Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: blacken700 on January 17, 2010, 05:41:47 AM
-
Sarah Palin wants to buy a vowel "Can I have an R?"Is she getting dumber? Where would Sarah Palin be now if she looked like Big Momma----just asking. :D :D :D
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/u2mrhankey/omg.gif)
-
Blacken, you are truly an embarassment to man-kind and getting worse by the hour as you spend most of your time at DU.
She gave a correct answer and obviously if you ever read a history book other than the Communist Manifesto you would know that her answer on George Washington and his reluctance to serve was factually correct.
So go back to DU with your fellow travelers in the DUmpster.
-
Blacken, you are truly an embarassment to man-kind and getting worse by the hour as you spend most of your time at DU.
She gave a correct answer and obviously if you ever read a history book other than the Communist Manifesto you would know that her answer on George Washington and his reluctance to serve was factually correct.
So go back to DU with your fellow travelers in the DUmpster.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/u2mrhankey/omg.gif)
I'm getting off this ship.
-
Beck would be a MUCH better candidate for VP, to be completely honest.
He is a highly intelligent man. he's immature and emotional, but who isn't?
he seriously knows his shit.
-
Beck would be a MUCH better candidate for VP, to be completely honest.
He is a highly intelligent man. he's immature and emotional, but who isn't?
he seriously knows his shit.
Beck, with all his temper tantrums, would be a most excellent choice for the republican party.
The reason why: He puts the Republic first.
Regardless of party, Palin is an absolute disaster. A shame of a candidate.
-
You know, if palin runs in 2012 - I predict SHE WILL NOT engage in those town hall discussions. You know why? Because supporters of Rudy, Thune, Mitt, and anyone else (not to mention lots of libs!) would show up and ask her simple questions about history.
And despite her love for the USA and down-folksy nature, she wouldn't get them right. We all know she couldn't have named 5 of the founding fathers if Beck has asked. Which do you admire most? "All of them!" That was like Couric asking her what newspapers she read. Even beck called "Bullcrap!" The, choosing washington because "he was the leader~" is poor.
In a true town hall, she would perform very poorly. Fred Thompson was a frontrunner in 2007/2008 until people realized he didn't know much about much, and started playing trivia with him. He just wasn't smart enough.
That being said, it's time for her to just become another fox news face, and let's focus the GOP on some kickass candidates - one who would mentally run circles around Obama/Biden, preferably.
-
333386 did you watch the video she just repeated washington because beck said it first you could tell she was lost in space, but you would not see that because all you see is her looks. :D :D :D
-
Blacken, you are truly an embarassment to man-kind and getting worse by the hour as you spend most of your time at DU.
She gave a correct answer and obviously if you ever read a history book other than the Communist Manifesto you would know that her answer on George Washington and his reluctance to serve was factually correct.
So go back to DU with your fellow travelers in the DUmpster.
I'm still waiting for Blacken and all these other Palin bashers to produce this official presidental qualifications list, to show exactly why Palin is supposedly unqualified to be Prez; whereas, Barack "tax-and-spend-stimulus-flopping-not-closing-Gitmo-on-time-weak-on-national-defense-hiding-like-a-punk-on-healthcare" Obama is qualified to be president.
-
hey dummy we don't need a list to tell she is to fucking stupid to be pres.,but maybe a moron like yourself does :D :D :D :D :D
-
hey dummy we don't need a list to tell she is to fucking stupid to be pres.,but maybe a moron like yourself does :D :D :D :D :D
And you make this "brillian" assertion, based on what?
What exactly makes her "stupid" with regards to running this country, especially since the Harvard grad (currently in office) almost literally can't balance a checkbook?
Put your money where your mouth is, instead on mindlessly posting boneheaded YouTube video, which feebly mask your inability to put any legitimate coherent thoughts together.
-
Blacken: I am still waiting for you to play the msnbc clip of Mika B. calling Abe Lincoln her favorite founding father.
-
Beck would be a MUCH better candidate for VP, to be completely honest.
He is a highly intelligent man. he's immature and emotional, but who isn't?
he seriously knows his shit.
Beck is not an intelligent man
his job is to appeal to the large amount of borderline mental patients and retards that watch TV
he's a fucking train wreck but in comparison to Palin he has moments where he appears otherwise
-
Beck is not an intelligent man
his job is to appeal to the large amount of borderline mental patients and retards that watch TV
he's a fucking train wreck but in comparison to Palin he has moments where he appears otherwise
but olbeirman is intelligent, right straw?
-
hahahahahaha... Fucking priceless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
That interview was seriously embarrassing. The things Beck would say, and the "oh my god why did I take this interview" look on Palin's face. hahahaha.... it was hard to watch. total train wreck.
-
but olbeirman is intelligent, right straw?
relative to Palin or Beck I'd say yes
he's not a genius but he's no dummy either
I'm still not sure if Palins profound stupidity outweighs Becks very average intelligence + manic depressive energy
-
333386 did you watch the video she just repeated washington because beck said it first you could tell she was lost in space, but you would not see that because all you see is her looks. :D :D :D
Are you saying that Sarah Palin is a political siren, leading men and the Rupublican party to be dashed upon the rocks off the shore of the American Meltdown?
-
Are you saying that Sarah Palin is a political siren, leading men and the Rupublican party to be dashed upon the rocks off the shore of the American Meltdown?
I'm saying that this is a completely idiotic focus. No one has argued that Palin is einstein. Palin doesnt argue that she is einstein. That is not her appeal as a person.
She has been factually accurate on most things that the lunatic leftists bash her about, like this question in particular. The woman was plucked out of Alaska literally with no notice whatsoever, and now is under the microscope for every shit she takes. On the policy positions though, and experience in actually doing something, she is far smarter than Obama, Biden, Gore, et al. Lets go issue by issue and Palin is far ahead of Obama on almost every one of them. Its sort of like do you really want a brilliant bank robber like Maddoff ("Obama") or an honest bank manager who knows how to keep the cog going take care of basic shit ("Palin")?
Conversely, I do see people saying that Obama is brilliant, etc yet where is the evidence or proof of that? The man practically calls himself the messiah for fucks sake? Yet where is he ever asked a difficult question, ever? Notice how after his last two press conferences there has not been one press conference? Guess why that is? Take a long hard guess?
One year after the "transformational" messiah was elected, what do we have? A worsening UE situation, a worsening debt situation, a corrupt health care scheme, massive energy taxes looming, amnesty for illegal aliens looming, increasing wars all over the place, marxist czars and appointments that appear from the Rocky Horror Show, Wall Street too big to fail bailouts and guarantees that threaten our fiscal situation, etc.
So all I am saying is, fine bash Palin, but please GMAFB and realize that there is idiocy from the president on down. Focusing on Palins' mistakes is fine, but to act like there is not idiocy abound right now is just completely dishonest.
If I were you, I would be far more worried about what Obama is doing on many fronts undermining our nation on every front than a stupid answer Palin gives to Beck.
-
You don't have to "prove" Palin is stupid. She confirms and verifies the charges all on her own. The woman simply has no grasp of anything outside of an 11th grade level and one that was taught by a religious group at that.
She can't help it. As a person and individual she is doing well for herself, but as a future political leader and POTUS candidate that people are building her up as, she is an utter failure.
-
You don't have to "prove" Palin is stupid. She confirms and verifies the charges all on her own. The woman simply has no grasp of anything outside of an 11th grade level and one that was taught by a religious group at that.
She can't help it. As a person and individual she is doing well for herself, but as a future political leader and POTUS candidate that people are building her up as, she is an utter failure.
Fine, and I will not argue with you on that.
For me right now, I like Thune unless something better comes by.
-
You don't have to "prove" Palin is stupid. She confirms and verifies the charges all on her own. The woman simply has no grasp of anything outside of an 11th grade level and one that was taught by a religious group at that.
She can't help it. As a person and individual she is doing well for herself, but as a future political leader and POTUS candidate that people are building her up as, she is an utter failure.
And how does she "confirm and verifies" the charges? Against WHAT STANDARD do you measure this, in terms of being able to run this country?
Once again, you, Blacken, and all the other anti-Palin blowhards can't produce the goods, when asked to demonstrate exactly what is required to be President. Why does Palin fall short, yet Obama meet the bill?
Keep in mind that Obama's numbers are plunging like a rock, dipped in lead. And, his healthcare plan is on the brink of being KILLED. His stimulus plan was a collosal FLOP, as was his promise to close Gitmo.
Obama's boneheaded policies are backfiring left and right, leaving the Democrats ripe for a political @$$-whippipng. And, you and your ilk keep talking that mess about how dumb Palin is? PLEASE!!!
Obama's the one with the Harvard degree. What HIS EXCUSE for all this stupidity on his end?
-
With all of that said, I'm beginning to believe Obama truly is the Messiah.
His crackpot agenda and policies have raised the GOP from the dead!!!
Hmmm.....hmmmm....hmmmm. ...Barack Hussein Obama!!!
-
With all of that said, I'm beginning to believe Obama truly is the Messiah.
His crackpot agenda and policies have raised the GOP from the dead!!!
Hmmm.....hmmmm....hmmmm. ...Barack Hussein Obama!!!
The thing is, its like arguing - "Obama is brilliant, so its ok."
No its not ok! His policies suck ass and whether he is einstein or newton, it doesnt matter IMHO. Everything is is trying has already been tried and failed everywhere it was attempted.
How brilliant can Obama be if he could not see that his Stimulus Bill was a collosal waste and destined to fail? I saw that and explained why fron day one. I did not go to Harvard, yet I knew what was going to happen. So what good is being considered "brilliant" if everything you do or try has already failed, or is destined to fail from the get go?
-
The thing is, its like arguing - "Obama is brilliant, so its ok."
No its not ok! His policies suck ass and whether he is einstein or newton, it doesnt matter IMHO. Everything is is trying has already been tried and failed everywhere it was attempted.
How brilliant can Obama be if he could not see that his Stimulus Bill was a collosal waste and destined to fail? I saw that and explained why fron day one. I did not go to Harvard, yet I knew what was going to happen. So what good is being considered "brilliant" if everything you do or try has already failed, or is destined to fail from the get go?
Again, that's why I've asked these clucking Palin critics here, to break it down here. Show exactly what the qualifications for president are and why Palin supposedly falls short vs. Obama.
For all their yakking, Blacken, Lurker, Straw Man, et. al. can't seem to muster that effort. Is YouTube out of videos, or are their thought-processes on vacation (it is MLK day, after all)?
-
Does Barry still believe that there are 58 states?
-
Did you know that Austrian is a language?
-
Look, Palin has made many stupid gaffes. All of us Palin supporters admit that openly.
However, for everyone to jump all over her as if she is the only one who makes gaffes is just dishonest.
Obama himself is the biggest gaffe machine there is and IMHO is worse since he and his supporters claimed his harvard brilliance was one of his main qualifications for the office.
Here: I will post this for Blacken since its his thread:
And Palin is a dunce? Mika says Lincoln is a founding father yet no one jumps on her. I got it.
-
At 0:56 of this video, Barry admitted in 2004 that he lacked the experience to be President. He was right.
-
At the end of the above video, Barry flip flopped on whether he heard Wright make controversial remarks.
-
At 0:56 of this video, Barry admitted in 2004 that he lacked the experience to be President. He was right.
I have posted this a few times and not one kneepadder, 240, Straw, Lurker, KC, Benny, Mons, Blacken, included can tell me what he did between 2004 and 2006 that all of a sudden made him qualified for Pres.
-
I have posted this a few times and not one kneepadder, 240, Straw, Lurker, KC, Benny, Mons, Blacken, included can tell me what he did between 2004 and 2006 that all of a sudden made him qualified for Pres.
This is why Obama nut huggers are hypocrites.
-
This is why Obama nut huggers are hypocrites.
Serious, what did he do in in a year and a half that changed everything?
-
Again, that's why I've asked these clucking Palin critics here, to break it down here. Show exactly what the qualifications for president are and why Palin supposedly falls short vs. Obama.
For all their yakking, Blacken, Lurker, Straw Man, et. al. can't seem to muster that effort. Is YouTube out of videos, or are their thought-processes on vacation (it is MLK day, after all)?
WTF do you keep harping on about some list for? What list? What qualifications? Where is the standard?
The reason no one has responded to your lame ass is because your entire question is just nonsense.
You are throwing a blanket generalization out there as if it were cut and dried while doing nothing but revealing yourself to be quite stupid for assuming there is a concrete answer to an abstract question.
But since you asked why Obama is a better candidate to hold the POTUS, then I will give you REASONS why, since there is no established list of QUALIFICATIONS that you keep crying about as though they exist. ::)
1 - I don't think anyone has to worry about Obama quitting in the middle of his term.
2 - I don't think anyone has to worry about Obama leaving a meeting with Putin or Kim in a burst of tears because "they were not nice to him".
3 - I don't think Obama believes in witches.
4 - Speaking gaffes are one thing, thinking gaffes are something else all together.
5 - I don't think Obama believes rape victims should pay for their own exam kit.
6 - I don't think Obama views the world from the outlook of the 1890's
7 - I don't think Obama has a reputation for blaming people for his own fuck ups and messes that he finds himself in based on his own sole actions or words
Want to continue along with the same bullshit you have been screeching about like it was actually relevant?
-
Fine, and I will not argue with you on that.
For me right now, I like Thune unless something better comes by.
Oh no you don't. You don't go to liking Thune. Every time you said you liked someone, you fucking jinxed them. So you just go on to liking someone else and leave Thune alone.
-
Serious, what did he do in in a year and a half that changed everything?
What could ANYONE have done in only a year and half to change ANYTHING?
-
What could ANYONE have done in only a year and half to change ANYTHING?
No, I was referring to his statement in 2004 when he won his senate seat saying he would not run for president because he was not qualified for the job. He decided to run for president in 2006. I am asking what he did in that year and half to all of a sudden become qualified, even by his own standard.
-
Oh yes lets make a thread which obviously shows Palin to be a retard, about something else great deflection there guys ::)
-
Oh yes lets make a thread which obviously shows Palin to be a retard, about something else great deflection there guys ::)
If she is a retard, so what?
Palin I am not worried about. Nor should you idiots since she doesn't even hold an office. Now, the lying buffoon who holds the top post in this country and his lackeys should be of some concern to you.
-
Oh yes lets make a thread which obviously shows Palin to be a retard, about something else great deflection there guys ::)
Its about consistency. Bash Palin, fine, but to ignore the equal stupidy that occurs from Obama , Biden Pelosi etc is just dishonest on your part.
-
Its about consistency. Bash Palin, fine, but to ignore the equal stupidy that occurs from Obama , Biden Pelosi etc is just dishonest on your part.
If you start a thread and that person wants to post in it them fine, if not that is there choice. You don't have to post in every thread for 'consistency'
-
If you start a thread and that person wants to post in it them fine, if not that is there choice. You don't have to post in every thread for 'consistency'
That was not the point. The point is that does palin make gaffes ? Yes. Is she a genius? No. Do people who like her claim she is a genius? No. Do people who support her admit to her deficiences? Yes. So we keep having these threads as trying to prove palin is not a genius. Ok. Who ever said she was?
But to attack Palin over something like this is especially moronic since she answered the question with a factually accurate answer.
So who is worse - Palin, or the thread starter who gets owned by the clip he posts?
-
1 - I don't think anyone has to worry about Obama quitting in the middle of his term.
Of course not. The media doesn't get into his private life and makes up lies about him 24 hours a day 7 days a week.
2 - I don't think anyone has to worry about Obama leaving a meeting with Putin or Kim in a burst of tears because "they were not nice to him".
Why wouldn't they be "nice" to him? He has the habit of bowing and apologizing to them. The only thing left for him to do is to give them a hand job.
3 - I don't think Obama believes in witches.
Supposedly he believes in GOD. Yeah, that same God. Creator of the heavens, earth, moon and human race. Does that bother you?
4 - Speaking gaffes are one thing, thinking gaffes are something else all together.
Speaking gaffes are different? Is his mouth connected to his brain or his ass? Which one? I know there are videos out there where he confused piracy with privacy. And where he kept saying "uhm, uhmmmm" before rambling on about abortion. Barry is worse because without a teleprompter he can't THINK. Period.
And if speaking gaffes are one thing, how come Bush was treated like a moron all the time by the media?
5 - I don't think Obama believes rape victims should pay for their own exam kit.
That was despicable. Palin was an idiot for allowing that.
6 - I don't think Obama views the world from the outlook of the 1890's
Only through 1920 Fascist glasses.
7 - I don't think Obama has a reputation for blaming people for his own fuck ups and messes that he finds himself in based on his own sole actions or words
Nor does he take responsibility for them. Besides, his cabinet, HIS Democratic party and HIS White House spokesperson are the ones doing the blaming. Why do the dirty work yourself when others are more than happy to do it for you?
-
If you start a thread and that person wants to post in it them fine, if not that is there choice. You don't have to post in every thread for 'consistency'
LOL! Bro, logic to tea baggers is like sunlight to vampires.
-
LOL! Bro, logic to tea baggers is like sunlight to vampires.
Ha ha. Hysterical, you mean like the shill job you do for whatever comes out of the WH?
-
1 - I don't think anyone has to worry about Obama quitting in the middle of his term.
Of course not. The media doesn't get into his private life and makes up lies about him 24 hours a day 7 days a week.
The media was involved in Palins life for all those colleges? And Mayor? And whatever committee she quit?
2 - I don't think anyone has to worry about Obama leaving a meeting with Putin or Kim in a burst of tears because "they were not nice to him".
Why wouldn't they be "nice" to him? He has the habit of bowing and apologizing to them. The only thing left for him to do is give them a hand job.
And Bush held hands and kissed them on the mouth. Which is a lot closer to what you are insinuating than obama. Even though it was customary gestures. ::)
3 - I don't think Obama believes in witches.
Supposedly he believes in GOD. Yeah, that same God. Creator of the heavens, earth, moon and human race. Does that bother you?
No. Witches are one thing, God is another. Do you know the difference? Obviously not. Although, I haven't heard Obama harp on and on about God's plan in his life and God's War either.
4 - Speaking gaffes are one thing, thinking gaffes are something else all together.
Speaking gaffes are different? Is his mouth connected to his brain or his ass? Which one? I know there are videos out there where he confused piracy with privacy. And where he kept saying "uhm, uhmmmm" before rambling on about abortion. Barry is worse because without a teleprompter he can't THINK. Period.
And if speaking gaffes are one thing, how come Bush was treated like a moron all the time by the media?
And if that were the case for Obama and Bush, you reason for Palin to be excused is WHAT again?
5 - I don't think Obama believes rape victims should pay for their own exam kit.
That was despicable. Palin was an idiot for allowing that.
I think we all already know she is an idiot.
6 - I don't think Obama views the world from the outlook of the 1890's
Only through 1920 Fascist glasses.
*YAWN* How redundant.
7 - I don't think Obama has a reputation for blaming people for his own fuck ups and messes that he finds himself in based on his own sole actions or words
Nor does he take responsibility for them. Besides, his cabinet, HIS Democratic party and HIS White House spokesperson are the ones doing the blaming. Why do the dirty work yourself when others are more than happy to do it for you?
Who's he blamed? Unlike Katie and her "gotcha" politics and the allegations and charges from MEMBERS OF HIS OWN PARTY who were "just being mean to him"... I really can't think of any.
Nice try. Come back play again with better material.
-
Ha ha. Hysterical, you mean like the shill job you do for whatever comes out of the WH?
HAHAHAHAH!!!
That's the thing. Liberal fags can't stand an opposing view or anything that shatters their little glass house.
-
Ha ha. Hysterical, you mean like the shill job you do for whatever comes out of the WH?
Hardly.
The only thing I have defended is the damn Christmas ornaments that had your tampon in an uproar.
Perhaps you can list anything else I shilled for? Hmmmm?
-
HAHAHAHAH!!!
That's the thing. Liberal fags can't stand an opposing view or anything that shatters their little glass house.
Sorry cupcake.
1 - I am straight.
2 - I am a registered independent voter.
Looks like your little statement is irrelevant. Just like the rest of your posts. But try again.
-
Sorry cupcake.
1 - I am straight.
2 - I am a registered independent voter.
Looks like your little statement is irrelevant. Just like the rest of your posts. But try again.
Cupcake? Only fags use that term. You have just outted yourself. OK, I'll correct myself you are a GAY "registered" independent voter. Do you feel better now?
-
Cupcake? Only fags use that term. You have just outted yourself. OK, I'll correct myself you are a GAY "registered" independent voter. Do you feel better now?
Sorry Princess,
If your entire debate skills rest on false assumptions of another poster, you really are more insecure than I first thought. Which granted, I thought it was quite a lot based on your dazzling display of stupidity.
Now pick your tiara up, put on your big girl panties and just deal with the fact that other than an irrelevant voice on this forum, you have none at all.
Feel free to come back and try again when you have better material. "Cupcake"
-
1.The media was involved in Palins life for all those colleges? And Mayor? And whatever committee she quit?
Hey, nitwit. You said "term", thus you meant her political career. If you ignore the role the media played sending hundreds of reporters to Alaska looking for any little thing in her personal as well as professional life, then you are dumber than a rock. Barry doesn't have to worry about that since the media, which is mostly liberal, is still in his back pocket.
2.And Bush held hands and kissed them on the mouth. Which is a lot closer to what you are insinuating than obama. Even though it was customary gestures.
Bush showed respect toward their custom. But when did Bush APOLOGIZE for anything?
3 - No. Witches are one thing, God is another. Do you know the difference? Obviously not. Although, I haven't heard Obama harp on and on about God's plan in his life and God's War either.
In the Bible, witches, demonic possessions, demonic influence are spoken about and forbidden. So if Barry believes in GOD, then he should believe in his word and the existence of such evil forces. Barry doesn't have to harp on about God's plan in his life. Sitting 20 years in Wright's church is sufficient proof of that belief.
So if Barry is not constantly talking about God, then to you it means he is not as superstitious as Palin. That logic is stupid.
4 - And if that were the case for Obama and Bush, you reason for Palin to be excused is WHAT again?
I did not excuse anyone. You, aka MORON, tried to excuse Obama. Do you suffer from Alzheimer's?
5 -I think we all already know she is an idiot.
So is Barry. Your inability to understand that is where you fail.
6 - I don't think Obama views the world from the outlook of the 1890's
Only through 1920 Fascist glasses.
*YAWN* How redundant.
And your point is more relevant?
7 - Who's he blamed? Unlike Katie and her "gotcha" politics and the allegations and charges from MEMBERS OF HIS OWN PARTY who were "just being mean to him"... I really can't think of any.
Didn't I say that his spokesperson, media and party do it for him? Blaming the Republicans for stalling stimulus package and the health care bill when they are the minority. They can't even filibuster anything in either house. Blaming Bush for "the past 8 years" which supposedly caused him to spend even more money. When does the current economy and wars become his own responsibility?
Lurker, you don't need to come back with better material. I have seen your best and it's lame. Move on, scrub.
-
Sorry Princess,
If your entire debate skills rest on false assumptions of another poster, you really are more insecure than I first thought. Which granted, I thought it was quite a lot based on your dazzling display of stupidity.
Now pick your tiara up, put on your big girl panties and just deal with the fact that other than an irrelevant voice on this forum, you have none at all.
Feel free to come back and try again when you have better material. "Cupcake"
Cupcake! Princess! These are words that a straight man do not use. You can't be straight. No way.
You are as gay as the day is long.
-
Talk about her all you want but the fact remains she makes more money than all of us doing what she does. As does Bush, Obama, Hillary you name it.
-
1.The media was involved in Palins life for all those colleges? And Mayor? And whatever committee she quit?
Hey, nitwit. You said "term", thus you meant her political career. If you ignore the role the media played sending hundreds of reporters to Alaska looking for any little thing in her personal as well as professional life, then you are dumber than a rock. Barry doesn't have to worry about that since the media, which is mostly liberal, is still in his back pocket.
Yep. Despite establishing her quitters personality years before in college, Mayors still have terms. So do committees. Perhaps you can supply evidence of the media rushing to Alaska then causing her to quit? Oh you can't can you. No surprise. ::)
2.And Bush held hands and kissed them on the mouth. Which is a lot closer to what you are insinuating than obama. Even though it was customary gestures.
Bush showed respect toward their custom. But when did Bush APOLOGIZE for anything?
Boo-fucking-hoo. Yet Obama doing the same isn't showing respect to their customs? Boo-fucking-hoo. Bush should have apologized to this country for running it into the ground. So your point is what? Oh, you don't have one. ::)
3 - No. Witches are one thing, God is another. Do you know the difference? Obviously not. Although, I haven't heard Obama harp on and on about God's plan in his life and God's War either.
In the Bible, witches, demonic possessions, demonic influence are spoken about and forbidden. So if Barry believes in GOD, then he should believe in his word and the existence of such evil forces. Barry doesn't have to harp on about God's plan in his life. Sitting 20 years in Wright's church is sufficient proof of that belief.
So if Barry is not constantly talking about God, then to you it means he is not as superstitious as Palin. That logic is stupid.
Anyone talking about how God speaks through them and how God wants them to do something, etc.. etc.. is just plain stupid. Thank God Obama doesn't do that. We'll leave that up to the other party to do that nonsense. So by this own logic, one can say that it was God's Plan for Obama to become POTUS and Palin to become... Fox News contributor. Wellllllll.... okaaayyyyyy. Looks like God favors one more than the other. You got an answer to that? It's God's will. Who are you to question it? Unless you really mean that God made a mistake. Is that it? You got an answer? Of course you don't. ::)
4 - And if that were the case for Obama and Bush, you reason for Palin to be excused is WHAT again?
I did not excuse anyone. You, aka MORON, tried to excuse Obama. Do you suffer from Alzheimer's?
Incorrect. I was judging Obama by the same standards applied to the other losers. Nice try. I see reading isn't your strongest point.
5 -I think we all already know she is an idiot.
So is Barry. Your inability to understand that is where you fail.
So you are comparing one idiot to another? Nice! Great way to raise the bar and have a relevant point. Which you didn't, and you don't. As said... hypocrisy is a bear trap that repubs keep finding their foot caught in.
6 - I don't think Obama views the world from the outlook of the 1890's
Only through 1920 Fascist glasses.
*YAWN* How redundant.
And your point is more relevant?
Mine doesn't have to be. The fact is that your irrelevant replies negates anything else that is required from opposite side of the argument by sheer virtue of common sense and logic. Nothing more I need to do in light of that.
7 - Who's he blamed? Unlike Katie and her "gotcha" politics and the allegations and charges from MEMBERS OF HIS OWN PARTY who were "just being mean to him"... I really can't think of any.
Didn't I say that his spokesperson, media and party do it for him? Blaming the Republicans for stalling stimulus package and the health care bill when they are the minority. They can't even filibuster anything in either house. Blaming Bush for "the past 8 years" which supposedly caused him to spend even more money. When does the current economy and wars become his own responsibility?
Lurker, you don't need to come back with better material. I have seen your best and it's lame. Move on, scrub.
Boo-fucking-hoo. At least his "blame" was grounded in evidence. Hers was grounded in what? Her head? The fact that you even took time to post this bullshit shows you can even follow a train of thought from a prior reply (that you even quoted) without trying to sidetrack yourself with bullshit. Nice try though.
Come back again little boy.
With better material.
-
Cupcake! Princess! These are words that a straight man do not use. You can't be straight. No way.
You are as gay as the day is long.
Helium Heels,
Did your gaydar go off or something? Or are you once again attempting the silly tactic of self projection as a defense?
I bet your next reply will be along the lines of asking me for a date with all the gay obsession you are exhibiting.
-
but olbeirman is intelligent, right straw?
well, yes.
Olbermann.
-
Cupcake! Princess! These are words that a straight man do not use. You can't be straight. No way.
You are as gay as the day is long.
drag queen fight!!!!!
-
Helium Heels,
Did your gaydar go off or something? Or are you once again attempting the silly tactic of self projection as a defense?
I bet your next reply will be along the lines of asking me for a date with all the gay obsession you are exhibiting.
before asking for a date we need to see some pics.
-
can some of the Palin fan's here explain to me what she means at ~ 1:30 into this clip when she says
"man has fallen" and we have a "fallen world"
that sounds like some Grade A religious kookery and I'd like her to explain more about her beliefs about our "fallen world" and how that would influence her decisions if she were ever in a position of power.
-
You know what Straw - its religious nonsense. I cant argue with you on that.
She is right in saying we should never place faith in politicians though.
-
She is right in saying we should never place faith in politicians though.
But yet, she aspires to be one????
-
You know what Straw - its religious nonsense. I cant argue with you on that.
She is right in saying we should never place faith in politicians though.
so you have no problem with a politician who think we're "fallen" as the Starting Point of her philosopy and view of the world?
you're kidding right?
haven't you seen what happens when we have a religious nutbag running our country?
-
so you have no problem with a politician who think we're "fallen" as the Starting Point of her philosopy and view of the world?
you're kidding right?
haven't you seen what happens when we have a religious nutbag running our country?
I agree 100% Straw. Imagine if we had a president who spent 20 years in a church like this ? Of thats wright!
-
I agree 100% Straw. Imagine if we had a president who spent 20 years in a church like this ? Of thats wright!
find me some clip where Obama is talking about how "man has fallen" or we live in a "fallen world " and I'm right there with you
-
WTF do you keep harping on about some list for? What list? What qualifications? Where is the standard?
That, genius, is what I've been asking YOU and every other blowhard, who claims that Palin ain't qualified to be president.
The reason no one has responded to your lame ass is because your entire question is just nonsense.
Or, you (for all your bleating) are a spineless punk, with nary a coherent thought to back your pointless smack.
You are throwing a blanket generalization out there as if it were cut and dried while doing nothing but revealing yourself to be quite stupid for assuming there is a concrete answer to an abstract question.
But since you asked why Obama is a better candidate to hold the POTUS, then I will give you REASONS why, since there is no established list of QUALIFICATIONS that you keep crying about as though they exist. ::)
1 - I don't think anyone has to worry about Obama quitting in the middle of his term.
2 - I don't think anyone has to worry about Obama leaving a meeting with Putin or Kim in a burst of tears because "they were not nice to him".
3 - I don't think Obama believes in witches.
4 - Speaking gaffes are one thing, thinking gaffes are something else all together.
5 - I don't think Obama believes rape victims should pay for their own exam kit.
6 - I don't think Obama views the world from the outlook of the 1890's
7 - I don't think Obama has a reputation for blaming people for his own fuck ups and messes that he finds himself in based on his own sole actions or words
The only thing you got right about all of that mess are the three words, I don't think!
That's the point; YOU DON'T THINK!! You simply post mindless mess, which you can't support or defend to save your life.
Number 7 is the biggest laugh of them all. Obama's been blaming, Fox News, Bush, and everybody else he can find, when his goofball policies fall FLAT on their faces.
Want to continue along with the same bullshit you have been screeching about like it was actually relevant?
You're one to talk. With each passing month, your claims about the Democrats having a stranglehold on Washington continue to crumble. If Brown wins in Mass., that puts yet another dent in your feeble wall of foolish claims.
-
find me some clip where Obama is talking about how "man has fallen" or we live in a "fallen world " and I'm right there with you
Ha ha. Every waking damn day of his life this jerkoff reminds us that we are a fallen nation and need to be transformed.
I so hope Brown wins.
This will be his Waterloo!
-
That, genius, is what I've been asking YOU and every other blowhard, who claims that Palin ain't qualified to be president.
Or, you (for all your bleating) are a spineless punk, with nary a coherent thought to back your pointless smack.
The only thing you got right about all of that mess are the three words, I don't think!
That's the point; YOU DON'T THINK!! You simply post mindless mess, which you can't support or defend to save your life.
Number 7 is the biggest laugh of them all. Obama's been blaming, Fox News, Bush, and everybody else he can find, when his goofball policies fall FLAT on their faces.
You're one to talk. With each passing month, your claims about the Democrats having a stranglehold on Washington continue to crumble. If Brown wins in Mass., that puts yet another dent in your feeble wall of foolish claims.
Choking on Teh Stupid as usual I see.
You can't even articulate a response to your own braying and crying issue. Must really suck to have to post that long winded cry fest right there only to prove my point once again for me.
Loser.
-
can some of the Palin fan's here explain to me what she means at ~ 1:30 into this clip when she says
"man has fallen" and we have a "fallen world"
that sounds like some Grade A religious kookery and I'd like her to explain more about her beliefs about our "fallen world" and how that would influence her decisions if she were ever in a position of power.
Christians believe man is in a fallen state and need Christ for their redemption.This is not kookery,unless you think ALL of Christianity is kookery,its THE premise of Christianity.Its the entire religion.Its the entire messege.Now,you may think Christianity is stupid and thats fine,but she is esposing normal,mainstream Christian thought there.Id venture to say that even in a kook church like Rev. Wrights that was taught.
-
Christians believe man is in a fallen state and need Christ for their redemption.This is not kookery,unless you think ALL of Christianity is kookery,its THE premise of Christianity.Its the entire religion.Its the entire messege.Now,you may think Christianity is stupid and thats fine,but she is esposing normal,mainstream Christian thought there.Id venture to say that even in a kook church like Rev. Wrights that was taught.
You're not that swift are you Billy.
I'm well aware what she was talking about which is why I called it GRADE A RELIGIOUS KOOKERY in my original post.
no one who talks like that should ever be in a position of power in our country
-
You're not that swift are you Billy.
I'm well aware what she was talking about which is why I called it GRADE A RELIGIOUS KOOKERY in my original post.
no one who talks like that should ever be in a position of power in our country
Yet someone thinks the constitution is fatally flawed from its inception and sits in a racist church for 20 years is?
-
You're not that swift are you Billy.
I'm well aware what she was talking about which is why I called it GRADE A RELIGIOUS KOOKERY in my original post.
no one who talks like that should ever be in a position of power in our country
Then EVERY guy that has been the president that claims to be a Christian shouldnt have been.Barack Hussein Obama brings the Bible into his sermons all the time ,Jimmy Carter did as did Bill Clinton.By your standards all should have been disqualified.YOUR not too swift.This is a Christian country,what she said is preached in just about every pulpit every Sunday of the year.
I find it almost incredible that that offends you,but Hussein Obama saying "the white mans greed runs a world in need" doesnt bother you at all.In my opinion THAT should disqualify anyone from EVER being president of the United States.
-
Then EVERY guy that has been the president that claims to be a Christian shouldnt have been.Barack Hussein Obama brings the Bible into his sermons all the time ,Jimmy Carter did as did Bill Clinton.By your standards all should have been disqualified.YOUR not too swift.This is a Christian country,what she said is preached in just about every pulpit every Sunday of the year.
I find it almost incredible that that offends you,but Hussein Obama saying "the white mans greed runs a world in need" doesnt bother you at all.In my opinion THAT should disqualify anyone from EVER being president of the United States.
1. Not all Christians take the Bible literally (i.e don't believe in a Gardent of Eden or a "Fall")
2. We're not a Christian country in spite of how much you'd like to believe it
3. I'm not in any way offended by Palin's beliefs. I just think that it's just another reason why she's incapable of being a leader in any way shape or form (ok - maybe she can lead a nutty christian church)
-
1. Not all Christians take the Bible literally (i.e don't believe in a Gardent of Eden or a "Fall")
2. We're not a Christian country in spite of how much you'd like to believe it
3. I'm not in any way offended by Palin's beliefs. I just think that it's just another reason why she's incapable of being a leader in any way shape or form (ok - maybe she can lead a nutty christian church)
Anyone who calls themselves a Christian and doesnt believe that man is in a fallen state,is not a Christian.Why?Because if man is not in a fallen state,there would have ben no reason for Christ to come to earth and sacrifice his life.His death would have been a total waste of time.So,please,these so called CHristians who "dont take the Bible litterally" are like republicans like Colin Powelll who think higher taxes and big government is what republicans want.Idiotic.
Last poll I looked at showed that 75% of the country considers themselves Christian.Thats a Christian nation.
Once again,Bill Clinton believed in the same spiritual things she does.Was he qualified?
Obama was won to Christ by a sawed off Racist.Is he qualified?Jimmy Carter was a Baptist was he qualified?
-
Anyone who calls themselves a Christian and doesnt believe that man is in a fallen state,is not a Christian.Why?Because if man is not in a fallen state,there would have ben no reason for Christ to come to earth and sacrifice his life.His death would have been a total waste of time.So,please,these so called CHristians who "dont take the Bible litterally" are like republicans like Colin Powelll who think higher taxes and big government is what republicans want.Idiotic.
Last poll I looked at showed that 75% of the country considers themselves Christian.Thats a Christian nation.
Once again,Bill Clinton believed in the same spiritual things she does.Was he qualified?
Obama was won to Christ by a sawed off Racist.Is he qualified?Jimmy Carter was a Baptist was he qualified?
I still dont see how Straw rectifies his disdain for Palin's religios beliefs yet completely dismisses the fact that Obama himself went to a racist church for 20 years.
-
I still dont see how Straw rectifies his disdain for Palin's religios beliefs yet completely dismisses the fact that Obama himself went to a racist church for 20 years.
I don't care about anyones personal beliefs but some personal beliefs make person's ineligble to hold public office (IMO). I don't want someone who thinks we live in a fallen world or who thinks Jesus return to earth in imminent (or thinks he/she can hasten it with public policy) to be in office.
If Obama talked liked a religious kook then I would be the first to say he should not hold office.
I don't care what Wright said. I ony care what the canditate or politician says in their own words.
-
I don't care about anyones personal beliefs but some personal beliefs make person's ineligble to hold public office (IMO). I don't want someone who thinks we live in a fallen world or who thinks Jesus return to earth in imminent (or thinks he/she can hasten it with public policy) to be in office.
If Obama talked liked a religious kook then I would be the first to say he should not hold office.
I don't care what Wright said. I ony care what the canditate or politician says in their own words.
Ok, than can you explain what Obama meant in this clip? I'm not playing games with you Straw and sincerely want to know how you interpet it.
-
Straw- is Obama not saying we are fallen as a nation in this clip due to our constitution?
-
I don't care about anyones personal beliefs but some personal beliefs make person's ineligble to hold public office (IMO). I don't want someone who thinks we live in a fallen world or who thinks Jesus return to earth in imminent (or thinks he/she can hasten it with public policy) to be in office.
If Obama talked liked a religious kook then I would be the first to say he should not hold office.
I don't care what Wright said. I ony care what the canditate or politician says in their own words.
But Obama stands there and goes right into his black preacher voice over and over and over again whenever he talks to black audiances.The guy uses religion when it serves his need.He is a disgrace of a human being.
-
Ok, than can you explain what Obama meant in this clip? I'm not playing games with you Straw and sincerely want to know how you interpet it.
no idea but it would help if the clip was longer than 4 seconds
though, something tells me you think you know exactly what it means even if only 4 seconds long
-
Straw- is Obama not saying we are fallen as a nation in this clip due to our constitution?
1. No he is not
2. He's not talking about "man" or "our world" being fallen - he's not talkining about he same thing as Palin is at all
3. When was this clip made (in the last year or 4-5+ years ago
4. Again, a short snip with no context about the discussion but as lawyer you might be aware of some of the things that were flawed in the original document that have since been ammended (key word there).
Come on 333 - you know damn well what Obama was talking about and it's got nothing to do with the nutty stuff that Bible Spice was talking about
-
Choking on Teh Stupid as usual I see.
You can't even articulate a response to your own braying and crying issue. Must really suck to have to post that long winded cry fest right there only to prove my point once again for me.
Loser.
Spoken like the pointless and spineless creature you are.
You didn't address a SINGLE issue, regarding the qualifications for president and why Palin doens't fit the bill.
All you did was spew a bunch of mess about what you don't think. As I said, the words, "I don't think" pretty much sum up the bulk of the garbage you continue to heave.
-
Beck would be a MUCH better candidate for VP, to be completely honest.
He is a highly intelligent man. he's immature and emotional, but who isn't?
he seriously knows his shit.
Hes very intelligent, he just is playing with fire with his racist, rants on TV every day..
-
I love this board!
Sometimes I just lurk to see what the convo is about and refuse to participate in the b.s.
I see, at times I am not the only one to let the "others" go off on tangents and speak amongst themselves.
At times like that, I realize nothing that I say will penetrate their logic.
Rock On!
Sandra
-
Spoken like the pointless and spineless creature you are.
You didn't address a SINGLE issue, regarding the qualifications for president and why Palin doens't fit the bill.
All you did was spew a bunch of mess about what you don't think. As I said, the words, "I don't think" pretty much sum up the bulk of the garbage you continue to heave.
Brevity in your case must apply to intellect as I haven't seen anything past the third grade level. You have yet to supply this so called list of "qualifications" that you are attempting to argue about. No list. No logic. No point. Kind of typical of you as usual.
Then again, 2 pages ago I made this clear. Obviously you couldn't comprehend those big words I was using.
-
Brevity in your case must apply to intellect as I haven't seen anything past the third grade level. You have yet to supply this so called list of "qualifications" that you are attempting to argue about. No list. No logic. No point. Kind of typical of you as usual.
Then again, 2 pages ago I made this clear. Obviously you couldn't comprehend those big words I was using.
If ObamaCare dies, will you give Palin credit for starting the ball rolling on killing this obscenity?
-
Brevity in your case must apply to intellect as I haven't seen anything past the third grade level. You have yet to supply this so called list of "qualifications" that you are attempting to argue about. No list. No logic. No point. Kind of typical of you as usual.
Then again, 2 pages ago I made this clear. Obviously you couldn't comprehend those big words I was using.
Ummm....Einstein, get a clue. My question, regarding that qualifications list was poised directly to PALIN CRITICS (which I am NOT). You claim she ain't qualified to be president. Let's see this list of presidental qualification and you show that she doesn't fit the bill.
Continue to cower and run, Lurker. And, while you're at it, you might want to consider (in light of what's gone down teh last two months) your previous rock-headed statements, regarding the Democrats' stranglehold on Washington and Obama's being a lock for re-election.
-
The qualification list you are bleating about.... where is it? Who cares who it was posed to. You are insinuating a list exists. WHERE IS IT?
It doesn't exist. Just like your brain cells.
Again, brevity applies to your intellectual level for sure.
-
The qualification list you are bleating about.... where is it? Who cares who it was posed to. You are insinuating a list exists. WHERE IS IT?
It doesn't exist. Just like your brain cells.
Again, brevity applies to your intellectual level for sure.
Einstein, I'm the one who asked the question. You claim Palin ain't qualified to be Prez. Produce the standard that says she's not.
You can't do that, which is why you keep reply with this crackhead posts of yours.
If it doesn't exist, then you have no basis (other than your screwball left-wing musing) to claim that she can't be Commander-in-Chief.
-
Let's see this list of presidental qualification
So let's see it? You keep braying about it. Or are you just arguing with yourself. This is the 4th time I have asked for this list. Since you keep insinuating there is one, where is it?
You really are stupid aren't you?
-
Einstein, I'm the one who asked the question. You claim Palin ain't qualified to be Prez. Produce the standard that says she's not.
You can't do that, which is why you keep reply with this crackhead posts of yours.
If it doesn't exist, then you have no basis (other than your screwball left-wing musing) to claim that she can't be Commander-in-Chief.
Sarah started the ball rolling on killing ObamaCare with her Deathpanels facebook posting.
Thats why I like her. She is a fighter, a patriot, and calls a spade a spade.
-
Einstein, I'm the one who asked the question. You claim Palin ain't qualified to be Prez. Produce the standard that says she's not.
You can't do that, which is why you keep reply with this crackhead posts of yours.
If it doesn't exist, then you have no basis (other than your screwball left-wing musing) to claim that she can't be Commander-in-Chief.
Where's the list?
Not only can I claim she isn't fit to be POTUS, I can also claim you are by far one of the most stupidest posters on here as you are doing nothing contradicting yourself and arguing with yourself over a list that doesn't exist. Which was obvious 2 pages back when I said so.
If the list doesn't exist - and it doesn't- you have no basis - other than your own stupidity which you have in common with her - to claim she could be POTUS.
Now you want to argue with yourself with your own contradiction? They do have meds to help with those voices in your head.
-
I don't care about anyones personal beliefs but some personal beliefs make person's ineligble to hold public office (IMO). I don't want someone who thinks we live in a fallen world or who thinks Jesus return to earth in imminent (or thinks he/she can hasten it with public policy) to be in office.
If Obama talked liked a religious kook then I would be the first to say he should not hold office.
I don't care what Wright said. I ony care what the canditate or politician says in their own words.
this is the problem and has always been with your straw you dont see how logic like this can be used to justify saying this other person shoudlnt be eligible to hold office b/c they believe a certain way... ::)
gay marriage ring a bell?
-
Where's the list?
Not only can I claim she isn't fit to be POTUS, I can also claim you are by far one of the most stupidest posters on here as you are doing nothing contradicting yourself and arguing with yourself over a list that doesn't exist. Which was obvious 2 pages back when I said so.
If the list doesn't exist - and it doesn't- you have no basis - other than your own stupidity which you have in common with her - to claim she could be POTUS.
Now you want to argue with yourself with your own contradiction? They do have meds to help with those voices in your head.
Once again, your inability to read rears its ugly head. The question put to Palin-bashers was to show EXACTLY why Palin is not qualified to be president, but Obama is.
And, in typical cluck-and-duck, yellow-streaked fashion, you cower and hide behind your feeble post.
Again, your own words, "I-don't-think", sum up your responses, to a tee.
-
Again, your own contradictions beat you over the head.
Where is the list? If there isn't one, you can't say she is qualified simply because this so called mysterious list doesn't exist. Which doesn't seem to stop you from crying about it for others that say she isn't.
She isn't qualified for anything related to POTUS.
You aren't qualified for anything related to common sense.
It's official. You are stupid.
-
Again, your own contradictions beat you over the head.
Where is the list? If there isn't one, you can't say she is qualified simply because this so called mysterious list doesn't exist. Which doesn't seem to stop you from crying about it for others that say she isn't.
She isn't qualified for anything related to POTUS.
You aren't qualified for anything related to common sense.
It's official. You are stupid.
How is Boy Wonder doing?
-
Again, your own contradictions beat you over the head.
Where is the list? If there isn't one, you can't say she is qualified simply because this so called mysterious list doesn't exist. Which doesn't seem to stop you from crying about it for others that say she isn't.
She isn't qualified for anything related to POTUS.
You aren't qualified for anything related to common sense.
It's official. You are stupid.
YOU made the statement that she isn't qualified. Yet, when asked to produce a standard to defend your claim, you produce nothing but foolishness.
Yet again, you make the claim. So, either produce some concrete evidence to back your claim, or exercise your right to zip that trap of yours.
Plus, the question (which you continue to duck, like the spineless chap you are) is to show how Obama is qualified to be president, whereas Palin is not.
Since both are politically green, either both are qualified or both are not. If you make the claim that one is and one isn't, then defend such with some facts, rather than your standard boneheaded blathering.
-
She isn't qualified. Plain and simple.
You went crying about a list comparing her qualifications to Obamas. I asked for the list. You flaked out.
Perhaps if you actually had that list, you could then argue without contradicting yourself whether or not Obama is qualified. But you can't. But still try to. ::) Ohhhhkay!
So... where's the list?
I can't tell what is the bigger display of stupidity you are showing. Crying about an imaginary list or the fact you even admit the list doesn't exist and yet still attempt to base your entire whinefest on it.
Now come back, talk in circles once more. Whine some more. Go on about "the list" and continue to contradict yourself. No need to be embarassed. We already know you are beyond stupid at this point.
-
She isn't qualified. Plain and simple.
You went crying about a list comparing her qualifications to Obamas. I asked for the list. You flaked out.
Perhaps if you actually had that list, you could then argue without contradicting yourself whether or not Obama is qualified. But you can't. But still try to. ::) Ohhhhkay!
So... where's the list?
I can't tell what is the bigger display of stupidity you are showing. Crying about an imaginary list or the fact you even admit the list doesn't exist and yet still attempt to base your entire whinefest on it.
Now come back, talk in circles once more. Whine some more. Go on about "the list" and continue to contradict yourself. No need to be embarassed. We already know you are beyond stupid at this point.
Hey how did Brown do last night in mass.YES!!!YES!!!!!YES!!!!YES!!!!! NOT NO.YES!!!!
-
She isn't qualified. Plain and simple.
BASED ON WHAT?? That is the question, brought to you and other Palin-bashers for the better part of two weeks
You went crying about a list comparing her qualifications to Obamas. I asked for the list. You flaked out.
Perhaps if you actually had that list, you could then argue without contradicting yourself whether or not Obama is qualified. But you can't. But still try to. ::) Ohhhhkay!
So... where's the list?
That, O Rhodes scholar is what was asked of YOU. Since YOU insist that she isn't qualified, let's see some standard of qualifications to show unequivocally that she is not; yet Obama is.
If you're scared, say you're scared!!
Plus, in case you missed, I've stated that both Obama and Palin are politically GREEN. Neither have a litany of experience in government. So, again, what is your basis of Obama's qualificaitons vs. Palin's lack of such?
Put up or shut up!!!
I can't tell what is the bigger display of stupidity you are showing. Crying about an imaginary list or the fact you even admit the list doesn't exist and yet still attempt to base your entire whinefest on it.
Now come back, talk in circles once more. Whine some more. Go on about "the list" and continue to contradict yourself. No need to be embarassed. We already know you are beyond stupid at this point.
You can't back your smack, so continue to run like the punk you are. We'll all watch your silliness on display (as well as watch your previous claims of perpetual Democratic rule fall to piece, one-by-one).
-
BASED ON WHAT??
Why, based on that little list you are referring to.
Post that list and I will break it down and compare Obama to Palin. Soon as I get that list we will be under way won't we?
But we won't get that list will we? You can't provide it. Because it doesn't exist. As you admitted prior. So unless that little list actually exists - and it doesn't - then you are basing your entire little whinefest on an intangible. You are stupid. Welcome to reality.
The only thing I am scared of is someone like you lacking braincells and operating heavy machinery.
Self contradictions are bitch when you can't escape them aren't they? You would certainly know about that.
-
Ha ha!1!!!
240 & Lurker - can you really say this woman is brilliant? What a joke this dyke is. She is a moron.
-
Why, based on that little list you are referring to.
