Taking the Lord's Name in Vain

I posted this on the GPV replacement:

The main point of this commandment always seems to have been not to swear, especially not to use the Lord's name when doing so. I have often wondered if we have been missing the point of this commandment. For me this thought started several years ago when I was watching a video of a sales pitch being done from a church pulpit. At first I wondered why they were doing this, but I quickly realized their angle. It was that we are accustomed to trusting what we hear from the pulpit, and thus we would be more trusting if their program. At that point I felt that was the most blatant case of taking the Lord's name in vain i had ever seen, but then I quickly realized it happens all the time. People use God's name or their claim to their own Christianity to promote their own ideas on a regular basis, sometimes in very hateful ways.

Do you think God cares or wants to be associated with the fact that you scored a touchdown or won the big game? Does it promote his teachings in any way? I think not. Do you think that God wants you to use your Christianity or drop his name a few times to promote you selling a car? I think not. Do you think God wants you to use his name or your perception of his teachings to promote hate towards others? Most certainly not!

Do you think God wants his name stamped on our currency with all the baggage it carries? What does money do to promote his teachings? Do you think God wants to have his name used so freely in our government? Does our government serve God in its decisions, our does it ultimately serve itself? What does God teach about being self serving?

That is why I feel we are missing the point of the third commandment, by a long shot. All if these things are an outright violation of the third commandment IMO.

What are your thoughts?

Dr. Jones wrote:I posted this on the GPV replacement:

The main point of this commandment always seems to have been not to swear, especially not to use the Lord's name when doing so.  I have often wondered if we have been missing the point of this commandment.  For me this thought started several years ago when I was watching a video of a sales pitch being done from a church pulpit.  At first I wondered why they were doing this, but I quickly realized their angle.  It was that we are accustomed to trusting what we hear from the pulpit, and thus we would be more trusting if their program.  At that point I felt that was the most blatant case of taking the Lord's name in vain i had ever seen, but then I quickly realized it happens all the time.  People use God's name or their claim to their own Christianity to promote their own ideas on a regular basis, sometimes in very hateful ways.  

Do you think God cares or wants to be associated with the fact that you scored a touchdown or won the big game?  Does it promote his teachings in any way?  I think not.  Do you think that God wants you to use your Christianity or drop his name a few times to promote you selling a car?  I think not.  Do you think God wants you to use his name or your perception of his teachings to promote hate towards others?  Most certainly not!  

Do you think God wants his name stamped on our currency with all the baggage it carries?  What does money do to promote his teachings?  Do you think God wants to have his name used so freely in our government?  Does our government serve God in its decisions, our does it ultimately serve itself?  What does God teach about being self serving?

That is why I feel we are missing the point of the third commandment, by a long shot.  All if these things are an outright violation of the third commandment IMO.  

What are your thoughts?

Insightful post, Dr.

I agree with what you said about using His name to promote selfish goals. I think it does happen a lot. It is misused quite a bit. But people have a right to do so. I do admit, that I do find myself going back to businesses that I think are run by Christian people because they have a Christian saying or Bible verse displayed or, if they are playing a Christian radio station.

However, I do not agree that His name is "stamped" on our currency, so to speak. It doesn't say that it is His money. It simply says "In God We Trust". Nothing wrong with that.

Whatever anyone else says, this nation WAS founded on fundamental Christian principles. Saying that we trust in God is a proclamation that this nation follows those Godly principles. Even though the government has strayed from following it for the most part, I would not be in favor of removing that saying from our money.

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:I posted this on the GPV replacement:

The main point of this commandment always seems to have been not to swear, especially not to use the Lord's name when doing so.  I have often wondered if we have been missing the point of this commandment.  For me this thought started several years ago when I was watching a video of a sales pitch being done from a church pulpit.  At first I wondered why they were doing this, but I quickly realized their angle.  It was that we are accustomed to trusting what we hear from the pulpit, and thus we would be more trusting if their program.  At that point I felt that was the most blatant case of taking the Lord's name in vain i had ever seen, but then I quickly realized it happens all the time.  People use God's name or their claim to their own Christianity to promote their own ideas on a regular basis, sometimes in very hateful ways.  

