Who do you like?

[China Cat Sunflower]

Hey Pathy!

You can google it. Here's the first link I got The War on Religion by Rep. Ron Paul

Chris

[Pathless]

And as I often do, I've attempted to find on my own an answer to my question. Here's what I've found so far. A snippet written in 2003:

Originally Posted by Ron Paul

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.

Originally Posted by Ron Paul

The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation’s history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people’s allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation’s Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.

Annnnnd...

that turns me off, too. Y'all know how I feel about Christmas.

[Pathless]

Here's an interesting editorial that refers to the above opinion piece by Ron Paul.

[Pathless]

One more and I'll stop. I know others can do this for themselves, we're all big people here. Sometimes I just like to boost my post count by cut-and-paste endeavors. What can I say? I am very vain when it comes to my post count there in the left margin.

Watch this--

Ooooooh! Ding!! I just hit 1,260! Celebrate good times, c'mon!

Oh um. Here's what I wanted to post. See, it's got his picture there, too:




Ron Paul has worked to hobble the freedom of religion, claiming that there should be no separation of Church and State in American government. In a speech in 2002 explaining his introduction of legislation that would forbid American federal district courts and federal claims courts from hearing cases in which citizens claim to have had their religious freedom violated, Representative Paul complained,

"In case after case, the Supreme Court has used the infamous 'Separation of Church and State' metaphor to uphold court decisions that allow the federal government to intrude upon and deprive citizens of their religious liberty."

Ron Paul further complained in that speech that the government ought not to be blocked from establishing official prayers in schools and at public events, and promoting the Old Testament as the source of American law in courthouses through the exclusive display of the Ten Commandments. In doing so, Ron Paul sided with radical right wing Christian zealots who seek theocracy, like Judge Roy Moore from Alabama.


Ron Paul's legislation, if enacted, would have enabled a two-class system of rights in America, with members of majority religious groups able to establish special rights to enforce their beliefs through the power of government institutions, and others unable to protect their right to not participate in the majority's religious rituals through the constitutionally-guaranteed access to the courts.

Ron Paul Opposes Separation of Church And State

[China Cat Sunflower]

It's the toady factor. You can't be the toad of the cons and the religious right and get my vote. You listenin' McCain?

Chris

[wil]

Well we are aware that there is no separation between church and state in the constitution...that was I believe was developed via a Supreme Court decision...

Constitution says congress shall pass no law....

My past votes have been Perot, Hagelin, and Libertarian....odds are the two party system won't submit a candidate that will get me to pull a lever...or hang a chad...or touch a screen in their favor.

[seattlegal]

The reason for our government from the Declaration of
Independence: {'The why?" if you will, as contrasted with 'The how? of our Constitution}

In Congress, July 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. — The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world....

The why of our nation and government is to secure the unalienable rights humans have been endowed with by our Creator.
Our rights do not come from the government. If the government forgets this, and says our unalienable rights come from the Government, the Government, in effect, makes itself to be God.

Keeping the government from usurping God's place is the true meaning behind the wall of separation between Church and State, imo. That is why the First Amendment says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

For Congress to make such a law would be encroaching on God's territory, and upon individual conscience, something endowed upon us by our Creator, making the Government into god.

[Pathless]

The problem I see with Ron Paul's position is that he is promoting the 'Christians are being so oppressed' argument without taking into consideration all of the other religions and spiritualities that may be marginalized. Why should Christianity have special priveleges in this country? People would clearly be upset if Aleister Crowley's "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be the Whole of the Law. Love is the Law, Love under Will," were proclaimed in a sculpture outside of some court. Yet for some Christians, it becomes an issue of civil rights when they are told that promoting religion on court steps via a sculpture of the ten commandents is not okay? Eh, no... to me that smacks of hypocrisy and special privelege. Law in this country, depsite its dubious origins, has no business being Biblical, just as it has no business being derived from the Koran or the Tao Te Ching.

Hey wait... Tao Te Ching? I could warm up to that idea:

Tao Te Ching: Verse 57

If you want to be a great leader,
you must learn to follow the Tao.
Stop trying to control.
Let go of fixed plans and concepts,
and the world will govern itself.

The more prohibitions you have,
the less virtuous people will be.
The more weapons you have,
the less secure people will be.
The more subsidies you have,
the less self-reliant people will be.

Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.

-- Lao-Tzu

[seattlegal]

I like the Tao Te Ching on governing. {With freedom comes responsibility.}

[flowperson]

Hi...

Well I caved and noted support for Dennis (the Menace) Kucinich. I've never felt much of an affinity for people from Cleveland (John Rockefeller, George Steinbrenner, Don King ). But I've been a Devo fan forever (Whip it Good !).

I find myself agreeing with what Dennis says more often than not, so he's got my vote, until he loses the primaries at least, and then I'll go into default mode again.

Here's an excellent article/analysis from the NY Times regarding the nature of the United States being/not being a "Christian" nation. Very much on the mark for me.

flow....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/op...577&ei=5087%0A

[Pathless]

That there's a good article, Flow. Thanks for sharing.

[flowperson]

Nooooo problemo...bro ! (don'cha just love alliteration ?)

Oh...and it"s been on the NY Times' top ten list of most e-mailed articles since it was published, which mean that there are lots of people seriously thinking about this. A good sign...I guess.
flow....

[InLove]

I agree--good article, flowy.

I am doing my best to take a look at all the candidates. I really do not want to "waste" my vote this time, if there can be such a thing in reality. I still think it may be a little too early to make a firm commitment, but I do believe we should all be watching very mindfully as events of the coming months unfold. I have my favorite, and have had for a long time, and with good reason in my opinion. And maybe I will talk more about this at some point. I am trying my best to take a bi-partisan approach (or tri-partisan, or non-partisan or however you want to think of it), but the truth is, I have become quite partisan in this lifetime. I just have a very difficult time supporting any candidate running on the GOP ticket. I really do. Oh gosh, especially right now. I really hope that expressing these thoughts doesn't serve to lose me too many friends here in C-R, but I guess if that is the case, then the comraderie is not that strong anyway. Like I say, I am willing to listen, but it will take some mighty powerful convincing.

InPeace,
InLove

[wil]

Originally Posted by InLove

I just have a very difficult time supporting any candidate running on the GOP ticket.

I was quite interested in debate and politics in jr and sr high school... it seemed then we had Republican and Democratic Platforms, and we had conservatives and liberals in both parties. Something has changed over the years...there does not appear to be a platform for either party any more and the conservatives and liberals have supposedly gathered to their party lines... Bush and the old republican congress in no way represent or act like the party of 30-40 years ago. And democrats lean so far to the fringe during the primary and so far to the middle during the general election that the same candidate speeches and rhetoric are unrecognizable just months apart.

Third party politics is my home.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Ron Paul was on the News Hour with Jim Lehrer tonight but I missed it.

Alternative Party politics fascinates me. An old girlfriend of mine once ran for Lt. Gov. of California on the Natural Law Party ticket. I wonder what Nader is planning this time.

Chris