quote:

Originally posted by biplane1:
I was able to tape the show but haven't had a chance to see it. I don't recall anyone saying why this fellow, Rick Warren, stopped to visit Ray. Does anyone know?

_____________________

Rick Warren wanted to!

By the way, 'NIGHTLINE' will have a special on Rick Warren tonight, August 18th. click: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/

Also, Rick will also be on Larry King Show tonight, 9pm ET

I watched the event. Couple of questions that I had:
1) If the charge for attending was $2k USD, was the govenment reimbursed for the cost of the security supplied by the Secret Service, which you and I paid for?
2) Would this event have occurred if one or both of the particpants had not been Christian?
It was too close to a church vs state issue for my vote. Maybe it will set a president and the other religious leaders of non-Christian beliefs will offer to chair such an event in the future. Since there is no requirement for a religious affiliation in the US Constitution as a prerequisite for running for the Presidency, why did Mr Warren ask about the candidate's religious beliefs at all. And why should we care?

quote:

Originally posted by patrask:
I watched the event. Couple of questions that I had:
1) If the charge for attending was $2k USD, was the govenment reimbursed for the cost of the security supplied by the Secret Service, which you and I paid for?
2) Would this event have occurred if one or both of the particpants had not been Christian?
It was too close to a church vs state issue for my vote. Maybe it will set a president and the other religious leaders of non-Christian beliefs will offer to chair such an event in the future. Since there is no requirement for a religious affiliation in the US Constitution as a prerequisite for running for the Presidency, why did Mr Warren ask about the candidate's religious beliefs at all. And why should we care?

phil~ (patrask)

It was $2,000 for the first few rows. After that it was $500. It cost Saddleback Church about $1.2 - $1.4 million dollars to put in the new digital equipment to broadcast a live feed to the news outlets. (Over 600 news media from all over the world were there on campus). Over 3,000 seats were free. Money over that amount went to the 'PEACE PLAN' in Rwanda and other African countries. 'NIGHTLINE' tonight will cover the work being done there.

Secret Service costs $40,000.00+ a day, every day during the Presidential campaign, for a total of $104,000,00.00. That's one hundred and four million even when Obama is vacationing in Hawaii and McCain is taking a lengthy nap. I don't know if Saddleback Church shared some of that expense.

As to being a Christian, Obama misses the depth of meaning. I watched the debates in Illinois with Obama and Alan Keyes, and Obama was sorted-out by Keyes for this very reason. And for Obama to say he doesn't understand when a baby is a baby, comes from a person who doesn't get it when scripture says that you are known before you were ever in your mother's womb...even before the Earth was created. Does he really know what it means to be redeemed? Intellectually, probably. In reality, probably not. Not saying he doesn't seek to understand, to learn. Rick Warren afterwards said he would have questioned further...both Obama and John McCain... concerning their belief system, but the questioning would have far exceeded the one hour each candidate he had been alotted for broadcast. I'm sure many Jews or Islamic believers, Hindus and many others, find all this rather perplexing. But I know a particular fellow in New York area who is Jewish who found it very interesting.

There is this ongoing debate for years and years about separation of Church and State, if it really is there in the Constitution, or not. Blame Thomas Jefferson for starting the debate in this country. But it seems every religious and idealistic platform has their own idea of church and state separation.

Didn't Rick Warren ask both candidates at the end of their perspective Q&A what they thought of those who thought otherwise of such an event being held in a church setting?

If you caught the sermon Sunday morning (it's available on line as a video)...that was basically the Topic. Why should we care at all? (Ah, you must've peeked at the sermon notes somehow...)

__________________________________________

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Nard Kordell,

I think I heard someone say that this country was founded on Judeo-Chrsitian principals during the event at Saddleback. In fact, I believe this country was founded by those who truly wanted freedom FROM religion as well as freedom to follow ANY religion, without interferance from the Government, either to prevent or to promote A religion.

Christians out number the rest of us heathens here in the good old US of A, but that should not allow them to coerse the electoral process with implied threats of vote withholding for religious beliefs. Any organisation that comingles religion and politics is free to do so, in my book, as long as they pony up and pay the taxes the rest of us must pay to make such connections. It can't be both ways. Either the organisation stands alone, ouside the government and political process and remains, tax exempt for their good works in the service of God and Man, or they are working for their own betterment and therefore should not be allowed to achieve tax free standing, but should pay a portion of the proceeds as all other for-profit organizations must do. If the people really understood how much taxes they would not have to pay if the so called tax exempt, primarily religious, organisations had to pay their fair share, there would be still be a middle class left in this country.

I have no problem with actual church-for-meetings-service property, i.e. Houseof God buildings. But all the other things, the hospitals, the gas stations, and rental properties that are owned by the churches and somehow allowed to go untaxed is a travesty.

Believe what you may, but, when the event even has the smallest odor of self promotion, then I object, unless the organisation becomes a tax paying one.

"In God We Trust"

patrask (Phil)

First part...religion and freedom: okay, right!

secondly...
I don't see any connection between tax exempt organizations and falling incomes of the middle class. Wages and salaries have been stagnant for most of the past decade. It's not taxation that drives wages but jobs and industries. As for faith and politics, they have also been a part of the American political scene and will continue to be as long as America is free. (Now please stand for the singing of the National anthem.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRvVzaQ6i8A

quote:

Originally posted by Braling II:
"In God We Trust"

You won't find that in the Constitution or the National Anthem. Its a johnny come lately add on pushed during the cold war to set the USA apart from the so called god-less Soviet Union of old. To me it always begs the question: who's God do we all trust in?

quote:

Originally posted by Nard Kordell:
...and McCain is taking a lengthy nap.

Shades of Reagan?

quote:

Originally posted by patrask:
...who's God do we all trust in?

Well, I am hartened to see that I live with the majority.

quote:

Originally posted by patrask:

quote:

Originally posted by Braling II:
"In God We Trust"

To me it always begs the question: who's God do we all trust in?

---------
Patrask, you have the right to choose what good God (small or large 'g') you wish to understand and love.

I know a fellow years back who didn't like to step into a library because he said he was overwhelmed by so many books at one time and didn't know what to read. Same with God. It's not a matter of what the country is believing in, or the world, or how many variety of god there is, or your neighbor's belief or your boss. It's what do YOU believe in!? Who do YOU believe in!?

People from India have tens of thousands of gods. Many tribes in Mexico and South America have a number of crazy incantations of Roman Catholicism running thru the realms of voodoo to strange sacrifices. There is mythological gods. There is the god of self. God of money. There is the god of sex and sensual lust. There is the Hindu, Buddist, Greek Orthodox and Baptists, and on and on. It all boils down to after examining the evidence, who is your God?

I am, by the way, certainly not anti-religion. My objections starts when the faithful of any faith start to lean on the fragile interface between religion and state. This country was founded by very wise and experienced people who had already seen what a state sponsored religion could do, and were trying to set up a government that would allow anyone to practice any faith on their own without interference FROM the government. The problem occurs when the pressure is applied in the opposite direction, when a particular faith or group of believers start to seek control OVER the government to, in their minds, justly spread their message in any way that they can.

Americans must be eternally vigilant to always allow complete freedom to practice any faith, and always to prevent any government intervenion in the practice of that faith. If we, as Americans, lose sight of this very significant difference in how we are governed, we will only repeat the failures of the past and those who are in a minority position will be trampled by the those who feel they have a right to do so in the name of their faith.

My rules are very simple:
1) Always do unto others what you would have them do unto you.
2) Take care of your own house and do not attempt to run your neighbor's house, for you do not want him interferring in your household.

Thus, issues like abortion become non-issues, when they are presented as NOT MY BUSINESS. Chosing to abort or not to abort is a personal decision, and when others try to legislate that in order to control their neighbors actions, the result is always bad. For that reason I am not against abortion, only in favor of adoption as a better solution, for those who strongly feel that abortion is wrong FOR THEM. I really do not understand why the faithful must try and control those who do not believe what they believe. If their faith is strong and their actions are just, is not that enough, and will not the light from their flame of truth enlighten those who have yet to reach the same conclusions?

Thus, my concern over the Rick Warren event is the same as it was over the Billy Graham involvement with government figures, it rings of passive endorsement of one view over those of another. I don't mind opening meetings with a prayer, but I think the honor to speak that prayer should be rotated amongst representatives of several faiths, removing the apparent sanctioning of a perticular faith by government officials who are elected by ALL the people.

Light my fire, but do not have the government provide the matches.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: patrask,

quote:

Originally posted by patrask:


My rules are very simple:
1) Always do unto others what you would have them do unto you.

Thus, issues like abortion become non-issues, when they are presented as NOT MY BUSINESS. Chosing to abort or not to abort is a personal decision, and when others try to legislate that in order to control their neighbors actions, the result is always bad. For that reason I am not against abortion, only in favor of adoption as a better solution, for those who strongly feel that abortion is wrong FOR THEM. I really do not understand why the faithful must try and control those who do not believe what they believe. If their faith is strong and their actions are just, is not that enough, and will not the light from their flame of truth enlighten those who have yet to reach the same conclusions?

Thus, my concern over the Rick Warren event is the same as it was over the Billy Graham involvement with government figures, it rings of passive endorsement of one view over those of another. I don't mind opening meetings with a prayer, but I think the honor to speak that prayer should be rotated agmost representatives of several faiths, removing the apparent sanctioning of a perticular faith by government officials who are elected by ALL the people.

Light my fire, but do not have the government provide the matches.

Rick Warren addressed your issue of seperation of Church and State.

Barack Obama is against saving the life of a baby in a botched hospital abortion procedure. Whatta you think?

I think that medical decisions belong to medically trained personel and their patients. It is none of my business how your doctor treats your cancer, is it? So, why is it any different when it comes to a medical procedure commonly called abortion? What has any of this got to do with running the government, usless, like I am afraid, you are in the business of engaging the government to officially support your personal beliefs. Beware. that allows another of a different belief to do so as well. Is that what govenment is for, to support the beliefs of one faith over those of another? Welcome to the DARK AGES, AGAIN.

quote:

Originally posted by embroiderer:


Barack Obama is against saving the life of a baby in a botched hospital abortion procedure. Whatta you think?

I think what you said is an oxymoron, a botched abortion is not an abortion is it? Do you mean that the mother's life should be sacrificed to enable the baby to live? Show me your M.D.