Do you think God cares or wants to be associated with the fact that you scored a touchdown or won the big game?  Does it promote his teachings in any way?  I think not.  Do you think that God wants you to use your Christianity or drop his name a few times to promote you selling a car?  I think not.  Do you think God wants you to use his name or your perception of his teachings to promote hate towards others?  Most certainly not!  

Do you think God wants his name stamped on our currency with all the baggage it carries?  What does money do to promote his teachings?  Do you think God wants to have his name used so freely in our government?  Does our government serve God in its decisions, our does it ultimately serve itself?  What does God teach about being self serving?

That is why I feel we are missing the point of the third commandment, by a long shot.  All if these things are an outright violation of the third commandment IMO.  

What are your thoughts?

Insightful post, Dr.

I agree with what you said about using His name to promote selfish goals. I think it does happen a lot. It is misused quite a bit. But people have a right to do so. I do admit, that I do find myself going back to businesses that I think are run by Christian people because they have a Christian saying or Bible verse displayed or, if they are playing a Christian radio station.

However, I do not agree that His name is "stamped" on our currency, so to speak. It doesn't say that it is His money. It simply says "In God We Trust". Nothing wrong with that.

Whatever anyone else says, this nation WAS founded on fundamental Christian principles. Saying that we trust in God is a proclamation that this nation follows those Godly principles. Even though the government has strayed from following it for the most part, I would not be in favor of removing that saying from our money.

My point us that I don't feel they have the right to do this. I think they are breaking a commandment by doing so, unless they are running their business by the book.(pun intended)

Take Dave Ramsey for instance. He essentially sells from the pulpit, but in most cases he runs his business as close to the teachings of Christ as you can. He teaches people not to buy material things they cannot afford. He also teaches people that after they have taken care of themselves and their family, they should try to find enjoyment in giving their money to those in need. I'm not saying I feel he has earned a full right to passage, but he certainly does walk the walk better than others.

The primary functions of the government however don't always coincide with the teachings if he bible. Many don't think it is the government's place to help those in need. Others feel that it isn't the government's job to stop an abortion based on religious reasons. As we can see the government's role in religion is subject to the wants and needs of its citizens more than the rules of Christianity. Therefore, if nobody has any intentions of following the bible collectively as a country, are we using his name in vain by having it all over our governing body?

As far as the money goes, I couldn't disagree more. I can't imagine why he would want his name on something that has caused so much hardship. He spends more time being critical of money on the bible than he does praising it.

Is aborting children against God's will?

Darth Cheney wrote:Is aborting children against God's will?

Not too sure about Gods will but it sure seems to be against a few religions will fer sure.

Darth Cheney wrote:Is aborting children against God's will?

Any answer there is purely personal speculation. Personally, I would say yes. Would I have said that 10-15 years ago if I was faced with that decision? I dunno. My guess is that as with many of these tough decisions, even the stiffest of critics may say "Just this once." I think that in regard to the decisions of others, someone who truly believes in God can rest assured that little soul will ultimately be given a fair shake.

Enough of that though.

Let's not pretend that abortion is the only place our government fails God. A government run healthcare program would be a given. These "entitlement" programs would be much stronger. We would have been expected to forgive Bin Laden instead of kill him.

Our government is not a Christian entity. To pretend that it is by associating it with God may be a pretty slippery slope.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:Is aborting children against God's will?

Any answer there is purely personal speculation.  Personally, I would say yes.  Would I have said that 10-15 years ago if I was faced with that decision?  I dunno.  My guess is that as with many of these tough decisions, even the stiffest of critics may say "Just this once."  I think that in regard to the decisions of others, someone who truly believes in God can rest assured that little soul will ultimately be given a fair shake.

Enough of that though.  

Let's not pretend that abortion is the only place our government fails God.  A government run healthcare program would be a given.  These "entitlement" programs would be much stronger.  We would have been expected to forgive Bin Laden instead of kill him.

Our government is not a Christian entity.  To pretend that it is by associating it with God may be a pretty slippery slope.

Government a Christian entity?


sounds like you are tossing out a well stuffed strawman, i don't think i have ever heard anyone say our government is a Christian entity.

nightlight88 wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:Is aborting children against God's will?

