The constitution specifically forbids any state run church. I am in agreement that is the way it should be. The new testament makes it very clear that the local church is the extent of the circle of oversight of any single spiritual leader established by God.
I also agree that you are fully free to worship whatever god you choose. Grant me the same freedom. Allow me to be free to worship God. Allow me to teach my children the truth about God and His creation.

I am not disagreeing with the general sentiment against religion here either. Religion is flawed. Religion is made by man. Faith, which everyone here possess, does govern individual mans thoughts and actions. So should it also influence their decisions in running government.
The writings of the founding fathers referenced here should be studied by all a little more closely. These fathers did condemn religion of the time and bravo for them. It was flawed. That is why they left England to begin with. But their words are twisted to mean things they did not say. I love how the things that fit with an anti-Christian slant are bolded in reference and the rest of the statement completely ignored. Just as one must rely on the whole counsel of God, the entire bible and not just parts, we also must read the entire writings of the founding fathers, not just parts.

Going specifically to the old legal definition, it specifically has this:

to make (a church) a national or state institution

I agree with that. It is why the people left England. The state run church is not biblical.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,17 that the man of Godt may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Equipped for every good work. So, we should all turn to God in every thing we set forth to do, and do it with His wisdom and guidance. And that absolutely does include governing this nation.

Many here disagree and label these posts as Troll. I am not trolling. I am spreading truth as I am commanded to do. You can ridicule and mock me all you want. As a matter of fact, I thank you for it. I am sad you are following the path of destruction though, and I will pray for you all.

Too many! Even if it was 1 it was way too many.

Both lives should have been equally fought for. If one did not make it, that is extremely unfortunate, but neither should have been sacrificed for the other. What if that choice had to be made between two adults? Both would be fought for as equally as possible. The child in the womb should be fought for no less equally.

I would certainly suggest that neither of those examples represent "men". A man before God would not do such things. In the case of the rape example. Why should the child be killed because the woman was raped? That makes no sense whatsoever.

I am completely opposed to those options as well for the very reason you mention. Both of those options cause spontaneous abortion done deliberately. In both cases, it is murder.

The nazis killed Jews because of their inferior heritage/geneology, not their religion. I don't agree with what they did.

Nice point though. More people have been killed by way of various dictators over the centuries than even the most flawed organized religion.

I am just certain someone will come along and bring up all the life killed under God's direct orders to the Hebrews when entering the land of Canaan. _I_ cannot explain why that was done other than punishment for the sins of those people. Of course, I do not pretend to think I can even fathom the plans God has for us all.

I am pleased you will be sufficiently entertained.

So, 150 million women killed their unborn children? The numbers of children killed is much larger than Planned Parenthood proclaims. What makes these women slaves? While I agree they probably are slaves, not in the sense you try to claim, I contend with your position that having a child makes them a slave to a man. I know a ton of women that would argue vehemently with you.

I don't see anyone fighting to take away anyone's rights. I believe the rights of both the living woman and the living unborn child are equal under the constitution. The right to life should be equally afforded to all. I never said forsake the woman for the child. And I never would. My wife would force the Dr to fight for both lives if either or both were endangered during pregnancy. As any sensible woman would.

Children. The child's body is within the woman's body. Yes, the child is a human being long before being able to live outside the woman's womb. Should a person dependent on life support not be considered human anymore but just a lump of flesh wasting space? Yes, it should be illegal to terminate through deliberate action. It is murder. Yes, illegal through irresponsible action. Same as DUI homicide or poisoning any other person. Yes, illegal through deliberate inaction. Although your example is not necessarily inaction. It is illegal to starve any other human. A line should not be drawn. All life should be equally protected and fought for. Of course, let's stick with the current definition of homicide since this is the killing of a human being.

No, if I had my way, they would all be alive and in loving families.

Human life starts at conception. Science has proven that repeatedly. Aside from that, a heartbeat is detectable 18 days post conception. So yes, they were children.

The constitution itself would not exist as is is without the dedicated and concerted prayers of the men writing it. They could do nothing but bicker and argue daily until they turn to God in prayer for wisdom.

Very faithful men were the ones that wrote in the freedom guaranteeing that the same thing that happened in the Great Britain, causing them to rebel and break away, could not happen here. Those freedoms are being eroded today.
The constituation of these United States in incompatible with the US becoming a non-Christian nation.

I am not talking about religion. See my other comment.

Notice that I said faith and not religion. I am not a fan of organized religion by any means. Neither is my Savior.

If you want to talk about children being killed, you should consider what "religious fanatics" fight against every day. Over 54 million children killed legally under US law since the 60s, in the name of choice.

I see where it says Congress shall make no law respecting an _establishment_ of religion. I agree with the statement whole heartedly. I see nothing saying faith shall play no role in government. This country would not be as free as it is without men that relied heavily on their faith in God to determine that freedom. The field of science would not be as advanced as it is without men that relied heavily on their faith in God for wisdom and direction.

Just as an FYI, Brown is new to Harris. The former CEO left shortly after the data center was functional. He actually went out on top of bringing Harris up to a $6B+ company.
Not defending anyone here, just giving some information. Brown could not possibly be responsible for this blunder.

With that said, I thought the idea was a little crazy to begin with when Harris wouldn't even put less critical data into a 3rd party providers hands, even with sensitivity guarantees. So, why would their government services division think the government would do it with more critical data?

+10 SuperInsightful

No mod points.

Someone please quickly develop something that implements this. I need to use it to influence the behavior of the used car salesmen that Good hires to push their product.