Why do they hate the First Amendment?

[Funny Fundie]

Just one day spent traversing the Mall in Washington, D.C., would expose you guys to an undeniable fact of American history: Biblical and religious quotations, including the Ten Commandments, adorn nearly every significant building and monument in our nation's capital. Indeed, the role of faith, family and freedom in American history is inscribed on monuments across the length and breadth of Washington, D.C. For instance, the words of Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address, carved in granite, thunder from inside the Memorial that bears his name, praying that the "mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away" but recalling that "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether." At the National Archives are the words "What is past is prologue," inlaid at the Archives' entrance is a bronze medallion of the Ten Commandments.
Washington Monument. is inscribed on the aluminum tip of the capstone, is the Latin phrase Laus Deo -- "Praise be to God." Along the stairway to that height are 190 carved tributes donated by states, cities, individuals, associations, and foreign governments. The blocks resound with quotations from Scripture -- "Holiness to the Lord" (Exodus 28), "Search the Scriptures" (John 5:39), "The memory of the just is blessed" (Proverbs 10:7) -- and such invocations as, "May Heaven to this Union continue its Benefice."
the words of Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address, carved in granite, thunder from inside the Memorial that bears his name, praying that the "mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away" but recalling that "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."

“It can not be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians, not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!”
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."

--Patrick Henry.​

​

​

Christian and Jewish symbols on Federal property--clearly not intended to be separate from the state.​

​

This should all tell us that the First Amenment isn't meant to be applied to religious symbols on Federal property, and Patrick Henry all but concludes that we may invoke the name of Jesus when we pray before the high school football game.
​

My, how the irreligious zealots and secularists have damaged the integrity and heritage of this country!
​

 

[QuakerOats]

Looking at all of the religious symbols, art, and text 'embedded' into American society, it's hard not to forget that Judaeo-Christianity played a large part in it's history, as it continues to today. However, I think it's very important to look at everything in context, especially where the law is concerned. Way back when, it was probably inconceivable to many that Christianity, or religion in general, would not be so much a part of our lives today, if you will, as it was for them. What I mean is, for many of them, no doubt 'freedom of religion' meant 'freedom to practice Judaeo-Christianity as you choose,' not necessarily because they were intolerant, so to speak, but because it was all they knew, as a majority of the people who came to America were Westerners, immersed in the Judaeo-Christian teachings of the time. Things were not as they are today, and as times have changed, we must apply the law accordingly. That said, I don't approve of removing the old articles of faith from public buildings, as reminders of the past, but I also don't think new ones should be erected. In Canada, our national anthem says 'God keep our land, glorious and free...' It's a reminder of our Judaeo-Christian heritage, which actually isn't as 'strong' as yours in the United States, yet we very rarely hear complaints about our anthem from Atheists, or whomever (that I'm aware of, anyhow). We tend to just accept it as it is, an 'artifact' of part of our heritage, and move on. A Muslim friend of mine in Bosnia says things are pretty much the same way there. People just respect that Judaeo-Christianity, and Islam have been, and continue to be a large part of the society there, and think nothing more of it. A healthy balance, I say. In conclusion, I don't think it's a 'hate' of the First Amendment, it's just a failure to understand it, often on both sides.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

DO you really want to get into it? The US was not founded as a Christian nation nor were our laws based on anything in the bible.

A quote from Abraham Lincoln.
"The Bible is not my book, and Christianity is not my religion. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma."

John Adams
"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.

James Madison
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."


Ben Franklin
"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my church. "

"Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. "


The treaty of Tripoli
"As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."


Thomas Jefferson
". . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law"

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.
The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus."

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816
Priests...dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversions of the duperies on which they live.
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Correa de Serra, April 11, 1820
It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825


Thomas Paine
"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." - Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason, 1794-1795.)
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of... Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."- Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason, 1794-1795

 

[wanderingone]

You want to base our laws on architecture and sculpture?

Why do you need to pray in public before a football game?

 

[craigerNY]

You forgot Mohammed, he is part of the Frieze of the supreme court. What say you of that Funny Fundie?

 

[jayem]

I'm a non-believer, though I personally don't think that purely ceremonial religiosity is such a big deal. But the 1st Amendment also means that government shouldn't favor one lawful religion over another. The US in the 21st century is a pluralistic society with many Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, and other citizens. Their faiths must be treated as the full legal equivalent of Christianity. So I really don't have a problem if a public school asks a Baptist minister to deliver a prayer at graduation. But if even one Jewish or Indian-American student requests it, then a rabbi or a Hindu priest should also deliver a prayer. And if a non-theistic student requests it, then a humanist or secularist speaker should be allowed, too. Expression of Christianity is fine, but government cannot show preference to it. Government must be neutral regarding all law-abiding religious beliefs and practices, and cannot support the majority over the minority.