Any answer there is purely personal speculation.  Personally, I would say yes.  Would I have said that 10-15 years ago if I was faced with that decision?  I dunno.  My guess is that as with many of these tough decisions, even the stiffest of critics may say "Just this once."  I think that in regard to the decisions of others, someone who truly believes in God can rest assured that little soul will ultimately be given a fair shake.

Enough of that though.  

Let's not pretend that abortion is the only place our government fails God.  A government run healthcare program would be a given.  These "entitlement" programs would be much stronger.  We would have been expected to forgive Bin Laden instead of kill him.

Our government is not a Christian entity.  To pretend that it is by associating it with God may be a pretty slippery slope.

Government a Christian entity?


sounds like you are tossing out a well stuffed strawman, i don't think i have ever heard anyone say our government is a Christian entity.

Please....Let's try to be realistic here. Every time someone tries to remove anything related to God from a government run entity a fight ensues. What are they fighting over?

Dr. Jones wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:Is aborting children against God's will?

Any answer there is purely personal speculation.  Personally, I would say yes.  Would I have said that 10-15 years ago if I was faced with that decision?  I dunno.  My guess is that as with many of these tough decisions, even the stiffest of critics may say "Just this once."  I think that in regard to the decisions of others, someone who truly believes in God can rest assured that little soul will ultimately be given a fair shake.

Enough of that though.  

Let's not pretend that abortion is the only place our government fails God.  A government run healthcare program would be a given.  These "entitlement" programs would be much stronger.  We would have been expected to forgive Bin Laden instead of kill him.

Our government is not a Christian entity.  To pretend that it is by associating it with God may be a pretty slippery slope.

Government a Christian entity?


sounds like you are tossing out a well stuffed strawman,  i don't think i have ever heard anyone say our government is a Christian entity.

Please....Let's try to be realistic here.  Every time someone tries to remove anything related to God from a government run entity a fight ensues.  What are they fighting over?

The misinterpretation of the Constitution...it does not guarantee freedom from religion, it guarantees freedom to chose any religion or not. People who have zero understanding of the founders and their intentions reconstruct history to forward THEIR agenda..

Everyone knows the US was not founded on Christian principles since most of the early settlers and authors of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were a mixed bag of Muslims, Hindu, Buddha, and a tad of Shintoism thrown in for good measure.

That is the why the Ten Commandments of the Judeo-Christian faith is present within the building of the US Supreme Court.

Darth Cheney wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:Is aborting children against God's will?

Any answer there is purely personal speculation.  Personally, I would say yes.  Would I have said that 10-15 years ago if I was faced with that decision?  I dunno.  My guess is that as with many of these tough decisions, even the stiffest of critics may say "Just this once."  I think that in regard to the decisions of others, someone who truly believes in God can rest assured that little soul will ultimately be given a fair shake.

Enough of that though.  

Let's not pretend that abortion is the only place our government fails God.  A government run healthcare program would be a given.  These "entitlement" programs would be much stronger.  We would have been expected to forgive Bin Laden instead of kill him.

Our government is not a Christian entity.  To pretend that it is by associating it with God may be a pretty slippery slope.

Government a Christian entity?


sounds like you are tossing out a well stuffed strawman,  i don't think i have ever heard anyone say our government is a Christian entity.

Please....Let's try to be realistic here.  Every time someone tries to remove anything related to God from a government run entity a fight ensues.  What are they fighting over?

The misinterpretation of the Constitution...it does not guarantee freedom from religion, it guarantees freedom to chose any religion or not.  People who have zero understanding of the founders and their intentions reconstruct history to forward THEIR agenda..

I would say that freedom of religion most certainly means freedom from others' religion.  But that's a whole different conversation.  I am not talking about it in terms of the government's point if view, but from the churches point of view.

Let me put it to you in a language you will be more responsive to.  I saw a video a while back of Obama congratulating Planned Parenthood on all their wonderful work.  At the end of his speech he said "God bless you".  To me he is dropping God's name to create a level of comfort that says "He just said that God says abortion is ok, so it must be ok", when God would likely say something quite the opposite.

He used his position in our federal government as a very loud megaphone to spread his message that God thinks abortion is ok.  In doing so he broke the third commandment, big time.  What do you think?

Skeptical wrote:Everyone knows the US was not founded on Christian principles since most of the early settlers and authors of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were a mixed bag of Muslims, Hindu, Buddha, and a tad of Shintoism thrown in for good measure.

That is the why the Ten Commandments of the Judeo-Christian faith is present within the building of the US Supreme Court.  

You make some great points.  Would you say that the judgments handed down by the Supreme Court follow the teachings of Jesus?  I say no.  If your church was doing an ongoing fundraiser at a particular event that suddenly turned in a direction that was not acceptable to members of your church would you continue to set up there?  Again I say no. Why cut the Supreme Court building slack?  Is it because you don't want to lose the perceived relationship with someone with such a large megaphone? Is it for God's benefit or your own?

Dr. Jones wrote:

Skeptical wrote:Everyone knows the US was not founded on Christian principles since most of the early settlers and authors of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were a mixed bag of Muslims, Hindu, Buddha, and a tad of Shintoism thrown in for good measure.

That is the why the Ten Commandments of the Judeo-Christian faith is present within the building of the US Supreme Court.  

You make some great points.  Would you say that the judgments handed down by the Supreme Court follow the teachings of Jesus?  I say no.  If your church was doing an ongoing fundraiser at a particular event that suddenly turned in a direction that was not acceptable to members of your church would you continue to set up there?  Again I say no. Why cut the Supreme Court building slack?  Is it because you don't want to lose the perceived relationship with someone with such a large megaphone?  Is it for God's benefit or your own?

We can play the 'what if' game all day.

I would say only a minority of azzholes want every mention of CHRISTIANITY stricken from sight. But oh my goodnes, not islam.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:Is aborting children against God's will?

Any answer there is purely personal speculation.  Personally, I would say yes.  Would I have said that 10-15 years ago if I was faced with that decision?  I dunno.  My guess is that as with many of these tough decisions, even the stiffest of critics may say "Just this once."  I think that in regard to the decisions of others, someone who truly believes in God can rest assured that little soul will ultimately be given a fair shake.

Enough of that though.  

Let's not pretend that abortion is the only place our government fails God.  A government run healthcare program would be a given.  These "entitlement" programs would be much stronger.  We would have been expected to forgive Bin Laden instead of kill him.

Our government is not a Christian entity.  To pretend that it is by associating it with God may be a pretty slippery slope.

Government a Christian entity?


sounds like you are tossing out a well stuffed strawman,  i don't think i have ever heard anyone say our government is a Christian entity.

Please....Let's try to be realistic here.  Every time someone tries to remove anything related to God from a government run entity a fight ensues.  What are they fighting over?

The misinterpretation of the Constitution...it does not guarantee freedom from religion, it guarantees freedom to chose any religion or not.  People who have zero understanding of the founders and their intentions reconstruct history to forward THEIR agenda..

I would say that freedom of religion most certainly means freedom from others' religion.  But that's a whole different conversation.  I am not talking about it in terms of the government's point if view, but from the churches point of view.

Let me put it to you in a language you will be more responsive to.  I saw a video a while back of Obama congratulating Planned Parenthood on all their wonderful work.  At the end of his speech he said "God bless you".  To me he is dropping God's name to create a level of comfort that says "He just said that God says abortion is ok, so it must be ok", when God would likely say something quite the opposite.

He used his position in our federal government as a very loud megaphone to spread his message that God thinks abortion is ok.  In doing so he broke the third commandment, big time.  What do you think?

"Freedom of religion" is actually a colloquialism. The Constitution does not use that phrase nor does it mention anything close to "Freedom from Religion". It does mention a prohibition of the "free exercise" of religion and prohibits Congress from establishing a religion. Stamping or printing the national motto, "In God We Trust", on the currency or coinage has been held by an Federal Appeals Court in Aronow vs United States that "It is quite obvious that the national motto and the slogan on coinage and currency 'In God We Trust' has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion. Its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character and bears no true resemblance to a governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise."

Skeptical wrote:Everyone knows the US was not founded on Christian principles since most of the early settlers and authors of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were a mixed bag of Muslims, Hindu, Buddha, and a tad of Shintoism thrown in for good measure.

