E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
AP
Tea Partier Glen Urquhart cites Hitler as the originator of "separation of church and state."
From NBC's Pete Williams
A congressional candidate's statement linking the concept of separation of church and state with Adolf Hitler is getting a new round of attention, even though the man who said it has since backed away from it.
At a campaign event in April, Glen Urquhart -- a Tea Party candidate who's the GOP nominee for Congress in Delaware -- was asked about the issue and replied with a question. "Where does this phrase, 'separation of church and state' come from? Anybody know?" he asked.
When a history teacher in the audience started to answer that it came in a letter from one of the founding fathers, Urquhart said that wasn't the case.
"Actually, that exact phrase is not in Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists. He was reassuring them that the federal government wouldn't trample on their religion. The exact phrase, 'separation of church and state,' came out of Adolph Hitler's mouth. That's where it comes from. So the next time your liberal friends talk about separation of church and state, ask them why they're Nazis," Urquhart said.
Though he made the comment five months ago, it received renewed scrutiny after a You Tube video of the exchange was posted by the website Rawstory.com.
Many legal scholars have pointed out that Thomas Jefferson did, in fact, write about the concept in his letter to the Baptists in 1802, using the phrase "a wall of separation between Church & State." (Here's a link to the letter. )
Professor Eugene Volokh of the UCLA law school noted on his legal blog that the phrase was well established in the 19th century. "In American court cases alone, it dates back to 1825 (in an argument of counsel) and 1840 (in a judge's opinion). It's quite clear that the American phrase 'separation of church and state' does not at all come from Hitler. It probably pre-existed Jefferson, was likely popularized by him, and was routinely used long before the Americans ever heard of Hitler," Volokh wrote.
In the months since Urquhart made the statement, he has more or less disclaimed it, attributing it to the early steps of a novice campaigner. "Everybody in that room understood what I meant, that tyrants tend to misuse the separation of church and state," he said recently, as reported by Delaware's News Journal newspaper. "The Nazis used the same separation of church and state rhetoric for a very, very bad purpose," Urquhart said.
But was he at least right about Hitler, that he embraced church-state separation? It's a notion widely accepted on many Internet blogs.
But two historians, experts on Nazi Germany, say that's not the case.
"There was never separation of church and state under the Nazis. The two official religions of Germany -- Catholicism and mostly Lutheran Protestantism -- remained the official churches right through the period of the Third Reich," according to Prof. Richard Steigmann-Gall of Kent State University.
"During the war, when tensions grew between Nazis and the churches, particularly over the so-called 'euthanasia campaign,' Hitler privately considered an official separation of church and state. But he relied far too heavily on support from Protestant and Catholic Germans to ever take the idea seriously," he said.
Another expert on the period, Professor Robert Ericksen of Pacific Lutheran University, said the Nazis continued the Weimar Republic's practice of taxing church members and using the money to support Germany's churches. "The state paid for religious education, which was offered in all schools, and the state paid for the theological facilities as before," Ericksen said.
"Most Christians and most Christian clergy -- Protestant and Catholic -- were very enthusiastic supporters of Hitler and the Nazi cause. He promised a return to traditional values and to end the 'moral decadence' of Weimar culture," according to Ericksen.
Ericksen said some Nazi leaders saw Christianity as a rival and opposed church influence. "But Hitler never risked taking on the churches directly, whatever his own preferences might have been."
Leave a Comment:
What makes you think this tea baggin liar is any less indifferent to facts than the rest of the crazy crowd...
Republicans have a lengthy history of attempting to re-write history to fit their own twisted agenda...
Tea Bagging? Sounds like a homophobic statement!!
Makes you wonder why the originally picked that name for themselves, right Ray?
@newday You're confusing them with CNN's Anderson Cooper. He was the first to call them Tea Baggers. They've always referred the themselves as Tea Partiers, Tea Party protesters or members of the Tea Party.
I can never understand How People could ever think of voting for the Crazies in the tea Party!!!
I understand that anytime anyone attempts to compare someone to Hitler (or Nazi policy in general) it's an automatic failure of the argument because it uses a general association fallacy and creates a false dichotomy.
Why does Mr. Urqhart matter? Why do we give legitimacy to the statements of the uneducated and ignorant? Why is this being drawn up from the deep five months after it was first said?
Oh you've got to be kidding. It doesn't matter if it was 5 months or 5 minutes ago, this is an incredible erroneous thing for a person running for Congress to say. And aren't we still hearing about "clinging to guns and religion?" You're just embarrassed by the report of yet another whacko statement from a Tea Partier/Republican. Whacko I say. Nuts.
It matters because he is Delaware's GOP nominee to Delawares only congressional seat.
@Amy B. Portland, ME: I think, in your furor, you've fundamentally misunderstood me. You'd do well to check your knee-jerk reactions before clicking the 'post' button.
I will not speak to the so-called 'points' in your comment; they're mistaken and beneath me.
I will reiterate this, however - the more often fringe-view candidates are presented in the media the more legitimacy they gain. Before making light of something which was, by the article's own wording, a buried and forgotten story, Urquhart didn't have too much in the way of notoriety. Given the caliber of many of the posters here on Newsvine (and numerous other blogs) there are quite a number of people that wouldn't take any issue with his sentiment. Time and again I've seen posters a-plenty who find nothing wrong with (and even applaud themselves for) holding bigoted opinions and values.
If the Tea Party, in a broader sense, hadn't received the amount of attention it has none of those who now stand poised to enter the halls of Congress - O'Donnell, Angle, Urquhart, Miller - would've likely defeated their party's more moderate candidates. When something is reported on at the national level, it validates that thing.
That was and remains my point. Acknowledging ignorance lends credence to ignorance. If you'll notice from my very first sentence, Urquhart's claim carried no weight anyhow because he made use of a common, widespread logical fallacy.
@hawkeyedemocrat: Put it into perspective - one among four-hundred and thirty-five with the possibility of only serving a single two-year term. Exactly how much damage do you think this man can do to the country as a whole, or even to Delaware? Do you not think that if he stands up and makes these claims whilst in Congress he'll draw so much ire from his fellow Representatives as to be silenced utterly? Do you really think that if he repeats himself in this fashion he'll last more than that single term?
"I will reiterate this, however - the more often fringe-view candidates are presented in the media the more legitimacy they gain."
You must have a pretty low opinion of the American voter if you think that a journalist reporting this kind of nutty comment increases the chances this person will be elected.
Polls show that most people think Sarah Palin is unqualified for public office, despite her voluminous media coverage. Where she is effective is in ginning up the base, but she doesn't bring converts to the Republican Party.
Where the media has failed America is by not informing the public what exactly is in the healthcare reform bill, or that it will reduce, not increase, the federal deficit, or that the recession would have been much worse if the stimulus hadn't been spent. The media doesn't cover the growth of new industries based on alternative energy, nurtured by grants from the Obama administration and poised to make the US a world leader in new technologies.
Amy, don't skirt my point and accuse me of untruths. Don't launch into a tirade about HCR or ARRA when the topic at hand is Glen Urquhart's lunatic statements.
Notoriety yields legitimacy - not for all, but tellingly, for enough given the results of the primaries that yielded Angle, O'Donnell and Miller.
The article says about Hitler:
"He promised a return to traditional values and to end the 'moral decadence'"
Gee, where have I heard that recently?
Congratulations, you've just sunk to Urquhart's level.
Holocaustic is correct. The tenant is called "Godwin's Law." It states all arguments (on newsgroups) devolve to the point of one party making an ad hominem comparison to Nazis, or invoking references to Nazi practices or propaganda. At which point that person loses the argument by default.
In this case, the GOP candidate, and pretty much Heartlight3.
Yes, and since Glen Urquhart is the one who equates Liberals with Nazis then that would be him.
It's unfortunate he brought in the Hitler thing. No one wins by doing that. However, he was accurate as to Jefferson's perspective in the Danbury letter, which was essentially to state that the Danbury baptists had nothing to fear from the federal government. He was on the side of "freedom OF religion", not freedom from religion.
Godwins Law!
Jeff - Would you please tell that to Glenn Beck and all those tea partiers with the Hitler signs.
No, Richard, if you read Jefferson, he was pretty hostile toward priests. In fact, the religious of that time were aghast at the possibility of Jefferson as President. Again, quoting Jefferson: "The clergy (wishing to establish their particular form of Christianity) believe that any portion of power confided to me (as President) will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion." And this from Jefferson in a letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper: "Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of Common Law." It is illustrative to note that President Jefferson would not declare a day of Thanksgiving. He considered it to be government coercing the people to pray.
@Holocaustic
"Why does Mr. Urqhart matter? Why do we give legitimacy to the statements of the uneducated and ignorant?"
