Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael M who wrote (15922)	6/28/2002 10:39:16 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Feelings are running high on this. Neither Government nor any public institution should require citizens to declare their submission to God, because many citizens don't believe in God and Government has no business telling citizens what to believe. Like Laz, I would rather have seen the whole issue left alone, but when it comes right down to it, what is so controversial about the statement above? Is it un-American in some way? Why should feelings run high over such a simple thing? Odd that so many people who think of themselves as patriots should show such resentment at the notion that Government in all its forms ought to be bound by the Constitution.

To: Michael M who wrote (15922)	6/29/2002 7:18:20 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

It would please no one (except maybe a couple of people on SI) and make some of them even more upset. I'm curious about why it would please no one that a leader, recognizing that a divisive cultureal war was ignited by an idiot, would attempt to settle the matter down? How is that a bad thing? Why would anyone get upset about that? The President should tell people what they're thinking and then tell them it's OK to think that? The Prez had the good sense to step up and say that it was OK to be Muslim. He did that so dampen hostility amongst us citizens. He should do the same thing with atheists. He can provide a framework that includes all of us and what we're thinking and gives us a palatable way of looking at what the other guy is thinking. There's no value whatsoever in either atheists feeling estranged from society or "good Christians" hating them. The simplest and best way to settle something like that is "I'm OK, you're OK" and let the "good Christians" infer a wink if they must. The best way to thwart an enemy is to make him your friend. If only all our political problems were so easy! If you disagree, please tell me why.