Petition Against Chaplain

[trevn]

and around and around we go...

 

[cyclonenum1]

And you missed my point. The Nazi party had an elitist attitude for the aryan race, which was the dominant demographic, while considering the gypsies, homosexuals, Jews, etc. as irrelevant because they weren't the majority. Nice try at skewing my words, though. I didn't call anyone a Nazi, just stating that if we ignore the minorities, it's dehumanization and then people start seeing them as objects or subhuman because there isn't a need to take their views into account. I have no problem with there being a chaplain for the team, or someone for them to confide in, but it should never be someone who has a religious agenda. Out of all the people I've met in my life, the agnostics are those who treat all religions the same. Sounds like the kind of person who should be a team chaplain, not a christian conservative who has an agenda to tell a student-athlete that he's a sinner if he confides that he's a homosexual and doesn't know if he should come out of the closet to his teammates.

Actually, I don't believe that I did...you just don't seem to understand that the tale of the Nazi party in Germany is one of minority rule by fear and oppression...why do you think that the Nazi party totally collapsed when their leaders were captured, killed, or committed suicide? Because only a small circle of leaders had this "elitist" attitude and philosophy. If "95%" of the population had been committed to the principles of the Nazi party then it would have been much tougher to defeat them.

I did not "skew" any of your words...you brought up the Nazi's in a clear effort to do some "high brow name calling"...you did not call those of us that think the team should be free to have a Chaplain "Nazis" but your analogy specifically used this example with all sorts of negative connotations to compare us to Nazis...which, in my book, is no different than calling me a Nazi. However, I am not about to let someone call me a Nazi (directly or indirectly) for believing that our FB Coach and team should be able to have a team Chaplain.

A couple of other things.

I don't believe anyone in favor of a team Chaplain has indicated that we should "ignore the minorities" or that we "see them as objects or subhuman" or that we think "there isn't a need to take their views into account". In fact, I would submit that those that don't want to see a Chaplain in the ISU FB locker room are not taking the views of the majority into account.

Why do you assume that a Chaplain would be a "christian conservative who has an agenda to tell a student-athlete that he's a sinner"? Actually, I believe that those serving as Chaplains simply act as a resource for those inclined to use their services. Kind of like the Library on campus...some will choose to frequent it and some will not...but it's their choice. You obviously have some very negative views on Christians.

 

[jbhtexas]

The founding fathers built the government around basic rights, knowing that future generations could and would adapt it to present day situations.

Please show me one document written by a founding father where it is suggested that the constitution should be "adapted" by judicial intepretation. The means that the founding fathers instituted for changing the constitution is that of the constitutional amendment.

The whole purpose of the Judicial Branch is to keep Congress from signing into law any legislation that would take away those rights.

I agree. But now the judicial branch is interpreting the constitution such that the very rights guaranteed by the constitution are being taken away.

It's difficult to believe that anyone who has studied our government to any extent would compare it to a flight manual.

I used an analogy to illustrate a point. But I guess if making wise arse remarks is all you've got, it's all you've got.

 

[Cyphor]

Going back to the founding fathers is not impossible. In fact, it is rather easy. Most of those men were prolific writers, and their thoughts are captured for us in their many writings. Through scholarly research, we can very accurately determine their intentions when it comes to the constitution.

The founding fathers wrote the constitution the way they did because that's the way they intended government to function. If we don't intend to interpret the constitution to follow the wishes of the original writers, then why bother having a constitutuion at all? It makes absolutely no sense to claim to be governed by a document, and then interpret that document any way we want to.

I have not seen any writings by any of the Founding Fathers that indicate that they intended the constitution to be some kind of dynamic document that would be interpreted differently by subsequent generations. I challenge you to provide one such document written by any founding father that supports the concept of dynamic interpretation.

This dynamic interpretation position is the invention of lazy, 20th century politicians and philosophers who's views differ from those of the founding fathers. They are unable/unwilling to change the constitution to meet their viewpoints through valid means (i.e. amendments), so they have abused the judicial branch by turning it into an organization that makes laws instead of the organization that was charged by the constitution to interpret laws.

A little analogy...Suppose you were a passenger on one of the many 1960/70's vintage DC-9's still flying for passenger service. One of the engines catches fire, and the pilot has to pull out the vintage 1960's flight manual to solve the problem. If the flight manual says, "You must flip switch A1 to position C to put out the fire", would you want the pilot to interpret that as "Flip switch A1 to position B to put out the fire"? Of course not. The people who wrote the flight manual knew what to do to put out the fire, and gave instructions for how to deal with the issue. If 40 years of flight experience has not provided a better solution (i.e. the manual has not been updated), then that instruction should still be considered valid governance for how to deal with that particular aspect of the airplane.

We treat most documents as described above. Why is it then, that when it comes to the constitution, now we must treat that document as one that requires dynamic translation? Again, I'm open to any writings of the founding fathers indicating that the constitution should be treated as such.

Somehow, the amendment that the government should not establish a state religion, and that people should be free to practice religion is now being interpreted such that prayer cannot take place in public instituions and at government-related events. However, that interpretation violates the freedom to practice religion clause of the amendment.

If one interprets a statement such that said interpretation ends up violating the original statement, then said interpretation is probably wrong.

Why are you still flying a DC-9? Please join the rest of us and at least fly a 747. I'm worried about you. Those engines are old and liable to break.

You can live in your 1776 world all you want and interpret the founders in any way you like. I don't care, just please don't lambaste people who don't agree with your interpretation (like me). It hurts me feelin's:sad9cd:

 

[Cyclone62]

You obviously have some very negative views on Christians.

Could it possibly be because these same people use the Bible and twist its words to get what they want politically? Story of Ham to advocate slavery, seeing white supremacy, laws against women, not allowing homosexuals benefits in the government that heterosexuals have, etc. I'm not saying that all Christians are like that, just that it happens a lot with that contingency. I'm starting to get tired of Christians telling me that I'm living a sinful life because I believe that women should have the right to choose, and that homosexuals are people who are not living in sin, should be allowed to get married, etc. I'm just leaving this at the fact that I'm right to me, that's all that matters, and everyone who disagrees wih me can just go shove it. Keep your religion to yourself, I don't need it.

 

[jbhtexas]

Why are you still flying a DC-9? Please join the rest of us and at least fly a 747. I'm worried about you. Those engines are old and liable to break.

When you have to go where only NWA flies, and you have to fly at certain times, you kind have to fly on the plane that they provide.

 

[trevn]

I'm right to me, that's all that matters, and everyone who disagrees wih me can just go shove it.

There's that Amercian spirit!

 

[ornryactor]

You know, I was thinking- it'd be cool if we could all just be bigoted and closed-minded for a while, maybe throw out some insults and a ridiculous phrase or two. It could be fun! After all, isn't everyone sick of considering things from other people's viewpoints? Seriously- who gives a crap? Those are other people; they're probably hilariously wrong anyway. Anyone with me?




Just kidding, guys. But really- try and keep it civil. Please?

 

[cyclonenum1]

The whole purpose of the Judicial Branch is to keep Congress from signing into law any legislation that would take away those rights.

You may want to re-read your comment here!

The framers of the Constitution devised the "Separation of Powers" to prevent the majority from ruling with an iron fist (based upon past experience they wanted to avoid monarch-like rule). This separation of powers provides a system of shared power between the three branches of our government created in the Constitution with each having "Checks and Balances" over the other. The goal is to ensure that no one branch can usurp enough power to become dominant.

The following is an overview of the powers of the Executive: veto power over all bills; appointment of judges and other officials; makes treaties; ensures all laws are carried out; commander in chief of the military; pardon power.

The following is an overview of the powers of the Legislature: Passes all federal laws; establishes all lower federal courts; can override a Presidential veto; can impeach the President.

