• 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 .
You just don't get it, do you? Or rather, you don't WANT to get it because it's as plain as day to everyone else and it flies in the face of your precious theories. This is like discussing evolution with a Young Earther! :roll:

Since he wasn't the only signatory he is not the only and last source for it's interpretation.

The constitution stands on it's own by it's own words as does every other contract ever written. No ONE signatory of a contract can decide what is and isn't meant by the contract, only the courts have that power.

To top it off, Hamilton, which was also a signatory, interprets it differently - so quit acting like Madison is the one and only source or opinion that matters. Madison wasn't the King of America and he doesn't get to dictate from the grave what the constitution means. Get over it!

Hamilton lived only until 1804 when he was shot to death, ...Madison lived until 1836 and wrote on the Constitution almost to his death, and wrote many pieces of work on it.
 
yes, but taxes are legal, and a law which prevents the physical damage of a person or property before it could happen is legal by statutory law.

example, its against the law to store propane near a source of heat, becuase it could explode and cause damage.

however laws which force me to engage in actions i do not wish to engage in are unlawful.

if i wish to engage in something with is not a right like driving i have to play by the states rules.

but the state mandating my child must receive schooling and taking my tax money to do it, and then teaching them things which are against my beliefs.. thats wrong.

its not different then the schools teaching homosexuality is wrong in the 50's is wrong.

HOME SCHOOL THEM THEN

They take my money to teach kids I didn't bring into this world. I should get my taxes back first.
 
[

this idea that parents should pay taxes to support a public school and then the public schools does things the parents disapprove of, does not sound like the nation of the founders to me.
The fact that i have to pay for public schools and didn't have any children in them is far more abusive.
it does not matter and its not your call to tell something what they must be taught, people can be bigots, racist, or whatever, its not a crime, and no one has the authority to tell another person what to do.
You are right it is not my call, if it was my call parents would teach their children and public schools wouldn't exist. But it's not my call. It's the school districts and states call.

Nobody is taking away your right to be a bigot. If you want to teach your kids that the earth is flat and the sun comes up because a magical dragon drags it through the sky, do it. No law says you can't.

If you go to public school and exist in that environment yes just like traffic people do have the right to tell you what to do in that setting, solution, alternative schooling.
 
HOME SCHOOL THEM THEN

They take my money to teach kids I didn't bring into this world. I should get my taxes back first.

Single people are often used as sources of subsidization for families. Families get all sorts of tax breaks and credits, but all that has to get paid; and it's paid by single people. Even though the families are using disproportionately more of the "public" resources.
 
Single people are often used as sources of subsidization for families. Families get all sorts of tax breaks and credits, but all that has to get paid; and it's paid by single people. Even though the families are using disproportionately more of the "public" resources.

If there is anything unfair to complain about it's that. But i will go one farther. I have a boyfriend we are both men we took in a boy we are a household but can't be called one because two men can't be a household.
 
If there is anything unfair to complain about it's that. But i will go one farther. I have a boyfriend we are both men we took in a boy we are a household but can't be called one because two men can't be a household.

In my world, I'd call you a household, but you'd get no special tax credits or subsidies. Not based on the fact that it wold be a same sex marriage, but on the fact that no marriage will get any special tax credits or subsidies. You had a kid? Good for you, don't expect me to pay for it. How many of the "small government conservative" types would go postal if their subsidies and tax payer hand outs were taken away?

So many of these people are just government dependents, and they don't even know it.
 
then give me my tax money to solve the problem!

Give me mine first. I'm paying for your schools and your parks and all the other public places you are taking your kids and enjoying that I am not going to because it's full of people and their bratty kids. Give me back the tax write offs you have as a family on your mortgage. Give me back all your tax credits for your kids. You're eating other people's lunches and you won't even admit it.
 
The fact that i have to pay for public schools and didn't have any children in them is far more abusive.

You are right it is not my call, if it was my call parents would teach their children and public schools wouldn't exist. But it's not my call. It's the school districts and states call.

Nobody is taking away your right to be a bigot. If you want to teach your kids that the earth is flat and the sun comes up because a magical dragon drags it through the sky, do it. No law says you can't.

If you go to public school and exist in that environment yes just like traffic people do have the right to tell you what to do in that setting, solution, alternative schooling.

america is not a democracy where you get to determine the rights of other people, ....be it you , or the state.
 
Give me mine first. I'm paying for your schools and your parks and all the other public places you are taking your kids and enjoying that I am not going to because it's full of people and their bratty kids. Give me back the tax write offs you have as a family on your mortgage. Give me back all your tax credits for your kids. You're eating other people's lunches and you won't even admit it.

difference........my money is taxed from me, and i am commanded to send my child to an institution i am paying for, which is doing me a disservice by promoting things from there point of morality[ which they dont have the authority to teach] to children i dont believe in.

so my tax money is being used against me...is the park or things you name being used against you...no!
 
difference........my money is taxed from me, and i am commanded to send my child to an institution i am paying for, which is doing me a disservice by promoting things from there point of morality[ which they dont have the authority to teach] to children i dont believe in.

so my tax money is being used against me...is the park or things you name being used against you...no!

My money is taxed from me and I am commanded to send YOUR child to an institution I am paying for, which is doing me a disservice by promoting things from your point of morality that I have to pay for your kids. My money is taxes from me and used to subsidize tax breaks on married couple's mortgages, forcing me to pay more while couples can write off taxes. My money is taxed from me to provide entertainment for you and your kids, I provide for the parks and the roads you use more than me and the infrastructure necessary to support your family, etc.

You're eating my lunch, only you don't have the balls to admit it. You just want to sit there and bitch about other people eating your lunch, but you're more than happy to help yourself to mine.
 
difference........my money is taxed from me, and i am commanded to send my child to an institution i am paying for, which is doing me a disservice by promoting things from there point of morality[ which they dont have the authority to teach] to children i dont believe in.

so my tax money is being used against me...is the park or things you name being used against you...no!

One example - I'm not allowed (as an adult) in public playgrounds around where I live. If I want to enter I need to be accompanied by a child. My tax dollars paid for that, yet I'm barred from going in at 6am when nobody is there and doing some chin ups on the monkey bars.
 
then give me my tax money to solve the problem!

Give me mine back first, I didn't have a kid in school for 19 years of my tax paying life. then we will consider giving yours back. And the only reason you are going to let your kids be educated with something you don't approve of is over some pretty money.

Forget it, we will save homeschooling for people that care about their kids more than their money.

How petty
 
My money is taxed from me and I am commanded to send YOUR child to an institution I am paying for, which is doing me a disservice by promoting things from your point of morality that I have to pay for your kids. My money is taxes from me and used to subsidize tax breaks on married couple's mortgages, forcing me to pay more while couples can write off taxes. My money is taxed from me to provide entertainment for you and your kids, I provide for the parks and the roads you use more than me and the infrastructure necessary to support your family, etc.

You're eating my lunch, only you don't have the balls to admit it. You just want to sit there and bitch about other people eating your lunch, but you're more than happy to help yourself to mine.

is your tax money being used against you....to do things which you find offensive?

if i pay taxes for build a public building, and i am told i myself cannot enter it.......that is using my money against me.

government cannot use my tax money for things which are against me, and please to not give me the war argument.
 
Give me mine back first, I didn't have a kid in school for 19 years of my tax paying life. then we will consider giving yours back. And the only reason you are going to let your kids be educated with something you don't approve of is over some pretty money.

Forget it, we will save homeschooling for people that care about their kids more than their money.

How petty


that money is not against you, are they teaching homosexuality is wrong.........that would be against you, and you would have a right to your money.
 
is your tax money being used against you....to do things which you find offensive?

Yes. I find it offensive that lazy jerks can't raise their own kids and insist I pay their way.

if i pay taxes for build a public building, and i am told i myself cannot enter it.......that is using my money against me.

What am I using a public school for? I have a PhD, I've done all the schooling there is. I don't need it, I don't use it, but you demand I pay for your kids. Get a job, quit eating my lunch.

government cannot use my tax money for things which are against me, and please to not give me the war argument.

Why not? The War on Terror, the War on Drugs, the War on Poverty, etc. have all robbed me of money and freedom. But I can't bring that up? Why, because you want more of my lunch? Takes a village indeed, you want to rally against that but you insist that I pay your way. You insist that I invest my sweat into your well being. Talk about offensive. I think you should take that "libertarian" lean off right away because you obviously have no idea what it means when you are willing to take MY lunch for your needs. Socialists....sometimes they don't even know they're socialists.
 
All municipalities (towns,counties,states,etc) that I'm aware of grant religious institutions exemptions from any local property taxes. So, in effect, the people in the towns where they're located basically subsidize these religious institutions regardless of whether they spread teachings which agree or disagree with the actual taxpayers that subsidize their existence. Should those taxpayers have a say in these instituions' teachings? I mean, they help pay for their continued existence. Maybe some are 'working against' me, yet they still get the exemption which means MY taxes funding someone else's moral ideals.
 
america is not a democracy where you get to determine the rights of other people, ....be it you , or the state.

nether is a public school you play in their yard you play by their rules. Of you don't like it quit crying about your tax dollars because mine go to the same place and I can't get them back, and get off of you behind, get a higher paying job, buy a used car, live on Bologna and white bread live in a more affordable home, get a second job.

Otherwise i see you as lazy. You can do it, you just don't want to. Truth is you want the school to bend to your will. Ever think that the people of the state want that to be part of education?

If you don't want your k kids taught in public schools get them the hell out of it. If the only reason you keep them there is to "get your moneys worth" out of your tax dollars, then you don't really care about the curriculum. You are more concerned with money than your children.

I adopted a boy, my lovers little brother. He was thirteen when he came to stay with me. I put a roof over his head and food in his stomach, most importantly love and happiness in his heart. I can't claim him as a dependent because my lover and I are both male. I can't claim that my house is a homestead even though it is, because the state won't let us. That includes a desperately needed couple of hundred dollars of tax breaks. On top of that after a long day of dealing with drunk retards I make the time to explain to my boy that the school is full of **** on some things.

That is a penniless solution to this problem, out just requires you to give a damn. Father hood is the most important job you have, it comes first no matter what.

So I don't care that you can't get your reduced property taxes back, because I am paying for my kid and your kid. You are k just paying for part of your kid. (in Texas) and you don't care enough about your most important job to take the time to educate your kids. I guess that brand new SUV is more important, or that big screen television or whatever pointless crap gets in the way.
 
I can't claim him as a dependent because my lover and I are both male.

Clax, that should be no impediment to ONE of you claiming him as dependent. Children have single fathers regularly. (Sometimes if there's been a divorce, it's agreed which spouse will take the exemption for the child) If you provide >50% financial support, you're entitled. Check out the Member of Household or Relationship Test - sounds like you'd qualify.

I don't know the exact circumstances, so if I'm out of line, apologies.

Yeah, yeah - - WAAAY off topic as well.
 
that money is not against you, are they teaching homosexuality is wrong.........that would be against you, and you would have a right to your money.

No i wouldn't have the right to it. I have the right not to be imprisoned for paying my taxes. Money isn't being used against you of they teach your kid that homosexuality is okay, that helps you. Your kids will grow up leaving behind out dated biases.that is a good thing.

But never the less you can always take your kids out of school. Then that money wouldn't be used against you. You would be in the position I am in.
 
No i wouldn't have the right to it. I have the right not to be imprisoned for paying my taxes. Money isn't being used against you of they teach your kid that homosexuality is okay, that helps you. Your kids will grow up leaving behind out dated biases.that is a good thing.

But never the less you can always take your kids out of school. Then that money wouldn't be used against you. You would be in the position I am in.

this is total BS on your part.

in the 50's they taught homosexuality was wrong, and if they were still teaching it today, you would be outraged.....however becuase they are not and the wheel has turned in your favor, and they are teaching that its normal to other people who now feel outraged, your opinion is, screw them, i dont care if they are outraged, as long as i get what i want.

and you know what , thats normal, becuase everyone anyways wants things to there advantage, no matter so ever else is at a loss.
 
Clax, that should be no impediment to ONE of you claiming him as dependent. Children have single fathers regularly. (Sometimes if there's been a divorce, it's agreed which spouse will take the exemption for the child) If you provide >50% financial support, you're entitled. Check out the Member of Household or Relationship Test - sounds like you'd qualify.

I don't know the exact circumstances, so if I'm out of line, apologies.

Yeah, yeah - - WAAAY off topic as well.

I appreciate your help. Being that Evan (my lover) was his older brother he could use that sanguin relationship to attain guardianship, that took several months. It was hard on the boy. He had just lost everything. But i looked into becoming a foster parent, i could get money for that, takes a long time to set up. He is going to be 15 in a month, he can be emancipated at that point, then i can claim him as a minor dependent and say my home is a safe haven for neglected youth. That is almost as good as a foster home. Plus it takes the monkey off our backs about worrying if something were to happen to Evan.
 
I appreciate your help. Being that Evan (my lover) was his older brother he could use that sanguin relationship to attain guardianship, that took several months. It was hard on the boy. He had just lost everything. But i looked into becoming a foster parent, i could get money for that, takes a long time to set up. He is going to be 15 in a month, he can be emancipated at that point, then i can claim him as a minor dependent and say my home is a safe haven for neglected youth. That is almost as good as a foster home. Plus it takes the monkey off our backs about worrying if something were to happen to Evan.


Good luck with everything. Seriously.
 
this is total BS on your part.

in the 50's they taught homosexuality was wrong, and if they were still teaching it today, you would be outraged.....however becuase they are not and the wheel has turned in your favor, and they are teaching that its normal to other people who now feel outraged, your opinion is, screw them, i dont care if they are outraged, as long as i get what i want.

and you know what , thats normal, becuase everyone anyways wants things to there advantage, no matter so ever else is at a loss.

This post would be of value of you lost anything. You don't. There is nothing wrong with teaching kids that bring gay is okay, just like there is no harm in teaching that it's okay to worship Buda.

The problem is that you think it's wrong, fine, think it's wrong, HOME SCHOOL . I am sorry you can't have your cake and eat it also. Teaching kids that something like homosexuality is wrong is about like teaching that religion is wrong. You should be outraged what if your kid was gay?

Yes it is in my favor, but if they were teaching that it was wrong to be a evangelical nut job I would have a problem with that.
 
Back
Top Bottom