Minneapolis Spreads the Good News Far and Wide

[Hot Dogger]

Does present-day reality bear your thoroughly offensive musings out?

I hardly think so.

The US Constitution is timeless and isn't concerned about modernity vs. antiquity. For instance, our 2nd Amendment didn't mean muskets, although by what you've said, one might conclude that's your understanding.

[Hot Dogger]

Like some of you, I've the tact of a nuclear bomb. So now, our form of government is in no way based upon the so called "Judeo-Christian Doctrine" (which is a religious invention). However, citizens are free to live by such a doctrine and encourage others to do the same. There's a difference between governance and living. Do your research and you'll see that our Bill of Rights is rooted in Native American Iroquois law and tradition. Nowhere in history was everything in the Bill of Rights used as a source of governance, not even the Magna Carta.

[Drummond]

Like some of you, I've the tact of a nuclear bomb.

Strangely enough, I'd noticed. I'm sure you mean us to, don't you, to the maximum extent possible ?

So now, our form of government is in no way based upon the so called "Judeo-Christian Doctrine" (which is a religious invention). However, citizens are free to live by such a doctrine and encourage others to do the same. There's a difference between governance and living. Do your research and you'll see that our Bill of Rights is rooted in Native American Iroquois law and tradition. Nowhere in history was everything in the Bill of Rights used as a source of governance, not even the Magna Carta.

Most of this I'm not qualified to comment on in any detail. But your statement 'There's a difference between governance and living' caught my eye.

Strictly speaking, you've got a point. But just not to the unshakeable extent that you think you have.

It's surely easy to see why I'm right ?

Governance. As in, to govern. To direct. To define direction, to have a society that's cohesively viable, where its citizens can live happy and good lives.

You don't get that from chaos.

Try founding a society on anarchy. See if it lasts a week.

Governance. The passing of laws, rules by which all should live, rules borne of a sense of what's right or wrong, THEREFORE, OF NECESSITY, FROM A BELIEF-SYSTEM, existing for the health of the community. People in that community do live, and have the freedom to live good lives, because of the nature and quality of their community and society.

But without proper governance, how long would it last ? Breakdowns in society threaten to bring death upon people.

So, you're ultimately wrong. Good governance and the act of living, even if not the same, are invariably indivisible.

You want to define evil, Hot Dogger ? Lack of governance and the anarchy it brings may help you out, 'big-time'.

[Gunny]

Like some of you, I've the tact of a nuclear bomb. So now, our form of government is in no way based upon the so called "Judeo-Christian Doctrine" (which is a religious invention). However, citizens are free to live by such a doctrine and encourage others to do the same. There's a difference between governance and living. Do your research and you'll see that our Bill of Rights is rooted in Native American Iroquois law and tradition. Nowhere in history was everything in the Bill of Rights used as a source of governance, not even the Magna Carta.

You would be incorrect. Western society is indeed based on Judeo-Christianity. Everything we believe regarding right and wrong has its basis in Judeo-Christianity. We are steeped in it from birth, and history proves it at every turn.

Only non-believers, who believe in non-believing, think otherwise.

Our Constitutional Rights are endowed upon us by our "Creator". The term is used solely as a means to not specify a religion and to ensure no one "Church" has a step up on others by being mentioned. The "Creator", regardless religion, is singular and a supreme being. That spells "God" to me. You can call him what you like, but it is the same supreme being.

[KitchenKitten99]

Without getting into reading all the lengthy posts/replies...

This is being fought locally - legally. Kind of.

One of the guys I helped campaign for local state representative is leading the lawsuit. The only problem is that no churches surrounding the area want to enter in as the plaintiff. There is an attorney who has several MN Supreme Court civil rights wins under his belt who will represent. Just gotta get at least one church on board. They are too timid and scared from what Don tells me.