The following is an overview of the powers of the Judiciary: the power to try federal cases and interpret the laws of the nation in those cases; the power to declare any law or executive act unconstitutional.

As you can see, the Judiciary is not established to "keep Congress from signing into law any legislation"...they can only interpret laws and determine constitutionality. And, by the way, Congress doesn't "sign into law" legislation...the Executive branch (President) does that (or the President can choose to veto legislation delivered to him from Congress)!

It's difficult to believe that anyone who has studied our government to any extent would make a statement like the one quoted above.

 

[Cyphor]

When you have to go where only NWA flies, and you have to fly at certain times, you kind have to fly on the plane that they provide.

NWA scares me (and I'm not talking about the rap group). Also terrifying, American West. Their planes are like aluminum cans attached to a scud missile

 

[Cyphor]

You know, I was thinking- it'd be cool if we could all just be bigoted and closed-minded for a while, maybe throw out some insults and a ridiculous phrase or two. It could be fun! After all, isn't everyone sick of considering things from other people's viewpoints? Seriously- who gives a crap? Those are other people; they're probably hilariously wrong anyway. Anyone with me?




Just kidding, guys. But really- try and keep it civil. Please?

Truely, What could be more American? :rolleyes5cz:

 

[cyclonenum1]

I'm just leaving this at the fact that I'm right to me, that's all that matters, and everyone who disagrees wih me can just go shove it. Keep your religion to yourself, I don't need it.

WOW! Nothing like being self-centered and unwilling to hear other points of view!

Frankly, I'm not a big proponent of proselytization. In fact, I always cringe when I hear athletes thank God after scoring a touchdown on TV. But that is their choice. Just as it is my choice to live my life in a way that leads by example rather than trying to convince others to live like me by trying to convince them with my words.

 

[CY ST8T]

Maybe there should be a petition against the fact that all language by Gene and his staff is spoken in English. After all I'm sure there are players that have part of different nationalities and if we don't appease there groups we also should be condemned. Afterall we are a Public Institution. I fell asleep halfway through this long *** thread with all this interesting conversation on Nazi Germany and the founding fathers intentions. ZZZZZZ

 

[247cy]

And the Nazi party catered to the 95% majority while dismissing the 5% minority as irrelevant. That worked out well, no?

Dude...you might want to try again later in another thread, because according to Goodwin's Law, you lose.
I'm not trying to be mean or attack you, but any time you have to use the Nazis or anything associated with them you lose whatever credibility you have in trying to make a point.

Message board protocol should have ended this train-wreck back at this post.

 

[bos]

Could it possibly be because these same people use the Bible and twist its words to get what they want politically? Story of Ham to advocate slavery, seeing white supremacy, laws against women, not allowing homosexuals benefits in the government that heterosexuals have, etc. I'm not saying that all Christians are like that, just that it happens a lot with that contingency. I'm starting to get tired of Christians telling me that I'm living a sinful life because I believe that women should have the right to choose, and that homosexuals are people who are not living in sin, should be allowed to get married, etc. I'm just leaving this at the fact that I'm right to me, that's all that matters, and everyone who disagrees wih me can just go shove it. Keep your religion to yourself, I don't need it.

Thats not just some Christians that view that to be wrong, there are many cultures and religions that would agree as well. I am glad that you said not all Christians are that way, because Im not that way at least not with all of it.

 

[Cyclone62]

WOW! Nothing like being self-centered and unwilling to hear other points of view!

Frankly, I'm not a big proponent of proselytization. In fact, I always cringe when I hear athletes thank God after scoring a touchdown on TV. But that is their choice. Just as it is my choice to live my life in a way that leads by example rather than trying to convince others to live like me by trying to convince them with my words.

Alright, it sounds like you understood most of my point there. I agree with your second paragraph. And, I do listen to other points of view, but when the other side of the equation is unwilling to listen to a different side of the argument, I'll save my breath and just say to shove it. That's what I meant, and many times, people give me hypotheticals such as what is and what is not a sin in the eyes of God as their refutation. Until God himself tells me that something is a sin, I will interpret things my own way because the bible was written by man (who always has some kind of agenda) and man is fallible. I elaborated for you. It's my personal belief that believing that there is a God, and living a moral, accepting, and caring life is what God wants. I don't think God meant for organized religion to become what it has today; a way to condemn your fellow brothers and sisters because they don't live up to your standrds. Will many Christians accept this when I tell them all of my beliefs and values? I've met six who have, the rest tell me that I need to re-read the bible and go to church.

Maybe there should be a petition against the fact that all language by Gene and his staff is spoken in English. After all I'm sure there are players that have part of different nationalities and if we don't appease there groups we also should be condemned. Afterall we are a Public Institution.

Interesting thought, except that English is a national language. Christianity should not be endorsed by the government.

 

[Cyclone62]

I am glad that you said not all Christians are that way, because Im not that way at least not with all of it.

Well, I said not all Christians because I'm a Catholic, and feel that the organized religion has some ideas wrong. I just can't believe how some people take things that were written hundreds (Constitution) and thousands (bible) of years ago as infallible texts that cannot be changed.

 

[PsychedClone]

Being a military veteran, I'd be interested in knowing if these loony toon professors would like to rid the military of chaplains too??? Why should we allow a dying soldier the opportunity to reconcile with his God??? What a travesty that those chaplain's salaries ARE FUNDED with tax dollars. How about the religious chapels that exist on the military bases??? Aren't they funded with tax dollars??? Let's just tear those structures down. I'm sure these particular professors wouldn't know about such things because they probably never served their country.

Why not just take this argument to the nth degree and just ban religion in our country completely? There is the answer. End of subject.

 

[CY ST8T]

Being a military veteran, I'd be interested in knowing if these loony toon professors would like to rid the military of chaplains too??? Why should we allow a dying soldier the opportunity to reconcile with his God??? What a travesty that those chaplain's salaries ARE FUNDED with tax dollars. How about the religious chapels that exist on the military bases??? Aren't they funded with tax dollars??? Let's just tear those structures down. I'm sure these particular professors wouldn't know about such things because they probably never served their country.

Why not just take this argument to the nth degree and just ban religion in our country completely? There is the answer. End of subject.

Excellent Point. It won't let me Rep you without spreading it around more so I will tell you on here that it was a great point!

 

[BryceC]

Could it possibly be because these same people use the Bible and twist its words to get what they want politically? Story of Ham to advocate slavery, seeing white supremacy, laws against women, not allowing homosexuals benefits in the government that heterosexuals have, etc. I'm not saying that all Christians are like that, just that it happens a lot with that contingency. I'm starting to get tired of Christians telling me that I'm living a sinful life because I believe that women should have the right to choose, and that homosexuals are people who are not living in sin, should be allowed to get married, etc. I'm just leaving this at the fact that I'm right to me, that's all that matters, and everyone who disagrees wih me can just go shove it. Keep your religion to yourself, I don't need it.

I understand what you are saying 62, but I would reply by saying that these professors are twisting meanings in the constitution to get what they want politically.

I understand you don't like it when Christians attack people, and judge people, and use the bible as a weapon to attack. I know these kinds of people and they are what really turned me off to religion for a time. But the fact is that the bible is all we really have to go off of so I will base the foundation for my faith on that. If I'm not, then I'm going off of feeling and personal belief and that's not exactly what God had in mind either.

I try not to use my religion to push my beliefs on other people... but the fact is I am pro-life because of my religion and I wouldn't endorse or vote for someone that wasn't pro life. I don't think that is an example of me pushing my beliefs on anyone, I just think it's me acting in accordance with my moral code. I hope you understand what I'm getting at here, although it didn't come off all that well.