Skip to content


  1. I don’t think anything you or I have ever experienced classifies as a “religion-based assault”. If you are a Christian being murdered by the Taliban for your beliefs, you can say that. Otherwise, you’re being a snowflake.

    I never said I wanted a theocracy. I like our constitutional republic because it is the greatest experiment in human freedom since the beginning of time. But separation of church and state does not mean that the church has nothing to do with the state or that those in the state should not be part of a church. The phrase was first used in a letter from Thomas Jefferson, the third United States president, to a minister to assure him that the “separation of church and state” would always be there to prevent the state from ruling the church. Jefferson was not what you could call a devout person, but he understood that morality cannot exist where biblical ethics are outlawed, and that where morality dies so does mankind as a whole.

    I try to be courteous in every conversation and I apologize if I came across in a way I did not intend. However, I am not apologetic for what I said, and I would still like an answer on the last question regarding Roe vs. Wade and the Dred Scott decision.


    • After commenting on the earlier post, I came here to reconsider my use of the word “assault. (I thought “verbal assault” would be obvious.) For that I apologize. “Opposing views” or something similar was more my intent.

      Separation of church and state also prevents the church from ruling the state. They are and should always remain separate entities. Your remarks, with references to sin and evil, sounded decidedly religious in nature. I don’t expect you to apologize for your beliefs. But I do believe you should not try to impose them on others or use them as a basis for overturning Roe v. Wade.

      As for Roe v. Wade and the Dred Scott decision, I’m not familiar with that issue, but at first glance (more than half a century beyond my last classroom) I fail to see a connection between a decision about women’s rights and a decision about slavery. Different issues, different times, different courts. Personhood, perhaps, although the original concern in Roe was a woman’s right to privacy. Science and society advance and change, as do legal precedents and thinking.


  2. So Ashley, do you also consider it a religious assault when Christians murder Muslims? See, I do. I shudder when I see those portraits of a blue eyed, blond haired Jesus, when in actuality he would have resembled the very people our country has spent the last 20 years pursuing and killing whenever possible.


Now that I've had my say ...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: