• 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!

Is the Bladensburg Cross Unconstitutional?

prometeus said:
A hypocrite asshole who broke the law.
Click to expand...

You'd have a lot stronger argument if he was the only Baker in the area; he wasn't.

A Baker refuses to serve certain customers. Actually, that's not even true, the Baker refuses to decorate a cake a certain design that one of his customers demanded. He was more than willing to sell them a cake. He was more than willing to sell them a decorated cake, just not decorated the way that particular customer wanted.

For this he was targeted for political purposes and destroyed for political purposes. Because he was a practicing Christian and didn't refuse to serve a customer, he refused to decorate a cake in a particular way.

So I can go and demand a Hollywood screen play writer to write a Christian themed and Christian oriented screen play, and he has to comply?
He as to do it?

Freedom of speech.
Do you have a real example of just lies?
Click to expand...

What does the left when it has the opportunity to support free speech, freedom of expression?

Judge: Bars are allowed to throw out Trump supporters - New York Post
https://nypost.com/2018/04/.../judge-bars-are-allowed-to-throw-out-trump-supporters/
Apr 25, 2018 - And you need to leave right now because we won't serve you!” Piatek claims the staff of The Happiest Hour on West 10th Street told him after ...
​

The example of the bar, the example of the Covington Catholic high school student, these weren't examples of free speech? Examples of Freedom of Expression? Really?

Or those rights now only reserved for the free speech the left agrees with; only for the expressions that the left agree with?
All others need be repressed, stamped out; punished?

Sorry, but the political left has become duplicitous, hypocritical abusive a**holes, using political power, 'fake news' politically biased, leftist pushing news media and social media and those raft of useful idiots (including those Celebutards in Hollyweird) to punish those who have the temerity to disagree with them; to have a differing opinion or political position, and it is clearly a fascistic tyranny in its nature.
And I'm to then believe all the claims that its the political right that's all what's wrong with the country? :lamo:lamo:lamo
 
eohrnberger said:
You'd have a lot stronger argument if he was the only Baker in the area; he wasn't.
Click to expand...
Quote so what? He is the one you brought up and he is the asshole that broke the law.

the example of the Covington Catholic high school student
Click to expand...
Another asshole and nobody stopped him.

And I'm to then believe all the claims that its the political right that's all what's wrong with the country?
Click to expand...
Oh no, being an asshole is something share by all kinds of people. The problem is that you believe that so called conservatives are never assholes and are the embodiment of virtue and righteousness. Good luck with that delusion.
 
prometeus said:
Quote so what? He is the one you brought up and he is the asshole that broke the law.

Another asshole and nobody stopped him.

Oh no, being an asshole is something share by all kinds of people. The problem is that you believe that so called conservatives are never assholes and are the embodiment of virtue and righteousness. Good luck with that delusion.
Click to expand...
Well, you are right, there are assholes on all sides. But it's only the liberals who want to enshrine their form of assholism as public policy, and then enforce it with the government gun. Funny, I was just thinking of the long and deep history of the Democratic party and the KKK. Seems history dies repeat itself, in slightly different forms.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
eohrnberger said:
Well, you are right, there are assholes on all sides. But it's only the liberals who want to enshrine their form of assholism as public policy, and then enforce it with the government gun. Funny, I was just thinking of the long and deep history of the Democratic party and the KKK. Seems history dies repeat itself, in slightly different forms.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Funny how silly memes I see on the internets prompts me into doing a bit of research. Then what do I find here on DP? Another case of historical ignorance that is clung to because it fits certain political beliefs.

The conflation of the Dems with the Klan is just another effort to change history by those who are today acting more like the Klan than their denigrated opponents.
Actual historical facts tell us that during the 1920s, the decade when the Klan reached its peak membership, both Dems and Reps were members. It depended upon the location, with the Klan we think of today in the Dem-controlled South. However, in the Midwest where there were large numbers of immigrant Catholics and Jews, the Klan was Republican.

Today, we think of the Klan as being primarily racist but in the 1920s, anti-Catholicism and anti-Semitism were just as important in the ideology of the group as racism.

By 1930, the Klan claimed to have 11 governors, 16 senators and as many as 75 congressmen —roughly split between Republicans and Democrats.
I am not excusing the racism of many Democrats during this period by playing the WHATABOUT game. I AM trying to provide a bit of context to the efforts of one side to attack their opponents even though the attackers are just as guilty.

Its initial successes in state and local elections prompted the Klan to turn its attention toward the White House in 1924. Its imperial wizard, Hiram W. Evans, first descended on Cleveland, where Republicans had gathered to nominate Calvin Coolidge. There, about 60 Klan leaders and lobbyists prevailed upon party officials to smother a resolution condemning the Klan before it ever went to a floor vote, a move called a “brilliant victory” by The Fiery Cross, a Klan newspaper in Indianapolis that also described the Republican convention as having a “real, genuine Klan atmosphere.”

Emboldened by its success in Cleveland, Klan leaders appeared two weeks later at the Democratic convention in New York City. There was great support for the Klan among many state delegations, but bitter opposition from others. The conflict was exacerbated by the party’s hopeless division over Prohibition, with the “wet” wing of the party hoping to nominate New York Gov. Al Smith, a Catholic.

