The Role of the Church in Instituting Martial Law

Perhaps.... This far removed from the Mayflower... John and Priscilla, have many heirs....

Ten percent of the population according to some statistics.

I didn't know John Lennon and Priscilla Presley had children?????

""Please to illustrate your continued claims of attempted denominational dominance.. Thank you in advance..."""


If a Church leader of any kind goes into the white house and claims to speak for the majority, that in itself is highly suspicious.
The fact is, some people will never listen to this because they will not take ownership that this behavior is a problem, or any ownership if it is their particular bias. Some people will not admit what Falwell did for example. If I say the name , there will be excuses galore claiming it never happened, or it is not a problem. But , I know the danger .
Just as some others will not own the fact that pushing atheist ideologue on others is pushing a religious belief.
There are attempted denominational abuses of all kinds.
Fortunately, I don't think they get that far to completely destroy everyone's rights , but far enough that some people instead of working to resolve the issues, let themselves get caught up in a confrontational mentality.
By backing up and not allowing a confrontational stance, one will find that destructive behavior is not necessary.
I lived abroad for a short time, and I really do know what it is to have limited rights, in religion, and as a non-citizen.
People really have *no* idea how good they have it here !

pepperens wrote:
People really have *no* idea how good they have it here !

Actually, I think many do know how good we have it here, but we are seeing things eroding as far as our rights and the whole attitude towards Christians in general. We may not have lived in countries where religious rights have been taken away, but many of us follow stories regarding just this issue. I hear a lot from missionaries that visit, plus my own research. I do not want to see that happen here in the US, therefore I try to stay informed and inform others and try to speak out when I see our rights in trouble.

Actually, I think many do know how good we have it here, but we are seeing things eroding as far as our rights and the whole attitude towards Christians in general. We may not have lived in countries where religious rights have been taken away, but many of us follow stories regarding just this issue. I hear a lot from missionaries that visit, plus my own research. I do not want to see that happen here in the US, therefore I try to stay informed and inform others and try to speak out when I see our rights in trouble.[/quote]

I think its fair to speak out when it is a concern of rights.
I would still say there are a lot of people who really do not have any idea at all. There is no comparison . Once one lives it, one knows how one really can be easily in a troublesome situation - there is no tip of the ice berg even at this point.
There are some who claim that if they can't take away someone elses rights, then their own rights are being violated. That is a false claim.
When I see anyone claiming that their religious symbols have to be portrayed behind a government official , I find that suspicious.
There just is a lot of false sensationalist stuff going on that really has nothing to do with rights.

I don't think they're saying their religious symbols have to be portrayed behind the government official, but if said government official comes to a University that happens to be a Catholic University, then those symbols should be left as is instead of covering them. Otherwise, don't go to a religious organization to give speeches.

I think its fair to speak out when it is a concern of rights.
I would still say there are a lot of people who really do not have any idea at all. There is no comparison . Once one lives it, one knows how one really can be easily in a troublesome situation - there is no tip of the ice berg even at this point.
There are some who claim that if they can't take away someone elses rights, then their own rights are being violated. That is a false claim.
When I see anyone claiming that their religious symbols have to be portrayed behind a government official , I find that suspicious.
There just is a lot of false sensationalist stuff going on that really has nothing to do with rights

.

Okay, here is a shocker. If we are to have religious freedom then it needs to be across the board. To me it means that if someone wants to practice satanism then they can. I may not agree with them but as our Amendments read we have the freedom to do so. If a government official gets invited to a religious school to speak then they need to respect that institution and not make them cover religious symbols up. It is small steps that are taken...Little things. It is like putting a frog in a pot of cold water then turning it on. The frog has no clue it is his death sentence.....

Sonshine wrote:I don't think they're saying their religious symbols have to be portrayed behind the government official, but if said government official comes to a University that happens to be a Catholic University, then those symbols should be left as is instead of covering them. Otherwise, don't go to a religious organization to give speeches.

Oops...LOL! You answered it.

pepperens wrote:
If a Church leader of any kind goes into the white house and claims to speak for the majority, that in itself is highly suspicious.

Perhaps I see it somewhat differently than you do... I believe that God is not a respecter of persons... Therefore I look upon any preacher, anywhere, as sharing what they believe... Whether or not, they do it from the White House lawn.... Or from a pulpit...

