• 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!

Gov. urges Oklahomans to pray for rain

SlackMaster said:
There may be people that make this party line distinction, but I did not.

Republican, Democrat, other... doesn't matter to me. If you use your office to promote an event whose sole purpose is to promote religion or a specific religion over another specific religion or non-religion... you're in violation of the establishment clause.
Click to expand...

I know! We were literally TRIPPING over the anti Obama(or any other democrat)/anti-religion threads around here. Its insane sometimes! :roll:
 
VanceMack said:
I know! We were literally TRIPPING over the anti Obama(or any other democrat)/anti-religion threads around here. Its insane sometimes! :roll:
Click to expand...

I've stated three times now that it's a violation of the establishment clause REGARDLESS of party lines.

You're arguing against an argument that I haven't made. I think that's called straw-man fallacy.

The fact that others may be guilty of this special pleading has nothing to do with the argument that I made. It seems to me like, perhaps you don't want to address my arguments and instead are trying distract attention away from that.
 
VanceMack said:
You are talking about Obama...right? I agree...that ****ing cretin actually made religous comments and offered prayers at the national prayer breakfast. Im glad to see so many liberals are finally seeing him for what he is. But oh...how you must despise him so...

Wait...thats not cuz he is black is it? You racist...
Click to expand...

If and when Obama asks American to pray, then you would be comparing apples to apples and I would happily condemn it. As it is, you're reaching and yet again apologizing for the religious right's stupidity. But hey, as you proved so well on the Pray away the Gay thread, that's not virgin territory for you. (no pun intended) The National Prayer Breakfast isn't something I support either by the way. But if Obama prays, he should keep it to himself.

And who was it that brought up race here?

Oh that would be you.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Or you can close a can and mind your own buisness.
Click to expand...

Last time I check, I was a taxpayer. The actions of elected officials are "my business"

And since he has freedom of speech on his side that would be the smartest thing you could do.
Click to expand...

I choose not to bury my head in the sand like you apparently like to do regarding the separation of church and state. Being a blind follower is hardly what I'd consider a "smart thing to do" But hey, lot's of the religious right folks do like to do that..
 
Top Cat said:
If and when Obama asks American to pray, then you would be comparing apples to apples and I would happily condemn it. As it is, you're reaching and yet again apologizing for the religious right's stupidity. But hey, as you proved so well on the Pray away the Gay thread, that's not virgin territory for you. (no pun intended) The National Prayer Breakfast isn't something I support either by the way. But if Obama prays, he should keep it to himself.

And who was it that brought up race here?

Oh that would be you.
Click to expand...
I havent ever apologized for religion...Ive very directly pointed out mindless leftists hypocrisy. That ANYONE is so completely ****ing stupid to get upset over a governor suggesting people pray (and you must have missed the Obama prayer breakfast speech) puts their own bigotry and intolerance on full display. Its sad...pathetic...but also tragically...very common.
 
Top Cat said:
Last time I check, I was a taxpayer. The actions of elected officials are "my business"
Click to expand...

Do you live in OK? Texas? If not then you have no say, or buisness, in what thier gov says or does.

Top Cat said:
I choose not to bury my head in the sand like you apparently like to do regarding the separation of church and state. Being a blind follower is hardly what I'd consider a "smart thing to do" But hey, lot's of the religious right folks do like to do that..
Click to expand...

See, this is what happens when you are new to a forum and start assuming crap about people. I've argued against religion more times on this forum than I have argued for it. As I do support separation of church and state. However seperation of church and state does NOT include a govenor asking people to pray. It only applies to laws being made about religion. Here, read the first amendment again and pay attention to the part that I bold...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

No where in there does it state that politicians cannot talk about religion or ask the people they represent to pray.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Do you live in OK? Texas? If not then you have no say, or buisness, in what thier gov says or does.
Click to expand...

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I live in Texas.

