NationStates Jolt Archive

So SUE me!

"I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I'm not going to sue somebody for singing a Ho-Ho-Ho song in December.

"I don't agree with Darwin, but I didn't go out and hire a lawyer when my high school teacher taught his theory of evolution.

"Life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness will not be endangered because someone says a 30-second prayer before a football game.

"So what's the big deal? It's not like somebody is up there reading the entire book of Acts. They're just talking to a God they believe in and asking him to grant safety to the players on the field and the fans going home from the game.

"'But it's a Christian prayer,' some will argue. Yes, and this is the United States of America, a country founded on Christian principles. According to our very own phone book, Christian churches outnumber all others better than 200-to-1. So what would you expect-somebody chanting Hare Krishna? If I went to a football game in Jerusalem, I would expect to hear a Jewish prayer. If I went to a soccer game in Baghdad, I would expect to hear a Muslim prayer. If I went to a ping pong match in China, I would expect to hear someone pray to Buddha.

"And I wouldn't be offended. It wouldn't bother me one bit. When in Rome....

"But what about the atheists?" is another argument. What about them? Nobody is asking them to be baptized. We're not going to pass the collection plate. Just humor us for 30 seconds.. If that's asking too much, bring a Walkman or a pair of ear plugs. Go to the bathroom. Visit the concession stand. Call your lawyer Unfortunately, one or two will make that call.

"One or two will tell thousands what they can and cannot do. I don't think a short prayer at a football game is going to shake the world's foundations.

"Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights. Our parents and grandparents taught us to pray before eating, to pray before we go to sleep.

"Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing. Now a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying. God, help us. And if that last sentence offends you, well..........just sue me.

"The silent majority has been silent too long. It's time we let that one or two who scream loud enough to be heard, that the vast majority don't care what they want... it is time the majority rules!

"It's time we tell them, you don't have to pray... you don't have to say the pledge of allegiance, you don't have to believe in God or attend services that honor Him. That is your right, and we will honor your right...but by golly, you are no longer going to take our rights away... we are fighting back... and we WILL WIN!

"God bless us one and all, especially those who denounce Him... God bless America, despite all her faults, she is still the greatest nation of all..... God bless our service men who are fighting to protect our right to pray and worship God...." - Paul Harvey

Ah ok?

-Backs away slowly and runs before he turns around-

Ah ok?

-Backs away slowly and runs before he turns around-
( Watching as BF falls flat on his ass. )

Why should you have the right to sue anyone over secular things like santa claus or biology in the first place?


As for forcing your religion into public life and coercing children into acknowledging its validity in school, that's just flat-out unconstitutional and unamerican.

Really brother, if you want that kind of thing, go live in iran or saudi arabia.

Why should you have the right to sue anyone over secular things like santa claus or biology in the first place?


As for forcing your religion into public life and coercing children into acknowledging its validity in school, that's just flat-out unconstitutional and unamerican.

Really brother, if you want that kind of thing, go live in iran or saudi arabia.
Sorry, but Kerry lost. I don't have to leave. :D

Sorry, but Kerry lost. I don't have to leave. :D

And apparently, everyone else has to leave, yes?

Are all of those quotes from Paul Harvey? Or are they quotes from different people?

And apparently, everyone else has to leave, yes?
Only if they want to, and apparently a number of them do. Interesting how the "play-the-game-my-way-or-I'll-take-my-toys-and-go-home" ploy seems to work only when liberals lose, isn't it! :D

Sorry, but Kerry lost. I don't have to leave. :D


Wow, have another person who believes America was founded as a Christian nation...you know, there are historical documents, signed by the founders of this nation, which blatantly deny that.

Are all of those quotes from Paul Harvey? Or are they quotes from different people?
I think they're all from Paul Harvey, or at least that's the way it appeared in the email I got them from.

Wow, have another person who believes America was founded as a Christian nation...you know, there are historical documents, signed by the founders of this nation, which blatantly deny that.
There you go with the straw man arguments again. Where have I EVER said I believed that? :)

I'm an athiest.

........America, despite all her faults, she is still the greatest nation of all.....

That's the only sentence in your entire post that came close to offending me. mostly because it isn't true. And because I live in one of the nations which disproves that statement.

You do what you want with your religion. just don't force it on other people..

A short prayer before some match or whatever though, that isn't exactly forcing it on other people.... :)

At the end of the day, who cares?

