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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (215961)	1/25/2005 11:01:36 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575173

Elroy, What are you talking about government putting more and more restrictions on your ability to practice your religion? It was an exaggeration, but the point is clear. Government is indeed penetrating more and more into our everyday lives. At the same time, government-funded buildings and spaces are being pushed as "religion-free zones." Look at public schools, for instance. Back when the country was founded, there were no public schools. Families either had to educate their kids themselves or send them to parochial school. Separation of church and state wasn't an issue because in terms of education, the state was practically non-existent. Now look at today. A state-funded education is taken for granted. Either you send your kids to public school, or you pony up the money and/or time for private/home schooling. For most families, there is no choice. Yet some people think public schools ought to be a place where no one is allowed to wear or do anything religious. That means for most families of faith, their kids will just have to shut up and accept the "religion-free zone" the way it is. Well both statements seem accurate and appropriate to me, so I don't see your beef. And there aint much of a "battle" because as far as I can tell attempts to use public money to promote specific religions usually lose in the courts. Meanwhile, we're spending public money to pull any religious symbolism from public documents. Thanks to the ACLU, for instance, Los Angeles County will spend close to $100K changing all of its seals to remove the cross. A small price to pay for a "religion-free zone"? Maybe we ought to drop that stupid idea in the first place. Tenchusatsu

To: Elroy who wrote (215961)	1/25/2005 12:02:57 PM
From: Alighieri	Respond to of 1575173

What percentage of your tax dollars do you want spent on building Bhuddah statues in state court houses? He won't answer that question...nor the one on how tolerant christians would be if judge moore had installed a stone copy of the koran in that famous court room. Al

To: Elroy who wrote (215961)	1/25/2005 8:29:27 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575173

It's not about using tax dollars to pay for religion, it's about letting citizens use public facilities for creating any club they way, including religious if they so desire. Why should Federal funds only go to non-Christian charities, for instance? All charities should be treated equal. Our laws say that every religion (or absence of one) should be treated equally. It does not say we need to censor and ban any religion from public institutions or public discourse.