When Gary told me he had found Jesus, I thought, Ya-hoo! We're rich! But it turned out to be something different.
pieter b
The 1st amendment applies only to CONGRESS. Read it is says Congress shall make no law. The intent of those that drafted the constitution was to leave religious matters to the statesand the citizens of those states. Â Â
By this interpretation, the states have the power to establish an official church within the state, to ban non-conforming religions like, say Judaism or the Mormons, and to both prescribe and proscribe religious ritual. I don't think that was the intent of the framers.
By this interpretation, the states have the power to establish an official church within the state, to ban non-conforming religions like, say Judaism or the Mormons, and to both prescribe and proscribe religious ritual. I don't think that was the intent of the framers.
It was the framers intent to let the states and their citizens decide those issues. And in fact there were state churches before and after the adoption of the constitution.
In any event I am happy to cast aspersions on certain folks. We've noticed. Luke 6:37
I am doing exactly what you do. The only difference I am comfortable being judged on the same standards I judge others. You and your ilk aren't.
41"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 42How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
All these sayings Christ often used; it was easy to apply them. We ought to be very careful when we blame others; for we need allowance ourselves. If we are of a giving and a forgiving spirit, we shall ourselves reap the benefit. Though full and exact returns are made in another world, not in this world, yet Providence does what should encourage us in doing good. Those who follow the multitude to do evil, follow in the broad way that leads to destruction. The tree is known by its fruits; may the word of Christ be so grafted in our hearts, that we may be fruitful in every good word and work. And what the mouth commonly speaks, generally agrees with what is most in the heart. Those only make sure work for their souls and eternity, and take the course that will profit in a trying time, who think, speak, and act according to the words of Christ. Those who take pains in religion, found their hope upon Christ, who is the Rock of Ages, and other foundation can no man lay. In death and judgment they are safe, being kept by the power of Christ through faith unto salvation, and they shall never perish.
Federal law in this area supersedes state law. However, that doesn't matter to hypocritical liberals. - bodine
and then, in his very next post...
The 1st amendment applies only to CONGRESS. Read it is says Congress shall make no law. The intent of those that drafted the constitution was to leave religious matters to the states and the citizens of those states.
and...
The federal law is that states, cities and schools can't promote or hinder religion.
which is it bodine...are the Feds out or do they supercede in this case?
because you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Federal law in this area supersedes state law. However, that doesn't matter to hypocritical liberals. - bodine
and then, in his very next post...
The 1st amendment applies only to CONGRESS. Read it is says Congress shall make no law. The intent of those that drafted the constitution was to leave religious matters to the states and the citizens of those states. and...
If you were not so intellectually challenged you would know the difference between what is and what should be. The intent of the first amendment is clear but that hasn't stopped liberal judges from intentionally misreading it to achieve political objectives it couldn't achieve through the political process. But of course liberals won't apply it consistently because they are purely result oriented.
which is it bodine...are the Feds out or do they supersede in this case?
see above, Charlie
because you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Not if you would apply your mind. Oh I forgot you ruined it.
The intent of the first amendment is clear but that hasn't stopped liberal judges from intentionally misreading it to achieve political objectives it couldn't achieve through the political process. But of course liberals won't apply it consistently because they are purely result oriented.
you are the one who isn't applying it consistantly...
Federal law in this area supersedes state law. However, that doesn't matter to hypocritical liberals. - bodine
The intent of those that drafted the constitution was to leave religious matters to the states and the citizens of those states. - bodine
AUSTIN - Unitarian Universalists have for decades presided over births, marriages and memorials. The church operates in every state, with more than 5,000 members in Texas alone.
But according to the office of Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, a Denison Unitarian church isn't really a religious organization -- at least for tax purposes. Its reasoning: the organization "does not have one system of belief."
Never before -- not in this state or any other -- has a government agency denied Unitarians tax-exempt status because of the group's religious philosophy, church officials say. Strayhorn's ruling clearly infringes upon religious liberties, said Dan Althoff, board president for the Denison congregation that was rejected for tax exemption by the comptroller's office.
"I was surprised -- surprised and shocked -- because the Unitarian church in the United States has a very long history," said Althoff, who notes that father-and-son presidents John Adams and John Quincy Adams were both Unitarians.
. . .
[O]f the [tax-exemption] denials, at least a fourth include less traditional groups, the records show. In addition to the Denison Unitarian church, the rejected groups include a Carrollton group of atheists and agnostics, a New Age group in Bastrop, and the Whispering Star Clan/Temple of Ancient Wisdom, an organization of witches in Copperas Cove.
Some of the denials occurred because of missing paperwork or other problems, according to the comptroller's office. A few, like the denial for the New Age group and the witches group, were decided because their services were closed to the public, according to documents.
