Does the Bible Really Say You should not Judge?

[Wyatt earp]

sure - banning the c bible or any desert religion from public institutions is why the document was written.



now you know ... there is no place for any religion in the public school - teaching various economics is though just fine and should be encouraged.

It said "congress" nothing about state and local governments

 

[lg325]

I went to public schools my whole childhood . For teachers, I had Muslims, Mormons, Catholics, Jews, and others for teachers. I had nothing against them but I would not want them pushing their beliefs on me unless it was an elective class on religion. But I and other students use to discuss religion and share our experience of what we call being baptized by the Holy Spirit. They let us have a prayer circle, as long as did not hold up foot traffic. I had a private conversation with teachers about my religion. They were not knowledgeable of Baptists and had a negative opinion of them. I reminded them of Martin Luther King jr. Was a Baptist preacher. When it comes to the Judging question as I have stated on other threads a good education on Apologetics and Hermeneutics is the best way to understand scripture. And Prayer.

 

[Clyde 154]

so true, they have no other choice - prohibited by the u s constitution.



all three desert religions are based on fictitious events and forgeries of original documents that were either not preserved or deliberately destroyed -

and not a single etched tablet confirming their scriptural content from the time of their events - do you wonder why no one takes your religion, christianity seriously - know you know.

The constitution does not forbid churches from teaching public school. Read a history book on occasion. It was not until 1948 that the liberal courts forced religion out of our public schools. SCOTUS ruled falsely under the "establishment" clause....declaring that the establishment clause (which was directed specifically at the Federal Government) excluded state and local government from establishing their own school policies.

The Constitution does not separate the church and state...........the radical court system is the entity that attempted to redefine the US Constitution. (MCcollum v. Board of Education). You can't present one line in the Constitution that forbids anyone from practicing their religion in a public setting.

Who the hell wants the politicians in Washington DC dictating what our children can and cannot be taught at the state and local level.....COMRADE?

For over a century after the founding of our nation all the public schools were located in the church buildings, with classes often taught by the church itself. The logic behind the fact being that the churches provided public education to the children of the US average citizen in the fact they wanted every free citizen to learn to read so they could avoid the same situation they ran from in Europe where the lay person could not read from the Bible but was dependent upon the STATE to tell them what the Bible actually stated. That's why the Establishment Clause was placed into the Constitution by THE PEOPLE/STATES.......to stop BIG BROTHER FED from dictating what is and what is not acceptable as a guaranteed freedom OF RELIGION.

Now the liberals on the federal courts want to make believe that the PEOPLE who drafted the constitution to limit the power and scope of the federal government wants to use those restrictions against THE PEOPLE/STATES who drafted and ratified the amendments. The amendments were written by THE PEOPLE to stop the FEDS from expressly doing what SCTOUS did in 1948. STICK Their long communist noses up the asses of the local and state governments and place limits upon their religious practices.

 

[Disir]

Do you feel you need approval to judge or scapegoat others?

There appears to be this need to get as many people as possible to support acting atrocious towards others.

There is a thread hiding in the Debate Zone titled something like Is it OK to call people fat? Yes. Hiding. I said what I said.

There has been at least one response of "they might not know". Of course they do.

With enough public support it is OK to be incredibly cruel to anyone. Here we see it again but this time it's about divine approval to support being incredibly cruel to anyone.

 

[BreezeWood]

It said "congress" nothing about state and local governments

really, that is clarified by the civil war amendments, 14th - there are no individual state's rights per law, the constitution.

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

state's rights never existed and by war was reaffirmed.

 

[ding]

really, that is clarified by the civil war amendments, 14th - there are no individual state's rights per law, the constitution.



state's rights never existed and by war was reaffirmed.

Not according to the guys who actually wrote the 14th amendment. We know this because of the failed Blaine amendment.

 

[Wyatt earp]

really, that is clarified by the civil war amendments, 14th - there are no individual state's rights per law, the constitution.



state's rights never existed and by war was reaffirmed.

No it wasn't

 

[BreezeWood]

No it wasn't

those people lost the civil war, sorry no more slaves - the 14th amendment settled the issue of states rights once and for all except perhaps religious zealous that avoid basic education.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]