Regardless, to suggest that he can't comment on it, is in my opinion, unfounded. I think they have the right to comment on whatever they want.

Kal'Stang said:
See, this is what happens when you are new to a forum and start assuming crap about people. I've argued against religion more times on this forum than I have argued for it. As I do support separation of church and state. However seperation of church and state does NOT include a govenor asking people to pray. It only applies to laws being made about religion. Here, read the first amendment again and pay attention to the part that I bold...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

No where in there does it state that politicians cannot talk about religion or ask the people they represent to pray.
Click to expand...

This argument was made earlier in the thread and refuted. A law does not have to be made for there to be an establishment clause violation. Think "prayer in school". There is plenty of case law to back this up as well.
 
VanceMack said:
I havent ever apologized for religion...Ive very directly pointed out mindless leftists hypocrisy. That ANYONE is so completely ****ing stupid to get upset over a governor suggesting people pray (and you must have missed the Obama prayer breakfast speech) puts their own bigotry and intolerance on full display. Its sad...pathetic...but also tragically...very common.
Click to expand...

You've said this four times now. Do you think if you try for a fifth time we'll agree with your opinion?
 
VanceMack said:
Yes...the same lame retort to the same mindless...THIS time...by golly THIS time it must be MANMADE!!! We dont care that climate change and drought is a historical occurrence...THIS time...blame the humans!!! :lamo

Every time you post there is like circus music going off in the background.
Click to expand...

The problem I have with this sort of attitude is that it's pretty much exactly the same as those who claim the environmental changes are all due to humans. There's nothing wrong with trying to figure out what sort of impact we have (and it's above 0, below 100) and finding ways to mitigate those effects. Though very likely you'll never get it to zero anyway. I don't really like how this part of science has become political because it starts to distort the science and people start claiming this or that and trying to emphasize or play off certain aspects of the data. Humans are remarkable animals, and in the very short time we've been on this planet we've come to dominate it. Only a fool would say that we don't have an impact on the environment; locally and globally. But there are also long standing climate dynamics as well for we have seen extreme shifts in the earth's climate over long periods of time. So as climate changes, there are components which are natural and components which are man made.

There have been droughts in the past, ice ages too. Weather patterns change, temps change, etc. That doesn't mean that humans can't or have not had an effect.
 
SlackMaster said:
I know this wasn't directed at me, but I live in Texas.

Regardless, to suggest that he can't comment on it, is in my opinion, unfounded. I think they have the right to comment on whatever they want.
Click to expand...

My response to him was because he told others that they should just "STFU". As such its perfectly valid to tell him the same.

SlackMaster said:
This argument was made earlier in the thread and refuted. A law does not have to be made for there to be an establishment clause violation. Think "prayer in school". There is plenty of case law to back this up as well.
Click to expand...

Prayer in schools are allowed so long as it is not done or set up by teachers. I agree with that part. However there is a difference between the two. A school environment is for teaching and as such allowing teachers to give prayer is in effect teaching children about religion. Which effectively foists peoples religion upon others, which violates a persons right to practice a particular religion or to not practice a religion. A govenor asking people to pray is not teaching anyone and as such does not foist anything onto anybody else. All the people have to do with the govenor is to shut off the TV or ignore what he says. A student however is not allowed that luxury.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Prayer in schools are allowed so long as it is not done or set up by teachers. I agree with that part. However there is a difference between the two. A school environment is for teaching and as such allowing teachers to give prayer is in effect teaching children about religion. Which effectively foists peoples religion upon others, which violates a persons right to practice a particular religion or to not practice a religion. A govenor asking people to pray is not teaching anyone and as such does not foist anything onto anybody else. All the people have to do with the govenor is to shut off the TV or ignore what he says. A student however is not allowed that luxury.
Click to expand...

My reason for citing "prayer in schools" was not to equate it to this situation, but to show that government entities do not have to make a law for it to be an establishment clause violation. Schools weren't trying to make a law saying you could pray, but teacher were leading prayer. It was a violation.

