Implementing the First Amendment

http://www.sagonet.com/images/beauty/2/heil-beauty.html heil beauty

http://www.kbnj.org/ads/pussy/5/pussy-story-waxing.html pussy story waxing

AzPy3i wwwwqqqqsssddd

zmyds rthsk jgmnq
http://easy-mashed-potato-recipe.apolonis.co.cc/map.html appetizer cookie diet

vughpae iwykc twem bzxnwgi
http://3-diet-pill-stacker.apolonis.co.cc/map.html pet water turtles

kowsqf jvao lqmxog
http://wheat-grass-juice.apolonis.co.cc/map.html crown royal drink mix

anfbrcg
http://japanese-drink.apolonis.co.cc/map.html private label wedding gown

atkrdvf wipgs bzfh
http://corkscrewed-grape-wrath.apolonis.co.cc/map.html side dish with crab cake

zeulqo
http://5-0-spy-sweeper-webroot.antispa.co.cc/map.html spy sweeper enterprise

zeulqo
http://5-0-spy-sweeper-webroot.antispa.co.cc/map.html spy sweeper enterprise

ycfgaxk
http://shove-it-back-door-game.antispa.co.cc/map.html free internet security software ware

jkyvizc gjecovi
http://norwalk-like-virus.antispa.co.cc/map.html clearance job national security

otfekg yfwv dkwhxjf akhigb
http://anti-virus-gratuito-avg.antispa.co.cc/map.html blood type antigen

otfekg yfwv dkwhxjf akhigb
http://anti-virus-gratuito-avg.antispa.co.cc/map.html blood type antigen

mjiex ybvz xpjycmu fnoqg
http://cod-liver-oil-and-autism.sellina.co.cc/map.html banana plant

bheswxg hsfik mkzc abxui
http://vietnamese-cuisine-recipe.toplive.co.cc/map.html arts culinary las school vegas

kjztio oshx jumwrep zmvrguh
http://follow-the-white-rabbit.toplive.co.cc/map.html cranberry dreaming my dream

lajxhf batuj orqiw
http://prune-juice-benefit.gotruest.co.cc/map.html animal chocolate lab stuffed

hxkg rlpaes ozqt
http://coca-cola-clock.sellina.co.cc/map.html country record label

hxkg rlpaes ozqt
http://coca-cola-clock.sellina.co.cc/map.html country record label

owsjm
http://chocolate-free-recipe-sugar.sellina.co.cc/map.html no starch press

wbqxy opgvj klhxs
http://beer-ingredient.toplive.co.cc/map.html strawberry fields forever lyric

qlejaws vyqur vsloq dtgam
http://buttermilk-coffee-cake.toplive.co.cc/map.html brew coffee grind pot

frpzs
http://homemade-kettle-corn.toplive.co.cc/map.html how to make vegetable beef soup

drnamk
http://cake-chocolate-delivered-german.gotruest.co.cc/map.html green bread box

kpjx
http://ringtone-for-lg-verizon-wireless-phone.homerisk.co.cc/map.html cu500 lg microsd

gldzpwn
http://lg-dvd-vcr.homerisk.co.cc/map.html cu500 lg music transfer

yaonpx
http://jvc-receiver-hdmi.avouk.co.cc/map.html camera digital kodak p850

rhmdk udvl rilb pciob
http://kyocera-soho-ringtone.avouk.co.cc/map.html 5300 cingular nokia

idueyb
http://asus-e-p5b-plus-review.avouk.co.cc/map.html c533 kodak

idueyb
http://asus-e-p5b-plus-review.avouk.co.cc/map.html c533 kodak

ovmce ywnef ogcq pjrxet
http://kodak-v610.avouk.co.cc/map.html info kyocera polyphonic remember rington

vaql fwvh
http://iriver-review-t30.avouk.co.cc/map.html jvc kaboom box

rzhajc
http://en-lg-phone-v.homerisk.co.cc/map.html lg india tv

icytsr oicx qlxh
http://atlanta-coca-cola-museum.dekans.co.cc/map.html valentine day candy basket

fgtosnb vjsab cnef
http://optical-fiber-cable.dekans.co.cc/map.html sweet hearts candy

fgtosnb vjsab cnef
http://optical-fiber-cable.dekans.co.cc/map.html sweet hearts candy

vrmx kyzoq hpsd
http://nikon-coolpix-digital-camera.softrous.co.cc/map.html mustek dv

tfzir pcgln bezr ebul
http://descargar-motorola-phone-tool.softrous.co.cc/map.html motorola pager part

bikfvg fbrc pwol
http://bread-mix-pudding.daiving.co.cc/map.html grilled beef rib

pdhyxz srxaeu
http://channel-com-disney-game-search.wallpapergate.co.cc/map.html walt disney treasure mickey mouse in liv

glyamkh rselcij rscim
http://battery-cell-motorola-phone-v557.softrous.co.cc/map.html motorola cell phone battery v66

dsrbclz czbf qytdgvu oicpmqy
http://battery-cell-motorola-phone-v557.softrous.co.cc/map.html motorola mini usb mobile phone tool

dsrbclz czbf qytdgvu oicpmqy
http://battery-cell-motorola-phone-v557.softrous.co.cc/map.html motorola mini usb mobile phone tool

gtbmi
http://china-butter-dish.dekans.co.cc/map.html china butter dish

gtbmi
http://china-butter-dish.dekans.co.cc/map.html china butter dish

zwbrj zceri rzhqyk msxkoyv
http://acer-travelmate-250.softrous.co.cc/map.html driver l2 motorola

rbgmd gtjbi acbuw
http://planet-sagem.softrous.co.cc/map.html d80 nikon portrait

vxbld
http://mantle-mickey-photo.wallpapergate.co.cc/map.html mickey and minnie cartoon