But the denials of the Red River Unitarian Universalist Church in Denison and the North Texas Church of Freethought in Carrollton, as well as an earlier denial by Sharp for the Ethical Culture Fellowship of Austin, were ordered because the organizations did not mandate belief in a supreme being.
. . .
The comptroller's office has not always barred "creedless" religions from tax exemption, said Douglas Laycock, a University of Texas law professor who specializes in religious liberty issues.
That standard first came up in 1997, when then-Comptroller Sharp ruled against the Ethical Culture Fellowship of Austin. In making that decision, Sharp overturned the recommendation of his staff.
The Ethical Culture Fellowship sued, claiming that Sharp overstepped his authority. Allied with the group in the ongoing lawsuit are pastors from a broad range of faiths, including Baptists, Lutherans and Mennonites.
Both the lower court and the Texas Supreme Court have ruled against the state's decision. In one opinion, an appeals court said the comptroller's test "fails to include the whole range of belief systems that may, in our diverse and pluralistic society, merit the First Amendment protection."
Strayhorn vows to continue the legal fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary. "Otherwise, any wannabe cult who dresses up and parades down Sixth Street on Halloween will be applying for an exemption," she said in a April 23 news release.
Actually, I don't think this is a secular attack on religion; I think -- I don't know, but I'd bet $50 on it -- that the Texas Comptroller is a member of a "Bible-believing" Christian church that takes a narrow view of Christianity, and wishes she could pull the tax exemption for the Church of Rome and the Latter-Day Saints as well.
<edit> jethro wrote: If you understood my position you would make a ludicrous statement.
PEACHTREE CITY, Ga. — Thank the Lord — and the proofreaders at Peachtree Editorial and Proofreading — that the Bible refers to "our ancestors" instead of "sour ancestors," and calls for an end to "factions" — not "fractions."
Evidence from the Netherlands illustrates that when the definition of marriage is altered, people begin to shrug their shoulders at the concept of marriage altogether and see it as unnecessary – since same-sex marriages became legal in Norway, for example, 80 out of 100 babies in some areas of the country are now born to single mothers.
If it helps, I happen to think that it isan attack on a particular religion, most likely because Unitarianism is too "fuzzy" for the Texas comptroller's view of what a "proper" religion should be. And guess what? Ms. Strayhorn is a Republican, not a "liberal."
I wonder if D. Limbaugh will reply to my letter suggesting that he take up the cause of the Austin Unitarians.
You don't know that. There are liberal republicans. Jim Jeffords was one. Lincoln Chafee is one as is Rudi Gulliani. And of course, Arnold is a republican in name only
Thomas Jefferson was a unitarian, as was Paul Revere.
Again, Ms. Strayhorn appears to be basing the tax exemption on her personal opinion of the validity of a church's theology, which is a lousy precedent.
Personally, I think that all churches should be taxed like any other business, but that's not the way we've traditionally done things. If the $cientologists get a Texas exemption, why not the Unitarians?
As I see it, the Unitarians believe in everything, yet nothing.
individual Unitarians believe in something...the Church simply recognises that this something is not going to be the same something for every individual.
you know, if you look at all the Religions of the world and compare them, you find out that they pretty much all are trying to explain the same idea. Unitarians understand this and believe that the Truth can be gotten closer to if you look at different belief systems and find the common thread that is woven into all their fabrics.
I'll try. I'm actually on vacation this week. Just been relaxing and doing stuff around the house.
Worked in the garden earlier this week. Rearranged our bedroom. I just got done putting the first coat of stain on my shed. In case you didn't know, I'm real proud of my shed. :-)
Section C-2.1. Principles. We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote
The inherent worth and dignity of every person; Justice, equity and compassion in human relations; Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations; A free and responsible search for truth and meaning; The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large; The goal of world community with peace, liberty and justice for all; Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.
The living tradition which we share draws from many sources:
Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life; Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion and the transforming power of love; Wisdom from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life; Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our neighbors as ourselves; Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit; Spiritual teachings of Earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature.
They are probably spinning in their graves seeing what has happened to it as well.
I doubt it...they held the same beliefs.
They believe in nothing.
simply not true.
Like I said, it is a social club.
so, your Church doesn't believe in fellowship?
the fact is, all Religions are basically trying to explain the same thing...UU just recognizes this and believes that in order to better understand the one thing, one should learn all the different stories that try to explain it.
By this interpretation, the states have the power to establish an official church within the state, to ban non-conforming religions like, say Judaism or the Mormons, and to both prescribe and proscribe religious ritual. I don't think that was the intent of the framers.
We've noticed. Luke 6:37
By this interpretation, the states have the power to establish an official church within the state, to ban non-conforming religions like, say Judaism or the Mormons, and to both prescribe and proscribe religious ritual. I don't think that was the intent of the framers.