This directly refutes the argument that the establishment clause only applies to laws.

I said it before on this thread...

Whether or not you agree with the prayer, whether or not its compulsory or voluntary, whether or not it's a "big deal", whether or not its a teaching environment... doesn't matter.

The only thing that matters is that he's there in an official governmental capacity as "Governor" Rick Perry (not private citizen Rick Perry) for the primary purpose of promoting religion over non-religion and specifically Christianity over other religions.

That is a clear violation of the establishment clause.

I'll agree that the "prayer in schools" situation is a more egregious violation due to the fact that students weren't given a choice, but that doesn't matter. Teachers can't even lead a voluntary prayer.
 
Ikari said:
The problem I have with this sort of attitude is that it's pretty much exactly the same as those who claim the environmental changes are all due to humans. There's nothing wrong with trying to figure out what sort of impact we have (and it's above 0, below 100) and finding ways to mitigate those effects. Though very likely you'll never get it to zero anyway. I don't really like how this part of science has become political because it starts to distort the science and people start claiming this or that and trying to emphasize or play off certain aspects of the data. Humans are remarkable animals, and in the very short time we've been on this planet we've come to dominate it. Only a fool would say that we don't have an impact on the environment; locally and globally. But there are also long standing climate dynamics as well for we have seen extreme shifts in the earth's climate over long periods of time. So as climate changes, there are components which are natural and components which are man made.

There have been droughts in the past, ice ages too. Weather patterns change, temps change, etc. That doesn't mean that humans can't or have not had an effect.
Click to expand...

Except that there is no indication that there HAS, so to pollute yet another thread with the global warming garbage because it MUST be true...thats kinda mindless. Good lord...droughts have occurred throughout history. But...stop the presses...THIS time...its AGW...uh huh!!! It is! And if you dont believe it you dont like science and stuff! Lets spend tons of money we dont have on more research about it.

I dont know how many times that I have said SEPARATE of the AGW debate that we should already be pursuing green energy for cleaner and more efficient power sources. There is absolutely no reason to tard every discussion up with the OHMIGODGLOBALWARMINGWEREALLGONNADIE bull****.
 
It may have an effect on the drought, it may not.

I don't think climate change discussion pertains to this thread.
 
SlackMaster said:
You've said this four times now. Do you think if you try for a fifth time we'll agree with your opinion?
Click to expand...

Was that a response to you? If yet another bigoted and hate-filled intolerant leftist asks me then rest assured I will respond to THAT person in the same way. Of COURSE you wont AGREE with my opinion...you are the ones DOING it.
 
SlackMaster said:
My reason for citing "prayer in schools" was not to equate it to this situation, but to show that government entities do not have to make a law for it to be an establishment clause violation. Schools weren't trying to make a law saying you could pray, but teacher were leading prayer. It was a violation.

This directly refutes the argument that the establishment clause only applies to laws.

I said it before on this thread...

Whether or not you agree with the prayer, whether or not its compulsory or voluntary, whether or not it's a "big deal", whether or not its a teaching environment... doesn't matter.

The only thing that matters is that he's there in an official governmental capacity as "Governor" Rick Perry (not private citizen Rick Perry) for the primary purpose of promoting religion over non-religion and specifically Christianity over other religions.

That is a clear violation of the establishment clause.

I'll agree that the "prayer in schools" situation is a more egregious violation due to the fact that students weren't given a choice, but that doesn't matter. Teachers can't even lead a voluntary prayer.
Click to expand...

I'll think about this.
 
VanceMack said:
Was that a response to you? If yet another bigoted and hate-filled intolerant leftist asks me then rest assured I will respond to THAT person in the same way. Of COURSE you wont AGREE with my opinion...you are the ones DOING it.
Click to expand...

I'm the one doing what exactly?

You're saying that "leftists" keep getting all pissy when Republicans bring up religion, but not when Democrats do.