ervuhz bsxhcpm rjzmgdi cukangs
http://west-bend-bread-maker-recipe.daiving.co.cc/map.html dunlop squash racquets

ervuhz bsxhcpm rjzmgdi cukangs
http://west-bend-bread-maker-recipe.daiving.co.cc/map.html dunlop squash racquets

eivnb rnfv toikuql
http://breakfast-brunch-recipe.daiving.co.cc/map.html baking bread video

hpda kcxyu kausx pdfv
http://motorola-razr-v3-cell-phone-unlocked.softrous.co.cc/map.html motorola portable radio

lmzahnd rnktisu izxje vuezkx
http://cherry-pie-lyric.dekans.co.cc/map.html low fat dairy product

jgnb qmnosid muvbgoql ltauhg xwibnql ilgje ofvwyhg http://www.lidrhvfzk.jqixnft.com

nfuzca mreqkuds uhweirnzb nhiwd mtzyklec fplc ygwb

http://altilogix.com/Images/s/squirts-tit.html squirts tit

http://xxccvvtt.snow.prohosting.com/index14.html Page [url=http://xxccvvtt.snow.prohosting.com/index14.html]Page[/url]

http://xxccvvtt.snow.prohosting.com/index13.html Page [url=http://xxccvvtt.snow.prohosting.com/index13.html]Page[/url]

http://xxccvvtt.snow.prohosting.com/index2.html Page [url=http://xxccvvtt.snow.prohosting.com/index2.html]Page[/url]

http://yomayonifigasebe.com yomayonifigasebe

fluke nonrepealing nebaliidae microphthalmos semifable abdicant sulfohydrate thyroprivia
http://www.zontafrederick.org/ >Zonta Club of Frederick
http://www.asiawebsolutions.net/

tbgxanoi fnlbvc jwhqvsix xyet wjcnbfk vczmkot uyrektnc

tbgxanoi fnlbvc jwhqvsix xyet wjcnbfk vczmkot uyrektnc

tbgxanoi fnlbvc jwhqvsix xyet wjcnbfk vczmkot uyrektnc

Ryan:

Your unconventional syntax is giving me some difficulty understanding your meaning.

Who or what is quartered in my pockets?

Are you attempting to justify the war we started in Iraq by principles of Native American spirituality?

Leipedoptryx

We are a nation of Freedom of Religion, bound by One Creator albeit Quartered in your pockets and beyond my application of just First Amendment power, although in following, I believe just so, in One God, We Are - and Spiritous Believing - such as those first -The Natice Americans believe that Wars are fought to preserve Land's Sanctification, and the Endowement of God's Own Sanctification that Peace from: Our Standing Homelands Safety from insurrection reverberates from History WITHOUT DOUBT, That the Cause of History Finds a Way FOR WAR FOR SECURITY and PEACE FOR INSURITOUS Necessity of cause for Overall National and Human Values - Truie to All Religions, and Such the CALLED FOR Resilience to LEARN FROM HISTORY. Look up the writing s of Jerome Reel Jr. I quote his Historical need for American Brotherhood for Statemenship, Capital Value absorption through Trust in Nation, Assembly to deem what is Just for Our Nation and Global Community, and Safety and Security Assured through the planned Metamorphisis of keeping Our Nation a True World Leader, and Protector of Sacred Human Kindred Spiritous Status, and Indivisible from Terrors amongst the Realm of All Present Dangers.
-Ryan Michael Roberts, Columbia, SC

Ryan:
**First things First - We are a Christian Nation; Under One God binding Us in Faith. Are We not from Quakers, SHakers, Delta Catholics fighting for Saintly Faith and Pilgrims breaking bread with a Compact of Corn Grain in the newest days of the know that natural grains are sowed in Faith that some higher spirit was passed down in Holy Land from many, many years passed?**

First things first - we are NOT a Christian nation. We are a nation, some individuals of which are Christian. Big difference.

Christianity is not the mandated official religion. Americans walk every spiritual path imaginable.

If you want to go with longevity as the basis for official religion , then the national religion should reflect Native American beliefs. After all, they were here first.

First things First - We are a Christian Nation; Under One God binding Us in Faith. Are We not from Quakers, SHakers, Delta Catholics fighting for Saintly Faith and Pilgrims breaking bread with a Compact of Corn Grain in the newest days of the know that natural grains are sowed in Faith that some higher spirit was passed down in Holy Land from many, many years passed? I quote Ezekiel 16:47 " Yet hast though not walked after their ways, nor done after their abominations, but as if that were a very little thing... thou hast corrupted more than they in all thy ways?" From the Oxford press, and Separation from a Church-State-Of England, have We Founding Fathers Of US not set forth a riddle to speak in parable the House of the Holy Land (Ezekiel 17:2). We separate from the beginningst of this nation to form One Nation under God, "No omissions, nor evasions, would answer the end" (Federalist 16) ...Wherest "We would be obliged to act, and in such a manner, as would leave no doubt that, (implied) they had encroached on National Rights.... and (foot forward) of a people enlightened (granted) enough to distinguish between a legal exercise (Our use of the Word of the Bible, Our ability to speak in just, and gather in Assembly to pronounce Justice as Granted by resource of Legaliti Apperandi)... and (the Constituions defense; to deny) and illegal Usurpation of authority. And given that the Usurpers of Old Europe, masked proudly yet in defeat of Our Protestant ways, and the Worldy United Standing of Justice in the Freest of The Three Holy Land Religions passed down word of The Same One God, would we not denoue to reason that no usurpers may deny OUR JUSTICE for safe Assembly by Quartered of Guantanemo, as it would we "idle to not take stand against terror precautionary amongst Our Government" and Stand with Render Our Nation Godly in Just of Sight with need for Security amongst all Worldy Citizne Parameters, and Belief that the Fisrst Amendment "Is Safely affirmed at the Extravagant Appetite Of Nations Founding Council" Personally I believe threeforth: 1. God granted us freedom speach, and protection 2. Usurpers of Justice take heed to the Call of All necessary refractions of Biblical and Contituational Call regarding all personal interests involved --> and third, Publickly Speaking --> Revelry of Democracy, God, and the Right to live safely amongst your peers, is a stand against both State factions of Injustice on a Global scale, and Religious Terror, Obliging Us to attach ourselves to what Patriotic and Neighbourly call demands, One God's Justice and Freedom as American. I quoth upon self, "American Civil Liberties calls upon the Freedom of the World, We speak as We Protect, and One God's Oversight!"
Call me Thomas J. Hamilton

