Shinken

[url]http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.2082.IS:[/url] [QUOTE]`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari [A decision by the Supreme Court to hear an appeal from a lower court], or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.[/QUOTE] It seems to me as though this proposed Bill is trying to make the Supreme Court unable to even be able to use the power of judicial review (which is the Supreme Court's power to deem a law unconstitutional) in the case of a law that is based on Biblical law. For example, if President Bush manages to get his proposed "Protect the Sanctity ( :rolleyes: ) of Marriage Act" passed, the Supreme Court would never be allowed to use the power of judicial review to repeal the amendment under this proposed bill. I do realize that this Bill is highly unlikely to ever get passed, but I am still concerned by this Bill (and others similar in nature). Doesn't this run against the separation of Church and State? (NOTE: the term "writ of certiorari" in the quote is not well-known, so I added the definition in brackets for clarity. This is my source for the definition: [url]http://www.techlawjournal.com/glossary/legal/certiorari.htm[/url] )

A few days ago I rented this film, and I must say that I enjoyed it- to a degree. The film, while interesting, was a bit... drawn out, in my opinion. Ashton Kutcher did well in such a serious role, much better than I thought he would. However, I was still somewhat dissatisfied with his performance, mainly on the basis that I couldn't stop telling myself "Yes, Ashton Kutcher [i]is[/i] being serious". The plot was great, but like I said, a bit drawn out. As for the ending, it was okay. It also brought up an interesting (albeit somewhat self-defeating) question: If the main character does what he does to himself at the end, how would he manage to go into the past to do so in the first place? *scratches head* Oh well. Here's a tidbit of hilarity involved with this film: As the credits rolled across the screen, my grandmother proclaimed the following. [i]"I'm surprised that Christ didn't strike us down for watching this movie."[/i] And she [i]wasn't[/i] referring to any faults she may have found with the movie's cast or their abilities.

[QUOTE=LostProphet] [IMG]http://www.dallasnews.com/s/dws/img/07-04/0701saddam2.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] "...And no lettuce on the Big Mac!"

[quote name='KarmaOfChaos][SIZE=1][color=deeppink]...Things like religious beliefs, physical health, emotional health, and mental health play a very big part chi/ki, and the stronger you are in each of these, the more likely you are to feel comfortable with yourself and be able to find calm and truly get in touch with your chi...[/color'][/SIZE][/quote] I'd have to disagree with that. I'm not exactly a "religious" person, in the common sense of the term. As for physical health, I'm overweight, so that kinda throws it out the window. Emotionally I'm fine, and mentally... I scare my own family. :blah: Just kidding. However, I'm not saying that these factors are wrong. Just that they don't apply for me.

I know what [b]outlawstar69[/b] is talking about. I'm not arrogant about it or anything, but I will admit that I am a tad bit smarter than most people in my area. Just for being in English 11 Honors, while being only in the tenth grade, I'm instantly labeled as a snotty rich kid, which I definitely am not. Especially not rich. This also brings me the label of "geek", which is by and large absolutely true, and I'll admit it. As for the religious discrimination, well... Don't really have that problem (personally, anyways), but only because I actively avoid the problem. My area is predominantly Christian, so it's a big to-do when there's somebody who doesn't subscribe to the Judeo-christian norm (I should know- I'm Buddhist). It's not quite active discrimination as much as something that causes one to be isolated and looked down upon as a bad influence or something.

I'm personally sick of hearing people saying that old [i]"We're in America, we shouldn't have to speak anything but American!"[/i] jargon. (Since when was there an "American" language?) Seriously. You have no idea how many people I've heard say that. The worst part is that they're [i]not[/i] quoting the doting psycho-mom from VCPR in Vice City. They actually believe it! As for morals, I'd have to agree that they're relative. After all, one man's satanic ritual is another man's prayer group.

This is extremely ironic. Today in English class, a friend came in with a radio and started blaring the [i]Fresh Prince[/i] theme song. I've only seen a few episodes of the show, but I enjoyed it. The only reason I've never really seen it was that it was a bit before my time, as the nineties was the period of time that saw me turn double-digits only when they were coming to a close. (Then again, it seems to me that the nineties were just a ten-year extension of the eighties.)

Last Comic Standing... All I can say is, [i]"Dat Phan, you crazy!"[/i] I know there's a sequel program coming out soon, and I personally can't wait. Of course, the name is no guarantee of another Dat Phan in the making...

If you ask me, race, nationality, religion, or any of that stuff should have nothing to do with recognition of a person. If you do something great (or horrible), no matter where you're from, or what you believe in, you're still doing it as a human being.

You know you're easily amused when... 1)While standing in your driveway waiting for your bus to arrive, you put your stuff on the ground and try and catch mosquitoes as they fly by you, and improve daily. (This is actually pretty fun. They can't bite you- they're too scared.) 2)When you find yourself Googling for random words. 3)When you find yourself translating entire posts/paragraphs into Al Bhed via an online translator. (Btw, there actually is one, and I use it all the time) 4)You have a CD collection that includes the soundtracks to Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy (random installments), and Sonic games. (Maybe this fits under the "You know you're a geek when..." category... :D ) 5)You find yourself genuinely enthralled by a rubber yo-yo filled with water. (It's more amusing to hit people with it. That, and poke a small hole in it, spin it really fast, and then watch with glee as people try to figure out where all the water's coming from.) In conclusion, I have no life. :D

Being not of voting age, I'm currently unable to partake in the mayhem. However, if I were able to vote... Anybody who reads my blog knows I'd go for Kerry any day. Instead of wasting time giving my reasons, I'll just kindly direct you to check the archives of my blog. I'm sure I ranted about it somewhere... Anyways, my vote goes for Kerry. Imaginary though it may be... :tasty:

Well, it's not the country that's doing it. It's a few (possibly more, according to reports from Afghanistan) soldiers who went overboard, lost sense of morality, etc. In a recent poll, CNN found that 73% of Americans felt the abuse was unjustified. So, it shows that the majority of the country does not (at least outwardly/publicly) hold the "They did it to us, it's only fair!" opinion.

And the winner is... James! But, to get back on topic, anyone who thinks that the Iraqi prisoners "deserved it", and justify it with the age-old "well, they did it to us!", I think Gandhi can handle this one. [i]"An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind."[/i] -Mohandas Gandhi

Let me get this straight: Since the Iraqis tortured and belittled our soldiers, it is absolutely fine for our soldiers to do the same? I disagree. Lowering ourselves to such a dishonorable level, purely for revenge, is not justifiable, no matter what. Torturing people who are at one's mercy is a horrible thing to do, and yes, I do recognize that the Iraqi military has done this to an extent that nobody will ever know how far it went. But we should not have to stoop down to such tactics. It's deplorable! Look at Saddam's regime. We constantly criticize and denounce their torture tactics, and yet, when a few of our soldiers decide to go morally AWOL and do the same to prisoners, people say that they deserve it. Why? Aren't they human beings as well? No matter what a person has done, as Sting said, "we have the same biology". Also, I hope that people don't go all anti-military because of the actions of a few. I have a cousin in Iraq, and a good friend of mine has her brother in Iraq as well. So, I obviously have respect for the military. Just not for the people who did this. (I apologize if this post seems somewhat unfocused. I'm somewhat tired.)

I'm of the belief that it would be impossible to change the past. Why? If you go into the past and change something intentionally, you would then eliminate that event from ever ocurring in history. Thus, you would have no reason to go back into the past and change something while you were in the future, erego the event would still happen. However, if one did change something, maybe some sort of "alternate timeline" would be created. It's pure speculation. Entertaining, thought-provoking speculation that makes for some pretty good discussions.

Well, it's been quite a while since I've crafted any poetry, so I've had more than a few inspiring experiences. Thus, it's time for me to make up for my slacking off. This poem is comprised of multiple haiku that all form one long poem. [i]This span of my life has given to me more than I could dream. A test of the will; A wolf in sheep's clothing, claws at the ready. A guide from the past, through nine circles of this life, has shown me the way To emerge as "me", instead of what I "should be". Limitless beliefs. And as for the wolf, it has returned to its den, its hunger sated. And now as I turn, staring straight into the sun, I see or go blind."[/i] Opinions? Constructive criticism? Anything? [SIZE=1]Hello?[/SIZE=1] *crickets chirp in the reeds*...

I think this quote from [i]The Order[/i], starring Heath Ledger, may be somewhat relevant to the current discussion: [b]"Knowledge is the enemy of faith."[/b] I see it this way: Nobody can actually [i]know[/i] whether or not their faith is the "true religion". (I'd post more, but I've got a lot of stuff to do! )

[QUOTE=Charles]For some reason, when I look at [i]Hell Boy [/i]trailers, I experience terrible LXG flashbacks. There's not much I can say about the film and I can't reference the comic books, so I'll have to take a wait-and-see approach with this one. Hopefully the plot--even if it's not spectacular--will come together cohesively much unlike the aforementioned LXG's. As of this moment, I don't find myself necessarily captivated by the character designs. They look like generic [i]X-men[/i] base types. Hmm. Time will tell.[/QUOTE] I think that all comic-book fans have been horribly scarred by LXG. The seemingly random casting, the overall feeling of a rushed project... You know what I'm talking about. Hellboy, however, seems to have much more going for it. A somewhat more identifiable story (LXG was about world domination in the past- we already knew that the bad guy would lose), and definitely cooler characters. What isn't there to like about a demon fighting for the good guys? And best of all (my brother will love this part), the Nazis get their leather-clad butts handed to them (and what a large, red, scaly hand it is!), with Hellboy taking names, apparently. The action looks superb, as well, and then there's Hellboy's humor. It's the same kind of appeal that Spidey has: no matter what the situation, there's always a handy wisecrack. Also, Hellboy just looks cool. I'm definitely looking forward to this one, but after LXG, I've lost my confidence somewhat. I hope that this isn't an LXG clone...