There you go with the straw man arguments again. Where have I EVER said I believed that? :)

Assuming the quotes are not from you, I was referring to the person who was quoted having said something to that extent.

Sorry, but Kerry lost. I don't have to leave. :D

Like i said, if you want the whole "religion in government" thing they've been doing it for years in iran and saudi arabia.

You might want to try it on for size before you wage war against the US to install it here.

Assuming the quotes are not from you, I was referring to the person who was quoted having said something to that extent.
Ok. I misinterpreted your post. My apologies. :)

Like i said, if you want the whole "religion in government" thing they've been doing it for years in iran and saudi arabia.

You might want to try it on for size before you wage war against the US to install it here.
And like I said ... if you think I want "the whole 'religion in goverment' thing," post the quote where I indicated that. :)

And like I said ... if you think I want "the whole 'religion in goverment' thing," post the quote where I indicated that. :)

I think that denying obvious implications is dishonest. But thats just me.

I won't sue you...

but the original author (Samuel Thompson) of this well-circulated essay might for copyright infringement...

:p

And like I said ... if you think I want "the whole 'religion in goverment' thing," post the quote where I indicated that. :)


perhaps we should contemplate the meaning of the word IF..it seems that it has been misinterpreted quite often recently

Of course, he is not talking about "forcing people to recognize" anything, except the individual right of everyone to practice their religion, irregardless whether it is public or private area.

Those who wish to bar any form of religious expression by individuals in society, are absolutely no different than the fundamentalists who wish to force particular practices on the population in general...

Freedom of religion, is just that; and seperation of church and state is just that. A ruling to bar prayer by individuals is just as unconstitutional as a ruling to mandate prayer by individuals. Part of the price you pay for liberty and freedom, is that others as well, possess the exact same liberties and freedoms that you do.

I think that denying obvious implications is dishonest. But thats just me.
What "obvious implications?"

I won't sue you...

but the original author (Samuel Thompson) of this well-circulated essay might for copyright infringement...

:p
Thought I recognized it!

I won't sue you...

but the original author (Samuel Thompson) of this well-circulated essay might for copyright infringement...

:p
Heh! Ok. Well, I don't know about that. The email in which I received this seemed to indicate the entire quote was from Paul Harvey. My apologies to Mr. Thompson. :)

Of course, he is not talking about "forcing people to recognize" anything, except the individual right of everyone to practice their religion, irregardless whether it is public or private area.

Those who wish to bar any form of religious expression by individuals in society, are absolutely no different than the fundamentalists who wish to force particular practices on the population in general...

Freedom of religion, is just that; and seperation of church and state is just that. A ruling to bar prayer by individuals is just as unconstitutional as a ruling to mandate prayer by individuals. Part of the price you pay for liberty and freedom, is that others as well, possess the exact same liberties and freedoms that you do.


School sanctioned prayers before football games and the like and moments for 'prayer and reflection' in class are clearly an act of forcing youngsters to recognize the validity of religion.

This has been affirmed time and again by the supreme court.

Of course, he is not talking about "forcing people to recognize" anything, except the individual right of everyone to practice their religion, irregardless whether it is public or private area.

Those who wish to bar any form of religious expression by individuals in society, are absolutely no different than the fundamentalists who wish to force particular practices on the population in general...

Freedom of religion, is just that; and seperation of church and state is just that. A ruling to bar prayer by individuals is just as unconstitutional as a ruling to mandate prayer by individuals. Part of the price you pay for liberty and freedom, is that others as well, possess the exact same liberties and freedoms that you do.

It is still rude for a group to pray over a loudspeaker at a public function. If the parents want to pray together, fine. If a group of students want to pray together, fine. Just announce a moment of silence, and all groups will be able to pray if they want. It's just the whole loudspeaker thing that gets to people.

Of course, he is not talking about "forcing people to recognize" anything, except the individual right of everyone to practice their religion, irregardless whether it is public or private area.

Those who wish to bar any form of religious expression by individuals in society, are absolutely no different than the fundamentalists who wish to force particular practices on the population in general...

Freedom of religion, is just that; and seperation of church and state is just that. A ruling to bar prayer by individuals is just as unconstitutional as a ruling to mandate prayer by individuals. Part of the price you pay for liberty and freedom, is that others as well, possess the exact same liberties and freedoms that you do.
Good post! At least YOU understand the quoted text, regardless of who the original author is! :)

perhaps we should contemplate the meaning of the word IF..it seems that it has been misinterpreted quite often recently
You mean kinda like Slick Willie Clinton wanted the definition of "is" elucidated? LOL!