Post that list and I will break it down and compare Obama to Palin. Soon as I get that list we will be under way won't we?
Try that again, YOU (and your fellow Palin bashers) were asked to produce the goods, showing that Palin is unqualified to be president. Since you can't do it, you play the projection game. Sorry, no sale!!
But we won't get that list will we? You can't provide it. Because it doesn't exist. As you admitted prior. So unless that little list actually exists - and it doesn't - then you are basing your entire little whinefest on an intangible. You are stupid. Welcome to reality.
The only thing I am scared of is someone like you lacking braincells and operating heavy machinery.
Self contradictions are bitch when you can't escape them aren't they? You would certainly know about that.
No, that falls on you. I never claimed that Obama wasn't qualified to be president, nor that Palin wasn't qualified to be president. I simply stated that both were green.
-
this is the problem and has always been with your straw you dont see how logic like this can be used to justify saying this other person shoudlnt be eligible to hold office b/c they believe a certain way... ::)
gay marriage ring a bell?
If any politician proclaims publicly to have radical religious views then they are ineligible to hold high public office.
that's my opinion (in case you haven't figured it out)
the same goes for Obama and the same went for Bush (and we see how that turned out).
Being a christian or a person of faith is not the same as being a bat shit crazy bible thumper
-
If any politician proclaims publicly to have radical religious views then they are ineligible to hold high public office.
that's my opinion (in case you haven't figured it out)
the same goes for Obama and the same went for Bush (and we see how that turned out).
Being a christian or a person of faith is not the same as being a bat shit crazy bible thumper
I actually dont disagree with you AS LONG as the same standard applies to those with lib views as well as those with right wing views.
-
If any politician proclaims publicly to have radical religious views then they are ineligible to hold high public office.
that's my opinion (in case you haven't figured it out)
the same goes for Obama and the same went for Bush (and we see how that turned out).
Being a christian or a person of faith is not the same as being a bat shit crazy bible thumper
And what, do tell, exactly makes a religious view, "radical"
-
Palin isn't qualified to be POTUS. As soon as the list of qualifications is provided, I will go down the list and explain exactly why she fails to measure up.
Now where is that list? Where is this list of POTUS qualifications that candidates are measured by? Hmmm....? Certainly it must exist. Question is, does it exist out of the board idiot's delusional mind?
List? Let's have it.
-
Palin isn't qualified to be POTUS. As soon as the list of qualifications is provided, I will go down the list and explain exactly why she fails to measure up.
Now where is that list? Where is this list of POTUS qualifications that candidates are measured by? Hmmm....? Certainly it must exist. Question is, does it exist out of the board idiot's delusional mind?
List? Let's have it.
You claim she ain't qualified...YOU PRODUCE the goods that verifies that she's not but Obama is (as has been asked of you and your ilk for nearly two weeks).
Time's a-waisting!! Cease the clucking and start delivering.
-
And what, do tell, exactly makes a religious view, "radical"
thinking we're "fallen"
thinking the "end times" are imminent
thinking God wants you (fill in politician name) to be in office
Shit like that and you're not getting my vote and you're not qualified to lead a secular country like the USA
I'm guessing shit like that will acutally win your vote
-
thinking we're "fallen"
thinking the "end times" are imminent
thinking God wants you (fill in politician name) to be in office
Shit like that and you're not getting my vote and you're not qualified to lead a secular country like the USA
I'm guessing shit like that will acutally win your vote
Hysterical - Obama thinks he is God and you have no problem with that. Straw - watch this clip Bro. He says "We need to remake the world".
Why is that Straw unless he believes we are fallen no?
-
thinking we're "fallen"
thinking the "end times" are imminent
thinking God wants you (fill in politician name) to be in office
Shit like that and you're not getting my vote and you're not qualified to lead a secular country like the USA
I'm guessing shit like that will acutally win your vote
First, the USA ain't a secular country.
Second, plenty of Presidents have Christian faith, thus holding to the view of man being fallen.
-
First, the USA ain't a secular country.
Second, plenty of Presidents have Christian faith, thus holding to the view of man being fallen.
We're absolutely a secular country
you know it but you're just deluded by your own religious beliefs.
If we're not a secular country then the only other option is a theocracy
are we a theocracy?
do we have an official state religion?
do we have a religous requirement to hold office?
do we even require the holder of our highest office to take an oath to God?
The answer to all those questions is no?
-
Palin isn't qualified to be POTUS. As soon as the list of qualifications is provided, I will go down the list and explain exactly why she fails to measure up.
Now where is that list? Where is this list of POTUS qualifications that candidates are measured by? Hmmm....? Certainly it must exist. Question is, does it exist out of the board idiot's delusional mind?
List? Let's have it.
Asking for list x 2.
Anyone seen? After two weeks of gnashing of the teeth about this "list of qualifications" I would think it existed by now.
Anyone seen the list?
-
First, the USA ain't a secular country.
BULLSHIT!!!!
You are just on a roll today with your insipid arguments aren't you?
Slyvan called. They want their diploma and crayons back.
-
Asking for list x 2.
Anyone seen? After two weeks of gnashing of the teeth about this "list of qualifications" I would think it existed by now.
Anyone seen the list?
Again, you claim that Palin ain't qualified. On what grounds do you make such a statement?
Two weeks later, you and the Palin critics come up with SQUAT!!!
-
Palin isn't qualified to be POTUS. As soon as the list of qualifications is provided, I will go down the list and explain exactly why she fails to measure up.
Now where is that list? Where is this list of POTUS qualifications that candidates are measured by? Hmmm....? Certainly it must exist. Question is, does it exist out of the board idiot's delusional mind?
List? Let's have it.
Asking for the list x 3.
Once we get that list of qualifications we can get down to pointing out why she isn't.
List? Where is that list?
-
Again, you claim that Palin ain't qualified. On what grounds do you make such a statement?
Two weeks later, you and the Palin critics come up with SQUAT!!!
The constitution sets the qualifications not Straw or Lurker.
BTW - where is that long form BC?
-
BULLSHIT!!!!
You are just on a roll today with your insipid arguments aren't you?
Slyvan called. They want their diploma and crayons back.
Still cowering behind your usual squealing of silliness!!!
This ain't a secular country, never has been!! Get a clue, take some history classes, and (while you're at it) grow a spine and back your claims about Palin.
-
We're absolutely a secular country
you know it but you're just deluded by your own religious beliefs.
If we're not a secular country then the only other option is a theocracy
No, it's not!! As Dr. King stated, the church is not the master NOR the slave of the state. It is its conscience.
are we a theocracy?
do we have an official state religion?
do we have a religous requirement to hold office?
do we even require the holder of our highest office to take an oath to God?
The answer to all those questions is no?
Yet, we have holders of our highest office (current one included) take that oath before God. We have in our Declaration of Independence that the Creator gives us inalienable rights.
That is NOT the hallmark of a secular nation.
Our laws are based, in part, on the Ten Commandments (recently re-instated in a courtroom in Kentucky).
That is NOT the hallmark of a secular nation.
-
No, it's not!! As Dr. King stated, the church is not the master NOR the slave of the state. It is its conscience.
Yet, we have holders of our highest office (current one included) take that oath before God. We have in our Declaration of Independence that the Creator gives us inalienable rights.
That is NOT the hallmark of a secular nation.
Our laws are based, in part, on the Ten Commandments (recently re-instated in a courtroom in Kentucky).
That is NOT the hallmark of a secular nation.
Here's the oath of the POTUS.
Can you show me where the God part is?
You've claimed it's there right?
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Here's another clue for you that we are absolutely a secular nation:
Article 6 of the Constitution states:
"No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
-
You know, if palin runs in 2012 - I predict SHE WILL NOT engage in those town hall discussions. You know why? Because supporters of Rudy, Thune, Mitt, and anyone else (not to mention lots of libs!) would show up and ask her simple questions about history.
And despite her love for the USA and down-folksy nature, she wouldn't get them right. We all know she couldn't have named 5 of the founding fathers if Beck has asked. Which do you admire most? "All of them!" That was like Couric asking her what newspapers she read. Even beck called "Bullcrap!" The, choosing washington because "he was the leader~" is poor.
In a true town hall, she would perform very poorly. Fred Thompson was a frontrunner in 2007/2008 until people realized he didn't know much about much, and started playing trivia with him. He just wasn't smart enough.
That being said, it's time for her to just become another fox news face, and let's focus the GOP on some kickass candidates - one who would mentally run circles around Obama/Biden, preferably.
i pray to god she does...
-
i pray to god she does...
By that time the right could dig up a corpse and beat the happless Obama.
-
Still cowering behind your usual squealing of silliness!!!
This ain't a secular country, never has been!! Get a clue, take some history classes, and (while you're at it) grow a spine and back your claims about Palin.
Incorrect once again.
Is there a surgery for stupidity? Maybe transplant some intellect? Anyone want to donate some brain cells for your need?
-
Palin isn't qualified to be POTUS. As soon as the list of qualifications is provided, I will go down the list and explain exactly why she fails to measure up.
Now where is that list? Where is this list of POTUS qualifications that candidates are measured by? Hmmm....? Certainly it must exist. Question is, does it exist out of the board idiot's delusional mind?
List? Let's have it.
Asking for list of qualifications x 4.
-
1) Be a Natural Born citizen (or a Citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution)
2) Be 35 years of age or older
3) Be a resident for at least 14 years.
-
1) Be a Natural Born citizen (or a Citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution)
2) Be 35 years of age or older
3) Be a resident for at least 14 years.
good point
those are the legal requirements and there are probably 200 million + people in this country who meet them.
the harder requirement is raising the millions of dollars needed (unless you're already loaded) and then the hardest part is actually get people to vote for you.
Palin would be eaten alive in the primaries by other candidates in her own party
she'll never hold office again and sincerely don't think she wants to hold office
-
thinking we're "fallen"
thinking the "end times" are imminent
These 2 are not radical views. Might be radical to you, but any person that claims to be a Christian and don't believe in the these 2 phrases, is not a Christian. Those are CLEAR teachings of the Bible. Nothing symbolic about them. There is no room to say that the Bible doesn't really mean them. It does teach that man is fallen and that God will bring an end to this world by establishing his own kingdom. You can choose to call it "whack". But, don't act like it's open for interpretation. Book of Genesis, Hebrews Chapter 8, Romans and 1 Corinthians speak about this and they are in the Bible. You know. The same book that all Christians are supposed to read, study, and BELIEVE as being the WORD OF GOD. The same GOD that supposedly Barack believes in. IF Barry doesn't believe any of that, then he is not a Christian.
-
These 2 are not radical views. Might be radical to you, but any person that claims to be a Christian and don't believe in the these 2 phrases, is not a Christian. Those are CLEAR teachings of the Bible. Nothing symbolic about them. There is no room to say that the Bible doesn't really mean them. It does teach that man is fallen and that God will bring an end to this world by establishing his own kingdom. You can choose to call it "whack". But, don't act like it's open for interpretation. Book of Genesis, Hebrews Chapter 8, Romans and 1 Corinthians speak about this and they are in the Bible. You know. The same book that all Christians are supposed to read, study, and BELIEVE as being the WORD OF GOD. The same GOD that supposedly Barack believes in. IF Barry doesn't believe any of that, then he is not a Christian.
It's interesting to me how many people on here are so quick to say what Christians must believe.
surely you're aware that many people who believe themselves to be Christian don't share your views and don't take the Bible literally
I hope Palin keeps talking about how we're a fallen world. I think that would be great. I just hope some resporter asks her to explain how her religious views will influence her policy decisions.
-
It's interesting to me how many people on here are so quick to say what Christians must believe.
surely you're aware that many people who believe themselves to be Christian don't share your views and don't take the Bible literally
I hope Palin keeps talking about how we're a fallen world. I think that would be great. I just hope some resporter asks her to explain how her religious views will influence her policy decisions.
Straw, I think religion should not be a part of politics. I have never been a social con all that much.
However, if UE is still at 10% and the economy in the toilet in 2011 2012, anyone will beat Obama, including Palin.
-
Here's the oath of the POTUS.
Can you show me where the God part is?
You've claimed it's there right?
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
You forgot four little words: "SO HELP ME GOD!!", not mandatory but often used and is customary, which suggest respect for the Christian foundation of this country.
Here's another clue for you that we are absolutely a secular nation:
Article 6 of the Constitution states:
"No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
Guess what!! To get such an office, you have to get elected. And, those who are electing you (at least on the surface) believe in God.
Again, note Dr. King's words. The church is not the master or the slave of the state. It is the conscience of the state.
There's a reason why politicians from BOTH PARTIES hit the churches hard, during election cycles. Where was Obama this weekend, prior to his all-for-naught cameo at Coakley's rally?
We have religious roots in our government. It's in the Declaration of Independence. It's in our laws (see the Ten Commandments).
We are a Christian nation, not a theocracy, NOR a secular nation.
-
Asking for list of qualifications x 4.
Nice try, coward!!! The question has been out there for you Palin-bashers for over two weeks.
You can't answer the bell. So, continue your slithering and sulking. And, while you're in your corner hiding, take a good long look at your previous claims about the Democrats having a lock on Washington, and Obama being a shoo-in for a second term.
Let that marinate, while you flee like a scalded dog.
-
You forgot four little words: "SO HELP ME GOD!!", not mandatory but often used and is customary, which suggest respect for the Christian foundation of this country.
We have religious roots in our government. It's in the Declaration of Independence. It's in our laws (see the Ten Commandments).
We are a Christian nation, not a theocracy, NOR a secular nation.
I left it out because it's not part of the oath
neither is swearing on a bible required.
you still haven't provided 1 bit of actual proof to your claim where as I have provided you multiple source of fact that we are a secular nation
-
I left it out because it's not part of the oath
neither is swearing on a bible required.
you still haven't provided 1 bit of actual proof to your claim where as I have provided you multiple source of fact that we are a secular nation
I guess Obama is not in alignment with your views Straw?
-
I left it out because it's not part of the oath
neither is swearing on a bible required.
you still haven't provided 1 bit of actual proof to your claim where as I have provided you multiple source of fact that we are a secular nation
On the contrary, I've provided the fact that our laws are based, in part, on the Ten Commandments (I can easily cite the founding fathers that say as much, if you like; or point out AGAIN that we have the Decalogue in our courtrooms).
And, our Declaration of Independence states that our Creator gives us inalienable rights.
You seem to think that if a nation is either a theocracy or secular. Such is not the case.
One more time: The church is neither the master nor the slave of the state, but its conscience. They work hand-in-hand; one doesn't overpower the other (at least, it's not supposed to do so).
That, Straw Man, does NOT equate to either a theocrary or a secular nation.
-
I guess Obama is not in alignment with your views Straw?
Again - NOT REQUIRED
they may add it if they wish
the founders went out of their way to say that there is no religious requirement to hold office, no official state religion, no mention of Jesus or Christianity in the Consitution or the Declaration of Independence (which does include metnion of Natures God and Creator but since many founders were in fact Deist)
So what we have is an abundance of proof that we are a secular nation and zero proof that we are a christian nation.
Are we a nation with a lot of Christians?
Yes, but that does not make us a christian nation. We have a lot of other religions and plenty of atheist too.
come on 333 - you know this shit already
-
No, religion really has no place in politics IMHO.
I am not a social conservative at all. I am not into the religious stuff at all and think it really gets in the way.
The more I read of the founders, the smarter and more insightful I believe they were, are.
We need total religious freedom, and that includes FREEDOM FROM RELIGION as well.
You have no beef with me Straw on those issues.
-
Again - NOT REQUIRED
they may add it if they wish
the founders went out of their way to say that there is no religious requirement to hold office, no official state religion, no mention of Jesus or Christianity in the Consitution or the Declaration of Independence (which does include metnion of Natures God and Creator but since many founders were in fact Deist)
So what we have is an abundance of proof that we are a secular nation and zero proof that we are a christian nation.
Are we a nation with a lot of Christians?
Yes, but that does not make us a christian nation. We have a lot of other religions and plenty of atheist too.
come on 333 - you know this shit already
Christianity is, by far, the dominant religion. It's the basis of our laws. At last check, we don't have any statutes, based on Baal or Molech worship.
And, only a handful of the Founding Fathers were Deist. But don't take my word for it:
Name of Signer State ReligiousAffiliation
Charles Carroll Maryland Catholic
Samuel Huntington Connecticut Congregationalist
Roger Sherman Connecticut Congregationalist
William Williams Connecticut Congregationalist
Oliver Wolcott Connecticut Congregationalist
Lyman Hall Georgia Congregationalist
Samuel Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist
John Hancock Massachusetts Congregationalist
Josiah Bartlett New Hampshire Congregationalist
William Whipple New Hampshire Congregationalist
William Ellery Rhode Island Congregationalist
John Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist; Unitarian
Robert Treat Paine Massachusetts Congregationalist; Unitarian
George Walton Georgia Episcopalian
John Penn North Carolina Episcopalian
George Ross Pennsylvania Episcopalian
And, that's just the short list
The signers were those individuals who happened to be Delegates to Congress at the time... The signers possessed many basic similarities. Most were American-born and of Anglo-Saxon origin. The eight foreign-born... were all natives of the British Isles. Except for Charles Carroll, a Roman Catholic, and a few Deists, every one subscribed to Protestantism. For the most part basically political nonextremists, many at first had hesitated at separation let alone rebellion.
http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html (http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html)
-
Nice try, coward!!! The question has been out there for you Palin-bashers for over two weeks.
You can't answer the bell. So, continue your slithering and sulking. And, while you're in your corner hiding, take a good long look at your previous claims about the Democrats having a lock on Washington, and Obama being a shoo-in for a second term.
Let that marinate, while you flee like a scalded dog.
Asking for the list x 5.
No list I see. No signs of intelligence either.
-
Asking for the list x 5.
No list I see. No signs of intelligence either.
Did you post this from a hall of mirrors?
Once of these days, a backbone will replace your wishbone and you'll actually back your statements, regarding Palin's supposed lack of qualifications.
Until then, cluck away, O cowardly one.
-
I actually dont disagree with you AS LONG as the same standard applies to those with lib views as well as those with right wing views.
this is the problem though b/c straw in all likelihood tolerates the lib views...gay marriage
but
condemns the views of cons
he probably also sees no problem in doing so in effect not following his own logic....AGAIN
-
Did you post this from a hall of mirrors?
Once of these days, a backbone will replace your wishbone and you'll actually back your statements, regarding Palin's supposed lack of qualifications.
Until then, cluck away, O cowardly one.
Asking for the list x 6
-
I left it out because it's not part of the oath
neither is swearing on a bible required.
you still haven't provided 1 bit of actual proof to your claim where as I have provided you multiple source of fact that we are a secular nation
You forget you are trying to use facts and logic with someone that clearly has no connection with reality amid their delusions.
The Constitution clearly establishes the separation of church and state in it's body which certainly identifies the US as a secular nation. The Constitution forbids all forms of religious tests and clearly refuses to recognize one form of religion above another. Just because the majority of the population may believe in one religion that means nothing and in no way, shape or form, has any bearing whatsoever on the nation from a constitutional or governmental standpoint.
"The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."
--Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11 (first signed Nov. 4, 1796, later being signed by Congress and the president in 1797)
The US was clearly and unequivocally established as a secular nation. Anyone claiming otherwise is just beyond stupid. Which given the poster you are attempting to explain this to, one can understand it.
-
You forget you are trying to use facts and logic with someone that clearly has no connection with reality amid their delusions.
The Constitution clearly establishes the separation of church and state in it's body which certainly identifies the US as a secular nation. The Constitution forbids all forms of religious tests and clearly refuses to recognize one form of religion above another. Just because the majority of the population may believe in one religion that means nothing and in no way, shape or form, has any bearing whatsoever on the nation from a constitutional or governmental standpoint.
"The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."
--Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11 (first signed Nov. 4, 1796, later being signed by Congress and the president in 1797)
The US was clearly and unequivocally established as a secular nation. Anyone claiming otherwise is just beyond stupid. Which given the poster you are attempting to explain this to, one can understand it.
The Constitution says no such thing, contrary to the brain-dead musings of a spineless jellyfish, like you, Lurker. What our Constitution does is establish what Dr. King states, that the church can and should be the conscience of the state.
Our laws, O historically-inept one, are based (in part) on the Ten Commandments; the Founding Fathers stated as much. As provided in the link posted earlier, the lion's share of them (contrary to Straw's claims) were Protestant Christians, not deists.
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams, 1798
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
And, since you want to talk about having no connection with reality, your previous boneheaded claims about the Democrats hvaing a lock on Washington and Obama being a shoe-in for re-election are being shattered, as we speak.
-
Bullshit.
Then again reading the Constitution requires a higher skill level than third grade. Which you do not possess.
Once again, choking on Teh Stupid.
Bottom line is that the nation is secular from the Constitutional standpoint and there is nothing you can do or say to change it. That's the fact. That is the reality. That is something that no delusions of your rabid Christian mind will ever change. Get used to it.
-
Bullshit.
Then again reading the Constitution requires a higher skill level than third grade. Which you do not possess.
Once again, choking on Teh Stupid.
Bottom line is that the nation is secular from the Constitutional standpoint and there is nothing you can do or say to change it. That's the fact. That is the reality. That is something that no delusions of your rabid Christian mind will ever change. Get used to it.
I just see you rambling in your posts, but you don't use any reference to the Constitution or writings by the founding fathers to support your view.
This nation was FOUNDED on CHRISTIAN BELIEFS. FACT! Most Americans identify themselves as Christians. About 77%. You are out of luck. Move on. You lost this debate.
-
I just see you rambling in your posts, but you don't use any reference to the Constitution or writings by the founding fathers to support your view.
This nation was FOUNDED on CHRISTIAN BELIEFS. FACT! Most Americans identify themselves as Christians. About 77%. You are out of luck. Move on. You lost this debate.
Bullshit!!! You only want it to simply because of delusional projection of your own beliefs.
The thing with using logic and facts on stupid Christians is that they can't grasp it. Being they are conditioned to believe inane stories without evidence.
Many of the founding fathers were deist or agnostic. FACT
The Declaration of Independence, for example, relies upon deist theology, rather than Christian. FACT
There are no specific reference to Christianity or Jesus in the Declaration of independence. There are a few references to a 'Nature's God' who is the creator of life, giver of rights and 'supreme Judge of the world' . FACT
The 1787 constitution is a nearly godless document. It mentions neither God, nor Christianity outside of a reference to the date using the Christian calandar. It does however have a provision against requiring specific religious ideas as a qualification for office. FACT
Article VI, Section 3, US Constitution
"...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." FACT
If the United States were set up as a Christian Nation why would the First Amendment grant equal rights to all religions?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." FACT
You are a complete toolbag. FACT
Only stupid people mistake references to God as the doctrine of Christianity. FACT
-
I personally believe that the freedom FROM religion is as important as the freedom of religion.
I cant stand the religious right who push social issues while ignoring economic issues and freedom.
That is why I cant vote for Huckster.
-
I personally believe that the freedom FROM religion is as important as the freedom of religion.
I cant stand the religious right who push social issues while ignoring economic issues and freedom.
That is why I cant vote for Huckster.
geez, just when hell started to thaw...... ;D and its only jan. with any luck this wont happen again for months.
-
I personally believe that the freedom FROM religion is as important as the freedom of religion.
I cant stand the religious right who push social issues while ignoring economic issues and freedom.
That's why I vote for those who push ALL OF THE ABOVE!! And, why I, like you, are a Palin fan!!
-
geez, just when hell started to thaw...... ;D and its only jan. with any luck this wont happen again for months.
I'm not kidding. I am considered a heretic by my own since I wont go to church etc yet consider myself as much a patriot as anybody.
My patriotism and beliefs have nothing do with what I do on Sundays, but I respect those who believe otherwise. I just wish something they felt the same way.
-
Bullshit!!! You only want it to simply because of delusional projection of your own beliefs.
The thing with using logic and facts on stupid Christians is that they can't grasp it. Being they are conditioned to believe inane stories without evidence.
Many of the founding fathers were deist or agnostic. FACT
The Declaration of Independence, for example, relies upon deist theology, rather than Christian. FACT
There are no specific reference to Christianity or Jesus in the Declaration of independence. There are a few references to a 'Nature's God' who is the creator of life, giver of rights and 'supreme Judge of the world' . FACT
The 1787 constitution is a nearly godless document. It mentions neither God, nor Christianity outside of a reference to the date using the Christian calandar. It does however have a provision against requiring specific religious ideas as a qualification for office. FACT
Article VI, Section 3, US Constitution
"...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." FACT
If the United States were set up as a Christian Nation why would the First Amendment grant equal rights to all religions?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." FACT
You are a complete toolbag. FACT
The reason the First Amendment reads the way it does, El Bonehead, is because the Founding Fathers were working form different denominations OF CHRISTIANITY!! Do you really think any of them were concerned about Islam, Buddhism, Molech or Dagon worship?
Only stupid people mistake references to God as the doctrine of Christianity. FACT
Come back, when you get a spine, a clue, and some sense.
