Diamond was the only Pokemon game I bought never completed; I stopped at the Elite Four. After beating Red, Yellow, Silver, Crystal, Sapphire, Emerald, and Fire Red, the very process of playing a Pokemon game got tiresome. Sure, it took me over a decade to get tired of it, but it happened.
This is true. It took me a couple of years just to start playing again, but I enjoy it at the moment so I'm good.
@Gunter: Imagine being in a city full of these fuckers all weekend.Good riddance! Fucking up my commute and my hanging out with their yelling! I love the guy interviewing. These people make me angry and sad.
I made a really bad decision tonight. Seriously guys. Going to a bar when you have an eight AM class is never legit. Even if you think, "Oh, it's just Model UN, what's the worst that could happen?"
Bury Obamacare with Kennedy? That's just mean and disrespectful!
ARG! Fascism and Socialism are completely different and America is supposed to be secular, Jesus is not the king of America! We don't have fucking kings! These people make me so fucking angry! GAAH!
Seriously people, do some fucking research before you protest. You all just sound like complete and total asshats.
The funny thing is, I "agree" with up to 1/8th of what they're saying. Why I say "agree," is because I don't think they really care about those things. For instance, they say they're against government corruption. Well, I'm against government corruption! But where were they during the Bush Administration? Etc...
tl;dr These kinds of people are completely insane and should be dealt with as one would the insane (asylums, hospitals, or however we deal with them now).
Just an FYI, America never has been secular, nor is it likely to become that way in our lifetime. Not discriminating based on religion and being secular are too very different ideas.
Just an FYI, America never has been secular, nor is it likely to become that way in our lifetime. Not discriminating based on religion and being secular are too very different ideas.
The government of the United States of America has been and should forever be secular. The citizens, however, is a different matter.
The government of the United States of America has been and should forever be secular.
Show where it says it's secular.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That's not secular, that's just "there will be no national religion and no discrimination based on religion." Religion and politics have been tied together in this country for a very long time.
You know, the USA is pretty silly. On one hand they say "Church and State separate", and on the other hand they say "In God we trust", which then gets printed in clear text above the White House on their money.
EDIT: Gedavids, there's such a thing as an edit button, don't forget it.
You know, the USA is pretty silly. On one hand they say "Church and State separate", and on the other hand they say "In God we trust", which then gets printed in clear text above the White House on their money.
My point is that it doesn't say "church and state separate." People have taken "no national religion" to mean "church and state separate." That's not the way it is, nor is religion being involved with politics a relatively recent occurrence.
EDIT: I swear some one posted something before I posted that and then deleted it before I hit submit.
The United States Government is a secular government. The definition of secular being:
Secularity (adjective form secular) is the state of being separate from religion. Despite occasional confusion, secularism is not necessarily synonymous with atheism nor agnosticism, it is instead the belief that religion and authority should be separate.
My point is that it doesn't say "church and state separate." People have taken "no national religion" to mean "church and state separate." That's not the way it is, nor is religion being involved with politics a relatively recent occurrence.
There is, however, an important distinction to make between politics and law.
Whatever, I don't think we're gonna agree on this. In my opinion, religion does drive politics, which in turn drives government, which makes government not secular. If you want to disagree you're more than welcome, but I'm done arguing.
EDIT:
There is, however, an important distinction to make between politics and law.
Yes, but politics create laws. Example, the ban many states have on same sex marriage.
My point is that it doesn't say "church and state separate." People have taken "no national religion" to mean "church and state separate." That's not the way it is, nor is religion being involved with politics a relatively recent occurrence.
I wasn't talking to you at all. Just making my personal statement that is merely indirectly related to your banter. I'm not arguing against or for you, no need to dance.
EDIT: I swear some one posted something before I posted that and then deleted it before I hit submit.
And this excuses you from collapsing your own 2 minute differing posts, why? Said mystical post no longer is visible to the forum. You should've hit the edit button regardless because you had barely posted.
In my opinion, religion does drive politics, which in turn drives government, which makes government not secular.
That is the exact problem. America was founded as a secular nation and as time progressed, the country became more religious. Religion infected the government like a cancer, and now look at it.
Whatever, I don't think we're gonna agree on this. In my opinion, religion does drive politics, which in turn drives government, which makes government not secular. If you want to disagree you're more than welcome, but I'm done arguing.
Let's put it this way. In my opinion, political parties are the core politics, which in turn drive government. Does this make our government a party based government? Political parties are never formally defined in any U.S. Government document. Every United State political party is a private organization, which by definition makes them not part of our government (no matter what they would want you to think otherwise).
The argument is exactly analog to the argument of religion and United States government.
You are free to disagree with me, but I have essentially every American Government scholar, textbook, and paper on my side.
EDIT: And furthermore, if you think that I am deluding myself, then you are just playing ignorant of the fact that my statements are more precise than your own. I'd rather not lump two separate entities into a single bag so particular agendas can be pushed under the guise of our Constitution.
That is the exact problem. America was founded as a secular nation and as time progressed, the country became more religious. Religion infected the government like a cancer, and now look at it.
That was a really long time ago.