Because this brainless, fascist scum wishes to be a part of the legislative process in THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. And I'm sure this pig feels empowered by the upswell of others who feel the same way. They said it couldn't happen here. I beg to effing differ!!!!!
Because the crazies need to be called out. Period. It something is a lie, it's a lie. We can no longer rely on the media to call people out.
Five months ago the media should have reported this. Anyone who knows history knows about Jefferson's letter. Except the bats%&t crazies running for office.
I don't want someone like that in Congress, do you?
Insipid remarks are unbecoming.
Of course I don't want anyone like that in office - but you're missing my point that reporting on his comments gives them legitimacy. Reporting on or acknowledging his very existence gives him legitimacy.
Even should he win the election, what then? He'll spend two years making a fool of himself and promptly be thrown out. Nothing galvanizes the electorate like idiots in elected office, re: the current POTUS and 111th Congress.
I think there seems to be a synapse that fires when the 'journalists' hear about a story and when they can loop a video of the incident non stop. It fills the void in their otherwise story 'void' lives.
But video? OY! Now we can have a PARTY!
Or something like that.
Hitler also said Hello to people. So when your friends say hello, ask them why they are Nazis.
The scary thing He just might win the election!!! I can't believe that People would be so stupid to ever let These People get as far as They did in the first place...
Well, there WERE big huge signs at the teabagger rallies with photos of President Obama with Hitler mustaches. To be honest I never quite got the connection between the two.
When in doubt - go to Hitler. Or to the Communists. Or the socialists. Now it's the Muslims I guess.
Very strange country we have become. Very strange and simple minded.
Get out Nov 2nd and see what you can do to help protect the country from these fools.
They are no better than 'radiacl Islamists' that 'hate our way of life'!
So the next time your liberal friends talk about separation of church and state, ask them why they're Nazis," Urquhart said.
Amazing. Truly amazing. Liberals want people to live their lives with no interference from either Church or politicians. If you go to Church or don't go to Church is none of my business. It's none of my business who you are in love with or want to marry. If you find someone you want to go through this very difficult life with, then I'm happy for you. What you do on Sunday mornings is up to you. Whether it be going to Church. Going out for breakfast. Reading a spy novel. Playing with your children. Doing yard work. Going for a walk, a bike ride. Working. Visiting your parents.
It's your life. Live it the way you are happy living it. There is so much stress out there. Do what makes YOU happy. That's what America has to offer each and every one of us. It's no one's business how you live.
What is so hard about that? How does he get Nazism from that?
PAT,
Right on, brother!
Ummm... Chuck... that's 'sister' Pat! lol
Hey, you! Trynna get 'collapsed' again, for opening you mouth? We don't TOLERATE words like 'sister' on here! Sounds, well, 'collective' or 'harmonious' or some other commie deal.....
I don't know Drive-by...
I'm kinda enjoying wearing the Queen of Collapse crown - it's SOOO sparkly!
drive-by-observer
And "sister" is feminazi, too!
Hmmm... Isn't that the term that was coined by the oxycontin addicted sexist?
Pat, Boston, Ahh, lest us forget the Bush as Hitler signs. Don't feel to good does it?
Rob, it was an unfair comparison then and it remains an unfair comparison now.
Exodite Dragon is as right as anyone in this forum has ever been.
And for the record, the coiner of the term "feminazi" also stated that there were only about 25-30 individuals in the whole country to which it should be applied and I doubt any of them post at First Read.
The Tea Party has that picture every where They go!!! Most of the People just yell at them there...
Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists is well worth reading, since it is a thing of beauty. Quoting from that letter this phrase from Jefferson "....thus building a wall of separation between church and state..." These are the critical words that show the Founders' intent with religion. Why is it that the "tea baggers" so often act as though they believe they are "channeling" the Founders, when they know absolutely nothing about them? That letter is easy to find on the internet, and I hope people will read it and finally understand that the "tea baggers" have no clue what they are talking about regarding the Founders or anything else.
Jefferson was brilliant, yet remember the schools in (I think) Texas want to rewrite their textbooks to minimize his contributions?
Sad, isn't it, myopinion?
Remember too, that Jefferson took his bible and removed the parts he didn't like and called it the Jefferson Bible. He most assuredly had his own axes to grind.
Couldn't agree with you more. Here are some more quotes, I pasted a few below - all from founding fathers and ALL in disagreement with these lunatics!
http://www.americainprophecy.com/famous-american-leaders-quotes.asp
I was reading a book the other day, about George Washington and found it interesting that he was wholly against the Boston Tea party, not because of what it stood for (anti-British/taxation) but that it was childish and unbecoming of an American gentleman.