-
The 1787 constitution is a nearly godless document. It mentions neither God, nor Christianity outside of a reference to the date using the Christian calandar. It does however have a provision against requiring specific religious ideas as a qualification for office. FACT
Article VI, Section 3, US Constitution
"...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." FACT
If the United States were set up as a Christian Nation why would the First Amendment grant equal rights to all religions?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." FACT
First you have to look at the historical context and where the colonist came from. What that passage means is that the US government cannot create a religion or Church of America ( like the Church of England), and that you cannot be lynched for worshipping a tree if thats what you choose to do.
-
The reason the First Amendment reads the way it does, El Bonehead, is because the Founding Fathers were working form different denominations OF CHRISTIANITY!! Do you really think any of them were concerned about Islam, Buddhism, Molech or Dagon worship?
Bullshit!! And you can't prove it either.
You just simply wish for it to be so because if your own insecurities and religious delusions. But it isn't. So live with it.
US = secular
You = idiot
-
Bullshit!! And you can't prove it either.
You just simply wish for it to be so because if your own insecurities and religious delusions. But it isn't. So live with it.
US = secular
You = idiot
I don't have to wish for it to be so. It is so, whether you and your crackpot musings believe it or not.
I can and have proven it. Again, get some sense, get a clue, and grow a spine.
-
Bullshit!!! You only want it to simply because of delusional projection of your own beliefs.
The thing with using logic and facts on stupid Christians is that they can't grasp it. Being they are conditioned to believe inane stories without evidence.
Many of the founding fathers were deist or agnostic. FACT
The Declaration of Independence, for example, relies upon deist theology, rather than Christian. FACT
There are no specific reference to Christianity or Jesus in the Declaration of independence. There are a few references to a 'Nature's God' who is the creator of life, giver of rights and 'supreme Judge of the world' . FACT
The 1787 constitution is a nearly godless document. It mentions neither God, nor Christianity outside of a reference to the date using the Christian calandar. It does however have a provision against requiring specific religious ideas as a qualification for office. FACT
Article VI, Section 3, US Constitution
"...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." FACT
If the United States were set up as a Christian Nation why would the First Amendment grant equal rights to all religions?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." FACT
You are a complete toolbag. FACT
Only stupid people mistake references to God as the doctrine of Christianity. FACT
HAHAHAHAHAH!!!
Your little "brain" just melted down.
You can tell whose the poster without a clue when he/she types a thesis instead of getting to the heart of the matter.
Move on retard. You don't have a clue what you are yapping about.
-
I don't have to wish for it to be so. It is so, whether you and your crackpot musings believe it or not.
I can and have proven it. Again, get some sense, get a clue, and grow a spine.
The founders, like Jefferson, believed in God, and were considered Deists, but were not big on organized religion.
The more I read of the founders, like Jefferson, Washington, ect, the more I cherish the gift they gave us.
-
First you have to look at the historical context and where the colonist came from. What that passage means is that the US government cannot create a religion or Church of America ( like the Church of England), and that you cannot be lynched for worshipping a tree if thats what you choose to do.
Again, if the Constitution was set up based on Christianity, then why would it grant freedom to ALL religions and forbid any religion to be placed above another. The first commandment says what? "You shall have no other God before me".
If the US was based on Christianity - which it isn't - then it is a failed effort since the Constitution clearly allows for people to have other, or none, beings of spiritual devoting and worship higher than God if they so choose.
-
First you have to look at the historical context and where the colonist came from. What that passage means is that the US government cannot create a religion or Church of America ( like the Church of England), and that you cannot be lynched for worshipping a tree if thats what you choose to do.
That goes back to what I also said earlier that being a Christian nation DOES NOT EQUATE to being a theocracy.
And, it also goes back to the words of Dr. King about the church being the state's consciene, not its master or slave.
-
I don't have to wish for it to be so. It is so, whether you and your crackpot musings believe it or not.
I can and have proven it. Again, get some sense, get a clue, and grow a spine.
The only thing you have proven is that you are an idiot.
You have posted NO facts at all for this delusion you keep clinging to.
-
HAHAHAHAHAH!!!
Your little "brain" just melted down.
You can tell whose the poster without a clue when he/she types a thesis instead of getting to the heart of the matter.
Move on retard. You don't have a clue what you are yapping about.
Your only response to facts posted is this? Oh, you must be from the G&O board. ::) Go figure. Now I understand the lack of brainwattage.
-
The only thing you have proven is that you are an idiot.
You have posted NO facts at all for this delusion you keep clinging to.
Why cant we just get along and live and let be?
-
The founders, like Jefferson, believed in God, and were considered Deists, but were not big on organized religion.
The more I read of the founders, like Jefferson, Washington, ect, the more I cherish the gift they gave us.
A handful were deists. A lot more were Protestant Christians. They establish a government where Christian worship came voluntarily.
-
Why cant we just get along and live and let be?
Because generally when encountering rabid Christians they are actually to stupid to know that they are in fact, stupid.
-
Because generally when encountering rabid Christians they are actually to stupid to know that they are in fact, stupid.
maybe you should use the spell check before calling someone stupid
you are missing an "o"
LOL!!!
-
Again, if the Constitution was set up based on Christianity, then why would it grant freedom to ALL religions and forbid any religion to be placed above another. The first commandment says what? "You shall have no other God before me".
If the US was based on Christianity - which it isn't - then it is a failed effort since the Constitution clearly allows for people to have other, or none, beings of spiritual devoting and worship higher than God if they so choose.
Wrong again, El Bonehead!! It is hardly a failed effort, because a Christian nation DOES NOT EQUATE to Christianity being mandated into worship by law. The church isn't the master or slave of the state. It is the conscience.
-
LOL!!!
You bolded the wrong one.
Might want to rethink the LOL part there until you at least get it right.
-
you are missing an "o"
lol!!
Glad to see you went back and corrected your first little attempt.
"LOL"
-
The only thing you have proven is that you are an idiot.
You have posted NO facts at all for this delusion you keep clinging to.
So, on top of your other shortcomings, you've missed your "Hooked on Phonics" sessions, again.
Clinging to delusions falls on you. A prime example of that is your silly statements about Democrats having indefinite power and Obama being a lock for a second term.
-
Because generally when encountering rabid Christians they are actually to stupid to know that they are in fact, stupid.
I believe the govt really has no business being involved with religion. Its a toxic mix IMHO.
When people believe that "God" ordains them to take a public policy position, the end result really cant be that good. I do believe in natural law however in terms as it pertains to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
But that is where it ends. The freedom of religion needs to be just as important as the freedom FROM religion since a religion can be anything.
-
I believe the govt really has no business being involved with religion. Its a toxic mix IMHO.
When people believe that "God" ordains them to take a public policy position, the end result really cant be that good. I do believe in natural law however in terms as it pertains to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
But that is where it ends. The freedom of religion needs to be just as important as the freedom FROM religion since a religion can be anything.
Exactly. Which is why the Founding Fathers were smart enough to establish a secular nation.
-
So, on top of your other shortcomings, you've missed your "Hooked on Phonics" sessions, again.
Clinging to delusions falls on you. A prime example of that is your silly statements about Democrats having indefinite power and Obama being a lock for a second term.
Still nothing factual to post I see.
Instead of oh... say, words of the actual Constitution and words that came directly from the Founding Father's mouth. But surely better evidence than that exists to support your little delusions. But where?
Why don't you show us? Oh that's right. You can't.
-
I believe the govt really has no business being involved with religion. Its a toxic mix IMHO.
When people believe that "God" ordains them to take a public policy position, the end result really cant be that good. I do believe in natural law however in terms as it pertains to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
But that is where it ends. The freedom of religion needs to be just as important as the freedom FROM religion since a religion can be anything.
People vote on policy, based on what they feel is right and wrong. That is formed largely by their religious beliefs (or lack of them).
Many believe in universal health care, because of the words of Jesus to heal the sick and care for those less fortunate. Of course, the big debate in politics is HOW they get such care and (more importantly) who foots the bill.
Many believe in the sanctity of life in the womb, based on religious beliefs. Others belief marriage is between a man and a woman, based on religious beliefs.
The list goes onward.
-
Exactly. Which is why the Founding Fathers were smart enough to establish a secular nation.
The founders were scholars, historians, philosphers, and looked at all of the failed experiments of the past, including Rome, Greece, Constantinople, Byzantine Empire, etc and truly crafted a document hopefully fixing some of the errors that plagued those societies.
While I respect religious people for the view points and beliefs, even they should understand the peril of having organized religion play any part in the govt.
-
Because generally when encountering rabid Christians they are actually to stupid to know that they are in fact, stupid.
And I am the stupid one?
Listen you stupid atheist (which in itself is a religion), USA was based on Christian beliefs and 77% of Americans identify temselves as Christians. You want to argue that politicians shouldn't base on their decision on Christian beliefs. Fine. But, don't act like this country was founded solely on the whim and man made moral beliefs. Gee, I wonder what the main reason was for the Pilgrims to sail all the way to this continent. I wonder who they thank for the first year of survival.
What are you? 8 years old that you don't even understand your basic American history? Go back to school, nimrod.
-
Still nothing factual to post I see.
Instead of oh... say, words of the actual Constitution and words that came directly from the Founding Father's mouth. But surely better evidence than that exists to support your little delusions. But where?
Why don't you show us? Oh that's right. You can't.
Earth to El Bonehead, did I NOT just post the words that came from some of the Founding Fathers, along with their religious affliliations?
Recap:
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams, 1798
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
Once again, get a clue and some sense.
-
People vote on policy, based on what they feel is right and wrong. That is formed largely by their religious beliefs (or lack of them).
Many believe in universal health care, because of the words of Jesus to heal the sick and care for those less fortunate. Of course, the big debate in politics is HOW they get such care and (more importantly) who foots the bill.
Many believe in the sanctity of life in the womb, based on religious beliefs. Others belief marriage is between a man and a woman, based on religious beliefs.
The list goes onward.
Policies should be based upon the constitution, precedent, and legal principals, not religious ones.
-
The founders were scholars, historians, philosphers, and looked at all of the failed experiments of the past, including Rome, Greece, Constantinople, Byzantine Empire, etc and truly crafted a document hopefully fixing some of the errors that plagued those societies.
While I respect religious people for the view points and beliefs, even they should understand the peril of having organized religion play any part in the govt.
Yep.
When you consider exactly how modern Christianity was birthed to begin with (by Constantine through political actions) they were wise enough to know that religion and politics should be free from one another and established the country accordingly.
-
Policies should be based upon the constitution, precedent, and legal principals, not religious ones.
No doubt about that!!!
But those legal principles are, in part, from Scripture, which include the Ten Commandments (which is why we have such in our courtrooms).
At the very least, commandments 5 - 10, deal with civil issues (how man treats his fellow man).
-
And I am the stupid one?
Listen you stupid atheist (which in itself is a religion), USA was based on Christian beliefs and 77% of Americans identify temselves as Christians. You want to argue that politicians shouldn't base on their decision on Christian beliefs. Fine. But, don't act like this country was founded solely on the whim and man made moral beliefs. Gee, I wonder what the main reason was for the Pilgrims to sail all the way to this continent. I wonder who they thank for the first year of survival.
What are you? 8 years old that you don't even understand your basic American history? Go back to school, nimrod.
Yes, you are the stupid one. We have already established that by this point.
Again, the major population's religious beliefs has no bearing on the nation or it's government process.
It can't be simpler than that. But yet you can't understand it. So to repeat... yes, you are the stupid one.
-
Earth to El Bonehead, did I NOT just post the words that came from some of the Founding Fathers, along with their religious affliliations?
Recap:
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams, 1798
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
Once again, get a clue and some sense.
Here's a clue.
First Amendment. It's content and nature clearly renders your little whinings as irrelevant. Which isn't hard to do given your track record.
You got something more factual than the First Amendment? Think not. Try again.
-
Yes, you are the stupid one. We have already established that by this point.
Again, the major population's religious beliefs has no bearing on the nation or it's government process.
It can't be simpler than that. But yet you can't understand it. So to repeat... yes, you are the stupid one.
No, that honor falls on you, or did you forget that, less than a month ago, this country celebrated Christmas as a FEDERAL HOLIDAY (i.e. many people got the day off.....WITH PAY).
As I said, last month, I saw no legions of atheists, marching to their jobs, demanding that their bosses take their Christmas bonuses back.
-
Here's a clue.
First Amendment. It's content and nature clearly renders your little whinings as irrelevant. Which isn't hard to do given your track record.
You got something more factual than the First Amendment? Think not. Try again.
A state religion doesn't have to be established, O silly one, in order for a nation to be a Christian one.
Our national anthem states, "in God is our trust" (3rd verse). It's on our money. Federal employees (and many others) get Christmas off WITH PAY. The list goes onward.
I try to believe that you aren't this dumb. But, my faith is wearing on that one.
-
No, that honor falls on you, or did you forget that, less than a month ago, this country celebrated Christmas as a FEDERAL HOLIDAY (i.e. many people got the day off.....WITH PAY).
I bet you are one of the stupid Christians who still think Jesus was born on Dec 25th too aren't you?
We also celebrated MLK Day off ... WITH PAY as FEDERAL HOLIDAY
And Columbus Day off.... WITH PAY as FEDERAL HOLIDAY
How many other days were off... WITH PAY as FEDERAL HOLIDAY? How many of them were religious affiliated?
You tard, you proved my point once again. A dozen as FEDERAL HOLIDAY days off... WITH PAY out of the year and only one of related to "Christianity". Proves my point.
-
A state religion doesn't have to be established, O silly one, in order for a nation to be a Christian one.
Our national anthem states, "in God is our trust" (3rd verse). It's on our money. Federal employees (and many others) get Christmas off WITH PAY. The list goes onward.
I try to believe that you aren't this dumb. But, my faith is wearing on that one.
Again, having to repeat for the slow ones in class :
Only stupid people mistake references to God as the doctrine of Christianity Doctrine.
Which is exactly why the most powerful man in the nation at any given time - POTUS - isn't required to utter those words.
-
I bet you are one of the stupid Christians who still think Jesus was born on Dec 25th too aren't you?
We also celebrated MLK Day off ... WITH PAY as FEDERAL HOLIDAY
And Columbus Day off.... WITH PAY as FEDERAL HOLIDAY
How many other days were off... WITH PAY as FEDERAL HOLIDAY? How many of them were religious affiliated?
You tard, you proved my point once again. A dozen as FEDERAL HOLIDAY days off... WITH PAY out of the year and only one of related to "Christianity". Proves my point.
One, Dr. King was a PREACHER (or did you forget that?).
Two, Christmas is celebrated FOR THE EXPRESSED PURPOSE OF ACKNOWLEDGING A SIGNFICANT RELIGIOUS EVENT: The Birth of Jesus Christ (REGARDLESS of whether he was actually born on Dec. 25th, which I have never asserted nor mantained).
-
Again, having to repeat for the slow ones in class :
Only stupid people mistake references to God as the doctrine of Christianity Doctrine.
Which is exactly why the most powerful man in the nation at any given time - POTUS - isn't required to utter those words.
But, the most powerful man in the nation, at any given time, HAS UTTERED SUCH, of his own free will!!
And, they do so, because they acknowledge the heritage of this country, as cited by our Founding Fathers, two of which I just quoted (contrary to your crackpot claims that I didn't).
-
IMHO - religion has ZERO place in politics,. whether its the people in the black church screaming like Rev. Wright, or Huckster, or the Jerry Falwell types.
Of course private morality comes into play, but that is a far cry from organized religion influence legislation in terms of what organized religion wants.
IMHO it corrupts the religion.
-
One, Dr. King was a PREACHER (or did you forget that?).
Two, Christmas is celebrated FOR THE EXPRESSED PURPOSE OF ACKNOWLEDGING A SIGNFICANT RELIGIOUS EVENT: The Birth of Jesus Christ (REGARDLESS of whether he was actually born on Dec. 25th, which I have never asserted nor mantained).
Big fucking deal what King was. He was also a person who violate "Christian principles" by having affairs. One thing he wasn't was a Founding Father or anyone who had input to what went in the Constitution so your little attempt at linkage is completely irrelevant. No surprise there.
Was Columbus a preacher? No.
Washington? No.
Are Memorial Day and Veterans Day geared only for "holy wars"? No.
Keep trying. Maybe you one day post something of logic.
-
IMHO - religion has ZERO place in politics,. whether its the people in the black church screaming like Rev. Wright, or Huckster, or the Jerry Falwell types.
Of course private morality comes into play, but that is a far cry from organized religion influence legislation in terms of what organized religion wants.
IMHO it corrupts the religion.
You aren't down with "Praise the Lord and vote for me"-style politics. Boy, you aren't much fun!!!
Rest assured that Obama will get the Holy Ghost, when his presidency in on the line in 2012. His challenger will, too.
-
But, the most powerful man in the nation, at any given time, HAS UTTERED SUCH, of his own free will!!
And, they do so, because they acknowledge the heritage of this country, as cited by our Founding Fathers, two of which I just quoted (contrary to your crackpot claims that I didn't).
Too bad the Constitution and POTUS oath doesn't support your delusions. Well, not too bad... more like "Thank God" they don't.
-
IMHO - religion has ZERO place in politics,. whether its the people in the black church screaming like Rev. Wright, or Huckster, or the Jerry Falwell types.
Of course private morality comes into play, but that is a far cry from organized religion influence legislation in terms of what organized religion wants.
IMHO it corrupts the religion.
This is why the right wing base continues to shrink every election.
-
Big fucking deal what King was. He was also a person who violate "Christian principles" by having affairs. One thing he wasn't was a Founding Father or anyone who had input to what went in the Constitution so your little attempt at linkage is completely irrelevant. No surprise there.
Was Columbus a preacher? No.
Washington? No.
Are Memorial Day and Veterans Day geared only for "holy wars"? No.
Keep trying. Maybe you one day post something of logic.
The thing that concerns me most with the religious types, whether right or left, if that they will justify unconstitutuional positions on issues based upon what they believe their religion tells them what to do as opposed to what the constituion, legal history, and legal precedent says.
-
Big fucking deal what King was. He was also a person who violate "Christian principles" by having affairs. One thing he wasn't was a Founding Father or anyone who had input to what went in the Constitution so your little attempt at linkage is completely irrelevant. No surprise there.
Was Columbus a preacher? No.
Washington? No.
Are Memorial Day and Veterans Day geared only for "holy wars"? No.
Keep trying. Maybe you one day post something of logic.
None of those other federal holidays had to do with the birth a RELIGIOUS ENTITY.
And, since I've already cited some of the Founding Fathers and their buy-in on the matter, I can easily dismiss your musings for the first-class buffoonery that it is.
Get a clue, get some sense, and grow a spine.
-
You aren't down with "Praise the Lord and vote for me"-style politics. Boy, you aren't much fun!!!
Rest assured that Obama will get the Holy Ghost, when his presidency in on the line in 2012. His challenger will, too.
Hell no. I am a libertarian by and large and dont like it when people like Huckster justify economic socialism with his religious beliefs. Its awful.
I can both respect your absolute right to religion and its beliefs and also have libertarian beliefs at the same time.
-
This is why the right wing base continues to shrink every election.
Wrong again, Lurker.
This ranks right up there with your silly claims about the Dems having Washington on lock. Right now, they're quaking in their boots about what just went down less than 48 hours ago.
The Dems know their hides are on the line THIS YEAR. Their supermajority is GONE, in the most unlikely fashion possible (their ace-in-the-hole Senate seat just got SNATCHED from them). Obamacare is DOA and the Dems who sold out their constituents to attempt pass this mess are running for the hills.
-
None of those other federal holidays had to do with the birth a RELIGIOUS ENTITY.
And, since I've already cited some of the Founding Fathers and their buy-in on the matter, I can easily dismiss your musings for the first-class buffoonery that it is.
Get a clue, get some sense, and grow a spine.
Of none of the others had anything to do with a RELIGIOUS ENTITY. (gnashing those teeth aren't you)
Because we are a secular nation is the reason why. As evident by the very first amendment that you keep trying to argue with. ::) Tard.
-
Wrong again, Lurker.
This ranks right up there with your silly claims about the Dems having Washington on lock. Right now, they're quaking in their boots about what just went down less than 48 hours ago.
The Dems know their hides are on the line THIS YEAR. Their supermajority is GONE, in the most unlikely fashion possible (their ace-in-the-hole Senate seat just got SNATCHED from them). Obamacare is DOA and the Dems who sold out their constituents to attempt pass this mess are running for the hills.
The right wing religious conservatives are a dying breed. "Thank God".
The next election, just like the last will be decided by moderates and independents.
You are a complete tool. Tell me, did you work hard to become so stupid or did it just come natural for you.
-
The right wing religious conservatives are a dying breed. "Thank God".
The next election, just like the last will be decided by moderates and independents.
You are a complete tool. Tell me, did you work hard to become so stupid or did it just come natural for you.
While the religious aspect is probably true,conservatism is on the rise.Gallop had a poll showing that conservatism is now the most popular ideology.This country has always been center right.Now we have a tool in there that is a socialist and the country is speaking.
-
The right wing religious conservatives are a dying breed. "Thank God".
The next election, just like the last will be decided by moderates and independents.
You are a complete tool. Tell me, did you work hard to become so stupid or did it just come natural for you.
IMHO - the winning formula for the GOP needs to be pro-freedom libertarianism like RP, Schiff, Harry Browne, etc.
To economic liberty is far more important right now since we are all getting raped in taxes, inflation etc. You want to attract tons of voters, get a charasmatic libertarian to describe how the govt is screwing you financially dailly. You want religious freedom? Great - knock yourself out, you will never here from me.
However, to me the true moral issue is the govt stealing your $, not esoteric "pro-family values" nonsense that should be taught in the home first and foremost.
I dont understand the "pro-family values" crowd who trusts the govt to somehow teach these supposed values. WTF is that?
Get the govt out of our lives, relifiously, economically, civically as much as possible, etc.
-
While the religious aspect is probably true,conservatism is on the rise.Gallop had a poll showing that conservatism is now the most popular ideology.This country has always been center right.Now we have a tool in there that is a socialist and the country is speaking.
lurker is right. social libertarianism is on the rise. Most likely because young people are getting more involved in politics.
-
lurker is right. social libertarianism is on the rise. Most likely because young people are getting more involved in politics.
To me, social libertarians are ripe for the picking to teach economic libertarianism and should never be judged scornfully.
I can find someones' behavior repulsive but at the same time respect their rights as a private citizen so long as it does not infring on mine.
I just wish those same people I may have tolderance for socially would respect my economic rights.
-
To me, social libertarians are ripe for the picking to teach economic libertarianism and should never be judged scornfully.
I can find someones' behavior repulsive but at the same time respect their rights as a private citizen so long as it does not infring on mine.
I just wish those same people I may have tolderance for socially would respect my economic rights.
hey, most libs i know im my life are not fiscally liberal. In fact, i dont know one liberal who fundamentally supports higher taxes, high gov spending. Its just that theyre very liberal on social issues and a little soft on foreign policy. And in-turn get lumped in to lib or con category.
-
While the religious aspect is probably true,conservatism is on the rise.Gallop had a poll showing that conservatism is now the most popular ideology.This country has always been center right.Now we have a tool in there that is a socialist and the country is speaking.
Most people get confused with the term "conservatism" when being applied in politics. There are two common types it generally applies to in discussions.
There is true conservatism that I am in favor of, this relates to an economic standpoint such as spending and small government.
Then there is the social conservatism of the religious based far right that is about intrusion, dictating how people should live their own lives, and attempting to regulate the entire nation with laws that are based on the narrow minded viewpoint of a minority (wingnuts).
The religious far right is dying out. Which is a good thing. Candidates have only been paying lip service to them for a while now.
As 2nd coming stated, more young people will be getting involved in politics. Many of these young people naturally have more liberal views than their parents. (Not saying they ARE liberals, just their views are not as socially conservative as their ancestors may have been). You will see the moderate base and ranks growing faster than the left or right side in the future years. While shunning the typical religious outlook of conservatism, they will still most likely embrace the aspect of true conservatism in some regards.
-
hey, most libs i know im my life are not fiscally liberal. In fact, i dont know one liberal who fundamentally supports higher taxes, high gov spending. Its just that theyre very liberal on social issues and a little soft on foreign policy. And in-turn get lumped in to lib or con category.
I am revolted by the behavior of a lot of people, but IMHO, the heavy hand of govt regulating those behaviors to my liking is worse than my private discomfort.
Most people dont undertand that about me and assume I am some far right fundy. Absolutely not. I think the Govt needs to be kept in check on all fronts. However, when it comes to electoral politics, I find the encroachments on my economic freedoms and choices worse than the perceived social issues pushed by the religious right.
-
hey, most libs i know im my life are not fiscally liberal. In fact, i dont know one liberal who fundamentally supports higher taxes, high gov spending. Its just that theyre very liberal on social issues and a little soft on foreign policy. And in-turn get lumped in to lib or con category.
Well look at me. I have already made my views on :
Gun rights
Immigration
Bail Out
Health Care
etc...
known and despite the Repubs on here having the exact same opinion on these issues, I am still labeled a liberal.
-
The right wing religious conservatives are a dying breed. "Thank God".
The next election, just like the last will be decided by moderates and independents.
You are a complete tool. Tell me, did you work hard to become so stupid or did it just come natural for you.
Woefully inept and tragically pitiful, as usual, Lurker.
The reason that moderates and independents are the tie-breakers is because the base of BOTH parties is pretty much set.
Democrats can't win without the far-left; Republican CAN NOT WIN without the "right wing religious conservatives". That's the base, the demographic that got Bush a second term.
They may not win without the social conservatives. But, they WILL NOT WIN without them.
If the Republicans get a candidate for president that can energize that base, coupled with the appeal to moderates, Obama is a good as DEAD in 2012 (which would put the final nail in your screwball assertions of long-term Democratic domination in Washington).
-
Even better - let's get a truly progressive 3rd party and make the Dems and Repubs irrelevent.
If that ever happened you'd see Dems and Repubs falling all over themselves to find middle ground to retain their own personal power and the power of their corporate benefactors
The Dems have no spine and the Repubs have no brain
-
Woefully inept and tragically pitiful, as usual, Lurker.
The reason that moderates and independents are the tie-breakers is because the base of BOTH parties is pretty much set.
Democrats can't win without the far-left; Republican CAN NOT WIN without the "right wing religious conservatives". That's the base, the demographic that got Bush a second term.
They may not win without the social conservatives. But, they WILL NOT WIN without them.
If the Republicans get a candidate for president that can energize that base, coupled with the appeal to moderates, Obama is a good as DEAD in 2012 (which would put the final nail in your screwball assertions of long-term Democratic domination in Washington).
Only an idiot - you fit the bill - would attempt an argument in the face of what is already known.
Religious base is shrinking because the nation is outgrowing the silliness of it.
The part I bolded is a perfect example of your typical contradictions and not knowing what the hell you are talking about. It makes no sense. Just like you. But carry on with your delusions.
-
Most people get confused with the term "conservatism" when being applied in politics. There are two common types it generally applies to in discussions.
There is true conservatism that I am in favor of, this relates to an economic standpoint such as spending and small government.
Then there is the social conservatism of the religious based far right that is about intrusion, dictating how people should live their own lives, and attempting to regulate the entire nation with laws that are based on the narrow minded viewpoint of a minority (wingnuts).
The religious far right is dying out. Which is a good thing. Candidates have only been paying lip service to them for a while now.
As 2nd coming stated, more young people will be getting involved in politics. Many of these young people naturally have more liberal views than their parents. (Not saying they ARE liberals, just their views are not as socially conservative as their ancestors may have been). You will see the moderate base and ranks growing faster than the left or right side in the future years. While shunning the typical religious outlook of conservatism, they will still most likely embrace the aspect of true conservatism in some regards.
I agree!!Im an economic conservative but a libertarian on ALL social issues.I want the government to stay the hell out of my life!!!I dont want them to tell me what to eat,what to watch,what to think,what to say NOTHING!
While your right that religious conservatives want to controll your life,liberals do the EXACT same thing,but on different issues.This is why I hate liberals.It was Joe Biden that got steroids on the controlled substance list and made them a felony.Its Obama that wants to tell us how hot to have our homes,what cars we should drive,how heavy we should be,how much we pay to tan.etc etc.
YES religious conservatives want to dictate who you sleep with,but liberals want to dictate who you associate with and every other aspect of our lives.THEY are the ones who try to punnish you for politically incorrect speech,they try to ban music,they try to stop radio talk shows.
So,I agree that the religious right are goof balls,but the loony left is equally idiotic.
-
Only an idiot - you fit the bill - would attempt an argument in the face of what is already known.
Religious base is shrinking because the nation is outgrowing the silliness of it.
The part I bolded is a perfect example of your typical contradictions and not knowing what the hell you are talking about. It makes no sense. Just like you. But carry on with your delusions.
That was simply a typo, which should have read, "They may not win WITH social conservatives. But they WILL NOT WIN without them."
Delusions would be your moronic statements of the past, regarding the Dems having a lock on Washington indefinitely with Obama as a shoo-in for re-election. In about ten months, you're going to see that delusion GET SMASHED TO PIECES.
The religious base isn't going anywhere. A prime example of that would be the 11 marriage amendments that pass in 2006 and 2008, even though Republicans lost big time.
Many of that base participated in those tea parties, which have made their presence felt. Liberals were laughing and mocking them. After what just went down Tuesday, they ain't laughing no more.
You carry on with YOUR delusions. And watch your feelings continue to get hurt.
3 straight lost elections, Supermajority GONE (one year earlier than anyone could have imagined, courtesy of the one ace-in-the-hold Senate seat going GOP), ObamaCare DOA, Democratic heads on the chopping block, and (barring a major about-face, Clinton-style), the official-goose-cooking of one Barack Hussein Obama....Hmmmm, Hmmmm, Hmmmm!!!
-
Religious base is shrinking and dying out.
The US is a secular nation.
You are an idiot.
This thread has established all of the above.
-
I agree!!Im an economic conservative but a libertarian on ALL social issues.I want the government to stay the hell out of my life!!!I dont want them to tell me what to eat,what to watch,what to think,what to say NOTHING!
While your right that religious conservatives want to controll your life,liberals do the EXACT same thing,but on different issues.This is why I hate liberals.It was Joe Biden that got steroids on the controlled substance list and made them a felony.Its Obama that wants to tell us how hot to have our homes,what cars we should drive,how heavy we should be,how much we pay to tan.etc etc.
YES religious conservatives want to dictate who you sleep with,but liberals want to dictate who you associate with and every other aspect of our lives.THEY are the ones who try to punnish you for politically incorrect speech,they try to ban music,they try to stop radio talk shows.
So,I agree that the religious right are goof balls,but the loony left is equally idiotic.
I think the difference is that a religious person wants to convert you to his beliefs by moral persuasion. They simply believe that their beliefs and values are good and want you to share those values. A liberal wants to convert you to their beliefs and values by passing laws. Using the force of government to get you to do what they have unilaterally determined is best for you.
Of course, the question isn't always what's good for you. I think it's better if a person doesn't smoke, wear seat belts, don't abuse drugs, etc., but the question is: who should decide?
-
Religious base is shrinking and dying out.
The US is a secular nation.
You are an idiot.
This thread has established all of the above.
Strikes one, two, and three!!!
Keep on cowering and watch your past claims about the Dems' lock on Washington get smashed to pieces, along with the rest of the foolishness you keep posting.
-
Strikes one, two, and three!!!
Keep on cowering and watch your past claims about the Dems' lock on Washington get smashed to pieces, along with the rest of the foolishness you keep posting.
How's the non-secular nation with the ever increasing christian right wing party going for you in those delusions of yours?
Reality called. Said you were a tard. Hope this helps a bit child.
-
How's the non-secular nation with the ever increasing christian right wing party going for you in those delusions of yours?
Reality called. Said you were a tard. Hope this helps a bit child.
Look who's talking: A crackpot of a coward, hanging onto delusions of indefinite Democratic rule, even while witnessing the beatings firsthand, which will likely continue in 2010.
Add to that, the statements IN BLACK AND WHITE, from the Founding Fathers that we are a Christian nation (contrary to El Bonehead's claims that I didn't produce such quotes).
But, to add the Grey Poupon to your toes (since you insist on keeping your foot in your mouth):
Religion is of general and public concern, and on its support depend, in great measure, the peace and good order of government, the safety and happiness of the people.
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty. - Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice, giving the majority opinion in the case, "Runkel v. Winemiller", 1799.
NEXT!!!!
-
And, it appears that US Supreme Court was SOOOOOOOO convinced that we are a Christian nation, that it ruled as such, not once but TWICE!!!
The concept of a "wall" of separation between church and state is a useful metaphor but is not an accurate description of the practical aspects of the relationship that in fact exists. The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any. Anything less would require the "callous indifference"... - US Supreme Court, "LYNCH v. DONNELLY", 1984
If we pass beyond these matters to a view of American life, as expressed by its laws, its business, its customs, and its society, we find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth. Among other matters note the following: The form of oath universally prevailing, concluding with an appeal to the Almighty; the custom of opening sessions of all deliberative bodies and most conventions with prayer; the prefatory words of all wills, "In the name of God, amen;" the laws respecting the observance of the Sabbath, with the general cessation of all secular business, and the closing of courts, legislatures, and other similar public assemblies on that day; the churches and church organizations which abound in every city, town, and hamlet; the multitude of charitable organizations existing everywhere under Christian auspices; the gigantic missionary associations, with general support, and aiming to establish Christian missions in every quarter of the globe. These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation. In the face of all these, shall it be believed that a congress of the United States intended to make it a misdemeanor for a church of this country to contract for the services of a Christian minister residing in another nation? - US Supreme Court, "Church of the Holy Trinity v. The United States", 1892.
So, what was all that noise you were talking again, Lurker?
Oh, by the way, cowardly one, you're still on the hook for backing your claims about Sarah Palin, not being qualified for President, as opposed to Barack Obama.
-
How's the non-secular nation with the ever increasing christian right wing party going for you in those delusions of yours?
Reality called. Said you were a tard. Hope this helps a bit child.
I can't tell which is greater. The idiot's inability to argue against the First Amendment or the sheer stupidity of attempting to do so.
-
I can't tell which is greater. The idiot's inability to argue against the First Amendment or the sheer stupidity of attempting to do so.
Ummm, the Supreme Court justices read that same 1st amendment, when they made those rulings.
So what's your excuse, now? Did those justices miss your memo, when ruling AT LEAST TWICE that this is indeed a Christian nation? What about those Founding Fathers that said the exact same thing?
Once again, please get a clue. I'm NOT arguing against the First Amendment. It is that very amendment that rips your moronic statements apart.
As do the words of the Founding Fathers, themselves, words that YOU FOOLISHLY CLAIMED that I didn't post, when making my arguments.
But, since I need the laughs, continue your mindless, spineless clucking. Continue your chirping about long-term Democratic reign, while the party steps closer to the woodshed. And hide behind all of that, while failing to back your claims about Palin.
-
I can't tell which is greater. The idiot's inability to argue against the First Amendment or the sheer stupidity of attempting to do so.
Having to repeat for the slow ones on board who continue to fail in their attempts to encapsulate the nation inside their religious dogma.
-
Having to repeat for the slow ones on board who continue to fail in their attempts to encapsulate the nation inside their religious dogma.
Run, coward, run!!!
Run from the fact, that your claim about my not mentioning the Founding Fathers' words about this being a Christian nation, ring more hollow than your head (I listed at least two: Adams and Jay, along with a link, citing other Founders).
Run from the fact that the Supreme Court has mentioned that such is the case, USA being a Christian nation, AT LEAST TWICE (See "The Holy Trinity Church v. United States" and "Lynch v. Donnely).
Run from the fact that, for all of your bleating, TO THIS DAY, you can't back a single one of your statements as to why Palin is not qualified to be President but Obama is.
Run from the fact that your previous claims about the Democrats, having an indefinite lock on Washington and Obama being a shoo-in for re-election, are CRUMBLING BEFORE YOUR VERY EYES (Three consecutive lost elections, Supermajority GONE, ObamaCare DOA, Democrats retiring left and right to avoid the impending trip to the wooshed in November, Obama trying to re-invent himself into a populist, etc.).
Again, I need the laughs. So continue to cower like the punk that you are.
-
Having to repeat for the slow ones on board who continue to fail in their attempts to encapsulate the nation inside their religious dogma.
Once again, having the baby Jebus in their eyes makes people blind to facts and logic. So having to repeat again....
If the founding fathers wanted a christian nation they would have specifically said so and stated it in the Constitution.
They didn't.
It isn't.
You have to live with it.
Stupid is as stupid does I see.
-
Once again, having the baby Jebus in their eyes makes people blind to facts and logic. So having to repeat again....
If the founding fathers wanted a christian nation they would have specifically said so and stated it in the Constitution.
They didn't.
It isn't.
You have to live with it.
Live with THIS:
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams, 1798
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
These are TWO of the Founding Fathers, O silly one. There are plenty more, that say much the same thing.
Also, live with THIS:
The concept of a "wall" of separation between church and state is a useful metaphor but is not an accurate description of the practical aspects of the relationship that in fact exists. The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any. Anything less would require the "callous indifference"... - US Supreme Court, "LYNCH v. DONNELLY", 1984
If we pass beyond these matters to a view of American life, as expressed by its laws, its business, its customs, and its society, we find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth. Among other matters note the following: The form of oath universally prevailing, concluding with an appeal to the Almighty; the custom of opening sessions of all deliberative bodies and most conventions with prayer; the prefatory words of all wills, "In the name of God, amen;" the laws respecting the observance of the Sabbath, with the general cessation of all secular business, and the closing of courts, legislatures, and other similar public assemblies on that day; the churches and church organizations which abound in every city, town, and hamlet; the multitude of charitable organizations existing everywhere under Christian auspices; the gigantic missionary associations, with general support, and aiming to establish Christian missions in every quarter of the globe. These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation. In the face of all these, shall it be believed that a congress of the United States intended to make it a misdemeanor for a church of this country to contract for the services of a Christian minister residing in another nation? - US Supreme Court, "Church of the Holy Trinity v. The United States", 1892.
One does NOT have to mention such in the Constitution to state that the USA is a Christian nation. Nor does being a Christian nation require that such be a theocracy.
Stupid is as stupid does I see.
Then, you're surrounded by mirrors, AGAIN.
-
Live with this : First Amendment establishes a secular nation by separating church and state. No single religion - that means Christianity - is placed above others. If they wanted a Christian nation they would have included it. They didn't, it isn't.
USA = secular nation from establishment.
You = complete idiot from birth.
I can't tell which is greater. The idiot's inability to argue against the First Amendment or the sheer stupidity of attempting to do so.
-
Live with this : First Amendment establishes a secular nation by separating church and state. No single religion - that means Christianity - is placed above others. If they wanted a Christian nation they would have included it. They didn't, it isn't.
USA = secular nation from establishment.
You = complete idiot from birth.
I can't tell which is greater. The idiot's inability to argue against the First Amendment or the sheer stupidity of attempting to do so.
Get a clue, spineless one. There is no separation of church and state. We have Supreme Court rulings that say as much.
Is Islam on equal footing with Christianity? NOPE!!
Is Buddhism on the same level as Christianity? Hardly!!
What about Molech worship? PLEASE!!!
Any homages to Baal or Ashoreth over the last couple hundred years? I doubt it!!
Get another clue, O ye without backbone, Our Founding Fathers CAME RIGHT OUT AND SAID THAT THIS WAS A CHRISTIAN NATION. Their statements are right there, in black-and-white, for ALL to see (as are the Supreme Court rulings).
Please obtain some sense, yellow-streaked one. I'm not arguing (nor have I EVER argued) AGAINST the 1st Amendment. That amendment simply stated what Dr. King would sum up centuries later, that the church is the conscience of the state, not its master nor its slave.
-
Is it the Baby Jeesbus or Teh Stupid that is in your eyes making you blind?
No separation of church and state? Oooooohhhkay! You have just proven your stupidity has no limits.
We do, which is why we are a secular nation.
-
Not to get in the way of a brawl, BUT
I dont understand why any religious person would want their religion anywhere near the corrupt govt or anything to do with it if they perceive their own religion to be pure and clean.
To me it makes no sense.
Just my .02.
-
Is it the Baby Jeesbus or Teh Stupid that is in your eyes making you blind?
No separation of church and state? Oooooohhhkay! You have just proven your stupidity has no limits.
Tell THAT to the US Supreme Court!!
The concept of a "wall" of separation between church and state is a useful metaphor but is not an accurate description of the practical aspects of the relationship that in fact exists. The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any. Anything less would require the "callous indifference"... - US Supreme Court, "LYNCH v. DONNELLY", 1984
We do, which is why we are a secular nation.
Adams, Jay, and other Founding Fathers say we are a CHRISTIAN nation. Get a grip and a clue, please. You sound even more ridiculous than normal.
-
Not to get in the way of a brawl, BUT
I dont understand why any religious person would want their religion anywhere near the corrupt govt or anything to do with it if they perceive their own religion to be pure and clean.
To me it makes no sense.
Just my .02.
Well, to quote the one of the Founding Father, whom Lurker foolishly claims I never did, regarding this issue:
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
The founders felt that if non-Christian people (or at least, those who were such in name only) were put into power, "Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution....".
Unfortunately, that's darn near happened, thanks to silly Dems and GOPers, alike.
-
Not to get in the way of a brawl, BUT
I dont understand why any religious person would want their religion anywhere near the corrupt govt or anything to do with it if they perceive their own religion to be pure and clean.
To me it makes no sense.
Just my .02.
There is a reason that God isn't listed anywhere at all in the Constitution. And your statement above is exactly why.
That is why this is not a Christian nation anymore than it is a Jewish nation.
They were determined to separate religion and government, and thus, they wrote a constitution that was entirely secular. It begins by identifying the source of its legitimacy: “We the people of the United States...do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Doesn't say "We the Christians..." Nor does it even mention God.
While John Adams was president, the young nation clearly affirmed its secular status when it signed a treaty with Tripoli, a Muslim region of North Africa. Article 11 of the treaty states, "As the Government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"
The hypocrisy of religious idiots arguments is the very fact that if this were a christian nation based on the ten commandments the very constitution itself would be a contradiction as the First Amendment clearly violates the First Commandment.
But when using facts and logic, you have to require rabid christians to have more than two brain cells - one which is devoted exclusively to the jeebus.
-
Tell THAT to the US Supreme Court!!
The concept of a "wall" of separation between church and state is a useful metaphor but is not an accurate description of the practical aspects of the relationship that in fact exists. The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any. Anything less would require the "callous indifference"... - US Supreme Court, "LYNCH v. DONNELLY", 1984
Adams, Jay, and other Founding Fathers say we are a CHRISTIAN nation. Get a grip and a clue, please. You sound even more ridiculous than normal.
The Supreme Court didn't write the Constitution. Fucking DUH!!!
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison agreed the Constitution was a secular establishment of the nation. Looking back on the destruction religious wars had caused since the Protestant Reformation, they believed that the surest way to achieve the domestic peace necessary for free and orderly economic activity and to avoid the oppression and injustice caused by various forms of religious establishment, was to separate the religious and civil realms. Which is why church and state ARE separated. Fucking DUH!!!!
When Jefferson's Bill to Establish Religious Freedom came up again in 1786, it passed by a vote of 60 to 27. In an attempt to give some kind of official recognition to Christianity, some assemblymen tried to insert an acknowledgment of “Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion.” Jefferson took pleasure in the fact that “the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindoo, the infidel of every denomination.” which is the very foundation of secular establishment. Fucking DUH!!!
Adams said we are not a Christian Nation with the Treaty of Tripoli. Fucking DUH!!!!
You are a certified idiot. Fucking DUH!!!!
-
Well, to quote the one of the Founding Father, whom Lurker foolishly claims I never did, regarding this issue:
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
The founders felt that if non-Christian people (or at least, those who were such in name only) were put into power, "Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution....".
Unfortunately, that's darn near happened, thanks to silly Dems and GOPers, alike.
I am not religious at all, and to me, many people who claim to be religious have done all of those things already.
-
There is a reason that God isn't listed anywhere at all in the Constitution. And your statement above is exactly why.
That is why this is not a Christian nation anymore than it is a Jewish nation.
Wrong again, as cited BY THE FOUNDING FATHERS THEMSELVES!!
They were determined to separate religion and government, and thus, they wrote a constitution that was entirely secular. It begins by identifying the source of its legitimacy: “We the people of the United States...do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Doesn't say "We the Christians..." Nor does it even mention God.
Those men were VIRTUALLY ALL CHRISTIANS. Their religious affiliations are shown on the cite I linked sometime ago. There is no mention of God, because such was HARDLY a question in their minds. They were hardly concerned about Allah, Buddha, Molech, or Dagon.
While John Adams was president, the young nation clearly affirmed its secular status when it signed a treaty with Tripoli, a Muslim region of North Africa. Article 11 of the treaty states, "As the Government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"
Of course, you leave out (in a feeble attempt to save your pitiful arugments) the words spoken BY ADAMS himself, along with Jay, other Founding Fathers, and rulings from the Supreme Court, which go something to the tune of:
These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation. In the face of all these, shall it be believed that a congress of the United States intended to make it a misdemeanor for a church of this country to contract for the services of a Christian minister residing in another nation?"
Where were the calls to amend the Constitution, to counter such a ruling, if the Founding Fathers SWORE up and down that America was so "secular"?
As usual, you ignore the context of the statement. The Muslims in Tripoli thought America was a theocracy. This treaty is worded to clearly show that it is not. And lost in all of the is the minor fact that, Article 11 of that treaty (containing those words) GOT DROPPED a mere eight years later.
That would explain by a Supreme Court could easily declare that America was a CHRISTIAN Nation in 1892.
The hypocrisy of religious idiots arguments is the very fact that if this were a christian nation based on the ten commandments the very constitution itself would be a contradiction as the First Amendment clearly violates the First Commandment.
Wrong again, spineless one. Reason:
The concept of a "wall" of separation between church and state is a useful metaphor but is not an accurate description of the practical aspects of the relationship that in fact exists. The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any. Anything less would require the "callous indifference"... - US Supreme Court, "LYNCH v. DONNELLY", 1984
If we pass beyond these matters to a view of American life, as expressed by its laws, its business, its customs, and its society, we find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth. Among other matters note the following: The form of oath universally prevailing, concluding with an appeal to the Almighty; the custom of opening sessions of all deliberative bodies and most conventions with prayer; the prefatory words of all wills, "In the name of God, amen;" the laws respecting the observance of the Sabbath, with the general cessation of all secular business, and the closing of courts, legislatures, and other similar public assemblies on that day; the churches and church organizations which abound in every city, town, and hamlet; the multitude of charitable organizations existing everywhere under Christian auspices; the gigantic missionary associations, with general support, and aiming to establish Christian missions in every quarter of the globe. These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation. In the face of all these, shall it be believed that a congress of the United States intended to make it a misdemeanor for a church of this country to contract for the services of a Christian minister residing in another nation? - US Supreme Court, "Church of the Holy Trinity v. The United States", 1892.
Declarations by our US court that we are a Christian nation, with nary a PEEP, from the other Founders (or the people) to have such a ruling amended in the US Constitution.
So, continue to cluck foolishness, O Ye without vertabrae.
-
The Supreme Court didn't write the Constitution. Fucking DUH!!!
Yet, after it made such a statement, NOBODY (not the people, nor the Founding Fathers) rose in furious anger DEMANDING that such a ruling be overturned via Constitutional Amendment, as usually happens when a court rules in a manner, inconsistent with its people.
DUH, yourself, Spineless one!!!
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison agreed the Constitution was a secular establishment of the nation. Looking back on the destruction religious wars had caused since the Protestant Reformation, they believed that the surest way to achieve the domestic peace necessary for free and orderly economic activity and to avoid the oppression and injustice caused by various forms of religious establishment, was to separate the religious and civil realms. Which is why church and state ARE separated. Fucking DUH!!!!
When Jefferson's Bill to Establish Religious Freedom came up again in 1786, it passed by a vote of 60 to 27. In an attempt to give some kind of official recognition to Christianity, some assemblymen tried to insert an acknowledgment of “Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion.” Jefferson took pleasure in the fact that “the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindoo, the infidel of every denomination.” which is the very foundation of secular establishment. Fucking DUH!!!
Adams said we are not a Christian Nation with the Treaty of Tripoli. Fucking DUH!!!!
No, Adams didn't. That treaty was merely to keep American ships from being assaulted by Muslim attackers, not to mention the minor fact that Article 11 ("As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or
tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation.....") GOT DROPPED from the Treaty less than a decade later.
Plus, we have Adams stating, LESS THAN A YEAR AFTER SIGNING THAT TREATY, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." What religion do you supposed he meant (Hint: it ain't Islam or Molech worship)?
John Jay stated JUST MONTHS BEFORE the treaty was signed, "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.”
If that weren't enough, we have mutiple Supreme Court cases, declaring the USA as a Christian nation, long after Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli went bye-bye.
You lose again, spineless one.
-
We are not supposed to have rules. We have represenatives.
-
I am not religious at all, and to me, many people who claim to be religious have done all of those things already.
You ain't lying on that one. That's why those who are people of faith (and those who aren't) need to give these folks the heave-ho.
-
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
I don't have to pretend. The Founding Fathers are the ones who declared America a Christian nation. Denying that, even with the words of the Founding Fathers (in BLACK AND WHITE) clearly in front of your face, merely exposes your whining for the first-class buffoonery that it is.
Like the true chicken that you are, you continue to dodge the facts, especially when they clobber your screwball claims, namely about the Treaty of Tripoli, which I easily dismantled. Lest you forget, the man who signed the Treaty into law declared our nation a Christian one. AND, Article 11 (the one to which you cling in utter fear and ignorance, to support your cluckings) GOT DROPPED a mere eight years later.
Throw in a few Supreme Court rulings and yet MORE Founding Fathers' statements about America, as a Christian nation, and all your musing get put to sleep.
Edit -- Just to throw yet another dagger in the heart of your stupid arguments, I will remind you of a 2002 ruling in the Cleveland school voucher case, "Zelman v. Simmons-Harris". That's the ruling, which allows states with school voucher programs to use such voucher at religious schools (under certain conditions).
-
HAHAHAHAHA!!
Lurker looking stupid as always. He keeps restating the same lies, yet doesn't respond, nor tries to acknowledge the quotes posted by Mcway that are directly from the founding fathers.
Lurker getting absolutely destroyed.
-
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
It's so fun watching Christards try to twist the facts to support their own delusions.
-
HAHAHAHAHA!!
Lurker looking stupid as always. He keeps restating the same lies, yet doesn't respond, nor tries to acknowledge the quotes posted by Mcway that are directly from the founding fathers.
Lurker getting absolutely destroyed.
Oh, and the exact quotes I provided are not from the Founding Fathers and the word for word contents of the First Amendment? Are you blind or just stupid?
Ok. Since you are obviously as stupid as the other idiot on here, perhaps you can help her out and find where God or Jesus or a Christian Nation is listed in the Constitution?
The only thing getting destroyed is the credibility of Christians in light of their insecurities and sheeple mentality. Good job for proving that.
-
It's so fun watching Christards try to twist the facts to support their own delusions.
You mean like YOUR trying to twist the Treaty of Tripoli, as proof that John Adams claimed that America was not a Christian nation, despite his words to the contrary......AND THE FACT that Article 11 of that treaty (containing those words about America not being a Christian nation) GOT DROPPED from the Treaty, less than a decade later?
-
"...they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"
Maybe the word God is not mentioned specifically but I think it is implied by the above. What religion? I don't know. Of the three major ones: Islam, Judaism and Christianity, I think we can speculate what predominated at the time. In fact, I think we can speculate what religion predominates in this country (U.S.) now.
I think the founders were very adamant on creating a secular government. But I think the values of the society were clearly influenced by the Judeo/Christian ethic. I don't know why some feel it is so important to deny that. If so, where did the founding fathers come up with their values?
-
The bottom line that you have to live with, deal with, cry over or pray about... (who cares anyway)
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA was not founded with Christian views in mind. That assumption is a Nationalist one which often confuses the Bible with the Bill of Rights. Educated people - which would exclude you - have long known as it should be that our early Patriots and Inventors were more Scientists and Scholars than they were Religious. The Constitution was written with full knowledge of what happens when you let " religion " guide a government.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Oh, and the exact quotes I provided are not from the Founding Fathers and the word for word contents of the First Amendment? Are you blind or just stupid?
Not quite. You conveniently LEAVE OUT the statements, made by those same men, regarding the Christian nature of our country, as was evidence by your boneheaded use of the Treaty of Tripoli.
Ok. Since you are obviously as stupid as the other idiot on here, perhaps you can help her out and find where God or Jesus or a Christian Nation is listed in the Constitution?
The only thing getting destroyed is the credibility of Christians in light of their insecurities and sheeple mentality. Good job for proving that.
You couldn't destroy toilet paper, with a gallon of water and a set of Ginsu knives. When the facts come in, you run out, like the spineless silly man that you are.
Once again, the Founding Fathers stated, point-blank, that this was a Christian nation. And, if there were any doubts about that, when the Treaty of Tripoli was written, the Founding Fathers took care of that, BY DROPPING ARTICLE 11 FROM THE TREATY.
-
Edit -- Just to throw yet another dagger in the heart of your stupid arguments, I will remind you of a 2002 ruling in the Cleveland school voucher case, "Zelman v. Simmons-Harris". That's the ruling, which allows states with school voucher programs to use such voucher at religious schools (under certain conditions).
Nice try with irrelevant info. The Constitution was not written in 2002.
To beat you at your own little pitiful game, if the Constitution and nation was founded on Christian principles, Roe vs Wade wouldn't exist. But what did the Supreme Court say about that? Fucking DUH!!!! It might help your argument if you use logic and don't get busted by general contradictions.
-
"...they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"
Maybe the word God is not mentioned specifically but I think it is implied by the above. What religion? I don't know. Of the three major ones: Islam, Judaism and Christianity, I think we can speculate what predominated at the time. In fact, I think we can speculate what religion predominates in this country (U.S.) now.
I think the founders were very adamant on creating a secular government. But I think the values of the society were clearly influenced by the Judeo/Christian ethic. I don't know why some feel it is so important to deny that. If so, where did the founding fathers come up with their values?
Of course the "inalienable rights" come from God, that being life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. However, the Founders never intended a christian govt or any govt influenced by religious figures for that matter.
I still have no idea why any religious person would want their religion involved with the govt on any level or vice versa. It baffles me that anyone can not understand the fact that many people came here fleeing religious oppression due solely from the fact that in Europe the governments were too involved with religion in the first place. The pilgrims wanted freedom of religion, that being to be left the hell alone from the govt.
Lets keep it that way.
-
"...they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"
Maybe the word God is not mentioned specifically but I think it is implied by the above. What religion? I don't know. Of the three major ones: Islam, Judaism and Christianity, I think we can speculate what predominated at the time. In fact, I think we can speculate what religion predominates in this country (U.S.) now.
I think the founders were very adamant on creating a secular government. But I think the values of the society were clearly influenced by the Judeo/Christian ethic. I don't know why some feel it is so important to deny that. If so, where did the founding fathers come up with their values?
Of course the "inalienable rights" come from God, that being life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. However, the Founders never intended a christian govt or any govt influenced by religious figures for that matter.
I still have no idea why any religious person would want their religion involved with the govt on any level or vice versa. It baffles me that anyone can not understand the fact that many people came here fleeing religious oppression due solely from the fact that in Europe the governments were too involved with religion in the first place. The pilgrims wanted freedom of religion, that being to be left the hell alone from the govt.
Lets keep it that way.
-
Once again, the Founding Fathers stated, point-blank, that this was a Christian nation.
Idiot.
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
Perhaps you find the Jebus in the Constitution and share with the rest of us?
-
"...they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"
Maybe the word God is not mentioned specifically but I think it is implied by the above. What religion? I don't know. Of the three major ones: Islam, Judaism and Christianity, I think we can speculate what predominated at the time. In fact, I think we can speculate what religion predominates in this country (U.S.) now.
I think the founders were very adamant on creating a secular government. But I think the values of the society were clearly influenced by the Judeo/Christian ethic. I don't know why some feel it is so important to deny that. If so, where did the founding fathers come up with their values?
Of course the "inalienable rights" come from God, that being life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. However, the Founders never intended a christian govt or any govt influenced by religious figures for that matter.
I still have no idea why any religious person would want their religion involved with the govt on any level or vice versa. It baffles me that anyone can not understand the fact that many people came here fleeing religious oppression due solely from the fact that in Europe the governments were too involved with religion in the first place. The pilgrims wanted freedom of religion, that being to be left the hell alone from the govt.
Lets keep it that way.
-
It baffles me that anyone can not understand the fact that many people came here fleeing religious oppression due solely from the fact that in Europe the governments were too involved with religion in the first place.
Exactly. But common sense isn't effective for people with the Jebus Infection.
Combining church and state is absolutely what the Constitution did not do.
-
Of course the "inalienable rights" come from God, that being life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. However, the Founders never intended a christian govt or any govt influenced by religious figures for that matter.
I believe you are correct. The Founders never intended a Christian government or any religious based government. But I do believe the values they had were influence by the Judea/Christian ethic. If you disagree, where did their values come from?
I like the second part of your question about religion being involved in government. I have to go right now but hopefully I can get back to that.
-
The bottom line that you have to live with, deal with, cry over or pray about... (who cares anyway)
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA was not founded with Christian views in mind. That assumption is a Nationalist one which often confuses the Bible with the Bill of Rights. Educated people - which would exclude you - have long known as it should be that our early Patriots and Inventors were more Scientists and Scholars than they were Religious. The Constitution was written with full knowledge of what happens when you let " religion " guide a government.
Utter baloney! Once again, the Founding Fathers and their religious affiliations are easily accesible, courtesy of the link I provided.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
Once again, for the benefit of the spineless and clueless Lurker.
- God does NOT need to be mentioned in the Constitution, for our country to be a Christian nation.
- The very men who signed that Constitution and helped pen it stated, point-blank, that this IS a Christian nation.
- Our federal Supreme Court made ruling that this WAS/IS a Christian nation, based on that Constitution, with virtually NO protest from the Founding Fathers or the people.
- Your STUPID attempt to assert a secular nation, using the Treaty of Tripoli, got skewered. The reason for the wording of Article 11 of that treaty was clearly explained. Less than a decade later, Article 11 GOT DROPPED.
- We have a ruling from the Supreme Court, nixng that claim about "separation of church and state". It's been standing for nearly 30 years.
- We have rulings from that Court IN THE NEW MILLENIUM, that kills your "separation of church and state" flap, from the Ten Commandments in courtrooms, to public school vouchers being used at Christian schools.
So, once again, the facts put your claims down, expose you for the goof that you are, and even shows your utter cowardice, regarding your addressing the initial items brought to you, regarding a certain former Alaskan governor.
-
Of course the "inalienable rights" come from God, that being life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. However, the Founders never intended a christian govt or any govt influenced by religious figures for that matter.
I still have no idea why any religious person would want their religion involved with the govt on any level or vice versa. It baffles me that anyone can not understand the fact that many people came here fleeing religious oppression due solely from the fact that in Europe the governments were too involved with religion in the first place. The pilgrims wanted freedom of religion, that being to be left the hell alone from the govt.
Lets keep it that way.
Exactly!! That's why, as Dr. King stated, the church is the conscience of the state, not its master (as in theocracies, depicted in Muslim countries) nor its slave (as in European countries).
-
Exactly. But common sense isn't effective for people with the Jebus Infection.
Combining church and state is absolutely what the Constitution did not do.
Still running off at the mouth, I see. Before you lecture anyone about common sense, how about explaining why you LEFT OUT THE FACTS, that the Treaty of Tripoli was worded, with the intent of keeping American ships safe from attacks from Muslim pirates, ALONG WITH the fact that Article 11 (the words around which you used as proof to support your silly argument about America not being a Christian nation) GOT DROPPED FROM THE TREATY a mere 8 years later.
-
It baffles me that anyone can not understand the fact that many people came here fleeing religious oppression due solely from the fact that in Europe the governments were too involved with religion in the first place.
I guess I can take a crack at this real quick: I think it was more vice versa, it was religion that was too involved in government in the first place. Again, that's why I think the Founders were very adamant about having a secular government. Therefore what one may consider immoral and a sin will not necessarily be considered illegal. Adultery for example, a violation of the 7th Commandment and a sin in Christianity. But I certainly don't want people arrested for that offense unless it was my wife then I would insist on nothing less than execution.
But that still does not negate that their values were based on the Judea/Christian ethic.
OK, now I'm late........
-
I believe you are correct. The Founders never intended a Christian government or any religious based government. But I do believe the values they had were influence by the Judea/Christian ethic. If you disagree, where did their values come from?
I like the second part of your question about religion being involved in government. I have to go right now but hopefully I can get back to that.
The reason I am adamant against religion being mixed with government is as follows:
1. Government is inherently a mechanism of control and combining that with religion is a toxic mix in the wrong hands.
2. Religion should not be corrupted by the evils of govt.
3. We have thousands of years of evidence that people in government who believe that their religion empowers them to take a certain action often times will do so regardless of the laws or constitution.
4. There may be a time in the future, whether we like it or not, when Christians will not be the majority and we need to have in place a secular govt where the rights of minorities are not trampeled, that being Christians or any other religion for that matter.
5. Religious doctrine often conflicts with constitutional rights. To me constitutional rights are far more important overall. Free Speech etc are an example. I dont want religious people dictating my viewing or listening choices, as repulsive as it might be, as those lead to far worse abuses.
6. Religions get corrupted when they are involved with Government.
-
The reason I am adamant against religion being mixed with government is as follows:
1. Government is inherently a mechanism of control and combining that with religion is a toxic mix in the wrong hands.
2. Religion should not be corrupted by the evils of govt.
3. We have thousands of years of evidence that people in government who believe that their religion empowers them to take a certain action often times will do so regardless of the laws or constitution.
4. There may be a time in the future, whether we like it or not, when Christians will not be the majority and we need to have in place a secular govt where the rights of minorities are not trampeled, that being Christians or any other religion for that matter.
5. Religious doctrine often conflicts with constitutional rights. To me constitutional rights are far more important overall. Free Speech etc are an example. I dont want religious people dictating my viewing or listening choices, as repulsive as it might be, as those lead to far worse abuses.
6. Religions get corrupted when they are involved with Government.
I can't argue with any of those well reasoned points.
I think the argument is when forming the basis of a society where does one turn to determine the values, what is right and what is wrong, what is legal and what is illegal, to build a moral foundation of a fair and just society.
It seems to me that the basic foundation of values was the Judea/Christian ethic. If not, then where did our founders get their value system and moral foundation?
I don't know if I like the "In God we Trust" stamp or swearing on the Bible when taking office or testifying in court. But it may be an indication that there may have been a slight hint of Christian influence in our culture.
-
Christopher hitchens explains it .i think he's quite a bit smarter than most of us here and a hell of alot smarter then you mcway
-
Once again, have to repeat for the slow ones...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
Attempting to argue otherwise only shows what a true idiot you are. But feel free, we already know that.
-
Christopher hitchens explains it .i think he's quite a bit smarter than most of us here and a hell of alot smarter then you mcway
Geeze,Hitchens may be smart but the guy is a stone cold drunk.I dont think Id take his word for anything.
-
Once again, have to repeat for the slow ones...
Attempting to argue otherwise only shows what a true idiot you are. But feel free, we already know that.
So, the coward has slithered out of his corner, yet again. It's been nearly two days, and our bastion of bravery has YET TO OWN UP to that foolish mistake of his, using the Treaty of Tripoli, to prop his pitiful argument.
Let's hear it, O Spineless one, or are you in the mood for another helping of Foot Dijon?
Let's hear you play down the Founding Fathers, who stated POINT-BLANK that this is a Christian Nation, the Supreme Court rulings that said as much (with nary a peep of opposition).
Normally, I like chicken. But, I may make an exception in your case, Lurker.
Maybe you'll get a clue and stop making lame-brained arguments (i.e. claiming I didn't cite the Founding Fathers, when their quotes are sitting there, in PLAIN SIGHT for all to see. Or hinging your argument about the USA not being a Christian nation, on a treaty, the crafters of which scratched that language from it 8 years later).
-
It's hilarious watching the Jebus freaks cling to their delusions in an effort to cover up their own insecurities in light of the facts.
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
It's hilarious watching the Jebus freaks cling to their delusions in an effort to cover up their own insecurities in light of the facts.
Come one, El Pollo Loco, please explain to the audience WHY you used the Treaty of Tripoli, to bolster your claims of America not being a Christian nation, WHEN the FOUNDING FATHERS TOOK ARTICLE 11 OUT of the TREATY.
Explain why you accused me of not citing the Founding Fathers, to support my case, when I have their quotes sitting there, in BLACK AND WHITE, which states that we are Chrisitan nation, along with a website link (citing the Christian denominations of the Fathers).
I'll leave the clinging to delusions to you, which you will likely still do, even if the the Democrats get BEAT DOWN in November (but that's another issue).
-
mcway I'm curious are you slightly retarded :D,i think you hung around pat Robison, jerry fallwell a Little to long
-
mcway I'm curious are you slightly retarded :D,i think you hung around pat Robison, jerry fallwell a Little to long
Bro - you voted for and shill for Obama. You shilled for the Stim Bill and HCR, both failures. You are not one speak on this issue or any other for that matter.
-
hey broooo you don't know who i voted for ,just because i have a little more sense than you and can see that palin is a train wreck waiting to happen hey if McCain would have picked someone other then that misfit,instead he pandered to the religious right.
-
mcway I'm curious are you slightly retarded :D,i think you hung around pat Robison, jerry fallwell a Little to long
This from the guy who gets his information from the red-headed stepchild of cable news, MSNBC?
Now that's rich.
All I've done is expose Lurker for the mindless and spineless coward that he is.
He will not address the fact that the Founding Fathers declared that America is a Christian nation, NOT EVEN with the quotes of the Founding Fathers, saying such in black-and-white.
Like a certified fool, he used the Treaty of Tripoli as proof that America is not a Christian nation, citing Article 11 of that treaty, DESPITE the fact that the language (and there's controversy regarding whether that was actually in the version that the Arabs got) GOT DROPPED from the Treaty, just eight years later. And the man who signed it DECLARED that this is a Christian nation.
And, as if that weren't enough, there are at least three Supreme Court rulings, that cite America as a Christian nation (with little-to-no challenge from the Founding Fathers or the populace). You would think that a country that was supposed OH-SO-SECULAR would screech at such a ruling.
Basically, Lurker has reverted to posting utter foolishness, bereft of facts, loaded with empty rhetoric, all in a attempt to hide the fact that, to this day, he CANNOT answer the challenge of showing exactly why one Sarah Palin is unqualified to be president, but Barack Obama is.
-
Good thing about facts is that they never change.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
mcway I'm curious are you slightly retarded :D
Slightly?
Typical of Christians to be so overpowered by their own delusions that simple facts and logic can't penetrate the bubble.
-
Slightly?
Typical of Christians to be so overpowered by their own delusions that simple facts and logic can't penetrate the bubble.
You mean simple facts, such as:
- The Founding Fathers stated that this was a Christian nation (from which you run, like a coward)?
- The Founding Fathers DROPPED Article 11 from the Treaty of Tripoli, which you SWORE was a glaring testament to the USA not being a Christian nation (still running, yellow-streaked one)?
- The multiple rulings from the Supreme Court, citing the USA as a Christian nation (keep clucking, Lurker!!)?
Good thing about facts is that they never change.
Yep!! And it is those facts that expose you for the spineless wimp, that you are.
Edit - And, at the risk of kicking a man when he's down, here are YET MORE QUOTES from the guy Lurker claimed used the Treaty of Tripoli to declare that America is not a Christian nation:
It is the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons, to worship the SUPREME BEING, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping GOD in the manner most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship. - John Adams, "Thoughts on Government", 1776
The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If `Thou shalt not covet' and `Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free. - John Adams, "A Defense of the American Constitutions", 1787
-
Facts are awesome. Too bad idiot Christians fear them.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Facts are awesome. Too bad idiot Christians fear them.
We love facts, especially when they make cowards like you look even SILLIER than normal.
When the Constitution was submitted to the American public, "many pious people" complained that the document had slighted God, for it contained "no recognition of his mercies to us . . . or even of his existence." The Constitution was reticent about religion for two reasons: first, many delegates were committed federalists, who believed that the power to legislate on religion, if it existed at all, lay within the domain of the state, not the national, governments; second, the delegates believed that it would be a tactical mistake to introduce such a politically controversial issue as religion into the Constitution. The only "religious clause" in the document--the proscription of religious tests as qualifications for federal office in Article Six--was intended to defuse controversy by disarming potential critics who might claim religious discrimination in eligibility for public office.
That religion was not otherwise addressed in the Constitution did not make it an "irreligious" document any more than the Articles of Confederation was an "irreligious" document. The Constitution dealt with the church precisely as the Articles had, thereby maintaining, at the national level, the religious status quo. In neither document did the people yield any explicit power to act in the field of religion. But the absence of expressed powers did not prevent either the Continental-Confederation Congress or the Congress under the Constitution from sponsoring a program to support general, nonsectarian religion."
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html (http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html)
We now return you to your regularly-scheduled programming of Lurker's buffoonery and cowardice.
-
Silly Christians sure gnash their teeths over living in a secular nation it seems. Why is it secular? Oh that's right...
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Silly Christians sure gnash their teeths over living in a secular nation it seems. Why is it secular? Oh that's right...
So why aren't any American Christians gnashing their teeth, living in the USA? OOOOOHHHHH!!!!! Because the FOUNDING FATHERS declared that America is a Christian Nation.
Religion is of general and public concern, and on its support depend, in great measure, the peace and good order of government, the safety and happiness of the people.
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty. - Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice, giving the majority opinion in the case, "Runkel v. Winemiller", 1799.
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams, 1798
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
Now who should I believe, Hmmmm......The Founding Fathers, or a gutless buffoon who can't get his fact straight (i.e. the Treaty of Tripoli)?
Founding Fathers, or gutless buffoon?
Founding Fathers, or spineless punk?
Founding Fathers, or crackpot delusionist?
Decisions, DECISIONS!!! ::)
-
We should rename this thread Lone Christian Takes Stupid To A New Level With Delusions
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
BTW, Lurker,
There's still the little matter of your cowardly avoidance why the Founding Fathers DROPPED Article 11 from the Treaty of Tripoli. Try addressing that, unless that skull of yours needs some more ice to cool off.
And, while you're at it, you can also adress my original question, put to you nearly three weeks ago, regarding Sarah Palin and Barack Obama.
But, I'm sure few (if any) will hold their collective breaths. They just watch your run your mouth and run away, but not before developing a sudden taste for poultry.
-
We should rename this thread Lone Christian Takes Stupid To A New Level With Delusions
I prefer Spineless One Wedges Foot in Own Mouth, while Running Like Scalded Dog.
Recap:
- Founding Fathers declared America a Christian Nation (plenty of quotes, posted here, which Lurker apparently can't read).
- Lurker's claim about John Adams (Founding Father), using Treaty of Tripoli to declare America is not a Christian nation, was refuted by Adams' own quotes, along with Article 11 (containing the verbage, "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,....) being DROPPED from the Treaty, eight years later.
Then, there's the matter of explaining why such allegedly "secular" men would insist on electing CHRISTIAN men to office,
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
Of course, NO ONE expects Lurker to actually address such issue. That would require some sense and a set of....you know........
-
Did someone mention Obama? Interesting because the POTUS agrees that we are a secular nation.
“We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation, we consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values." Obama. POTUS.
Why would he think this? Oh yeah... because....
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
And what are those values and where did they originate from?
-
Did someone mention Obama? Interesting because the POTUS agrees that we are a secular nation.
“We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation, we consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values." Obama. POTUS.
Why would he think this? Oh yeah... because....
Would this be the SAME President Obama, who ALSO said that:
- His stimulus would ensure unemployment would NOT exceed 8%.
- Healthcare debate would be on C-Span.
- Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba would be closed as of last Friday.
- 95% of Americans' taxes would not increase "one dime".
So, if he BOTCHED UP ALL OF THAT, what are the odds of him, making a bone-headed statement such as that, regarding the heritage of this country?
Hmmmm.....
Sorry, using Obama's buffoonery and cowardice to mask your own doesn't quite make the grade. But, keep on clucking.
-
And what are those values and where did they originate from?
Judaism and Christianity introduced NO principles which were not already universal and commonplace in religions that predated Christianity. Christianity is not original in any form, simply a rip off of other religions and pagan principles with a few name changes and such. "Judeo-Christian principles" do not exist. Therefore saying anything is based upon Christian Values is meaningless simply because the constitution is in direct violation of biblical laws, and in no way is attributed to Christianity, but universalism. As in our Founding fathers intended at the time from a spirit of deep mistrust of religious doctrine. Religious fervor was seen then as being politically destructive to the health of nations which as evident by those who fled England in the first place.
-
Christians simply can't grasp facts and logic even when beaten at their own word games. Has to be frustrating living in a secular nation I suppose.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Judaism and Christianity introduced NO principles which were not already universal and commonplace in religions that predated Christianity. Christianity is not original in any form, simply a rip off of other religions and pagan principles with a few name changes and such. "Judeo-Christian principles" do not exist. Therefore saying anything is based upon Christian Values is meaningless simply because the constitution is in direct violation of biblical laws, and in no way is attributed to Christianity, but universalism. As in our Founding fathers intended at the time from a spirit of deep mistrust of religious doctrine. Religious fervor was seen then as being politically destructive to the health of nations which as evident by those who fled England in the first place.
You mean THESE Founding Fathers:
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
Religion is of general and public concern, and on its support depend, in great measure, the peace and good order of government, the safety and happiness of the people.
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty. - Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice, giving the majority opinion in the case, "Runkel v. Winemiller", 1799.
The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If `Thou shalt not covet' and `Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free. - John Adams, "A Defense of the American Constitutions", 1787
Funny, there ain't no mention of "universalism" by these guys. That is but more goofball revisionist history on your end.
Notice how you see NO references to Allah, Buddha, Molech, Zeus, Dagon, Baal, or any other deity.
This truly shows just how big of a crackpot you actually are, Lurker, making such a moronic claim, with the words of the Founding Fathers, plain as day for all to see (and what I've posted is hardly exhaustive).
And, just to embarrass yourself further, you know display your utter lack of facts, regarding ancient religions.
But, that's to be expected when you use Barack Obama and the Treaty of Tripoli, to make such stupid points.
Of course, dear cowardly one, you still got some 'splainin' to do, regarding that Treaty of Tripoli, and what was asked of you, weeks ago (regarding Sarah Palin and Barack Obama).
-
Judaism and Christianity introduced NO principles which were not already universal and commonplace in religions that predated Christianity.
I haven't had a chance to read all the posts and there's a lot of arguments to address. This one caught my eye.
Judaism was the first monotheistic religion. One God, one set of values of right and wrong that applied to everybody regardless of culture.
If one accepts that religion played more of a role in peoples lives two hundred years ago, and those who consider themselves atheist or agnostic today are still a small minority in this country (US), and of those who adhere to a religious belief system Christianity is still the predominate religion, it doesn't seem much of a stretch the influence Christianity had in the founding of this country.
If not Christianity then what? Islam? Shintoism? Buddhism? Were people simply born with an innate sense of right and wrong? It is simply encoded in our DNA that say, for instance, stealing is wrong, lying is wrong?