Unlike in Cleveland, however, the KKK confronted vigorous pushback at the Democratic convention, first in a raucous debate over whether to condemn the Klan by name (a resolution to do so lost by a razor-thin margin amid numerous last-minute vote changes) and then in a bitter fight over the presidential nomination itself, in which both the Klan and anti-Klan candidates ultimately withdrew.
Click to expand...

Bad history means we often repeat the mistakes of the past, simply because we don't know of those misdeeds.
 
Somerville said:
Funny how silly memes I see on the internets prompts me into doing a bit of research. Then what do I find here on DP? Another case of historical ignorance that is clung to because it fits certain political beliefs.

The conflation of the Dems with the Klan is just another effort to change history by those who are today acting more like the Klan than their denigrated opponents.
Actual historical facts tell us that during the 1920s, the decade when the Klan reached its peak membership, both Dems and Reps were members. It depended upon the location, with the Klan we think of today in the Dem-controlled South. However, in the Midwest where there were large numbers of immigrant Catholics and Jews, the Klan was Republican.

Today, we think of the Klan as being primarily racist but in the 1920s, anti-Catholicism and anti-Semitism were just as important in the ideology of the group as racism.

By 1930, the Klan claimed to have 11 governors, 16 senators and as many as 75 congressmen —roughly split between Republicans and Democrats.
I am not excusing the racism of many Democrats during this period by playing the WHATABOUT game. I AM trying to provide a bit of context to the efforts of one side to attack their opponents even though the attackers are just as guilty.



Bad history means we often repeat the mistakes of the past, simply because we don't know of those misdeeds.
Click to expand...
Fair. Dems and Reps were represented in the KKK.

However, all the lefists screaming racism accusations at their political opponents just sounds more and more like accusing others of what they themselves are doing.

Given the most recent revelations from the Virginia govonor office, not so easily dismissed out of hand anymore.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Somerville said:
Is a cross a purely Christian symbol when it is used as a fallen veteran memorial? The SCOTUS will be making a decision on this matter in the next couple weeks.



Reasons offered by the American Humanist Assn.


All quotes from [URL="https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2019/01/31/heres-why-the-supreme-court-must-say-the-bladensburg-cross-is-unconstitutional/]Here’s Why the Supreme Court Must Say the Bladensburg Cross Is Unconstitutional[/URL]
Click to expand...

And perhaps next we can chisel off the Christian Crosses, Stars of David and Islamic Crescents off the gravestones of Arlington National Cemetery. I am an atheist, but I cannot for the life of me see how these symbols present any harm to anyone or present any form of imposition nothing on non-Christians. I think this so-called "humanist" organization should leave them alone.
 
eohrnberger said:
But it's only the liberals who want to enshrine their form of assholism as public policy
Click to expand...
You mean like letting everyone make their own decisions?

Funny, I was just thinking of the long and deep history of the Democratic party and the KKK.
Click to expand...
The result of lack of education and falling for talking points. Here is a clue, it is not the name that matters. Those assholes were bigot conservatives, much like the ones you are defending now.
 
Felis Leo said:
And perhaps next we can chisel off the Christian Crosses, Stars of David and Islamic Crescents off the gravestones of Arlington National Cemetery. I am an atheist, but I cannot for the life of me see how these symbols present any harm to anyone or present any form of imposition nothing on non-Christians. I think this so-called "humanist" organization should leave them alone.
Click to expand...

See post #50. There is a difference between a gravestone dedicated to an individual and a large monument supposedly intended to commemorate ALL who fell during a war.

For some reason, I doubt your claim of being an atheist.
 
Somerville said:
See post #50. There is a difference between a gravestone dedicated to an individual and a large monument supposedly intended to commemorate ALL who fell during a war.

For some reason, I doubt your claim of being an atheist.
Click to expand...

Doubt away, Somerville. I do not see the harm inflicted upon non-believers (whether atheists or non-Christians) by this cultural totem remaining in place. I am an atheist, not a vampire. Crosses in plain sight do not scare me.
 
eohrnberger said:
The left's continue effort to destroy the Christian religion.
Click to expand...

Much respect to anyone that tries to destroy any organized idiocy.

He is an idea, just get rid of the ridiculous God thing and call it a social club.

All are then better off.
 
prometeus said:
Quote so what? He is the one you brought up and he is the asshole that broke the law.

Another asshole and nobody stopped him.

Oh no, being an asshole is something share by all kinds of people. The problem is that you believe that so called conservatives are never assholes and are the embodiment of virtue and righteousness. Good luck with that delusion.
Click to expand...

People should be free to be assholes without the government putting a gun to their heads.
Or do you believe that only people who agree with you, ones that reflect the same talking points, political and social positions as you, these are the only ones allowed to have freedoms?

I think Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung ran their countries along similar lines.
 
noonereal said:
Much respect to anyone that tries to destroy any organized idiocy.

He is an idea, just get rid of the ridiculous God thing and call it a social club.