"Religion and Politics are not to be discussed in polite company"
My great-grandma use to tell me that, never really knew why or what it really meant and by the time I grew up, I had completely forgotten that lesson or what she called a Golden Rule if I remember correctly. That is till my wife said it to me one day and stopped me in my tracks. Probably on a day where I got on my political soapbox and was running my mouth! hahahhaa.. Anyways, I think the deep rift in our country is because we're all here reading and talking politics and religion in the first place, when these are taboo topics that our ancestors deemed improper to discuss in public themselves. I think this is a lesson that everyone should learn and our current environment is a good example of why. *shrug*
Jefferson was reassuring the Danbury Baptists that they had nothing to fear from him (Jefferson was recently elected) or the federal government in their local dispute with another Christian denomination. The context is one of protecting religion from the federal government and guaranteeing no interference in religion by the federal government.
The context in which the phrase "thus building a wall of separation between church and state" was written is as important as the phrase itself. And such a beautiful phrase should not be used in isolation so frivolously.
Debunked above at 2.13 Richard, but thanks for playing.
hey keeping looking - you still know nothing after reading Jefferson's letter. But you are a lib. Actually understanding the founders intent requires deeper insight than any lib is capable of.
It's my country too, dude, but thanks for making it clear that only people who think like you are welcome here.
It makes it clear that Conservative talk about "equality" and "democracy" are just a sham.
Hey listen up Dems, Whatever you say about the Republicans or Conservatives, at least they weren't Nazis or were their party called socialists , like the Democratic Socialist Party. Similar to the German Democratic National Socialist Party. NSDAP. Stick that in your chest.
SO, Juven, when are you going to support the claims you made that there are NO RICH industrialists backing the Tea Party?
Inquiring minds want to know.
I seem to remember that the Bush fortunes were made by doing deal with Nazi Germany...so WHO was not Nazi Juven??
He won't, Pietro, because he can't. Besides, he's too busy finding something else to conflate.
One could only laugh at THIS stretch -- if it wasn't so sad. Hitler was as far from the "left" or "liberalism" as you could possibly get, no matter WHAT the party name was.
Juven, I don't care the political party of label of a candidate, I care about where they stand on the issues, and I want them to at least of above average intellect. I don't care if their ACT or SAT score wasn't high enough to get them into an Ivy League school, but I sure want them to know basic historical facts, and not sound like they had no formal education!
You mean Juven CANNOT back up ANY of his assertions or posts?
Really?
* shocked look *
Say it ain't so, Juven. Say it ain't so.
'Conflate.' I like that word.
The only real socialism in Nazi Germany was Corporate Socialism. German corporations were provided with slave labor by the regime to build weapons systems. In turn, German and some international companies (like IBM) assisted the Nazis in constructing and running their death camps. The Nazi regime didn't seize private businesses unless they were owned by Jews or people who were openly against the regime.
None of that sounds anything like the socialism of Socialist and Social Democratic political partics that have been in power much of the time in Europe since the end of the Second World War.
Democratic in the term "Democratic National Socialist Party" simply means their officials are elected. Has ZERO relation to this or any other Democratic party.
Same as Republicans and their Republican party has no relation to the Peoples Republic of China or the People Republic of North Korea. Does Republican now mean you're a Communist??? WHOA!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_dictatorship
Guess who was a RIGHT WINGER! Yep you guessed it:
Germany / Third Reich / National Socialist German Workers Party / 1933-1945 / Adolf Hitler
Gee, I don't see the word Democrat in that name. Wow, could you be full of @!$%#?
So stop pointing your damn dirty finger at us, when you got 3 pointed back at you! Go back to your F(AU)XNews and your imaginary reality!
Godwins Law :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
Thank you for getting it.
Hillary/Pelosi 2012!
That would only be if Obama doesn't run for a 2nd term!!!
That is pretty damn dumb. The Nazis were the most evil government in history. Using them as an example of church and state is just stupid.
It just shows how far to the right the Tea Party is!!! This Country will really go down the drain if They get into office...
Where do they dig up these lunatics? This religious fanaticism must be stopped before they turn the whole country into brain dead zombies. In case you're wondering, I'm not a democrat.
He also beat the Delaware GOP establishment candidate Michelle Rollins, but not by as much as O'Donnell beat Castle.