Well, it may be within your beliefs, and I have no problem with your doing so. It's just... when you speak of it as the truth, it sounds disrespectful to those with other beliefs, as it says to them, "I'm right and you're wrong." But at least you've said time and again you're not trying to force them into it. People who do that shall feel my personal wrath. ^^x

What am I afraid of? Not much really. Sure, my heart rate will rise when I watch something like Dawn of the Dead, but that's because it's a horror movie: Fear is expected. What really scares me is the prospect of my grandmother finding out the other 50% of my religious beliefs (the Buddhist portion). She's a very religious person, of the Christian persuasion. If she found out about my being Buddhist, I don't know what she'd do, nor do I want to find out. Unfortunately, I may do just that, as my brother read my myOtaku site, in which I state my Buddhist beliefs. So now, he might (read: Probably/definitely will) tattle to my grandmother, thus releasing Pandora's Box right in my lap. :( Oh, and nightmares. Then again, they scare anyone. :D

Go TN! Anyways, seeing as how this thread was started on the separation of Church and State, I figure I may as well bring up some more good-old "Bush-Bashing". :D [url]http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=130336[/url] Read the first (very long) post in this thread, and be amazed. I do realize that a lot of the article contained in the thread may indeed be mere speculation, but Bush's religiously-motivated actions (along with the insane amount of sources in the article) lead me to believe that at least one part of that article is true. Part of the article deals with Christian Reconstructionists, a group that basically wants to throw out the US constitution, and make the United States a Christian autocratic theocracy (read: One guy ruling over the US, which would be only for Christians). Now, usually, one takes news of these people with more than a pinch of salt, but when (as mentioned in the article) you hear that Bush 1.0 gives financial aid to a reconstructionist minister, and both Bushes are close friends/ "spiritual allies" (I believe the article said) with the man, it adds some reality to the situation. Bush's ties to evangelical Christianity are, for all intents and purposes, his business. Until he starts trying to force the tenets of his particular faith (especially those concerning gays) on a nation whose population is not entirely Christian. Thus, the separation of Church and State does seem to be falling apart in this country. Hopefully it doesn't take a turn for the Mid-Eastern worse. (I know it sounds like I'm being pessimistic in the extreme, but I'm only drawing a comparison) *sits back and waits for the huge amount of pro-Bush, anti-Clarke/Kerry/anything-anti-Bush backlash*

Ah, but there are just as many who have a sense of morality, but don't necessarily belong to a religion. Also, our nation may have been founded by religious people, but that in no way justifies how any one religion can force its way into the government at the exclusion of other religions, as our society is a democracy. One of the tenets of our democracy is freedom of religion, which means that all people have a right to worship freely without interference. Any one religion having power over another seems to qualify as interference to me. (I'd post more, but I'm in need of a shower. And not a golden one. ;) Just kidding.)

How is allowing other religions a chance, and not forcing Christianity upon those who don't believe in it, 'turning away from God'? I don't see any fervent denouncing of the Bible being displayed on CNN, instead I see people's rights being violated because of a man (Bush) who takes his religion and crams it down everyone else's throat. Need an example? Read my latest MyOtaku post. Also, I, along with many people, I'm sure, don't really appreciate being preached to. I respect your beliefs, and I encourage you to have them. However, I don't see why you have to push it upon others as the only way, and that their beliefs are wrong. It's irritating, for one thing, and it's also somewhat insulting, because you inadvertently stated that their religion is definitely wrong, and then you pulled out the dogma card. Not everyone (read: nobody) appreciates having their religion insulted, and then being told that there is only one way, etc. Please, Justin, refrain from pushing your beliefs on others. It's not really appreciated, and it's insulting.

I'd have to agree with Wandering Mage on the point that separation of church and state isn't going so well in this country any more. It seems to me that President Bush is pushing the beliefs of his religion upon the entire country, despite the fact that not everyone is Christian (myself partially included). I, too, can't wait for November. I only wish I was able to vote in this election... I'd go on a rant about how the current administration rubs me the wrong way, but that'd be off-topic. Unfortunately. It seems to me that separation of church and state has only been a so-so prospect in this country, as Christianity has always seemed to have the most effect/pull on the government. But that's just my opinion... ^^x (Oh, and Japan, just to clear up, the Crusades' purpose was also to 'reclaim the Holy Land', or at least that's what I've ben taught since the seventh grade. ^^x As for "spreading the good news about Christianity", what makes it such good news when compared to any other religion? Personally, I hate it when one religion tries to force itself upon another. It's hypocritical, and nobody has the right to do so, in my opinion. Again, that's just me.) Itte ki masu! :glasses:

I, personally, don't buy into the whole "Non-believers are instant hell-occupants" deal, because it just doesn't fit into the loving God equation. Yes, I know of the 'wrath of God' stuff, but I don't see why he would send most of the world to heaven, when he also states that everyone is a 'child of God'.