It was the framers intent to let the states and their citizens decide those issues. And in fact there were state churches before and after the adoption of the constitution.
In any event I am happy to cast aspersions on certain folks.
We've noticed. Luke 6:37
I am doing exactly what you do. The only difference I am comfortable being judged on the same standards I judge others. You and your ilk aren't.
41"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 42How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
Commentary on Luke 6:37-49
All these sayings Christ often used; it was easy to apply them. We ought to be very careful when we blame others; for we need allowance ourselves. If we are of a giving and a forgiving spirit, we shall ourselves reap the benefit. Though full and exact returns are made in another world, not in this world, yet Providence does what should encourage us in doing good. Those who follow the multitude to do evil, follow in the broad way that leads to destruction. The tree is known by its fruits; may the word of Christ be so grafted in our hearts, that we may be fruitful in every good word and work. And what the mouth commonly speaks, generally agrees with what is most in the heart. Those only make sure work for their souls and eternity, and take the course that will profit in a trying time, who think, speak, and act according to the words of Christ. Those who take pains in religion, found their hope upon Christ, who is the Rock of Ages, and other foundation can no man lay. In death and judgment they are safe, being kept by the power of Christ through faith unto salvation, and they shall never perish.
http://www.christnotes.org/commentary.asp?ViewCommentary=Luke+6&Version=MHC
and then, in his very next post...
and...
which is it bodine...are the Feds out or do they supercede in this case?
because you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Federal law in this area supersedes state law. However, that doesn't matter to hypocritical liberals. - bodine
and then, in his very next post...
The 1st amendment applies only to CONGRESS. Read it is says Congress shall make no law. The intent of those that drafted the constitution was to leave religious matters to the states and the citizens of those states. and...
If you were not so intellectually challenged you would know the difference between what is and what should be. The intent of the first amendment is clear but that hasn't stopped liberal judges from intentionally misreading it to achieve political objectives it couldn't achieve through the political process. But of course liberals won't apply it consistently because they are purely result oriented.
which is it bodine...are the Feds out or do they supersede in this case?
see above, Charlie
because you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Not if you would apply your mind. Oh I forgot you ruined it.
you are the one who isn't applying it consistantly...
which is it bodine?
or are you a hypocritical liberal?
He isn't a liberal, crabby. Of that we can be sure.
you are the one who isn't applying it consistantly... The law is what is. And whatever it is it needs to be applied consistently.
The intent of those that drafted the constitution was to leave religious matters to the states and the citizens of those states. - bodine
which is it bodine?
I told you there are the ways things should be and then there is the way things are.
or are you a hypocritical liberal?
If you understood my position you would not make such a ludicrous statement.
He isn't a liberal, crabby. Of that we can be sure.
That's right I am not mentally ill!!!!!
Is this a secular attack on religion?
Unitarian group denied tax status
Actually, I don't think this is a secular attack on religion; I think -- I don't know, but I'd bet $50 on it -- that the Texas Comptroller is a member of a "Bible-believing" Christian church that takes a narrow view of Christianity, and wishes she could pull the tax exemption for the Church of Rome and the Latter-Day Saints as well.
<edit> jethro wrote: If you understood my position you would make a ludicrous statement.
You can't make this sort of thing up, folks.
sorry, pieter, you don't know what you were talking about.
PEACHTREE CITY, Ga. — Thank the Lord — and the proofreaders at Peachtree Editorial and Proofreading — that the Bible refers to "our ancestors" instead of "sour ancestors," and calls for an end to "factions" — not "fractions."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120389,00.html
Evidence from the Netherlands illustrates that when the definition of marriage is altered, people begin to shrug their shoulders at the concept of marriage altogether and see it as unnecessary – since same-sex marriages became legal in Norway, for example, 80 out of 100 babies in some areas of the country are now born to single mothers.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/rebeccahagelin/rh20040519.shtml
jethro, is the Texas comptroller's decision a secular opression of religion or not? A simple yes or no will suffice.
jethro, is the Texas comptroller's decision a secular opression of religion or not? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Well you won't get a yes or no answer. I haven't the time or the inclination to look at it now.
If it helps, I happen to think that it isan attack on a particular religion, most likely because Unitarianism is too "fuzzy" for the Texas comptroller's view of what a "proper" religion should be. And guess what? Ms. Strayhorn is a Republican, not a "liberal."
I wonder if D. Limbaugh will reply to my letter suggesting that he take up the cause of the Austin Unitarians.
so, bodine, which is the way things should be and which is the way things are?
I was raised in (and help build) and married in a Unitarian-Universalist church.
Ms. Strayhorn is a Republican, not a "liberal."
