Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

November 22, 2006

Thankfully we don't get too much of that here - particularly in the

media.

Jo

sadly here, too dang much...

just spend 20 seconds watching any televangelist

who would have thought god would need so much cash....

November 22, 2006

Hi Sharon

This is not necessarily my point of view, just a theory (I like to

theorise, but can have several on the same subject):

If you feel that you are feeling and thinking like/for god, then

maybe god wants you to feel that way - maybe that is the way it is

meant to be. This is a good theory if you believe that god is all

powerful.

Jo

, Shhhhh <compassion2grace

wrote:

>

> Hi Peter. Hmmm, I rather hate to be branded. The church I

currently attend is Faith Fellowship in San Leandro, CA, a member of

the Foursquare denomination.

>

> I was not raised in a religious home of any sort. Perhaps

because of that, I have always been a spiritual seeker. Been down a

lot of paths. I'm fifty years old so I've had a lot of time for

wandering. For a large part of my life I had " my own religion. " By

that I basically mean I decided how things would be if I was God,

what I figured made sense or was " right. " I think that was really

pretty audacious of me, basically creating God in my own image!

That's not really all that unusual, though. Even my 15-year old does

it.

>

> peace,

> sharon

>

> peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:

>

> Hi Sharon,

> If you dont mind me asking, what brand of christianity are you

subscribing to? COE , Presbytarian, 7DA, RC? Do you believe the old

testament?

> Just wondered.

> Me I believe in what I can see, hear, and touch and smell. I have

a strange ( possibly misguided ) faith in human nature.

> I was made to go to chapel every sunday when I was baby until my

teens, when I was old enough to decide for myself. I just formed an

opinion that there may well be an omnipotent one, but it may not be

what some people call god,jehova,buddha, a positive spirit or

whatever.

>

> The Valley Vegan...........

>

> Peter H

>

> Send instant messages to your online friends

http://uk.messenger.

>

> Sponsored Link

>

> Get an Online or Campus degree - Associate's, Bachelor's, or

Master's -in less than one year.

>

November 22, 2006

that wasn't aimed at anyone in particular..

it was just..the voice of warning

just in case

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:41 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Fraggle ... regarding your last post, I hope I'm not giving anybody bad feelings about anything. That is not my intention at all. I have grown to really like and enjoy those of you who post regularly on here during the short time I've been here. I do enjoy a good debate, but if anybody's feelings are being overly stepped on let me know and I will shutup.

Till then ... I am not a scholar of American history, and I couldn't say exactly what Jefferson is referring to here. Likely it is not the displaying of a piece of art featuring the Ten Commandments. Jefferson and the other founding fathers have written extensively on their faith and the importance that they thought it had for the nation they helped to found. You are probably aware of that, but if you wanted me to dig some up I will be happy to oblige. I guarantee the founding fathers would never want a state religion ... neither would I. Not even an official religion. As we have already discussed, the end result of that is a cheapening of the religion, something that is more likely to become an obstacle to a man or woman's relationship with God. I'll bet the state of religion in Europe was of as much concern to these men as the state of Europe because of the religion.

But I just have to go back to the very clear words in the Constitution itself. Right alongside and equal to the establishment clause is the free exercise clause. If we had a Muslim in the senate, I would expect him to be allowed to exercise his religious freedom as well. Wouldn't you?

Don't you really think it is better to give freedom than to deny it?

In peace,

sharon

fraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote:

from the first days of this nation, our government was based on the foundations of seperation of church and state

jefferson, adams, franklin et al, were products of the Enlightenment, and many saw only bad ju ju when they looked toward europe and her continued "religious problems"

from jefferson in 1802

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:08 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

It okay for them to approve of a religion. It is just not okay to make you belong to a religion, and it is not okay to prevent you from belonging to another religion. Freedom OF religion is not the same as freedom FROM religion.

peace,

sharonfraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

allowing public support from a governemnt official, site, program for a religion is tacit approval

why have a manger scene on the lawn of a state capitol if you are not also going to allow an islamic mineret?

how about a minorah in the windows of a courthouse?

and a giant pentagram on the steps of congress....?

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 3:37 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

"... or the free exercise thereof."

Making no law regarding the establishment of religion is a far cry from prohibiting public entities any religious expression.

sharon

fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

sorry, i have to disagree

it does say it there plain and simple

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

congress can not make a stae religion....

thats what the first amendment is saying

and, amendments are part of the constitution...

Jefferson was a big backer of the early amendments, and he wrote extensively on the seperation not only of chucrh and state, but also on the seperation of the powers of the government

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 11:07 AM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

We don't actually have a separation of church and state. That phrase appears nowhere in the constitution. What we have is an amendment that say, "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or free exercise thereof."

That's it. Plain and simple.

Congress can't tell you what religion you have to belong to, and it can't prevent you from practicing whatever religion you choose to practice.

sharonPeter Kebbell <metalscarab > wrote:

Hi Sharon

>Well actually, Peter, it is in all capital letters: IN GOD WE TRUST.

Fair enough - not being American, I don't look at the currency a lot :-)

However, it is still "god" in the singular - so only works for monotheistic religions, and for male deities, which of course brings in the whole issue of gender and patriachal concepts...

>People do not need to be offended by the word GOD. Although there is room for

> understanding that within my experience also. There was a time I could not say the word

> "God." If I had to refer to it, I called it "the G word."

I'm not at all offended by the word "god", I just find it rather odd that it appears on the currency, and in the national oath, of a nation which is supposed to have seperation of religion and state....

BB

Peter

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near historic lows: $150,000 loan as low as $579/mo. Intro-*Terms History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $310,000 Mortgage for $999/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new house payment

History repeats itself

and each time the price gets higher

November 22, 2006

but

exercising religious freedom has ZERO to do with the governement sanctioning and authorizing religion on the grounds that belong to ALL the people

sorry..i am still not at all getting how x-tians feel they are persecuted

when they have everything...they control everything..

i am in no way trying to put down your feelings/emotions,

i just don't get the "poor persecuted x-tian" syndrome

to me, its like Trump b*tchin about taxes.....

and..speaking of muslims in the senate...funny you should mention..we have our first ever muslim elected to the House in the last election........

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:41 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Fraggle ... regarding your last post, I hope I'm not giving anybody bad feelings about anything. That is not my intention at all. I have grown to really like and enjoy those of you who post regularly on here during the short time I've been here. I do enjoy a good debate, but if anybody's feelings are being overly stepped on let me know and I will shutup.

Till then ... I am not a scholar of American history, and I couldn't say exactly what Jefferson is referring to here. Likely it is not the displaying of a piece of art featuring the Ten Commandments. Jefferson and the other founding fathers have written extensively on their faith and the importance that they thought it had for the nation they helped to found. You are probably aware of that, but if you wanted me to dig some up I will be happy to oblige. I guarantee the founding fathers would never want a state religion ... neither would I. Not even an official religion. As we have already discussed, the end result of that is a cheapening of the religion, something that is more likely to become an obstacle to a man or woman's relationship with God. I'll bet the state of religion in Europe was of as much concern to these men as the state of Europe because of the religion.

But I just have to go back to the very clear words in the Constitution itself. Right alongside and equal to the establishment clause is the free exercise clause. If we had a Muslim in the senate, I would expect him to be allowed to exercise his religious freedom as well. Wouldn't you?

Don't you really think it is better to give freedom than to deny it?

In peace,

sharon

fraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote:

from the first days of this nation, our government was based on the foundations of seperation of church and state

jefferson, adams, franklin et al, were products of the Enlightenment, and many saw only bad ju ju when they looked toward europe and her continued "religious problems"

from jefferson in 1802

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:08 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

It okay for them to approve of a religion. It is just not okay to make you belong to a religion, and it is not okay to prevent you from belonging to another religion. Freedom OF religion is not the same as freedom FROM religion.

peace,

sharonfraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

allowing public support from a governemnt official, site, program for a religion is tacit approval

why have a manger scene on the lawn of a state capitol if you are not also going to allow an islamic mineret?

how about a minorah in the windows of a courthouse?

and a giant pentagram on the steps of congress....?

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 3:37 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

"... or the free exercise thereof."

Making no law regarding the establishment of religion is a far cry from prohibiting public entities any religious expression.

sharon

fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

sorry, i have to disagree

it does say it there plain and simple

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

congress can not make a stae religion....

thats what the first amendment is saying

and, amendments are part of the constitution...

Jefferson was a big backer of the early amendments, and he wrote extensively on the seperation not only of chucrh and state, but also on the seperation of the powers of the government

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 11:07 AM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

We don't actually have a separation of church and state. That phrase appears nowhere in the constitution. What we have is an amendment that say, "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or free exercise thereof."

That's it. Plain and simple.

Congress can't tell you what religion you have to belong to, and it can't prevent you from practicing whatever religion you choose to practice.

sharonPeter Kebbell <metalscarab > wrote:

Hi Sharon

>Well actually, Peter, it is in all capital letters: IN GOD WE TRUST.

Fair enough - not being American, I don't look at the currency a lot :-)

However, it is still "god" in the singular - so only works for monotheistic religions, and for male deities, which of course brings in the whole issue of gender and patriachal concepts...

>People do not need to be offended by the word GOD. Although there is room for

> understanding that within my experience also. There was a time I could not say the word

> "God." If I had to refer to it, I called it "the G word."

I'm not at all offended by the word "god", I just find it rather odd that it appears on the currency, and in the national oath, of a nation which is supposed to have seperation of religion and state....

BB

Peter

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near historic lows: $150,000 loan as low as $579/mo. Intro-*Terms History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $310,000 Mortgage for $999/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new house payment

History repeats itself

and each time the price gets higher

November 22, 2006

Hi Jo. I know what you mean. I also like to theorize, and can see many sides myself. When I was in college originally (a loooong time ago), I had a philosophy minor and English major. I am now a paralegal student at our local university, and I love legal research and writing. It is just part of my personality for sure. I do it with a smile, so I hope it doesn't irritate you guys! The bottom line, I would assume, is that we are all joined here by compassion and an ability to emphathize with the suffering of others on this planet. in peace, sharonheartwerk <jo.heartwork wrote: Hi SharonThis is not necessarily my point of view, just a theory (I like to theorise, but can have several on the same subject):If you feel that you are feeling and thinking like/for god, then maybe god wants you to feel that way - maybe that is the way it is meant to be. This is a good theory if you believe that god is all powerful.Jo , Shhhhh <compassion2grace wrote:>> Hi Peter. Hmmm, I rather hate to be branded. The church I currently attend is Faith Fellowship in San Leandro, CA, a member of the Foursquare denomination.> > I was not raised in a religious home of any sort.

Perhaps because of that, I have always been a spiritual seeker. Been down a lot of paths. I'm fifty years old so I've had a lot of time for wandering. For a large part of my life I had "my own religion." By that I basically mean I decided how things would be if I was God, what I figured made sense or was "right." I think that was really pretty audacious of me, basically creating God in my own image! That's not really all that unusual, though. Even my 15-year old does it.> > peace,> sharon> > peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:> > Hi Sharon,> If you dont mind me asking, what brand of christianity are you subscribing to? COE , Presbytarian, 7DA, RC? Do you believe the old testament?> Just wondered.> Me I believe in what I can see, hear, and touch and smell. I have a strange ( possibly misguided ) faith in human nature.> I was made to go to chapel

every sunday when I was baby until my teens, when I was old enough to decide for myself. I just formed an opinion that there may well be an omnipotent one, but it may not be what some people call god,jehova,buddha, a positive spirit or whatever.> > The Valley Vegan...........> > > Peter H > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. > > > > > > Sponsored Link> > Get an Online or Campus degree - Associate's, Bachelor's, or Master's -in less than one year.>

Sponsored Link$420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/month - Think You Pay Too Much For Your Mortgage? Find Out!

November 22, 2006

I think that by the words written into our constitution, the government is required to authorize and sanction ALL religion. Meditate on the words, "Congress shall make no law regarding to establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof." I would not agree that the majority of people in this country are Christian. I think secular humanism is the up and coming faith here. I also think secular humanism is hostile towards Christianity, and is therefore seeking to get rid of things that have been sitting around for a long time without causing anybody any problems. You will never see the ACLU standing up for a Christian's first amendment rights. They seem bent on shushing them. There is another way to look at it. Christians could quite easily be on the shushing end of things ... they could say they don't want any religious symbolism or activities in public places,

because of the fact that the Constitution guarantees equal access to all religions and they would rather give up their freedom than allow the other religions the right to exercise theirs. Again, it is freedom for all, or freedom for none. in peace, sharonfraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote: but exercising religious freedom has ZERO to do with the governement sanctioning and authorizing religion on the grounds that

belong to ALL the people sorry..i am still not at all getting how x-tians feel they are persecuted when they have everything...they control everything.. i am in no way trying to put down your feelings/emotions, i just don't get the "poor persecuted x-tian" syndrome to me, its like Trump b*tchin about taxes..... and..speaking of muslims in the senate...funny you should mention..we have our first ever muslim elected to the House in the last election........ Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:41 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges Fraggle ... regarding your last post, I hope I'm not giving anybody bad feelings about

anything. That is not my intention at all. I have grown to really like and enjoy those of you who post regularly on here during the short time I've been here. I do enjoy a good debate, but if anybody's feelings are being overly stepped on let me know and I will shutup. Till then ... I am not a scholar of American history, and I couldn't say exactly what Jefferson is referring to here. Likely it is not the displaying of a piece of art featuring the Ten Commandments. Jefferson and the other founding fathers have written extensively on their faith and the importance that they thought it had for the nation they helped to found. You are probably aware of that, but if you wanted me to dig some up I will be happy to oblige. I guarantee the founding fathers would never want a state religion ... neither would I. Not even an official religion. As we have already discussed,

the end result of that is a cheapening of the religion, something that is more likely to become an obstacle to a man or woman's relationship with God. I'll bet the state of religion in Europe was of as much concern to these men as the state of Europe because of the religion. But I just have to go back to the very clear words in the Constitution itself. Right alongside and equal to the establishment clause is the free exercise clause. If we had a Muslim in the senate, I would expect him to be allowed to exercise his religious freedom as well. Wouldn't you? Don't you really think it is better to give freedom than to deny it? In peace, sharon fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote: from the first days of this nation, our government was based on the foundations of seperation of church and state jefferson, adams, franklin et al, were products of the Enlightenment, and many saw only bad ju ju when they looked toward europe and her continued "religious problems" from jefferson in 1802 "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to

execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties." Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:08 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges It okay for them to approve of a religion. It is just not okay to make you

belong to a religion, and it is not okay to prevent you from belonging to another religion. Freedom OF religion is not the same as freedom FROM religion. peace, sharonfraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote: allowing public support from a governemnt official, site, program for a religion is tacit approval why have a manger scene on the lawn of a state capitol if you are not also going to allow an islamic mineret? how about a minorah in the windows of a courthouse? and a giant pentagram on the steps of congress....? Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 3:37 PM

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges "... or the free exercise thereof." Making no law regarding the establishment of religion is a far cry from prohibiting public entities any religious expression. sharon fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote: sorry, i have to disagree it does say it there plain and simple Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion congress can not make a stae religion.... thats what the first amendment is saying and, amendments are part of the constitution... Jefferson was a big backer of the early amendments, and he wrote extensively on the

seperation not only of chucrh and state, but also on the seperation of the powers of the government Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 11:07 AM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges We don't actually have a separation of church and state. That phrase appears nowhere in the constitution. What we have is an amendment that say, "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or free exercise thereof." That's it. Plain and simple. Congress can't tell you what religion you have to belong to, and it can't prevent you from practicing whatever religion you choose to practice. sharonPeter Kebbell

