PDA

View Full Version : "What is it about socialists, that makes them despise religion?"



megimoo
04-25-2009, 06:35 PM
Obama's Ungodly Youth Corp

What is it about socialists, that makes them despise religion? It seems that whenever a Socialists wins an election that gives them the ultimate power in a country, the first thing they try to do is remove religion as a force in that society. Oh it's not done in a way that the people realize it is happening. No, it's more covert and insidious in the way it is brought about. Usually it's done right under the noses of the very people who claim their ruler would never do such a thing. In America, religious persecution by the government has been brewing for a few generations.

The shot over the bow of religion was fired by Hugo Black, a former Ku Klux Klan member appointed to the Supreme Court by FDR. In 1947 when Hugo Black wrote the majority opinion for Everson vs. Board of Education., he reinterpreted the meaning of the First Amendment of the Constitution by taking completely out of context a phrase used by President Thomas Jefferson in a letter he wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. By using the phrase “separation of church and state,” in his opinion, Justice Black limited the religious liberty of all Americans. Now after 62 years of constant government attack, Obama and Congress are about to take their godless agenda forward by disallowing college students the right to worship as they please.

Americans have been told that this is just a simple expansion of the national service programs. However, if the he truth is to be told, Obama plans to build a million youth movement, who's members will be denied their right to religious freedom. Sponsored by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy a Democrat from NY, the Bill, HR 1388, was passed by the House of Representatives where both Republicans and Democrats voted 321-105 in favor. The Bill moved to the Senate where it passed by a vote of 79 to 19 with one present vote, and on April 21st Obama signed it into law.

The “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act” known or GIVE, is also known as the, “The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, an Act to reauthorize and reform the national service laws." This Bill will for all intents and purpose combine JFK's Peace Corps and WJC's AmeriCorps with Obamas new “Youth Brigades”. The idea is to create a volunteer movement among the junior high, high school, and College aged youth of America. This movement will be a precursor of his larger plan for a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded as the U.S. military. Obama’s plan begins with his requirement that anyone receiving school loans or who volunteer to serve at least three months as part of the brigade.

This all sounds fairley innocuous until you read the part of the bill that forbids any student in the program to participate in religious activities. The exact wording from section 132A of HR 1388 is as follows. ”Engaging in religious instruction, conducting worship services, providing instruction as part of a program that includes mandatory religious instruction or worship, constructing or operating facilities devoted to religious instruction or worship, maintaining facilities primarily or inherently devoted to religious instruction or worship, or engaging in any form of proselytization. “ In layman's terms that means, All members of the Corp are not allowed to no attend church services of any kind and never are they to witness about their faith to others.

My biggest frustration in seeing this the law come about, is how the Republicans did not even attempted to stop or change this religiously poisonous Bill. So with a stroke of his pen, Obama has told God to leave our children alone. Hitler did a similar thing when he told the church to worry about God and that he would take care of the people. Now we could argue about whether Obama is a communist or if he is a fascist, personally I do not see too much difference between the two philosophy's. Eventually both destroy the will of men, because politically, both ideologies strive for an omnipotent, totalitarian, bureaucratic state. They also attempt to replace God with the state by contending that that man exists for the State. Economically, communism abolishes private property, while fascism maintains it, but nationalizes the most important industries and the principal banks. (sound familiar?) When it come to religion, communism attempts to destroy all forms of religion. Fascism on the other hand could care less about most religions, but will ands must destroy Christianity, because it is the only religion who's devout followers have proved through the years they will not reject their God.



http://www.norcalblogs.com/post_scripts/2009/04/obamas_ungodly_youth_core.html#more

AlmostThere
04-25-2009, 10:08 PM
In the same section of code, actually the first two prohibited activities are as follows:

(1) Attempting to influence legislation.
(2) Organizing or engaging in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes.

Join Obama's little Nazi party and throw away the U.S. Constitution. :mad:

Constitutionally Speaking
04-26-2009, 08:48 AM
This explains it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c

Water Closet
04-26-2009, 09:03 AM
If one looks at the full text...


