Satire on democracy!

[Tom Schindler]

Not to be intolerant or rude, but choosing religion is a personal choice.

It is still a freedom of the USA and the government must abide by those that "choose" to belong to that religon. If going to prison if drafted is what is needed, so be it.



You choose to be Catholic because why or is it because you believe being Catholic is your ticket to the afterlife? If you feel being Catholic will get you to heaven, then being Catholic is not a choice, but a requirement for you because going to hell is not an option.



It can roll both ways.





Tom

 

[Bill Barber]

The best thing about The Amish and the mennonites, Mormans and quakers also to a point is, they are all Communists, which can be a good thing.

(read: The communistic societys of the united states)

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Caymen said:

It is still a freedom of the USA and the government must abide by those that "choose" to belong to that religon. If going to prison if drafted is what is needed, so be it.

Fortunately, going to prison if drafted wasn't needed. Back when we had a draft, if your religious values didn't support you fighting in a war, there were other ways to serve your country. Many Mennonites that I now know served their country quite honorably during the Vietnam War as "1W" conscientious objectors, serving in VA hospitals, etc.



TJR

 

[Les]

Many Mennonites that I now know served their country quite honorably during the Vietnam War as "1W" conscientious objectors, serving in VA hospitals, etc.

You could also join the Peace Corp.

 

[Roger Batts]

If it is, then the top 5% would essentially run the country and define its laws and our government...and I thought that's essentially what most on this board have rallied against all their lives.

Isn't that what's going on now?

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Roger,



Yes, some think that is exactly what is going on and do rally against it.



To some extent, the golden rule still applies in this country (those with the gold make the rules).



Still, the fact is that our government and its laws don't actually, formally define that the affluent or those that have more or pay more (in taxes) get a greater voice in defining things.



All I was saying was that what was being suggested could be viewed as formalizing such a government and system of governance.



TJR