<metalscarab > wrote: Hi Sharon >Well actually, Peter, it is in all capital letters: IN GOD WE TRUST. Fair enough - not being American, I don't look at the currency a lot :-) However, it is still "god" in the singular - so only works for monotheistic religions, and for male deities, which of course brings in the whole issue of gender and patriachal concepts... >People do not need to be offended by the word GOD. Although there is room for > understanding that within my experience also. There was a time I could not say the word > "God." If I had to refer to it, I called it "the G word." I'm not at all offended

by the word "god", I just find it rather odd that it appears on the currency, and in the national oath, of a nation which is supposed to have seperation of religion and state.... BB Peter Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near historic lows: $150,000 loan as low as $579/mo. Intro-*Terms History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near

39yr lows. $310,000 Mortgage for $999/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher Sponsored LinkMortgage

rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment

November 22, 2006

Hi Sharon

>Like you said, I think it is because people identify themselves as being that religion when in matter of fact they have never really personally and spiritually

> embraced it. I'm guessing you don't have that problem much with your religion, huh? What do you mean by paganism, exactly? Is that the same as Wicca?

It's not so prevalent in Paganism, simply because Paganism is relatively small, and therefore doesn't have much of a "profile". However, there are fundamentalist Pagans, as there are in any other religion - those who think that their way is the only way, and that everyone else should agree with them. So Paganism isn't by any means immune from idiots!!!

Wicca is a small part of Paganism, although it is by far the most vocal part (at least in the UK), which means the public perception tends to hone in on Wicca! Paganism is basically a spiritual path based on recognising the divine in nature, but there are a large number of ways that happens - Wicca is one part, there are also Druids, Heathens (followers of Norse pantheons), Feri / Faery / Fairy traditions, and eclectic Pagans, amongst a whole raft of smaller traditions / groups!

BB

Peter

November 22, 2006

Hi Jo

Seems to have done - but only because they got threatened with being kicked out the Union themselves...

BB

Peter

-

jo

Tuesday, November 21, 2006 8:05 PM

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Hi Peter

Has the situation improved in Bristol university?

BBJo

-

Peter Kebbell

Tuesday, November 21, 2006 12:50 PM

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Hi Sharon

>Okay, I have actually read the article now, and you guys should also. What I am reading is that the CU's want

> to be able to say who will be able to be a governing/influencing member of their own groups. And I do believe

>they should have that right, shouldn't they? Should vegan groups be forced to have pharmaceutical

> representatives talk about the good of testing on animals, and have those people serve on their governing

> boards? No protesting would go on that way, for certain! Should gay rights groups be forced to have people

> who disagree with their lifestyle come and talk about it and vote on their policies? No.

That is indeed what the article says. However, the article is not written from an objective point of view, and has completely ignored the real reasons why these CUs have been banned. I am a student at Bristol University, and have direct experience of the CU here. I am also a member of the University Pagan Network, and have spoken to people in other universities about their experiences with the CUs. Edinburgh is one of the Universities which is involved in the University Pagan Network, and I have spoken to people there about how the CU actively campaigns against the existence of non-Christian religious groups, as they do at Bristol, and other universities. I am talking here from direct experience - I attended the Bristol University AGM 2 years ago, where the Christian Union put forward a motion that all non-Christian societies be banned from affiliation to the Union, and use of the Union and Chaplaincy buildings. This is not second hand knowledge from a biased newspaper report, this is actual first hand experience.

>The CU's aren't trying to deny any of the other groups the right to exist.

Yes they are. Just because the newspaper hasn't reported it, doesn't mean that this is not the case.

>Come on, people. Let's be a little more tolerant.

I absolutely agree - let's have some tolerance for those of us who don't belong to the majority religion in this country.

BB

Peter

November 22, 2006

I think this is one of the things that fascinated me in the past. Fairies, runes. Mists of Avalon??? I had a couple of good friends who were practicing wiccans and psychics. Does shamanism fall under this umbrella? peace, sharon Peter <metalscarab wrote: Hi Sharon >Like you said, I think it is because people identify themselves as

being that religion when in matter of fact they have never really personally and spiritually > embraced it. I'm guessing you don't have that problem much with your religion, huh? What do you mean by paganism, exactly? Is that the same as Wicca? It's not so prevalent in Paganism, simply because Paganism is relatively small, and therefore doesn't have much of a "profile". However, there are fundamentalist Pagans, as there are in any other religion - those who think that their way is the only way, and that everyone else should agree with them. So Paganism isn't by any means immune from idiots!!! Wicca is a small part of Paganism, although it is by far the most vocal part (at least in the UK), which means the public perception tends to hone in on Wicca! Paganism is basically a spiritual

path based on recognising the divine in nature, but there are a large number of ways that happens - Wicca is one part, there are also Druids, Heathens (followers of Norse pantheons), Feri / Faery / Fairy traditions, and eclectic Pagans, amongst a whole raft of smaller traditions / groups! BB Peter

Sponsored Link

Degrees for employed people - in as fast as 1 year. A.S. / Bachelors / Masters

November 22, 2006

Hi Sharon

> Hmmm, I rather hate to be branded. The church I currently attend is Faith Fellowship in San Leandro, CA, a member of the Foursquare denomination.

As I'm always intrigued by various religions, and branches thereof, I hope you won't mind if I ask.... could you say a bit more about Foursquare? It's not one I've come across before. Something I'd be paticularly interested in, is how a regular Foursquare church service / ritual gathering / whatever you may call it would look like?

BB

Peter

November 22, 2006

Hi Sharon

>Till then ... I am not a scholar of American history, and I couldn't say exactly what Jefferson is referring to here. Likely it is not the displaying of a piece of art

> featuring the Ten Commandments. Jefferson and the other founding fathers have written extensively on their faith and the importance that they thought it had for

> the nation they helped to found.

But don't forget that Benjamin Franklin was involved in Satanic worship. Something I always find rather amusing is that the Book of Common Prayer still used by moost US curches was put together by Franklin and Francis Dashwood over tea one evening, following their regular Satanic worship in the caves under Dashwood's home. I'm als aware that several of the other founding fathers were "unorthtodox" in their religious views, but it's a while since I looked into it, so can't remember details now.

Of course, there is also the influence of Freemasonry on the constitution. It's no secret that most of those involved in drafting the constitution were active Masons, and used concepts from Masonry to form the nature of the American state - and since religion is specifically banned from Freemasonic gatherings, this was very likely the intention with regard to their vision for the state....

BB

Peter

November 22, 2006

I love anything with fairies!

number of ways that happens - Wicca is one part, there are also

Druids, Heathens (followers of Norse pantheons), Feri / Faery / Fairy

traditions, and eclectic Pagans, amongst a whole raft of smaller

traditions / groups!

>

> BB

> Peter

>

November 22, 2006

Hi Sharon

>You will never see the ACLU standing up for a Christian's first amendment rights. They seem bent on shushing them.

See, I'm confused here. Not being in the US, I don't know that much about ACLU, but my Pagan friends out there are all really upset at the existence of ACLU, because from their perception it seems to place the rights of Christians above those of any other religion. I know that they all think they would have more freedom to practice Paganism if ACLU didn't exist.