You don't know that. There are liberal republicans. Jim Jeffords was one. Lincoln Chafee is one as is Rudi Gulliani. And of course, Arnold is a republican in name only
William Howard Taft was a unitarian. http://www.potus.com/whtaft.html
to not recognise the Unitarians as a chuch is a pretty good indication that you aren't a liberal in any meaningful sense of the word.
why? many liberals are in contempt of religion.
Thomas Jefferson was a unitarian, as was Paul Revere.
Again, Ms. Strayhorn appears to be basing the tax exemption on her personal opinion of the validity of a church's theology, which is a lousy precedent.
Personally, I think that all churches should be taxed like any other business, but that's not the way we've traditionally done things. If the $cientologists get a Texas exemption, why not the Unitarians?
to not recognise the Unitarians as a Chuch
As I see it, the Unitarians believe in everything, yet nothing.
I agree with Pieter though, they're as much of a "Church" as the Scientologists.
And if you're OK with Strayhorn deciding what's a religion and what's not, imagine your worst nightmare -- Hillary Clinton with that power.
I rest my case.
Hey, THX, stop by more often, would you?
individual Unitarians believe in something...the Church simply recognises that this something is not going to be the same something for every individual.
you know, if you look at all the Religions of the world and compare them, you find out that they pretty much all are trying to explain the same idea. Unitarians understand this and believe that the Truth can be gotten closer to if you look at different belief systems and find the common thread that is woven into all their fabrics.
the Church simply recognises that this something is not going to be the same something for every individual.
Sounds like nothing to me. of course you can relate, crabs, since you understand nothing!
Is that a) biting wit, or b) a joke that just bites?
B
You are correct!
Hey, THX, stop by more often, would you?
I'll try. I'm actually on vacation this week. Just been relaxing and doing stuff around the house.
Worked in the garden earlier this week. Rearranged our bedroom. I just got done putting the first coat of stain on my shed. In case you didn't know, I'm real proud of my shed. :-)
well, it's not nothing...it's more something than most.
It includes your beliefs, if your beliefs are not nothing, neither is theirs.
your backyard is pretty gay looking
Damon Salandria 5/20/04 8:19pm
Real grown up comment college boy
how do you get "gay looking" from that picture?
Looks like a house a hobbit would live in.
it's a joke, you people are way too uptight
Rich, I graduated, your lame college boy smack will have to be retired
your backyard is pretty gay looking
I'll take that as a compliment. :-)
Other than the shed, I had nothing to do with it. My wife's the gardener.
Looks like a house a hobbit would live in.
No! This, looks like a house a hobbit would live in.
Built it yourself, did you say? Nice.
We have a shed something like that that we inherited when we bought this house. A little more symmetrical and traditional looking.
I don't think the neighbors like it.
Built it yourself, did you say? Nice.
Yeah, with the help of my Dad. Actually, more like I'm the one that helped him. He was a carpenter for 40 years.
I don't think the neighbors like it.
Why don't they like it?
ARTICLE II Principles and Purposes
Section C-2.1. Principles. We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote
The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
The goal of world community with peace, liberty and justice for all;
Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.
The living tradition which we share draws from many sources:
Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;
Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion and the transforming power of love;
Wisdom from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit;
Spiritual teachings of Earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature.
Not one mention of God.
get your reading glasses, THX...
"Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God'slove by loving our neighbors as ourselves"
I was raised in (and help build) and married in a Unitarian-Universalist church.
Ah, the cult of liberalism. That explains a lot.
well, it's a good cult.
George Washington, Thom Jefferson and John Adams all held Unitarian beliefs.
thanks for pointing out how much of an American Church the Unitarians, since much our country was founded on the liberal ideals it espouses.
personally I don't subsribe to any one religion although from Unitarian-Universalism I consider myself more of a Universalist.
of course, not subscribing to any one Religion is sort of the whole point of the U-U.
get your reading glasses, THX...
I stand corrected.
well, it's a good cult.
How? They believe in nothing. It is more like a social club for those that wish to claim they go to church without going to a real church.
George Washington, Thom Jefferson and John Adams all held Unitarian beliefs.
They are probably spinning in their graves seeing what has happened to it as well.
thanks for pointing out how much of an American Church the Unitarians, since much our country was founded on the liberal ideals it espouses.
Yea, right. I doubt that our country was based on anything that stands for nothing.
personally I don't subsribe to any one religion although from Unitarian-Universalism I consider myself more of a Universalist.
So you believe that all will be saved? How does this happen and why would you then call Christianity a fairy tale?
of course, not subscribing to any one Religion is sort of the whole point of the U-U.
Like I said, it is a social club.
A good cult? No such animal.
Universalist?... Believing in anything anti-American.
I doubt it...they held the same beliefs.
simply not true.
so, your Church doesn't believe in fellowship?
the fact is, all Religions are basically trying to explain the same thing...UU just recognizes this and believes that in order to better understand the one thing, one should learn all the different stories that try to explain it.