‘‘(a) PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES.—An approved national service
position under this subtitle may not be used for the following
activities:‘‘
(1) Attempting to influence legislation.
‘‘(2) Organizing or engaging in protests, petitions, boycotts,
or strikes.
‘‘(3) Assisting, promoting, or deterring union organizing.
‘‘(4) Impairing existing contracts for services or collective
bargaining agreements.
‘‘(5) Engaging in partisan political activities, or other activities
designed to influence the outcome of an election to Federal
office or the outcome of an election to a State or local public
office.
‘‘(6) Participating in, or endorsing, events or activities that
are likely to include advocacy for or against political parties,
political platforms, political candidates, proposed legislation,
or elected officials.
‘‘(7) Engaging in religious instruction, conducting worship
services, providing instruction as part of a program that
includes mandatory religious instruction or worship, constructing
or operating facilities devoted to religious instruction
or worship, maintaining facilities primarily or inherently
devoted to religious instruction or worship, or engaging in
any form of proselytization, consistent with section 132.
‘‘(8) Consistent with section 132, providing a direct benefit
to any—
‘‘(A) business organized for profit;
‘‘(B) labor union;
‘‘(C) partisan political organization;
‘‘(D) nonprofit organization that fails to comply with
the restrictions contained in section 501(c) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, except that nothing in this paragraph
shall be construed to prevent participants from
engaging in advocacy activities undertaken at their own
initiative; and
‘‘(E) organization engaged in the religious activities
described in paragraph (7), unless the position is not used
to support those religious activities.
‘‘(9) Providing abortion services or referrals for receipt of
such services.
‘‘(10) Conducting a voter registration drive or using Corporation
funds to conduct a voter registration drive.
‘‘(11) Carrying out such other activities as the Corporation
may prohibit.
(emphasis mine)

It's clear that the bill prohibits anyone using his/her position in the organization to perform those activities and does not constrain anyone from doing any of those things on his/her own time. This kind of crap, from a blogger who doesn't know the difference between "who's" and "whose" illustrates the paranoia, the misinformation, the deliberate deceit, and the hysteria which the whacky-whacky right has taken over from the looney-looney left since the election.

djones520
04-26-2009, 09:55 AM
If one looks at the full text...


(emphasis mine)

It's clear that the bill prohibits anyone using his/her position in the organization to perform those activities and does not constrain anyone from doing any of those things on his/her own time. This kind of crap, from a blogger who doesn't know the difference between "who's" and "whose" illustrates the paranoia, the misinformation, the deliberate deceit, and the hysteria which the whacky-whacky right has taken over from the looney-looney left since the election.

While I disagree with you on a lot of stuff, your dead on here. A lot of people are going to make us look as bad as the DUmmies over the next four years...

AlmostThere
04-26-2009, 10:25 PM
Let's see how long 'on company time' lasts. With the exception of the last 100 days, the changes we've seen in this country were incremental. We'd step out on a slippery slope and before too long, we're sliding full speed, head first. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

noonwitch
04-27-2009, 08:45 AM
Let's see how long 'on company time' lasts. With the exception of the last 100 days, the changes we've seen in this country were incremental. We'd step out on a slippery slope and before too long, we're sliding full speed, head first. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.



In the 80s, when Coleman Young was Mayor of Detroit, Ze'ev Chavets commented in his book (Devil's Night And Other True Stories Of Detroit) about a city employee signing business letters on city stationery "yours in Christ". Whatever one might say about Coleman, he was a liberal and was even accused by HUAC of communism.

In my job in the state government, I have attended staff meetings that opened with christian prayer, I have observed various coworkers who have items in their offices that have religious sayings and scipture verses printed on them, and many who read the Bible at their desks. A now-retired coworker used to hold Bible studies in the conference room at lunchtime once a week. These activities span 3 administrations-2 have been liberal dems (Blanchard and Granholm) and one was Engler.

We send foster kids to a church-sponsored camp for them every summer. If they didn't have this program for our kids (who frequently have behavior problems and need extra adult supervision for this type of thing), our kids wouldn't go to camp. We don't send our muslim kids, however, and the camp people agree to keep their lessons at a non-sectarian (but christian) basis.

When I file petitions at court intake, a county government office, I also see many religious items in the worker's offices. Especially common in both the court offices and my office are things by TD Jakes, as there is a big church here that is affiliated with his.

I wouldn't worry too much about this. People talk about religion all the time at work, either in personal or other terms. Anyone who works in a government agency that is about helping people knows that church programs and agencies back us up. We know that lots of people who don't meet government criteria for help (single, homeless people, drug addicts, etc.) would starve to death if it wasn't for groups like the Salvation Army. Incidentally, the SA never gives up on junkies, either. They will take them back in their programs again and again.

A lot of liberals think that the government is the social safety net, or that it should be the only one. The government can never be that comprehensive. Churches are out in the community where the people are, in ways the government can't and shouldn't be.

FlaGator
04-27-2009, 09:10 AM
The idea is to create a volunteer movement among the junior high, high school, and College aged youth of America. This movement will be a precursor of his larger plan for a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded as the U.S. military. Obama’s plan begins with his requirement that anyone receiving school loans or who volunteer to serve at least three months as part of the brigade.

I am not seeing where there is a denial of religious liberties when the organization will be volunteer based. If don't like the requirements then don't volunteer and apply for only private student loans. If you associate with an organization you must abide by that organizations rules.

Water Closet
04-27-2009, 09:19 AM
I am not seeing where there is a denial of religious liberties when the organization will be volunteer based. If don't like the requirements then don't volunteer and apply for only private student loans. If you associate with an organization you must abid by that organizations rules.

In addition to your point, FlaGator, the amendment to the regulation prohibits religious, corporate marketing, and other activities when the individeual is acting as part of his/her role in the organization. Such clauses, I would think, are pretty standard for government positions and, in no way, prohibit an individual from practicing or even prostelyzing for his/her faith when not functioning in such a capacity.

Rebel Yell
04-27-2009, 10:02 AM
In addition to your point, FlaGator, the amendment to the regulation prohibits religious, corporate marketing, and other activities when the individeual is acting as part of his/her role in the organization. Such clauses, I would think, are pretty standard for government positions and, in no way, prohibit an individual from practicing or even prostelyzing for his/her faith when not functioning in such a capacity.

Look whose talking now. ;):D

Water Closet
04-27-2009, 11:41 AM
Look whose talking now. ;):D

Huh? Whose on first? ;) :D

FlaGator
04-27-2009, 11:45 AM
Huh? Whose on first? ;) :D

Actually Whose' up in the booth calling the game.

AlmostThere
04-27-2009, 01:03 PM
Noon,

I'm sure there are instances where there is an apparent acceptance but there are also a number of cases that worry this secular mind.

Obama's pick to be chief legal counsel at State, Harold Koh, a self-described advocate of trans-nationalism would like to see international law intertwined into U.S. law. He doesn't believe Americans should only be governed by laws created by their elected officials. If international restrictions were allowed to be imposed, I think we can easily see that Christian speech would be restricted. A Christian minister standing at the pulpit saying that homosexuality was an abomination would suddenly be hate speech. This is already occurring in England.

There are numerous examples where reasonable religious expression has been quashed.

Two college students in Alameda, CA threatened with suspension for praying on Campus for a sick professor.
http://www.insidebayarea.com/timesstar/localnews/ci_12110179?source=rss

The SCOTUS will decide soon if a football coach can kneel down or even bow his head while his team engages in a prayer. I believe it was in 62 that the SCOTUS basically said school employees couldn't lead religious activities. But a team has a prayer before engaging in a sport where someone could be injured, and the coach is banned from kneeling with his team or even bowing his head?

I'm not a religious person but I think people who are religious have had their religious rights curtailed more and more over the last 50 years.

Does your legal mind see 2 students praying for a sick professor or a coach bowing his head as establishment of religion? This layman's mind can't but I can see this as prohibiting the free exercise thereof.