That is the why the Ten Commandments of the Judeo-Christian faith is present within the building of the US Supreme Court.  

I know now I should have included a sarcasm disclaimer when I posted the above.

It was because of this

Dr. Jones wrote: Our government is not a Christian entity.  To pretend that it is by associating it with God may be a pretty slippery slope.

Numerous times on various opinion forums there have been comments that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles but nobody that I recall ever declared this country to be a Christian nation (except by those who read that as meaning the US is a Christian nation and accused the poster of saying such).  IMHO founded on Judeo-Christian principles and being a Christian nation are totally different mainly due to the 1st Ammendment to the US Constitution; "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

At no time on those various other forums did anybody make the comment the government was a Christian entity until earlier this evening on this thread.

That is why I ventured in with the sarcasm about the early settlers of this great country and did not mention the fact the dominant religious followings were of the various factions of the Judeo-Christian faith.  With that in mind it logically follows those various Judeo-Christian teachings would somewhat influence the foundation documents of this country.  It can be said it was due to the wisdom of those creators of the Constitution and subsequent first ten Amendments and the very first in particular is the reason this country is not a Christian nation.

As I have said, people claim that there is nothing religious about our government, but any time anyone tries to remove God's name from anything there is hell to pay.  Also any time someone tries to build a shrine to an alternative religion or no religion at all, there is hell to pay.  Fargo has the ten commandments displayed on the lawn of their city hall.  A group wanted to put up a monument that very simply stated that as a founding principle of our constitution, we are entitled to believe in whatever religion we choose, or no religion at all.  So the city passed an ordinance against any competing monuments.  Does there seem to be any "freedom of religion" there?  People seem to be taking out of both sides of their mouths.

But again, we have gone off topic.  I'm starting to see a pattern here.  I'm guessing it's because people are sometimes uncomfortable accounting for their sins.

Again, my point is not from a constitutional standpoint but from a biblical one.  When we take God's name or his teachings and drop them in a manner of subtle coercion to support something that is not consistent with his own teachings, we are ultimately using his name for our own benefit, not his.  This breaks the third commandment.

Dr. Jones wrote:But again, we have gone off topic.  I'm starting to see a pattern here.  I'm guessing it's because people are sometimes uncomfortable accounting for their sins.

Again, my point is not from a constitutional standpoint but from a biblical one.  When we take God's name or his teachings and drop them in a manner of subtle coercion to support something that is not consistent with his own teachings, we are ultimately using his name for our own benefit, not his.  This breaks the third commandment.

I will go a long way to find a company that operates under good, Christ-like principles but I will refuse to do business with anyone who uses God as a cheap marketing tool.

Here are a couple passages from the bible that give a little insight on God's opinion of money. I especially like the one from the book of Matthew where he basically says the two are like oil and water. I'm sure he is pleased.

1Timothy 6:10
For the love of money is a root if all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.

Matthew 6:24
“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.

Dr. Jones wrote:Here are a couple passages from the bible that give a little insight on God's opinion of money.  I especially like the one from the book of Matthew where he basically says the two are like oil and water.  I'm sure he is pleased.  

1Timothy 6:10
For the love of money is a root if all kinds of evils.  It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.

Matthew 6:24
“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.

So what is your point in all this ?

Dr. Jones wrote:
I would say that freedom of religion most certainly means freedom from others' religion.  But that's a whole different conversation.  I am not talking about it in terms of the government's point if view, but from the churches point of view.

Let me put it to you in a language you will be more responsive to.  I saw a video a while back of Obama congratulating Planned Parenthood on all their wonderful work.  At the end of his speech he said "God bless you".  To me he is dropping God's name to create a level of comfort that says "He just said that God says abortion is ok, so it must be ok", when God would likely say something quite the opposite.

He used his position in our federal government as a very loud megaphone to spread his message that God thinks abortion is ok.  In doing so he broke the third commandment, big time.  What do you think?

I agree. He did break the third commandment.