BB

Peter

November 22, 2006

I hesitate to get involved in this discussion, but the ACLU has been and is involved right now in protecting the civil rights of Christians. Anyone who's interested can go to aclu.org and search on "Christian,religious liberty," etc., to get the facts. Here's a recent example: US District Court Rejects Federal Government's Attempt to Bypass Ruling on .. 04/12/2005In Virginia, the ACLU successfully defended the right of a Christian group to perform baptisms in a public park. www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16262prs20050412.html

Here's another:

Barred .. 01/12/2006... Island Files Appeal on Behalf of Christian Prisoner Barred ... appeal in federal court on behalf of a Christian prisoner who was ... Wesley Spratt had been preaching during Christian services for seven years at ... www.aclu.org/religion/frb/23445prs20060112.html

Carolyn

November 22, 2006

Hi Sharon

I find it helps me think if I voice theories. After all, anything could be true or not :-)

Jo

-

Shhhhh

Wednesday, November 22, 2006 4:59 PM

Re: Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Hi Jo. I know what you mean. I also like to theorize, and can see many sides myself. When I was in college originally (a loooong time ago), I had a philosophy minor and English major. I am now a paralegal student at our local university, and I love legal research and writing.

It is just part of my personality for sure. I do it with a smile, so I hope it doesn't irritate you guys!

The bottom line, I would assume, is that we are all joined here by compassion and an ability to emphathize with the suffering of others on this planet.

in peace,

sharonheartwerk <jo.heartwork wrote:

Hi SharonThis is not necessarily my point of view, just a theory (I like to theorise, but can have several on the same subject):If you feel that you are feeling and thinking like/for god, then maybe god wants you to feel that way - maybe that is the way it is meant to be. This is a good theory if you believe that god is all powerful.Jo , Shhhhh <compassion2grace wrote:>> Hi Peter. Hmmm, I rather hate to be branded. The church I currently attend is Faith Fellowship in San Leandro, CA, a member of the Foursquare denomination.> > I was not raised in a religious home of any sort. Perhaps because of that, I have always been a spiritual seeker. Been down a lot of paths. I'm fifty years old so I've had a lot of time for wandering. For a large part of my life I had "my own religion." By that I basically mean I decided how things would be if I was God, what I figured made sense or was "right." I think that was really pretty audacious of me, basically creating God in my own image! That's not really all that unusual, though. Even my 15-year old does it.> > peace,> sharon> > peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:> > Hi Sharon,> If you dont mind me asking, what brand of christianity are you subscribing to? COE , Presbytarian, 7DA, RC? Do you believe the old testament?> Just wondered.> Me I believe in what I can see, hear, and touch and smell. I have a strange ( possibly misguided ) faith in human nature.> I was made to go to chapel every sunday when I was baby until my teens, when I was old enough to decide for myself. I just formed an opinion that there may well be an omnipotent one, but it may not be what some people call god,jehova,buddha, a positive spirit or whatever.> > The Valley Vegan...........> > > Peter H > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. > > > > > > Sponsored Link> > Get an Online or Campus degree - Associate's, Bachelor's, or Master's -in less than one year.>

Sponsored Link$420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/month - Think You Pay Too Much For Your Mortgage? Find Out!

November 22, 2006

Don't hesitate, Carolyn. And, on the second two cases you mentioned I stand corrected, and happily so. On the first, however, the ACLU was arguing to bar the transfer of public land to a private party in order to allow a cross to keep standing there. peace, sharonCarolyn MFEMF <wordwerks wrote: I hesitate to get involved in this discussion, but the ACLU has

been and is involved right now in protecting the civil rights of Christians. Anyone who's interested can go to aclu.org and search on "Christian,religious liberty," etc., to get the facts. Here's a recent example: US District Court Rejects Federal Government's Attempt to Bypass Ruling on .. 04/12/2005In Virginia, the ACLU successfully defended the right of a Christian group to perform baptisms in a public park. www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16262prs20050412.html Here's another: Barred .. 01/12/2006... Island Files Appeal on Behalf of Christian Prisoner Barred ... appeal in federal court on behalf of a Christian prisoner who was ... Wesley Spratt had been preaching during Christian services for seven years at ... www.aclu.org/religion/frb/23445prs20060112.html Carolyn

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment

November 22, 2006

Sorry

i disagree whole heartedly...

and i'm just going to leave it at that

Shhhhh Nov 22, 2006 9:31 AM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

I think that by the words written into our constitution, the government is required to authorize and sanction ALL religion. Meditate on the words, "Congress shall make no law regarding to establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof."

I would not agree that the majority of people in this country are Christian. I think secular humanism is the up and coming faith here. I also think secular humanism is hostile towards Christianity, and is therefore seeking to get rid of things that have been sitting around for a long time without causing anybody any problems. You will never see the ACLU standing up for a Christian's first amendment rights. They seem bent on shushing them.

There is another way to look at it. Christians could quite easily be on the shushing end of things ... they could say they don't want any religious symbolism or activities in public places, because of the fact that the Constitution guarantees equal access to all religions and they would rather give up their freedom than allow the other religions the right to exercise theirs.

Again, it is freedom for all, or freedom for none.

in peace,

sharonfraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote:

but

exercising religious freedom has ZERO to do with the governement sanctioning and authorizing religion on the grounds that belong to ALL the people

sorry..i am still not at all getting how x-tians feel they are persecuted

when they have everything...they control everything..

i am in no way trying to put down your feelings/emotions,

i just don't get the "poor persecuted x-tian" syndrome

to me, its like Trump b*tchin about taxes.....

and..speaking of muslims in the senate...funny you should mention..we have our first ever muslim elected to the House in the last election........

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:41 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Fraggle ... regarding your last post, I hope I'm not giving anybody bad feelings about anything. That is not my intention at all. I have grown to really like and enjoy those of you who post regularly on here during the short time I've been here. I do enjoy a good debate, but if anybody's feelings are being overly stepped on let me know and I will shutup.

Till then ... I am not a scholar of American history, and I couldn't say exactly what Jefferson is referring to here. Likely it is not the displaying of a piece of art featuring the Ten Commandments. Jefferson and the other founding fathers have written extensively on their faith and the importance that they thought it had for the nation they helped to found. You are probably aware of that, but if you wanted me to dig some up I will be happy to oblige. I guarantee the founding fathers would never want a state religion ... neither would I. Not even an official religion. As we have already discussed, the end result of that is a cheapening of the religion, something that is more likely to become an obstacle to a man or woman's relationship with God. I'll bet the state of religion in Europe was of as much concern to these men as the state of Europe because of the religion.

But I just have to go back to the very clear words in the Constitution itself. Right alongside and equal to the establishment clause is the free exercise clause. If we had a Muslim in the senate, I would expect him to be allowed to exercise his religious freedom as well. Wouldn't you?

Don't you really think it is better to give freedom than to deny it?

In peace,

sharon

fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

from the first days of this nation, our government was based on the foundations of seperation of church and state

jefferson, adams, franklin et al, were products of the Enlightenment, and many saw only bad ju ju when they looked toward europe and her continued "religious problems"

from jefferson in 1802

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:08 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

It okay for them to approve of a religion. It is just not okay to make you belong to a religion, and it is not okay to prevent you from belonging to another religion. Freedom OF religion is not the same as freedom FROM religion.

peace,

sharonfraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

allowing public support from a governemnt official, site, program for a religion is tacit approval

why have a manger scene on the lawn of a state capitol if you are not also going to allow an islamic mineret?

how about a minorah in the windows of a courthouse?

and a giant pentagram on the steps of congress....?

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 3:37 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

"... or the free exercise thereof."

Making no law regarding the establishment of religion is a far cry from prohibiting public entities any religious expression.

sharon

fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

sorry, i have to disagree

it does say it there plain and simple

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

congress can not make a stae religion....

thats what the first amendment is saying

and, amendments are part of the constitution...

Jefferson was a big backer of the early amendments, and he wrote extensively on the seperation not only of chucrh and state, but also on the seperation of the powers of the government

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 11:07 AM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

We don't actually have a separation of church and state. That phrase appears nowhere in the constitution. What we have is an amendment that say, "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or free exercise thereof."

