Boehner reacts to Falwell death
House Republican Leader John Boehner of West Chester issued the following statement last last night on the death of Rev. Jerry Falwell:
"Today, millions of Americans are mourning the loss of Jerry Falwell, who helped ignite a conservative revolution in the 1970s and 1980s that continues today. His reaction to the high-tax policies of the late seventies helped chart a course that emphasized freedom and patriotism, and sparked a return to family-oriented American values. His legacy will live on through his greatest achievement, the establishment of Liberty University. My thoughts and prayers are with the Falwell family and staff."
22 Comments:
at 12:11 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:34 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:46 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3:11 PM, May 16, 2007 
thirstycoon said...
-
-
at 3:56 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4:50 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4:51 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 7:47 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:22 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:51 PM, May 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:42 PM, May 22, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:51 AM, May 23, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 7:03 PM, May 23, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:04 PM, May 23, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:24 PM, May 23, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:36 AM, May 24, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:18 AM, May 24, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:22 AM, May 24, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4:11 PM, May 24, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:37 PM, May 24, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:41 PM, May 24, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:00 AM, May 25, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*Nothing like separation of church and state !
We find it interesting that the dead man is not noted for bringing lost individuals to God, instead noted for using religion for political gain !
PATHETIC !
HAD ENOUGH, VOTE DEMOCRAT 2007 !
We shall hear:
Blessed are those that recognize a wolf in sheep's clothing !
John your buddy is calling !
Here are two events -- try to guess which one the Enquirer thinks is noteworthy enough to mention:
John Boehner sucks up to Falwell's right-wing followers;
--OR--
John Boehner tells a lie on the floor of the House.
In case you're not sure, the correct response is the first one. Think about that: The House minority leader can actually say things that are blatantly false on the floor of the House, and his hometown paper will simply look the other way.
Outrageous. Those at the Enquirer who enable these Republican liars should be ashamed of themselves.
Jerry and John - both for freedom, as long as what one wants to do agrees with their values.
Separation of church and state exists only in the minds of liberals and in a letter that is hundreds of years old. It does not exist in the Constitution.
That being said, I think that Boehner saying "millions" of Americans are in mourning over this is a bit of an exaggeration.
People criticize Falwell for squashing the first amendment but the same people want to restrict his exercise of freedom of speech and religion.
Welcome to the Church of Liberalism and our doctrine of hate and hypocrisy.
"...Separation of church and state exists only in the minds of liberals and in a letter that is hundreds of years old. It does not exist in the Constitution...."
Typical wRong wingnut whacko spewing the elephant dung propaganda !
The 1st. Amendment, whacko !
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.
Key word "respecting" !
re·spect (rĭ-spěkt') Pronunciation Key
tr.v. re·spect·ed, re·spect·ing, re·spects
To feel or show deferential regard for; esteem.
To avoid violation of or interference with: respect the speed limit.
To relate or refer to; concern.
n.
A feeling of appreciative, often deferential regard; esteem. See Synonyms at regard.
The state of being regarded with honor or esteem.
Willingness to show consideration or appreciation.
respects Polite expressions of consideration or deference: pay one's respects.
A particular aspect, feature, or detail: In many respects this is an important decision.
PATHETIC !
HAD ENOUGH, VOTE DEMOCRAT 2007 !
Reverend Daniel E. Pilarczyk definitely outshines Reverend Falwell, when he shields the Priests who molested children.
Bold person,
Show me where in the Constitution the phrase "separation of church and state" shows up. You can't, because it doesn't.
What you quoted me is the amendment that guarantees that there will be no government-established or sponsored religion. I already knew about that, but good job with that Google search.
Article 1 says nothing about "separation of church and state". That concept was the result of an inference made from a letter Thomas Jefferson sent to the Danbury Connecticut Baptist Association on January 1, 1802, responding to a letter written by the Danbury Baptist Association expressing concern about individual religious liberty and its place in the new nation at the time. In it he said that Congress would "make no law respecting an establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, 'thus building a wall of separation between church and state.'" It was there that the nation's concept of a "separation between church and state" was born.
Look it up for yourself. It's not hard to find.
Liberals and whackos (key word there) such as yourself have taken the CONCEPT of "separation of church and state" as initiated by Thomas Jefferson and have twisted it into a literal interpretation of the first Amendment.
Next time you want to get all high and mighty and try to "educate" someone, you may want to know your subject matter a little better.
Talk about "PATHETIC".
a return to family-oriented American values?
Boehner - you're a sick puppy if you think teaching hate is an american value.
oh, but you really believe that!
"Liberals and whackos (key word there) such as yourself have taken the CONCEPT of "separation of church and state" as initiated by Thomas Jefferson and have twisted it into a literal interpretation of the first Amendment.
"
Ummm gee... Thomas Jefferson... wasn't he one of the guys who wrote the constituion... and ummm gee... the part "congress shall make no law establishing" is precisely the concept of "separation of church and state" that you say doesn't exist.
First you said it wasn't there... now you say it is.
Which is it? Nutjob.
*sigh*
Reading comprehension is not prevalent here.
Please go back and re-read what I wrote. Maybe then you will see why your post is so absurd.
"Maybe then you will see why your post is so absurd."
No more absurd than yours.. anyone can Wiki. Separation of church and state is the legal concept that grew out of the amendment in question and is precisely what the founding fathers intended. The government shall dictate no national religion.... therefore the government may not allow displays of religion on government property unless it allows all religions to use said government property for display. It is all or none... therefore it should be none... cause there are some whacko nutjob religions out there that would have crazy **** to display.
LOL
Sorry, it's not a legal concept.
