Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
scribblet

Separation of Church and State - No Hats Policy Congress

Recommended Posts

Democrats now want to repeal a law that bans Congress from “wearing hats” so that Ilhan Omar can wear her religious attire.

First Democrats  preach separation of Church and State by purging God from everything but now, they want to  infuse it to the Congressional floor in order to accommodate Islam. 

So what should it be...     Separation of church and State or accommodation for Islam.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/hats-congress-religious-garb-exception?bt_ee=ONRQahIBWdjXs%2By0XjPUc8EXJbPXxnxNtcYMUvgxotGxCmoL1yh8ZM7or%2BcUesZQ&bt_ts=1542395625024

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Republicans in Alabama passed a law in November, allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed in Government buildings and schools. 

So what should it be ... Separation of church and State or accommodation for Christianity.

http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-Alabama-Ten-Commandment-constitutional-amendment.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full and absolute separation of church and state and accommodation for nobody at all, obviously.

But no-one's going to ask me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do U.S. Sikh congressmen wear their turbans, there is a Sikh caucus but couldn`t determine if they did or not.

It was Republicans who passed the Alabama law, not Democrats who are the hypocrites,   The problem is when you accommodate one thing, there are many others to come along.   Not only that this woman is anti semitic, supports Hamas and says this is just the beginning of change...    and so it begins

 

 

 

Edited by scribblet
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t mind dress and religious symbols.  I’m much more concerned with forms of extreme ideology, political or religious. Holders of such views should not be on the immigration welcome list. I’m also concerned about removing statues and rewriting history as though people living a century ago had a modern context.  It’s an Orwellian rewriting of history. On the other hand, swastikas and other hate symbols are over the line. I’d include the Confederate flag in that, not on private property but public buildings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t mind dress and religious symbols.  I’m much more concerned with forms of extreme ideology, political or religious. Holders of such views should not be on the immigration welcome list. I’m also concerned about removing statues and rewriting history as though people living a century ago had a modern context.  It’s an Orwellian rewriting of history. On the other hand, swastikas and other hate symbols are over the line. I’d include the Confederate flag in that, not on private property but public buildings. 

Yeah, now that you mention it, I would much rather see people not allowed to kill someone for blasphemy than not allowed to wear a hat.

Shame about the Confederate Flag.  It really is quite striking.  Mind you, the swastika was pretty cool too until the 20th century.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Shame about the Confederate Flag.  It really is quite striking.  Mind you, the swastika was pretty cool too until the 20th century.

 

So was/is the Stars and Stripes union flag, but nobody is calling for it to be banned from public places.

As for religion, U.S. coins and currency still announces "IN GOD WE TRUST".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2018 at 11:35 AM, scribblet said:

Democrats now want to repeal a law that bans Congress from “wearing hats” so that Ilhan Omar can wear her religious attire.

First Democrats  preach separation of Church and State by purging God from everything but now, they want to  infuse it to the Congressional floor in order to accommodate Islam. 

So what should it be...     Separation of church and State or accommodation for Islam.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/hats-congress-religious-garb-exception?bt_ee=ONRQahIBWdjXs%2By0XjPUc8EXJbPXxnxNtcYMUvgxotGxCmoL1yh8ZM7or%2BcUesZQ&bt_ts=1542395625024

Being a little bit pregnant...yah funny how that does not really work well...You know where I stand and it ain't a little bit preggo. Your point is taken. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

So was/is the Stars and Stripes union flag, but nobody is calling for it to be banned from public places.

As for religion, U.S. coins and currency still announces "IN GOD WE TRUST".

At least it doesn't say which God. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2018 at 12:33 PM, dialamah said:

Republicans in Alabama passed a law in November, allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed in Government buildings and schools.

So what should it be ... Separation of church and State or accommodation for Christianity.

If I was a dyed in the wool right-wing Christian I'd describe the accommodation of Christianity as being a defense against Islam.

In the meantime I'm in a cafe overhearing a discussion about the powers that be crashing the economy so as to prevent us from finding out about the deep state's secret excavation of Atlantis, somewhere in Antarctica apparently.

The separation of state and church almost seems quaint in today's world.

Of course if I was a dyed in the wool deep state operative I'd be  rounding up whistle blowers like me and.....

Knock, knock, knock...

Oh oh.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite like the system here in Finland and other Nordic-countries where the Evangelical-Lutherans are the State-Church(they still are here in Finland, no more in Sweden) that you either belong to the Church or you don't. People really ask do you belong to the Church. They don't ask do you belong to a church.

If you belong you pay taxes to the church. If you don't belong to it then you don't pay taxes to the church. The taxes are about 1% of your income.

Even though unlike the previous decades when the church-membership was over 90% of the population and now it has fallen to 70% and still falling I can't help wondering what goes in the mind of people who rather spend their money on paying the salaries of bishops rather than keep the money themselves.

I personally quit the church as soon as I had my 18th birthday and therefore was able to make decisions for myself.

It is a different thing in other countries. If you are baptised, for example, catholic they will always count you as one of theirs, no matter how irreligious you may be.

In countries such as Canada or the US the idea of a state-church is of course unthinkable for the sheer reason that the population is so fractured coming from different backgrounds. Yet it doesn't seem to stop bible-bashing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, -TSS- said:

In countries such as Canada or the US the idea of a state-church is of course unthinkable for the sheer reason that the population is so fractured coming from different backgrounds. Yet it doesn't seem to stop bible-bashing.

It doesn't seem to have put much of a dent in irrational thinking either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"No hats" discriminates in favour of Christians.  Separate Church and state and get rid of the rule.

Christians already have too much influence on politics.  We can't ban them yet, so just change the hat rule for now thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lefties are always on board with the separation until it infringes on one of their favourite religions.  Than it’s racist.  Same with all of their other important issues.  This graph illustrates the phenomenon.

 

7595A1EB-284C-498D-8D9E-C94B6CA97679.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2018 at 4:28 PM, eyeball said:

This graph better captures the influence of a nerve spasm in a right wingers knee joint.

..and clearly your left leaning sphincter muscles. Funny how that works both ways

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, sphincters don't work both ways I'm afraid.

I thought you were a doctor? Or was it lawyer...a professor maybe? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...