 

[Funny Fundie]

Looking at all of the religious symbols, art, and text 'embedded' into American society, it's hard not to forget that Judaeo-Christianity played a large part in it's history, as it continues to today. However, I think it's very important to look at everything in context, especially where the law is concerned. Way back when, it was probably inconceivable to many that Christianity, or religion in general, would not be so much a part of our lives today, if you will, as it was for them. What I mean is, for many of them, no doubt 'freedom of religion' meant 'freedom to practice Judaeo-Christianity as you choose,' not necessarily because they were intolerant, so to speak, but because it was all they knew. In conclusion, I don't think it's a 'hate' of the First Amendment, it's just a failure to understand it, often on both sides.

DO you really want to get into it? The US was not founded as a Christian nation nor were our laws based on anything in the bible.

A quote from Abraham Lincoln.
"The Bible is not my book, and Christianity is not my religion. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma."

John Adams
"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.

James Madison
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."


Ben Franklin
"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my church. "

"Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. "


The treaty of Tripoli
"As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."


Thomas Jefferson
". . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law"

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.
The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus."

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816
Priests...dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversions of the duperies on which they live.
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Correa de Serra, April 11, 1820
It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825


Thomas Paine
"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." - Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason, 1794-1795.)
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of... Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."- Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason, 1794-1795

Guys, I think u have to come to a consensus.

The first person (QuakerOats) says that Christianity played a very major role in our country back then, and that everyone was more or less a practicing Christian back then.

Then OphidiaPhile contradicts QuakerOats by saying everyone back then were hardened, militant secularists, and that our Founding Fathers seemed as anti-Christian then as the staunch atheists are today (i am going by the quotes he provided).

So, what's it going to be? was everyone a christian back then and that christian/jewish symbols were just par for the course? Or were all our Founding Fathers the opposite of that; militant atheists.

Ophidiaphile? QuakerOats? You guys will have to agree with one another first before we can proceed in a logical manner.

 

[craigerNY]

Ah yes, the "all or none" proposal..................and away we go

 

[Isambard]

Ah yes, the "all or none" proposal..................and away we go

What is it about the fundie mind that only allows them to see the world in false dichotomies?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

DO you really want to get into it? The US was not founded as a Christian nation nor were our laws based on anything in the bible.

To the victors belong the spoils. And of course how to write history.

Are you correct? America has a past.

America was founded by murderous traitors and terrorists. And look what we are today, a nation with multiple wars and territorial conquest in every century and multiple prisons filled with violene felons in every state. With wealthy businessmen becoming more wealthy every decade since its inception.

Let's look at history through an unclouded lens.

John Adams: Traitor, terrorist.

James Madison: Advocate of treason and war. Sponser of terrorism.

Ben Franklin: Traitor, spy, propagandist and terrorist.

The treaty of Tripoli: America at war. A familiar theme of this "secular" nation from its founding until this very day. The T of T, a deal cut with Islamic terrorists for big business to gain wealth. Another familiar theme of secular America.

Thomas Jefferson: Traitor, slave owner, terrorist.

Thomas Paine: Propagandist, traitor, terrorist.

Abraham Lincoln: Slaughtered fellow human beings for federal (secular) tax dollars to keep flooding in from the Southern states. Wrote the emancipation proclamation to crush the Southern states and drive them to ruin, killing and unleashing disease and suffering on untold thousands of people in the process.

This could be said of the country set forth by these men:

It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." - Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason, 1794-1795.)

What did the Christians do in America?

They built universities, hospitals and the schools.

Fortunately for the future of America and Britain's more fortunate citizens . . . , there were Christians standing alongside these secularists and signing the Declaration of Indepence.

Many would come to be known as abolitionists, a Christian movement to end the salvery practiced by men like Thomas Jefferson and his fellow wealthy land owners.

The Church: Enslaver or Liberator?

By Richard Reddie

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/abolition/church_and_slavery_article_04.shtml

But the real thrust of Christian abolitionism emerged from the evangelical revival of the 18th century, which spawned dynamic Christians who had clear-cut beliefs on morality and sin, which shaped their approach to the issue of slavery.
Wesley's 'Thoughts Upon Slavery' questioned the morality of slavery and those who took part in it, while William Wilberforce - the evangelical Anglican member of parliament who campaigned to end the slave trade - believed that he had been called by God to end the immoral practice of slavery.

'The Church of England had links to slavery... the bishop of Exeter personally owned slaves.'

Many evangelicals were interested in the physical as well as spiritual condition of enslaved Africans. Clergymen such as James Ramsay, who had worked in the Caribbean, was influential in pointing out to fellow believers that many Africans died without hearing the gospel.
Practical evangelical abolition work began with the Anglican Granville Sharp in the mid 1760s, when he fought for the freedom of a young African, Jonathan Strong. Sharp rose to national prominence during the landmark Somerset Case of 1772, which determined the status of slavery in Britain.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

Guys, I think u have to come to a consensus.

The first person (QuakerOats) says that Christianity played a very major role in our country back then, and that everyone was more or less a practicing Christian back then.

Then OphidiaPhile contradicts QuakerOats by saying everyone back then were hardened, militant secularists, and that our Founding Fathers seemed as anti-Christian then as the staunch atheists are today (i am going by the quotes he provided).

So, what's it going to be? was everyone a christian back then and that christian/jewish symbols were just par for the course? Or were all our Founding Fathers the opposite of that; militant atheists.

Ophidiaphile? QuakerOats? You guys will have to agree with one another first before we can proceed in a logical manner.

Christians do not even agree so why should anyone else? I have done a lot of research and yes most of the common uneducated people were Christian whereas the educated and the founding fathers were either Deists or Humanists.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

To the victors belong the spoils. And of course how to write history.

Are you correct? America has a past.

America was founded by murderous traitors and terrorists. And look what we are today, a nation with multiple wars and territorial conquest in every century and multiple prisons filled with violene felons in every state. With wealthy businessmen becoming more wealthy every decade since its inception.

Let's look at history through an unclouded lens.

John Adams: Traitor, terrorist.

James Madison: Advocate of treason and war. Sponser of terrorism.

Ben Franklin: Traitor, spy, propagandist and terrorist.

The treaty of Tripoli: America at war. A familiar theme of this "secular" nation from its founding until this very day. The T of T, a deal cut with Islamic terrorists for big business to gain wealth. Another familiar theme of secular America.

Thomas Jefferson: Traitor, slave owner, terrorist.

Thomas Paine: Propagandist, traitor, terrorist.

Abraham Lincoln: Slaughtered fellow human beings for federal (secular) tax dollars to keep flooding in from the Southern states. Wrote the emancipation proclamation to crush the Southern states and drive them to ruin, killing and unleashing disease and suffering on untold thousands of people in the process.

This could be said of the country set forth by these men:

It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." - Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason, 1794-1795.)

What did the Christians do in America?

They built universities, hospitals and the schools.

Fortunately for the future of America and Britain's more fortunate citizens . . . , there were Christians standing alongside these secularists and signing the Declaration of Indepence.

Many would come to be known as abolitionists, a Christian movement to end the salvery practiced by men like Thomas Jefferson and his fellow wealthy land owners.

We should have let the redneck fly over states secede when they wanted to it would be a better country now.

 

[Beanieboy]

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.

It seems the author of the OP has the issue, not others who are trying to observe it by making religion neutral in regards to Congress.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

We should have let the redneck fly over states secede when they wanted to it would be a better country now.

For them, for sure.

The Christians would have ended slavery a lot more peaceful then the secularists did.

Sweet home Nashville.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

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.

Every word exclusively for religion. Even the secularists that slaughtered the British to sieze their lands and cities knew that Christians would set things right if only allowed to be what they are without being impeded.

Smart those perfidious American secularists.

It seems the author of the OP has the issue, not others who are trying to observe it by making religion neutral in regards to Congress.

But that's not what's happening. The modern day secularists are trying to outlaw free speech and peaceful assembly of Christians in every public arena. Now let's reread that FIRST (and obviously MOST important right) Amendment and allow religious people to spread their message without government censorship anywhere that freedom (and the Constitution) is important.

 

[Beanieboy]

Every word exclusively for religion. Even the secularists that slaughtered the British to sieze their lands and cities knew that Christians would set things right if only allowed to be what they are without being impeded.

Smart those perfidious American secularists.



But that's not what's happening. The modern day secularists are trying to outlaw free speech and peaceful assembly of Christians in every public arena. Now let's reread that FIRST (and obviously MOST important right) Amendment and allow religious people to spread their message without government censorship anywhere that freedom (and the Constitution) is important.

Can you cite examples where Americans are not allowed to practice their religion privately, or are not allowed to spread their message?

Even Phelps isn't censored, and his message and method are quite vile.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Christians do not even agree so why should anyone else? I have done a lot of research and yes most of the common uneducated people were Christian whereas the educated and the founding fathers were either Deists or Humanists.

How fascinating. The Christians are the open-minded ones practicing diversity and the secularists are the lemmings all in lock-step.

I love it.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Can you cite examples where Americans are not allowed to practice their religion privately,

Soulforce has harrassed private Christian schools and have pressured Christian Churches with disruption and protest. Click on over to soulforce.org.

or are not allowed to spread their message?

You're kidding right?

Even Phelps isn't censored, and his message and method are quite vile.