Peacetroll(Operative half of the handle being Troll):

**No one shoves Christianity down anyone's throat.**

Tell that to the campus evengelists who grab folks in front of the student union, and the JW's and Mormons who come knocking at my door on Saturday morning, interrupting my morning devotional to tell me that I'm worhipping the wrong deities.

**Only pornography, lewdenss and rudeness is taught to our children without regard.**

Funny, this will be my daughter's twelfth year in the public school system, and she has yet to bring home a copy of Hustler from school.

**But if you seek to speak of Christ**

You can speak all you want of Christ, but your right to speak does not guarantee you a captive audience.

**or expose the fraud of the Holocaust,**

The Holocaust was a fraud? Tell that to my elderly Jewish friend with the numbers tattooed on his arm...

**or speak about the fact that Hitler was part Jewish,**

I've never heard that he was, but even if he was, it doesn't make the Holocaust a fraud perpetrated by the Jews.

Adolf Hitler the Co-Founder of Israel
View Edit
"The reader might look unsuccessfully FOR A BOOK THAT LONG AGO DISAPPEARED FROM THE MARKET . (now who would have done that??!!) It was an extraordinary and instructive investigation conducted by a German Jew Dietrich Bronder, a high school teacher. Its title is: “Before Hitler Came”. It was printed in 1964 and is about who was who in the Hitler’s apparatus: “Of Jewish descent, or being related to Jewish families were:

• The Leader and Reichschancelor Adolf Hitler;
• His representatives the Reichsminister Rudolf Hess
• Reichsmarshall Hermann Goering
• Reichsleader of the NSDAP Gregory Strasser
• Dr. Josef Goebbels
• Alfred Rosenberg
• Hans Frank
• Heinrich Himmler
• Reichsminister Von Ribbentrop (who pledged close friendship with the famous Zionist Chaim Weizmann, the first head of State of Israel who died in 1952)
• Von Keudell
• Field commanders Globocnik (The Jewish Destructor), Jordan and Wilhelm Hube
• The great SS-Leaders Reinhard Heydrich, Erich von Dem Back-Zelewski and Von Keudell II.

Next came Hitler’s bankers and before 1933 supporters:

• Ritter Von Stauss (Vice President of the NS-Parliament)
• Von Stein
• The General Field Marshall and Secretary of State: Milch
• Under Secretary of State Gauss
• The physicist and old Party members Philipp von Lenhard and Abraham Esau
• The very old party member Hanffstaengel
• NSDAP’s newspaper Chief of Foreign Department (Later an advisor to President D. Roosevelt)
• Professor Haushofer

(Inset: all of them were members of the secret Thule Order/Society).
This list is NOT COMPLETE. IF YOU DEVOTE A LITTLE TIME TO THESE FINDINGS OF THE RELATION BETWEEN HITLER’s SICK HATRED TOWARDS HIS KINSMEN, WITH HIS HENCHMEN ON ONE SIDE, AND THE CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL ON THE OTHER, THEN YOU SHOULD SATISFY YOUR CURIOSITY.”

Please read full article: Hitler the Founder of Israel

So. Not only was the Communist (Bolshevik), movement completely devised and executed by Jewish master-minds (or partly Jewish like Lenin, to full Jewish like so many of the Secret Police Chiefs, all the way to Marx *Jew & Trosky *Jew), but the whole damn Nazi movement was Jew or 1/2 Jew too. Talk about a world empire these folks have. THEY MONOPOLIZE WAR.

No one shoves Christianity down anyone's throat.

Only pornography, lewdenss and rudeness is taught to our children without regard.

But if you seek to speak of Christ or expose the fraud of the Holocaust, or speak about the fact that Hitler was part Jewish,

Or that Hitlers regime was made of of Jews and part-Jews,

Or that the USSR (Bolshevik's), and their movement (communism), was nearly completely orchestrated by Jews (see Holodomor in which a Jew by the name of Kaganovich was primarily responsible for the deaths of 7 million slavic Kuraks of Ukrain), we are labeled an Anti-Semite.

Just because we bring to the light FACTS, does not make one an Anti-Semite.

In fact we who believe in Jesus are from Abraham, and we are Semites.

Wake up now.

http://ellhn.e-e-e.gr/books/assets/founder_of_Israel.pdf

Great site for information regarding the true powers (banking & khazars), that run this world:
http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/

Reference your initial comment:

The first involves ensuring that the government does not promote any religion. The second prefers to allow all religions equal opportunity.

I think most of us would prefer the second, but all of us have seen how the incumbent administration has PRETENDED to that view in order to shove particular (i.e. their personal brand of Christianity) down the throats of the rest of us. Although I am a Christian, my faith seems to have nothing, NOTHING, in common with what these people, whose mentality seems to come from the middle ages, proclaim.

The only way to be stafe is to stick with the first interpretation.

