It's not a date, so lets talk politics and religion...

[Gd5150]

The next President ought to 'test the powers of his office' by declaring 'Progressivism' to be a religion, and thus banned from influencing government or promoting their ideas in the public square.

The question is how does one define religion? One's beliefs based on faith? If this were the case, an argument can be made to keep the big bang, evolution, man made global whatever, all out of schools as none are proven, and none can truly be proven. So one must possess much faith in the "science" behind the theories. Is this faith considered religion? Of course not. Should these theories be taught in school? Of course they should. (with emphasis that they are theories)

But why not the history of religions. There are scientists that study the bible, the crucifixion, etc... Why should none of this be mentioned in the classroom? Does the Bible not require the same level of faith as the Big Bang. Mind you I happen to believe in the Big Bang because there is much supporting evidence that leads to it being the most logical explanation of the formation of our universe at this point. That's not to say the theory could'nt be totally different in 100 years when we have better telescopes and computers to further study the universe. To truly prove the theory though, one would need a time machine and decent camera.

So really the question is when does one's faith become religion? Why does the left get to define this? Why is one persons faith banned from public eduction, and not another's?

[Yorkshire pud]

Why does the left get to define this?

Oh? I wasn't aware that having a faith was necessarily political? But if it were; why is it 'left'? Do you actually know what 'left' means politically generally, but in this context; faith?

[PB the Deplorable]

The question is how does one define religion?...

I'm just pointing out that if there are no longer checks and balances, if separation of powers and the consent of the governed are out the window, if Congress and the courts no longer matter, then let's get an American back in office to 'fundamentally change' the country by returning our country to we the people.

Those we hire to represent our interests, to manage the bureaucracy, to make sure the laws are enforced and carried out should not instead be implementing their agendas and stealing our Liberty. 

50 years in the wrong direction is long enough.  Since we have now arrived at the point where a President is no longer limited by laws, courts, or Congress, let's elect one who will simply declare Liberalism a religion and thus not to be mixed with government. 

When the purge begins, we tell then that elections have consequences.  If they take back the House and Senate, our President can tell them he represents those who didn't vote.  Whoever doesn't like it can expect to be spied on and dealing with the IRS for the duration - but any record of it will be hidden or destroyed.  The road map back to sanity is clear

[Hautex]

Good-a-place-as-any...lol
    Ever get something stuck in your head that kept getting ideas thrown in that reinforced (complicated?) it? In another post, I told of my book idea that involved mysterious disappearances through history and the age old battle between good and evil. If there were only a finite number of souls created at the beginning that had to be eternally split and diluted to be sure all humans got at least some part of a soul, good and evil had to orchestrate mass simultaneous deaths to create 2 pure, strong souls to lead the next epic, generational, good vs evil battle, 1 on each side.
    Well, a friend of mine is a Jehovah witness and mentioned that only 144,000 souls would be selected to enter heaven. Put that together with my book idea and that number could actually be the number of originally created pure souls.... kinda fits...
    Now that this tidbit is put somewhere safe(?) on paper, I can sleep a little easier at night. Just for the record, I believe that different religions were created because of the environmental input in focusing, and keeping, our attention of what is right and just. Severe conditions require an additional severity in rules and tenets to ensure survival where temperate and fruitful climates can exist with more serenity in the doctrine. If you made it through to here, you may have the next piece of the puzzle?... Peace be on you! (and they all replied "peace on you too")