Muscatine

Revisit old subject-Separation of church-state

Posted in: Muscatine
  • Stock
  • nvizible
  • Neighbor
  • Muscatine, IA
  • 94 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Neighbor

Religious materials are provided by various churches and other organizations.

There is no cost to the taxpayer to support these materials in prisons or jails. Yes I do believe it is a good thing to provide them. We, society, must accept responsibility for those we choose to take freedom from. We must provide adequate food,shelter,clothing and yes I get it that many folks think jails and prisons are too soft. I can tell you they are not nice places to be. We likley all know someone or have a loved one that is/has been locked up at some point. Ask them if they want to go back if you think it is so nice.

 

For davie:. As usual, you missed the whole point. The point is the liberal double standard....period. Why can prisoners have bibles and muslims get prayer and Koran time but our kids in schools cannot? You mention the constitution again; and obviously know nothing about it. It IS the liberal agenda because it is they that claim the Constitution prevents this (liberal interpretation pushed upon all others), all while the Constitution does not contain any such words as "separation of church and state". And, as the liberal you are, davie,  if you believe it does preclude this...where does it say public prisoners in Gov't institutions can have bibles and Korans issued to them but kids can't have bibles or even pray in school?

 

Nvisible...you may have also missed the point. I did not say anything about tax dollars providing bibles and Korans. But, bibles and Korans, are issued and allowed, and church and prayer time are allowed in these Gov't institutions....but not in our schools. When I was in California working with their D.O.T. engineers on a project, their muslim engineers got to have prayer time to kneel on their prayer rugs, facing East, and pray while getting paid by tax dollars.

 

For the liberal-davies of the world; how did the constitution allow one but not the other, since davie's expertise on the constitution will set us all straight? He thinks it is a constitutional issue. I simply am calling out the double-standard. Why are some facets supported, but not others under the same auspices? That is the issue I presented.

 

Bigbrother - It would appear you desire to continue this insulting play of yours, I have no such desire. I'll respectfully ask to actually read the Constitution, than simply give your interpretation to it's meaning in reference to the subject at hand. If you can not or will not, than simply move on with out the insults.

  • Avatar
  • logic
  • Respected Neighbor
  • Muscatine
  • 197 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Respected Neighbor

 

Bigbrother - It would appear you desire to continue this insulting play of yours, I have no such desire. I'll respectfully ask to actually read the Constitution, than simply give your interpretation to it's meaning in reference to the subject at hand. If you can not or will not, than simply move on with out the insults.Constitution


The constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

 

Given the arguments here I believe allowing the "free exercise" in some government institutions and not others is in violation. 

 

No, I am not answering for anyone, just checking information.

Advertise Here!

Promote Your Business or Product for $10/mo

istockphoto_1682638-attention.jpg

For just $10/mo you can promote your business or product directly to nearby residents. Buy 12 months and save 50%!

Buynow