King Officials Vote to Take Down Chri...

King Officials Vote to Take Down Christian Flag

There are 50 comments on the Fox 8 WGHP story from Sep 16, 2010, titled King Officials Vote to Take Down Christian Flag. In it, Fox 8 WGHP reports that:

A Christian flag flying at the Veterans Memorial at Central Park has been removed following a city council vote on Wednesday.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Fox 8 WGHP.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#43 Oct 24, 2010
jesus is a schmuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me give an example of neutrality. I know a an elemantary school taecher that is an atheist. A student of hers spoke with her about god and everybody being a child of god. The student asked my fiiend about this. My friend had an opportunity to sway the child in another direction which would have gone against her student's parents teachings. Because she is in a public "neutral" property she has an obligation to not go against the student's parents teachings. Would you agree with this as being the only fair thing to do. This could have been a teacher that was a christian with an atheist child and the same same process should have been applied. It is the professional thing to do and it is best for these teachers to not sway children in any way to their personal philosophy or religion.
When we are on government "neutral" property it is most professional for us to not allow one religion to have displayed their religious symbol over all or instead of others' religious symbols. It is professional and most compassionate. If christian or jews or muslims or atheists care to display their religion on their person or carrying their symbol with them that would be perfectly fine as long as the symbol is not left on the site. This way a person would not be from expressing their religious freedom and/or freedom of speech.
I did not ask for an example. I said: Please State for me your foundation for a "Neutral Property" using the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Please!
The Christian Way

Burlington, NC

#44 Oct 24, 2010
U D Side wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not ask for an example. I said: Please State for me your foundation for a "Neutral Property" using the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Please!
I know what you have asked for. I have given you my view as to fairness. You obviously are not concerned about fairness. You are concerned about pushing your christian flag onto a government property and with no concern about those that are not christian. There are many things not written in our bill of rights and declaration of independence. However, we have interpreted those documents since being written. I was pointing out how best to be fair to all but I understnad fairness is not what american christians want it is dominance in all aspects of private and public life what christians want. But then again hypocrisy is something christians are well aware of since their role model jesus christ is one.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#45 Oct 24, 2010
U D Side wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not ask for an example. I said: Please State for me your foundation for a "Neutral Property" using the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Please!
The Christian Way wrote:
<quoted text>
.......... There are many things not written in our bill of rights and declaration of independence. However, we have interpreted those documents since being written..........
Thank you: "There are many things not written in our bill of rights" "However, we have interpreted" Who has interpreted? Please state where in the US constitution the authority is given to anyone to interpret the constitution or its amendments. Please cite article and section.
The Christian Way

United States

#46 Oct 25, 2010
U D Side wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Thank you: "There are many things not written in our bill of rights" "However, we have interpreted" Who has interpreted? Please state where in the US constitution the authority is given to anyone to interpret the constitution or its amendments. Please cite article and section.
The constitution is interpreted by federal and state judges. It is also interpreted by the supreme court.
Rev Jay Vincent Shore

Scarborough, Canada

#47 Oct 25, 2010
The Christian Way wrote:
<quoted text>
The constitution is interpreted by federal and state judges. It is also interpreted by the supreme court.
With all due respect, "The Constitution" (actually, the concept of "rights") was flushed down the toilet long ago. The keys to that are in Job 32:21, and Galatians 2:6 (and that chapter intro in context)

Men have been reduced to the mere rank of "persons" and those "persons" are "residents" (res/property identified) of the state that THEY supposedly created.

And the blind lead the blind, and even hold up signs pointing the way to hell for those who would dare disagree with their choice..."

Rev Jay Vincent Shore
http://absentcapacity.wordpress.com

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#49 Oct 25, 2010
U D Side wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Thank you: "There are many things not written in our bill of rights" "However, we have interpreted" Who has interpreted? Please state where in the US constitution the authority is given to anyone to interpret the constitution or its amendments. Please cite article and section.
The Christian Way wrote:
<quoted text>
The constitution is interpreted by federal and state judges. It is also interpreted by the supreme court.
I asked: Please state where in the US constitution the authority is given to anyone to interpret the constitution or its amendments. Please cite article and section.
jonah and the big fish

Winston Salem, NC

#50 Oct 25, 2010
U D Side wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I asked: Please state where in the US constitution the authority is given to anyone to interpret the constitution or its amendments. Please cite article and section.
I think you know the answer as well as anyone. What is your point? You do know that there will be disputes concerning the constitution. How else would we handle these disputes except through our court system? Would you expect violence or rebellion?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#51 Oct 25, 2010
jonah and the big fish wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you know the answer as well as anyone..........
Thank You
jonah and the big fish wrote:
<quoted text>
..........What is your point?.........
"We The People" have the authority to rewrite the US Constitution and amendments through the amendment process. The judiciary is charged with upholding the US Constitution and interpreting law.

Quoted text:
“To ensure that no single person or entity had a monopoly on power, they instituted a system of checks and balances. The president's power is checked by the Congress, which can refuse to confirm his appointees, for example, and has the power to impeach, or remove, a president. Congress may pass laws, but the president has the power to veto them (Congress, in turn, may override a veto). And the Supreme Court can rule on the constitutionality of a law, but Congress, with approval from two-thirds of the states, may amend the Constitution.”
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/usconstitution/...

First amendment
“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.”

Thus without law, there exist nothing for the President to sign or veto. Also without law there exist nothing for the Supreme Court to rule on. So judicial review can only render a decision based on the constitution. If the first amendment is interpreted loosely and abstractly and by function of the “supremacy clause” extended to apply on the more aggregated forms of government we have censorship of religious speech. If justices interpret the first amendment as written. We have religious liberty imparted to on the more aggregated forms of government. It is important to note that the first amendment came after the constitution including the supremacy clause was already in place. This affirms that the singling out of congress was intentional. Many believe that religious liberty is most consistent with the framers intent.

http://www.coralridge.org/medialibrary/defaul...
http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles...
http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles...
http://users.mikrotec.com/~dcgay/judicialtyra...

There are those who would claim that the judiciary creating case law where it is expressly stated NO LAW shall exists is in its self unconstitutional.
god of the gaps

Winston Salem, NC

#52 Oct 27, 2010
U D Side wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank You
<quoted text>
"We The People" have the authority to rewrite the US Constitution and amendments through the amendment process. The judiciary is charged with upholding the US Constitution and interpreting law.
Quoted text:
“To ensure that no single person or entity had a monopoly on power, they instituted a system of checks and balances. The president's power is checked by the Congress, which can refuse to confirm his appointees, for example, and has the power to impeach, or remove, a president. Congress may pass laws, but the president has the power to veto them (Congress, in turn, may override a veto). And the Supreme Court can rule on the constitutionality of a law, but Congress, with approval from two-thirds of the states, may amend the Constitution.”
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/usconstitution/...
First amendment
“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.”
Thus without law, there exist nothing for the President to sign or veto. Also without law there exist nothing for the Supreme Court to rule on. So judicial review can only render a decision based on the constitution. If the first amendment is interpreted loosely and abstractly and by function of the “supremacy clause” extended to apply on the more aggregated forms of government we have censorship of religious speech. If justices interpret the first amendment as written. We have religious liberty imparted to on the more aggregated forms of government. It is important to note that the first amendment came after the constitution including the supremacy clause was already in place. This affirms that the singling out of congress was intentional. Many believe that religious liberty is most consistent with the framers intent.
http://www.coralridge.org/medialibrary/defaul...
http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles...
http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles...
http://users.mikrotec.com/~dcgay/judicialtyra...
There are those who would claim that the judiciary creating case law where it is expressly stated NO LAW shall exists is in its self unconstitutional.
My friend, if the supreme court rules on an issue then you can be sure we must abide by it. However, if you are saying you will not follow the supreme court ruling then you may end up in jail. Are you asking people to force an issue the supreme court has ruled against? Are you asking for people to rebel against our government? What is it you want? If the supreme court were to rule on the king flag by stating it must remain down then it must remain down. Are you asking the king city council to go against the supreme court ruling?
Tamerlane

Tallahassee, FL

#53 Oct 27, 2010
god of the gaps wrote:
<quoted text>
My friend, if the supreme court rules on an issue then you can be sure we must abide by it. However, if you are saying you will not follow the supreme court ruling then you may end up in jail. Are you asking people to force an issue the supreme court has ruled against? Are you asking for people to rebel against our government? What is it you want? If the supreme court were to rule on the king flag by stating it must remain down then it must remain down. Are you asking the king city council to go against the supreme court ruling?
Don't bother.

He and his kind lost this argument in 1803. It's a settled issue.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

King Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Local bands in king (Apr '08) Dec '16 My Tats 2
who is this sexy tatted up white guy? he just ... (Apr '11) Dec '16 My Tats 6
News N.C. town sued over sculpture of soldier with c... (Jan '15) Dec '16 Spotted Girl 4
Vote for Donald J Trump Oct '16 MAGA 1
trick or treating (Oct '11) Oct '16 Sheltiemama 2
Looking for Terry Walden (Apr '16) Apr '16 info please 1
charlie lawson (Aug '07) Feb '16 Laura 87

King Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

King Mortgages