stevetheupsguy
sʇǝʌǝʇɥǝndsƃnʎ
I thought this thread was about a "tea party"? Would someone please pass the crumpets?!?!
Isn't she the one who got really sick after performing at the concert you went to at Gillette?
Now I'm even more confused!!!What about the right for women to vote? Also the Tea Party was formed by the Koch brothers so it's roots are pro corporation. Another big problem with the Tea Party is their top canidates Perry,Bachman,and Palin pander to extremist right wing Christian cults like the New Apolstolic Reformation. We can't afford to have these self appointed apostles and prophets have any power. All I ask is to research the people behind this new cult and find out the crazy and spooky language that spews out of their mouths.
No, he/she is saying that the NAR are spooky.Now I'm even more confused!!!
First you tell me that the Koch brothers are behind the Tea Party; but then you say they talk "spooky."
Isn't Spooky Dude the guy behind the opposition to the Tea Party???
Whats great about this country is everyone is entitled to our opinions and beliefs , I for one would like to be able to continue to do that for a while longer and so would my children . So less Government and more of the private sector is what Im for . Im a union member and proud of my union , but my politics fall in line with conservative values . I do not want my kids and grandkids to be slaves to the Chinese , maybe you guys do , thats your right .
Now I can't go to church, in my own state? Sheesh!They tend to forget the constitution they all claim to love so much has a specific reference to separation of church and state.
Why don't we just create, A Tea Party!?!?Well, liberal/progressive politics want to save and protect american jobs while conservative and reactionary politics are for free trade. Maybe you need to look into which side sells us out less!!
Careful here: The constitution does NOT have a specific reference to "separation of church and state." The 1st ammendment reads "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The traditional understanding of those words meant that Congress will not establish a national, state sponsored church, like say the Church of England, legally require people to attend worship services, or have courts give opinions on doctrinal issues like the appropriateness of infant baptism, for example. The first ammendment was NOT historically understood to be a prohibition of public prayer events or the call to sidelining the faithful when creating public policy.They tend to forget the constitution they all claim to love so much has a specific reference to separation of church and state.
Careful here: The constitution does NOT have a specific reference to "separation of church and state." The 1st ammendment reads "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The traditional understanding of those words meant that Congress will not establish a national, state sponsored church, like say the Church of England, legally require people to attend worship services, or have courts give opinions on doctrinal issues like the appropriateness of infant baptism, for example. The first ammendment was NOT historically understood to be a prohibition of public prayer events or the call to sidelining the faithful when creating public policy.