so does this mean a person can stand oon a particular platform and then when they get into power not carry out the proposals they were elected on?
It's official, Huckabee is a crackpot.
- Thread starter All Else Failed
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
so does this mean a person can stand oon a particular platform and then when they get into power not carry out the proposals they were elected on?
-
171Replies
-
4KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
But I draw the line when certain groups use that as an excuse to remove a donated bible that was on public display at a courthouse.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
Of course. It pretty much always happens.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
I don't think so, I may be unaware of one if it exists, though.
GraceAbounds
Well-Known Member
No President can fully carry out all of their desires (where they stand on issues). If they could, they'd be a King. All they can do is work and push towards where they stand on issues - so you vote for the guy who you think is going to 'push in the same direction' that you would 'push'.
thanks grace ,this is as all other things quite alien to us here.
here each party has a manifesto and it is that ,that we vote upon.that way we have the choice of changing things as the manifestos point out what each party will do if they have power.the queens speach says ,,,"my government will..."outlining the proposed changes etc..
we do ofcourse feel attracted to various politicians if they have charisma,but it is policy on which we vote
here each party has a manifesto and it is that ,that we vote upon.that way we have the choice of changing things as the manifestos point out what each party will do if they have power.the queens speach says ,,,"my government will..."outlining the proposed changes etc..
we do ofcourse feel attracted to various politicians if they have charisma,but it is policy on which we vote
GraceAbounds
Well-Known Member
Right and many people vote on policy here as well, but in our government it takes more than just our President to get things done. You have the Congress which is made up of the Senate and the House of Representatives. You have our judicial branch, the Supreme Court. You have state laws and federal laws. There is a lot more to making things happen than just the President saying 'it is so'. I'm sure it works along the same way in your government as well, no?
Which answer to no one and are not elected yet can make or break a law if they feel like it.
crickey! i shall enjoy watching all this unfold and have all your input to understand it ..itll make for a very interesting year,,thanks peeps
IntruderLS1
Active Member
You get worked up over the strangest stuff.
What do you think us crazy Christan's are going to do? BBQ atheists and force them to teach the Bible to your kids?
The Nation was in fact founded on a certain set of principals. What's the harm in reminding ourselves of them from time to time?
You demand your theory be taught in schools, and you don't even know your theory!!
What do you think us crazy Christan's are going to do? BBQ atheists and force them to teach the Bible to your kids?
The Nation was in fact founded on a certain set of principals. What's the harm in reminding ourselves of them from time to time?
You demand your theory be taught in schools, and you don't even know your theory!!
BadBoy@TheWheel
DT3's Twinkie
Well....Sorry guy's and gal's. But I think AEF has a point. I think everyone is making him out to be a fanatic, which let's face it, he deserves sometimes. But to his defense:
The Constitution was written to allow us the freedom to practice our religion, not enforce us to. It allowed us to talk about it, or not....Freely, not make us mention it, or make us think about it.
Law's in essence are moral code's, true. That does not mean that they are Christian, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, or any other. Moral and RELIGION are two different things, I think we like to tell ourselves they are not but they are.
You can not be a religious person and have a large degree of personal integrity, and a vast expanse of moral fiber.
The real issue is the Uber Religious want everyone to see it, feel it and believe it.
The normal religious do not need everyone else to do something to feel okay about it with themselves. Sometimes I feel like everyone wants those of us who are quiet about it, shout it from the rooftops.
Well guess what....I have the freedom to believe what I want, say what I feel is right, and I don't have to answer to anyone about my belief in God or anything else.
Why can't the religious right just be happy they have what they have and leave everyone else the hell alone?
The Constitution was written to allow us the freedom to practice our religion, not enforce us to. It allowed us to talk about it, or not....Freely, not make us mention it, or make us think about it.
Law's in essence are moral code's, true. That does not mean that they are Christian, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, or any other. Moral and RELIGION are two different things, I think we like to tell ourselves they are not but they are.
You can not be a religious person and have a large degree of personal integrity, and a vast expanse of moral fiber.
The real issue is the Uber Religious want everyone to see it, feel it and believe it.
The normal religious do not need everyone else to do something to feel okay about it with themselves. Sometimes I feel like everyone wants those of us who are quiet about it, shout it from the rooftops.
Well guess what....I have the freedom to believe what I want, say what I feel is right, and I don't have to answer to anyone about my belief in God or anything else.
Why can't the religious right just be happy they have what they have and leave everyone else the hell alone?
IntruderLS1
Active Member
I just can't get worked up over it until I see the speech. I'm sure like everything else, this is highly inflammatory.
Until then, let the Bar-B-Q'ing of Atheists and forced indoctrination of children continue!!
Until then, let the Bar-B-Q'ing of Atheists and forced indoctrination of children continue!!
GraceAbounds
Well-Known Member
Where's AEF?
:jk
:24:
:jk
:24:
BadBoy@TheWheel
DT3's Twinkie
Well, you are not making a fair reference here, for two reasons.
1. That was not put on the Dollar bill until the FDR administration.
2. One nation under God was put in the Pledge long after the Constitution was written.
You cannot say that it was the intent of the forefathers to do that, it was the intent of the leaders at the time.
Essentially, the government has absolutely no right to insinuate that there is, was, or that we as a nation have to believe there is a God. If that was the government that we are supposed to have, why didn't we just accept the Church Of England?
We could have spared the lives of a lot of folks who fought to defend us from British colonization.
Because they wouldn't let you blow your nose without throwing you in jail?
IntruderLS1
Active Member
78,875Threads
2,185,391Messages
4,959Members