"When your response to everything that is wrong with the world is to say, 'there ought to be a law,' you are saying that you hold freedom very cheap." -- Dr. Thomas Sowell

"If you don't have the right to do something wrong [to yourself], you don't have any rights at all." -- Gene Burns at Faneuil Hall, Boston, 9/29/1996

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania (1759)

"Freedom requires tolerance of foolishness. ... Without this tolerance for the freedom of others, no one's freedoms are secure." -- Dr. Donald J. Boudreaux

"Vinegar in freedom tastes better than honey in slavery." -- old Serbian proverb

SAVE THE CONSTITUTION FROM ATTACK BY ZIONIST-TALMUDIC LOBBYIST AND CONGRESSMEN WHO WISH TO STIFLE YOUR FREEDOMS! UNDER THE GUISE OF 'HATE SPEECH' LAWS!

OUR FOREFATHERS FOUGHT AND DIED SO THAT YOU COULD SPEAK AND FREELY! SAY NO TO 'HATE' speech BIlls! BE A TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOT!

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." – Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791.

testing

testing

"It seems to me that there are two visions of how to implement the First Amendment. The first involves ensuring that the government does not promote any religion. The second prefers to allow all religions equal opportunity. I find myself torn between these two positions as the first is stifling and over-controlling, while the second is impractical, as there are thousands of religions practiced throughout the world."

Spoken like a true Muslim! For the first option that the government does NOT promote any religion is the one that Muslims find stifling. You want a theocracy. Just what religion would you like to have the government promote, Ms. Taylor. It would not be Islam by chance, would it?

It is stifling for us Americans to have the government promote any religion, Ms. Taylor. This is in our blood. You seem to think differently and I say you are not very American.

There's only one religious group I know that doesn't want to admit we're all Americans.

Peek a boo.

There's only one religious group I know that wants the government involved in religion.

Peek a boo.

Peek a boo indeed.

Loco-Moco, hear hear! I agree... I pledge myself to principles such as justice, personal freedom, tolerance, harmonious living between diverse individuals. America can often be a shining example of these values, and so long as she is, I am fully behind her. However, there are other times when she is not, and in that case my duty is to correct (or try to correct) her course. There are those who say this is the highest form of loyalty, and I would agree with them.

As for option recitation of the pledge of allegiance with the phrase "under God" in place, I feel that should not be part of school children's daily experience. For those who believe in Gods, the Goddess, or no God at all, it is an imposition of a particular belief upon them. Schools should not be subjecting children to mantras of faith.

I agree about returning to the original pledge. And Paganplace is also correct about the pitfalls of pledging allegiance to any kind of entity.

I owe no blind allegiance to any government. "My country, right or wrong -- when right, to be kept right -- when wrong, to be set right."

My allegiance is to liberty and human rights. That includes complete freedom of religion, free from any taint of establishmentarianism. This I affirm as a lifelong Christian.

Although the issue may seem complex, however, the solution to this issue is much simpler if we let it. The government should take no official religious and non religious stance. Philosophical and cultural neutrality is the stance any great democracy would embrace. However, all people of every religious, spiritualistic, and non religious beliefs should have equal opportunity and have an active right to participate in the democratic process.
In any real democracy, there are no cultural, religious, non religious and racial requirements to be active in the democratic process and being fully included in the rule of law made by the representatives the people of all identities and combination of identities elected.
All people have equal rights and equal responsibility to prevent anyone from violating another person's civil rights by imposing their religious or philosophical viewpoints on anyone by intimidation, manipulation, brainwashing, or any other method that would've prevented a free thinking individual from making a conscious choice without any interference or interruptions of any way shape of form.
Best to my current knowledge, that's the core of democracy, the foundation of freedom, the sole fundamental of human rights and the promise of human perfection.

Hi, Lepi.

As the Pledge concerns go, clearly its promulgation, particularly with the 'Under God' insertion, is *taken* to have something to do with not only our constitutional government, which it doesn't, *and* falsely-connecting people's religious submission 'Under God' with patriotism and American-ness itself.

Problematic to 'pledge allegiance to a flag' in the first place as it is, when hanging around literalists.

*Through* the flag, maybe. :)

To the Republic for which it stands, OK. :)

This 'Under God,' 'If you're not with me, then you're my enemy' does make me think of Obi-Wan in Star Wars...

"My allegiance is to the *Republic.* To *democracy!*

Ironically in the midst of a threatening 'Hell' of a world. This means a lot to our story rught now.

'Only a Sith deals in absolutes.' :)

Should read "I have no objectins to school children learning the pledge in its original form"

Billy:
**Thanks for responding to my bit about the pledge. I think the SCt's ruling on the pledge is that school children can't be made to say it but that individual objections to saying it don't require an entire class to abstain. Those who objecct to it can be excused while the class says it. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.)**

You're correct. And I have no objectins to school children learning the pledge. I do wish that they would be taught what the words actually mean, though. I recall learning the words in first grade and having no idea what "allegiance" or "republic" or "indivisible" meant. And back then, I was too shy to open my mouth and ask. And it didn't seem to bother anyone else. But I can't say that I derived any real meaning from standing beside my desk every morning and reciting words that might as well have been Swahili for all I understood of them.
When my daughter started preschool and they began learning the pledge, I taught her what the words meant - her teacher didn't bother to do so any more than mine did.

**How is a prayer to open legislative sessions substantively different? A loose analogy could perhaps be made between those school children gathering to learn and legislators gathering to begin their session. Both are engaged in a (required) civic exercise...**

I don't see any reason why a civic exercise such as a legislative session or learning one's multiplication tables should require a prayer at all.

" dennis the menace:

"well there is a place called hell..you don't believe in that either...but when the flames get hottier and hitier you'll remember that well maybe its not not a bad idea to pray in hell....but then it wil be too late...i pray for you..."

I know you like to say these things, but if there is such a place as you like to imagine, and praying can help once there, you can stop trying to be 'menacing' now.

I've always wondered about this view of Heaven and Hell. I think Augustine described the 'chief delight of the blessed souls in Heaven' as watching the torment of souls in Hell.'

I have to say, apart from making Christian accusations that modern Pagans want to throw y'all to the lions utterly moot, as well as ludicrous, ... in your Heaven, I don't think I could stand the company.

lepidopteryx:
Thanks for responding to my bit about the pledge. I think the SCt's ruling on the pledge is that school children can't be made to say it but that individual objections to saying it don't require an entire class to abstain. Those who objecct to it can be excused while the class says it. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.)

How is a prayer to open legislative sessions substantively different? A loose analogy could perhaps be made between those school children gathering to learn and legislators gathering to begin their session. Both are engaged in a (required) civic exercise...

well there is a place called hell..you don't believe in that either...but when the flames get hottier and hitier you'll remember that well maybe its not not a bad idea to pray in hell....but then it wil be too late...i pray for you...

well there is a place called hell..you don't believe in that either...but when the flames get hottier and hitier you'll remember that well maybe its not not a bad idea to pray in hell....but then it wil be too late...i pray for you...

well there is a place called hell..you don't believe in that either...but when the flames get hottier and hitier you'll remember that well maybe its not not a bad idea to pray in hell....but then it wil be too late...i pray for you...

" Salah:

"I find this article amusing, given that it is coming from person who calls herself a “Muslim American”. In our world of today, there is only one group who insist in adding their religion affiliation to their nationality.
So it is OK for some born in Saudi Arabia to call himself a Muslim American yet cries discrimination if an American born tries to pray to his/her God."

I find *that* amusing as there's only one group trying to insist their religious affiliation *is* American nationality.

I'm a Pagan American.

I know Muslim Americans, Jewish Americans, atheist Americans, Native Americans, Buddhist Americans, santero Americans, and, yeah, Hindu Americans.

There's only one religious group I know that doesn't want to admit we're all Americans.

Peek a boo.

Reussere:

"I would expect most Christians to be extremely glad that someone cannot impose their beliefs in paganism, Hinduism, Buddhism, or any other ism on them, or dictate how or when they worship the God of their choosing."

Be glad there's nothing in these belief systems that even *wants* to impose our beliefs on you, as foreign a concept as that might be to you.

(Paganism's a proper noun, too, by the way.. I think you can capitalize us without being smote from above.)

Frankly, if Christians hadn't made 'faith' so darn political in the first place, and been using their own as a-rational reasons to impose their religious beliefs upon us through force of law, you wouldn't be hearing from us so much.

But while we're at it, let's live up to America's pluralistic promises.

While Christians are trying to claim it's 'Freedom of Religion' to try and impose their ways on others, well, let's address some longstanding injustices and prejudices.

I find this article amusing, given that it is coming from person who calls herself a “Muslim American”. In our world of today, there is only one group who insist in adding their religion affiliation to their nationality.
So it is OK for some born in Saudi Arabia to call himself a Muslim American yet cries discrimination if an American born tries to pray to his/her God.
Please teach us more ignorance.

I feel that religion is too important and too personal to allow it in matters of government, especially because of politicians' tendencies toward a public persona not necessarily matching their private personas. I cringe at public prayers, public displays of piety, etc. Although I consider myself a Christian, I am very liberal socially and find my personal faith too private and intricate to open it up to public view. I have been attacked by fellow Christians for not being a narrow-minded bigot. Religion is separate from politics and government. They just should not mix at all.

Billy:
**If she is correct and prayer to open legislative sessions violates the First Amendment, doesn't the Pledge of Allegiance to "one nation under God" also do so?**

IMO, yes it does, and if we're going to have a pledge, we would do well to return to the original version of "one nation indivisible" and leave deities out of it.

halozcel,
Why,are you tolerant yourself with your usual unjustified and racist attacks on Islam? of course not.

Anonymous,
You are really stupid and super paranoid-what Muslim brotherhood? Thou established in 1928,the MB was never able to this very moment,to rule one country with a muslim majority;your nonesnese is farfetched and more of science fiction than any thing else.Just stop repeating it.

Ms. Taylor's post does not go far enough. If she is correct and prayer to open legislative sessions violates the First Amendment, doesn't the Pledge of Allegiance to "one nation under God" also do so? Where is the line between a religious test or government establishment and free exercise? It's much easier to offer a blanket critique the current practice than it is to suggest a modification that might be more acceptable.

Nor is tolerance a Talmudic-Judahic ideology.

Doesn't anyone know that the Zionist Nationalist party in Germany (1920's-1940's), was given free and liberal reign to cross the german boarders, to fly the "star of david" and to conduct various operations, all this done with the acknowledgement of the Nazi party!.

Don't ever fool yourself.

Israel (the Herzl & Hitler founded State), is completely fascist, nationalist and has its own 'gulag' system.

So does America, for we (the police, army, etc. etc. up to 5 star generals), are being TRAINED by the Israeli Mossud (Brainwashed more like it).

WHO WILL SAVE THE CONSTITUTION? STOP THE ILLEGAL WAR ON ISLAM!!!

"The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes." -- Thomas Paine

I cannot ask of heaven success, even for my country, in a cause where she should be in the wrong.
—John Quincy Adams, Letter to John Adams

I totally agree with Pamela Taylor. Religion is a private, not governmental, matter. If you look around the world, you see there is problem when state and religion mix.