Just because they represent some brand of Christian belief... Does not cause me to automatically give more deference to a particular denomination... The POTUS is within his rights to invite anyone into the house where he resides.... Secular or religious... Same as you... Same as me...

pepperens wrote:
The fact is, some people will never listen to this because they will not take ownership that this behavior is a problem, or any ownership if it is their particular bias. Some people will not admit what Falwell did for example. If I say the name , there will be excuses galore claiming it never happened, or it is not a problem. But , I know the danger .

I find your premise intriguing, firstly because you state it in a defensive manner and secondly because I have no idea of what Falwell did that has grated your cheese...

Last I heard, the man was dead... I guess, whatever he said/did, had no lasting impact on me...

pepperens wrote:
Just as some others will not own the fact that pushing atheist ideologue on others is pushing a religious belief.

Now that I believe... I have always felt that atheism is a religion... And that having a faith-based belief that there is no god, is in fact..... Their god....

pepperens wrote:
There are attempted denominational abuses of all kinds.

You appear to have a conjectural, apocalyptic, predisposition... Replete with straw-man armies... Please prove your factoids, with actual hard data... Thank you in advance...

pepperens wrote:
Fortunately, I don't think they get that far to completely destroy everyone's rights , but far enough that some people instead of working to resolve the issues, let themselves get caught up in a confrontational mentality.
By backing up and not allowing a confrontational stance, one will find that destructive behavior is not necessary.

Oh.... You mean something like this?...

Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death.

--- Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

I believe that it is commonly referred to as.... The free exercise of First Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States of America... You know... The old... "I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it"...

pepperens wrote:
I lived abroad for a short time, and I really do know what it is to have limited rights, in religion, and as a non-citizen.

And I know how it feels to have no rights... While still on US soil....

pepperens wrote:
People really have *no* idea how good they have it here !

And by that... I take it you mean everyone but you?.....

Homey don't think so.....

And while I love my country.. I am also increasingly alarmed by the flouting of the will of the people and the Constiution... By elected representitives.. Who appear to have completely forgotten... Just who they are working for...

"Free government is founded in jealousy, not confidence. It is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind those we are obliged to trust with power.... In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in men, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1799

.

There are attempted denominational abuses of all kinds.
You appear to have a conjectural, apocalyptic, predisposition... Replete with straw-man armies... Please prove your factoids, with actual hard data... Thank you in advance...


Here's my take on this, and no, I don't have actual hard data, but just about every organized religion does have it faults, which could be construed as abuses, since it's an abuse of the way that God intended our relationship to Him to be. This is why I have a problem with "religion" Religion has done more to cause division within the body of Christ than any outsiders ever could. The abuses are there. Every organized religion has an agenda, and there are times that that agenda gets in the way of God's agenda. There has been a lot of harm done supposedly in the name of God by the "religous" people.

Sonshine wrote:

Here's my take on this, and no, I don't have actual hard data, but just about every organized religion does have it faults, which could be construed as abuses, since it's an abuse of the way that God intended our relationship to Him to be. This is why I have a problem with "religion" Religion has done more to cause division within the body of Christ than any outsiders ever could. The abuses are there. Every organized religion has an agenda, and there are times that that agenda gets in the way of God's agenda. There has been a lot of harm done supposedly in the name of God by the "religous" people.

Now Katrina...

Keep the mindset you had when you wrote the above and read this.....

Matthew 13:24 Here is another story Jesus told: "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a farmer who planted good seed in his field.

Mat 13:25 But that night as everyone slept, his enemy came and planted weeds among the wheat.

Mat 13:26 When the crop began to grow and produce grain, the weeds also grew.

Mat 13:27 The farmer's servants came and told him, `Sir, the field where you planted that good seed is full of weeds!'

Mat 13:28 " `An enemy has done it!' the farmer exclaimed. " `Shall we pull out the weeds?' they asked.

Mat 13:29 "He replied, `No, you'll hurt the wheat if you do.

Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest. Then I will tell the harvesters to sort out the weeds and burn them and to put the wheat in the barn.' "

If you look upon Jesus, as the farmer sowing good seed.... It is not much of a stretch, to imagine just what the weeds could possibly be representing in this parable....

.

CP, I understand that, which is why I posted what I did about Susan's remark about the abuses in the church. I realize that the church is full of the weeds, as well as the wheat.

Sonshine wrote:
Here's my take on this, and no, I don't have actual hard data, but just about every organized religion does have it faults, which could be construed as abuses, since it's an abuse of the way that God intended our relationship to Him to be.

I personally believe that the perpetrators of organized religion are more wrapped up in adoring the wrapping paper of the gift of the gospel of Jesus... Then they are in the the true gift, of the gospel of Jesus himself....

IMHO.. They are more ready to defend their slant on how they are superior in doctrine to everyone else... Then they are prepered to defend the faith...

Sonshine wrote:
This is why I have a problem with "religion" Religion has done more to cause division within the body of Christ than any outsiders ever could. The abuses are there. Every organized religion has an agenda, and there are times that that agenda gets in the way of God's agenda.

I find it necessary to separate religion... Which is inanimate... From believers in said religion, who are animate... Inanimate objects of worship.. Are idols.... And this is but a part, of what the Bible says about them...

Isaiah 48:5 That is why I told you ahead of time what I was going to do. That way, you could never say, `My idols did it. My wooden image and metal god commanded it to happen!'

Sonshine wrote:
There has been a lot of harm done supposedly in the name of God by the "religous" people.

This should come as no surprise...

Mathew 7:21 "Not all people who sound religious are really godly. They may refer to me as `Lord,' but they still won't enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The decisive issue is whether they obey my Father in heaven.

Mat 7:22 On judgment day many will tell me, `Lord, Lord, we prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.'

Mat 7:23 But I will reply, `I never knew you. Go away; the things you did were unauthorized.

Matthew 24:23 "Then if anyone tells you, `Look, here is the Messiah,' or `There he is,' don't pay any attention.

Mat 24:24 For false messiahs and false prophets will rise up and perform great miraculous signs and wonders so as to deceive, if possible, even God's chosen ones.

2 Corinthians 11:14 But I am not surprised! Even Satan can disguise himself as an angel of light.

2Cr 11:15 So it is no wonder his servants can also do it by pretending to be godly ministers. In the end they will get every bit of punishment their wicked deeds deserve.

.

Very interesting responses about idols, and good food for thought, I appreciate reading the commentary.
I would agree, that in retrospect, one could stand outside the university to avoid the controversy.( of course having watched what goes on in public situations and diplomat situations - the secret service might have had intel that where he did stand , was the best room to be , so they were working to keep things as nuetral as possible)
I really can appreciate how complex these things can get when a person is a public person , it is not easy. No matter what someone does , - someone is going to complain , whine , try to project some kind of agenda.
Just watch the complaing if a public official never showed up at any religious insitution for a visit. Then you will really hear it.
Having watched divisions of ritual in Anabaptist communities and Amish and Jews, I happen to know why complaining about this stuff can be extremely intricate and sometimes petty. There is never and end to how many ideas on how someone thinks something should be done.
This is why I leave the petty stuff alone, and refuse to be taken up by sensationalist articles .

,<<Isaiah 48:5 That is why I told you ahead of time what I was going to do. That way, you could never say, `My idols did it. My wooden image and metal god commanded it to happen!'.>>

There are midrash involving Abraham as to realizing why stone idols are not powerful and the meaning of what an idol is, or is not.
It is the focus, that can create the idol, instead of the idol itself.
Ritual, is supposed to be an aid, but once ritual becomes oppressive law, it becomes like an idol- it is the prime focus over God, and the prime focus over the spirit of the law.
Just as many laws can become this way.
This is why *spirit* of law is to be explored, studied and recognized whenever we study any ritual.
It does not mean the initial ritual is the problem , it is the focus.

,<<It is already considered that if you speak out against the his policies you are a racist. .>>

Not really, I dont' agree on everything in any person's policy, but I don't get accused of that.
I would believe it depends on more what the policy is, and how someone is talking about it.

,<<<Okay, here is a shocker. If we are to have religious freedom then it needs to be across the board. To me it means that if someone wants to practice satanism then they can. I may not agree with them but as our Amendments read we have the freedom to do so. If a government official gets invited to a religious school to speak then they need to respect that institution and not make them cover religious symbols up. It is small steps that are taken...Little things. It is like putting a frog in a pot of cold water then turning it on. The frog has no clue it is his death sentence.....
Dawn,<<<<

This is no shocker. Satanists are allowed to practice, but they still have to stay within civil law and not break criminal law to maintain peaceful co-existance. Just as we can't outlaw KKK unfortunately.... for the same or other reasons - people call that freedom of speech, even when someone claims they have the freedom to promote oppression , hatred, and other forms of extremism. It is an unfortunate paradox .

This is why so much law is about balance , and no one thing stands by itself.

,<<It is already considered that if you speak out against the his policies you are a racist. .>>

Not really, I dont' agree on everything in any person's policy, but I don't get accused of that.
I would believe it depends on more what the policy is, and how someone is talking about it.


Actually, I have been accused of it numerous time because I don't support Obama. Of course it was by people that don't know me otherwise they would see just how ridiculous that statement is when applying it to me.

I think as far as the religious icons in Notre Dame are concerned, if that had been the only problem we had with the administration it probably wouldn't be that big of a deal. We don't worship the symbols. However, when you take all the little things and add them together it starts to become a big issue. Remember, it's the little foxes that destroy the vine. You can't just look at one issue, but look at it as a whole. Those of us who have been watching for this sort of erosions of Christian rights in America have seen enough of the little things that concern us. We can't have tunnel vision.

I think as far as the religious icons in Notre Dame are concerned, if that had been the only problem we had with the administration it probably wouldn't be that big of a deal. We don't worship the symbols. However, when you take all the little things and add them together it starts to become a big issue. Remember, it's the little foxes that destroy the vine. You can't just look at one issue, but look at it as a whole. Those of us who have been watching for this sort of erosions of Christian rights in America have seen enough of the little things that concern us. We can't have tunnel vision.[/quote]


I think it is important to remember that there are people who very cautiously separate church or any kind of religious insitution from state. By being very careful in that separation, that is all it is and nothing more.
For myself I have seen many suspicious activitities in some elected officials cow towing to denominational abuse and badgering. Fortunately, on the most part , people do speak up on both ends.
You will never be able to please everyone on some of these things.

I think it is important to remember that there are people who very cautiously separate church or any kind of religious insitution from state. By being very careful in that separation, that is all it is and nothing more.
For myself I have seen many suspicious activitities in some elected officials cow towing to denominational abuse and badgering. Fortunately, on the most part , people do speak up on both ends.
You will never be able to please everyone on some of these things.

The problem comes in not in separation of Church and state, but when they start taking away our freedoms as Christian's and American citizens. Maybe I go to different places than you do, or read different articles, but Christian's are becoming very un PC these days. So now, Christians are starting to stand up for their rights. I don't know what elected officials are cow towing to denominational abuse and badgering. Could you share a link on that or give an example?

pepperens wrote:
I think it is important to remember that there are people who very cautiously separate church or any kind of religious insitution from state. By being very careful in that separation, that is all it is and nothing more.

It is also very important to remember that the same POTUS who insisted that all Christian symbols be covered... Is the same POTUS who violated all proper protocol by genuflecting to the Islamic, Saudi Arabian King Abdullah...

IMHO... Obama, by covering one to "remain neutral" and bowing to the other, demonstrating servitude to him, is duplicitous... To say the very least... And a dangerous loose cannon, on the deck of our American ship of state, at best.....
.

Issue one :""The problem comes in not in separation of Church and state,"""


Issue two :"""but when they start taking away our freedoms as Christian's and American citizens."""

These are two separate issues , and I see both as valid.

It is also very important to remember that the same POTUS who insisted that all Christian symbols be covered... Is the same POTUS who violated all proper protocol by genuflecting to the Islamic, Saudi Arabian King Abdullah...


My sense is it is tradition in that culture, so I don't find it a big deal. Certainly not my choice, ...American women who go to Saudi Arabia also put up with far more degrading humiliation and have to be in American ghettos to live normally as we understand it.
There are much bigger issues at hand .
Sometimes the greeting of ultimate respect brings about extraordinary results.
I don't turn a blind eye to whether some of these foreign leaders have total integrity, but I don't find this a real issue or seriously anything to do with theocracy affecting our country.
And it is in their space. I would much rather work on the double standard that non-American citizens don't have rights even though we hold dear those rights as a moral and ethical right all humans should have..

I don't see it as two separate issues. I'm a Christian American. To me it's no different than African American's or Latin American's etc. It's who I am. So they start playing games with my religious rights or the constitution, it's all the same to me. They are my rights as a citizen. It seems like the PC thing to do is protect everyone's rights but the Christians.

Sonshine wrote:I don't see it as two separate issues. I'm a Christian American. To me it's no different than African American's or Latin American's etc. It's who I am. So they start playing games with my religious rights or the constitution, it's all the same to me. They are my rights as a citizen. It seems like the PC thing to do is protect everyone's rights but the Christians.

How can two separate issues take away from the fact that they are valid issues - they don't.
So being concerned about religious or faith rights as a citizen does not go away dealing with each issue and identifying it correctly.
I am not going to say that someone is taking away my religous or faith rights because they danced on my lawn , or am I going to say they started a fire and call the fire department. They tresepassed - and it is a separate issue from my religious rights . Same goes for diplomatic issues, what a president does with a foreign official in greeting, and whether I can pray in peace .
I watch in caution, but I won't blow things out of proportion until to is truly valid.
The reason is simple - gossip and non-truths can happen very easily if one is not careful.
Whenever I read sesationalist journalism, I make a point to read an article from what may be presumed to be considered another jounalism view point. Then, I take each article and look for how they are working to manipulate language for their point of view. That is exactly how I read these articles.
I rarely post them without careful commentary, because there is a strict law in my belief system about spreading damaging rumors - an old Jewish ethical law about "Lashon Hara".Few people take this particular ethic seriously, but I believe it is important to search out bias whenever possible to keep to fairness.

7dawn wrote:AAAAGGGGHHHHH!


Okay, have the Amendments or Constitution been amended yet? Separation of church and state in it's proper context is nothing like what people believe it to be! It wasn't to separate God from the government but to keep the government from declaring one religion as the only one....They did not want to go down the road of England and what they left. The states have the right to establish one religion among their state but not the government.


Obama bowing to the Saudi king showed subservience to him. If you watch the news any time Arab leaders meet they hug and kiss eachother on both cheeks or they grab eachother by the arms and kiss both cheeks. They do not bow...Not that I have seen. So, Obama effectively told the Arab world that we are subservient to them...(not sure on the spelling on subservient)...

I know this is the rumour that is being spread, but I looked at articles online and I see exactly what is going on - it nothing but rumours along with many others, it was a gesture that could be interpreted different ways, and it looked much more of following tradition in a particular country. But because people are building on othe false rumours this is the type of thing that creates problems . My brother told me that in Austria people there were convinced Clinton was a scientologist - they bought all these rumous hook line and sinker.
I know exactly what separation of church and state is, which is exactly why Atheists also need to take ownership of pushing their type of denominational agenda as well as some Christian denominations doing the same. It can be paradoxal, but can be handled.
The fact that some people think "God and Government" are supposed to be together as God and State , is a specific Christian denomination agenda being pushed- other Christians feel taken advantage of by this banner waving - many anabaptists are outraged along with others. There are Christians who do not believe this to be the case . It is Christians abusing other Christians and eventually finding a way to be taking away their rights.
Do I believe God as the center of my life - every minute . But, I do not want the government involved in any way in their interpretation of what God is, or what God does, or what is God , or a state waving denomination banners, - they have no business in this at all -period.
Just so there is no confusion - because once these conversation come up - people immediately picture the other in a discussion as the extremist vision. I do believe in prayer in public school - I think rooms should be set aside for fair and proper meditation. But, I also believe these situations are difficult to resolve and why we need private schools at this point-and they should be affordable. Its nice - at my daughter school which is private - they are not listed as a "Christian" or Jewish school - but they teach bible stories along with other stories. There is no tension or freaking out of any kind. I agree public schools have gone way too far in one direction . As they say - difficult cases make bad law - which is *why* that separation is needed even though it hit a paradox, there has to be reasonable ways of resolving it instead of a few Christian groups pushing their agenda claiming they speak for everyone else.