Again, I want to reitereate, that I believe the founders were very adamant about having a secular government but I don't think they wanted a culture devoid of all religious values, in this case, Christianity.
-
I almost forgot:
"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ." - James Madison
"I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man." - Alexandar Hamilton
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
"I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
So much for Lurker's buffoonery about a "deep mistrust of religious doctrine", among the Founding Fathers.
-
Jebus Land called. Said you are a fool. Oh yeah... let's not forget
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
I haven't had a chance to read all the posts and there's a lot of arguments to address. This one caught my eye.
Judaism was the first monotheistic religion. One God, one set of values of right and wrong that applied to everybody regardless of culture.
If one accepts that religion played more of a role in peoples lives two hundred years ago, and those who consider themselves atheist or agnostic today are still a small minority in this country (US), and of those who adhere to a religious belief system Christianity is still the predominate religion, it doesn't seem much of a stretch the influence Christianity had in the founding of this country.
If not Christianity then what? Islam? Shintoism? Buddhism? Were people simply born with an innate sense of right and wrong? It is simply encoded in our DNA that say, for instance, stealing is wrong, lying is wrong?
Again, I want to reitereate, that I believe the founders were very adamant about having a secular government but I don't think they wanted a culture devoid of all religious values, in this case, Christianity.
Post of the day.
-
and the founding fathers, being christian, were also white males. It was good to be white and male, with land and money back then. No wonder they were happy.
-
Christians simply can't grasp facts and logic even when beaten at their own word games. Has to be frustrating living in a secular nation I suppose.
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
You keep repeating these points and all are true though when a phrase like "the year of our Lord" or "creator" is use that could be considered hinting at a God, though the word "God" is not specifically enunciated. But why does this imply that America is not a Christian nation or any other nation? Especially when you insist that there is a distinct separation of church and state. If I am a Christian and my family is Christian we are a Christian family regardless of the government. One has nothing to do with the other, at point which you are so determine to point out. Americans who consider themselves Christians varies anywhere from 76-86%. A vast majority. So what?
Why is it a sign of insecurity and lack of independent thought to conclude from these statistics that the vast majority of Americans are Christians? I have no problems with insecurity or feel I am surrendering independent thought that Israel is a Jewish country or that Saudi Arabia is a Muslim country.
-
and the founding fathers, being christian, were also white males. It was good to be white and male, with land and money back then. No wonder they were happy.
Yeah, better to have been an African Slave Trader selling your own people right? ::) ::)
-
Jebus Land called. Said you are a fool. Oh yeah... let's not forget
O Ye of big mouth and little spine.
It appears you don't read very well. So, let's hear what some of the FOUNDING FATHERS had to say about America as a Christian nation:
"I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
Religion is of general and public concern, and on its support depend, in great measure, the peace and good order of government, the safety and happiness of the people.
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty. - Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice, giving the majority opinion in the case, "Runkel v. Winemiller", 1799.
Who do I believe folks, our Founding Fathers, or a babbling gutless crackpot, named Lurker?
-
I haven't had a chance to read all the posts and there's a lot of arguments to address. This one caught my eye.
Judaism was the first monotheistic religion. One God, one set of values of right and wrong that applied to everybody regardless of culture.
If one accepts that religion played more of a role in peoples lives two hundred years ago, and those who consider themselves atheist or agnostic today are still a small minority in this country (US), and of those who adhere to a religious belief system Christianity is still the predominate religion, it doesn't seem much of a stretch the influence Christianity had in the founding of this country.
If not Christianity then what? Islam? Shintoism? Buddhism? Were people simply born with an innate sense of right and wrong? It is simply encoded in our DNA that say, for instance, stealing is wrong, lying is wrong?
Again, I want to reitereate, that I believe the founders were very adamant about having a secular government but I don't think they wanted a culture devoid of all religious values, in this case, Christianity.
No one knows what the first religion really was. The Egyptians predate the Jews, The Mesopotamians predate them. The Chinese predate them... etc.. and so on. All the way back to the caveman.
Although the Egyptian religion is generally regarded by most as the oldest religion. Its origins date back beyond 3000 BCE.
Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are all Abrahamic religions. Abraham dates back to 1800 BC. Contrary to what religious nuts believe, it didn't start with Adam and Eve. ::)
Rama, krishna, God, Buddha, etc... no matter which deity you choose to depend upon for your marching orders, some things can be considered universal. Only that god was to be worshipped. Stealing, murder, etc.. was forbidden. And so on. How anyone can consider The Ten Commandments as exclusive "Christian Values" makes no sense. Since those "values" existed in form in other, older religions. Since it is a set of values shared by different religions one can see why it is "universal" in nature.
-
You keep repeating these points and all are true though when a phrase like "the year of our Lord" or "creator" is use that could be considered hinting at a God, though the word "God" is not specifically enunciated. But why does this imply that America is not a Christian nation or any other nation? Especially when you insist that there is a distinct separation of church and state. If I am a Christian and my family is Christian we are a Christian family regardless of the government. One has nothing to do with the other, at point which you are so determine to point out. Americans who consider themselves Christians varies anywhere from 76-86%. A vast majority. So what?
Why is it a sign of insecurity and lack of independent thought to conclude from these statistics that the vast majority of Americans are Christians? I have no problems with insecurity or feel I am surrendering independent thought that Israel is a Jewish country or that Saudi Arabia is a Muslim country.
The answer is simple. None of Lurker's listed points (which he mindlessly repeats, because he lacks the guts to address the questions put before him) keep America from being a Christian nation.
As I said earlier, Lurker is of the silly belief that for America to be a Christian nation, it would have to be theocracy, ala Saudi Arabia or other Muslim countries. Such is simply not the case.
It ain't that hard to say that America is a Christian nation, WHEN OUR FOUNDING FATHERS SAID THE EXACT SAME THING.
-
No one knows what the first religion really was. The Egyptians predate the Jews, The Mesopotamians predate them. The Chinese predate them... etc.. and so on. All the way back to the caveman.
Although the Egyptian religion is generally regarded by most as the oldest religion. Its origins date back beyond 3000 BCE.
Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are all Abrahamic religions. Abraham dates back to 1800 BC. Contrary to what religious nuts believe, it didn't start with Adam and Eve. ::)
Rama, krishna, God, Buddha, etc... no matter which deity you choose to depend upon for your marching orders, some things can be considered universal. Only that god was to be worshipped. Stealing, murder, etc.. was forbidden. And so on. How anyone can consider The Ten Commandments as exclusive "Christian Values" makes no sense. Since those "values" existed in form in other, older religions. Since it is a set of values shared by different religions one can see why it is "universal" in nature.
Yet, O myopic one, our Founding Fathers DID NOT CITE Rama, Krishna, Buddha, or any other deity for the values that helped shape this country. It's pretty clear WHOM they cite as the God to be worshipped.
And, there's not a blessed mention of univeralism among the Founding Fathers.
-
You keep repeating these points and all are true though when a phrase like "the year of our Lord" or "creator" is use that could be considered hinting at a God, though the word "God" is not specifically enunciated. But why does this imply that America is not a Christian nation or any other nation? Especially when you insist that there is a distinct separation of church and state. If I am a Christian and my family is Christian we are a Christian family regardless of the government. One has nothing to do with the other, at point which you are so determine to point out. Americans who consider themselves Christians varies anywhere from 76-86%. A vast majority. So what?
Why is it a sign of insecurity and lack of independent thought to conclude from these statistics that the vast majority of Americans are Christians? I have no problems with insecurity or feel I am surrendering independent thought that Israel is a Jewish country or that Saudi Arabia is a Muslim country.
Year of the Lord was the standard way of writing dates back then. It was simply what one did, not to intone religious beliefs into anything. No different than adding Eastern Standard Time after a time now. It was a language custom, not a religious one. It went out just like saying "thou", "thee", etc..
The # of the population that are Christians have no bearing on the establishment of this nation through the Constitution since it is/was done from a governmental standpoint. Saying "God" doesn't become Christian Doctrine. Since many other deities are considered "God" and "gods" as well. If the Founding Fathers truly wanted a Christian Nation they would have explicitly spelled it out. But they didn't, which is exactly why "god" was left out of the Constitution.
The very fact that the Constitution violates the Ten Commandments that it is supposingly built upon is all the proof one needs. Because if they did indeed for this to be a Christian Nation then they were really terrible Christians who never read the Bible (which is no surprise by the # today like that) since they created a document that violated the core of Christianity (Commandment 1) with it's very first entry (First Amendment).
-
Yet, O myopic one, our Founding Fathers DID NOT CITE Rama, Krishna, Buddha, or any other deity for the values that helped shape this country. It's pretty clear WHOM they cite as the God to be worshipped.
And, there's not a blessed mention of univeralism among the Founding Fathers.
They didn't cite God either in the Constitution. Which is why...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
They didn't cite God either in the Constitution. Which is why...
They don't have to cite God in the Constitution, for America to be a Christian nation (That is but a screwy requirement on YOUR end, that holds no basis in fact)
But, don't take my word for it:
I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
-
Year of the Lord was the standard way of writing dates back then. It was simply what one did, not to intone religious beliefs into anything. No different than adding Eastern Standard Time after a time now. It was a language custom, not a religious one. It went out just like saying "thou", "thee", etc..
The # of the population that are Christians have no bearing on the establishment of this nation through the Constitution since it is/was done from a governmental standpoint. Saying "God" doesn't become Christian Doctrine. Since many other deities are considered "God" and "gods" as well. If the Founding Fathers truly wanted a Christian Nation they would have explicitly spelled it out. But they didn't, which is exactly why "god" was left out of the Constitution.
The very fact that the Constitution violates the Ten Commandments that it is supposingly built upon is all the proof one needs. Because if they did indeed for this to be a Christian Nation then they were really terrible Christians who never read the Bible (which is no surprise by the # today like that) since they created a document that violated the core of Christianity (Commandment 1) with it's very first entry (First Amendment).
Hmmmm......
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay, 1816
Religion is of general and public concern, and on its support depend, in great measure, the peace and good order of government, the safety and happiness of the people.
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice, giving the majority opinion in the case, "Runkel v. Winemiller", 1799.
"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ." - James Madison
"I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man." - Alexandar Hamilton
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
Spelled out, in plain English, in pure black and white.
The Bible, the Law of Sinai, the Ten Commandments......And you're silly enough to think that they might have been talking about Buddha?
-
Year of the Lord was the standard way of writing dates back then. It was simply what one did, not to intone religious beliefs into anything. No different than adding Eastern Standard Time after a time now. It was a language custom, not a religious one. It went out just like saying "thou", "thee", etc..
The # of the population that are Christians have no bearing on the establishment of this nation through the Constitution since it is/was done from a governmental standpoint. Saying "God" doesn't become Christian Doctrine. Since many other deities are considered "God" and "gods" as well. If the Founding Fathers truly wanted a Christian Nation they would have explicitly spelled it out. But they didn't, which is exactly why "god" was left out of the Constitution.
The very fact that the Constitution violates the Ten Commandments that it is supposingly built upon is all the proof one needs. Because if they did indeed for this to be a Christian Nation then they were really terrible Christians who never read the Bible (which is no surprise by the # today like that) since they created a document that violated the core of Christianity (Commandment 1) with it's very first entry (First Amendment).
It seems you are conflating the notion of a Christian government and a predominately Christian nation. We have, and should strive to have, a secular government. As far as a value and moral system goes it seems to me to have been primarily influenced by the Judea/Christian ethic. In so far as religious and moral values go if we are not primarily a Christian nation then what are we?
-
It seems you are conflating the notion of a Christian government and a predominately Christian nation. We have, and should strive to have, a secular government. As far as a value and moral system goes it seems to me to have been primarily influenced by the Judea/Christian ethic. In so far as religious and moral values go if we are not primarily a Christian nation then what are we?
Here's where I disagree with you. It's hard to say that we have a secular government (as in a non-Christian one), when the Founders state our laws are based on Scripture, i.e.:
"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
Based on that and the way our government is actually structured, I believe Dr. King hit the nail on the head, when stating that the church is the conscience of the state, not its slave nor its master.
On a scale of 0 to 10 (the extremes being a secular/atheist society vs. a theocracy, respectively), I'd cite America as (or at least, designed to be) a 6 or 7.
-
It seems you are conflating the notion of a Christian government and a predominately Christian nation. We have, and should strive to have, a secular government. As far as a value and moral system goes it seems to me to have been primarily influenced by the Judea/Christian ethic. In so far as religious and moral values go if we are not primarily a Christian nation then what are we?
Which principle was the purpose for the Constitution to establish?
Governmental
Moral
Religious
Out of those three it was created to establish which one?
-
Here's where I disagree with you. It's hard to say that we have a secular government (as in a non-Christian one),
Delusions will always disagree with facts and reality. As your posts have proven.
Because....
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Which principle was the purpose for the Constitution to establish?
Governmental
Moral
Religious
Out of those three it was created to establish which one?
ALL of the above.
-
Delusions will always disagree with facts and reality. As your posts have proven.
Because....
My posts have proven you to be a sniveling coward, to say nothing of woefully inaccurate.
The reality is, the Founding Fathers deemed this a Christian nation. Go ahead, be a fool and deny that they didn't.
The reality is that you goofed up royally by using the Treaty of Tripoli to show the contrary (explain again why Article 11 got scratched, please).
The reality is you continue to wallow in silliness, by implying that the term "God" was somehow generic can could apply to a host of deities, DESPITE THE FACT that the Founding Fathers stated, in no uncertain terms, their references to the Lord, as depicted in Scripture.
I have the facts and the reality, which I can and have displayed with ease. You have nothing but your foot in your mouth and a streak down your back that's lemon-yellow.
Edit - AND, O dishonest one, what I actually said was, "It's hard to say that we have a secular government (as in a non-Christian one), when the Founders state our laws are based on Scripture.....(followed by posts of multple statements by the Founding Fathers, that make Lurker look awfully dumb).
-
ALL of the above.
Incorrect.
The purpose of the Constitution was to provide a sense of direction to the organization of the three branches of the US Government. The draft outlines the individual and combined powers of each branch, while reserving the rights of each individual state. It defines the importance of jury trials, civil liberties and duties and the accountability of the government.
It has nothing to do with being a religious document or a document based on religion because...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Incorrect.
The purpose of the Constitution was to provide a sense of direction to the organization of the three branches of the US Government. The draft outlines the individual and combined powers of each branch, while reserving the rights of each individual state. It defines the importance of jury trials, civil liberties and duties and the accountability of the government.
It has nothing to do with being a religious document or a document based on religion because...
Let's see what the men who drafted, signed, and governed by that Constitution said about it, shall we?
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
OOPS!! I forgot you don't like that, because it smashes your claims to pieces and make you look silly (or sillier, I should say).
-
Here's where I disagree with you. It's hard to say that we have a secular government (as in a non-Christian one), when the Founders state our laws are based on Scripture, i.e.:
"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
Based on that and the way our government is actually structured, I believe Dr. King hit the nail on the head, when stating that the church is the conscience of the state, not its slave nor its master.
On a scale of 0 to 10 (the extremes being a secular/atheist society vs. a theocracy, respectively), I'd cite America as (or at least, designed to be) a 6 or 7.
Perhaps I should qualify: by secular government I mean no state religion. No religious requirement to hold office or secure a government job. No encouraging (or discouraging) any religious affiliation of any sort by government.
But in light of the evidence it's hard to deny that Christianity didn't play some role in laying the moral foundation in our society and culture. I don't know why some are so fiercely adamant, or even threatened, by denying it.
It's curiousity that one is very quick to point out religious extremism and the harm it has caused throughout history. But often the same people remain silent to the concept of secular extremism especially in the light that the some most horrible regimes (Nazism, Fascism, Communism) that are responsible for the most deaths of innocent lives were secular regimes.
Lurker has seemed to have degenerated into ridicule and name calling rather than addressing directly your arguments. Some of the points he has made are true but irrelevant to the issue of the role Christianity has played in laying the moral foundation in our culture and society. He still has not answered the question that if it wasn't Christianity than what was it. Where did this value system come from? If he wants to say it didn't come from anywhere but just sort of evolved over the course of time through trial and error then that's fine. Or if we are just born with an innate sense of right and wrong.
-
Which principle was the purpose for the Constitution to establish?
Governmental
Moral
Religious
Out of those three it was created to establish which one?
Of the three, governmental.
-
BTW, Lurker,
There's still the little matter of your cowardly avoidance why the Founding Fathers DROPPED Article 11 from the Treaty of Tripoli. Try addressing that, unless that skull of yours needs some more ice to cool off.
And, while you're at it, you can also adress my original question, put to you nearly three weeks ago, regarding Sarah Palin and Barack Obama.
But, I'm sure few (if any) will hold their collective breaths. They just watch your run your mouth and run away, but not before developing a sudden taste for poultry.
Have you documented this claim?
5
The treaty was written in english and the controversy surrounds the translation from English to Arabic.
from Wiki:
It is to be remembered that the Barlow translation is that which was submitted to the Senate (American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II, 18-19) and which is printed in the Statutes at Large and in treaty collections generally; it is that English text which in the United States has always been deemed the text of the treaty.[15]
However the Arabic and English texts differ, the Barlow translation (Article 11 included) was the text presented to, read aloud in, and ratified unanimously by the U.S. Senate.
-
Perhaps I should qualify: by secular government I mean no state religion. No religious requirement to hold office or secure a government job. No encouraging (or discouraging) any religious affiliation of any sort by government.
Agreed! But based on the statements of the Founders the "religious affiliation" was with respect to denominations of Christianity. In other words, Baptists don't trump Methodists; Methodists don't get favored over Pentecostals, etc.
But in light of the evidence it's hard to deny that Christianity didn't play some role in laying the moral foundation in our society and culture. I don't know why some are so fiercely adamant, or even threatened, by denying it.
It's curiousity that one is very quick to point out religious extremism and the harm it has caused throughout history. But often the same people remain silent to the concept of secular extremism especially in the light that the some most horrible regimes (Nazism, Fascism, Communism) that are responsible for the most deaths of innocent lives were secular regimes.
Lurker has seemed to have degenerated into ridicule and name calling rather than addressing directly your arguments. Some of the points he has made are true but irrelevant to the issue of the role Christianity has played in laying the moral foundation in our culture and society. He still has not answered the question that if it wasn't Christianity than what was it. Where did this value system come from? If he wants to say it didn't come from anywhere but just sort of evolved over the course of time through trial and error then that's fine. Or if we are just born with an innate sense of right and wrong.
Join the club.
He hasn't addressed a host of questions, particularly about the Treaty of Tripoli, or even about (what this thread was about, from the start) Sarah Palin.
-
the only controversy is the translation from English to Arabic.
The text was written in English and the full version was read aloud in the Senate and passed UNANIMOUSLY
those are FACTS
again from Wiki:
From this, Miller concludes: "A further and perhaps equal mystery is the fact that since 1797 the Barlow translation has been trustfully and universally accepted as the just equivalent of the Arabic... yet evidence of the erroneous character of the Barlow translation has been in the archives of the Department of State since perhaps 1800 or thereabouts..."[15] It is important to note, though, that as Miller said:
It is to be remembered that the Barlow translation is that which was submitted to the Senate (American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II, and which is printed in the Statutes at Large and in treaty collections generally; it is that English text which in the United States has always been deemed the text of the treaty
However the Arabic and English texts differ, the Barlow translation (Article 11 included) was the text presented to, read aloud in, and ratified unanimously by the U.S. Senate
-
Have you documented this claim?
5
The treaty was written in english and the controversy surrounds the translation from English to Arabic.
from Wiki:
It is to be remembered that the Barlow translation is that which was submitted to the Senate (American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II, 18-19) and which is printed in the Statutes at Large and in treaty collections generally; it is that English text which in the United States has always been deemed the text of the treaty.[15]
However the Arabic and English texts differ, the Barlow translation (Article 11 included) was the text presented to, read aloud in, and ratified unanimously by the U.S. Senate.
I already mentioned that controversy, Straw Man.
But.....
The Treaty was broken in 1801 by the pasha of Tripoli and renegotiated in 1805 after the First Barbary War, at which time Article 11 was removed
http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Treaty:of:Tripoli.htm (http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Treaty:of:Tripoli.htm)
-
in other words you agree with the undeniable FACT that the following was included in the original treaty and passed with a unanimous vote:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
-
in other words you agree with the undeniable FACT that the following was included in the original treaty and passed with a unanimous vote:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
Lost in all of this was that the reason for Article 11 was to convince the Muslim that America was NOT a theocracy as their nations were, with regards to Islam. In other words, whatever reason it was put in the original treaty, IT WAS DROPPED less than a decade later.
So, why would a nation SOOOOOOOOOOO allegedly secular, take Article 11 out of the treaty, if it were so important to relay that America ain't a Christian nation, especially when the guy who signed it ALSO said the following:
Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
Not to mention, that there was THIS blurb, spoken about two years AFTER that treaty was signed:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
Strange words from folks, trying to declare that America ain't a Christian nation, ain't it?
-
I find it stranger that not one Senator voted against the original text at the time it was written.
Weird how all those alleged Christians had no problem voting in consent with the statement that America was in NOT IN ANY SENSE founded on the Christian religion.
-
The primary leaders of the so-called founding fathers of our nation were not Bible-believing Christians; they were deists. Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a supreme deity who created the universe to operate solely by natural laws. The supreme God of the Deists removed himself entirely from the universe after creating it. They believed that he assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible.
Other important founding fathers who espoused Deism were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and James Monroe.
Fundamentalist Christians are currently working overtime to convince the American public that the founding fathers intended to establish this country on "biblical principles," but history simply does not support their view. The men mentioned above and others who were instrumental in the founding of our nation were in no sense Bible-believing Christians. Thomas Jefferson, in fact, was fiercely anti-cleric. In a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, Jefferson said, "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes" (George Seldes, The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371). In a letter to Mrs. Harrison Smith, he wrote, "It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. By the same test the world must judge me. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest" (August 6, 1816).
Jefferson was just as suspicious of the traditional belief that the Bible is "the inspired word of God." He rewrote the story of Jesus as told in the New Testament and compiled his own gospel version known as The Jefferson Bible, which eliminated all miracles attributed to Jesus and ended with his burial. The Jeffersonian gospel account contained no resurrection, a twist to the life of Jesus that was considered scandalous to Christians but perfectly sensible to Jefferson's Deistic mind. In a letter to John Adams, he wrote, "To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, God, are immaterial is to say they are nothings, or that there is no God, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise" (August 15, 1820). In saying this, Jefferson was merely expressing the widely held Deistic view of his time, which rejected the mysticism of the Bible and relied on natural law and human reason to explain why the world is as it is. Writing to Adams again, Jefferson said, "And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" (April 11, 1823). These were hardly the words of a devout Bible-believer.
Jefferson didn't just reject the Christian belief that the Bible was "the inspired word of God"; he rejected the Christian system too. In Notes on the State of Virginia, he said of this religion, "There is not one redeeming feature in our superstition of Christianity. It has made one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites" (quoted by newspaper columnist William Edelen, "Politics and Religious Illiteracy," Truth Seeker, Vol. 121, No. 3, p. 33). Anyone today who would make a statement like this or others we have quoted from Jefferson's writings would be instantly branded an infidel, yet modern Bible fundamentalists are frantically trying to cast Jefferson in the mold of a Bible believing Christian. They do so, of course, because Jefferson was just too important in the formation of our nation to leave him out if Bible fundamentalists hope to sell their "Christian-nation" claim to the public. Hence, they try to rewrite history to make it appear that men like Thomas Jefferson had intended to build our nation on "biblical principles." The irony of this situation is that the Christian leaders of Jefferson's time knew where he stood on "biblical principles," and they fought desperately, but unsuccessfully, to prevent his election to the presidency. Saul K. Padover's biography related the bitterness of the opposition that the clergy mounted against Jefferson in the campaign of 1800
-
I find it stranger that not one Senator voted against the original text at the time it was written.
Weird how all those alleged Christians had no problem voting in consent with the statement that America was in NOT IN ANY SENSE founded on the Christian religion.
Weirder STILL is how, these alleged secular/deists, hell-bent of broadcasting that America was not a Christian nation, TOOK THAT CLAUSE OUT, just eight years later (and HAVEN'T PUT IT BACK TO THIS DAY!!).
-
The primary leaders of the so-called founding fathers of our nation were not Bible-believing Christians; they were deists. Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a supreme deity who created the universe to operate solely by natural laws. The supreme God of the Deists removed himself entirely from the universe after creating it. They believed that he assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible.
Other important founding fathers who espoused Deism were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and James Monroe.
Fundamentalist Christians are currently working overtime to convince the American public that the founding fathers intended to establish this country on "biblical principles," but history simply does not support their view. The men mentioned above and others who were instrumental in the founding of our nation were in no sense Bible-believing Christians. Thomas Jefferson, in fact, was fiercely anti-cleric. In a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, Jefferson said, "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes" (George Seldes, The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371). In a letter to Mrs. Harrison Smith, he wrote, "It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. By the same test the world must judge me. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest" (August 6, 1816).
PLEASE!!! Working overtime? That's more like a half-day at the office, if that.
