Political books worth reading.

[hydrogen3]

Short list:

Deliver Us from Evil by Sean Hannity

Killing the Constitution by Martin Reott and Patricia Reott

Why They Don't Hate Us: Lifting the Veil on the Axis of Evil by Mark Levine

Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America by Mark Levine

 

[kilofoxtrot]

"It doesn't say anywhere in the Constitution this idea of the separation of church and state."

~ Sean Hannity


When government and religion are mixed ..... BOTH ARE DIMMINISHED.

 

[the_tech_eater]

"It doesn't say anywhere in the Constitution this idea of the separation of church and state."

~ Sean Hannity


When government and religion are mixed ..... BOTH ARE DIMMINISHED.

While I agree that there should be separation, isn't Sean right that the constitution doesn't say anything about separation between church and state?

 

[kilofoxtrot]

I am going to go with Thomas Jefferson on this one.

Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."

 

[sanibel]

While I agree that there should be separation, isn't Sean right that the constitution doesn't say anything about separation between church and state?

In fact, the First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” And Article V stipulates: “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust.”

 

[the_tech_eater]

In fact, the First Amendment states: ?Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.? And Article V stipulates: ?No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust.?

Damn! How could I have forgotten so much about the constitution? Lol! Thanks for correcting me.

 

[sanibel]

My gripe with Sean Hannity as a write is that he's one-demential, one-sided and biased writer: Nothing is assumed or left for the imagination. I'd rather read a neutral voice that brings balance to the discussion and gives the reader room for imagination.

 

[hydrogen3]

My gripe with Sean Hannity as a write is that he's one-demential, one-sided and biased writer: Nothing is assumed or left for the imagination. I'd rather read a neutral voice that brings balance to the discussion and gives the reader room for imagination.

Who would this neutral voice be?.....Alan Colmes:talk-hand:

 

[hydrogen3]

I realized that conservatism was the philosophy that best suited me, with its emphasis on individual liberty, personal responsibility, and merit

 

[hydrogen3]

"It doesn't say anywhere in the Constitution this idea of the separation of church and state."

~ Sean Hannity


When government and religion are mixed ..... BOTH ARE DIMMINISHED.

What the Founding Fathers created in the Constitution is the most magnificent government on the face of the Earth, and the reason is this: because it was intended to preserve the American society and the American spirit, not to transform it or destroy it.

 

[Ledsteplin]

While I agree that there should be separation, isn't Sean right that the constitution doesn't say anything about separation between church and state?

The original idea was to keep the Gov't from dictating our religion. The whole meaning has been twisted. And, no it does not say or mean separation of church and state, except to keep the Government out of our hair. It was never meant as in, "remove prayer from schools" and such nonsense.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5

 

[Just_Me_D]

My gripe with Sean Hannity as a write is that he's one-demential, one-sided and biased writer: Nothing is assumed or left for the imagination. I'd rather read a neutral voice that brings balance to the discussion and gives the reader room for imagination.

I agree to a point, but some things are absolute, and nowadays, people are fearful of such things. The same goes for taking sides. Far too many people find it easier to stay in the middle. Some view it as being safe whereas some view it as cowardice.

 

[kilofoxtrot]

It was never meant as in, "remove prayer from schools" and such nonsense.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5

If people really knew what prayer is, then they would realize that it is impossible to remove prayer from schools.

Matthew 6:5

 

[kilofoxtrot]

What the Founding Fathers created in the Constitution is the most magnificent government on the face of the Earth, and the reason is this: because it was intended to preserve the American society and the American spirit, not to transform it or destroy it.

Thats why I quoted Thomas Jefferson........ a founding father. I'll take his word on the Constitution over Hannity's.

 

[sanibel]

Who would this neutral voice be?.....Alan Colmes:talk-hand:

Neutrality implies not judging the validity of an opinion. Thus, a neutral person will provide a platform for all opinions, including irrational or malicious opinions.I'd say Mr. Hannity does NOT.

 

[hydrogen3]

Neutrality implies not judging the validity of an opinion. Thus, a neutral person will provide a platform for all opinions, including irrational or malicious opinions.I'd say Mr. Hannity does NOT.

I agree with that statement... Again, who is the voice of Neutrality?

 

[Just_Me_D]

We've all strayed far enough and should get back to the thread topic - "Political Books Worth Reading". Thanks.

 

[Amamba]

The original idea was to keep the Gov't from dictating our religion. The whole meaning has been twisted. And, no it does not say or mean separation of church and state, except to keep the Government out of our hair. It was never meant as in, "remove prayer from schools" and such nonsense.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5

But you can't keep Gov't from dictating our religion if there's prayer in schools and courts. It's just one more thing that separates kids and serves to single out the students who belong to a minority religion. E.g. there are schools in which the majority of kids are children of Muslim immigrants; would you force them to listen to a Christian prayer, or would you force the Christian minority to listen to the Muslim one ? Or would everyone pray in their own way, inevitably creating tensions ? Would you live it up to the school principal, or Governor, or POTUS to determine what kind of prayers to use ? And would you trust them not to try to push their religious beliefs onto others ?

As far as I am concerned, my religion is my own and I shouldn't be forced to share it with anyone, or have anyone impose their prayer onto me. Even if it's the same prayer . You want prayer in school, there are private religious schools for that.

 

[Amamba]

We've all strayed far enough and should get back to the thread topic - "Political Books Worth Reading". Thanks.

I don't know if anyone suggested reading the Constitution of the United States, complete with amendments. Going to the original source is always the best approach.

 

[hydrogen3]

1984-George Orwell's novel of a totalitarian future society..