Can't have it both ways, Dora. Reread the quote.
When you're using the terms "if this is going to be", "we've got to" "or we've got to", that clearly communicates that if you accept the premise, then you've got to follow through with X. Again, it relies on the acceptance of the premise and all that entails.
Personally, I don't accept the premise that this is a Christian nation. One that has many Christians in its population, no doubt. But not operated by Christians nor encoding Christian doctrine as its laws- nor should it be. Want a theocracy? Try Iran. That's a Muslim nation, following Muslim law, not just one that happens to have a Muslim majority. There's a difference.
It struck no nerve for me personally, aside from the amusing hypocrisy of people who shunt aside and mock religion at every opportunity, yet use it to browbeat others into accepting their collectivist philosophy as a logical extension of religious beliefs that they themselves do not share.
Further amusing that this discussion falls after a week in which Michelle Bachman found and channeled her inner Iowan while on the stump testing the presidential waters. Funny how people can pull things out that serve their interests at the time, and just as quickly throw a blanket over them when they don't. I'll be she won't be giving that speech in Stillwater when she's running to retain her seat in Congress.
Last edited by thrice on Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:56 pm; edited 1 time in total