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States. It is under this “general welfare” clause that the federal government has assumed the power to initiate educational activity in its own right and to participate jointly with states, agencies and individuals in educational activities.

The History Of Federal Government In Public Education: Where Have We Been And How Did We Get Here? | League of Women Voters

The U.S. Constitution and Education.
Levin, Betsy
1986-Apr
Although education is primarily a state function, its importance to our society makes it fertile ground for litigation. The Constitution--by authorizing the Congress to enact legislation--constrains and prescribes what happens in schools. Legislative histories, especially since the early 1960s, are outlined here. The major topics include: constitutional limits on the inculcation of religious, political, and moral values; freedom of expression for teachers and students in the school environment; the free exercise of religion; the requirements of fair procedures in the school environment; and the obligation to provide equal educational opportunity. (BZ)

ERIC - Education Resources Information Center

a minute ago you wanted to use the 14th...now its back to article 1 section 8 again.

the general welfare is the 18 powers of congress.

“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” – James Madison in letter to James Robertson

“[Congressional jurisdiction of power] is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any.” – James Madison, Federalist 14

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined . . . to be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” – James Madison, Federalist 45

If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.” – James Madison, 1792

“The Constitution allows only the means which are ‘necessary,’ not those which are merely ‘convenient,’ for effecting the enumerated powers. If such a latitude of construction be allowed to this phrase as to give any non-enumerated power, it will go to every one, for there is not one which ingenuity may not torture into a convenience in some instance or other, to some one of so long a list of enumerated powers. It would swallow up all the delegated powers, and reduce the whole to one power, as before observed” – Thomas Jefferson, 1791

“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1798

There you have it. James Madison, the Constitution’s author and Thomas Jefferson the author of the Declaration of Independence, specifically say that Congressional powers are to be limited and defined – unlike most modern interpretations!

Admittedly, Jefferson and Madison were not our only Founders. These two were strict constitutionalists who feared the potential strength of any government. So let’s look at another Founder’s opinion—Alexander Hamilton who historically saw it in a somewhat looser vain.

“This specification of particulars [the 18 enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8] evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 83

Hamilton uncategorically states that all congressional powers are enumerated and that the very existence of these enumerations alone makes any belief that Congress has full and general legislative power to act as it desires nonsensical. If such broad congressional power had been the original intent, the constitutionally specified powers would have been worthless. In other words, why even enumerate any powers at all if the General Welfare clause could trump them?

“No legislative act … contrary to the Constitution can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 78

In short, Hamilton tells us that since the powers of Congress are enumerated and limit Congress to those powers, any assumed authority outside those specified that don’t have a direct relation to those explicit powers must be contrary to the Constitution and therefore — unconstitutional.
 
I know that things people claimed to have happen thousands of years ago without proper proof or documentation cannot be shown beyond the fiction they represent. Do you have a measurement, or do you have no proof. That's it.

Listen again

THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS
For someone who has a low tolerance for stupid, you engage in it a lot.

Maybe if I use big capital letters you will quit asking for stupid things such as measurements for God.
FAITH REQUIRES NO MEASUREMENTS.
 
Listen again

THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS THERE IS NO MEASUREMENTS
For someone who has a low tolerance for stupid, you engage in it a lot.

Maybe if I use big capital letters you will quit asking for stupid things such as measurements for God.
FAITH REQUIRES NO MEASUREMENTS.

Well someone needs their meds. I think you've stumbled upon my point finally. There is no measurement to faith, and there is no knowledge of it either because there can be no measurement. There is only wishful thinking. Thanks for finally catching on, even if you had to do so in a manner befitting a 16 year old spoiled girl who didn't get the color BMW she wanted for her sweet 16.

:roll:
 
I know that things people claimed to have happen thousands of years ago without proper proof or documentation cannot be shown beyond the fiction they represent. Do you have a measurement, or do you have no proof. That's it.
How do you know those claims are fiction?
 
How do you know those claims are fiction?

They cannot be proven, ergo I can only assume them to be fiction till such point that you can prove them. But the point is you said proof, not I, and it is that proof I am looking for you to demonstrate.
 
Back
Top Bottom