Iamon lyme: [...ever be trusted to run a legitimate and clean election.]

I meant to say legitimate and clean campaign.

But it's not just the campaigning. They've been ignoring the consitution for longer than some of you have been alive, appointed people to offices with little or no representation or oversight (or accountability) and on local levels work to overturn measures voted on... and then putting other measures to be voted on several times until they get the vote they want, and then often times simply go to judges to over rule the will of the people.

The idea behind "We The People" is being ignored to the point where it could soon become meaningless.

Iamon lyme: Did you watch the Dems convention where they were voting on putting the name "God" back into their platform? Half the crowd booed and voted no. They voted three times and then the moderator said he had a 2/3's majority. What a crock. Debbie Wasselman Schultz even denied there was dissension at the convention over the issue. CNN said she had to be living in a different reality to miss the obvious tension. Then Debbie cancelled all her other TV appointments. What a laugh.

mckinley: I thought God was supposed to be left out of politics. A separation between God and the State.

... Lest we forget the past and what has happened when in 'Christian' countries the church was the state. St Thomas More had people burned at the stake for reading the Bible in English!!

...... King James launched a mass hysteria on Witches... even more strange since the most famous verse used in to vindicate this action was to do with ... getting a woman pregnant out of wedlock.

(V): [... Lest we forget the past and what has happened when in 'Christian' countries the church was the state.]

It wasn't forgotten here when we declared the state had to keep it's hands off the church. This was to insure there would be no state controlled religion as existed at that time in England. I don't know what your own country's documents say about that, but you are repeating a myth about a "separation" that doesn't exist in the consitution. In our document it was intended to keep the state from taking over religion and telling people how they must worship, not to keep religious people from participating in government. Do you really not see the difference?

Iamon lyme: We have no laws here that prevent religious people taking part in government, the laws that did come into power regarding the CoE were that they possessed no other foreign loyalties, such as to the Pope... That the Monarch was the head of state. An early Patriot test in times of many wars between England and various European countries.

Now it seems in the US that the Bible is being used to decide policy and or allegiances. Pretty much what happened back in 17th and 18th century UK. Can you see the similarity?

... It wouldn't be so bad if the interpretation and application of the Bible was true to the intent as stated by Christ, it seems though to be just a means to get people to blindly follow like they have been taught/scared into blindly following a version of God.

... A version.

(V): [Now it seems in the US that the Bible is being used to decide policy and or allegiances.]

It doesn't seem that way to me, but for someone who denounces religion you seem strangely preoccupied with religious matters. I was encouraged to not believe in God while I was growing up, so I honestly cannot relate to anyone who harbors bitter catholic school memories. I was so firmly rooted in atheism I can honestly say I had no reaction at all towards people who believed in God... it just wasn't something I could relate to one way or the other.

Several years ago I spoke to someone from my home town who also went to catholic school, until he entered public high school. He knew that I had become a Christian, but was surprised that I was still a Christian. And I mean genuinely surprised. He said, "You still believe in that?" I could tell he didn't mean it as a put down, but I was surprised that he was surprised.

Anyway, I've seen the same kind bitterness towards religion you have in other people who've attended catholic schools. In fact, it's become so obvious to me that I believe I've spotted at least one other person at this board who fits that profile.

Iamon lyme: If you mean me, you couldn't be more wrong. (and you may not, but just in case) I was brought up Baptist. And had very good experiences with the members of my church.
You won't be surprised (if you know me at all) that I will not get into my personal reasons for deciding that organized religion is not for me. Not on a discussion board on the internet, with total strangers. Not my style. Generally

And because of some of the passions on this board, I feel forced to point out yet again, that I'm also NOT Atheist, because some seem to assume that my .... hmm I can't find the right word right now, but my distaste for the bible, means I must be some godless horrible person.

I just do NOT believe what you believe. That's all.

rod03801: Nope. I was expecting a response but I didn't see it coming from you. Apparently my mentalist abilities are way off today. I was actually waiting for someone else so I could tell him that it's not him, because I can't picture him in a plaid skirt and knee high socks... and even if I could I wouldn't want to. lol

And by the way, I wasn't thinking of you as an atheist either. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in God, doesn't believe in his existence. A distaste for the Bible doesn't automatically make you an atheist. I avoided cracking open a Bible, any Bible, for a long time. And one big difference between my conversion and CS Lewis is I've never been able to entirely shake off that "mouse searching for the cat" feeling. CS Lewis describes it as finally surrendering to it. But the way I was raised doesn't allow for surrender, and can be summed up in a line from the movie Galaxy Quest... "Never give up, never surrender!"

Iamon lyme: I have no bitter catholic school memories, it was a great school. Being a Christian does not mean you cannot be critical of your own religion.

... Especially dogmatic Christian values based on inaccurate translation and/or interpretation... being pushed on others. That seems totally counter to the aspect laid down by God of free will.

mckinley: Well ask the Dems. God was IN their platform and then they removed God and then last night they "voted" Him back in (in an obvious fraudulent vote). At least 1/2 of the liberal delegates BOOED the vote that allowed God back into the Democratic Platform (along with the acknowledgment that Jerusalem is the Capitol of Israel) (even though the Obama administration really doesn't accept Jerusalem as the Nation's Capital!!!

Artful Dodger: I haven't been watching the convention. I didn't watch the Republican convention either. But I did happen to see Clint Eastwood begin to talk when channel surfing, so I watched that.

Last night I was channel surfing again and thought I saw Benny Hill in drag, but then realised it was someone speaking at the Democrat convention. From what I hear it was a genuine love fest last night... thrills running up both legs for some of the folks there. Any time I think I feel a thrill running up my leg it's usually a bug... and a thrill running down my leg is usually bad news.

Iamon lyme: I can't remember if I saw the Benny Hill look alike last night or the night before. I think that may have been the night before. I'm not kidding, I thought I had tuned into the Benny Hill Show... that's right, now I remember, the real Benny Hill didn't show up until last night. LOL

Artful Dodger: [Did you watch the Dems convention where they were voting on putting the name "God" back into their platform?]

I misunderstood what I heard on the radio this morning. I thought the Dems were "voting" (if you can call it that) to leave out recognition of God and Jerusalem as the Capitol of Israel, so I was surprised to hear about the booing. Now it makes sense. I believe it was part of their platform 4 years ago, so I wonder what has changed between then and now? hmmmmm, I wonder....

Oh wait, I get it now. It changed!! You know, hope and change? They wanted to make some big changes, and hoped no one would catch on before the next election.

Iamon lyme: Well in their defense, they were for God and Jerusalem before they were against it before they were for it again (well sort of for it....they actually voted against the measure but the Chairman declared a 2/3's majority anyway (they even lie to their own party members).

mckinley: No it was not. You are seriously misinformed if you believe that to be the case. It's been all over the news.

mckinley: You're welcome. I've a huge accurate database. And it's better than google.