That's it. Plain and simple.

Congress can't tell you what religion you have to belong to, and it can't prevent you from practicing whatever religion you choose to practice.

sharonPeter Kebbell <metalscarab > wrote:

Hi Sharon

>Well actually, Peter, it is in all capital letters: IN GOD WE TRUST.

Fair enough - not being American, I don't look at the currency a lot :-)

However, it is still "god" in the singular - so only works for monotheistic religions, and for male deities, which of course brings in the whole issue of gender and patriachal concepts...

>People do not need to be offended by the word GOD. Although there is room for

> understanding that within my experience also. There was a time I could not say the word

> "God." If I had to refer to it, I called it "the G word."

I'm not at all offended by the word "god", I just find it rather odd that it appears on the currency, and in the national oath, of a nation which is supposed to have seperation of religion and state....

BB

Peter

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near historic lows: $150,000 loan as low as $579/mo. Intro-*Terms History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $310,000 Mortgage for $999/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment

History repeats itself

and each time the price gets higher

November 22, 2006

I hesitate because I'm too busy to get involved in a discussion. I rushed to the ACLU site and plucked out two cases to make a point. Your previous post stated, "You will never see the ACLU standing up for a Christian's first amendment rights." And that's not true. Whether one of my examples is applicable or not is beside the point. If you want to spend some time at the aclu.org, you can find hundreds more examples of the ACLU protecting the rights of Christian citizens.

Carolyn

-

Shhhhh

Wednesday, November 22, 2006 2:37 PM

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Don't hesitate, Carolyn. And, on the second two cases you mentioned I stand corrected, and happily so. On the first, however, the ACLU was arguing to bar the transfer of public land to a private party in order to allow a cross to keep standing there.

peace,

sharonCarolyn MFEMF <wordwerks (AT) msn (DOT) com> wrote:

I hesitate to get involved in this discussion, but the ACLU has been and is involved right now in protecting the civil rights of Christians. Anyone who's interested can go to aclu.org and search on "Christian,religious liberty," etc., to get the facts. Here's a recent example: US District Court Rejects Federal Government's Attempt to Bypass Ruling on .. 04/12/2005In Virginia, the ACLU successfully defended the right of a Christian group to perform baptisms in a public park. www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16262prs20050412.html

Here's another:

Barred . 01/12/2006... Island Files Appeal on Behalf of Christian Prisoner Barred ... appeal in federal court on behalf of a Christian prisoner who was ... Wesley Spratt had been preaching during Christian services for seven years at ... www.aclu.org/religion/frb/23445prs20060112.html

Carolyn

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment

November 22, 2006

Again, no scholar of American history, but what would be the source of your information? I'll have to have my son, who is a history major, ask his professors about this. Since he attends a very liberal university, I'm sure they won't cloak anything in conservative beliefs. peace, sharonPeter <metalscarab wrote: Hi Sharon >Till then ... I am

not a scholar of American history, and I couldn't say exactly what Jefferson is referring to here. Likely it is not the displaying of a piece of art > featuring the Ten Commandments. Jefferson and the other founding fathers have written extensively on their faith and the importance that they thought it had for > the nation they helped to found. But don't forget that Benjamin Franklin was involved in Satanic worship. Something I always find rather amusing is that the Book of Common Prayer still used by moost US curches was put together by Franklin and Francis Dashwood over tea one evening, following their regular Satanic worship in the caves under Dashwood's home. I'm als aware that several of the other founding fathers were "unorthtodox" in their religious views, but it's a while since I looked into it, so can't remember details now. Of course, there is also the influence of Freemasonry on the constitution. It's no secret that most of those involved in drafting the constitution were active Masons, and used concepts from Masonry to form the nature of the American state - and since religion is specifically banned from Freemasonic gatherings, this was very likely the intention with regard to their vision for the state.... BB Peter

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new house payment

November 22, 2006

I would think that it would be better not to worship the mighty dollar, or covert thy nieghbours ox, etc but to forgo earthly possesions? Mixing metaphors/and religions...........no hope for me now.......... The Valley Vegan.............Shhhhh <compassion2grace wrote: Jo, I would guess that placing "in god we trust" in the money invokes God's blessing on the finances of the country. I certainly would like God to bless my

money. I think he needs to make it a little bit BIGGER so it will quit slipping through the HOLES! hehe peace, sharonpeter VV <swpgh01 (AT) talk21 (DOT) com> wrote: RC church I believe was one of the richest institutions on the planet at one time, maybe the question should go to the pope... The Valley Vegan.............jo <jo.heartwork > wrote: Soem people don't trust in any gods because they don't believe in them. What has god/s got to do with money anyway? Jo - Sharon Murch Tuesday, November 21, 2006 1:26 AM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges See, that's exactly the kind of thing I mean ... "In God We Trust" has been on the money for 200 years, but suddenly there are actually people bringing lawsuits over it. Yes, that is an attack. And in point of fact, God is a

title, not a name, not even associated with a particular religion. As for the Christmas carols ... well, I can't stand them myself, for totally other reasons. In fact, I find music to be a highly personal thing that shouldn't be forced on other people. But I can see your point. On the other hand, if it had been one of those other things being played, I'll bet that AP would have applauded our "diversity." Sharon fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote: i understand where you are coming from but fer me, i don't think x-tianity is coming under any sort of attack..not in this country... i can't comment on the article, as have little inclination on the how's and why's on Uni life

in the UK... but..i can tell ya this... here..look at the world thru a non-x-tian lens.. (now, i am in no way shape er form putting down er judging yer religious views/choices/life) everywhere one goes..everything one does..has a religious overtone its on the money fer bacchus' sake.... now that the "holidays" are fast approaching, its like a giant wave is cascading down... you mentioned something about x-mas carols..and having to have them turned off now..i can admit some folks over react but... imagine if someone played the call to prayer over speakers during ramadan... how would you think people would react? how about some hebrew blessing over Channukah? and those are two religions that are from "the people of the book" now imagine if someone insisted on some

mongolian shamanistic ritual song be played over the intercom during high fire week er wotever(i made that up...no idea if this is a festival of high fire in mongolia) again..not trying to belittle your faith but...i can't go anywhere without x-tianity seemingly being forced on me... we are suppose to be a tolerant(excuse me as the laugh dies in me throat) and i applaud your view on your religion and your faith but, too many others view theirs as the only way..and only they are correct and many of them do hold the power, do hold the money, and have the loudest voices... cheers fraggle Sharon Murch Nov 20, 2006 3:46 PM Subject:

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges Well ... as a nonpersonal example, I think that the interpretation of the article in question feels kind of like an attack. I do feel rather like everyone in the world gets to have civil liberties these days, except for Christians ... and animal rights activists. See, I just can't find a popular cause. Believe me, Christianity is not popular. Maybe in the last generation it was, but we aren't living in the last generation. A comedian at SF State put it this way: "San Francisco is a very liberal city ... as long as you agree with them." I know there are a lot of sticky issues out there. The gay/lesbian thing is probably the stickiest one. I know lots of gays/lesbians, and among them are people I love and respect with all my heart. They presuppose that because of my religion that I am going to think differently about them, but that isn't the case. I personally find the expectation that I will not love and respect people who are gay/lesbian because of my faith to be prejudicial. My son's girlfriend wrote something on myspace regarding this in a conversation with a gay friend. I can't remember the details, but he was accusing her of being intolerant, when in fact he was the one who was being judgmental and

intolerant. I know, it's confusing, but the bottom line is people have got to have LOVE for one another, and TOLERANCE, meaning let others believe what they want, including the Christians. If you want to talk about evangelism ... well, it's not about forcing my beliefs on anyone else. It's about introducing you to a friend of mine. If God is real, then he is certainly capable of telling each person what he wants of them. If I believed it was my place to do that, I'd be making myself into God, wouldn't I? I suppose rather than feeling subject to attack, I feel subject to

prejudice. Sharon fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 11:55:00 AMRe: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges hey sharon so, if i may ask, how do you feel "assualted" or under attack? coming from the other side, i feel CONSTANTLY under attack, and this time of year its like drowning in a sea of christianity Sharon Murch Nov 19,

