Link

-- anon (@ .), October 19, 1999

Answers

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

Sadly and tragically, this nation has renounced the Christian principles upon which it was founded. Be not deceived, good friends. God will not be mocked. If He withholds His presence from this nation and leaves us to our own devices, we are indeed in deep trouble. And I believe that time is at hand.

Apparently this guy doesn't believe in the separation of church and state. I hope he's not a sherrif anywhere near where I live.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), October 20, 1999.

More real cheery news. Gotta stock up on barf bags.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), October 20, 1999.

Dancr, Where do you find this separation of church and state besides the Soviet charter? I keep hearing of it referred to and would just love to see it once.

-- Patrick (pmchenry@gradall.com), October 20, 1999.

Patrick, I believe it was the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that established the seperation of church and state. The Soviet version was to kill the priests.

-- Lobo (atthelair@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

The Soviets also bulldozed most of the churches.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), October 20, 1999.

Sounds like the guy's bent on creating his own army. Or maybe he just needs a refill on his RX. Either way, I think he's on the wrong side of the cage...

-- Gia (laureltree7@hotmail.com), October 20, 1999.

Lobo, That's the problem... you believe it's there with the rest of our countrymen; but I assure you it is not. We want the congresscritters to obey the constitution, but apparently none of us really knows what's in the thing, (save a few million). There is also no provision for many other programs we all grew up with, and take for granted, but if the .govs were confined to the constitutional cage as they should be, the federal budget would be 20% of what it is today, go figure...

-- Patrick (pmchenry@gradall.com), October 20, 1999.

The phrase "separation of church and state" does NOT appear in the constitution, or Bill of rights.

this phrase has been used by the "liberal court and media" since 1947 when our Supreme Court had to find this phrase in a PRIVATE LETTER written by President Jefferson to the Dansbury Baptists around 1804.

Have we been DUMBED DOWN and are we CONDITIONED YET?

The founding fathers had places to put their BIBLES while the were in legislation. It's now in the basement..."Out of sight, out of mind"

-- eyes wide open (djwolf@lanset.com), October 20, 1999.

dancr, don't be brainwashed by the socialist/humanist types seeking to destroy this country and fill their own pockets. separation of church and state was intended as protection for the church so that it doesn't become "governmentized." this sheriff would fit right in with our founding fathers in using god and country in the same sentence and owning a gun.

he is right. we have forgotten our roots. we have become so rotten (at the govt level) and so complacent (at the sheeple level) i can't believe it. we have leaders that allow/promote the murder of unborn children by sticking scissors in their little necks and sucking their brains out so they're dead but their bodies are in good shape so that the abortion industry can not only make money from the abortion but can also sell their body parts to the biologics manufacturers or researchers. we develop seed sterilizers so we can keep people from growing food from their own seeds. we allow the worst filth to fill the television airwaves. we target kids as the next generation of purchasers for tobacco, alcohol, drugs, and pornography and then wonder what is wrong with our children. we have a country full of policiticans who call themselves leaders who are selling our country out daily to the highest global bidder so they can all assure their seat in the global govt when it happens. plus much more. and you are worried about the separation of church and state. as the bible says, in the last days, "what is evil will be called good, and what is good will be called evil."

:-) i think i must be pms.

-- tt (cuddluppy@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

Correct, the phrase "separation of church and state" came from Jefferson. (Well, actually he compared it to 'erecting a wall between church and state')

That separation is based on the 1st Amendment, to wit: "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."

Interestingly, Washington himself said the United States was not, nor was it ever intended to be, a "Christian nation." The quote is in the Treaty of Tripoly.

Now, irregardless of our dear sheriff's mistaken beliefs, what does his letter mean to you? Is this a good idea, or merely more evidence that people in power like the idea of staying there? If you had received Mr. Schwiesow's letter in your mailbox, would you respond to it? For this, assume you either live in Sioux County, Iowa, or that your own sheriff has done the same thing.

And for extra credit, answer the same question if the letter had instead cited the Islamic, Jewish, atheist, Buddist, Taoist, Hindu, Wiccan, Yoruba, Baha'i, or even satanic principles that the country was founded on.

-- harl (harlanquin@aol.hell), October 20, 1999.

Dear Ashton and Leska,

Which is it this time,, Ashton or Leska??

-- SomeoneWhos (Gotta@Know.com), October 20, 1999.

There goes dancr again...upset when the word "Christian" is used by anyone. A couple of weeks ago she attacked a post of mine in which I innocently said that when I helped someone at WalMart to choose her supplies, she later said that she knew by my kindness that I was a Christian. I did not leave out or denigrate Jews in this simple recounting, yet dancr wrote vehemently that I had done so! When I tried to correct her misapprehension by describing my life with a Jewish family, in which I even instigated the Bat Mitzvah of the child , studied with her, and said the Mother's Blessing over the Friday evening meal, complete with candles, wine and Challah, she then wrote again to say, "Oh, NOW you try to include Jews..." or someething to that effect.

What dancr is doing here is the same. She doesn't care about the separation of church and state: she is simply saying, "Do not call this a Christian nation, or say it was founded on Christian beliefs. Say it is a Judaeo-Christian nation and I will accept it."

Dancr, stop being so terribly sensitive and defensive, and realize that you are not being excluded, nor are any Jews, when someone uses these phrases!

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), October 20, 1999.

the last time there wasn't a seperation between church and state it was called the Dark Ages.

-- theletterz (theletterz@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

This sheriff was NOT talking about merging or in any co-mingling church and state! It is way off the mark for people to be commenting on the separation of church and state in response to this sheriff's suggestion that he may need the help of legally armed citizens if things go south!!! Get off the anti-church kick here and you might appreciate what this man said. A thread a good while ago about a sheriff (maybe the same one?) found people responding favorably to his intent.

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), October 20, 1999.

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

Patrick, your question was answered already by lobo and harl, so I will not repeat, it here.

Elaine: I believe you have me at least partially confused with one of the forum regulars who goes by the name "a mom," who has occasionally joined in various conversations in order to request that people who seem to be making exclusive statements honoring just christians to please extend their compliments just a little bit to also include jews. I would not at all characterize these requests on the part of "a mom" as being what you called "vehement," but as extremely accommodating.

I did also once comment to someone, in a one liner post, that their religion does not have a corner on caring and compassion, because they seemed to be stating that it did. I can't find that thread at the moment, because I sometimes don't keep track of my one liners.

As far as I can recall, this is the only other time when I have ever taken issue with anyone's trumpeting of their religion. Most people here will acknowledge that it comes up plenty more times than I have taken it upon myself to mention anything about it. I have only done so when the speaker specifically disqualifies others from participation in society or honor.

Normally, I don't bother getting involved when folks go off on these self-congratulatory spiels (which happens quite a lot, actually). However, I have recently started to try just these few times to gently persuade folks to tone down the rhetoric, because in times of extreme stress, it is quite easy to become a victim of a zealot of any persuasion, not just Christians. There are already quite enough religious wars going on at any given moment. We don't really need for more to be added during the confusion that may come from Y2K.

My first post on this thread is in this light. This sheriff gives me the distinct impression that he's itching to round up a posse to go out herEtic hunting. Thus... my comment. And yes, a wall between church and state certainly would be most welcome in this situation. Call me sensitive, but I'd just prefer not to hear my sheriff rounding up the county's concealed weapon holders under a religious banner.

Elaine: You say, above, that I call for a Judeo-Christian nation, rather than a Christian nation. Apparently, I could use some big help with my writing skills, because that is actually the exact opposite of what I meant to say. I invite anyone to read what I actually said, there, and please help me to express myself better. I'm not being facetious. I really do believe that I did a bad job in that post, because even Diane chimed in with "Dancr, huh?"

It is not true that I get upset when the word "Christian" is used by anyone. I believe there are only two other threads where I have come anywhere close to commenting about religion of any kind (not just Christianity). The first is one in which I noted that there is a high proportion of creationists among those who "get it" about Y2K (a compliment to creationists, in my eyes). The other such thread is the first one that I started myself, in which I explore the fact that many pollies paint the lot of us with the broad brush of apocalyptic doomseekers, a tendency which I do not recognize in myself. Correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe that I have spoken negatively of Christians, or any other specific religion in any of these posts.

As a quick mental exercise, please rewrite this sheriff's letter, substituting the words Moslem and Allah, and see if it doesn't send a chill down your spine. (No disrespect to the believers of Islam intended.)

I sincerely believe that it is you who needs to be less sensitive. It is legitimate for me to complain about this sheriff's mixing of religion with his duties to impartially protect all of his constituents. It's quite discouraging for me to know that someone as generally enlightened as you (which I know about from your many excellent posts on this forum) can have such a big blind spot on this issue.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), October 20, 1999.

A Sheriff's Letter To Concealed Weapons Permit Holders

A Well-Regulated Militia
From a Letter in July to Concealed Weapons Permit Holders in Sioux County, Iowa,
by Jim R. Schwiesow, County sheriff
Harper's magazine, November, 1999.

