More intolerance of religious liberty

[Tahuyaman]

Marco Rubio is being attacked for posting Bible verses on Twitter. What is wrong with these people? How is this unconstitutional? How is this establishing an official state religion?

http://www.news-press.com/story/news/2017/08/25/marco-rubio-asked-stop-tweeting-bible-verses-freedom-religion-foundation/603608001/

Almost every day for the past three months, the Republican senator from Florida slips a pithy message from The Good Book into his Twitter feed for his nearly 3 million followers to digest. A few examples:
June 26: “As dogs return to their vomit, so fools repeat their folly. Proverbs 26:11”
July 24: “Though the just fall seven times, they rise again, but the wicked stumble from only one mishap. Proverbs 24:16”
Aug. 22: “The eyes of the LORD watch over the knowledgeable, but he defeats the projects of the faithless. Proverbs 22:12”


Rubio stakes out role in Congress as human rights champion
(http://www.news-press.com/story/news/politics/2017/07/30/rubio-stakes-role-congress-human-rights-champion/104144732/)



Now a Wisconsin-based organization devoted to the separation of church and state is asking him to stop on the grounds that it’s unconstitutional.

[resister]

The hell if it is unconstitutional, if he was quoting the Koran, I bet nary a peep.

Maybe a forum liberal can tell us how this violates the constitution?

[Tahuyaman]

The hell if it is unconstitutional, if he was quoting the Koran, I bet nary a peep.

Maybe a forum liberal can tell us how this violates the constitution?

Actually, a spokesman for Freedom From Religion said that if he also quoted verses from the Quran he'd be in good shape here. So, it appears that the Biblical view is what they object to.

[Crepitus]

Ok, unconstitutional? Not hardly. The man is allowed his beliefs.

And really, if you if you don't like bible verses, just don't read them.

[donttread]

Marco Rubio is being attacked for posting Bible verses on Twitter. What is wrong with these people? How is this unconstitutional? How is this establishing an official state religion?

http://www.news-press.com/story/news/2017/08/25/marco-rubio-asked-stop-tweeting-bible-verses-freedom-religion-foundation/603608001/

Almost every day for the past three months, the Republican senator from Florida slips a pithy message from The Good Book into his Twitter feed for his nearly 3 million followers to digest. A few examples:
June 26: “As dogs return to their vomit, so fools repeat their folly. Proverbs 26:11”
July 24: “Though the just fall seven times, they rise again, but the wicked stumble from only one mishap. Proverbs 24:16”
Aug. 22: “The eyes of the LORD watch over the knowledgeable, but he defeats the projects of the faithless. Proverbs 22:12”


Rubio stakes out role in Congress as human rights champion
(http://www.news-press.com/story/news/politics/2017/07/30/rubio-stakes-role-congress-human-rights-champion/104144732/)



Now a Wisconsin-based organization devoted to the separation of church and state is asking him to stop on the grounds that it’s unconstitutional.

He should just use his personal computer on his personal computer on his own time and make that clear. That would remove all possible PC on steroids objections.
As a side note though, he could be a bit more up beat with these versus. LOL

[Tahuyaman]

He should just use his personal computer on his personal computer on his own time and make that clear. That would remove all possible PC on steroids objections.
As a side note though, he could be a bit more up beat with these versus. LOLIt was his personal twitter account.

[donttread]

It was his personal twitter account.

If no government funds or equipment is involved they don't even have pretend ground to stand on. He should simply ignore them. As much as it pains me to defend a Donkephant politician ( yes he is) the government does not own him or his personal time and therefore the seperation of church and state is meaningless in this case.

[AeonPax]

Actually, a spokesman for Freedom From Religion said that if he also quoted verses from the Quran he'd be in good shape here. So, it appears that the Biblical view is what they object to.
`
`
Wrong. Here is what they said; “But it is not for the government in our secular republic to promote one religious book over others or to promote religion over nonreligion. Doing so violates the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.”

[Cthulhu]

... So friggin what?

A guy posts a few verses. No big deal.

Only the most anal retentive people get worked up over it.

I say let them brood and let their concerns fall on deaf ears.

Sent from my evil cell phone.

[Tahuyaman]

`
`
Wrong. Here is what they said; “But it is not for the government in our secular republic to promote one religious book over others or to promote religion over nonreligion. Doing so violates the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.”


He said exactly what I said he said. Do you think that was the only comment he made then shut-up?

[AeonPax]

He said exactly what I said he said. Do you think that was the only comment he made then shut-up?
`
That isn't what you quoted. The author did NOT say that. You paraphrased it using words they did no say or even imply. Please, point out the posted article where the author said this; "if he also quoted verses from the Quran he'd be in good shape here."

[del]

He said exactly what I said he said. Do you think that was the only comment he made then shut-up?
it's stupid to lie about things that are easily checked.

not that it will stop you

lol

[Tahuyaman]

`
That isn't what you quoted. The author did NOT say that. You paraphrased it using words they did no say or even imply. Please, point out the posted article where the author said this; "if he also quoted verses from the Quran he'd be in good shape here."


He did say that if he included verses from the Quran he'd be OK with it.

For some reason certain people believe that the separation of church and state means that government is supposed to be hostile to the Christian Faith. Government is not required to supress religion.

[Tahuyaman]

it's stupid to lie about things that are easily checked.

not that it will stop you

lol

Check. You'll see that I am right.

[del]

He did say that if he included verses from the Quran he'd be OK with it.

For some reason certain people believe that the separation of church and state means that government is supposed to be hostile to the Christian Faith. Government is not required to supress religion.

link or you're full of shit

i know what i'm betting on

[del]

Check. You'll see that I am right.

i did

you're wrong

i'm stunned

[Tahuyaman]

i did

you're wrong

i'm stunned


He in fact said that if verses from the Quran were included, he'd have no issue with this. He also threw in the Book of Mormon.

I know that you aren't interested in a discussion based on the facts, but that's nothing new with you.

[del]

He in fact said that if verses from the Quran were included, he'd have no issue with this. He also threw in the Book of Mormon.

I know that you aren't interested in a discussion based on the facts, but that's nothing new with you.

provide the facts

there's nothing in the piece you posted remotely like what you're claiming

so post it or stfu

[ripmeister]

The hell if it is unconstitutional, if he was quoting the Koran, I bet nary a peep.

Maybe a forum liberal can tell us how this violates the constitution?

I don't think it does. He's expressing his personal beliefs to his followers. I don't see a problem with that.

[Tahuyaman]

The left seems to believe that government is required to be hostile to religion. At least a Christian religion.

[Captain Obvious]

The left's hypocritic oath: DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO!

[donttread]

`
`
Wrong. Here is what they said; “But it is not for the government in our secular republic to promote one religious book over others or to promote religion over nonreligion. Doing so violates the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.”


He just needs to do this on his own time, computer and twitter account. Then their is no connection of church and state. Just a citizen to a religion. which is fine.

[donttread]

The left's hypocritic oath: DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO!

That's actually the oath of our entire political system AND the two "sides" rabid followers in a nutshell.

[AeonPax]

He just needs to do this on his own time, computer and twitter account. Then their is no connection of church and state. Just a citizen to a religion. which is fine.
`
I do not support the "The Freedom From Religion Foundation". Still, they keep winning lawsuits. This just happened here in Wisconsin;
http://www.cbs58.com/news/city-of-oconomowoc-could-soon-be-facing-lawsuit-over-welcome-signs (http://www.cbs58.com/news/city-of-oconomowoc-could-soon-be-facing-lawsuit-over-welcome-signs) This is getting very petty but still, municipalities (even small ones) are getting trounced by this organization. For all of it's false bravado and God talk, the religious right has yet to stop them....and they don't even try. Connect the dots.

[donttread]

`
I do not support the "The Freedom From Religion Foundation". Still, they keep winning lawsuits. This just happened here in Wisconsin;
http://www.cbs58.com/news/city-of-oconomowoc-could-soon-be-facing-lawsuit-over-welcome-signs (http://www.cbs58.com/news/city-of-oconomowoc-could-soon-be-facing-lawsuit-over-welcome-signs) This is getting very petty but still, municipalities (even small ones) are getting trounced by this organization. For all of it's false bravado and God talk, the religious right has yet to stop them....and they don't even try. Connect the dots.


Wow. Why is this considered a "government message" to begin with? Just charge the church for the sign