Please back up this claim that "I'm the one doing it". I've stated FOUR times now... I do not care if it's Republican or Democrat. When a Democrat thread pops up I'll hop in that one and give my two cents.

Regarding THIS THREAD'S topic though...
 
SlackMaster said:
Complaints? Can you be specific? What complaint?

Also, could you be more specific on where you think I'm wrong.

It's a bit difficult for me to respond to a baseless assertion.
Click to expand...

There seems to be a problem here where people do not read their quotes that are in my reply and then wonder what is being discussed. I quoted your complaint in my reply.

Watch. Your quote which was in my reply.

For the record, it's unconstitutional when Obama does it too.
Click to expand...

I quote that and reply: Your complaints will continued to be ignored as you are wrong.

Understand how it works?
 
VanceMack said:
Except that there is no indication that there HAS, so to pollute yet another thread with the global warming garbage because it MUST be true...thats kinda mindless. Good lord...droughts have occurred throughout history. But...stop the presses...THIS time...its AGW...uh huh!!! It is! And if you dont believe it you dont like science and stuff! Lets spend tons of money we dont have on more research about it.

I dont know how many times that I have said SEPARATE of the AGW debate that we should already be pursuing green energy for cleaner and more efficient power sources. There is absolutely no reason to tard every discussion up with the OHMIGODGLOBALWARMINGWEREALLGONNADIE bull****.
Click to expand...

No, there certainly isn't. Between you and scientists, I'm going with scientists. They happen to know a little something something about....science. Go figure.
 
1Perry said:
There seems to be a problem here where people do not read their quotes that are in my reply and then wonder what is being discussed. I quoted your complaint in my reply.

Watch. Your quote which was in my reply.



I quote that and reply: Your complaints will continued to be ignored as you are wrong.

Understand how it works?
Click to expand...

I've got the concept of how the forum works. Thanks for clearing that up.

I didn't see that quote as a complaint though.

com·plaint (km-plnt)
n.
1. An expression of pain, dissatisfaction, or resentment.
2. A cause or reason for complaining; a grievance.
3.
a. A bodily disorder or disease; a malady or ailment.
b. The symptom or distress about which a patient seeks medical assistance.
4. Law
a. The presentation by the plaintiff in a civil action, setting forth the claim on which relief is sought.
b. A formal charge, made under oath, of the commission of a crime or other such offense.
Click to expand...

I guess maybe 4b applies... but not really. Is that what you meant?
 
Ikari said:
No, there certainly isn't. Between you and scientists, I'm going with scientists. They happen to know a little something something about....science. Go figure.
Click to expand...

And the science regarding THIS particular drought as opposed to every OTHER drought...hmmm...

it MUST be AGW...right?
 
Top Cat said:
I most certainly do not want my politicians telling me to pray. Stick to doing your job.
Click to expand...

My Fellow Americans:

Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our Allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.

And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:

Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.

They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest -- until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the violences of war.

For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and goodwill among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.

Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.

And for us at home -- fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas, whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them -- help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.

Many people have urged that I call the nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.

Give us strength, too -- strength in our daily tasks, to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our armed forces.

And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons wheresoever they may be.

And, O Lord, give us faith. Give us faith in Thee; faith in our sons; faith in each other; faith in our united crusade. Let not the keeness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment -- let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogances. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace -- a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen.
Click to expand...

Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum - Our Documents
 
Caine said:
Why don't you guys take this to another thread about "climate change".....
Click to expand...

This is a thread about climate change..................and how some think the solution is prayer.
 
VanceMack said:
And the science regarding THIS particular drought as opposed to every OTHER drought...hmmm...

it MUST be AGW...right?
Click to expand...

I'm just saying. I can go with your hysterics on this issue, or overall data and analysis by scientists. On this case, the scientists are going to win. My main point to you in all this is that your dogma concerning global warming is just as strong and consuming as those you are rallying against. Same coin, different sides.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom