Hey Colorado! How's that TABOR working out for you?
Mike Keefe, cartoonist at the Denver Post, pictured the impacts of TABOR on the schools in Colorado.
Our blog neighbors a www.ontheborderline.net have been telling us how good that TABOR (Taxpayers'Bill Of Rights) has been working out for the good citizens of Colorado. After being referred by a friend to check out what the Denver daily newspapers have to say about it, it doesn't look like everybody in Colorado agrees with the OTBL'ers. I'm going to use this post to dump TABOR-related points of interest. If you have any addition info or links, feel free to add them in the comments.
Bridges are falling apart. Schools are overcrowded. Republicans working withDemocrats to solve the problems caused by TABOR are being trashed by their fellow Republicans. Social programs are under attack. Higher education is getting squashed. Etc., etc., etc...
21 comments:
Article Last Updated: 9/21/2005 03:36 AM
$91 million tab to fix bridges
CDOT estimate would cover only state's 20 worst. Repair needs across Colorado are rising as funding remains stagnant. Referendums C and D would provide little direct help.
By Robert Sanchez
Denver Post Staff Writer
DenverPost.com
The number of Colorado bridges in need of replacement has increased by nearly a third since 2003, prompting transportation officials to ask for $91.3 million in additional funding to fix the worst.
A Colorado Department of Transportation list of the state's 20 most urgent bridge projects includes at least five "structurally deficient" or "functionally obsolete" bridges in the metro area that must be replaced or significantly repaired now - though transportation officials warned this week that those plans could go unfunded without significant state help next year.
Overall, 106 bridges in the state received "poor" ratings, up from roughly 80 in 2003.
"We're not holding our breath" on the funding, said Joe Jehn, who represents Jefferson County on the state transportation commission that will study CDOT's list at a meeting next week. "But there are serious problems looming, and we can't repair our bridges with the current funding stream."
If passed this fall, Referendums C and D - which would let state government keep up to $3.7 billion that would otherwise be refunded under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights - would help fund certain CDOT projects, but few involve bridge work.
Still, said state Rep. Buffie McFadyen, D-Pueblo West, the referendums could free up additional money to eventually replace aging bridges across Colorado.
"We're looking at a $492 million shortfall in the state ... and finding another $91 million to fix bridges is going to be impossible," said McFadyen, who chairs the capital development committee that will review CDOT's request next year.
The capital construction list highlights CDOT's bridge-related priorities and comes as the transportation department struggles to replace or maintain crumbling bridges without significant increases in money.
Evidence of the state's aging bridges is visible in concrete chunks that have fallen from roadways in the past two years. Last year, a chunk of concrete dropped from the Speer Boulevard bridge onto Interstate 25. In 2003, concrete from the West Sixth Avenue bridge fell onto the interstate.
In both cases, no one was injured.
CDOT spends roughly $32 million annually from state and federal gas taxes to replace bridges and uses other money from maintenance and emergency funds to do repair work.
Since 1997, CDOT officials said, the bridge-replacement fund has seen its income stagnate, rising only as much as inflation even as the bridge-replacement backlog exceeded $300 million.
In 10 years, CDOT has said, about one-third of the state's bridges will be at least 50 years old. In 20 years, more than half of them will be at least 50 years old. That means more than 1,500 bridges could be in line for significant repair or replacement.
"The problem is that so many bridges are in such bad shape that they could pose a very serious threat in five years," said CDOT spokeswoman Stacey Stegman. "We're not crying wolf here. There are major, major problems."
While more than 3,200 bridges statewide are in good condition, 488 others need at least some rehabilitation or need to be replaced.
Metro-area bridges on the replacement list include U.S. 285 at Wadsworth Boulevard in Lakewood; 285 at County Road 60 near Morrison; Colorado 58 near Ealey Road outside Golden; and Interstate 76 at the Union Pacific Railroad line near Commerce City.
Also on the list for replacement or significant repair is the Interstate 70 viaduct near the Denver Coliseum. It would cost at least $16.5 million in state money to rehabilitate the viaduct for the short term.
Eventually, CDOT said, it will need $200 million to completely replace the bridge.
"Basically, we're putting Band-Aids on these bridges," said Stegman, the CDOT spokeswoman. "We're holding them together the best we can."
Staff writer Robert Sanchez can be reached at 303-820-1282 or rsanchez@denverpost.com.
Article Last Updated: 9/20/2005 11:57 PM
jim spencer
Larimer GOP puts party over people
By Jim Spencer
Denver Post Staff Columnist
DenverPost.com
Bill Kaufman served eight years in the Colorado General Assembly as a Republican representative from Larimer County. He has been chairman of the Larimer County Republican Party three times.
So when Kaufman went ballistic with the Larimer Republican executive board recently, he was no outside agitator.
"I learned with great dismay that the ... Executive Board voted to oppose Referendums C and D," Kaufman wrote in an Aug. 24 e-mail to current chairwoman Nancy Hunter. "In effect, you have just told Sen. Steve Johnson and Rep. (Bob) McCluskey to go to hell ... ."
Like Kaufman, Johnson and McCluskey are Republicans who support C and D.
As the campaign for state budget reform enters the homestretch, Republicans across Colorado should seriously consider Kaufman's caveat.
This vote is not a partisan event.
For the next five years, Referendum C lets the state keep money otherwise refunded to citizens under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights. Referendum D lets the state sell bonds for public projects.
Together, they are the brainchild of a Republican governor and a Democrat-controlled legislature. But C and D could not be on the ballot without significant GOP support from state and local legislators.
The idea that guys like Johnson and McCluskey aren't true Republicans because they support C and D is plain stupid, Kaufman said. That's why as party chairman, Kaufman never let the Larimer GOP board take stands on referendums. The current board, Kaufman wrote to Hunter, is "splitting the party."
Hunter said the board's decision on C and D came after state Rep. Jim Welker, a board member, offered a resolution opposing the referendums.
Hunter said the board listened to arguments for and against.
"We didn't tell anybody to go to hell," Hunter said. "We believe in Steve and Bob, and we'll support them in 2006. Folks will say we agreed to disagree and move forward."
Kaufman says it won't be that easy.
The Republican Party in Larimer and throughout the state has "spent the last 20 years telling people the government is no good," Kaufman said. "I will never tell you that government is perfect. I will never tell you that government can't improve. But you have to have government. And the never-ending denigration of government is wrong."
Not to mention self-destructive.
Hunter claims "taxpayers should not be the ones doing without" by giving up TABOR refunds.
In fact, many taxpayers will see programs cut without C and D. Many of them live in Larimer County.
By insisting that the state needs no more money, the Larimer GOP board has officially positioned itself against Republican Gov. Bill Owens. It has officially positioned itself against the ruling bodies of the county's three largest communities - Fort Collins, Loveland and Estes Park. It has officially positioned itself against one of the county's most important economic engines - Colorado State University, which already has suffered budget cuts and badly needs C and D to pass.
The board has also rebuked Kaufman, a member of the state transportation commission. For two years, the ex-Republican legislator has been telling folks that funds are not available to maintain existing roads, much less build new ones.
Hunter noted that she "didn't see any money for transportation coming to Larimer and Weld (counties) from C and D." Even if that's true, the executive board's opposition to the referendums leads to no future funding from another source.
Instead, the Republican board's stand is an ideological attack with no practical fallback position.
If C and D fail, the state estimates it must make $365 million in cuts to balance next year's budget.
Yet members of the executive board of the Larimer GOP have gone on record that Colorado is flush with dollars.
Conveniently, they didn't bother to discuss which government services they are willing to give up. And they sure didn't ask their neighbors.
TABOR | referendums c and d
Owens states case for C, D
Governor tailors reasons for referendums to Springs groups. This week's trip across Colorado includes explanations to key voting segments on why they should vote for suspending spending limits.
By Mark P. Couch
Denver Post Staff Writer
DenverPost.com
Colorado Springs - Gov. Bill Owens on Tuesday crafted custom-fit messages for tourism promoters, El Paso County residents and health care officials - part of an aggressive effort to recruit support for Referendums C and D.
Owens this week is traveling the state, explaining to key voting groups why they should vote for the plan to suspend the state's spending limits.
Referendum C asks voters to let the state keep and spend up to $3.7 billion over the next five years - money that would otherwise be returned to them under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights. Referendum D would let the state borrow $2.1 billion for roads, schools and health care.
During a luncheon speech to tourism promoters in Denver, Owens pitched better roads to bring in tourists.
In a news conference for El Paso County media, Owens proclaimed his conservative credentials by saying he has already cut $1 billion in state spending since 2001.
And to a group of health care professionals gathering in Colorado Springs, Owens decried a proposal to let first-time drug offenders avoid prison - a move that probably would increase demand on the medical system.
"What I'm trying to do is set Colorado's fiscal condition so that whoever succeeds me won't have to address this problem," Owens said during his speech to the Colorado Health Care Association, whose members have already contributed $95,600 in support of the ballot measures.
Owens is not the only politician on the campaign trail for the November ballot measures.
Democratic House Speaker Andrew Romanoff has been participating in almost daily debates across the state, taking on opponents such as Republican House Minority Leader Joe Stengel and Independence Institute president Jon Caldara.
As Owens heads into his final 16 months in office, he is making a strong push for ballot measures that would lift the limits imposed by TABOR, a constitutional amendment he backed when it passed in 1992.
In his speeches, the main message is always the same: The budget is broken and needs to be fixed.
"We're not making this up," Owens said. "Colorado really is facing a challenge."
According to Owens, the state can't recover from the hit it took in the early years of this decade, when the technology bubble burst and wiped out jobs and when terrorist attacks and wildfires deterred tourism.
TABOR | referendums c and d
Effect of TABOR tweaking on higher ed is debated
By Chris Frates
Denver Post Staff Writer
DenverPost.com
Grand Junction - The author of one of November's budget referendums and Republican gubernatorial candidate Marc Holtzman crossed swords Monday over what the election's outcome will mean to the future of higher education in Colorado.
Democratic Rep. Bernie Buescher of Grand Junction, who authored Referendum D, argued that passage of Referendum C is vital to keeping state tuition affordable.
Holtzman said the state's colleges and universities would be fine without November's budget measures. He said supporters were "trying to suggest scare tactics."
The debate was sponsored by Mesa State College's student newspaper, the Criterion. Both men answered questions about the referendums from a panel of student journalists.
Tuition at Mesa State increased 4.8 percent this academic year while Metropolitan State College of Denver saw a 14 percent hike and some students at the University of Colorado saw a 28 percent spike, a panelist said. The student asked both men how C and D would affect tuition.
Students pay too much tuition, Holtzman said, and he wants to find ways to freeze it.
If the measures fail, he said, tuition at public colleges and universities "will not be affected at all because we have other alternatives," which include selling the state's future tobacco-settlement revenue for a one-time payment or selling some state buildings and leasing them back.
Higher education, Buescher said, has seen the brunt of $1 billion in budget cuts. When a $900 million higher-education budget has been pared to $575 million, "the result is higher tuition," he said.
If C fails, Buescher said, the voucher students receive from the state to offset tuition will fall from $2,400 to $800.
In interviews, audience members said they were not swayed by the debate.
Brittany Warden, a Mesa State junior, said she favors the measures. "Listening to Holtzman, I just hear a lot of repetition and a lot of generalization," she said.
Garry Brewer of Grand Junction said he didn't have an opinion coming in but said Buescher "didn't sell me. ... It's time to go back to the drawing board."
TABOR series: part II
Rest of nation keeps close eye on fate of TABOR
Because Colorado has what is considered the model law, both foes and fans of the measure are using the state's experience to bolster their arguments in other states.
By Chris Frates
Denver Post Staff Writer
DenverPost.com
Colorado's Taxpayer's Bill of Rights is the foundation stone of the anti-tax movement, so true believers are closely watching November's budget-reform measures. The results could have national reverberations.
Since Coloradans passed the bill known as TABOR in 1992, the nation's strictest revenue limit has spawned many imitators. This year, similar spending or revenue restrictions have been proposed in 24 states.
TABOR supporters have held the constitutional amendment up as a model to be emulated. Opponents have pointed to Colorado's problems as harbingers of things to come if TABOR passes in other states.
In fact, most other states considering tax limitations have removed or softened the TABOR provision that has put Colorado in a bind. The "ratchet effect" prevents Colorado state revenues from rebounding from recession as quickly as the economy recovers.
Nevada voters will likely consider a TABOR-like spending limit in fall 2006. State Sen. Bob Beers, who is pushing the Nevada measure, called TABOR a "beacon of hope and common sense."
"Throughout the country, advocates of liberty and freedom look toward Colorado as the model for balanced, reasonable government growth," he said.
Beers, a gubernatorial candidate, also is gazing east to see how Referendums C and D fare in November. He and others decided to hold off circulating petitions to put a spending limitation on the ballot until after Colorado's election.
Opponents of Nevada's proposed spending limitation also are using Colorado's experience to argue against implementing it there, Beers said.
"They have been arguing that what we call TASC here, Tax and Spend Control in Nevada, is a bad idea because, after all, Colorado's about to repeal it," he said.
Referendum C would not repeal TABOR. It uses a provision of the constitutional amendment to ask voters to allow state government to keep all its revenue for the next five years instead of returning an estimated $3.7 billion to taxpayers as otherwise required by TABOR.
Referendum D asks voters for permission to take out what is essentially $2.1 billion in loans to pay for road, school and other improvements.
Grover Norquist, perhaps the nation's most influential anti-tax advocate, recently told a small group of well-heeled Republican donors that Referendums C and D are "not the way to strengthen the state or move us in the right direction."
Norquist spoke at a Greenwood Village home to help Colorado House Republicans raise money to regain control of the chamber they ran for almost three decades before this year.
In an interview, Norquist said that while Referendums C and D are "a big deal to Colorado taxpayers," they will not affect the national movement for more limitations on taxes and spending.
For instance, Californians will vote on a spending limit this fall being pushed by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican candidate for governor, is pushing for a TABOR-like bill in 2006. A number of other states are discussing similar limits.
"TABOR was a model when people decided they needed to focus on spending restraints. TABOR has therefore already done most of what it needed to do. It convinced activists in many of the 50 states that this is the model," Norquist said.
David Bradley is a policy analyst for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal Washington, D.C., think tank. His group opposes TABOR limits.
Colorado's budget-reform measures make it more difficult for the anti-tax crowd to sell TABOR in other states, Bradley said. That TABOR supporters like Republican Gov. Bill Owens are pushing the reform measures "is pretty damaging to the pro-TABOR side."
Even so, Bradley said, "I don't think the outcome is going to necessarily stop ... the pro-TABOR forces."
Americans for Prosperity is a conservative free-market grassroots organization pushing for revenue and spending limits throughout the country.
Barry Poulson, a University of Colorado economics professor who works with the group, has designed model TABOR legislation that addresses some of the problems Colorado has seen.
Regardless of what happens to Referendums C and D, anti-tax advocates "see the TABOR limit as the most effective way to restrain the growth of government," he said.
The results of Colorado's election will almost certainly find their way into the national debate over spending and revenue limits.
"I think both sides are watching Colorado," Bradley said. "Closely."
TABOR series: part III
Special interests first in line for TABOR refunds
Tax breaks give select groups more money than individual taxpayers. Douglas Bruce, the amendment's author, says lawmakers have abused the measure's flexibility.
By Chris Frates
Denver Post Staff Writer
DenverPost.com
The Taxpayer's Bill of Rights was sold to Colorado voters in 1992 as a tool for empowering taxpayers. But in the 13 years since, lawmakers - without voter approval - have eroded that authority by carving out tax breaks that give 17 special-interest groups first claim to any tax refunds.
In fact, special-interest groups would receive more money than the average taxpayer in four of the next five years if voters reject November's ballot proposal to suspend refunds under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights.
Legislative estimates show that over the next five years, almost $2 billion - more than half of all refunds - would end up in the pockets of special interests.
The biggest winners: the state's businesses. They top the list of special taxpayer groups with a $650 million tax break.
Other groups that get first dibs on the money include parents with child-care expenses, more affluent residents with capital-gains income and businesses that invest in certain types of programs or equipment.
After those special tax breaks are paid, anything left gets doled out to the rest of the state's taxpayers.
That's not the way it was supposed to be, says TABOR author Douglas Bruce.
"Here I give them flexibility, and they abuse it," Bruce said of lawmakers' decisions to create tax credits that send pet groups to the front of the line when it comes time to collect a TABOR refund.
Because of the economic downturn, Coloradans haven't seen a TABOR refund since 2001. But refunds are expected to be due again this year. If Referendums C and D pass, refunds would be suspended for five years after this year.
Referendum C would let the state keep an estimated $3.7 billion more than it is allowed to under TABOR. Referendum D asks voters to authorize $2.1 billion in loans largely for transportation and school improvements.
The measure's proponents use projections by the nonpartisan legislative council to estimate the suspension would cost the average taxpayer - someone who does not qualify for any of the tax breaks - a total of about $500 over those five years.
Opponents put the cost to taxpayers at a total of about $3,200 for a family of four, because that's how much the family will pay in taxes. It does not matter, they argue, that not all of it will be refunded to them.
Coloradans saw their first TABOR refund in 1997 - five years after the amendment's passage. Between 1997 and 2001, the state refunded $3.25 billion to taxpayers.
Lawmakers passed the first two tax credits in 1999 and the list grew to the current 17 by 2001 and includes breaks for charitable contributions, rural health care providers, pollution-control equipment and farmers.
With more tax breaks, the TABOR refund was distributed less proportionally. Even among those lucky enough to qualify for tax breaks, gaping payment disparities exist.
For instance, Coloradans' most recent TABOR refund came in 2001 and averaged $206 without any tax breaks.
More than 200,000 low-income Coloradans qualified for an additional tax break averaging $156 that year.
Meanwhile, about 9,000 more affluent residents received an average $5,433 break on capital-gains taxes. A related capital gains tax credit kicked back an average of $4,600 to 6,000 people.
That same year, more than 81,000 businesses qualified for a credit toward the taxes they paid to local governments on personal property. Of the almost $100 million credited, the 10 largest companies pocketed $22.8 million. The top 100 companies collected $42.7 million.
Meanwhile, taxpayer Lee Gray, whose household didn't qualify for a tax break, said he pocketed about $250.
Gray, a lawyer who lives in Centennial with his wife and two young daughters, has a household income of between $110,000 and $120,000 and is likely to give up about $675 over the next five years if Referendum C passes.
He said he doesn't think he qualifies for special tax credits. He supports the measures.
"Frankly, with the way we're growing, I think we're screwed if we don't do something for our infrastructure as far as roads and better schools," he said.
Don Willson, a small-business owner from Parker and father of four, probably will see about $1,000 in refunds during the five years covered by Referendum C. Wilson opposes both measures because government is already too big and "the only way to keep government in check in this day and age is to reduce its revenue."
Government, he said, should focus its energy where it excels. For instance, In-N-Out Burgers sells only sodas, milkshakes, burgers and fries.
"They should refocus their attention on a few things that they do real well, and that's protecting us, building infrastructure like roads and ... stick with education," he said.
The tax credits, he said, don't "sit well."
"The special interests are the voices that are heard, and I don't think that's right."
Your first problem is that you read the paper. The second problem is that you believe the paper. the third problem is that you are not there.
What would you suggest I read to give me the "truth" about TABOR? Why wouldn't I believe the paper? I believe the two Denver dailies have covered the issues related to TABOR quiet clearly and have provided a "balanced" look at the subject.
Having just come back from spending a week in the Denver area, I did get a chance to talk to people who are directly impacted by TABOR. They said they get between $100 and $200 annual for a tax rebate. They also said they would gladly give the rebate up, if the state fixed the roads.
You are correct in saying that I don't live there. But that doesn't stop my friends at www.ontheborderline.net from rambling on about the glories of TABOR in Colorado. My point with these post articles is to provide additional information on the subject. I believe the OTBL'ers only believe the media outlets the sing their three chord song: less government, public schools are all bad and so are the unions -- especially teachers' unions.
I put the post in about the GOP putting the party over the people, because I thought it goes well with the OTBL'ers calling Shelia Harsdorf and Kitty Roades RINO's because they see the importance of working to improve the educational opportunities for the constituents.
So post me some links that give me a balanced look at the subject. Or better, yet, put it your own words.
My feeling is that TABOR as an amendment is a method of legislation that is pushed by the political fringe that doesn't have the support to get it passed through the legislative channels...
What you need is not more articles to prove a point. What you need a new focus. Focus on scripture because as you say, my friend, it's all in there. We have a bible for a reason. Read it, analyze it and learn from it. Everything that is going on in this world has already been prophesized in this wonderfull book. Everything that is bad that you could probrably think of is stated word for word towards the end of the Bible.
Focus your attention on yourself. Cleanse yourself of your pride, anger, envy your sloth and all else. We are living in the day of judgemet where all people need to decide which direction or which road to take.
No, I'm not a fanatic but I do believe in God and I do believe that if we love God with all our heart mind and soul that we would indeed have love for our neighbor. we would not embarased to speak of God and allow Him to run our lives. THis is not evident on either borderline.
Well, there are many pages and passages in the Bible. Which ones pertain to TABOR? Maybe it's the one about it being harder for a camel to get throught the eye of a needle than a rich man getting into heaven? Maybe it's the one about the poor inheriting the Earth? Or is it the give to Ceasar what is Ceasars?
It's easy to say the Bible covers everything, but I need something a little more specific than that. I went to a Catholic school and we never opened a Bible there. I did do some Bible studying with Seventh Day Adventists. They were opposed to Sunday "blue laws" because one of the 10 Commandments tells them to rest on the seventh day, i.e., Saturday. For some reason, most of the Christian world goes to church on the first day of the week, i.e., Sunday. Since Jesus was a Jew, He went to church on Saturday, i.e., the Sabbath. What are you thoughts on this?
ist off the 7th day Adventists came out of the 1856 prophecy that Christ was to return to planet earth. Out of that prophecy came the 7th day adventists and many others.
The Sabbath issue is a big one for them since they see the practice of ceelbrating the Lords day on Sunday as an indefensible deviation of the express command God gave Moses in Exodus 20: 8-11. Being Catholic you know that the Church established by Christ and granted authority to bind and loose (Matt 18:18) and teach with his authority (Lk 10:16 Matt28:18-29) does have the authority.
In the first several decades after the death and Resurrection of Christ, the Church rapidly shifted its practice of abserving the Sabbath on Sunday, the day Christ rose from the dead (JN 20:1) It appears that the reasons were twofold; first the early Christians recogonized that thier weekly, communial celebration of the Mass- the ongoing re-presentation of Christs passion and death and ressurection was more appropriatly carried out on Sunday. Secondly the early Christians also recognized the necessity of diferentiating themselves from the Jews, begining with immediate abandonment of Judaism's system of ritual animal sacrifices and the gradual abandonment of circumcision, Jewish ceremonial rituals and preceps and observance of the passover and other Jewish feast days (Col 2:16-23)
Matthew 12:18 "For the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath"
I enjoy talking about faith matters. Any other faith question?
I have a couple of questions concerning your answers:
1. The third commandment deals with the Sabbath. Why would most Christian churchs not keep the Sabbath as Jesus did? I know you site Mark 2:23-28 as validation, but it seems away of justifying changing God's actual commandment. I thought these commandments were binding for all time? I believe the Roman's where sun worshipers and it seems to be a compromise with pagan sun worshipers.
2. Likewise, the 1st commandment says, "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments." Catholic and most Protestant churchs I've been have statues and that seems to violate the first commandment. Since the Romans were also big on idol worshipping, doesn't this seem to go against this commandment. God seems to be pretty straight forward on His feelings about this.
3. My questions above would also include questions on celebrating Christmas and Easter. These holidays also conincide with pagan festivals. do you think the early churchs dovetailed these holy days in with the pagan festivals in an attempt to spread the Gospel?
4. What is you feeling on displaying the 10 Commandments in public schools?
In the old testament God gave man a detailed drawing of what His church should have in it . It included ornate items, things that would make you look and say wow thanks be to God. We were to marvel in thier beauty.
Look at teh depictions of the Tabernacle cast in gold etc.
The statues came in to play to help us honor, not to worship.
We honor Mary for saying yes to God when she was asked to be the Mother of Jesus, we honor St. Joseph for staying by Mary's side and saying yes to God,etc.Mary is the new Eve just as Jesus is the new Adam.
In the time of Moses, the statue they made, they WORSHIPED as thier GOd, which of course was wrong. Today we are blessed to have these statues to remind us how to live holy lives, we have the Ark of the Covenant, the taberacle which is where Christ resides in His Church. "Could you not spend an hour with me"
As far as Christmas and Easter, I would need to get back to you on that as I have no answer for you at this time except that I know the birth of Christ was in October.
As far as diplaying the 10 commandments in a public school. Absolutely. The ten commandments were written in all our hearts before we were even born. Adam and Eve brok all 10 of them and they were not even written down.
When asked which commandment was the greatest Jesus replied" You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind. This is the greatest and first commandment and the second is like it. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law of the prophets"
SO yes the 10 commandments should be displayed everywhere to remind us of how to live a good amd moral life. Since the time prayer was removed from the schools, look at the mess we have today. In fact just recently we had a commotion at the High school because students want to start a gay allience. They want the right to be allowed to express thier homosexuality in public without being "ridiculed". We have become a very accepting nation,anything goes type mentality. Satin is having a hayday with us and we don't see it.
1. Do all religions recongnize the 10 Commandments? If we put them in public schools, wouldn't we have to put in the commandments or rules or guidelines taught by these religions, e.g. Buddhist, Hindus, American Indians, etc. It would only seem fair in a country like the US that calls for a separation of church and state.
2. Do you know when prayer was offically removed from public schools? Students are allowed to pray in public schools today, they just have to do it silently. It would seem that that would be appropriate, considering the expanding diversity of cultures and religions in communities like Hudson or New Richmond. I remember living in Hudson before any Blacks lived here. Blacks might have integrated into this town earlier, but there were city fathers that bought up the houses they looked at.
3. Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to express their homosexuality in public without being "ridiculed?" That would seem to be appropriate with the Biblical teachings that tells us to "love thy nieghbor as thyself" and "judge not for ye shall be judge."
What bothers you most about the "homesexuality in public" thing? Would it be members of the same sex holding hands or kissing? I don't think they are asking for the right to make love in school. If they were, I think that would violate public decency laws that pertain to hetrosexuals as well. Wouldn't you think a gay alliance organization would be helpful to these students so that they could get together and better understand what they are going through and what their feelings mean? Otherwise, you force them into a closet of isolation that could lead to serious mental problems and potential suicide. Do you personally know any gay people? If so, are they decent human beings? I know some and they seem alright to me. I know some that have had serious personal problems because of the gayness. I know a couple that have killed themselves because to the isolation, trauma and scorn they received from the people they counted on the most -- the family, mom, dad, brothers, sisters. Where do we start educating people on homosexuality, if not in the schools? Do we just ignore it, push it in a closet, pray really hard and hope it goes away? It's been part of human society since the beginning...
What are your suggestions on how to deal with homosexuality in the school age children?
4. Let me know what you find out about Easter and Christmas.
So many questions, let me get through one at a time.
Here is the answer to #3 about the pagan holidays.
3. To the best of my knowledge the Church did in fact place these holidays on/close to pagan celebrations intentionally. The idea was this:
The Church was trying to exist in a rather pagan culture. This was difficult. At the same time, She was trying to evangelize the pagans and bring them to Christ. She was also trying to protect her members from falling back into paganism. It just so happened that the biggest pagan holidays were around Dec. 25th and around April. The Church put their holidays there for two reasons. One, it made it easier to celebrate them without suffering some sort of persecution. Two, it made it easier to evangelize pagans, because it was a bridge between the two cultures. It gave them something in common, and common ground is always a good thing when it comes to evangelization (why is it easier to convert a Jew than an atheist? common ground.) Most importantly, it gave the Christians of the time something to celebrate on that day so they did not get drawn in to the pagan hype and start celebrating the pagan festivals and worshipping pagan gods on those days.
Do all religions recognize the 10 commandments?
At the begining of creation the 10 commandments had already been in place just not written down. Adam and Eve brok all 10 of them!
The desire for God is written in the human heart because man is created by God and for God and God never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find truth and happiness that he never stops searching for.
In many ways throughout history down to the present day, men have given expression to thier quest for God in thier religious beliefs and behavior: in prayers, sacrafices, rituals, meditations and so forth. These forms of religious expression despite the ambiguities they often bring with them are so universal that you may call man a religious being. NO?
Knowing this of course we also acknowledge that this vital bond of man to God can be forgotten, overlooked or even rejected by man. This causes revolts, ignorance or indifference. the cares and riches of this world, the scandal of bad example , thoughts that are hostil toward religion itself: its an attitude that makes us hide from God out of fear and we flee his call.
Why shouldn't homosexuals ...
Every society's judgments and conduct reflect a vision of man and his destiny. Without the light the Gospel sheds on God and Man, societies easily become totalitarian.
Mt 5:21 "you shall not kill: and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment" But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment" The judgment is Gods, he will judge at the end of time who is to enter into heaven and who goes to hell.
Let me simplifuy this
there is a difference between the homosexual orientation and the act.. Its the act that needs to be resisted because it goes against the purpose of our creation. They need to learn self controll and chastity, they need to rely on Gods grace to live morally.
Scripture condems homosexual acts "therefor God handed them to thier degrading passions. Thier females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did sshameful things with one another and thus recieved in thier own persons the due penelty for thier perversity (Rom 1:26-27 Other verses include Lev 18:22,20:13, Gen 18:20, 1 Cor 6:9.
Nothing can ever make a homosexual act morally acceptable in Gods eyes. Only Satan sees this as acceptable..
Scripture teaches that sexual difference between men and woman is divinely willed. Man and woman are to become one. The natural result is...a baby.
1. On the homosexuality question...
You've outlined some Bible verses that discuss unnatural acts and we are to assume this relates to homosexual acts. But my question dealt with students dealing with their homosexuality. How do they deal with it in a public school? I don't think we can legally introduce Bible quotes into a public school and tell these kids to pray for the urges, confusion and temptations to go away.
Shouldn't that be taught at home? If religious faith isn't instilled in the privacy of family's home, why would we expect the schools to be successful in instilling religion into these kids? That sounds like something a Christian school would handle.
2. What does the Bible say about divorce? I believe that too is unacceptable to God, but it seems quite common in Christians and non-Christians and non-religious couples? From what I've heard, there is much more instruction into Bible about the evils of divorce v. homosexuality, but you don't hear anybody pushing for Constitutional amendments banning divorce.
First of all if you beleive in God and everything written above than you should know the answer.
Why don't we allow kids to steal in the school?
Why dont we allow swearing?
Why don't we allow rollerblading to get to classes faster?
Why don't we allow smoking?
etc etc etc.
becasue it's either wrong or its bad for you.
We have become a let it be" type attitue"if it fits. If we like it or we think its ok, than it must be. Sorry, that just doesn't work here.
Satin (you do beleive in the existance of satin don't you?)
Satin wants us to do these bad things and he want us to allow them. He is the father of LIES.
As for divorce, wha tthe bible says on divorce I will write tomorrow, Im tired, its been a long day.
What is greater than God,
More evil than the devil,
The poor have it,
The rich need it,
And if you eat it, you'll die?
NOTHING
I was thinking Burger King's Monster Burger with a puond of cheese, a half ton of bacon, five all sawdust patties with cholesterol sauce...
Post a Comment