+- Mock (https://mockforums.net)
+-- Forum: Serious Shit? (https://mockforums.net/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: POLITICS (https://mockforums.net/forum-36.html)
+--- Thread: 2012 ELECTION (/thread-5690.html)
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Duchess - 08-13-2011
As long as he keeps God out of it I'm willing to listen.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
You do know that your rights are god given so the government can't take them away from you ?
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Duchess - 08-13-2011
I'm not debating God with you. He has no place in an election.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
I can see your point, I don't want anyone elected who has or feels any moral obligation based on god.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Duchess - 08-13-2011
Dick, are you saying that religion SHOULD be associated with politics?
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
I'm saying that our founding documents are associated with god, our rights are given by god and affirmed in our constitution,bill of rights and declaration of independence.
The biggest mistake that has been made is electing people who feel no moral obligation to god based on those principles alone.
no relationship with god ,no relationship to our constitution or the rights which god gave us.
I'm not saying we need a jesus freak in the whitehouse but we do need someone who recognises something greater than ourselves controlled the freedom that we were born into.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Cracker - 08-13-2011
Yes, you are.
I'm surprised you would take that tone, Dick. The First Amendment gives us freedom from religion. The separation of church and state is, and should be, implied.
Not everybody is a God-botherer. Decent people shouldn't need a reminder to be decent people. Religion is for the weak.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
It does not give us freedom FROM religion it gives us freedom OF religion.
Which by the way means you will never suffer under a state sanctioned and imposed religion.
You won't have to answer to the pope.
Now get back to your corner you sad little bitch.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Cracker - 08-13-2011
(08-13-2011, 04:51 PM)IMaDick Wrote: It does not give us freedom FROM religion it gives us freedom OF religion.
Wrong. Jesus freaks never "get" that. It means you can worship, or NOT worship, any way you want. The laws of this land are NOT to conform with ANY singular religion, even a majority one.
Morality is NOT tied to religion, except for the weak that need a concrete example.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
Eat shit you sad little bitch, I know what it says,how it says it and why it says it.
Our constitution protect even your rights because they were god given.
If the government can give you any of your rights they can take them away also.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Cracker - 08-13-2011
(08-13-2011, 04:32 PM)IMaDick Wrote: I'm saying that our founding documents are associated with god, our rights are given by god and affirmed in our constitution,bill of rights and declaration of independence.
The biggest mistake that has been made is electing people who feel no moral obligation to god based on those principles alone.
no relationship with god ,no relationship to our constitution or the rights which god gave us.
From Article 6:
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
It is expressly prohibited. In writing. In the Constitution of United States.
From Article 2:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
God does not appear in the Constitution. Jesus isn't on your toast. The Virgin Mary isn't on your garage door.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
You don't read well, and you certianly don't comprehend worth a shit.
Where are your rights from?
The state legislature or god? the federal Government or god? go back and read what I wrote.
apolgise in private if you must but apologise for being an asswipe.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Duchess - 08-13-2011
You're digging a hole, stop digging.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Cracker - 08-13-2011
(08-13-2011, 05:38 PM)IMaDick Wrote: Eat shit you sad little bitch, I know what it says,how it says it and why it says it.
Our constitution protect even your rights because they were god given.
If the government can give you any of your rights they can take them away also.
Then you should know better. You let your religion cloud your sight (and reading comprehension).
Call me a sad little bitch if you want to try to assert your opinion and control, but I come from a long line of Americans. Jamestown and Plymouth (yes, white slaves and religious nuts). So in my best colonial voice I say, Fuck Off, Sir. I understand the Constitution and what it means.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Cracker - 08-13-2011
(08-13-2011, 05:48 PM)Duchess Wrote:
You're digging a hole, stop digging.
Nah, he'll need the hole later.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
the government can't use any form of religious test but I sure the fuck can if I want to.
You don't seem to understand that those words are limiting only to the government. they do not limit my use of a religious test in choosing who I will vote for.
If the government could institute a religious test how long before you would have a state sanctioned religion? try to talk about the shit you understand and stay away from what you don't because you have a fucked up view of the constitution.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
(08-13-2011, 05:48 PM)Duchess Wrote:
You're digging a hole, stop digging.
I will need the hole later, cracker is in over her head.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Cracker - 08-13-2011
(08-13-2011, 05:49 PM)IMaDick Wrote: besides the government can't use any form of religious test but I sure the fuck can if I want to.
You don't seem to understand that those words are limiting only to the government. they do not limit my use of a religious test in choosing who I will vote for.
If the government could institute a religious test how long before you had a state sanctioned religion? try to talk about the shit you understand and stay away from what you don't because you have a fucked up view of the constitution.
Can you backpedal a little faster?
This thread is called "Election 2012." Perhaps you were referring to your local AARP elections? Because I took it to mean the PRESIDENTIAL election.
RE: 2012 ELECTION - Cracker - 08-13-2011
Do I need to explain what they meant by "religious test?" It isn't the same as Catechism...
RE: 2012 ELECTION - IMaDick - 08-13-2011
I can't back peddle as fast as you did.
The simple fact is cracker you missed the most important part of the Constitution, it affirms our rights as individuals and limits government.
I have the right to freely worship as I want, the government does not have the right to limit that, they cannot put any test on any person who is being sworn to office, I can however put any test I wish to a person is seeking an office.
any! no limits as to what I may look at, use as a guide or believe they need to qualify to receive my vote.
In this case I want someone with enough respect for the Costitution that they understand that my rights are secured in that they are god given and the government has no power to take them based on that fact.
you would make a good clown not everyone can back peddle as fast as you.