Why is the world catering to just 14%?

[ralphinal]

Sure if it means something like drawing a picture of God on your computer.

The penalty for breaking that law so far is being told you are contributing to moral decline if you don’t agree with it. Public Laws are designed for behavioral modification.

Do you have pictures of loved ones? Would you have a picture of Mohammid if you could get one?

America is a secular state based upon guiding principles of the Judeo-Christian heritage. We do not legislate morality.

 

[pnewton]

Just to be on the safe side, so that no one has to violate their conscience, if anyone believes that their money might be some God, package it up and mail it to Catholic Answers. Free your soul and help this ministry all in one move.

 

[ralphinal]

Just to be on the safe side, so that no one has to violate their conscience, if anyone believes that their money might be some God, package it up and mail it to Catholic Answers. Free your soul and help this ministry all in one move.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Do you have pictures of loved ones? Would you have a picture of Mohammid if you could get one?

America is a secular state based upon guiding principles of the Judeo-Christian heritage. We do not legislate morality.

I do but I don’t have pictures or drawing or representations of God, that’s forbidden in all of Islam like it is in the Ten Cs. Some sects don’t like images of any living thing at all.

A lot of morality is legislated, like no gay marriage for one.

 

[ralphinal]

I do but I don’t have pictures or drawing or representations of God, that’s forbidden in all of Islam like it is in the Ten Cs. Some sects don’t like images of any living thing at all.

A lot of morality is legislated, like no gay marriage for one.

The reason that marrage is legislated at all has to do with property inheritance and protection of women and children. Neither of these exist with traditional homosexual couples, therefor there is no reason to make a marrage provision.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

The reason that marrage is legislated at all has to do with property inheritance and protection of women and children. Neither of these exist with traditional homosexual couples, therefor there is no reason to make a marrage provision.

Sure they exist, like if one partner promises to support another one through medical school, then the other dumps th partner once he becomes a doctor, a marriage helps protect the investment. In California if the doctor could not get a divorce and got rich the partner who supported him could get half.

But we all know it’s not about finances anyway, it’s because the majority thinks it’s a sin and won’t allow it. Yet anyway.

 

[ralphinal]

Sure they exist, like if one partner promises to support another one through medical school, then the other dumps th partner once he becomes a doctor, a marriage helps protect the investment. In California if the doctor could not get a divorce and got rich the partner who supported him could get half.

But we all know it’s not about finances anyway, it’s because the majority thinks it’s a sin and won’t allow it. Yet anyway.

My post is about why the American governement is involved in marrage in the first place. Yes, the reason the people are against homosexual marrage is that they see it (correctly) as a sin. The government, in and of itself, has no reason to legislate it as the issues of property and portection of women and children are not there. If a homosexual pays for his partner to go to med-school, then gets dumped, he can sue him in civil court for palamony.

 

[zerinus]

I do but I don’t have pictures or drawing or representations of God, that’s forbidden in all of Islam like it is in the Ten Cs. Some sects don’t like images of any living thing at all.

The “all seeing eye,” at that particular image is called, is a symbol. It is not an image or a picture of God. It symbolizes that God is constantly looking over mankind, and observes all that they do. It is a symbol that represents an attribute of God—the attribute of His omniscience. It is not a picture of God. Nobody understands it that way.

The words: “In God we trust" is not related to that symbol. It is an independent declaration that the people of America (or most of them at least) put their trust in God. The words are no more related to that than the currency value is.

zerinus

 

[FaithofAbraham]

The “all seeing eye,” at that particular image is called, is a symbol. It is not an image or a picture of God. It symbolizes that God is constantly looking over mankind, and observes all that they do. It is a symbol that represents an attribute of God—the attribute of His omniscience. It is not a picture of God. Nobody understands it that way.

The words: “In God we trust" is not related to that symbol. It is an independent declaration that the people of America (or most of them at least) put their trust in God. The words are no more related to that than the currency value is.

zerinus

So you are saying it’s really not an symbol of a god, just a symbol of his eyeball. How can trusting in the god that is represented as looking over mankind not be related to each other unless it refers to two different gods?