Dr. Jones wrote:As I have said, people claim that there is nothing religious about our government, but any time anyone tries to remove God's name from anything there is hell to pay.  Also any time someone tries to build a shrine to an alternative religion or no religion at all, there is hell to pay.  Fargo has the ten commandments displayed on the lawn of their city hall.  A group wanted to put up a monument that very simply stated that as a founding principle of our constitution, we are entitled to believe in whatever religion we choose, or no religion at all.  So the city passed an ordinance against any competing monuments.  Does there seem to be any "freedom of religion" there?  People seem to be taking out of both sides of their mouths.

But again, we have gone off topic.  I'm starting to see a pattern here.  I'm guessing it's because people are sometimes uncomfortable accounting for their sins.

Again, my point is not from a constitutional standpoint but from a biblical one.  When we take God's name or his teachings and drop them in a manner of subtle coercion to support something that is not consistent with his own teachings, we are ultimately using his name for our own benefit, not his.  This breaks the third commandment.

Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.

nightlight88 wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:As I have said, people claim that there is nothing religious about our government, but any time anyone tries to remove God's name from anything there is hell to pay.  Also any time someone tries to build a shrine to an alternative religion or no religion at all, there is hell to pay.  Fargo has the ten commandments displayed on the lawn of their city hall.  A group wanted to put up a monument that very simply stated that as a founding principle of our constitution, we are entitled to believe in whatever religion we choose, or no religion at all.  So the city passed an ordinance against any competing monuments.  Does there seem to be any "freedom of religion" there?  People seem to be taking out of both sides of their mouths.

But again, we have gone off topic.  I'm starting to see a pattern here.  I'm guessing it's because people are sometimes uncomfortable accounting for their sins.

Again, my point is not from a constitutional standpoint but from a biblical one.  When we take God's name or his teachings and drop them in a manner of subtle coercion to support something that is not consistent with his own teachings, we are ultimately using his name for our own benefit, not his.  This breaks the third commandment.

Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.

Absolutely. It's never to late for us to change. Should you and I start a crusade to keep the people in this country from using the Lord's name for their own benefit? Starting with our federal and state governments and working our way down though the ranks. It's time we make people realize if they are going to claim to live by God, they better start acing accordingly. What do you say?

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:
I would say that freedom of religion most certainly means freedom from others' religion.  But that's a whole different conversation.  I am not talking about it in terms of the government's point if view, but from the churches point of view.

Let me put it to you in a language you will be more responsive to.  I saw a video a while back of Obama congratulating Planned Parenthood on all their wonderful work.  At the end of his speech he said "God bless you".  To me he is dropping God's name to create a level of comfort that says "He just said that God says abortion is ok, so it must be ok", when God would likely say something quite the opposite.

He used his position in our federal government as a very loud megaphone to spread his message that God thinks abortion is ok.  In doing so he broke the third commandment, big time.  What do you think?

I agree. He did break the third commandment.

Just him?

Dr. Jones wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:
I would say that freedom of religion most certainly means freedom from others' religion.  But that's a whole different conversation.  I am not talking about it in terms of the government's point if view, but from the churches point of view.

Let me put it to you in a language you will be more responsive to.  I saw a video a while back of Obama congratulating Planned Parenthood on all their wonderful work.  At the end of his speech he said "God bless you".  To me he is dropping God's name to create a level of comfort that says "He just said that God says abortion is ok, so it must be ok", when God would likely say something quite the opposite.

He used his position in our federal government as a very loud megaphone to spread his message that God thinks abortion is ok.  In doing so he broke the third commandment, big time.  What do you think?

I agree. He did break the third commandment.

Just him?

In that post, you listed one specific example. I agreed with that one specific example.

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:
I would say that freedom of religion most certainly means freedom from others' religion.  But that's a whole different conversation.  I am not talking about it in terms of the government's point if view, but from the churches point of view.

Let me put it to you in a language you will be more responsive to.  I saw a video a while back of Obama congratulating Planned Parenthood on all their wonderful work.  At the end of his speech he said "God bless you".  To me he is dropping God's name to create a level of comfort that says "He just said that God says abortion is ok, so it must be ok", when God would likely say something quite the opposite.

He used his position in our federal government as a very loud megaphone to spread his message that God thinks abortion is ok.  In doing so he broke the third commandment, big time.  What do you think?

I agree. He did break the third commandment.

Just him?

In that post, you listed one specific example. I agreed with that one specific example.

Can't argue with that.




Only a fool would try...