10 deleted, JuvenBachan attacking another Viner to begin a new thread:
Don't. You're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
Leave it to the Republicans to go in with Them!!!
Our kids are being taught the macro evolution faith movement, a false religion! Why aren't our kids being protected from this hoax of a religion by the concept of speration of chuch and state? Where's the ACLU when we rweally need them??Einstein said he was driven by wanting to know the mind of God and science without religion is inept! Moral relativity, survial of the fittest and you're an animal has huge social and financial costs to society! In God we trust? So help you God? Hitler worshipped the other god FYI-actions speak louder than words!
It sure doesn't show the 3rd World Country the right way to run Their Country!!!
How many clinks on (!) does it take to collapse a comment? Anybody?
It takes 5, Amy.
too few. what, you don't want everyone's opinion to be equally heard? that's just unamerican.
I don't disagree Hatr
Real fair system they've got going on around here...
5 nitwits can collapse posts with as many as 100's votes - sounds kinda 'fair & balanced' dontcha think? lol
I actually wish we had a "spam" choice -- so all those who merely cut and paste nonsense from the spurious websites can be collapsed.
Well, Beth, you do have the choices of 'No value' and 'Advertising'... could one of those be used?
And all it takes is five votes for a comment to become 'highly-rated,' despite the majority of them being little other than intellectual spittle.
Or ignore author works too...
I'm trying to figure out why Juven hasn't been banned outright. Maybe I should rescind my stated position on not flagging comments.
You, Holocaustic, have just asked the question of the day.
Holocaustic -
Have to agree with you about Juven. He gives us righties a bad name.
If WE decided to 'game' the system like our 'friends' on the right... this place would be nothing but page after page of little +'s...
But then all the self congratulatory comments to and from all the lefties here wouldn't be as much fun would they?
Nash and I had a lively discussion earlier about the spin surrounding ARRA. While I do still feel that my view on the topic is truer, Nash pointed out (rather successfully) numerous things I had to correct myself on. Likewise, yesterday Mixed Bag made several points concerning the effect of the Tea Party on the broader GOP and ultimately I had to yield to him.
If someone has a point to make, it needs to be stated factually, concisely and logically without descending into intolerable conceit - or being composed entirely of hateful sentiments and abusive insults. I am often not so holy in my commentary.
What annoys me about Juven - and those like him - is that even if they have a point to make, they don't even attempt to outline it. Baser emotions have supplanted reason for them. We don't know if there's any legitimacy to their views because their apathetic invective is all we see.
Of course they could ... but that wasn't my point.
That's funny... ONLY her friends call her Nash...
Hmmmm... I wonder....
You wonder what?
Wow, voting for censorship.
I'm with you on this one Feisty, it's a crock.
I'ts also the only concrete example of threatening my basic freedoms that I've seen in the last ten years.
Some people aren't what they appear to be... ;0)
_________________________
OMG Richard between you & Bill, Fairfax - I fainted... LOL I guess miracles really do exist!
You're quicker on the uptake than Mixed Bag, that's for damn sure. ;)
Oh...that explains a lot...
Feisty,
I was rather glad to see Bill, Fairfax chime in on the whole collapsing thing, I do not mind others putting up their opinions, even if I strongly disagree, as long as they are civil about it. I actually ENJOY seeing clear-thinking people on the right, like Candice and others who actually have something to say, debate ideas and, like myself, will admit to being wrong or that they had not thought about certain facets of the discussion in those particular ways before. THAT is what makes America great, the free discourse and dissemination of ideas where we can come to a center ground that works for EVERYBODY. People that will keep to the same, worn out, disproven ideas and yell loudly and rudely at others who do not share their ideas bring nothing to the table that is usable in any meaningful way. Sadly, the Tea Partiers seem to be almost exclusively of this latter sort and a lot of Repubs seem to have forgotten what honest discourse is about. Yes, we have a few on the left as well, but NOwhere near as rabidly as those from the TP and some of the Repubs.
People who honestly debate their ideas are one thing, rabid ideologues are another entirely and too many Americans seem to have forgotten the difference.
GOD forgive if They take over the House and the Senate it will go down the drain!!! We will lose everything good We have in This Country... They want to go backwards instead of forward like We should be doing!!!
The concept actually comes out of the enlightenment. That whole philosophy is why GW didnt declare himself king like every other revolutional leader has-- except Gandhi.
The Enlightenment also has no place in Texas school books. Anything on the part of Conservatives to make the population dumber and help them with their propaganda.