Idol: an image or other material object representing a deity to which religious worship is addressed.

De Nile: A river in Egypt.

Revelation 9:20 And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:

 

[He_Man]

IN GOD WE TRUST oath

People sure do fight to keep their idols, Israelites never wanted to let them go either and look what happened to them.

It says IN GOD WE TRUST, not IN CASH WE TRUST. Try again.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

My post is about why the American governement is involved in marrage in the first place. Yes, the reason the people are against homosexual marrage is that they see it (correctly) as a sin. The government, in and of itself, has no reason to legislate it as the issues of property and portection of women and children are not there. If a homosexual pays for his partner to go to med-school, then gets dumped, he can sue him in civil court for palamony.

The government is the people and so far they are against it because it is a sin, there is no other reason.

 

[ralphinal]

The government is the people and so far they are against it because it is a sin, there is no other reason.

Sin is not a consideration in the majority of the American government’s rulings. It is the best interest of the populace. Women and children historically have had few rights. It is the role of the government to portect them. That is basic American civics.

Is speeding a sin? Why are there speed limits?

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Sin is not a consideration in the majority of the American government’s rulings. It is the best interest of the populace. Women and children historically have had few rights. It is the role of the government to portect them. That is basic American civics.

Is speeding a sin? Why are there speed limits?

I don’t think we are talking about what is minority or majority, but whether it legislates at all on the basis of morality. Of course the answer is sure, sometimes it does.

 

[ralphinal]

I don’t think we are talking about what is minority or majority, but whether it legislates at all on the basis of morality. Of course the answer is sure, sometimes it does.

It does at times. More often then not, the moral code is parallel to that which will allow society to function. Prohibition of murder and theft, for example. Even if there was no moral code forbidding it, society can not thrive when it is allowed. Laws about worshiping God, however, are not allowed in American law. That is why the Shaia laws calling for the execution of apostate Muslims is so shocking to us as Americans.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

It does at times. More often then not, the moral code is parallel to that which will allow society to function. Prohibition of murder and theft, for example. Even if there was no moral code forbidding it, society can not thrive when it is allowed. Laws about worshiping God, however, are not allowed in American law. That is why the Shaia laws calling for the execution of apostate Muslims is so shocking to us as Americans.

I don’t agree with that either, but USA has had its blasphemy laws too. And colonial witch burnings.

 

[ralphinal]

I don’t agree with that either, but USA has had its blasphemy laws too. And colonial witch burnings.

The key word there is “had.” Rightly or wrongly, they are in the past. It should have never been acceptable to kill someone onthe basis of their faith. Period. My point is that TODAY there will be Christians (or animists) killed in Muslim countries for their faith. If a man converts from Islam, he may be executed. How can this be justified?

 

[FaithofAbraham]

The key word there is “had.” Rightly or wrongly, they are in the past. It should have never been acceptable to kill someone onthe basis of their faith. Period. My point is that TODAY there will be Christians (or animists) killed in Muslim countries for their faith. If a man converts from Islam, he may be executed. How can this be justified?

They can’t. But consider that Islam came along 600 years after Christianity. Where was Christianity at 600 years ago? From Wikipedia:

*In fully Christian Europe there were a number of persecutions directed against Jews and Christian heretics. There were massacres of Muslims and Jews when Jerusalem was taken by Crusaders in 1099.

Jews were also persecuted in Visigothic Spain and later elsewhere in Europe, especially after the emergence of the blood libel. Jews were eventually expelled from England by King Edward I. In Spain after the Reconquista, Jews were forced to either convert or be exiled. Many were killed. Although the Spanish had agreed to allow Muslims the freedom of religion in 1492, this was often ignored. In 1501, Muslims were offered the choice of conversion or exile. In 1556, Arab or Muslim dress was forbidden, and in 1566 Arabic language as a whole was prohibited in Spain.*

Not to mention that Hitler and Nazis were mostly Christians. So neither religion has been worse than the other in that area.