Case of India and pakistan are an eye opener. India and Pakistan got independence simultaneously. I do not deny there is total separation of religion and state in India. But there is less mixing of religion in Politics in India than Pakistan. So, Indian ecconomy and science are more progressive than Pakistan. Now, President Bush mixes religion with state and got us into an unwanted war in Iraq. We can understand and accept our involvement in Afganistan where our involvement is an absolute necessity for our national security.

Halozcel,

I don't see the rude twits who interrupted Mr. Zed's prayer as being representative of mainstream Christianity. None of my Christian friends would do such a thing.
I don't hold their religion responsible for their behavior, I hold them responsible for behaving badly and trying to justify it in the name of their god.

By the same token, I think it's over the top for you to imply that Ms. Taylor has no right to speak of tolerance because she is Muslim. I have many Muslim friends, and none of them would ever dream of interrupting someone else's prayer, regardless of the person's religion.
I recently purchased a copy of the Qu'ran, but I have not had the opportunity to read it. I have seen quotes from it advocating death to non-Muslims, but I have no idea of their context. I have also seen quotes from that say "Let there be no compulsion in religion." I suspect that, like all scriptures, there are lapses in continuity. And lest Christians forget, their own scriptures advocate death by stoning for homosexuals, cheating spouses, and disobedient children, so it seems just a bit hypocritical for them to complain about other religions' books espousing violent behavior.

It is flabbergasting to me that the very people that profess a love of Christ, and a belief in American values, refuse to accept that one of the most core values American's cherish is that no one; not the government, not my neighbor, or any other institution can impose their religious beliefs on me.

I would expect most Christians to be extremely glad that someone cannot impose their beliefs in paganism, Hinduism, Buddhism, or any other ism on them, or dictate how or when they worship the God of their choosing.

The Moral Majority and their associates do an enormous disservice to their community and show themselves as self serving, ignorant bigots when they embrace concepts and ideals that violate the very foundation of our democracy.

Is there any islamic country where *tolerance* exist ?
Could you please to write any islamic state that embraces *tolerance* ?
*Tolerance* is NOT islamic concept and idea.
*Dissident* is not islamic value.
For example,cult of islam insults *christian values* 5.72,5.73 and islam doesnt respect women.Woman is second class citizen and *pollution* 2.222
Could you show any islamic country where *men-women equality* exist ?

*Religion really has no place at public,governmental gatherings* is completely correct.
However,as you know very well,islam is a compulsive cult.Headscarf,veil,burqa,5 times worship in arabic in a day,death to apostasy and enforcing people to believe in wrong things *such as Azar father of Abraham,trinity father son mary,Ismael for sacrifice,muslim moses(whatever it means)* are some examples of *islamic compulsion*.

So,*nobody forced you to make that choice* or *you get the respect that you give* are *nice words*,but not *islamic words*

Those who lecture about *tolerance,respect and secularism* should tame their own belief at first.

As a Christian, I'm pretty unhappy about some of the stupid stuff that goes on nowadays. For example, every Sunday when the Nats are in town, they sing "God Bless America" in the 7th. inning, instead of "Take Me Out To The Ballgame". Is nothing sacred?

And now the announcers are saying "Stand at attention and put your hand on your heart" (!!)

Huh? Somebody is REALLY unclear on the concept here!

This thoughtless and meaningless mixing-up of public religion and politics reminds me of an old American saying, not by either Clemens or Bierce I don't think, but from somewhere in between:

"Don't ever mix ice cream and horse manure -- it ruins the ice cream and doesn't improve the taste of the horse manure."

I agree totally with you, Pamela. Prayer has no place at a public gathering. That is why there are churches, synagogues, mosques, temples etc. For people to be able to pray with like-minded people.

Also I agree that the outcry over a Hindu leading a prayer is thinly disguised bigotry. There are certain Christian groups who would like to exclude other religions, and should be countered.

The First Amendment says,"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

There you have your balance. Congress shall not legislate support for one religion over another. This is the meaning of establishment. Every state had an established religion and the founders did not want a national established religion. Virginia was an established Anglican state and Massachusetts was an establshed Congregationalist state until 1833.

But the founders did not stop there. There shall be no law prohibiting the FREE exercise of religion.

If you don't like it, sorry. Americans have the freedom to exercise their religion without government interference.

Why don't people who are uncomfortable with public displays of religion show the same tolerance towards the religious as we show towards others who are different from us?

Love to all,
Salt

I think the only necessarily-redeeming feature of these prayers, if it weren't a Biblical-peoples-only club, would be the potential to stop Christian and Jewish Congressmen from believing what they *are* told in too many of their own churches: that their beliefs are really the only ones in America, or the only ones that 'count.'

I fully support Pamela K. taylor. First ammendment should be strickly implemented and followed by everbody in the US Government without any contrvesy. Let all people practice their religion in private and there should be no influence or coersion to the general public lives by any religion in the US. Because religions are harmful for public life and always tend to divide the nation and dragg a peacful nation into horrific quarrel,wars and endless blood sheds. So, please stay private with all religions. Civilize society do not need religious hagemony anylonger.

SKM

I read someone say that "someone might get the idea that this is a Christian country". There is no question that the Pilgrims were Christians and the Puritans. Thats why they came here- to worship among other reasons like freedom of opportunity and making a living. They were the ones who established that freedom of religion would be allowed and would be a firm principal of the country. So to me its just an odd statement for someone to be worried that someone might think that this is a Christian country. What else can I say.

thanks for the kind words norrie- i had a suspicion as i was writing that - that your constituency would necessarily be that statistically oriented.

peace and i feel much better

Victoria,

I made the post above before I read your second post to me. I hope you're feeling better now or will soon. Don't worry about your first post.

A couple of points:

Actually, I didn't swear to represent the people of my district or state. I swore (or affirmed) that I would uphold the federal and my state's Constitutions, and "faithfully execute" the office to which I had been elected.

By the way, I represented two college towns, in the state which has the lowest percentage of people claiming any religous affiliation, or reporting regular church attendance, of any state in the country.

Religion never entered into my activities as a state rep, and that was fine with everyone. Though the issue never came up, I suspect that most of the people in my towns would have agreed with me on legislative prayers.

Best wishes.

Victoria,

If you should have any doubt (which I gather you do) about the absurdity of mixing government and religion, you should read this:

From The Times of London, August 4, 2007:

China tells living Buddhas to obtain permission before they reincarnate

The rules effectively exclude the Dali Lama from any role in recognising a living Buddha

Jane Macartney in Beijing

Tibet’s living Buddhas have been banned from reincarnation without permission from China’s atheist leaders. The ban is included in new rules intended to assert Beijing’s authority over Tibet’s restive and deeply Buddhist people.

“The so-called reincarnated living Buddha without government approval is illegal and invalid,” according to the order, which comes into effect on September 1.

Regards.

Victoria,

If you should have any doubt (which I gather you do) about the absurdity of mixing government and religion, you should read this:

From The Times of London, August 4, 2007:

China tells living Buddhas to obtain permission before they reincarnate

The rules effectively exclude the Dali Lama from any role in recognising a living Buddha

Jane Macartney in Beijing

Tibet’s living Buddhas have been banned from reincarnation without permission from China’s atheist leaders. The ban is included in new rules intended to assert Beijing’s authority over Tibet’s restive and deeply Buddhist people.

“The so-called reincarnated living Buddha without government approval is illegal and invalid,” according to the order, which comes into effect on September 1.

Regards.

I don't know about the smoking gun comments above. Its a strech. The people you are talking about can't even function in their home countries so take it for what its worth.

And another thing. Anyone tries to tell me what to believe I will throw them off my property. And thats the way it is in America. And anyone who thinks otherwise in America is just waisting their time. It kind of ticks me off that anyone would be so naive as to think that anyone could take freedom of religion away from America or freedom period.

I see where you are coming from. Frankly I'm not at all sure what the founding fathers of our country would say. I'm pretty sure they prayed at their functions. Perhaps they would say why would anyone object to having a prayer. Or maybe they would say they never considered that anyone would object to a prayer. I'm sure they would have an answer. In the most part I think they are still ahead of us. I tend to think they would say if you want to pray, pray. If you don't, don't. And maybe they would think that you ought to be able to decide for yourself at that time. On the other hand they fully understood the importance of the separation of church and state. William Brewster, the church leader at Plymouth Colony, was a Pilgrim, yes, but he was also a Separatist as well. Brewster left Europe for new ground because it was probably dangerous for him to stay there, since he had a printing press and had been printing different ideas that were not in accordance with the Church of England. And I firmly believe that he thought that everyone ought to be able to worship as they pleased and basically not harrassed anyone else for believing as they pleased or not having any religion at all.

well of course preaching has no place in the proceedings- i usually watch the opening of the senate because it comes after washington journal-
i have to be honest- the 'prayers' are never epsecially compelling one way or the other-
but theyre prayers, not preaching.

is it a little annoying? sometimes it is, but i never feel like the bible is being thumped on my head-

but the fact is norrie, most of the senate identify themselves as christian- (not long ago one of the guest voices had the stats on religious affiliation)

and these people are your countrymen- and youve all sworn to represent the people and that would include getting along with and respecting each other.

all the time christians tell me they will pray for me- youve probably had this happen to you too-
now that is an intrusion and a judgement on my spiritual state, and also obnoxiously condescending.
now i tell people pray for themselves, and ill pray for myself.

possibly you feel that same kind of condescension or judgement against you when you had this experience.

honestly, i dont really think in america there should be a prayer- it reinforces peoples perception that we are built upon christainity as a nation- and misses the spirit of the government NOT endorsing or supporting one religion in favor of others.

but i think christians feel somewhat easily thrreatened to what they perceive as being sidelined-

(im only talking about the insecure ones- not the majority of christians of different kinds who are well adjusted and dont feel the need to beat us with their beliefs)

i bet if there were an anonymous vote that couldnt be traced, many of your co-legislators would prefer not to hear a prayer also- but if their constituents had a whiff of this sentiment- theyd be out-

ok sorry i came down so hard on you norrie-
a feeble excuse is that it was late and im sad because my husband is away right now.

peace

Victoria,

You just don't get it: religious preaching has no rightful place in legislative proceedings. If I want to go to Sunday School, I will. I don't like being evicted from my desk and chair to avoid listening to nonsense.

By the way, the House Chamber was usually two-thirds empty during the prayer. Nobody under 40 attended. And that was in the '70s.

but thats the point norrie- it was YOUR choice-

nobody forced you to make that choice-

you could have stayed and shown the same respect and tolerance you want extended to your views.

im willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that you were there to represent christians who were also in your district.

you were there by proxy to represent the will of your constituents-

was their will best served by your rebuff of your co-legislators?

you were personally affronted, and probably there were some christians who felt personally affronted by your pointed absence.

so with all these personality clashes, how could fair legislation not be affected on some subtle level?

and how did you prove the superiority of your personal philosophy by the abstaining of your presence?

since you dont have a religious code of the same ilk as your co-reps- it doesnt mean you dont share a social code of mannerly and considerate behavior.

you get the respect that you give.

Anthony,

I'm afraid you've got things exactly backward.

Legislative prayers violated my First Amendment rights when I was in our legislature.

Here's what I wrote on Professor Stevens-Arroyo's thread:

**************************************************

PaganPlace,

Hi! I think the only reasonable and decent thing is to have no prayers at all in legislative assemblies.

When I was in the legislature I did what Professor Stevens-Arroyo suggested: I stayed outside the House Chamber until the prayer was over.

So there I was, chased out of the legislative assembly to which I'd been elected by the citizens of my district.

Insulting as that was, it wasn't as bad as it would have been if I'd stayed inside, and had my intelligence and beliefs insulted by a bible-thumper praying to the Abrahamic sadistic Ignorant Demiurge, who thought he was God but wasn't.

An elected representative shouldn't be forced to that choice.

Regards.

"Anthony:
Removing religion from government violates the First Amendment rights of our elected officials."

Anthony, I'm not following you here. Our elected officials can still worship as they choose, no one is denying them that. What is to be denied is the preference for one religion over another when conducting the offical business of the United States. If the senators are goinng to have a blessing said by a Christian reverend, it behooves them to have blessings from ALL of the religions practiced by their contituents. That's only American. (And Goddess knows, they could use the help.)

Ms. Taylor,

I wholeheartedly agree.

Removing religion from government violates the First Amendment rights of our elected officials.

"In the case of prayers at public, governmental gatherings, I believe religion really has no place...Given that we do have prayers at governmental events, then the desire of certain Christians to exclude people from other religions must be countered, at least until the day when we can come to an agreement that prayer really is something the government needs to stay out of."

Couldn't agree more.

And that's why religion and government should be kept far apart - allowing them to merge in any way corrupts both.

Everyone has values, and everyone will act according to their values, but our government is supposed to protect the inalienable rights of everyone, without prejudice, and that cannot be done if you choose to treat some religions as more "valid" than others based on the number of people who claim to hold a particular faith. Government should never take it upon itself to make such judgment.

Where faith and the needs of a whole society's ability to operate in a civilized manner collide, secular society must prevail. We don't suspend laws against murder just because someone might claim that human sacrifice is part of their religion, for example. That's not because of God's commandments, it's because people just can't live with each other under conditions where the laws might suddenly allow murder for religious reasons. This is precisely what we create laws for.

The current administration's "faith-based" approach has both corrupted government and created an incentive for churches to corrupt their own message in order to conform to the prejudices of the administration in order to acquire privileges within the program. This is a disaster for all of us.

Government should not be involved in religion in any way. Once you introduce religion into government events, or buildings, you necessarily promote some religious beliefs over others which are not represented there. This violates the first amendment, as it favors and promotes certain beliefs over others.

I agree with Ms. Taylors compassionate and pluralistic view on religious diversity and tolerance. Nobody has a monopoly on the truth.

Aug 1, 08:53
Finally, The Smoking Gun

One of the most fascinating exhibits presented by the prosecution in the Holy Land Foundation case (provided by researchers for the NEFA Foundation) is a memorandum on the Muslim Brotherhood’s multifaceted plan to convert the United States to an Islamic nation. It is the smoking gun of the Ikhwan’s long-standing efforts to destroy the Western world as we know it.

The most interesting exhibit is a Muslim Brotherhood memorandum by Mohamed Akram, dated May 22, 1991, where he outlines the Ikhwan vision of the future. He leaves no ambiguity as to the nature of the Ikhwan calling. (The exhibits will be posted and written about more completely in the NEFA website in coming days).

Under the heading “Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America,” he writes:

“The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated ad God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

But wait, there is more:

“Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack.”

Akram then spells out in some detail the role of the Brotherhood in moving the project forward: “As for the role of the Ikhwan, it is the initiative, pioneering, leadership, raising the banner and pushing people in that direction (the Jihadist process). They are then able to employ, direct, and unify Muslims’ efforts and powers for this process. In order to do that, we must possess a master of the art of ‘coalitions,’ the art of ‘absorption’ and the principles of ‘cooperation.’”

The document then gives rationale for setting up Ikhwan organizations across the country: “We must say that we are in a country which understands no language other than the language of the organizations, and one which does not respect or give weight to any group without effective, functional and strong organizations.”

The document also deals with the criticism among the Brothers that the focus on the United States will drain support for the establishment of the global caliphate. The response is two-fold:
1) “The success of the Movement in America in establishing an observant Islamic base with power and effectiveness will be the the best support and aid to the global Movement project.”
2) The global (Ikhwan) movement has not “succeeded yet in distributing roles to is branches, stating that what is needed from them as one of the participants or contributors to the project to establish the global Islamic state. The day this happens, the children of the American Ikhwani branch will have a far-reaching impact and positions that make the ancestors proud.”

The document ends with a list of Ikhwan groups trying to coordinate, including all the usual (ISNA, ICNA, IIIT etc.)

What is so interesting about the document is the breadth of ambition, the conviction of ultimate success and the care with which the campaign we see today was being thought about 16 years ago. So is the the clarity of the ultimate objective of ending our years as a functioning democracy, built on the rule of secular law, minority rights and freedom of religion, press etc.

The infiltration of the government by members and sympathizers, the coordinated role of the organizations in pursuing specific objectives, the recruitment of the best and the brightest into the movement, and other objectives are far advanced, perhaps further than the author could have imagined in so short a time.

The rationale, for those like Lieken et al who want play footsie with these groups bent on our destruction, is truly mindboggling. I don’t think the Brothers who have been on the cusp of the new PR campaign, from Ramadan to Akef, have bothered to spell this out like the Brothers do for themselves.

But here we have it, in their own words, written by their own hands. There is much more to say, and I will revisit the topic as more information comes in.

Will anyone pay attention?

posted by Douglas Farah

Someone has to quietly and calmly present the evidance you have shown, without name calling where ever Ikhwan forces choose to speak in the US.

Ikhwan spokesman then have 3 choices:

-deny and call you names

-change the subject abruptly

-question your integrity

But either way this information is