You mean kinda like Slick Willie Clinton wanted the definition of "is" elucidated? LOL!


lol

As far as church and state separation goes, I would have to say all of the hubbub over the 10 commandments is pretty overblown. They're pretty innocuous and hard to argue with if you read them. I think the separation of church and state was originally to prevent there from being a national church that people were required to attend, as in the Church of England, or Anglican church.

I also can't see the harm in prayers before games or at graduations, I think that the statement 'Congress shall make no law abridging' is pretty clear. If you're speaking about you're religion then that's doubly protected.

This is another one of those 'people need to be more tolerant of others' type issues. And the last couple of these type suits either way were from people on a crusade, and not indicative of the general population.

It is still rude for a group to pray over a loudspeaker at a public function. If the parents want to pray together, fine. If a group of students want to pray together, fine. Just announce a moment of silence, and all groups will be able to pray if they want. It's just the whole loudspeaker thing that gets to people.

You may find it 'rude', but it's not damaging to you in any way except for a little annoyance.

There is not an amendment that guaruntees you the right to not be offended or annoyed.

You may find it 'rude', but it's not damaging to you in any way except for a little annoyance.

There is not an amendment that guaruntees you the right to not be offended or annoyed.


I was simply trying to explain why people dislike it so much.

All I got to say is what about those poor band kids that are forced to sit through the whole part … they have to be there because it is a school activity and forced attendance if you want to be in band.

(not totally serious but true none the less)

School sanctioned prayers before football games and the like and moments for 'prayer and reflection' in class are clearly an act of forcing youngsters to recognize the validity of religion.

This has been affirmed time and again by the supreme court.

The Supreme Court is wrong, and misapplies the ruling. Because it applies it to more than "school sanctioned prayers"... A single individual, choosing to use their time to pray at a public function, is not applicable to government ruling. Anyone who thinks it is.... Is a traitor, irregardless of the governmental position they hold. It's the price of liberty....

Teachers leading prayers in public classrooms, is unconstitutional.

Students praying outloud, or communally before a football game, or before a graduation, is not.

This is the principle of seperation. This is the ideal of the Constitution of the United States of America. If you don't like it, tough shit.... It's why you are allowed to not pray, not be forced into state churches, and allowed to speak out. But merely because you are allowed to not be religious, in no way gives you the right to bar others from being so. Welcome to the United States, and welcome embrace the true concept of liberty and freedom. Republican and Democrats can both kiss my Libertarian, american ass.

I was simply trying to explain why people dislike it so much.

Gotcha! :D

I'll give ya that one, it is annoying.

I think half of the 'issues' discussed on this board could be solved with people doing three things: A) Being a little more tolerant of what other people do and say B) Being a little more compassionate towards others, especially people of different races and cultures and C) People just minding their own FUCKING business! Anything inside the fence around your house is your business, nobody else's, and if they don't like what you're doing in your own house, they should just put thier clothes on and go home!

Whew! Thanks! Glad I could get that off my chest! :D

Yeah, gotta give it to the Christians on this one. We need to redraw the line... like Fruit said, a group of individuals wants to pray, fine, we can take it;
Let's just refrain from leading an entire building in prayer. (Mandatory school Pep Rallies sucked ass, too.)

On an almost-related subjected, did anyone get a note from their employer telling them who to vote for this year?

The Supreme Court is wrong, and misapplies the ruling. Because it applies it to more than "school sanctioned prayers"... A single individual, choosing to use their time to pray at a public function, is not applicable to government ruling. Anyone who thinks it is.... Is a traitor, irregardless of the governmental position they hold. It's the price of liberty....

Teachers leading prayers in public classrooms, is unconstitutional.

Students praying outloud, or communally before a football game, or before a graduation, is not.

This is the principle of seperation. This is the ideal of the Constitution of the United States of America. If you don't like it, tough shit.... It's why you are allowed to not pray, not be forced into state churches, and allowed to speak out. But merely because you are allowed to not be religious, in no way gives you the right to bar others from being so. Welcome to the United States, and welcome embrace the true concept of liberty and freedom. Republican and Democrats can both kiss my Libertarian, american ass.
ROFLMAO!! Careful ... you might yet convince me to become a Libertarian! Heh!

I think religion should be kept in private. If you want to let the players pray in private, or let people pray on their own, but forcing organized prayer is waving your religion around in people's faces, and that isn't alright.

Why should you have the right to sue anyone over secular things like santa claus or biology in the first place?


As for forcing your religion into public life and coercing children into acknowledging its validity in school, that's just flat-out unconstitutional and unamerican.

Really brother, if you want that kind of thing, go live in iran or saudi arabia.


I agree with this guy.

I haven't got the time to argue about religion and politics anymore today. Safe to say in an over-generalising way without being bothered with an argument, the guy who started this thread is wrong and seems not to see the point about forcing relicgion upon people, even within the context he mentioned... blah, blah... too tired, whatever...


Kinda Sensible People is right too.

who is this straw man and how come no one believes him?! :p ;)

I think religion should be kept in private. If you want to let the players pray in private, or let people pray on their own, but forcing organized prayer is waving your religion around in people's faces, and that isn't alright.

Define, 'forcing organized prayer'. Because you seem to imply that groups prayer in public is this 'forcing organized prayer'.

As far as 'waiving your religion in people's faces'. No one is given the freedom to not be exposed to religion, simply from the fact that people are given the freedom of expression in general.

I can tell you this much, if you do not like seeing religion at all you are in the wrong country, bub... You would likely be far more comfortable in North Korea or China.

If I want to pray in public, I will do so; if you, the Supreme Court, the dickweed in present residence in the white-house, or the the whole of the numb-nut US legislature do not like it; I reffer to my previoustatement about kissing my Libertarian, American ass....

Define, 'forcing organized prayer'. Because you seem to imply that groups prayer in public is this 'forcing organized prayer'.

As far as 'waiving your religion in people's faces'. No one is given the freedom to not be exposed to religion, simply from the fact that people are given the freedom of expression in general.

I can tell you this much, if you do not like seeing religion at all you are in the wrong country, bub... You would likely be far more comfortable in North Korea or China.

If I want to pray in public, I will do so; if you, the Supreme Court, the dickweed in present residence in the white-house, or the the whole of the numb-nut US legislature do not like it; I reffer to my previoustatement about kissing my Libertarian, American ass....


someone's getting a little uptight about this..

But also, if you will allow a Christian group to pray over the loudspeaker at a football game, you should also allow Buddhists, Wiccans, Jews, and any other group that happens to pop up.

I'm an athiest.



That's the only sentence in your entire post that came close to offending me. mostly because it isn't true. And because I live in one of the nations which disproves that statement.

You do what you want with your religion. just don't force it on other people..

A short prayer before some match or whatever though, that isn't exactly forcing it on other people.... :)

At the end of the day, who cares?

Agreed! Why a nation that extoles freeom of choice yet forces its will wherever it damn well pleases is "still the greatest nation of all" baffles me.

Who cares? Right-wing Christian fundamentalists do. Try to get anyone to allow a non-Christian prayer in schools, sports arenas, etc, and see who raises Hell over it. I'm not atheist (in that I believe in God), but major religion is about money and mind-control, not about God. At least, not anymore. It both saddens and pisses me off.

The Supreme Court is wrong, and misapplies the ruling. Because it applies it to more than "school sanctioned prayers"... A single individual, choosing to use their time to pray at a public function, is not applicable to government ruling. Anyone who thinks it is.... Is a traitor, irregardless of the governmental position they hold. It's the price of liberty....

Teachers leading prayers in public classrooms, is unconstitutional.

Students praying outloud, or communally before a football game, or before a graduation, is not.

Except, you, in your eternal wisdom, choose to ignore the fact that no one is complaining about the second one. They're complaining about the first one.

Except, you, in your eternal wisdom, choose to ignore the fact that no one is complaining about the second one. They're complaining about the first one.

Trampling of the liberties, freedoms and principles of the US Constitution by fundamentalists and the like, on both sides; has been pissing me off for frikken decades!

Define, 'forcing organized prayer'. Because you seem to imply that groups prayer in public is this 'forcing organized prayer'.

As far as 'waiving your religion in people's faces'. No one is given the freedom to not be exposed to religion, simply from the fact that people are given the freedom of expression in general.

I can tell you this much, if you do not like seeing religion at all you are in the wrong country, bub... You would likely be far more comfortable in North Korea or China.

If I want to pray in public, I will do so; if you, the Supreme Court, the dickweed in present residence in the white-house, or the the whole of the numb-nut US legislature do not like it; I reffer to my previoustatement about kissing my Libertarian, American ass....

I meant that organizations (like stadium owners) should not ask people to pray, but that if people want to pray they should. I can't say I like seeing religion in public, but I understand that living and letting live is the only way to keep society whole.

All of the "athiest" totalitarian states just use athiest beleif to enforce their policies on others. don't like it? Well, guess what? They call you a theist and you don't matter anymore.

That is corrupting the whole point of being non-religious. If you force non-religion on others it is as bad as forcing religion on them.

quote

I think the separation of church and state was originally to prevent there from being a national church that people were required to attend, as in the Church of England, or Anglican church.

end qoute

this is very true. It states in the constitution that no law shall be made repecting (regarding) religion or the free expression there of. Now this is highly differant then the seperation of church and state that is claimed to be so. This was plaved in the constitution to prevent theocracies like England with Oliver Cromwell. No LAW regarding religion should be taken into effect. Now unless these announceements of reliegion messages were required by law, they should be allowed. Anything that is not required by law is fair game.

Since as far as I know, the pledge of alegiance is not required by law, it is not unconstitutional for "under god" to be in there. Just wanted to aplly my first two cents here. Thanks for listening.

Exactly, I do not believe in forcing anyone to do anything. But on the same note, don't expect to be protected from exposure to ideas and beliefs.

And with the instances of children being suspended for praying privately over their school lunches, and the like; I am pissed on this issue from both sides.

I've drawn the line, anyone stepped over it, is going to be beat senseless with a rolled up copy of the US Constitution.

The Supreme Court is wrong, and misapplies the ruling. Because it applies it to more than "school sanctioned prayers"... A single individual, choosing to use their time to pray at a public function, is not applicable to government ruling. Anyone who thinks it is.... Is a traitor, irregardless of the governmental position they hold. It's the price of liberty....

Teachers leading prayers in public classrooms, is unconstitutional.

Students praying outloud, or communally before a football game, or before a graduation, is not.

This is the principle of seperation. This is the ideal of the Constitution of the United States of America. If you don't like it, tough shit.... It's why you are allowed to not pray, not be forced into state churches, and allowed to speak out. But merely because you are allowed to not be religious, in no way gives you the right to bar others from being so. Welcome to the United States, and welcome embrace the true concept of liberty and freedom. Republican and Democrats can both kiss my Libertarian, american ass.


The ideal embodied in the constution is that which was correctly understood and applied in the aforementioned supreme court cases.

Namely, it is that the implicit coercion involved in holding a prayer session before something of secular importance and government sanction like a high school football game.

Professional football teams and those of private institutions are welcome to pray to their hearts content. Football teams funded by, sanctioned by and affiliated with the government are not.

No way!!!! Eutrusca, we were discussing this exact same thing in my history class today.

I swear, why does our country have to freak out at the teensiest bit of religion forced upon them?

GROW SOME THICKER SKIN, PEOPLE! That's what I did . . .

Sorry, but Kerry lost. I don't have to leave. :D

Hey Im for Kerry, and agreed with everything you said in your first post. It just proves, us Kerry supporters arent all hethens. I dont believe in sueing except in very extreme cases.

The ideal embodied in the constution is that which was correctly understood and applied in the aforementioned supreme court cases.

Namely, it is that the implicit coercion involved in holding a prayer session before something of secular importance and government sanction like a high school football game.

Professional football teams and those of private institutions are welcome to pray to their hearts content. Football teams funded by, sanctioned by and affiliated with the government are not.

What about private colleges, they receive government funding. Should we cut off Bill Clinton's alma mater?

And what about the various functioning synagogues and churches throughout the country that are funded by the tax payer? Should we close them?

Really, a bunch of school kids getting together to pray before a high school football game is much more minor than the above examples.

What it boils down to is the idelogues who run these anti-prayer campaigns are quite happy to piss on some poor high school kids parade, but they will assidiously avoid rocking the boat for their liberal buddies.

"God bless us one and all, especially those who denounce Him... God bless America, despite all her faults, she is still the greatest nation of all.....

Ugh, such BS.

Ugh, such BS.
Well, I'm very sorry you don't agree, but my Great-Great-Grandfather would definitely disagree with you ... he immigrated to the US to escape religious persecution ... in Sweden.

Well, I'm very sorry you don't agree, but my Great-Great-Grandfather would definitely disagree with you ... he immigrated to the US to escape religious persecution ... in Sweden.

Yeah, we didn't want a bunch of fundies here a few hundered years ago. That so has bearing on how much it sucks to live in the US today.

So not like 24 hours ago someone put up another "christians fighting back" nonsense up where a pair of students at a college got all in an uproar because part of their required reading was in the Qu'ran.

Which leads me to assume that if the prayer led was muslim this story would be a whole lot different.

Here's the thing, kids-this seperation protects you as much as it does me. I notice a great deal of context being left out to make the situation seem all the more ridiculous, as if roaming atheists and thier henchmen gang of lawyers are prowling the streets and forcing praying hands apart and dragging pious people to thier feet.

Stupid. Your religon. You follow it. Pray all you want. Knock yourselves out. No one, I repeat NO ONE is stopping you. Stop pretending they are. All anyone is stopping you from doing is using non-relgious institutions to impose and sanction your beliefs. If I started football games with the announcement, "And remember kids, there is no god and when you die all you do is decay!!!!" you'd go all Oral Roberts and don't pretend you wouldn't. Protects us all.

Yeah, we didn't want a bunch of fundies here a few hundered years ago. That so has bearing on how much it sucks to live in the US today.

And you would know this how?

You might like our tax system a bit better for one thing....

The solution?

Everybody should become Amish.

Nobody ever talks about them and you never hear them in the news bitching about some book they might have to read!

;)

Yeah, we didn't want a bunch of fundies here a few hundered years ago. That so has bearing on how much it sucks to live in the US today.
So you live in the USA? Hmmm. I thought you lived in Sweden. Silly me! :)

Nobody is stopping you from believing in the Holy Fairy Godfather.

America was founded by people escaping religious persecution - the Church of England as I recall. The same church my parents visit on a Sunday. Perhaps that tells you something about America's "Christian roots"?

Seems odd that a country that definitely was NOT founded on the principles of any particular religion seems to have more fundamentalist nutjobs in it than a country that definitely IS, but eh, that's the way the cookie crumbles.

And gay people aren't forcing you to marry a bloke, so why the Defense of Marriage Act? That's a whole lot more dangerous than someone who doesn't like the fact you OMG SAID A PRAYER. The latter has little to no chance of anything being done about it due to your written constitution. The former.. well, seems like it's already in force, doesn't it?

Exactly, I do not believe in forcing anyone to do anything. But on the same note, don't expect to be protected from exposure to ideas and beliefs.

And with the instances of children being suspended for praying privately over their school lunches, and the like; I am pissed on this issue from both sides.

I've drawn the line, anyone stepped over it, is going to be beat senseless with a rolled up copy of the US Constitution.

I agree.
..and I'm not even 'merican.

I've drawn the line, anyone stepped over it, is going to be beat senseless with a rolled up copy of the US Constitution.
Hmmm. How about a copy of the Harvard Law Review? Or the Constitutional Law Digest? Wait ... use a copy of Black's! That will leave a DEEP impression! LOL! :D

So you live in the USA? Hmmm. I thought you lived in Sweden. Silly me! :)

You know, there are these really neat things called "passports" and "visas" that let you travel to other countries and spend some time in them.

You know, there are these really neat things called "passports" and "visas" that let you travel to other countries and spend some time in them.
Really??? Wow! Golly gee-whizz, Gomer! What WILL they think of next! Tsk!

And you would know this how?

Again, you should look into "passports" and "visas" and "travel to other countries and spend time in them". My time spent in the US (an exchange year) really made me appreciate I didn't have to live there for longer.

You might like our tax system a bit better for one thing....

I like the Swedish tax system. It gives me the second highest standard of living (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Human_Development_Index) in the world - second only to Norway, which I am a frequent visitor of.

Really??? Wow! Golly gee-whizz, Gomer! What WILL they think of next! Tsk!

Yeah, imagine visiting other countries!

Again, you should look into "passports" and "visas" and "travel to other countries and spend time in them". My time spent in the US (an exchange year) really made me appreciate I didn't have to live there for longer.



I like the Swedish tax system. It gives me the second highest standard of living (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Human_Development_Index) in the world - second only to Norway, which I am a frequent visitor of.

Well Slick,

Before you make assumptions you should know whom you are dealing...