Allowing a religious display isn't establishing (or "dictating" as you say) a religion, therefore the First Amendment technically doesn't apply. The twisted interpretation of fine people such as yourself, combined with the litigious society in which we live, has lead to your warped and ignorant views.
"Allowing a religious display isn't establishing (or "dictating" as you say) a religion"
If this is public property the display is on...ctually yes it is... unless you give equal time and space to every other religion and therein lies the problem.
There are numerous cases to back me up.... what backs up your contention... nothing.
Like must folks... you have no basis in fact.
No it's not. Your ignorance is precisely what caused the First Amendment to be hijacked and misinterpreted.
If Mark Mallory allows a Catholic group to put up a cross in front of City Hall, this does not mean that Cincinnati is establishing Catholicism as the official religion of the city.
If Ted Strickland allows a Jewish group to put up a Star of David in front of the statehouse, this does not mean that Ohio is establishing Judaism as the official religion of the state.
You seem to have forgotten from where the Founding Fathers came. England had a state-established religion, and they left the country because they were not free to exercise their own religious beliefs. When they wrote the Constitution, they wanted to guarantee that the government would not dictate what religion anyone could follow, nor would it establish a national religion. This is the basis for the First Amendment.
Erecting a religious display on public property neither establishes a national religion nor restricts anyone from freely exercising their own religion. The misinterpretation of the First Amendment due to an ignorance of the concept of separation of church and state has led to an attitude not of religious freedom, but of religious absence.
In addition to exposing your lack of knowledge and understanding in this area, you are also getting away from my original point - that the phrase "separation of church and state" appears nowhere in the US constitution. As that applies to the original post, the Bold Blogger inferred that John Boehner violated this non-existent clause by his speech. Not only did Boehner not violate any laws, he also did not violate the intent or the spirit of the First Amendment. His words do not establish a state-controlled religion, nor do they prohibit anyone from freely exercising their own religion.
The First Amendment does not prohibit religion in society. It does not prohibit public figures from being religious.
Please, please, get over your liberal misguided viewpoint and learn about this subject. Relying on media soundbites and the ACLU for constitutional law and history is flawed logic at best.
"Please, please, get over your liberal misguided viewpoint and learn about this subject."
Please get over your right wing nutjob interpretation of U.S. history... in case you hadn't noticed much of what is written into the Constitution comes from one Thomas Paine. Please read his opinion and views on religion and you might just understand where the founding fathers were coming from.
I know you right wingers don't like associating any of our countries history w/France... you yourself probably think french fries are actually from France but whatever... your interpretation of this principle is incorrect.
Paine went on to give his opinion of religion:
"I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.
But, lest it should be supposed that I believe in many other things in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work, declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not believing them.
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."
Please read the above... look at whats happening in current history... and become somewhat more objective and you might get it sir.
I'm not debating what Boehner said.. frankly I am not interested in anything Boehner has to say... the man is a death pusher... his wife has been a tobacco lobbyist and he has taken bribe checks from tobacco companies while he has been in congress.
What does Paine have to do with it? You're trying to convince everyone that the First Amendment means that the government can't allow any religious displays because it means they are establishing a national religion, or preventing people from worshiping as they want. You keep getting off topic in hopes of trying to make your warped views legit.
It's not going to work.
Newsflash - Cincinnati used to allow the KKK to erect a cross on Fountain Square. *yikes* I don't recall the city taking on "white power" as their official stance on race relations. They also allowed a Christian cross - yet there has been no decree associated with that indicating that all Cincinnati residents are required to become practicing Christians. (thankfully)
I still have yet to hear from anyone who can point out where the phrase "separation of church and state" appears in the Constitution. If you can't, then stop wasting everyone's time with your flawed arguments.
" still have yet to hear from anyone who can point out where the phrase "separation of church and state" appears in the Constitution."
I never said that the statement exists in exact words in the constitution. Quit trying to change the subject... you've been smoking crack too much. I said that "separation of church and state" is a political and legal concept derived from the "congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion".
Your statement regarding the KKK is irrelevant because that is precisely what I mean... equal access must be granted... in that case equal access was granted so problem solved/point is moot.
I think your reading comprehension is what is in question here.
"therefore the government may not allow displays of religion on government property unless it allows all religions to use said government property for display. It is all or none.."
I stated the above in a previous post... was it not understood?
ENDORSING one religion would mean that only one groups display was allowed.
Is this so hard to understand?
From Websters dictionary:
"separation of church and state
The principle that government must maintain an attitude of neutrality toward religion. Many view separation of church and state as required by the First Amendment. The First Amendment not only allows citizens the freedom to practice any religion of their choice, but also prevents the government from officially recognizing or favoring any religion.
"
"I still have yet to hear from anyone who can point out where the phrase "separation of church and state" appears in the Constitution. If you can't, then stop wasting everyone's time with your flawed arguments.
"
... and if you had any reading comprehension skills you'd notice that I never said the phrase exists in the constitution. I said the concept, principle whichever you want to call it was birted out of the first amendment. Doesn't matter if the exact words are there... the meaning is clear and the spirit of Thomas Paine and other Deists are within that amendment.
Nothing hard to understand about any of this to me... perhaps you should take a class in basic logic 101.
Oh, good grief.
Did you even bother to read anything I wrote? My first post on this subject pointed out that it doesn't exist, and the Bold Blogger tried to tell me it did. Get over yourself, anonymous dude. It's not all about you.
I would continue to point out how wrong you are, but I heard that a teacher in a public school said "God bless you" when one of her students sneezed, and I have to go to church now since apparently a national religion has just been established by the government. Oh, and can you believe that it says "In God We Trust" on all our money? I can't believe that I haven't been worshiping the national religion that's been established by this all along.
Good grief...
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home