Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

READERS FORUM

October 12, 2013

Priests stopped Dear editor: One of the unintended consequences of the government shutdown is this: civilian Catholic priests who work for the U.S....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(11)

reasonrules

Oct-12-13 5:51 AM

Let me get my violin and play a sad song. You always cry restriction on religious expression is on the rise. when in fact it is the forcing of religous views on the masses is your greatest sins. As long as you keep your religous views in your church and in your home, you will always have that freedom to practice what you believe. The military will handle that small problem as they see fit.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Backwoods

Oct-12-13 8:49 AM

RR..Non-believers in Jesus Christ love to exercise there right to practice (religion) atheism and use there right of free speech to promote (homosexuality, abortion, ect.), but complain loudly if and when Christians exercise there right of religion and right of free speech. WHY, WHAT are you AFRAID of, if you weren’t so HYCRICAL you would be standing up for a Christians rights to do just that.

You atheist and muslims or should I say, all of those who fear or hate Christians and J*ws are living proof of satan and his minions. I know, you just don’t get it do you??? What’s ok for you, you want to eliminate for others. You are either for Jesus or satan, these are the only options.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BrookP

Oct-14-13 6:21 PM

Backwoods, atheism and humanism have no problem with anyone exercising their right to free speech. All groups are welcome to promote their beliefs. Please note, I said promote, not legislate. The problem comes when religious people want to legislate their belief onto everyone else. Our Constitution protects the citizens against such a thing. Have I mentioned that I love our Constitution?

Your second paragraph has no meaning to a non-Christian. Satan is part of the Christian belief, and doesn't exist for others. And, Jesus or satan are hardly the only two choices. There are about 200 active religions in the world, and, of course, no religion. That's a lot more than two choices. You are forgetting that you, yourself, would be a different religion if you had been born in Pakistan or India, for instance.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

OldWarrener

Oct-14-13 7:07 PM

Simppy put, no they dow't have a clue.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

Oct-14-13 10:43 PM

So BrookP, how do you feel about the words, "In God We Trust" being our national motto, and on all of our currency? How about, "One nation under God" in our pledge?

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BrookP

Oct-17-13 12:34 AM

Obviously, I think they should be removed. It doesn't bother me that it's on the money, but it shouldn't be there. As for the pledge, I'm sure you know that the god part was added by freaked out politicians. It's not the original pledge. I definitely think it should be removed. When I say the pledge, I just go silent on those words and speak the pledge as it was originally intended.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

Oct-23-13 9:54 AM

Just for you, Brook: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the Socialist States of America, and to the entitlements for which it stands, one nation "under water" with benefits and slavery for all. Have at it, sister.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BrookP

Oct-23-13 1:25 PM

Sorry, Stonewall. I follow the real (original) one.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

Oct-24-13 9:27 AM

Do you mean the 1892 version: "I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands: one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all"? In 1954 the words "under God" were added BY LAW. Are you suggesting that we should ignore laws...like DOMA, Immigration laws, marijuana prohibition, debt ceiling, ANNUAL budget submission (haven't had one for 3 years) and ObamaCare? Or do you subscribe to pick-and-choose?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BrookP

Oct-24-13 5:37 PM

Stonewall, apparently you didn't read my post, closely. I said "original." The 1954 version is clearly unconstitutional. But, since politicians are clearly afraid of the religious community, they won't change it back to how is should read.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

Oct-29-13 10:02 AM

Very well, BrookP. For YOU it's pick-and-choose. I got it now.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 11 of 11 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web