Always the Phelps thing. One bad Christian in a country of tens of millions of them.

Shall we compare individuals of the gay community against those of the Christian comunity?

How many missionaries of Gay actvism are heading out to African nations to clothe and feed the poor and needy there?

 

[Beanieboy]

Soulforce has harrassed private Christian schools and have pressured Christian Churches with disruption and protest. Click on over to soulforce.org.

Are you talking about the Equality Riders?

Every day, thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people suffer harassment, violence, and discrimination at the hands of those who do not understand them. This oppression usually hides in plain sight, masquerading as rigid doctrine or timeless tradition. Consequently, it often goes unchallenged and unchanged. Guided by principles of nonviolence, we at Soulforce Q approach these controversial issues with a readiness to meet people where they are. It is our belief that open and honest discussion begets understanding and healing, and that philosophy is at the heart of our work.

The Equality Ride is a traveling forum that gives young adults the chance to deconstruct injustice and the rhetoric that sustains it. It allows emerging young leaders to unite in the struggle for common equality. The idea is this. We get on a bus and journey to various institutions of higher learning. Through informal conversation and educational programming we explore concepts of diversity, comparing the effects of inclusive and exclusive viewpoints. More practically, we share and gain insights about how our beliefs influence policy and culture, thereby impacting society. Our goal is to carefully and collectively examine the intersection wherein faith meets gender and sexuality. Such discourse, especially when it affirms the beauty of our differences, plays an essential role in creating a safe learning and living environment for everyone.

Thus far, the Equality Ride has engaged more than fifty academic communities. Most have shown considerable hospitality in welcoming us, and our legacy at those schools is one of mutual growth and compassionate fellowship. In addition to panels and schoolwide symposiums, we have joined students in cafeterias and coffee shops, participated in Bible studies and worship services, and given presentations in packed classrooms. Unfortunately, not every school chooses to host the Equality Ride. With the notable exceptions of Morehouse College and Spelman College, voluntary redemptive suffering in the form of civil disobedience may become our avenue towards progress if, and only if, a school ignores the urgency and rejects dialogue.

A Movement in itself, the Equality Ride is empowering future generations to put their faith in action and make social justice a reality.

The project is to simply create discourse, to get people to think, and to examine the oppression, violence, and discrimination that gays and lesbian face. Oppressing others is not part of Christianity, nor is discrimination, or acting in violence towards one neighbor.

I don't understand how they are no allowing someone to practice their religion.

You're kidding right?
Always the Phelps thing. One bad Christian in a country of tens of millions of them.

I don't know if I can in good conscious call Phelps a Christian, because I believe him to be an enemy of God, and of his neighbor.
Nor was I trying to compare Christians to Phelps, which was my fault. I can see how you could have read it that way.
I meant that Phelps has his own brand of religion, and is able to freely practice it, even to the point of offending the grieving, legally, so I was trying to understand how someone practicing Christianity in a much more loving manner is not allowed to.

Shall we compare individuals of the gay community against those of the Christian comunity?

They overlap, so I don't think one could, nor do I see much point. I was simply trying to understand how Christians are being oppressed in a country where they are the majority, and in places like Minneapolis, liquor stores must obey Blue Laws, where they cannot sell alcohol on a Sunday, something where Christianity violates free trade due to their own beliefs. (If you don't want to drink on Sunday, work on Sunday, or buy alcohol on Sunday, no one will force you if other people may.)

How many missionaries of Gay actvism are heading out to African nations to clothe and feed the poor and needy there?

That's like saying, "How many missionaries of Republican Activism are heading out to clothe and feed the poor?" It doesn't make Republicans callous to the needy in 3rd World Countries. It's just that Republicans probably deal with Republican Issues, and join the Peace Corp if they want to travel to Africa to help people. Since there are nonChristian organizations (Peace Corp, etc.) where Republican can join, as well as religious organizations that are religion related, where members are Republican, being Republican is irrelevant.

However, religions, like Christianity, say things like, "I was hungry, and you fed me," so it would make sense that they would use that as one of their focuses and duties to serve God.

Have you been on such a missionary project? Can you talk about it? I'm very curious about. I had some time off when I was laid off, and I was trying to do something similar to what a friend had done, where she worked on a farm that grew food for people with AIDS and HIV. However, she was expected to pay for her flight, her lodging, for the time she stayed, and the work was all volunteer. She had to spend roughly $3000 to stay there for 6 weeks in Tanzania.

Have you had any experiences?

 

[WatersMoon110]

You forgot Mohammed, he is part of the Frieze of the supreme court. What say you of that Funny Fundie?

That must be rather offensive to Muslims, since they consider it to be blasphemy to depict the prophet. Actually, they tend not to carve or illustrate any human figures. I believe because it distracts the mind from God?