A New Law Intorduced in the House

Discussion in 'Politics' started by 2 Timothy2:1-4, Mar 21, 2007.

  1. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:2:./temp/~c110btEqIH:e7718:



    the whole thing is scary but here are some real nutty job duties:


    (3) call on the intellectual and spiritual wealth of the people of the United States and seek participation in its administration and in its development of policy from private, public, and nongovernmental organizations; and


    (4) develop policies to address violence against animals;


    (5) analyze existing policies, employ successful, field-tested programs, and develop new approaches for dealing with the implements of violence, including gun-related violence and the overwhelming presence of handguns;


    (11) promote racial, religious, and ethnic tolerance;


    (1) seek assistance in the design and implementation of nonviolent policies from media professionals;


    3) work with educators to equip students to become skilled in achieving peace through reflection, and facilitate instruction in the ways of peaceful conflict resolution;

      • (6) create and establish a Peace Academy, which shall--
        • (A) be modeled after the military service academies;
        • (B) provide a 4-year course of instruction in peace education, after which graduates will be required to serve 5 years in public service in programs dedicated to domestic or international nonviolent conflict resolution; and
    (3) develop community-based strategies for celebrating diversity and promoting tolerance.
     
  2. DQuixote

    DQuixote
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sounds like Congress finally admits "Strike 3 -- we're out!!"

    Imagine calling on government of the people, by the people, for the people as an excuse for doing nothing productive.
     
  3. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Most of these are pretty good ideas! :thumbs:
     
  4. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0

    Yea. I know.
     
  5. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is yet another plan - this one being pushed by "The Peace Alliance" - to expand the Federal government and further regulate - meaning to restrict - the freedom of citizens in the name of "peace". It's loaded with very dangerous concepts crafted in words that surely delight "peace" loving liberals everywhere. Topics include the typical subjects: hand guns, animal rights, violence against women, violence against homosexuals, promotion of "racial, religious, and ethnic tolerance", civil rights and labor law, and, of course, a new program to educate the youth on how to behave according to the "correct" way of thinking. Parts of it read a bit like the idealistic proclamations of a Communist state. It would add a whole department of thousands of new federal employees who would immediately get busy turning out volumes of regulations and forcing their concepts upon the various states through the control of funding.
     
    #5 Dragoon68, Mar 22, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 22, 2007
  6. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,430
    Likes Received:
    72
    A "Peace" Academy? HAH!

    We need to cut back on our expenses, not increase them. If we have to increase them, it needs to be for essential things.

    A "Peace Academy" is not essential. Encouraging peacemaking? Good. An Academy? A waste of money.
     
  7. hillclimber1

    hillclimber1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most of these hide terrible wolves in sheep's clothing. For instance to promote religious tolerance will encompass all religions except Christianity.

    Can the link be accessed?
     
  8. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    SO you don't think others have the right to have their own religion as you have? Freedom of Religion is a basic human and Constitutional right.
     
  9. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm glad to see that we agree! :thumbs: :laugh:
     
  10. Petra-O IX

    Petra-O IX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]Folks, is it possible to be any more Liberal than that?Tell me Victoria Toensing didn't write these laws?!
     
  11. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    He doesn't want other to have freedom, only those of his persuasion. This is one reason I think right-wing politics has the potential to be as dangerous as anything else we face in our country presently.
     
  12. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    And even then, that is not freedom, as one is forced to be part of the "in" group or denied human rights.

    Amen!
     
  13. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    These days when someone promotes religious tolerance they often really mean acceptance and endorsement of all religions other than Christianity.

    Tolerance should be a different action than acceptance but it's not these days. We should be able to tolerate others without accepting others. We can give others space to believe and practice their religions as they wish without having to share in them and without having to give up or hide our own. Christians can honestly never acknowledge or give credence to another religion or its gods and still be faithful to the one true God. We shouldn't accept what in untrue. We should be tolerant of sinners just like us who still don't believe just as we once did not also. We should be bold yet gentle in our profession of faith to others but we should not hide what we know to be the truth in the name of "tolerance". We should always remember that it is the Holy Spirit that convicts and calls another and not our own condemnation. Yet we should speak the truth as it is recorded in God's word.

