Why are Tea'vangelicals hell bent on codifiying their religious beliefs into law? And why is the American public allowing it?

The funny part is they are voting for Romney. He is NOT a Christian! Mormons do not believe in the Virgin birth. They believe there are multiple Gods and that the become one when they die.

this seems to have gone from religion to banning the birth control pill.
Fortunately in 1965 the Supreme Courts made it illegal to ban birth control.

This is the belief of phony conservatives. Real conservatives would be shocked by such beliefs.

I agree!

I just wish the real conservatives would stand up and take their party back so that together with liberals this country can get moving forward again!

lol, I think the real conservatives have long left the republican party and are now democrats.

Another stupid biased poll with answers that are as phony as the poll to preprogram the results! LOL

Vote out the RINOS and the LIBERALS!! That will do it!

and by answering you have taken your part in this.

Yes, my dear...I called it like it is...stupidity:-)

Why are we allowing a group of left wing socialist radicals or Communist, Marxist, Fascist,, tear down what this country has believed in since it's very inception? You put Obama in office and have nerve to talk in a mirror which what you say reflects what Obama is doing to this country by just changing a few words.

Nice choices and article.....NOT! Another glaringly shining example of the ignorance of the Progressive mind.

It is called control. Control the people and then control the money.

This is what liberals want including how many sheets of toilet paper you can use per dump. Where does personal responsibility ever come in with your side. You have become amoral, hedonistic and builders of nothing except collective repressive methods.

As the election becomes closer, the attacks become more vicious. Of course the name calling is a liberal staple, nothing new there.

Who is telling the Catholics what they must provide? Who is telling churches what they can say in the pulpit?

Religious freedom is in the Constitution, the removal of all things religious from the town square did not come from our Founding, it came from the last hundred years of Progressive invasion.

Tea'vangelical was coined by conservative David Brody..... Not a 'name calling' imaginary liberal.

And I'm sure you use it in the most benevolent way.

I left it up to you the reader to interpret it anyway your little heart wanted..... Yours obviously took it to an ugly place....

Nah, you didn't...you intended to be obtuse!

Seems the insults and name calling are staple to both sides. If from the founding it was stated a firewall should keep politics and religion apart, then it should be abided by, take religion out of politics. If you wish to change parts of the constitution and allow religion in politics, then it should be opened for change in other areas.
Just something to share
The establishment clause also says that there is a wall of seperation between the church and the state. Almost all contributions and property of sects of religion are free from tax, so it is clear that religion is an enemy of the government.

You, like so many other people have been taught and allowed to believe that the "wall of separation" is somehow believed to take religion out of the town square. When Jefferson used the phrase, which btw was in a series of letters between him and the Danbury Baptists, he used it to reassure them that government would not interfere in their religion. Since they were coming from Great Britain where the Church of England was taken over by government, not the other way around, they were worried.

If you were to look at the series of letters and actually read more than the sentence used, you'd see exactly what he meant.

Jefferson wasn't really the authoritarian on the Constitution since he didn't take part in it's writing and wasn't even in the country at the time. However, the Founders were quite clear and the country knew what they meant, until the Progressives rewrote history. Never during the first 150 years was religion excluded from government.

Since you don't allow negative choice to your blog I selected this choice which liberals believe in.
YOU DO NOT MENTION 1 SPECIFIC NEW LAW ENACTED IN YOUR RANT. Com'on tell us about these new laws?

HR 3
HR 212
Mississippi's defeated personhood amendment
Rand Paul inserting a "life at fertilization" amendment into a non-controversial national flood insurance bill

Why don't you make your blog more specific,-your right to kill your 'mistake'. And have tax payers chip in on the cost. Were you a mistake to your mother? One does not have to be religious to value life.

Because I said what I wanted to say!

If you couldnt figure out how this radical segment of the American electorate is trying to use the government to codify their religious beliefs on you own, all you had to do was ask like you did. And I responded in kind....

Let's play a game of metaphor shall we...

If a parent says a child is not allowed to eat cookies because it is against their religious or spiritual beliefs should the government make laws that prevent ALL children from eating cookies? If the parent is not doing their job of having their children adhere to their rules, they don't get to lobby the secular government to make laws that will prevent the child from disobeying their house rules!

The reality is if a woman decides to have an abortion it will not be a decision on your conscience. It is on her conscience. Our founding father James Madison said it best "Conscience is the most sacred of all personal property". And you, the Tea'vangelicals or the government have no right to try to control or legislate MY PERSONAL PROPERTY, MY CONSCIENCE!

As far as I am concerned you can do what you like with yourself or as a parent. However that choice does not include the right as a parent to abuse your child;-why? Because children have rights as well as you. If you are pregnant than besides yourself there is aother self involved though unable to give voice for their choice to live. When you were in your mother's womb I'm sure she thought of you as life and began making plans for you. If someone shot and killed her they would have been charged with 2 counts of murder. Its hypocrissy to claim a wanted child as life and an unwanted child as a mistake for the incinerator. Cookies aside.

so who will look after these babies, If i was a hooker on the streets forced to have a baby, i would walk out of the hospital and leave the baby there, I didnt want it, I was forced to have it. Someone else can take it, then maybe it would have a life free of abuse physically, mentally, emotionally, sexually.

Abortion and the termination of pregnancy has been around since antiquity. There are even well documented ancient Egyptian methods of aborting an unwanted pregnancy.

I say this to drive home the point that there is nothing you, the government or anyone on this earth can do to prevent a woman from deciding wether or not she will carry a pregnancy to full term. A law making it illegal will not prevent a woman from ending an unwanted pregnancy. Or have you forgotten about the thousands of women who used coat hangers or went to shoddy back alleys or worst died from botched abortions attempts by drinking bleach or other chemicals.

Is it your plan to have government mandate that every woman of child bearing years that ovulates submit to monthly period checks to ensure she has not or will not abort a pregnancy?

Is it your plan to have government enact criminal penalties and throw women in jail if they are found guilty of failing their monthly period check?

Will police resources be required to investigate spontaneous abortions as potential homicide?

Seriously, how far are you willing to go in your attempt control the conscience of others?

you put that nicely,(the rest not directed towards you) I personally would never have an abortion, BUT i would not judge another for it. It is a personal choice. we can abolish abortions and end up overpopulating with unwanted un kept kids. If you want that then thats fine if your gov gets in push to have housing and detention centres available, and welfare yes my friends WELFARE. If you want to overpopulate you need to provide shelter food jobs medical care. After all a lot of the forced born will be from unwanted pregnancies, and 9 times out of 10 they are made aware of that.
You can not force a woman to have a child. If a woman is raped and falls pregnant as a result, and is forced to have this child, the government should help out, after all it was ultimately the governments choice that she had the child. Look at it as child support. hahaha like that will happen.

Not to mention, this is not just about abortion. That is what YOU immediately went to...

I am intolerant of fundamentalism because it is intolerant of all things humane, rational, scientific, and peaceful.

The public face of the "Tea Party" is small government and lower taxes, but the real agenda is a Right Wing Christian Theocracy. All you have to do is listen to the words of their heroes.

" "Something that is beyond man is happening. America today begins to turn back to God." - Glenn Beck

"I think we should keep this clean, keep it simple, go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant,” she said. “They’re quite clear that we would create law based on the God of the Bible and the 10 commandments, it’s pretty simple.” - Sarah Palin

They truly believe we are a "Christian Nation", whatever that means, and they think Christianity, or at least their version of it, should be used to decide what's best for all Americans. That's why they are so dangerous.

When Christopher Columbus landed in the free world, he said a prayer to God and dedicated America to Jesus. That was hundreds of years ago, yet Jesus has continued to be the Dominant God in America and he will continue to be until God chooses otherwise. Separation of church and state was made to protect the church. Our forefathers vehemently encouraged Christian principles, because they knew that America would thrive and continue to be successful, if people would live with good morals and ethics. This is God's country and no one will ever change that, no matter what.

Other.

A) Because they're control freaks, and
B) Because we're stupid.

:-)

Total Freaking BS

When republics begin to fall apart there is an interesting play between religion and government and it all centers around a play for power. If the government is strong then the religious aspect of the governed society is acknowledged and respected for it's contributions to that society. However once as government begins to weaken there is always this power play by the religious to gain power over the government or at least share power with the government and this always leads to societal complications within the body of the governed. Hence the implied separation of church and state within the US government. The founding fathers where well aware of the power and influence of Religion in government because of their close ties to the ruling monarchies and their versions of state religions and the destructive nature of that marriage of two fundamental human power blocks. However our government should not try to dictate to religion what is and is not a secular problem as compared to a religious problem. One are of overlap for this situation is sex with it's various derivations of moral or social behaviour.

Because they saw how the left-wingers have used the government to tell people how to live their lives and got away with it, so the Tea Partiers are utilizing the same tactic. Brings to mind the old saying: "What's good for the goose is good for the gander".

Guess you're NOT really wanting Debate over this are you? Options to reply would indicate such!

So... Perhaps the one individual in Washington who should study up on Separation of Church and State is our President!

For not ONLY is Religion suppose to stay out of forcing it's specific religious belief on Govt, but Govt is suppose to stay out of specific Religions! Forcing Catholics to give their employees abortion pills is putting their views in front of religion!

There was never any mandate that "Forced" Catholic or religious employers to give their employees abortion pills! The disagreement was covering BIRTH CONTROL in health insurance plans of religious organizations that employ ALL people not us those of he faith of the institution!

Each individual, which I might add is who rights enshrined in the constitution apply to INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS, have not been forced to take or use birth control. Each man and woman in this country has the free will to decide what medication they take based on their beliefs and conscience!

What the president did was to say it is covered for any and all that want to use it. Their religious beliefs and conscience directs their actions and decisions, not just because it is available!!!

Seriously, I think you are completely missing the message of your faith if all it takes for you to ignore its teaching is temptation!

Does NOT have anything to do with my Faith, I'm not against women taking birth control pills! Im all for it. Hell, it will vastly reduce the number of ignorant govt entitled future people coming into this world!
The Catholic Church DOES indeed call them "abortion" pills. Furthermore, the Morning after pill is indeed and "abortion" pill.

No one is trying to tell any woman she cannot take them, simply that employers who feel they are against their faith should NOT be mandated to pay for them! On that note, nor do I want to pay some woman so she can have sex she feels she is entitled to have under the govt’s free program. So tell me, do you believe that the govt should mandate employers include all things that are meant to prevent pregnancy so man or woman don't take own responsibilities for their desired sex? The govt wants us to eat more healthier, should veggies also be included in an employer’s health program?

Why can't you understand that govt has no business in the sex life of any individual rather than mandate employers pay for pills? And you have the audacity to say that's a "woman's issue?" Next thing the govt will desire is to film sex and teach our kids the proper way of doing it!

"The Catholic Church DOES indeed call them "abortion" pills"

Well then the catholic church should work harder on it messaging & teachings to the faithful and less time interfering with the laws of the government considering over 90% of catholic women currently use birth control!

The church does not get to change government/secular law because it's parishners are ignoring their rules!

What part of that don't you get?!?

And FYI Rush Bimbo, birth control is used for many other female health issues beyond pregnancy prevention when having sex! Anytime you want to come along with me to talk to my gynecologist and have her explain all the other medical scenarios where birth control pills are prescribed.... You let me know!

I believe it is more like 95% of Catholic women, but what is your point? Should a rule of a parent to the child, "not to eat cookies" be considered by our govt as "illegal" simply because 95% of the kids are going to eat them anyway? You are missing the fact that "Separation of Church & State" not only prevents a certain religious denomination from coming into govt and declaring "all" Americans live by that rule..... it also declares that govt cannot come in and tell any Church what rules they must live by! (Unless those rules are contrary to the moral framework of the majority in America.)

So... FYI, when someone brings in Rush Limbaugh as a new direction in debates with me.... then I know I have completely dominated this discussion! For you are now "REACHING!" :)