Politics

Random Political Thoughts –


constitution

Wonder if people will take notice ….. pray… get involved in regards to what is going on in the world today- The political processes have just run a “muck” and SOME of the American People, have been so hypnotized by President Obama either having a great deal of “swag” ( which I cannot stand that term in reference to a world leader ) or they are STILL happy because a black man is in the White House –

With so many people out of work……homelessness, drugs, murder, inflation, military scandals etc… it is even a wonder that America still has a leg to stand on and REMAIN RESPECTED from other world leaders within NATO – (seriously) Italy, United Kingdom to name a few are to say the least……”loosley” have our country’s back as the votes have shown this week. I wonder WHY President Obama has been the ONLY U.S. President who have NOT shown any loyalty to Israel? He has proven to be Muslim when “it is convenient” and has proven to be Christian when “it is convenient” for the last few years.

Trust me, with a black man being in the White House in 2008 until present is INDEED huge news. Nonetheless, it is as huge as what he does during his two terms in office…. Just like a quarterback is only as good as his “line protects” him – nose tackle etc.

When things do not go the way the president wants, he blames CONGRESS and when things do not go the way congress wants, they blame THE PRESIDENT. I mean, when is America going to realize that every department is needed to effectively run a country even if the president is CHECKERBOARD!  ( F.Y.I. but being black is not enough to run a country! )

Praying that when AMERICA “eventually goes to war with Syria”…….our homeland soil can remain to be protected — After September 11th and with it also fast approaching – I am a bit worried – but Thank goodness = PRAYER still works.

Advertisements
Politics

God – Politics – Kids – Opinions – Church


wpid-20130116_133338.jpg
God indeed is everywhere and sees everything BEFORE things even occur. Nevertheless, I have often heard so many people say why God… where was God…..when God in reference to shootings on school grounds.

Well according to legislation that has been passed for some years now, ONE MOTHER did not like that her son had to take part in a prayer in school and she fought to have a right to say NO to prayer. She was so gun ho about her beliefs that a bill was created and prayer from ALL SCHOOLS WAS REMOVED!

Now please keep in mind that was the opinion of only ONE MOTHER – sad to say….there were no marches… no other parents showed a huge concern in disagreement with her, no one else went to Capital Hill to fight against what she wanted the lawmakers to do etc..etc..etc.. churches did not protest or even make the situation apart of their morning sermons like they usually do when there is a public issue –

227001_10151943234076992_1983320076_n

People mostly felt that this bill would not pass due to it being her OWN OPINION of what she felt her daughter should not have to be doing. Sadly, a great deal of people do not understand that is REALLY WHAT POLITICS is – the opinions of people who feel that their way of life is best suited for most communities, cities, counties, states etc. and they vote on it and MAJORITY RULES!

Another sad thing is that this prayer has been done in schools from the beginning of time ( fourscore and seven years ago as President Abraham Lincoln would say ) and this prayer is DONE IN CONGRESS and they still bypassed that and passed legislation on the same GOD that is written all over our money, school houses, churches and even legislation!!!!

So back to the questions of where was God…why God…when God…
Well I would like to ask this question to the PEOPLE THAT BELIEVE IN PRAYER………. Where were YOU when you got wind that this legislation was brought before Congress?

Because, one lady asked for God to be removed from schools… the flood gates of people did not put up a huge fight for her legislation to be thrown out and some people ONLY talked / complained amongst themselves which meant – YOU DID NOTHING.

Doing nothing is the same as AGREEING –

God does not enter into a place / space where He is not asked to come…..where He is not welcomed into. For the record, God WAS KICKED OUT!!! He is a gentleman and will NOT bo-guard His way into our lives….let alone a situation.

One question, is this not an interesting dynamic! Gotta love America!

Politics

More Political Talk / Views


Every belief that citizens try to express politically is rooted in some philosophy or religion or some set of assumptions about society and its
well-being. They do not come from out of nowhere. Religiously-based convictions about society and morality are as legitimate as those that spring from non-religious philosophies. Hence, Christians, Muslims, or Jews may seek to get laws passed that are rooted in their religious convictions. Such laws are appropriate as long as they have a secular purpose and do not constitute an establishment of religion.

Whether these laws are wise or worthy of enactment must be judged by whether they promote the common good as judged by national values not by the fact that they are or are not rooted in the religious faith of those who support them.

A religious foundation is neither required not forbidden. Neither secular humanism nor religious faith is privileged in this regard. Ideally and in principle, religious believers should not seek to get laws passed on religious grounds but because they express the values of the secular society. These norms and goals are defined by the founding documents and cultural traditions as they have come to be embedded in the common life. For example, if people of faith want to crusade for universal health coverage, e. g., they should argue for the policy not because the Bible or the Pope authorizes it or because God wills it but because it promotes “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” and because Congress is constitutionally permitted to spend money to provide for the “general welfare.”

Likewise, religious groups that seek to outlaw racial or gender discrimination should make their case on the claim that it would be good for society as a whole not on the fact that it is authorized by their religious faith.  In practical terms, however, if believers feel that distinguishing between the religious
basis and the political implications of their faith is an intolerable splitting of a unitary set of beliefs, then let them act accordingly. If  people actually
convince other voters to support legislation because the Bible, the Pope, Buddhist teachings, the Koran, or church doctrine mandates it, not much can be done about it except to make an effort to persuade them that there is a better way.

TRUST ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We cannot determine or control the reasons why people vote or support the policies they do or prevent them from convincing others to do the same. In the voting booth citizens are a law unto themselves. They can vote for whatever or whoever they want for any reason that motivates them. It is pointless to demand purity of principle on this matter. Voters act out of prejudice, self-interest, racial identity, ignorance, and for all sorts of other good and bad reasons, including their religious beliefs, philosophical commitments, and a devotion to justice based on American principles. Let us be realists about the matter.

 

Democracy is an untidy, often VERY messy,  matter…..IF you do not believe me… look at AMERCIA! Ugghhhhh……

The people can do what they want restrained only by Constitutional mandates. But it is better when acting politically in the public arena for believers to translate  religiously-based beliefs into the traditions, language, and values of the secular order. This is called for as a matter of principle. It is advisable pragmatically as well, since the tying of policy or voting explicitly to the tenets of a particular
religion, denomination, or sect may repel  large number of voters and hinder rather than further the cause.

I love Politics AND History……………

Politics

Church vs. State


Church conversations and little talks were a tad bit on my nerves – people do not understand the difference between CHURCH and STATE and I have been really seeing that over the last 5 years. However, it is merely the CHURCH that has a HIGH LACK OF KNOWLEDGE about politics….

Yes…… I MAY BE A HISTORY AND POLITICAL JUNKIE – but overall most black churches are not involved intellectually like “they should”….

The problem of church and state has to do with institutions and the spheres of action that are appropriate for each. Here the concept of separation is valid. The government does not appoint bishops and pastors for the churches. Churches, meaning here all religious organizations, do not appoint presidents, governors, and judges. No religion can be favored over others or supported by taxes.

So can we STOP with the OBAMA foolishness! WE THE PEOPLE voted a regular man into office to run a WHOLE country and not a PASTOR to run the country…. There is a difference – seriously.

The state has no role or authority in defining beliefs relating to God and worship. The free exercise of religion is to be guaranteed. The state is neutral between particular religions and permits citizens to believe or not believe in God and to engage or not engage in religious practices or belong to religious organizations according to the dictates of their conscience.

There is no religious test for holding office……………….. If it was a criteria… AMERICA would surely be in big trouble!! Yikes.

Is religion one of many activities that deserves protection so that other interests are equally important in the eyes of the law? Or does it deserve
special consideration so that its claims outweigh all others? If the former, our ultimate loyalties and our relationship to God may be demeaned and set aside for lesser values. Yet religion may be the sponsor of what is bigoted, heinous, reprehensible, or even trivial.

How can we protect religious liberty as a precious right and at the same time avoid  its misguided, destructive, immoral, and hateful manifestations? To put it differently, society has a set of laws and practices regarding justice, medical practice, morality, decency and many other things.

When religious beliefs and practices are in conflict with what society has deemed necessary or important for the health and welfare of its citizens or
to guard their civil rights, what trumps what? How serious a breach of religious freedom can be tolerated for the sake of making secular law applicable to everyone? How reprehensible must an act be to eliminate its practice in the name of freedom of religion? Should individuals be allowed to discriminate in the name of religion against blacks or homosexuals or unmarried persons of the opposite sex where their own property or private prerogatives are concerned while a public institution should not? How do we distinguish between private and public in these cases?

How are we to weigh civil rights against freedom of religion? To shift the focus, is religious conviction merely an example of human subjective preference which we can change by another choice, or is it a transcendent objective demand that claims our allegiance in a compelling way so that we  have no choice but to be obedient to it?

The Constitution specifically names freedom of religion as a protected right. How much weight does it therefore have in relation to conflicting claims? I am just so over everytime I put on the news someone is trying to take GOD off of something….. No one is stating to take His name off of money!

Let me touch briefly on a subject that is still with us.  It involves a proposal by President George W. Bush. The issue of government support for  faith-based human services is  full of complications, dangers, ambiguities, and subtleties. The beauty of religiously-oriented social ministries is the potential for dealing with people as whole selves, i. e., giving them food for the soul as well as for the body. But this very unity poses the problem of how it is
Constitutionally permissible for the government to enable the providing of secular bread without funding sectarian religion.

If, on the other hand, the delivery of goods and services to the needy is totally divorced  from the religious dimension, in what meaningful sense is it any longer faith-based, apart from merely being sponsored by a religious group? Why shouldn’t the government fund a church soup kitchen if all that is dispensed is soup? Because, we say, what the church would spend on soup can now be spent on  the church bus. But maybe they would just serve more soup. Maybe the soup itself is a  witness to the faith behind it, but if it is, is that not a sponsorship of religion?

Would the government discriminate against some religious groups? But that is a matter of administrative practice not of Constitutional principle. What is a religious group? What  does faith-based mean? Can we think our way through this thicket without falling into confusion?

IM DONE……………… ugghhhh

Politics

Do Your Civic Duty Today –


Shut up and just go VOTE ….. 1 woman made a complaint and started a movement and got legislation passed to get PRAYER taken out of schools…. You hear me???? The opinion of 1 woman!! I wonder why she wants God name on the money that she spends everyday….. UGGHH