Fewer prayer breakfasts and more public discussion of moral issues with a faith dimension would suit my taste better- and give me less cause for concern that it is all for show.
» Back to full entry
» Back to full entry



All Comments (6)
Prayer for 2008 to be a year of thorough washing by Jesus Christ; so that our heart doesn't scream out for unholiness!
Searchers for God's best, Jesus Christ. whether you are a Rabbi, the Queen or a Prince who understands very little you will need to wash yourself in God's wisdom, if you are desirous to honour God.
The Holy Bible is God's gift of wisdom to us. Bathe your tired toes in these holy books and you'll soon find that you can twinkle them.
The truth is that the Prince of Wales needs a good wash in God's wisdom, Tony Blair needs a good wash in God's wisdom and I need an extra good wash under the tap and in God's wisdom.
Lovers of ultimate truth, I'll report back to you when I have got things right.
One final observation You need to bathe yourself in God's love letter as much as I do!
January 15, 2008 11:35 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on January 15, 2008 23:35
Amen. Jesus never attended a prayer breakfast, and I intend as much as humanly possible to follow Jesus' example. He also said that if you want to pray, don't make a big public display out of it. Go to your room, shut the door, and pray to God in splendid solitude. Show me people who make a big deal of praying in public, Jesus said, and I will show you world class hypocrites.
January 4, 2008 6:08 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on January 4, 2008 06:08
Baroness Julia Neuberger,
Welcome back and Happy New Year.
As you stated "...and right that we should be suspicious of too much public demonstration of religious observance-".
I do share too on your observation how a person's personal religiousity can and do affect his or her political stance on issues you stated.
Thank you and best regards
"J"
January 3, 2008 5:25 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on January 3, 2008 17:25
I offer a comment based on the essay written by Rabbi Neuberger.
it is true that "religious views can affect a person's natural political stance considerably" but when I cast my vote for a candidate I am not voting for the candidate's personal religious views. when I witness a candidate take the oath of office, I expect that person to uphold this country's Constitution and act for the benefit of all of the electorate.
I accept the truth of Edmond Burke's statement, upon being reelected to the Parliment, when he said "Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion." however, when an elected official uses his personal religious beliefs to draft policy that forces said religious belief on the population as a whole, that is a betrayal.
we do need to know where a particular candidate stands. I would absolutely feel betrayed by an offical who pretends to be non-sectarian and interested in working for the public interest only to find out that the interest is really focused on protecting people from their own misguided beliefs. however, in the USA these days it seems that having strong faith is becoming a test for worth of a candidate.
I am and have always been a religious minority. I was rasied in an observant Jewish household and now define myself as a Pagan (drawing heavily from the faith tradition of my upbringing). I have always been aware that there are people, even politicians, who would prefer I be silent. they may even take steps to silence me if I don't cooperate with their wishes. but that is not what Democracy is supposed to be about. certainly not what the Constitution is intended to provide. the US Constitution is a document which has always been about ever increasing freedom and inclusion.
that is unless the current administration and the latest crop of candidates succeed in ammending the document to specifically exclude gay and lesbian people from accessing their rights as full citizens.
abortion, stem cell research, LGBT rights, marriage, death penalty, the right to die with choice and dignity, these and more all have religious implications. but elected officials need to work to find balance between competing interests. inclusion usually allows for increased freedom - if abortion remains legal it is by no means manditory. choice always includes the option for people to abstain for religious or other reasons. lack of choice means imposing the religious will of the few onto the many.
January 3, 2008 2:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on January 3, 2008 14:53
http://famousmormons.net/
January 3, 2008 1:32 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on January 3, 2008 13:32
Ooooopss!
VOTE: (((((( Peace Love Rock nRoll nRap Mit_ROMNEY fpr Prez, 08 YEA! )))))))))))))))))
Hallaluja! Praise the fearles & thus zero Jealous Holy No Man, thee CREATOR/MAKER of O.U.,R. Holy Cosmic FIAT-LUX, aka our MIRACLES IN MOTION immortally so!
May XTRA Photon's shine at the sides of our brave AMERICAN & FRIENDLY's boy's & Girl's ,whom, never die or died in vain, in defence of this Holy miraculous [zero 'sineth' nor 'curseth' appearance] REPUBLIC of SPACE-SHIP Momma Poppa Earth, aka S.S. GAIA, aka S.S. GEOID, aka S.S. TELLUSng something!
DOWN with Mid East MONARCHY & THEOCRACY and Global Too!
Hence: Potential Eclati-On, Mr. Prince Gearge W. BUSH, aka the MODERN-NAPOLIAN of the Mid East & where needed!
HARK:
VOTE: (((((( Peace Love Rock nRoll nRap Mit_ROMNEY fpr Prez, 08 YEA! )))))))))))))))))
January 3, 2008 1:18 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on January 3, 2008 13:18