2006 3:45 PM @gro ups.com Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges Didn't read the whole article, so I'm not really commenting on it, but I suppose it's time to confess to you all that I am actually one of those Christians. The only comment I can make on it is that I do see civil liberties of Christians being eroded in this country. The ACLU, for example, is not out making sure that we all have the right to speak out (you know, like the animal rights activists targeted in the AETA), but rather more concerned with making sure that certain groups, like Christians, cannot speak out or display symbols of their faith or whatever. I work in a public high school. Now we have an amendment to our constitution that says,

"Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." What that means is that Congress cannot go around passing laws saying you have to be a certain religion, or that you cannot be a certain religion. But that has been distorted vastly by those who want to make it seem as though if you are in any public arena you have to give up your "free exercise thereof" rights. In my office last year somebody put on some Christmas carols, and an assistant principal immediately rushed out and turned them off so as not to "offend" anybody. So it's a problem here, and I wouldn't be surprise if it's a problem elsewhere. This is the thing with being liberal and tolerant ... you have got to remember that means to be liberal and

tolerant of people who don't happen to agree with you. Peace! Sharon peter VV <swpgh01 (AT) talk21 (DOT) com>@gro ups.comSunday, November 19, 2006 12:37:27 AMRe: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges Does this make any sense to anyone or am I missing the point here? Their main grievance ( as far as I can see it ) is that they are being forced to let non christians sit on christian commitees? why would non christians be

interested in the first place? I can understand the gay issue, that gay christians ( I assume there are such peple ? - hard to tell what their bible condones these days) should be allowed on the commitees, so why should they be upset by that? This is confusing for my little brain The Times November 18, 2006 Students sue over Christian rights at collegesBy David Lister and Ruth Gledhill Follow the exploits of four university freshers in their blog CHRISTIANS on campuses across Britain are preparing to take legal action against university authorities, accusing them of driving their religious beliefs underground, The Times has learnt. Christian unions claim that they are being singled out as a ?soft target? by student associations because they refuse to allow non-Christians to address their meetings or sit on ruling committees. The dispute follows the associations? decisions at four universities to ban the unions from official lists

of societies or deny them access to facilities or privileges. Christian unions at Edinburgh, Heriot-Watt and Birmingham universities are all taking legal advice after being accused of excluding non-Christians, promoting homophobia and even discriminating against those of transgender sexuality. Two Christian unions announced yesterday that they were consulting lawyers, at the same time as the Government announced measures to tackle the threat of Islamist extremism on campus. At Exeter University the Christian union issued a statement on Thursday stating that it has given the students? guild 14 days to reinstate it in full or face legal action. It was suspended from the list of official societies last month for allegedly breaching rules on equal opportunities. Andrea Minichiello Williams, public policy officer for the Lawyers? Christian Fellowship, which has offered informal legal advice to the students, predicted that there would be a wave of legal action. She said: ?We haven?t seen examples of this sort of discrimination against any other groups and we are puzzled by why Christian unions seem to be being singled out.? The Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship, the umbrella group for Britain?s 350 Christian unions with a membership of up to 20,000 students, accused student authorities of extreme political correctness. It said that Christian unions faced a struggle ?unprecedented? in their 83-year history. Pod Bhogal, the fellowship?s head of communications, said: ?The politically correct agenda is being used to shut people up under the guise of tolerance when, in fact, you tolerate anything other than the thing you disagree with.? Amid calls for the fellowship to set up a fighting fund to contest legal actions, Emma Brewster, one of its 60 paid staff workers who act as mentors to Christian unions, said: ?We believe that we are going to see more situations like this in our universities. ?

The 150-strong Christian union in Birmingham was suspended this year after refusing to alter its constitution to allow non-Christians to address meetings and to amend its literature to include references to gays, lesbians, bisexuals and those of transgender sexuality. In Exeter, the Christian union had privileges suspended, including free access to university rooms and funding, after the guild deemed its core statement of beliefs too exclusive. At Edinburgh University, where copies of the Bible were banned from halls of residence last year after protests from the students? union, the Christian union has been banned from teaching a course about sex and relationships after complaints that it promoted homophobia. At Heriot-Watt, Edinburgh, the union has been told it cannot join the students? union because its core beliefs discriminate against non-Christians and those of other

faiths. Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger . History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $310,000 Mortgage for $999/mo - Calculate new house payment Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Sponsored Link$200,000 mortgage for $660/mo - 30/15 yr fixed, reduce debt, home equity - Click now for info Peter H

All New Mail – Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you.

November 22, 2006

Whats a foursquare denomination ( sorry to ask so many questions ), excuse my ignorance. The Valley Vegan............Shhhhh <compassion2grace wrote: Hi Peter. Hmmm, I rather hate to be branded. The church I currently attend is Faith Fellowship in San Leandro, CA, a member of the Foursquare denomination. I was not raised in a religious home of any sort. Perhaps because of that, I have always been a spiritual seeker.

Been down a lot of paths. I'm fifty years old so I've had a lot of time for wandering. For a large part of my life I had "my own religion." By that I basically mean I decided how things would be if I was God, what I figured made sense or was "right." I think that was really pretty audacious of me, basically creating God in my own image! That's not really all that unusual, though. Even my 15-year old does it. peace, sharonpeter VV <swpgh01 (AT) talk21 (DOT) com> wrote: Hi Sharon, If you dont mind me asking, what brand of christianity are you subscribing to? COE , Presbytarian, 7DA, RC? Do you believe the old testament? Just wondered. Me I believe in what I can see, hear, and touch and smell. I have a strange (

possibly misguided ) faith in human nature. I was made to go to chapel every sunday when I was baby until my teens, when I was old enough to decide for myself. I just formed an opinion that there may well be an omnipotent one, but it may not be what some people call god,jehova,buddha, a positive spirit or whatever. The Valley Vegan........... Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Sponsored LinkGet an Online or Campus degree -

Associate's, Bachelor's, or Master's -in less than one year. Peter H

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.

November 22, 2006

Hi Sharon

......but why would the Christians have the say over what happens?

Jo

-

Shhhhh

Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:31 PM

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

I think that by the words written into our constitution, the government is required to authorize and sanction ALL religion. Meditate on the words, "Congress shall make no law regarding to establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof."

I would not agree that the majority of people in this country are Christian. I think secular humanism is the up and coming faith here. I also think secular humanism is hostile towards Christianity, and is therefore seeking to get rid of things that have been sitting around for a long time without causing anybody any problems. You will never see the ACLU standing up for a Christian's first amendment rights. They seem bent on shushing them.

There is another way to look at it. Christians could quite easily be on the shushing end of things ... they could say they don't want any religious symbolism or activities in public places, because of the fact that the Constitution guarantees equal access to all religions and they would rather give up their freedom than allow the other religions the right to exercise theirs.

Again, it is freedom for all, or freedom for none.

in peace,

sharonfraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote:

but

exercising religious freedom has ZERO to do with the governement sanctioning and authorizing religion on the grounds that belong to ALL the people

sorry..i am still not at all getting how x-tians feel they are persecuted

when they have everything...they control everything..

i am in no way trying to put down your feelings/emotions,

i just don't get the "poor persecuted x-tian" syndrome

to me, its like Trump b*tchin about taxes.....

and..speaking of muslims in the senate...funny you should mention..we have our first ever muslim elected to the House in the last election........

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:41 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Fraggle ... regarding your last post, I hope I'm not giving anybody bad feelings about anything. That is not my intention at all. I have grown to really like and enjoy those of you who post regularly on here during the short time I've been here. I do enjoy a good debate, but if anybody's feelings are being overly stepped on let me know and I will shutup.

Till then ... I am not a scholar of American history, and I couldn't say exactly what Jefferson is referring to here. Likely it is not the displaying of a piece of art featuring the Ten Commandments. Jefferson and the other founding fathers have written extensively on their faith and the importance that they thought it had for the nation they helped to found. You are probably aware of that, but if you wanted me to dig some up I will be happy to oblige. I guarantee the founding fathers would never want a state religion ... neither would I. Not even an official religion. As we have already discussed, the end result of that is a cheapening of the religion, something that is more likely to become an obstacle to a man or woman's relationship with God. I'll bet the state of religion in Europe was of as much concern to these men as the state of Europe because of the religion.

But I just have to go back to the very clear words in the Constitution itself. Right alongside and equal to the establishment clause is the free exercise clause. If we had a Muslim in the senate, I would expect him to be allowed to exercise his religious freedom as well. Wouldn't you?

Don't you really think it is better to give freedom than to deny it?

In peace,

sharon

fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

from the first days of this nation, our government was based on the foundations of seperation of church and state

jefferson, adams, franklin et al, were products of the Enlightenment, and many saw only bad ju ju when they looked toward europe and her continued "religious problems"

from jefferson in 1802

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 6:08 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

It okay for them to approve of a religion. It is just not okay to make you belong to a religion, and it is not okay to prevent you from belonging to another religion. Freedom OF religion is not the same as freedom FROM religion.

peace,

sharonfraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

allowing public support from a governemnt official, site, program for a religion is tacit approval

why have a manger scene on the lawn of a state capitol if you are not also going to allow an islamic mineret?

how about a minorah in the windows of a courthouse?

and a giant pentagram on the steps of congress....?

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 3:37 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

"... or the free exercise thereof."

Making no law regarding the establishment of religion is a far cry from prohibiting public entities any religious expression.

sharon

fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote:

sorry, i have to disagree

it does say it there plain and simple

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

congress can not make a stae religion....

thats what the first amendment is saying

and, amendments are part of the constitution...

Jefferson was a big backer of the early amendments, and he wrote extensively on the seperation not only of chucrh and state, but also on the seperation of the powers of the government

Shhhhh Nov 21, 2006 11:07 AM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

We don't actually have a separation of church and state. That phrase appears nowhere in the constitution. What we have is an amendment that say, "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or free exercise thereof."

That's it. Plain and simple.

Congress can't tell you what religion you have to belong to, and it can't prevent you from practicing whatever religion you choose to practice.

sharonPeter Kebbell <metalscarab > wrote:

Hi Sharon

>Well actually, Peter, it is in all capital letters: IN GOD WE TRUST.

Fair enough - not being American, I don't look at the currency a lot :-)

However, it is still "god" in the singular - so only works for monotheistic religions, and for male deities, which of course brings in the whole issue of gender and patriachal concepts...

>People do not need to be offended by the word GOD. Although there is room for

> understanding that within my experience also. There was a time I could not say the word

> "God." If I had to refer to it, I called it "the G word."

I'm not at all offended by the word "god", I just find it rather odd that it appears on the currency, and in the national oath, of a nation which is supposed to have seperation of religion and state....

BB

Peter

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near historic lows: $150,000 loan as low as $579/mo. Intro-*Terms History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $310,000 Mortgage for $999/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new house payment History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Mortgage for $1,698/mo - Calculate new house payment

November 22, 2006

That's funny, Peter. Perhaps the problem is that the ACLU spends too much time in general protecting people from others' free expressions. This is just a theory, mind you ... those of you who know more about the ACLU than I do, don't get mad! I cannot imagine them ever standing up for a cause that promotes Christian liberty but that denies any others the same liberty. Do you know in what cases the ACLU has harmed the cause of paganism? peace, sharonPeter <metalscarab wrote: Hi Sharon >You will never see the ACLU standing up for a Christian's first amendment rights. They seem bent on shushing them. See, I'm confused here. Not being in the US, I don't know that much about ACLU, but my Pagan friends out there are all really upset at the existence of ACLU, because from their perception it seems to place the rights of Christians above those of any other religion. I know that they all think they would have more freedom to practice Paganism if ACLU didn't exist. BB Peter

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new house payment

November 22, 2006

Hi Peter

That's good. What a terrible thing to try to do. I wonder if they will try to sneak it in again.

I get a little annoyed because there is a meditation group that uses the Quiet Centre on campus once a week. When it is Ramadan the centre is closed to all but Muslims! That means we go a whole month with no meditation. The Buddhists also cannot use it in that time.

BBJo

-

Peter

Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:16 PM

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Hi Jo

No - they tried it last year, and got told by the Union that if they attempted it again they'd be banned from the building!

BB

Peter

-

jo

Sunday, November 19, 2006 7:36 PM

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Hi Peter

That sounds rather nasty - as you say fundamentalism. Di the CU manage to book all the rooms this year for other religions special days?

BBJo

-

Peter

Sunday, November 19, 2006 6:13 PM

Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Hi Peter

There's more to this that what the article says....

"The dispute follows the associations’ decisions at four universities to ban the unions from official lists of societies or deny them access to facilities or privileges.

Christian unions at Edinburgh, Heriot-Watt and Birmingham universities are all taking legal advice after being accused of excluding non-Christians, promoting

homophobia and even discriminating against those of transgender sexuality."

I only know about Edinburgh, out of those mentioned, but up there, the CU was handing out material which was libellous to other religions (I happen to know some of the Pagan Society there, and some of the stuff said about Paganism could have come from the Malleum Malleficarum.) I didn't know that they had been sanctioned by the University, but it's about time they were, as they do indeed promote religious hatred and homophobia - not just within their society, but across the whole university. Bristol CU were alsoo threatened with action: in the past 4 years, they've on several occassions attempted to book every room in the union building and chaplaincy at the times of other religion's major festivals, and have twice put motions to the Union AGM that all other religious societies should be banned from Union property. It's about time someone did something about these fundamentalist groups, and I'm delighted that someone finally has.

BB

Peter

November 22, 2006

Yes, that would be better. I haven't found a way to make it work, though. Have you? peace, sharonpeter VV <swpgh01 wrote: I would think that it would be better not to worship the mighty dollar, or covert thy nieghbours ox, etc but to forgo earthly possesions? Mixing metaphors/and religions...........no hope for me now.......... The Valley

Vegan.............Shhhhh <compassion2grace > wrote: Jo, I would guess that placing "in god we trust" in the money invokes God's blessing on the finances of the country. I certainly would like God to bless my money. I think he needs to make it a little bit BIGGER so it will quit slipping through the HOLES! hehe peace, sharonpeter VV <swpgh01 (AT) talk21 (DOT) com> wrote: RC church I believe was one of the richest institutions on the planet at one time, maybe the question should go to the pope... The Valley

Vegan.............jo <jo.heartwork > wrote: Soem people don't trust in any gods because they don't believe in them. What has god/s got to do with money anyway? Jo - Sharon Murch Tuesday, November

21, 2006 1:26 AM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges See, that's exactly the kind of thing I mean ... "In God We Trust" has been on the money for 200 years, but suddenly there are actually people bringing lawsuits over it. Yes, that is an attack. And in point of fact, God is a title, not a name, not even associated with a particular religion. As for the Christmas carols ... well, I can't stand them myself, for totally other reasons. In fact, I find music to be a highly personal thing that shouldn't be forced on other people. But I can see your point. On the other hand, if it had been one of those other things being played, I'll bet that AP would have applauded our "diversity." Sharon fraggle

<EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> wrote: i understand where you are coming from but fer me, i don't think x-tianity is coming under any sort of attack..not in this country... i can't comment on the article, as have little inclination on the how's and why's on Uni life in the UK... but..i can tell ya this... here..look at the world thru a non-x-tian lens.. (now, i am in no way shape er form putting down er judging yer religious views/choices/life) everywhere one goes..everything one does..has a religious overtone its on the money fer bacchus' sake.... now that the "holidays" are fast approaching, its like a giant wave is cascading down... you mentioned something about x-mas carols..and

having to have them turned off now..i can admit some folks over react but... imagine if someone played the call to prayer over speakers during ramadan... how would you think people would react? how about some hebrew blessing over Channukah? and those are two religions that are from "the people of the book" now imagine if someone insisted on some mongolian shamanistic ritual song be played over the intercom during high fire week er wotever(i made that up...no idea if this is a festival of high fire in mongolia) again..not trying to belittle your faith but...i can't go anywhere without x-tianity seemingly being forced on me... we are suppose to be a tolerant(excuse me as the laugh dies in me throat) and i applaud your view on your religion and your faith but, too many others

view theirs as the only way..and only they are correct and many of them do hold the power, do hold the money, and have the loudest voices... cheers fraggle Sharon Murch Nov 20, 2006 3:46 PM Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges Well ... as a nonpersonal example, I think that the interpretation of the article in question feels kind of like an attack. I do feel rather like everyone in the world gets to have civil liberties these days, except for Christians ... and animal rights activists.

See, I just can't find a popular cause. Believe me, Christianity is not popular. Maybe in the last generation it was, but we aren't living in the last generation. A comedian at SF State put it this way: "San Francisco is a very liberal city ... as long as you agree with them." I know there are a lot of sticky issues out there. The gay/lesbian thing is probably the stickiest one. I know lots of gays/lesbians, and among them are people I love and respect with all my heart. They presuppose that because of my religion that I am going to think differently about them, but that isn't the case. I personally find the expectation that I will not love and respect people who are gay/lesbian because of my faith to be prejudicial. My son's girlfriend wrote something on myspace regarding this in a conversation with a gay friend. I can't remember the details, but he was accusing her of being intolerant, when in fact he was the one who was being judgmental and intolerant. I know, it's confusing, but the bottom line is people have got to have LOVE for one another, and TOLERANCE, meaning let others believe what they want, including the Christians. If you want to talk about evangelism ... well, it's not about forcing my beliefs on anyone else. It's about introducing you to a friend of mine. If God is real, then he is

certainly capable of telling each person what he wants of them. If I believed it was my place to do that, I'd be making myself into God, wouldn't I? I suppose rather than feeling subject to attack, I feel subject to prejudice. Sharon fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 11:55:00 AMRe: Students sue over Christian rights at

colleges hey sharon so, if i may ask, how do you feel "assualted" or under attack? coming from the other side, i feel CONSTANTLY under attack, and this time of year its like drowning in a sea of christianity Sharon Murch Nov 19, 2006 3:45 PM @gro ups.com Re: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges Didn't read the whole article, so I'm not really commenting on it, but I suppose it's time to confess to you all that I am actually one of those Christians. The only comment I can make on it is that I do see civil liberties of Christians being eroded in this

country. The ACLU, for example, is not out making sure that we all have the right to speak out (you know, like the animal rights activists targeted in the AETA), but rather more concerned with making sure that certain groups, like Christians, cannot speak out or display symbols of their faith or whatever. I work in a public high school. Now we have an amendment to our constitution that says, "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." What that means is that Congress cannot go around passing laws saying you have to be a certain religion, or that you cannot be a certain religion. But that has been distorted vastly by those who want to make it seem as though if you are in any public arena you have to give up your "free exercise thereof" rights. In my office last year somebody put on some Christmas carols, and an assistant principal immediately rushed out and turned them off

so as not to "offend" anybody. So it's a problem here, and I wouldn't be surprise if it's a problem elsewhere. This is the thing with being liberal and tolerant ... you have got to remember that means to be liberal and tolerant of people who don't happen to agree with you. Peace! Sharon peter VV <swpgh01 (AT) talk21 (DOT) com>To:

@gro ups.comSunday, November 19, 2006 12:37:27 AMRe: Students sue over Christian rights at colleges Does this make any sense to anyone or am I missing the point here? Their main grievance ( as far as I can see it ) is that they are being forced to let non christians sit on christian commitees? why would non christians be interested in the first place? I can understand the gay issue, that gay christians ( I assume there are such peple ? - hard to tell what their bible condones these days) should be allowed on the commitees, so why should they be upset by that? This is confusing for my little brain The Times November 18, 2006 Students sue over Christian rights at collegesBy David Lister and Ruth Gledhill Follow the exploits of four university freshers in their blog CHRISTIANS on campuses across Britain are preparing to take legal action against university authorities,

accusing them of driving their religious beliefs underground, The Times has learnt. Christian unions claim that they are being singled out as a ?soft target? by student associations because they refuse to allow non-Christians to address their meetings or sit on ruling committees. The dispute follows the associations? decisions at four universities to ban the unions from official lists of societies or deny them access to facilities or privileges. Christian unions at Edinburgh, Heriot-Watt and Birmingham universities are all taking legal advice after being accused of excluding non-Christians, promoting homophobia and even discriminating against those of transgender sexuality. Two Christian unions announced yesterday that they were consulting lawyers, at the same time as the Government announced measures to tackle the threat of Islamist extremism on campus. At Exeter University the Christian union issued a statement on Thursday stating that

it has given the students? guild 14 days to reinstate it in full or face legal action. It was suspended from the list of official societies last month for allegedly breaching rules on equal opportunities. Andrea Minichiello Williams, public policy officer for the Lawyers? Christian Fellowship, which has offered informal legal advice to the students, predicted that there would be a wave of legal action. She said: ?We haven?t seen examples of this sort of discrimination against any other groups and we are puzzled by why Christian unions seem to be being singled out.? The Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship, the umbrella group for Britain?s 350 Christian unions with a membership of up to 20,000 students, accused student authorities of extreme political correctness. It said that Christian unions faced a struggle ?unprecedented? in their 83-year history. Pod Bhogal, the fellowship?s head of communications, said: ?The politically correct agenda is

being used to shut people up under the guise of tolerance when, in fact, you tolerate anything other than the thing you disagree with.? Amid calls for the fellowship to set up a fighting fund to contest legal actions, Emma Brewster, one of its 60 paid staff workers who act as mentors to Christian unions, said: ?We believe that we are going to see more situations like this in our universities. ? The 150-strong Christian union in Birmingham was suspended this year after refusing to alter its constitution to allow non-Christians to address meetings and to amend its literature to include references to gays, lesbians, bisexuals and those of transgender sexuality. In Exeter, the Christian union had privileges suspended, including free access to university rooms and funding, after the guild deemed its core statement of beliefs too exclusive. At Edinburgh University, where copies of the Bible were banned from halls of residence last year after protests from the

students? union, the Christian union has been banned from teaching a course about sex and relationships after complaints that it promoted homophobia. At Heriot-Watt, Edinburgh, the union has been told it cannot join the students? union because its core beliefs discriminate against non-Christians and those of other faiths. Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger . History repeats itself and each time the price

gets higher History repeats itself and each time the price gets higher Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $310,000 Mortgage for $999/mo - Calculate new house payment Peter H Send

instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Sponsored Link$200,000 mortgage for $660/mo - 30/15 yr fixed, reduce debt, home equity - Click now for info Peter H All New Mail – Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons?

Let our SpamGuard protect you.

Sponsored LinkMortgage rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new house payment

Sign In

Students sue over Christian rights at colleges

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest