<p>That’s what I’m saying. America is not just a Christian nation, but an Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, ect., nation, since because we are one big melting pot. Which I have no problem with! I just hope Christianity doesn’t get pushed out of the way when we try to accommodate for everyone else. When a lady requests to have the ‘Christ’ in Christmas Tress removed from a catalog from Lowe’s, I worry about the stance of Christianity.</p>
<p>On the other hand though, it goes the same for Christians. Unfortunately, I met alot of Christians who think “sharing your faith” is going around telling everybody their wrong and shoving a Bible in their face. It goes both ways.</p>
<p>“i assure you that several other religious books also advise against killing and stealing.”
-Yes I agree with that, undoubtedly.</p>
<p>if america had no tinge of religious influence then they would still most likely be outlawed. it was explicitly stated in the treaty of tripoli that america was “not in any sense founded on the christian religion.”
Note my wording, I said incorporate, not founded</p>
<p>christianity undoubtedly influenced america, but most of that influence has occurred in the past century and a half or so. i’m not saying that america was ever completely secular, because it wasn’t. but the founding fathers never intended america to be a “christian nation.”
I agree also, America wasn’t intended to be a Christian nation, but it has Christian influences (e.g. the Blue Laws; no other religion that I know of worships specifically on Sunday)</p>
<p>um yeah, that’s called giving birth. you think it’s justifiable for a young teenage girl to have to deal with pregnancy and having a child on top of experiencing psychological issues like ptsd because she was raped?</p>
<p>@RandomMuggle4-Thank you for correcting me. But, the school with the graduation wasn’t “endorsing” prayer. Is the tradition of praying at graduations endorsement? If the person doesn’t want to participate, he can just not join in.</p>
<p>It violates the Lemon test; the [public] school (which is created by the government) is endorsing a specific religion. Individual prayer is fine, but when a public school comes together and says “Let’s pray!”, that is a no-no. There is always a person who just takes things too personally and will sue the school because ‘they didn’t want to pray’.</p>
<p>@Dizzying- That’s tough. With a woman being raped, giving birth to the child has many downfalls. Depression (on the mother and the child), the child having to deal with having a rapist Dad, psychological effects, ect. I mean, that’s the only time I can justify abortion. But then your still killing the baby. <em>sigh</em> This is just so hard.</p>
<p>Well technically, it kind of is. The purpose of praying as a group is for everyone to pray. Yeah, a person who doesn’t want to pray can sit out, but there are the easily offended</p>
<p>You obviously haven’t spent much time in a medical room if you think the only way of giving birth is through the legs. But I do applaud you; you are a good demagogue. Btw, the feds have no constitutional authority to ban prayer in whatever setting, even in schools. Why do some public schools have prayer rooms for muslims if you don’t mind me asking</p>
<p>Well I’m offended that muslims have prayer rooms in airports and other so-called ‘public’ places. Isn’t the government endorsing a particular religion then. And btw you’re arguing along constitutional lines. You’re basically saying it violates the 1st amendment.If you honestly believe that, then surely you can’t legally argue against teachers upholding their 2nd amendment rights and bringing their guns to school; after all they’re all good taxpayers</p>
<p>and neither have you if you think that a fetus is likely to survive without spending several months in the womb; the issue is not how the baby comes out, it’s an unprepared girl or woman having to take on the stress of pregnancy, giving birth, and being a mother, in addition to the psychological effects of being raped.</p>
<p>I see. You’re obviously being very fair here. Considering the psychological damage to the girl, but ignoring the physical damage to the baby. Very fair indeed</p>
<p>@ Dora - yeah because the child really matters even though without the mother, the child wouldn’t be there. honestly, I hope you don’t think that every kid deserves to be born because he or she has the potential to be the next president or the next Albert Einstein. YOU only think they’re important because YOU think they have value and rights. In reality, not everyone feels the same way you do. Just because YOU and some others wouldn’t get an abortion, doesn’t mean you’re going to stop a woman, who knows her body, from doing what she wants. And no, I didn’t read your post, after I posted, I saw it, but I still won’t read it. =) Everyone has their own opinions and their own feelings. It’s the woman’s body, it’s the woman’s choice.</p>
<p>I don’t feel like arguing because this honestly could go on fo0o0oevvva@@~~~ ok grl n ima g0 densin k =)</p>
<p>Even though it may be her choice, who said it was the right choice? No, the baby might not cure cancer or be the greatest president ever lived, but that baby still should have a chance and a right to live, as any other human being does. What “good” mother would want her own baby to be killed? And there’s also psychological effects that go along with having a abortion too (depression, suicidal thoughts, eating disorders), so the mother doesn’t “know” her body that well.</p>
<p>BTW, through all my posts, I hope it doesn’t seem preachy, offensive, or mean. This is a subject I am just passionate about, and that’s what I’m trying to show through my posts, not hatred.</p>
<p>You just keep on spitting the same rhetoric like a zombie. ‘It’s the womans body, therefore she can kill the baby whenever she wants’ spoken like a true sheep baah</p>
<p>Are you kidding? What, specifically, was wrong or incorrect about what I said? Which facts did I distort? Where is your evidence for the ridiculous assertion that “Britain… actively supported Jewish immigration?”</p>
<p>@AndrewT- Do you need political-correct reasoning, or just basic common sense? Any life that is forming should get a chance of life, especially as almost birthed baby. If a man was on trial, accused of murdering somebody, but was really innocent, wouldn’t he deserve a chance to defend himself, and be given another chance? Same as a baby, who is even more defenseless, shouldn’t it be allowed to live?</p>