All are then better off.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't a more appropriate response be to allow people to practice their religion in peace?
I kinda thought that there was a founding document of this country that spoke to that, and in fact guaranteed that right.

Or do you believe that only people who agree with you, ones that reflect the same talking points, political and social positions as you, these are the only ones allowed to have freedoms?

I think Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung ran their countries along similar lines.
 
eohrnberger said:
Or do you believe that only people who agree with you, ones that reflect the same talking points, political and social positions as you, these are the only ones allowed to have freedoms?
Click to expand...

There is fact and speculation. There is no believing make believe.

It's 2018, we know much more today than we knew in 1776. We need to march forward not be frozen in the less enlightened past.
 
prometeus said:
You mean like letting everyone make their own decisions?

The result of lack of education and falling for talking points. Here is a clue, it is not the name that matters. Those assholes were bigot conservatives, much like the ones you are defending now.
Click to expand...

Of course ignoring the fact that the left has its fair share of 'assholes and bigots'.
How convenient for you, and your pre-packaged, approved talking points and narratives. :roll:
 
eohrnberger said:
People should be free to be assholes without the government putting a gun to their heads.
Click to expand...
And many if not most are as long as they do not affect others. TRhe bakes is a special one.

Or do you believe that only people who agree with you, ones that reflect the same talking points, political and social positions as you, these are the only ones allowed to have freedoms?
Click to expand...
Spare me the idiocy. Freedom is only freedom if no one else is affected.

I think Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung ran their countries along similar lines.
Click to expand...
You have no clue what you are babbling about.
 
eohrnberger said:
Of course ignoring the fact that the left has its fair share of 'assholes and bigots'.
Click to expand...
Nice bull crap deflection. If was just in your previous reply that you agreed with my point that assholes exist among all people. Aren't you even capable of keeping track of what you say?
 
RobertU said:
Did the pagans use a cross or a crucifix as a symbol? The crucifix has an elongated central bar. A mere cross is completely symmetrical. They aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...

Not true...a cross is a T shaped symbol, while the crucifix is merely a T shaped symbol with the body of Christ on it...that is the only difference...long before it was adopted as a Christian symbol, it was indeed a pagan symbol...

The most marked difference between a cross and a crucifix is the corpus or body of Christ on a crucifix. Some Protestants object to the crucifix because of the belief (which we Catholics share!) that Christ is resurrected, not still on the cross and thus, (some believe) He should not be depicted that way. Others find the prominent Catholic use of the crucifix in our churches and homes borders on idolatry.
Click to expand...

https://diocesan.com/cross-crucifix-similar-different/
 
noonereal said:
There is fact and speculation. There is no believing make believe.
Click to expand...
Other than it's exactly the position that you appear to be portraying.
It's 2018, we know much more today than we knew in 1776. We need to march forward not be frozen in the less enlightened past.
Click to expand...

You are free to practice or not, but don't be going and restricting that freedom from others who choose to practice. It is a Constitutional Right.
 
prometeus said:
And many if not most are as long as they do not affect others. TRhe bakes is a special one.
Click to expand...
No, that's incorrect.
Spare me the idiocy. Freedom is only freedom if no one else is affected.
Click to expand...
Again, not correct.
You have no clue what you are babbling about.
Click to expand...
Of course not. I'm sure you'd rather have the political left's forcing of their beliefs and values on others who beliefs differently by the government gun completely unimpeded.
prometeus said:
Nice bull crap deflection. If was just in your previous reply that you agreed with my point that assholes exist among all people. Aren't you even capable of keeping track of what you say?
Click to expand...

And, as I pointed out, that you conveniently wish to dismiss and disregard the assholes on the left side.
 
Felis Leo said:
Doubt away, Somerville. I do not see the harm inflicted upon non-believers (whether atheists or non-Christians) by this cultural totem remaining in place. I am an atheist, not a vampire. Crosses in plain sight do not scare me.
Click to expand...

Once again, a 'conservative' fails to see the problem. The 'problem' is not that the Bladensburg cross is in "plain sight". The plaintiffs in the case have even said they would not object to the monument if it were to be moved to private property where the cross would still be visible to the public.

The problem is the cross being located on public property and not simply being visible to the public. The problem is taxpayer funds going to the maintenance of the monument and ther grounds upon which it stands. Taxpayer funding from citizens who do not have the same religious belief as the one indicated by the cross.
 
eohrnberger said:
Other than it's exactly the position that you appear to be portraying.


You are free to practice or not, but don't be going and restricting that freedom from others who choose to practice. It is a Constitutional Right.
Click to expand...

Do that junk in the privacy of your own home. I don't want my family exposed to that garbage.

and then the same people worry about who goes the the bathroom where. Unbelievable.
 
Felis Leo said:
Doubt away, Somerville. I do not see the harm inflicted upon non-believers (whether atheists or non-Christians) by this cultural totem remaining in place. I am an atheist, not a vampire. Crosses in plain sight do not scare me.
Click to expand...

I guess you can use it as a teaching tool for your kids pointing out how nut jobs spend their time instead of being productive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom