Obama to Children "God bless you..." Separation of Church and State?

[PubliusInfinitum]

ROFLMNAO...

So, what the Leftist is saying is that she lacks the means to reason...

She doesn't 'fear anything'... Nor does she spend any time, worrying about what might happen if 'someone does something'...

Now some day when we hear of the untimely demise of this member, we should harken back to this admittance of her intellectual limitations, wherein she testified to a distinct absence of cognitive acuity, otherwise known as "Common sense."

Who knows how it might come to pass... Knife in the toaster... Electrical device in the tub... Right hand turns from the far left lane... Passing on a turn or a hill... Bungy jumping... with a garden hose, perhaps...

OH! I'd like to suggest base-jumping from a minumum of a 10 story building using a bed-sheet... and don't worry... If someone does anything at all, the odds if it breaking your fall much aren't all that likely...


I love these little reductio rants... where Leftist traits are completely rinsed from the discussion... Everyone is an individual... and traits common to, in this case secular-humanism; which is intrinsic in Left-think; are required to be completely detached from the discussion.

Why, its absolutely bad form to even IMPLY that the ideological Left has EVER even SUGGESTED that there is a Separation of Church and State... and that ANY refernce to GOD by a public official; on publicly owned property is tantamount to the ESTABLISHMENT OF A RELIGION, by the State which allows such...

ROFLMNAO...

Blah blah blah.....rather than sticking to your (I mean Hannity's) talking points, why not TRY thinking for yourself for a change? Are you HONESTLY afraid all of the itme?

Oh MY!

Now kids... check me if I'm wrong here... But does the above post not indicate at the MINIMUM... a 'care'... if not a FULL BLOWN FEAR of Hannity and his would-be 'talking-points?'

I mean come-on... Hannity wasn't even at issue... the name had not been breeched by anyone, anywhere in the discussion; and out of the blue.... BAM! she conjurs her own fears, in the image of one Sean Hannity...

And this even as she asserts that she has NO FEAR of ANYONE, doing anything...

Ya know kids... its entirely possible that this member is not being honest with us; and has advanced a position which not only lacks intellectual veracity, but is laced with several intellectual flaws within its structural reasoning; and whats worse is that she is advancing this as TRUTH! Indicating a rather obvious detachment from reality... and sadly, she seems to find this to be a point of some sort of twisted pride.

Which should send fear down the spine of EVERY American, as we realize that this member is legally entitled TO VOTE!

 

[bodecea]

By "Barry", I assume you are referring to Obama. Have you ever heard Obama fight to have "God" removed from anything? If not, why are you attempting to lump him in with other people who feel differently than he does?

well barry did speak at one church and had them cover up all religious symbols.. iirc

All the symbols in the room where covered up. In case you didn't know, that's pretty standard when having an event at a university (it denotes that your statements aren't endorsed by the university).

]

No! No! No! Obama was the first to ever do that! Oops

Like he's the first to give a speech to our children! Oops.

 

[Intense]

Separation of Church and State does not translate to to the removal of Every Reference to God in Public. They would have our Religious Practice limited to Churches and closets. That is not close to Locke's, or Madison's, Perspective. Plainly stated, Our First Allegiance is to Our Maker, through Conscience. Covering up Religious References in Churches, gives the impression as if they were unclean, and the effect negative. Mentioning God, to the kids, in the speech, no problem at all, either way.

One of the big drawbacks of instead of having a concrete position on an issue, but telling them what you anticipate will go over well, is you can't always predict changes in the wind with total accuracy.


From Memorial and Remonstrance.

Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considerd as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign. We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance. True it is, that no other rule exists, by which any question which may divide a Society, can be ultimately determined, but the will of the majority; but it is also true that the majority may trespass on the rights of the minority.

Because Religion be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body. The latter are but the creatures and vicegerents of the former. Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited: it is limited with regard to the co-ordinate departments, more necessarily is it limited with regard to the constituents. The preservation of a free Government requires not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are Tyrants. The People who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them, and are slaves. -James Madison

 

[VaYank5150]

Now kids... check me if I'm wrong here... But does the above post not indicate at the MINIMUM... a 'care'... if not a FULL BLOWN FEAR of Hannity and his would-be 'talking-points?'

For those of us who understand, Hannity is kept in our minds as nothing more than what he is, an entertainer. No fear of him.

 

[mal]

No! No! No! Obama was the first to ever do that! Oops

Like he's the first to give a speech to our children! Oops.

When did any other President Collectively Address Pre-K to 12th, Coast to Coast?...



peace...

 

[Intense]

No! No! No! Obama was the first to ever do that! Oops

Like he's the first to give a speech to our children! Oops.

When did any other President Collectively Address Pre-K to 12th, Coast to Coast?...



peace...

I'm told I have S.F.R.P. Sickness. They want My Radio!

 

[Mr. Capitalism]

I'm not Sure, but can Kids go around Giving Blessings of God to other Students?...

Yes, of course they can.

 

[Intense]

I'm not Sure, but can Kids go around Giving Blessings of God to other Students?...

Yes, of course they can.

Depends where.

 

[xotoxi]

Everyone else just calls him "President".

"Everyone"?...

Wow, you Box is VERY Small.



peace...

I was referring to NORMAL people.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Now kids... check me if I'm wrong here... But does the above post not indicate at the MINIMUM... a 'care'... if not a FULL BLOWN FEAR of Hannity and his would-be 'talking-points?'

For those of us who understand, Hannity is kept in our minds as nothing more than what he is, an entertainer. No fear of him.

Well I guess ya missed the irony, which given your intellectual means is understandable...

But ya started the discussion by running to detach the long standing irrational advocacies of the Ideological Left regarding the Separation of Church and State... from any Leftist who the opposition was not able to identify as having made such a specific public advocacy...

Meaning that ya came out trotting on the high horse of 'independent thought'; overtly rejecting generality as a basis to sound argument...

THEN... in reaction to my posts, YOU DEMANDED THAT MY WORDS WERE TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM OR OTHERWISE ASSIGNED BY SEAN HANNITY TALKING POINTS... which is a startling generalization... standing in direct opposition to the principles of your initial argument; demonstrating that you were merely wanting to stand on a convenient principle, without having any actual respect for such...

Now my favorite part was how such was a demonstration, BY YOU, my would-be opposition; that proved my point. And that you want to advance the notion that you 'maintain congizance of Hannity in your mind and that such effort is not a function of fear (read: concern) is hysterical... (in at least two contexts and on several levels)

And I want ya to know that I appreciate it... I can sit here and post my opinion on what a pack of hypocritical losers you people are ALL DAY... and despite the effort, none of that is nearly as effective as just ONE of these flaccid little trinckets..

Good stuff...

 

[VaYank5150]

Now kids... check me if I'm wrong here... But does the above post not indicate at the MINIMUM... a 'care'... if not a FULL BLOWN FEAR of Hannity and his would-be 'talking-points?'

For those of us who understand, Hannity is kept in our minds as nothing more than what he is, an entertainer. No fear of him.

Well I guess ya missed the irony, which given your intellectual means is understandable...

But ya started the discussion by running to detach the long standing irrational advocacies of the Ideological Left regarding the Separation of Church and State... from any Leftist who the opposition was not able to identify as having made such a specific public advocacy...

Meaning that ya came out trotting on the high horse of 'independent thought'; overtly rejecting generality as a basis to sound argument...

THEN... in reaction to my posts, YOU DEMANDED THAT MY WORDS WERE TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM OR OTHERWISE ASSIGNED BY SEAN HANNITY TALKING POINTS... which is a startling generalization... standing in direct opposition to the principles of your initial argument; demonstrating that you were merely wanting to stand on a convenient principle, without having any actual respect for such...

Now my favorite part was how such was a demonstration, BY YOU, my would-be opposition; that proved my point. And that you want to advance the notion that you 'maintain congizance of Hannity in your mind and that such effort is not a function of fear (read: concern) is hysterical... (in at least two contexts and on several levels)

And I want ya to know that I appreciate it... I can sit here and post my opinion of what a pack of hypocritical losers you people are ALL DAY... and despite the effort, no of that is nearly as effective as just ONE of these little trinckets..

Good stuff...