Dear Concealed Weapons Permit Holder:

These are troubling times. I personally believe that the potential exists for some very trying, perhaps even catastrophic, events to come to pass during the next few years, bringing about lawlessness of a magnitude unprecedented in our memory. And I strongly suspect this may happen within the next six to twelve months.

One would have to be totally deluded not to perceive the depravity present in our nation today. If a catastrophe actually does occur, we will certainly see the collapse of many state and federal agencies, and the fact is, the sheriff's office may need your help. We must be able to rely upon people who are solid, decent-of-character and law-abiding. As a holder of a permit to carry concealed weapons, you have been certified as morally and psychologically fit, and I have faith in your integrity.

I propose to put together a stand-by force composed solely of concealed weapon permit holders. This would be strictly a volunteer pool of trustworthy people that I could summon in dire times. I urge you to give serious consideration to this call. I have provided, with this letter, a short form of acceptance.

Sadly and tragically, this nation has renounced the Christian principles upon which it was founded. Be not deceived, good friends. God will not be mocked. If He withholds His presence from this nation and leaves us to our own devices, we are indeed in deep trouble. And I believe that time is at hand.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), October 20, 1999.

Dancr, it was someone who signed herself Dancr who said all of this in her hypersensitive post. Is there someone else here who does so? If it was not you, then I am sorry, but the tone seemed the same. No, I am not being too sensitive. If I were, I would have, but I have not ever once posted in hot response to the many nasty "hits" on this forum against Christians, and some of them have been really disgusting...nothing I would ever say to anyone about their faith, whatever it might be.

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), October 20, 1999.

Dancr, it was someone who signed herself Dancr who said all of this in her hypersensitive post. Is there someone else here who does so? If it was not you, then I am sorry, but the tone seemed the same. No, I am not being too sensitive. If I were, I would have, but I have not ever once posted in hot response to the many nasty "hits" on this forum against Christians, and some of them have been really disgusting...nothing I would ever say to anyone about their faith, whatever it might be.

You must have read the same post to which I refer, because you quote "a mom," who also was being very sensitive to an unintentional omission of Jews and all other good humans in my innocent statement.

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), October 20, 1999.

Thanks, Ashton & Leska, for putting the entire letter here for everyone to see. It demonstrates so clearly that he is NOT talking about using religious zealots, Christians, Jews or Muslims when he says simply that he may have to call upon CONCEALED WEAPONS PERMIT HOLDERS...obviously of ANY faith...who may be needed to protect their community! He only ENDS with saying we have gone far afield from the standards of our forefathers in national depravity, which no one on this forum has ever gainsaid, but rather, has agreed with wholeheartedly.

And if he said we'd gone far afield from Allah and our Muslim heritage, I would think he was nuts...this is not a Muslim nation, although there are many Muslims here. And would I be afraid if it were a call to carry arms for Muslims? You bet your bippy, because there are TWO types of Muslims: militantly fanatic right-wing believers in Jihad and killing off Jews and Christians, and decent, law-abiding, friendly Muslims who are almost as afraid of the others as most non-Muslims. No group can or should be characterized by its extremists. (I work with a lovely person whose family fled the regime of terror instituted in her country by these Muslim extremists!)

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), October 20, 1999.

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

This is where Elaine is claiming that I was being overly sensitive. If there was someplace else, please, quote or reference it. But, then, Elaine also considers it overly sensitive to witness a sheriff rounding up gun toting citizens to go out and protect his god from mocked. I think this kind of behavior is exactly what the founders of the United States had in mind when they wrote the First Ammendment to The Constitution.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), October 20, 1999.

Dancr, That's God is not mocked. (capital "G")

-- not talmud (wisdom@bible.God), October 20, 1999.

Thanks, "not talmud."

What I meant to say is that I do not consider it overly sensitive to comment negatively upon witnessing a sheriff rounding up gun toting civilians for the stated purpose of protecting his god from being mocked.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), October 20, 1999.

Dancr, you cannot really seriously read into what this sheriff said to mean that he is rounding up gun toting people to protect his belief system or God???? There is no logic in your conclusion, just as there was none in your personal opinion/assumption that in the linked post I was self-aggrandizing. Hostility abounds. Why?

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), October 21, 1999.

Look, Dancr's addy is available at her homepage!!!

-- take (it@offline.ladies), October 21, 1999.

Elaine says: Dancr, you cannot really seriously read into what this sheriff said to mean that he is rounding up gun toting people to protect his belief system or God???? Yes, I can and do read it that way. I am quite satisfied to let my words stand, and to allow readers to judge for themselves who is being hostile.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), October 22, 1999.