 

[zerinus]

So you are saying it’s really not an symbol of a god, just a symbol of his eyeball.

Listen my friend, don’t try to twist what people say. If that is your style of debate, then we have nothing further to discuss. I did not say that it is “a symbol of a god,” and did not say that it is “a symbol of an eyeball”.

First of all, you seem to have difficulty understanding what “symbol” means. If so, then go and look it up in the dictionary. If English is not your first language, then go and learn it. But don’t try to twist what people say.

Secondly, I said that it is a symbol. A symbol is not designed to “look like” anything. It is intended to symbolize or signify something. For example, one of the ancient symbols of Jesus Christ is a fish. Does that mean that Jesus looks like a fish? Or that Christians worship a fish?

Thirdly, I said that it is a symbol of God’s omniscience, meaning that He sees and knows all things. It is not a picture of God’s eye, and it does not say that is what God’s eye looks like. Please try not to twist what I say in the future, if you intend to conduct a civilized discussion.

How can trusting in the god that is represented as looking over mankind not be related to each other unless it refers to two different gods?

Because that is not a picture of God’s eye or of God. It is a symbol of God’s omniscience. The expression “in God we trust” is not an act of devotion to the symbol, and it is not related to the symbol. It is an act of devotion to God. Do not Moslems use symbols? Is not the Crescent and Star an Islamic symbol?



Does it not appear on some Islamic flags, including that of Turkey and Pakistan? Does that mean that Moslems worship that symbol, or think that that is what God Looks like?

Does not the flag of Saudi Arabia have a picture of a sword painted on it, and above it written “There is no God but Allah”?



Does that mean that the Arabs worship the sword, or think that that is what Allah looks like?

Idol: an image or other material object representing a deity to which religious worship is addressed.

Sure. So the Moslems worship the crescent and the star and the sword, right?

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

They can’t. But consider that Islam came along 600 years after Christianity. Where was Christianity at 600 years ago? From Wikipedia:

*In fully Christian Europe there were a number of persecutions directed against Jews and Christian heretics. There were massacres of Muslims and Jews when Jerusalem was taken by Crusaders in 1099.

Jews were also persecuted in Visigothic Spain and later elsewhere in Europe, especially after the emergence of the blood libel. Jews were eventually expelled from England by King Edward I. In Spain after the Reconquista, Jews were forced to either convert or be exiled. Many were killed. Although the Spanish had agreed to allow Muslims the freedom of religion in 1492, this was often ignored. In 1501, Muslims were offered the choice of conversion or exile. In 1556, Arab or Muslim dress was forbidden, and in 1566 Arabic language as a whole was prohibited in Spain.*

Not to mention that Hitler and Nazis were mostly Christians. So neither religion has been worse than the other in that area.

So you are saying that the Muslim faith has kept a people from advancing past the Middle Ages? No, I don’t think that you are, but that is how the statement reads. Hitler had given up on Christianity long before he started the Final Solution, and he used the prejudice of the people to his advantage. Note that Hitler’s origional rise to power was as an anti-Communist. Hate knows no religion and can be in all, even those like Christianity that teaches that we are to love our neighbors and forgive and pray for those who hate us.

To say that these Muslim laws seem antiquated by modern eyes because the faith is younger is a poor rational. I would accept colonialism or other economic excuses for the state of the people, but either there is something in Islam or something in the cultures that is keeping some of these people in a antiquated legal system.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Sure. So the Moslems worship the crescent and the star and the sword, right?

zerinus

A lot of them probably do, they turn their symbols, religions, and nations into idols same as others. They make Mohammed an idol too when they jail people for naming a teddy bear after him. But then that’s why I disregard mainstream Islamic doctrine, it is as corrupt as the next.

That doesn’t address the US problem though. Don’t you think they should ditch that thing which looks like an Egyptian devil and instead put Jesus on the money, if you really want something about God on it?