Fair enough, and duly noted. I was attempting to blame your thought process on Sean Hannity and the like because the things you seem concerned about, sound like something one would hear on an hour of Hannity's show. If you truly think this way, and are truly scared of all of the things that could/should/would/possibly happen, then more power to you. I can't imagine living my life that way, and hope you deal with it well.

 

[Mr. Capitalism]

I'm not Sure, but can Kids go around Giving Blessings of God to other Students?...

Yes, of course they can.

Depends where.

Very true. Here in America they can.

 

[bodecea]

For those of us who understand, Hannity is kept in our minds as nothing more than what he is, an entertainer. No fear of him.

Well I guess ya missed the irony, which given your intellectual means is understandable...

But ya started the discussion by running to detach the long standing irrational advocacies of the Ideological Left regarding the Separation of Church and State... from any Leftist who the opposition was not able to identify as having made such a specific public advocacy...

Meaning that ya came out trotting on the high horse of 'independent thought'; overtly rejecting generality as a basis to sound argument...

THEN... in reaction to my posts, YOU DEMANDED THAT MY WORDS WERE TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM OR OTHERWISE ASSIGNED BY SEAN HANNITY TALKING POINTS... which is a startling generalization... standing in direct opposition to the principles of your initial argument; demonstrating that you were merely wanting to stand on a convenient principle, without having any actual respect for such...

Now my favorite part was how such was a demonstration, BY YOU, my would-be opposition; that proved my point. And that you want to advance the notion that you 'maintain congizance of Hannity in your mind and that such effort is not a function of fear (read: concern) is hysterical... (in at least two contexts and on several levels)

And I want ya to know that I appreciate it... I can sit here and post my opinion of what a pack of hypocritical losers you people are ALL DAY... and despite the effort, no of that is nearly as effective as just ONE of these little trinckets..

Good stuff...

Fair enough, and duly noted. I was attempting to blame your thought process on Sean Hannity and the like because the things you seem concerned about, sound like something one would hear on an hour of Hannity's show. If you truly think this way, and are truly scared of all of the things that could/should/would/possibly happen, then more power to you. I can't imagine living my life that way, and hope you deal with it well.

Hannity is providing a nice service for all the crazy people. They've got quite a nest over there now, I must say.

 

[mal]

Hannity is providing a nice service for all the crazy people. They've got quite a nest over there now, I must say.

Stop talking Shit about Deb and PeterGriffin...



peace...

 

[Smartt33]

Glorious Leader to the Children: "Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America."

I'm not Sure, but can Kids go around Giving Blessings of God to other Students?...

I Thought the Left was Against the Injection of God into Publically Funded Places...

I don't Expect an Honest Response to this...

The same People who wanted "God" taken out of the Pledge will Excuse ANYTHING their Messiah does...

After all, he was Really Referring to himself in that Blessing.



peace...

I just wanted to add, If a voice analysis was made on Obama to determine sincerity in his words, It might be interesting to see just where those words would place his loyalty. As you may or may not have noticed, Obama was very nervous when he said those words, and so nervous that he was already walking away from the platform as he said them. I don't think they meant anything to him at all. So, the lefts really still aren't re-entering a Christian era. That was lip service to please the American people. Also, he rarely (if he has ever) says those words in his speaches, as have many other Presidents.

 

[Intense]

Glorious Leader to the Children: "Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America."

I'm not Sure, but can Kids go around Giving Blessings of God to other Students?...

I Thought the Left was Against the Injection of God into Publically Funded Places...

I don't Expect an Honest Response to this...

The same People who wanted "God" taken out of the Pledge will Excuse ANYTHING their Messiah does...

After all, he was Really Referring to himself in that Blessing.



peace...

I just wanted to add, If a voice analysis was made on Obama to determine sincerity in his words, It might be interesting to see just where those words would place his loyalty. As you may or may not have noticed, Obama was very nervous when he said those words, and so nervous that he was already walking away from the platform as he said them. I don't think they meant anything to him at all. So, the lefts really still aren't re-entering a Christian era. That was lip service to please the American people. Also, he rarely (if he has ever) says those words in his speaches, as have many other Presidents.

He has a Right to use his own words. It would be a nice change. I look forward to it.

 

[Father Time]

"The same People who wanted "God" taken out of the Pledge will Excuse ANYTHING their Messiah does..."

Sigh...

It's very simple

God in the pledge is an instance of government endorsing religion, Obama saying God bless you is just an example of Obama endorsing religion, and he's free to endorse whatever religion he likes for all I care (unless he's trying to get government to endorse it with him).

 

[Intense]

Prayer in Public School - Overview of Governing Constitutional Principles
The history of prayer in public school is a story of legal interpretation. The relationship between religion and government in the United States is governed by the First Amendment to the Constitution, which both prevents the government from establishing religion and protects privately initiated religious expression and activities from government interference and discrimination. The First Amendment thus establishes certain limits on the conduct of public school officials as it relates to religious activity, including prayer.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment requires public school officials to be neutral in their treatment of religion, showing neither favoritism toward nor hostility against religious expression such as prayer. Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch., 533 U.S. 98 (2001); Everson v. Board of Educ., 330 U.S. 1 (1947). Accordingly, the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is sponsored by the government but protects religious activity that is initiated by private individuals, and the line between government-sponsored and privately initiated religious expression is vital to a proper understanding of the First Amendment's scope. As the Court has explained in several cases, "there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect." Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 302 (2000).

Prayer in Public School - Drawing the Line of Permissible Expression
The Supreme Court's decisions over the past forty years set forth principles that distinguish impermissible governmental religious speech from the constitutionally protected private religious speech of students. For example, teachers and other public school officials may not lead their classes in prayer, devotional readings from the Bible, or other religious activities. Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962); School Dist. of Abington Twp. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963). Nor may school officials attempt to persuade or compel students to participate in prayer or other religious activities. Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 599 (1992). Such conduct is "attributable to the State" and thus violates the Establishment Clause. Weisman, 505 U.S. at 587.

Although the Constitution forbids public school officials from directing or favoring prayer, students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Community Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969). In addition, the Supreme Court has made clear that "private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression." Capitol Square Review & Advisory Bd. v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753, 760 (1995). Moreover, not all religious speech that takes place in the public schools or at school-sponsored events is governmental speech. Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 302. For example, "nothing in the Constitution ... prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the school day," and students may pray with fellow students during the school day on the same terms and conditions that they may engage in other conversation or speech. Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 313.

Prayer in Public School - Our Country's Legacy
It wasn't until the early 1960's that prayer in public school was "outlawed" by a new interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. In fact, the history of the U.S. includes prayer and Bible readings in all sorts of public places, including schools. In 1782, the United States Congress passed the following resolution: "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools."

William Holmes McGuffey is the author of the McGuffey Reader, which was used for over 100 years in U.S. public schools with over 125 million copies sold until it was stopped in 1963. President Lincoln called him the "Schoolmaster of the Nation." McGuffey declared: "The Christian religion is the religion of our country. From it are derived our notions on the character of God, on the great moral Governor of the universe. On its doctrines are founded the peculiarities of our free institutions. From no source has the author drawn more conspicuously than from the sacred Scriptures. From all these extracts from the Bible I make no apology."

Of the first 108 universities founded in America, 106 were distinctly Christian, including the first, Harvard University, chartered in 1636. In the original Harvard Student Handbook, rule number 1 was that students seeking entrance must know Latin and Greek so that they could study the Scriptures: "Let every student be plainly instructed and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ, which is eternal life, (John 17:3); and therefore to lay Jesus Christ as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of him (Proverbs 2:3)."

Prayer In Public School (Precedents)

 

[logical4u]

And of course, it was Liberals who Fought to have "God" Removed from the Classroom, so why is Barry bringing him back up to the Collective?

By "Barry", I assume you are referring to Obama. Have you ever heard Obama fight to have "God" removed from anything? If not, why are you attempting to lump him in with other people who feel differently than he does?

Didn't he have all Christian religious images covered when he went to William and Mary college? Doesn't he seem to play more to Allah, and his followers, than to G*d and His?

 

[JakeStarkey]

BHO reflected all that has been historically good with America: religiosity, hard work, encouragement to children, and telling them to strive.

Anyone who disagrees with his message will lose their influence on their children. The children will recognize fools, and they know BHO was the real deal today.