I have been in:

The UK
The ME
India
Singapore

I have even done work in Stockholm and guess what? Many of the people bitch about their taxes.

So what makes this country so bad mr expert?

Well Slick,

Before you make assumptions you should know whom you are dealing...

I have been in:

The UK
The ME
India
Singapore

I have even done work in Stockholm and guess what? Many of the people bitch about their taxes.

So what makes this country so bad mr expert?
"Slick!" ROFLMAO!!!!!!! Hahahahahahahaha!

I wouldn't say "what makes the US so bad", its not so bad, most places aren't.

As far as what fass is saying, one major difference between europe and the US with regard to taxes is that much of it is put into europe's social systems which many americans seem to think are such a bad thing. As far as I'm concerned they're one of the things about Europe. Being able to go to the doctor when I find something a bit out of the norm with myself, or the same for my family members is a freedom that I hold very dear. Over here if you find a lump or anything of the like and worry about it etc you can have an appointment to see the doctor within days secure in the knowledge that if something is wrong you don't have to worry whether your insurance will cover the cost of fixing it.

My fiancé lives in VA and due to her monetary situation she's not been able to afford to see a doctor in over a year, despite being ill on several occasions.

Anyway, back to the original point, I agree with the idea that prayers before public events are a bad idea. You might argue that its ok, we're not foisting religion upon you, but if you're not of a natural inclination to pray in that sort of circumstance there IS a pressure to conform to it. Generally it doesn't bother me, I'm pretty thick skinned and have had to put up with religion being foisted on me most of my life ( I was raised a catholic in a catholic school run by Irish priests - if you've been there you know what I'm talking about). Where I do take issue with it though, and this is an issue that people DO seem to have been skirting around since it was stated, is that if that prayer was muslim, sikh, wiccan or anything not christian in origin, there would be an outcry by christians with strong beleifs. In this light, the idea of the united states as an ethnically multicultural society falls down, as its appears to be fine to have such a society so long as it's predominantly christian.

I have even done work in Stockholm and guess what? Many of the people bitch about their taxes.

Of course people bitch about taxes. People bitch about taxes in the US as well, even though your tax system is supposed to be so good, according to you.

Oh, and Stockholm really isn't representative of the country as a whole, especially since most people there are "moderates" compared to social democrats in the rest of the country (grossly oversimplified).

So what makes this country so bad mr expert?

Oh, there's not that much that makes it bad per se, if you're one of the fortunates, but there's a lot that doesn't make it the "best", which was what was being claimed. Your poverty rates are one, your homeless rates another. Your lack of social freedoms is also another point. Puritanism is epidemic, with moralists getting so much attention it's outright scary. Gender equality is laughable from a Scandinavian point of view. Government transparency is almost non-existent. The rift between the rich and the poor is staggering. The form of government is outdated, with so much power vested in one person. A two party system nobody seems to be happy about, since so many bitch about voting "for the lesser of two evils" - that is to say when they bother to vote in numbers which would be seen as a democratic disaster in the rest of the comparable world. "Abstinence only education." "Creationism." "Faith based initiatives." "The PATRIOT Act." The low amount of people who have passports...

Oh, and American beer is pisswater.

Those are just a few which keep you from getting to that coveted "best" spot, imo.

The ideal embodied in the constution is that which was correctly understood and applied in the aforementioned supreme court cases.

Namely, it is that the implicit coercion involved in holding a prayer session before something of secular importance and government sanction like a high school football game.

Professional football teams and those of private institutions are welcome to pray to their hearts content. Football teams funded by, sanctioned by and affiliated with the government are not.

Wrongo... Regardless where the funds come from, members are alowed to pray. I could care less if I was on a private or public team, I will pray, and there is not a damn thing your sorry anal-retentive self, the Supreme Court, or anyone can do about it.

The Supreme Court is WRONG.

The First Amendment was designed so that this kind of thing would not happen, but no one, appearantly believes in the US Constitution anymore, most certainly very few in washington.

The First Amendment seperation clause was designed so that the lawmakers, that is the congress, nor its affiliates, can pass laws supporting or denying the religion of individuals... Telling the member, or members of a school football team that they cannot pray, is unconstitutional. Congress, is forbidden from making laws regarding religion; and the Supreme Court was never given any power to make any laws. Individuals, choosing to pray, are exercizing their First Amendment rights, Neither Congress, nor the Supreme Court has the authority or power to do anything in regards to this.