Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Obama breaks the constitution.

Page 1 of 2 [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

28 Oct 2011, 11:06 pm

Image


_________________
.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

28 Oct 2011, 11:10 pm

They last time I looked, the Constitution was still intact.


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

28 Oct 2011, 11:10 pm

What?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Oct 2011, 7:30 am

Fnord wrote:
They last time I looked, the Constitution was still intact.


Intact but largely neglected or distorted. Be thankful the First and Second amendments are still in effect.

ruveyn



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

29 Oct 2011, 9:38 am

Atheists who can't stop being offended that diety is referred to on their money are so tiresome.

But the pledge of allegiance - the very concept that a free nation has a pledge of allegiance - is offensive all by itself.



number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

29 Oct 2011, 9:57 am

blauSamstag wrote:
Atheists who can't stop being offended that diety is referred to on their money are so tiresome.


See, I always thought it was funny because shouldn't religious people be offended by having "God" on their money? I mean really, can you picture someone like JC saying, "Hmm, I know, let's put Dad on the cash. God should be in our hearts and our wallets." To me it seems like maybe something went over someone's head on that one.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

29 Oct 2011, 10:52 am

number5 wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
Atheists who can't stop being offended that diety is referred to on their money are so tiresome.


See, I always thought it was funny because shouldn't religious people be offended by having "God" on their money? I mean really, can you picture someone like JC saying, "Hmm, I know, let's put Dad on the cash. God should be in our hearts and our wallets." To me it seems like maybe something went over someone's head on that one.


Seriously. Not to mention the whole root of all evil thing.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

29 Oct 2011, 11:03 am

The first amendment reads

Quote:
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.


Does the "Pledge of Allegiance" have anything to do with Congress?

Clearly the government is way out of line by including "In God we Trust" on its currency.

I Timothy 6:10 wrote:
For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.


By trying to make a religious claim on our money, are we not, in fact committing blasphemy?

The root of all of our evil is the love of our money. Now, we are associating a trust in God with the root of all of our evil.



phil777
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 May 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,825
Location: Montreal, Québec

29 Oct 2011, 1:18 pm

In God we trust, all others pay cash. ;)



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

31 Oct 2011, 10:38 am

pandabear wrote:
Does the "Pledge of Allegiance" have anything to do with Congress?


Given that Congress officially recognized the pledge in 1942 and that a joint resolution of Congress inserted the words, "under God," into the Pledge in 1954, I suspect that it does.


_________________
--James


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

31 Oct 2011, 10:51 am

visagrunt wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Does the "Pledge of Allegiance" have anything to do with Congress?


Given that Congress officially recognized the pledge in 1942 and that a joint resolution of Congress inserted the words, "under God," into the Pledge in 1954, I suspect that it does.


I never say the 1954 version. Ever. The United States is an insult to God, assuming that God exists.

ruveyn



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

31 Oct 2011, 11:12 am

ruveyn wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Does the "Pledge of Allegiance" have anything to do with Congress?


Given that Congress officially recognized the pledge in 1942 and that a joint resolution of Congress inserted the words, "under God," into the Pledge in 1954, I suspect that it does.


I never say the 1954 version. Ever. The United States is an insult to God, assuming that God exists.

ruveyn

Which this god probably doesn't. In that case the US congress is just being hypocritical. There exist already violations of the clause against the preference of religion in government and the second amendment is already being bent (although arguable for a good reason). I am sure Congress and the president are violating more of the principles of the constitution than they used to. They're just a lot more subtle in their violations.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

31 Oct 2011, 11:16 am

Gedrene wrote:
Which this god probably doesn't. In that case the US congress is just being hypocritical. There exist already violations of the clause against the preference of religion in government and the second amendment is already being bent (although arguable for a good reason). I am sure Congress and the president are violating more of the principles of the constitution than they used to. They're just a lot more subtle in their violations.
a

Do you think all those body bags coming back from in undeclared war is subtle?

ruveyn



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

31 Oct 2011, 11:19 am

ruveyn wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
Which this god probably doesn't. In that case the US congress is just being hypocritical. There exist already violations of the clause against the preference of religion in government and the second amendment is already being bent (although arguable for a good reason). I am sure Congress and the president are violating more of the principles of the constitution than they used to. They're just a lot more subtle in their violations.
a

Do you think all those body bags coming back from in undeclared war is subtle?

ruveyn

Which undeclared war? Iraq or Afghanistan?
I wouldn't blame Obama for then trying to end those wars quickly.

Libya isn't a place where body bags are coming from in any numbers at all.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

31 Oct 2011, 5:10 pm

Obama hasn't tried to end any wars, in fact he's getting us into more!

As for the pledge, I don't see why we say it all with the god part or not. Looking back, the whole practice seems pretty creepy...

Image



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

31 Oct 2011, 5:31 pm

Jacoby wrote:
Obama hasn't tried to end any wars, in fact he's getting us into more!


Yup, it was George W Bush who agreed to pull out troops out of Iraq, so o'bummer gets no credit there.