ThatGuy113
Well-Known Member
Ok so your telling me you want a smaller government in every aspect except you still want them to decide how you live your life morally. Isnt that still similar to shariah law or even communism?
and the issue is hes justifying direct influence from the church on the state. Thats a no no.
"I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them, an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises and the objects proper for them according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands where the Constitution has deposited it... Everyone must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:429
P.S. I dislike Jefferson but he sure does make sense up there.
|
Gridlock is what breeds the issues that started what you and Mr Paul are arguing against anyways. It breeds partisanship and then when a party gets the majority they go as extreme as their base wants them to killing any chance of actual progress for the majority of citizens instead of the majority of legislators.
Cause every time I answer everything you say you boldly try to ignore it as nonsense. At least I actually explain why your wrong instead of just trying to tell you your wrong and then make up some story. 