Believe you me - Texans at large were not happy with the board's decision on that one.
ED, that's why EVERYONE needs to get to the polls on Election Day. School board elections tend to be low participation elections and in that case it's easier for a small group with an agenda to pack a board with their own candidates.
Can anybody named a well informed intelligent thoughtful candidate from the tea party? I can't think of one.
Good luck with that, please - the people in the Tea Party don't seem to know who is bankrolling them, much less have a cogent thought on how to contribute to America.
Fortunately there are other people willing to search for that information. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=1
There isn't one that has a brain in Their heads...
Source: http://www.americainprophecy.com/famous-american-leaders-quotes.asp
-----
"Every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshiping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience." George Washington, Letter, United Baptist Chamber of Virginia May 1789
"The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the Christian Religion." 1797 the treaty of Tripoli, signed by President Washington, and approved by the Senate of the United States
"Our reliance is in the love of liberty which God has planted in us. Our defense is in the spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands everywhere. Destroy this spirit and you whave planted the seeds of despotism at your own doors. Familiarize yourself with the chains of bondage, and you prepare your own limbs to wear them. Accustomed to trample on the rights of others, you have lost the genious of your own independence and become the fit subjects of the first cunning tryant who rises among you." Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Edwardsville, IL, 1858.
"Thank God, under our Constitution there was no connection between Church and State, and that in my action as President of the United States I recognized no distinction of creeds in my appointments office." James K. Polk
"Let us labor for the security of free thought, free speech, pure morals, unfettered religious sentiments, and equal rights and privileges for all men, irrespective of nationality, color, or religion;.... leave the matter of religious teaching to the family altar, the church, and the private school, supported entirely by private contribution. Keep church and state forever separate." Ulysses S. Grant's Speech to G. A. R. Veterans, at Des Moines, IA 1875.
"I hold that in this country there must be complete severance of Church and State; that public moneys shall not be used for the purpose of advancing any particular creed; and therefore that the public schools shall be non-sectarian and no public moneys appropriated for sectarian schools." Theodore Roosevelt, Address, New York, October 12, 1915
"that public moneys shall not be used for the purpose of advancing any particular creed;"
OK then. Let's rescind the tax exempt status of any church that in any way promotes a political position.
An excellent idea.
Do either of you see anything about religion that you wouldn't see as promoting a political position?
And isn't forcing federal taxes on churches/religions in violation of the spirit of the Danbury letter and its famous phrases?
By the way, I do believe that churches pay local property taxes if they own property and all purchases made with church donations are subject to state and local sales taxes.
Churches pay payroll taxes for employees as well.
The Catholic church's position on abortion is a moral position, not political, though I would guess that you disagree. However, you simultaneously prove that it's a moral position by constantly admonishing the church or religious people for "forcing" their morality on you.
The first amendment guarantees the church and its members the right to take a position on anything and to speak out about it. Aside from that the church and its members have no power to make law. So there is no violation of church and state for the church to take a moral position. I would also venture to say that there is no violation if the church takes a political position either.
The Catholic church takes political positions on social justice all the time and generally supports health care reform and more government funding for it. You don't see me out there calling for revocation of their tax exemption for that.
I don't really know what to say to your post since I don't particularly agree with or fit any of the accusations you've made. Am I capable of recognizing the difference between a statement about a moral issue and attempting to change secular law? Of course. Where have I ever admonished Catholics for 'forcing' morality on me? Nowhere.
Anyhow, if a religious organization (of any stripe - certainly not just a Christian church) came out and directly endorsed a particular candidate or political organization with tangible resources then, yes, I believe their tax-exempt status ought to be rescinded.
However, I remain unaware of any instance in which this has taken place. If it has, I would very much like to see irrefutable proof of such.
Sorry, Exodite. The first sentence was mostly rhetorical and the rest was off the top of the head rambling. Sorry if it sounded personal. Of course, I have never seen you admonish Catholics. I have certainly seen instances of Catholics being admonished in the manner I stated.
Not to mention that in referencing "either of you" I meant heartlight3 and holocaustic. I really hadn't seen any specific comments from you on the matter.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
sorry, Richard, but you are mistaken, churches or any not for profit are exempt from sales taxes if the provide their tax exempt certificate. I am involved with three different organizations and use the certificate for supplies all the time. It stretches the resources - ever so slightly. I don't mind paying the taxes for my purchases; but every little bit helps the organizations with so little cash. None of the three organizations I am referring to have a partisan agenda of any kind. And if they did, I would totally agree that they should NOT be tax exempt.
Richard, it's cool, no harm done, I just need to pause for a moment and stop grinning.
This Country and the World would be better off living by the 10 Commandments!!! If the way the Catholic thinks is so great... Why are there so many in Prison???
You can post all the facts you want. You can encourage all the critical thinking you want. The vast majority wants to be told what to think. And, when they are angry or scared, they will latch onto the argument that makes them feel better about themselves. It doesn't matter what Thomas Jefferson really said, it matters what Glen Beck says Jefferson really meant.
FOX News and the conservative radio guys have been telling their audience that they are the only ones telling them the truth, and that the audience is way smarter than the lefty liberal ivy league elite for years. It is only now that so many are hurting that they are gaining so much strength. And why not? In a time of real hardship, they are making their audience believe that they are the purveyors of truth and that they are smarter and better informed by listening. (Frankly, it is the most remarkable piece of marketing I've ever witnessed.)
A well informed public is a pipe dream. The question the left should be asking isn't whether or not the Tea Party candidates have a serious break with facts or even reality, but what message they can get out that makes the angry and scared feel better about themselves and their tiny universe. Quit trying to cater to logic and reason, those people are in your corner. Follow the conservative model and start preying on the disaffected by making them feel superior by throwing in with your ideology. MSNBC is a sad answer to the reach of FOX.
The left is entrenched in the most highly regarded universities in the world. I struggle to believe that their creativity cannot deliver a better vehicle for rebuttal of the right's constant drone than MSNBC and snarky blogs.
Good post, Kowrie1, and very observant. IMHO the problem lies in that the intelligent 1) find it hard to dumb down their message and 2) just can't believe that someone can not understand the logic they put forth.
We'd do well to require introductory courses on logic in the public schools - perhaps we might avoid some of the more flagrant abuses of thought exhibited by both liberals and conservatives.
Then maybe the right is correct and the left is full of elitists. I don't believe that though. I believe that the conservative movement has claimed "common sense" as their right -- they even say so -- spend an afternoon listening to Rush, Beck, and Hannity. They paint the left as over-educated snobs that look down their noses at the rest of America. This isn't true, but the rebuttal from the left often makes it easy to make that connection -- often snarky, belittling retorts. That may be the logical response to nonsense, but many in our country believe in the right's narrative like it was the 5th Gospel. Those kind of responses only increase their belief.
Stop belittling your countrymen and try to understand where they are coming from and meet them there. Or keep believing in your superiority and watch as the country slips further and further under the control of the braying voices in the employ of Rupert Murdoch.
What happens, Kowrie, when attempts to meet the opposition receive vitriol and venom as the only response?
Then return the vitriol with logic and well developed ideas. In a race to the bottom, nobody wins.
It highlights the right's genius though. The major media outlets try to press for accurate and fair reporting. They try to make candidates that are bereft of facts support their ideas and are called shills for the left. Fox et al. spend as much time demonizing the "mainstream media" as they do talking about their preferred candidates or repeating the RNC's daily talking points. Why? To discredit the only vehicle that logic and intellectual honesty has left and to cement their position as the only access to truth.
I say continue to repeat as plainly as possible and in as civilized a manner as possible the opposing view. Concede when the right has the better idea. Be honest. Debate, but don't debase. If not, you will quickly become that which you most despise.
Well spake.
FOX needs to acknowledge...they are now part of the "mainstream media".
Da Noid
Sorry, I have to disagree with that statement. Fox News is closer to the National Enquirer than it is to mainstream media.
FOXNEWS is the best. And everyone watches it, Dems, Independents, Tea Partiers, grassroots,
Republicans, Axelrod, Glib, the WhiteHouse, Bengala, Poderosa, CNN, MSNBC, Maddcow, Crazy Eddie,
St. Matthews( he saw the Christ-has a tingling up his leg) the Bama, his Big Mama , Dean , Soros,
and the Far Left Dems.
What in the world have you been smoking Juven?? Faux Neuz is nothing more than corporate controlled right wing propaganda that Calls itself news and hides under the name of Entertainment. Less than 5% of the populace watches it if they have any choice!
Now there is a good place to get the truth!!! Fox is one way I would never go to hear the truth...
A Teabagger who knows not whereof he speaks? Blasphemy. And it always cracks me up when people misquote themselves.
What I love better is when They say They never said something... Then They play what They Denied what They said they never said!!! They still deny it...
Why does the tea party associate themselves with whacko candidates? The goals of the tea party, are reasonable enough. We all want to see the deficit reduced and unnecessary spending curtailed. However, the lunatics and mentally unstable individuals, carrying the tea party banner turns off most voters.
Because They are nothing but waco Themselves!!!
NSDAP is the German abbreviation for National Socialist German Workers Party. You wouldn't know a true Socialist if you met one.
NSDAP is the German abbreviation for National Socialist German Workers Party. You wouldn't know a true Socialist if you met one.
NSDAP stand for National Socialist Democratic Workers Party.
Okay, okay, NSDAP is National Socialist Duetsche Workers Party.
Your repeating yourself... That doesn't it make it so!!!
Technically, ther term "seperation of church and state" first appeared in a decision by Justic Hugo Black in 1947.
The intent of the 1st Amendment means "hands off". If people want to pray everywhere, or nowhere, then the government has not right to say one way or the other.
The 1st Amendment protects freedom "of" relligion, not freedom "from".
Wrong, Rob, the first amendment does provide for freedom from religion as well as freedon of religion. Try reading a history book.
Did you not read the article Rob? The phrase was in use in American courts at least as early as 1825.
Matt, To say you have freedom "from" religion means that you need to deny someone else their freedom. Bear in mind, if you go around demanding people give up THEIR liberites, there will be noone around to defend yours.
History book? I have a pocket Consititution on my desk. The "free exercise clause" allows people to pray anywhere/whenever they want. The problem is people get "offended". How does someone else believing in God or the tooth fairy affect you?
Not true, Rob. I have freedom from religion by requiring that the government does not promote a particular religion. I also have freedom from religion by requiring that no one force their beliefs upon me. To try to say that to be free from something means you have to deny it from someone else is not true, it is a logical fallacy.
To understand the Constitution, you need to understand history, so just because you have a pocket Constitution at your desk and have read the "free exercise clause" does not mean that you understand it or the intent. So, I will assume that you have some intelligence and can comprehend most things you read but I then have to ask you these questions:
Have you read the Federalist Papers? Have you read any biographies about any of the Constitution's framers? If so, who? Have you read any history books written about that period in American history? If so, how many? Do you even know who actually wrote the Constitution?
What is the Tea Party obsession with Hitler? And another candidate from Delaware "dabbled" in black magic blood sacrifices? Bristol Palin is on Dancing With The Stars while her mother contemplates running for president? What's going on up there? (in their heads)
Like the tea bags they use to represent them, Tea Party candidates seem to make the water murky and brown no matter into which cup they are dipped. I'm going to switch to coffee.
Wasn't coffee lauded as the more American drink during the Revolution, anyhow? ;)
I remember reading that coffee took the place of tea since the embargoes kept tea from coming in to the ports. Washington really liked it.
Fact is, the Tea partiers are scaring the bejeesus out of the establishment of both parties. And that can only be good.
True enough, but I'd often hoped for a movement that looked to the Enlightenment for inspiration to accomplish a shake-down rather than one funded by the Koch brothers.
Just as I hoped for one that wasn't funded by George Soros.
Well there you go. We're screwed, it seems, no matter what.
I believe that the first amendment guarantees freedom FROM government for religions and freedom from/of religion for individuals
Debunked above in thread 2. It's a sword that cuts both ways, Richard.
The Wehrmacht uniform belt buckle had these words" "Gott mit uns." Anybody need that translated?
Nein, ich benötige nicht einen Übersetzer.
Простите, что?
ich brauche die Übersetzung!!
I am being sarcastic, of course.
I think I know what it means, but Got didn't exactly stick around for them, did he/she?
The good news for Mr. Urquhart is that one does not need to be a member of Congress to review the contents of the Library of Congress.
http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html
Amy B, Have you set down and read the Health Care law? It will increase your payments, providing you now have insurance now and not waiting for Obama's law to give it to you for free. It will increase the deficit by billions, even more after the first 10 years, but why should you care? You can pass that on to your kids and grand kids.
Liar!
Is it only the right wingers that believe that HCR was designed to give insurance for free? Why is that? Can they not read?
Looks like YOU haven't read the health care reform bill sonman. Are you waiting for a version to come out with crayons and pictures?
so tired of the gotp playing the hitler card.
Why would anyone running for office be stupid enough to look like Him??? He is a real nut case!!!