    We are witness to this desire for forced acceptance at work, at school, at city hall, and even in some churches. It also goes by the name of "diversity" whereby we're saturated with information about every other religion and encouraged to accept and participate in their activities. Employers often have diversity web sites loaded with information about every group - religious and otherwise - except Christianity! Every allowance is made for them while Christianity is increasingly pushed out of public view. Christians can hardly even mention their Holidays by name without drawing fire from others. Anyone who openly professes Christianity or advocates any public recognition of Christianity or dares criticize the beliefs of non-Christians is deemed to be intolerant of others.

    The doctrine of "separation of church and state" is not now being used to protect the church but to advance the cause of a secular state void of all religion much less Christianity or even an acknowledgment there is a god. Our "freedom" is being used against us.

    Any public official who even hints of their Christian faith is doomed! Why? It would seem that a leader who honors God should be respected. One who openly seeks the Lord's guidance in all that they do should be highly desired. A leader who offers a public prayer for guidance in the process of governing should be viewed as a good thing. But it is no longer so!

    We have come to the point where any expression of Christianity is labeled a "sin" against the "rights" of non-Christian and their supporters. Conversely, there is no tolerance for Christianity because it is such a threat to non-Christians - the non-believers - who will be convicted by God Almighty when the Lord Jesus Christ does not take their blame.

    These days it seems non-Christians, whether "religious" or not, are given a free pass to say whatever they wish while Christians are required to practice only in private and outside the "secular" world in which they live. That is the meaning of "religious tolerance" being advocated by the Peace Alliance. It is a potential continuation and amplification of a dangerous trend already well under way.
     
    #13 Dragoon68, Mar 22, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 22, 2007
  14. hillclimber1

    hillclimber1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    You didn't read my statement correctly, MP. I said that I think the religious tolerance will extend to all religions except Christianity. Christianity will be persecuted.
     
  15. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then my apologies for misunderstanding your intent, even though I still disagree with your premise.
     
  16. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,945
    Likes Received:
    296
    Zactly!

    You and Hillclimber are spot on.
     
  17. Jack Matthews

    Jack Matthews
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    1
    The problem is that most conservative Christians, who have enjoyed a high degree of preference and privilege from the government, perceive the tolerance of other religions as an attack on their own. It's difficult, when you've taken for granted the advantage of being the privileged, to accept the fact that you are now going to have to compete in the marketplace of ideas, and be considered equal in the eyes of the government with other religions.

    I'm hearing almost the same kind of rhetoric, and seeing the same kinds of reactions to this as occurred in the 60's and 70's with the civil rights movement. Of course, whites didn't see anything wrong with the "separate but equal" establishment, because in terms of holding power and privilege, they were not equal, but far superior. When the government began taking deliberate steps to correct those inequities, the screaming started, much of it coming from the same quarters of ultra-right wing Christianity.

    Public prayer in a school classroom is a good example of that. Most conservative Christians don't see why, if the majority in the room are O.K. with it, that it would be wrong to go ahead and do it. They would, however, be the first to scream if their child were the minority and the majority decided to go ahead and have a Muslim prayer service in the room, or if the majority were Wiccans and they decided to go ahead and have a Wiccan ceremony. Then they would object to their child either being forced to participate, or ostracised by having to leave the room until it was over.

    The idea that "everything but Christianity" is going to be tolerated is mistaken. Ultimately, the issue isn't about asserting "rights" it's about the witness and testimony given by Christians to Christ. Jesus told Peter that the gates of Hell would not prevail against his church. Instead of holing up in a fortress mentality here (Poor, poor us, we're being attacked by those godless liberals) this is a real opportunity for the church to get out of the fortress and attack the enemy on his territory. The problem is that Christians are fighting selfishly for their own previously extended privilege, instead of using the opportunity to advance the Kingdom.
     
    #17 Jack Matthews, Mar 23, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 23, 2007
  18. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,945
    Likes Received:
    296
    You are, as usual, quite wrong.
     
  19. Jack Matthews

    Jack Matthews
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    1
    You are, as usual, proving my contention to be quite correct. I provided evidence and examples for my contention. You just spouted off, and that proves my point. Conservative Christians just spout off and whine.
     
  20. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,945
    Likes Received:
    296
    Have a cup of coffee and settle down before you explode.:laugh:

    Personally, as a Bible believing conservative Christian and red blooded American patriot, I stand for your right to worship as you please.

    I also stand firmly against any effort to legislate against Christianity in a misguided effort to promote "religious tolerance".

    It sorta reminds me of "affirmative action". Surely you can grasp that concept after you calm down.
     

Share This Page

Loading...