Elections 2006

[no_such_reality]

Join one of the major parties you want to change and work hard to influence its policies.

That’s wasting your time. Both parties are beholding to their donors and radical voters. In the republican’s case, that’s big money people and the fundamentalist religious groups because of the demonstrated single issue impact in swing states.

Similarly the democrats are subject to the Union’s and their money. They also have their radical left members with similar impact.

You will not be changing either party.

[CardiffBaseball]

Don’t worry the GOP will eventually face the fact that Big Business and Evangelicals, cannot co-exist forever.

Big Business and their Orwellian-like adherence to globalization, will eventually cause a deep split in the GOP someday. The current administration promotes corporate welfare in the form of cheap off-the books labor.

Note that I am not saying that globalization can or will stop, I just see a day when the christians see that big business practices are nothing to stand up and fight for.

[ybc]

Interesting perspective. Sometimes the seed of destruction was planted within.

[PerryChase]

Or could it be that capitalists will feel that the Christians with their opposition to scientific research and popular culture are inhibiting business opportunities?

I see a big chasm coming in the GOP.

[sdrebear]

“jg”, when you refer to “nutty judges”, are you talking about all 44 federal judges who have, over the years, ruled unanimously that the cross should be removed? I wouldn’t really call that “losing”. Just because the forum of discussion is moving doesn’t change the fact that in court, on this issue, there has been a perfect record of defending the freedom of religion in our courts.

Oops, did we all read that last sentence correctly? That’s right! That Constitutional Amendment everyone is trying so hard to overcome was put in place to protect YOU (and me) and all of our religious beliefs from the influence of government. Asking the government to actively “help” in the “protection” of your religion is like asking a wolf to protect your steak from attacking squirrels. Who should we really be more worried about here?

That’s another argument I fail to understand. How are Christians being “attacked” in this situation? Nobody is going after your churches (are they?) Has anyone asked you to remove, or replace your church’s cross on their private land? Told you to change your church leaders, or what they are teaching you? Exactly who would ever have the power, or inclination to do such a thing? Hmmmm, let’s all think about it a little while. If you were thinking the government, YOU WIN! Now, what is keeping the government from having ANY say in what we do with our religion? Right again… the Constitution and its funny little “separation of church and state” rule that is supposedly suppressing your religious rights in some way!!! Who defends the constitution? Come on now. I know you know this… YES, the “nutty judges”!!! I know that was a painful road, but we’ve made it.

Look, I completely understand the emotional connection to the cross. It doesn’t really seem to be hurting anyone and the Mt. Soledad cross is beautiful up there on the hill. It’s not inherently offensive visually, but that was never REALLY the point. The point is that as a religious person, it is YOU (not some atheist) that should be marching up that hill, removing that cross and taking it safely to private church owned land (or any private land for that matter). It is YOU who should be protecting your religion from some government sponsored project who ultimately can only serve to bastardize your beliefs.

Here is a question. If there was a group called “Christians for the rescue of the Mt. Soledad Cross from Government Clutches” headed up by several local religious leaders, would the feelings of understanding start to creep in? If it was these leaders telling you that we need to save our cross from being used as a political pawn, would you then listen to them and see what is truly happening?

Unfortunately, I doubt you’ll ever see that group formed as our religious leaders are just as uninformed on this subject as most others are. They are out there fighting for the one and only thing that could possibly destroy our precious freedom of religion. I realize that it’s a long slippery slope to get to that point, but really… what is the point of taking that first step?

I will be the first in line to defend ANYONE’s religious symbol on their private land or person. It is our right in this country to practice our religion without ANY government involvement for or against our chosen path. That is a huge idea and took enormous forethought (and self control) by our founders to understand this and act accordingly. They knew that government always had and always would destroy true religious freedom if not protected. Perhaps even their own religion could be harmed when the next administration moved in with their own beliefs and forced change.

The allowance of one symbol on government land effectively endorses that religion (in this particular case, Christians) and more importantly, excludes all others. Unless you purpose that we also put up a Crucifix (yes, Catholics are often separated by other Christians, so I wouldn’t feel so “included” by this particular cross), Star of David, a Crescent Moon, a Buddha statue, an empty pedestal (for the atheist I guess), or whatever other symbols are out there that represent ALL of the people in this country (that our government is supposed to be representing), then the only real option is to remove the one symbol that is there, let our government display the one thing they can stand for (namely the flag) and return the cross to where it should have been built in the first place… safely and constitutionally protected at one of the many deserving churches who would love to give it a home.

I tried to choose my words carefully as I certainly didn’t want to demean anyone based on religion. Quite the contrary actually. I’m simply tired of people misunderstanding the purpose of this particular article of the Constitution and basically fighting to ruin the protections we all currently enjoy to worship as we please. I urge you to be careful what you ask of your government with respect to their involvement in our religion. You just might get it. Once that box is open, you may not like what future leaders choose to do with it. If you have any questions about the possibilities of this happening, please feel free to read the history of nearly any other country in the world (most have been around much longer than ours) to see how well government and religion have mixed.

[PerryChase]

sdrebear, i agree with you because I believe in the Constitution.

This issue is very similar to people supporting the Patriot Act or warrantless wiretaping because they beleive it’ll help catch terrorists. They don’t understand that by giving the government so much power to “interfere” we’re erroding our freedoms away.

[Author]

Posts