Hey blowero, try “faith”, for 1,117 results. That seems to be the current term.
Here’s my tests:
Go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/search
Choose only “speeches and remarks”
Results:
god 625
faith 346
pray 93
Now, I really think the OP went a bit far and stretched things. But then some others just denied it all which seems equally silly.
Thank you; that’s all I was trying to say.
What’s the problem, really, with any politician stating that his faith is what drives him to act responsibly and in what he believes to be the community interest? Now, I personally feel it’s obvious that there’s a huge problem if a politician–especially onein office–says that his faith is what must drive you or me to do what’s in the community interest. But do you honestly believe that every instance of Bush’s use of the term “faith” or “Lord” is him issuing a pharoahnic (sp?) proclamation that everyone must follow his religion?
Only if you are Aldebaran.
But, Aldebaran, I would be interested in your thoughts on whether or not it would be appropriate if Bush suggested public subsidies for the Christian church, a practice which you have claimed is unproblematic in Belgium. Would you consider this to be a sign that Bush is a religious fanatic, or not?
If you are still interested in your own thread, that is.
Regards,
Shodan
Isn’t that something of a distinction without a difference, though?
It is important in general. However, in this instance, I view it this way.
Contender One: “AwfulMan says ______ constantly when he’s speaking to the public!”
Contender Two: “He may say it a lot, but here are 29 instances when he spoke to the public this year when he didn’t say _______ at all.”
Contender One: “AwfulMan says _____ constantly anyway!”
Contender Three: “Well, actually, AwfulMan said _________ x times this year.”
Contender Two: “Nevertheless, there are instances when he didn’t say ________ so he does not say ________ constantly, as Contender One suggests.”
Contender Three: “But it’s important that we recognize that Contender Two only showed part of the picture.”
Contender Four: “Because only part of the picture was necessary to contradict what Contender One was claiming.”
Is it any clearer, yet?
Well, he’s taken it to The Supreme Court.
This is less impressive than it may sound, because they’re out of session and the guy who might be hearing the case is just one of them, Kennedy (I didn’t know they had districts too!) And the feds have indicated that at present they have no intention of going in there with a forklift, shoving a few dozen praying folks out of the way, and taking the monument, even though since midnight Moore (and therefore Alabama) have been in contempt of the order. They’re just going to go with the fines.
Interesting. But, Aldebaran, note that it’s the feds, speaking for the national gummint nominally headed by Bush, who want to get the Commandments OUT of the courthouse.
Yeah, clear as mud.:rolleyes:
Let’s see…I guess if we assume that hyperbole does not exist, and that the OP LITERALLY meant that every third word George W. Bush has ever said is the word “God”, (and then ignore the fact that he said he was referring to Bush’s speeches as opposed to radio addresses and press conferences), then I suppose you could disprove such a statement with a relatively small number of examples.
You honestly think that’s the case, huh?:dubious:
Well, in a few days there were a lot of posts made here, so I’ll try to answer the best I can and try not to overlook some.
To Zoe:
The best thing I can say is that you have no idea at all about the Belgian political landscape, the Belgian politics, the way religions are supported or why some can’t be supported (I explained some of this but you choose to overlook it). And you must be living in some strange dream when stating that Belgium is “in danger” to be “splitted between France and the Netherlands”.
That last remark if a very funny one… You could explain where you come from.
The remark about Belgium not being "stable is also very funny and the more since you contrast this to the USA.
Maybe you could go to an official Belgian website instead of an incomplete American one to be able to gain some understanding instead of coming with incomplete quotes from an incomplete and clearly unifnformed and biased one.
As for your remark on me needing to do this or that in order to make any chance on getting a doctorate: Sorry but I have already one and I’m not planning to throw it in the Atlantic to please you. And I’m very sure that I’ll get my next one too in a year or five.
Now don’t cry… I don’t want them to use them to go teaching.
This remark of yours however leads me to questioning once again this website. Some of the members seem to make it their hobby to attack others with personal remarks.
Well, you have that everywhere, but it is a bit disappointing to see it also happen on this website because of its quality and outstanding public.
Salaam. A
If you call finding Mr. Bush and his crew criminals “having an agenda” then I share that with millions of people on this globe. So I’m not even very originial.
I didn’t check that topic so I’ll have to look where the post you refer to is.
I’m sorry, but I don’t live on this website, so if a reply doesn’t come right away, it means that I’m not around.
So you said “fundamentalism”. In this you are not alone.
The goal of that topic is however not only to hear people’s opinions but next to see how they come to their idea’s.
Yes I do. So why do you think I don’t understand the meaning of the word?
I have the rest of the harmless terrorist army of OBL, OBL himself and since more recently also Saddam and the WMD’s of Iraq in my basements and secret caves. Those last ones I gave shelter in order to have them ready to be launched within 45 minutes on the USA. That is why the USA can’t find all those persons and items.
For the rest I’m completely harmless.
Salaam. A
Oh, forgot: Of course I burn daily my amounts of USA flags and cry while doing, because I find the USA falg really having a beautiful design… I adore those cheerful colours.
Yet if you applaud those who march on the streets screaming “death to America” and in fact are the hidden driving source and funder behind all this, you have to make sacrifices no?
Oh, forgot: Of course I burn daily my amounts of USA flags and cry while doing, because I find the USA flag really having a beautiful design… I adore those cheerful colours.
Yet if you applaud those who march on the streets screaming “death to America” and in fact are the hidden driving source and funder behind all this, you have to make sacrifices no?
Now I’m going to repost my OP, because many people seem to overlook or twist or have lost my intentions.
What I see in the answers here, is that people really have no idea how extreme and weird and fanatic such a person like that jugde comes across.
Further most of the posters here overlook completely that part of the problem here is that this is possible in the first place. It is unreal because in my view such an exaggeration, such a display of personal preferences in a public place by a public servant in function of his public service has nothing to do with “freedom of speach” at all, but with fanatism.
And of course I have taken notice before I made this topic that there are many protests and that he is ordered to have the thing removed. I wouldn’t have made the topic if there wouldn’t have been publicity around it since I don’t live in Alabama to witness the thing standing there myself. So your remarks about that come across as being a bit strange.
Still protests and orders to remove yhe thing don’t answer the question: How come that he could put it there in the first place and make the remarks MEB commented on. Which is also my comment, which made me open this topic.
Answers with the intention to formulate statements like “well WE live in a free country” and so on are no answers but only come across as the usual rethorics made by people who want the world to believe that the USA is The Place To Be and who believe themselves that all the rest lives in darkness.
Maybe you don’t want to come across as such, but you do.
But then, many think of me also what I’m not.
I tend to find that amusing, but it doesn’t contribute to the develoment of honest and interesting debate if we continue to think of eachother to be what we are not or to have intentions that aren’t there.
Maybe I’ll open somewhere a topic to explain myself… but frankly I don’t know where.
Salaam. A
If he would only suggest this for Christianity, I would say that he crosses the line, wouldn’t you?
If there was a funding of religions by the State in the same way it is done in Belgium, I would say that there can’t be any one sided fanaticism or any fanaticism at all.
Except then that if you only give tax money to religions, you exclude people who aren’t religious and who are also citizens and pay also taxes. Which isn’t the case in Belgium because as I explained also non religious groups and even individuals can ask to subsidizing.
As I explained above: I don’t live on this website, so if I don’t reply immediately, it means that I’m not around.
Further I am most of the time in an other timezone then most people who participate on this website.
It is for example now far over midnight where I am now.
Salaam. A.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Aldebaran *
**If you call finding Mr. Bush and his crew criminals “having an agenda” then I share that with millions of people on this globe. So I’m not even very originial. **
So we’re all in agreement that you dislike Bush.
**
Yes I do. So why do you think I don’t understand the meaning of the word? **
You are comparing a Judge who is a fundamentalist (believes in the literal words in the Bible) with terrorists (fundamentalist Muslims acting outside the religion). I say again, the words take on different meaning in American English. A Judge can practice the law he/she is sworn to uphold and still be a Christian. It is not Sharia Law which can be interpreted on the fly and then delivered without question (and quite severely).
**
I have the rest of the harmless terrorist army of OBL, OBL himself and since more recently also Saddam and the WMD’s of Iraq in my basements and secret caves. Those last ones I gave shelter in order to have them ready to be launched within 45 minutes on the USA. That is why the USA can’t find all those persons and items. **
I don’t even understand what you’re talking about at this point? The flag comments don’t make any sense either. I asked you a simple question based on your prior quotes and you side stepped it. If Mullahs incite their followers to kill people blindly do you think they are blasphemous to Islam?
Enjoy the day.
Here are 5 message boards where you can go and explain yourself.
You will be welcome there and will find it easier to be understood. Thanks for passing by through here.
Good luck and Good bye
Americans have to get over this nosense that it is a Christian
country!It is a country of many religions. If you put up something
imprortant to one religion you must allow the other religions
thier fair space in front of courthouses.A statue of Budda,the
star of David,maybe some important quote from the Koran.
Our forfather had it right,seperation of church and state will
keep the bigger religions from bulling the rest of us.
FrankoFranko: I’m an American and I never thought this country was “a Christian country.” Very many of us Americans do not buy into that myth. So how about not painting the whole group of us with that brush?
Is it an obligation in the USA to like Mr. Bush? Well it is not outside the USA.
Where do I ever compare this judge with terrorists?
Terrorist aren’t fundamentalist Muslims.
They are terrorists who claim to act according Islam while there is no place for any sort of such actions within Islam, as I said already repeatedly. By the way: suicide has also no place within Islam.
He can also be an atheist and he can also be a satanist, or whatever.
I don’t talk here about this man as a private person with a religion who was elected in a function as civil servant and who keeps his religion part of his private life.
I talk about him in his function as civil servant declaring that “the Law God gave to Moses” is his law and should be the basics for law in general.
Seen his position within the juridical system of the USA, such a person has every opportunity to open the door to every prejudice and injustice and disregard of the USA laws. If you disagree, that is your right. Maybe you agree that the Ten Commandments should be the basics of the law in the USA. But I think many Americans will firmly disagree with you as they do with that particular judge.
I don’t know what you talk about since you obviously don’t know what you talk about when it comes to the shari’a, its incorporation in the laws of the various countries, how it is incorporated in those countries laws and to which extend and how it is implemented within the juridical system of a variety of countries and where and to which extend it has influence, if it has influence at all.
So which country are you talking about, which law school are you talking about and which particular case are you talking about?
Based on which posts did you ask such a question that only deserves a joke as reply since I can’t take such a question -intended to be in fact an accusation that I support terrorists- serious for one fraction of a second. Since if I did, your insult to my dignity would be of the kind you wouldn’t like to confront in reality.
You do it again.
If you did read my posts on this message board you would know the answer and thus you wouldn’t come to the idea to ask such insulting questions in the first place. Well, at least I hope that for you.
I’m not going to repeat myself because a member of this website doesn’t want to take the effort to read my posts yet takes the effort to come with insulting suggestive questions.
So may I suggest that you read my posts again and then you have your answer staring at you all over the place.
Thank you.
Salaam. A
Aldebaran: Out of curiosity and not to defend Magiver, but why exactly should he bother to extend to you the same courtesy you refuse to extend to anyone else at all on this board–that is, reading their posts?