Don't get me wrong here, I don't like the involvement of religion in our government, but it is there. If you don't think of secular is a binary concept, I think we're more secular than a lot of middle eastern governments, but we're not totally secular either.
Let's put it this way. In my opinion, political parties are the core politics, which in turn drive government. Does this make our government a party based government? Political parties are never formally defined in any U.S. Government document. Every United State political party is a private organization, which by definition makes them not part of our government (no matter what they would want you to think otherwise).
You are free to disagree with me, but I have essentially every American Government scholar, textbook, and paper on my side.
And I do. If our elected officials, which write our laws, aren't our government than what is? The DMV?
EDIT: I swear some one posted something before I posted that and then deleted it before I hit submit.
Yeah, that was me; I had intended to post the same Wikipedia quote that Andrew did, but I decided it wasn't necessary, so I just removed my post.
In my opinion, religion does drive politics
Without a doubt.
which in turn drives government, which makes government not secular.
There is a lot of religious influence, but ultimately the way to judge whether or not the U.S. is secular is by the actions of the Supreme Court. I think those show that secularity is being upheld.
Nations like the U.K. do perfectly well without secularity anyway, though. State religion tends to be pretty good at producing atheists.
The officials aren't our government; the laws they make are. I'm not sure how you cannot understand this very fundamental idea.
I'm not a fucking poly sci major, this is news to me.
So our officials aren't our government, I think this argument is pretty much done then.
Before you posted, I redacted the statement as it was poorly worded and did not convey the proper meaning as I had intended.
EDIT: I'll rephrase. In every legal decision made by the elected officials, they have upheld the idea of secularity within the United States law. Some decisions may have been fueled by religious based opinions (Gay Marriage being a good example), but I would argue these do not overtly violate the secular boundary. There is two realms within the United States government; the politicking which is not formally defined by our legal system, and the specific legal decisions made by our governing body.
Before you posted, I redacted the statement as it was poorly worded and did not convey the proper meaning as I had intended.
I think I get the point now, this whole argument is a disagreement of terms. If I accept that our officials aren't our government as you say, then there isn't much to argue about now. My whole argument is that the religion affects our officials.
EDIT: I'll rephrase. In every legal decision made by the elected officials, they have upheld the idea of secularity within the United States law. Some decisions may have been fueled by religious based opinions (Gay Marriage being a good example), but I would argue these do not overtly violate the secular boundary. There is two realms within the United States government; the politicking which is not formally defined by our legal system, and the specific legal decisions made by our governing body.
I see, alright. So you're arguing that all things considered we're pretty secular. I think we try to be secular but religion creeps in, perhaps more than it should.
About 40% of all the students in all of my classes have some sort of hacking cough and 80% of them are disgustingly unhygienic. I am going to contract it soon.
About 40% of all the students in all of my classes have some sort of hacking cough and 80% of them are disgustingly unhygienic. I am going to contract it soon.
Comments
._.
Now I'm fucked.
ARG! Fascism and Socialism are completely different and America is supposed to be secular, Jesus is not the king of America! We don't have fucking kings! These people make me so fucking angry! GAAH!
Seriously people, do some fucking research before you protest. You all just sound like complete and total asshats.
tl;dr These kinds of people are completely insane and should be dealt with as one would the insane (asylums, hospitals, or however we deal with them now).
Great example of religion with politics.
EDIT: Gedavids, there's such a thing as an edit button, don't forget it.
EDIT: I swear some one posted something before I posted that and then deleted it before I hit submit.
The United States Government is a secular government. The definition of secular being:
Whatever, I don't think we're gonna agree on this. In my opinion, religion does drive politics, which in turn drives government, which makes government not secular. If you want to disagree you're more than welcome, but I'm done arguing.
EDIT: Yes, but politics create laws. Example, the ban many states have on same sex marriage.
The argument is exactly analog to the argument of religion and United States government.
You are free to disagree with me, but I have essentially every American Government scholar, textbook, and paper on my side.
EDIT: And furthermore, if you think that I am deluding myself, then you are just playing ignorant of the fact that my statements are more precise than your own. I'd rather not lump two separate entities into a single bag so particular agendas can be pushed under the guise of our Constitution.
Don't get me wrong here, I don't like the involvement of religion in our government, but it is there. If you don't think of secular is a binary concept, I think we're more secular than a lot of middle eastern governments, but we're not totally secular either. And I do. If our elected officials, which write our laws, aren't our government than what is? The DMV?
Nations like the U.K. do perfectly well without secularity anyway, though. State religion tends to be pretty good at producing atheists.
So our officials aren't our government, I think this argument is pretty much done then.
EDIT: I'll rephrase. In every legal decision made by the elected officials, they have upheld the idea of secularity within the United States law. Some decisions may have been fueled by religious based opinions (Gay Marriage being a good example), but I would argue these do not overtly violate the secular boundary. There is two realms within the United States government; the politicking which is not formally defined by our legal system, and the specific legal decisions made by our governing body.
I'd say we mostly agree.
And I really need to get back to work. :P
Note: I don't actually think that's going to stop me getting sick, but OJ is tasty and it won't hurt.