You and Lurker can act ignorant if you want (in which case, congratulations in advance on winning the Oscar). But, the simple facts are that the Founding Fathers stated that our nation is a Christian nation and built on Biblical principles.
But, don't take my word for it:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
Jefferson was just as suspicious of the traditional belief that the Bible is "the inspired word of God." He rewrote the story of Jesus as told in the New Testament and compiled his own gospel version known as The Jefferson Bible, which eliminated all miracles attributed to Jesus and ended with his burial. The Jeffersonian gospel account contained no resurrection, a twist to the life of Jesus that was considered scandalous to Christians but perfectly sensible to Jefferson's Deistic mind. In a letter to John Adams, he wrote, "To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, God, are immaterial is to say they are nothings, or that there is no God, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise" (August 15, 1820). In saying this, Jefferson was merely expressing the widely held Deistic view of his time, which rejected the mysticism of the Bible and relied on natural law and human reason to explain why the world is as it is. Writing to Adams again, Jefferson said, "And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" (April 11, 1823). These were hardly the words of a devout Bible-believer.
But, these words ARE the ones of devout Bible-believers:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
It is the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons, to worship the SUPREME BEING, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping GOD in the manner most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship. - John Adams, "Thoughts on Government", 1776
The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If `Thou shalt not covet' and `Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free. - John Adams, "A Defense of the American Constitutions", 1787
And there's plenty more from where that came.
Jefferson didn't just reject the Christian belief that the Bible was "the inspired word of God"; he rejected the Christian system too. In Notes on the State of Virginia, he said of this religion, "There is not one redeeming feature in our superstition of Christianity. It has made one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites" (quoted by newspaper columnist William Edelen, "Politics and Religious Illiteracy," Truth Seeker, Vol. 121, No. 3, p. 33). Anyone today who would make a statement like this or others we have quoted from Jefferson's writings would be instantly branded an infidel, yet modern Bible fundamentalists are frantically trying to cast Jefferson in the mold of a Bible believing Christian. They do so, of course, because Jefferson was just too important in the formation of our nation to leave him out if Bible fundamentalists hope to sell their "Christian-nation" claim to the public. Hence, they try to rewrite history to make it appear that men like Thomas Jefferson had intended to build our nation on "biblical principles." The irony of this situation is that the Christian leaders of Jefferson's time knew where he stood on "biblical principles," and they fought desperately, but unsuccessfully, to prevent his election to the presidency. Saul K. Padover's biography related the bitterness of the opposition that the clergy mounted against Jefferson in the campaign of 1800
Hate to break it to you, Blacken, but only a handful of those guys were deist:
Name of Signer State Religious Affiliation
Charles Carroll Maryland Catholic
Samuel Huntington Connecticut Congregationalist
Roger Sherman Connecticut Congregationalist
William Williams Connecticut Congregationalist
Oliver Wolcott Connecticut Congregationalist
Lyman Hall Georgia Congregationalist
Samuel Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist
John Hancock Massachusetts Congregationalist
Josiah Bartlett New Hampshire Congregationalist
William Whipple New Hampshire Congregationalist
William Ellery Rhode Island Congregationalist
John Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist; Unitarian
Robert Treat Paine Massachusetts Congregationalist; Unitarian
George Walton Georgia Episcopalian
John Penn North Carolina Episcopalian
George Ross Pennsylvania Episcopalian
And, that's just the short list.
The signers were those individuals who happened to be Delegates to Congress at the time... The signers possessed many basic similarities. Most were American-born and of Anglo-Saxon origin. The eight foreign-born... were all natives of the British Isles. Except for Charles Carroll, a Roman Catholic, and a few Deists, every one subscribed to Protestantism. For the most part basically political nonextremists, many at first had hesitated at separation let alone rebellion.
http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html (http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html)
-
Let's see what the men who drafted, signed, and governed by that Constitution said about it, shall we?.
Incorrect once again.
The Constitution spells out in black and white that any religious context within is from a CIVIL LIBERTIES standpoint, not a religious doctrine.
You can not understand that the Constitution plainly states it. You are arguing and losing against FACTS.
Which isn't surprising seeing how facts escape those with Jebus in their heads.
-
irrelevant to the issue of the role Christianity has played in laying the moral foundation in our culture and society.
Because we are not talking about culture and society.
We are talking about the nation from a governmental standpoint. Which seems to be an extremely hard topic for some people to stay on.
If it isn't about the nation and our government, it is not the topic I am talking about.
-
Yeah, better to have been an African Slave Trader selling your own people right? ::) ::)
you are against capitalism?
-
Of the three, governmental.
EXACTLY!
And from a governmental standpoint that was established by the Constitution is this country a secular nation or not?
-
Sarah Palin.
Already done. Maybe the Jebus in your eye caused you to miss it.
To repeat...
Palin is stupid. FACT
So are you. FACT
US is a secular nation. FACT
-
Incorrect once again.
The Constitution spells out in black and white that any religious context within is from a CIVIL LIBERTIES standpoint, not a religious doctrine.
You can not understand that the Constitution plainly states it. You are arguing and losing against FACTS.
Which isn't surprising seeing how facts escape those with Jebus in their heads.
I understand what the Constitution says quite well. I also understand WHAT THE MEN WHO WROTE IT AND SIGNED IT said, regarding the nature of our country.
When men who actually signed the darn thing state, in plain English, that America is a Chrstian nation, it pretty much exposes you for the rambling fool that you are.
-
Already done. Maybe the Jebus in your eye caused you to miss it.
To repeat...
Palin is stupid. FACT
So are you. FACT
Spoken the true spineless buffoon that you are. The Founding Fathers stated that this a Christian nation, with their statements in black-and-white for ALL to see.
Yet, we have Lurker, the yellow-streaked fool, continuing to make a Democratic symbol of himself, with such silliness.
It is to laugh.
US is a secular nation. FACT
Wrong again, dopey one!! Reason:
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
"I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
-
The primary leaders of the so-called founding fathers of our nation were not Bible-believing Christians; they were deists. Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a supreme deity who created the universe to operate solely by natural laws. The supreme God of the Deists removed himself entirely from the universe after creating it. They believed that he assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible.
Other important founding fathers who espoused Deism were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and James Monroe.
Fundamentalist Christians are currently working overtime to convince the American public that the founding fathers intended to establish this country on "biblical principles," but history simply does not support their view. The men mentioned above and others who were instrumental in the founding of our nation were in no sense Bible-believing Christians. Thomas Jefferson, in fact, was fiercely anti-cleric. In a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, Jefferson said, "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes" (George Seldes, The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371). In a letter to Mrs. Harrison Smith, he wrote, "It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. By the same test the world must judge me. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest" (August 6, 1816).
Jefferson was just as suspicious of the traditional belief that the Bible is "the inspired word of God." He rewrote the story of Jesus as told in the New Testament and compiled his own gospel version known as The Jefferson Bible, which eliminated all miracles attributed to Jesus and ended with his burial. The Jeffersonian gospel account contained no resurrection, a twist to the life of Jesus that was considered scandalous to Christians but perfectly sensible to Jefferson's Deistic mind. In a letter to John Adams, he wrote, "To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, God, are immaterial is to say they are nothings, or that there is no God, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise" (August 15, 1820). In saying this, Jefferson was merely expressing the widely held Deistic view of his time, which rejected the mysticism of the Bible and relied on natural law and human reason to explain why the world is as it is. Writing to Adams again, Jefferson said, "And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" (April 11, 1823). These were hardly the words of a devout Bible-believer.
Jefferson didn't just reject the Christian belief that the Bible was "the inspired word of God"; he rejected the Christian system too. In Notes on the State of Virginia, he said of this religion, "There is not one redeeming feature in our superstition of Christianity. It has made one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites" (quoted by newspaper columnist William Edelen, "Politics and Religious Illiteracy," Truth Seeker, Vol. 121, No. 3, p. 33). Anyone today who would make a statement like this or others we have quoted from Jefferson's writings would be instantly branded an infidel, yet modern Bible fundamentalists are frantically trying to cast Jefferson in the mold of a Bible believing Christian. They do so, of course, because Jefferson was just too important in the formation of our nation to leave him out if Bible fundamentalists hope to sell their "Christian-nation" claim to the public. Hence, they try to rewrite history to make it appear that men like Thomas Jefferson had intended to build our nation on "biblical principles." The irony of this situation is that the Christian leaders of Jefferson's time knew where he stood on "biblical principles," and they fought desperately, but unsuccessfully, to prevent his election to the presidency. Saul K. Padover's biography related the bitterness of the opposition that the clergy mounted against Jefferson in the campaign of 1800
Trying to pass this off as your own words Blacken ?
Or maybe you just forgot to post the link ::)
I'll do it for you, since you forgot:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.html
-
Blacken has yet, to the best of my knowledge, ever penned a coherent post on any subject.
-
Trying to pass this off as your own words blacken ?
Or maybe you just left off the link to where you copied it by accident ::)
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.html
Imagine that! Atheists making the ridiculous claim that America was NOT a Christian nation.
-
Imagine that! Atheists making the ridiculous claim that America was NOT a Christian nation.
LOL !!
Who would have thought.
-
When you see how Christian nuts cling to their delusions so feverishly, it is no surprise the Constitution was written and clearly spelled out that this is a secular nation.
Because...
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
When you see how Christian nuts cling to their delusions so feverishly, it is no surprise the Constitution was written and clearly spelled out that this is a secular nation.
Because...
The Constitution says no such thing, O phonically-challenged one.
What the MEN, WHO SIGNED AND WROTE THAT CONSTITUTION say about our nation, destroy your senseless musings.
And your inability to address direct questions put to you continue to show your lack of intellectual and testicular fortitude.
One more time....
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
"I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
"The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
I'll take what the Founding Fathers (the men who actually wrote, signed, and governed by the Constitution) actually said about this country, over a sniveling coward like you.
-
LOL @ the attempt to shove Christianity down the throats of an entire nation. Especially when it was established as a secular one.
Religious nuts just don't quit. Which is why the Constitution is not religious based by any means.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
LOL @ the attempt to shove Christianity down the throats of an entire nation. Especially when it was established as a secular one.
Religious nuts just don't quit. Which is why the Constitution is not religious based by any means.
Wrong again!!!
I simply post what the Founding Fathers said, point blank. And since you're too big of a coward to acknowledge that, you continue to cluck and whine like the feathered 5th-grader that you are.
-
I cant believe how long this thread is lasting.
-
I cant believe how long this thread is lasting.
What can I say? As long as I find it entertaining to watch Lurker make a complete fool of himself, I can keep this up for weeks.
If he gets any more in denial, I'm going to start thinking he's Egyptian. It ain't rocket science. The Founding Fathers stated that this is a Christian nation, that our laws are based, in part, on the Ten Commandments.
And these men WROTE THE CONSTITUTION. So, am I to deny what they say, in favor of a crackpot who's too chicken to answer a simple question about Sarah Palin, who's deluded into thinking that the Democrats are going to enjoy decades of power (even while these geese are being sizzled, as we speak, with mid-terms on the horizon)?
-
I cant believe how long this thread is lasting.
You know how delusional Christians are. They can't let go of something even when facts and logic confront them.
If they had independent thought processes, they would realize the irony in claiming a christian nation was established by a document that violates every biblical law in the "good book".
But lacking independent thought process, they fail to see that. Nothing new here. Part of the frustrations they have for living in a secular nation I suppose.
-
You know how delusional Christians are. They can't let go of something even when facts and logic confront them.
Back in that hall of mirrors, I see.
If they had independent thought processes, they would realize the irony in claiming a christian nation was established by a document that violates every biblical law in the "good book".
But lacking independent thought process, they fail to see that. Nothing new here. Part of the frustrations they have for living in a secular nation I suppose.
Not only do you suck at presenting facts, apparently you aren't that good at reading emotions. Stick to your day job.
The simple truth is that we have what the Founding Fathers said about the nature of this country. And the reason you keep running like a scalded dog is because those facts CLOBBER your delusion.
That's why you won't own up to the fact that your assertion about the Treaty of Tripoli was DEAD WRONG.
That's why you slither away, when the ACTUAL WORDS of the Founding Fathers trounce your brain-dead tripe.
Man up, for once, and face what's being addressed. Otherwise, if you're scared, say you're scared.
-
If they had independent thought processes, they would realize the irony in claiming a christian nation was established by a document that violates every biblical law in the "good book".
Because....
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
You would realize how stupid you sound, if you could grasp that the men, WHO ACTUALLY WROTE THE CONSTITUTION, stated that America is a Christian nation.
And, just out of morbid curiosity, how does the Constitution supposeldy violate Biblical law, especially when of them pesky FOUNDING FATHERS said......
"The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
Let's see, if Lurker actually answers this one, instead of displaying his usual lack of a set and running away.
-
If they had independent thought processes, they would realize the irony in claiming a christian nation was established by a document that violates every biblical law in the "good book".
Because.... First Amendment directly violates First Commandment. Already been posted before. But for the slow ones here....
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Damn Lurker, you really have made a fool of yourself.
-
Damn Lurker, you really have made a fool of yourself.
Not really.
I take it you can't read either.
-
Because we are not talking about culture and society.
We are talking about the nation from a governmental standpoint. Which seems to be an extremely hard topic for some people to stay on.
If it isn't about the nation and our government, it is not the topic I am talking about.
I have freely conceded that the Founders wanted a secular government. No establishment of any religion. It is you who so adamantly insist that we are a secular nation.
If it could be shown that the city of Compton was majority Black. Could we call that city predominately Black?
If it could be shown that say, the majority of the people in the State of Utah, considered themselves Mormon. Could we say that Utah is predominately a Mormon State?
If it could be shown that the majority of the people living in Idaho considered themselves Republican. Could we say that it is a majority Republican State? Maybe even assign it a color?
If it could be shown that the majority of the nation (75%>) considered themselves Christian? Could we say that nation is predominately Christian?
-
Not really.
I take it you can't read either.
I have read you repeating the same shit over and over, and not answering his questions...
I have watched day after day, as MCWAY makes a fool of you.
Seems you are the one with a reading comprehension problem.
-
Let's see:
First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
First Commandment:
Thou shalt have no other gods before me
And the First amendment violates the First Commandment, because..........
-
I have read you repeating the same shit over and over, and not answering his questions...
I have watched day after day, as MCWAY makes a fool of you.
Seems you are the one with a reading comprehension problem.
The last question was answered in that quote.
Previous questions already answered.
So did you miss them or can you just not read? Which is it?
-
I have freely conceded that the Founders wanted a secular government. No establishment of any religion. It is you who so adamantly insist that we are a secular nation.
If it could be shown that the city of Compton was majority Black. Could we call that city predominately Black?
If it could be shown that say, the majority of the people in the State of Utah, considered themselves Mormon. Could we say that Utah is predominately a Mormon State?
If it could be shown that the majority of the people living in Idaho considered themselves Republican. Could we say that it is a majority Republican State? Maybe even assign it a color?
If it could be shown that the majority of the nation (75%>) considered themselves Christian? Could we say that nation is predominately Christian?
You have answered your own question here.
The % of the population has no bearing on how our nation was established from a governmental standpoint by the Constitution.
Everything I have stated has been towards a governmental standpoint. Not a culture/society issue. The Constitution clearly deals with governmental establishment as a whole and within the context of civil liberties. Not religious doctrine.
Do you agree?
-
You have answered your own question here.
The % of the population has no bearing on how our nation was established from a governmental standpoint by the Constitution.
Everything I have stated has been towards a governmental standpoint. Not a culture/society issue. The Constitution clearly deals with governmental establishment as a whole and within the context of civil liberties. Not religious doctrine.
Do you agree?
But, your claim, O myopic one, is that America is a secular NATION. That's as right as two left shoes.
NEWS FLASH!!! A NATION is comprised of its culture and society, NOT JUST ITS GOVERNMENT. And the nature of the Constitution is that (as Dr. King puts it) the church is the conscience of the state, not its master (i.e. Muslim theocracies) nor its slave (i.e. 18th/19th-century England).
The men who signed and wrote the Constitution INSISTED that leaders be Christian ones (the only "establishment" issues were with regards to different Christian denominations).
-
Let's see:
First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
First Commandment:
Thou shalt have no other gods before me
And the First amendment violates the First Commandment, because..........
First Amendment places no religion above or below another. Christianity, Hindu, Pagan worship, Islam, etc.. are all equal.
First Commandment is clearly a Christian principle that excludes all other religions other than Christianity. You can not be a Christian and worship Allah, or Xendu or the tree outside. If the First Amendment were based on Christian principles, it would not have placed Christianity on the same level as other religions. Therefore by allowing the worship and existence of other gods and religions other than Christianity the First Amendment clearly violates the First Commandment. If it were religious based. Which it isn't.
-
But, your claim, O myopic one, is that America is a secular NATION. That's as right as two left shoes.
NEWS FLASH!!! A NATION is comprised of its culture and society, NOT JUST ITS GOVERNMENT. And the nature of the Constitution is that (as Dr. King puts it) the church is the conscience of the state, not its master (i.e. Muslim theocracies) nor its slave (i.e. 18th/19th-century England).
Bigger news flash you idiot. I have been talking about the nation from a government standpoint since page 2. Not culture. Not society.
Kind of slow aren't you?
The Constitution establishes nothing in regards to specific culture or society issues. The Constitution is strictly from a governmental standpoint.
You really attempting to give those two brain cells of yours a run for the money today aren't you?
-
First Amendment places no religion above or below another. Christianity, Hindu, Pagan worship, Islam, etc.. are all equal.
First Commandment is clearly a Christian principle that excludes all other religions other than Christianity. You can not be a Christian and worship Allah, or Xendu or the tree outside. If the First Amendment were based on Christian principles, it would not have placed Christianity on the same level as other religions. Therefore by allowing the worship and existence of other gods and religions other than Christianity the First Amendment clearly violates the First Commandment. If it were religious based. Which it isn't.
Once again, the Establishment Clause was written in the context of not favoring DIFFERENT DENOMINATIONS OF CHRISTIANITY. The last thing on the minds of the Founding Fathers was Islam, Buddhism, or any other pagan religion.
A prime example of that:
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
You think Adams, Q. Adams, and Chase simply made statements like that off the cuff, IGNORING the First Amendment? PLEASE!!!
You think John Jay was worried about facing Mecca 5 times a day? GET REAL!!!
Bigger news flash you idiot. I have been talking about the nation from a government standpoint since page 2. Not culture. Not society.
Kind of slow aren't you?
The Constitution establishes nothing in regards to specific culture or society issues. The Constitution is strictly from a governmental standpoint.
You really attempting to give those two brain cells of yours a run for the money today aren't you?
Once again, Clucky, you ain't had your Wheaties today. The Founding Fathers (you know, THE MEN WHO WROTE AND SIGNED AND GOVERNED BY THE CONSTITUTION) said, in no uncertain terms, the basis for which they framed it.
Lest you missed it again, blind one:
"The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
So, even if you're talking from a purely governmental standpoint, you're still a full-fledged resident of Bonehead-Land, because the Founders mentioned that Scripture inspired their drafting the Constitution.
-
Let's see what the men who drafted, signed, and governed by that Constitution said about it, shall we?
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
OOPS!! I forgot you don't like that, because it smashes your claims to pieces and make you look silly (or sillier, I should say).
You’re aware that none of these quotes support your that right?
Do you have any quotes from these guys explaining why they forget to mention Jesus in the founding documents and even went out of their way to explicitly state that no religious test would ever be required to hold public office?
Do you have any quotes from John Adams explaining why he signed his name to a treaty that included the words “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” if he supposedly believed otherwise.
-
You’re aware that none of these quotes support your that right?
On the contrary, if the men who signed the Constitution say it's a Christian country, then that's what it is.
Do you have any quotes from these guys explaining why they forget to mention Jesus in the founding documents and even went out of their way to explicitly state that no religious test would ever be required to hold public office?
Mentioning Jesus, contrary to the "Straw Man" you and Lurker keep making, isn't necessary to make America a Christian nation, as the Founding Fathers have maintained REPEATEDLY.
Once again, the "religious test" had to do with the denominations within Christianity, NOT other pagan religions.
Reason:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
Do you have any quotes from John Adams explaining why he signed his name to a treaty that included the words “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” if he supposedly believed otherwise.
I explained that already. That likely had more to do with making the point that America was not a theocracy, like certain Muslim countries. But you don't have to be a theocracy to be a Christian nation.
Adams didn't supposedly believe otherwise. We have his words, stating what he believed. The question then becomes, why you (and Lurker) repeatedly ignore what the Founders actually said?
And, lost again in all of this, if the Founders were so hell-bent on declaring their secular identity, WHY WAS ARTICLE 11 REMOVED from the Treaty of Tripoli in 1805?
And, why did the Founding Fathers CONTINUE to make statements about America's being a Christian nations IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE TREATY WAS SIGNED and throughout the years until and AFTER Article 11 got DROPPED?
-
Why do you think your hand picked quotes have more significance than the founding documents?
That's what I don't understand.
If I showed you quotes from Thomas Payne, Thomas Jefferson etc... I assume you would give them the same deference that you have for the people who share your opinion right?
The only thing that matters are official documents of this country.
The official documents say - No State religion, No religious requirement to hold office etc...
The Treaty of Tripoli is an official document - passed unanimously (and signed by the same John Adams you've quoted earlier in the thread).
Official documents are all that matter
Quotes of personal feelings or beliefs by people are irrelevent
Keep trying to find some actual proof
-
Why do you think your hand picked quotes have more significance than the founding documents?
That's what I don't understand.
If I showed you quotes from Thomas Payne, Thomas Jefferson etc... I assume you would give them the same deference that you have for the people who share your opinion right?
The only thing that matters are official documents of this country.
The official documents say - No State religion, No religious requirement to hold office etc...
The Treaty of Tripoli is an official document - passed unanimously (and signed by the same John Adams you've quoted earlier in the thread).
Official documents are all that matter
Quotes of personal feelings or beliefs by people are irrelevent
Keep trying to find some actual proof
I've already found it. And, what you repeatedly keep forgetting is that Article 11 of the Treaty is GONE, has been since 1805.
So, obviously your claims about official documents betray you. If the Founding Fathers were intent on declaring America a non-Christian nation, they would NOT have dropped Article 11, when it got renegotiated in the 19th century.
Oh, by the way, the statement of Samuel Chase was NOT just "personal feelings". It was the VERDICT FROM THE SUPREME COURT, of which he was a member, writing the MAJORITY VIEW OF THAT COURT. And that Supreme Court stated (once again),
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty. - Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice, giving the majority opinion in the case, "Runkel v. Winemiller", 1799.
Note the date: 1799, roughly TWO YEARS after the Treaty of Tripoli (with Article 11, which got removed in 1805).
So, much like Lurker, your attempts to dismiss what the Founding Fathers said about America being a Christian nation simply fall flat.
-
I've already found it. And, what you repeatedly keep forgetting is that Article 11 of the Treaty is GONE, has been since 1805.
So, obviously your claims about official documents betray you. If the Founding Fathers were intent on declaring America a non-Christian nation, they would NOT have dropped Article 11, when it got renegotiated in the 19th century.
is this your opinion or some fact you can actually prove
show me some proof of this statement otherwise I have no reason to draw the same conclusion as you (i.e. no proof that's its true)
I assume they removed it because it was a statement of the obvious since it was clearly layed out in our constition that we had a secular government.
I'll respond to everything else you've said but we've got to resolve this issue first
-
Why do you think your hand picked quotes have more significance than the founding documents?
That's what I don't understand.
If I showed you quotes from Thomas Payne, Thomas Jefferson etc... I assume you would give them the same deference that you have for the people who share your opinion right?
The only thing that matters are official documents of this country.
The official documents say - No State religion, No religious requirement to hold office etc...
The Treaty of Tripoli is an official document - passed unanimously (and signed by the same John Adams you've quoted earlier in the thread).
Official documents are all that matter
Quotes of personal feelings or beliefs by people are irrelevent
Keep trying to find some actual proof
Are the words "separation of church and state" on any official documents?
-
Are the words "separation of church and state" on any official documents?
you can't find google?
-
you can't find google?
He can find Google. What he CAN'T FIND is "separation of church and state" in any official documents.
-
He can find Google. What he CAN'T FIND is "separation of church and state" in any official documents.
and what do you thing this means?
btw - I'll address every one of your points in your last post but first you have to simply provide some proof of your statement
consider it a simple test just to make sure you understand the difference between opinion and fact
-
and what do you thing this means?
btw - I'll address every one of your points in your last post but first you have to simply provide some proof of your statement
consider it a simple test just to make sure you understand the difference between opinion and fact
Weren't you the one who said that only official documents matter? I wonder if the concept of separation of church and state is on a official document because, if it is, I want to put a stop to this swearing in ceremony stuff.
-
Weren't you the one who said that only official documents matter? I wonder if the concept of separation of church and state is on a official document because, if it is, I want to put a stop to this swearing in ceremony stuff.
what does lack of that statement prove (this is not a trick question)?
-
You’re aware that none of these quotes support your that right?
Do you have any quotes from these guys explaining why they forget to mention Jesus in the founding documents and even went out of their way to explicitly state that no religious test would ever be required to hold public office?
Do you have any quotes from John Adams explaining why he signed his name to a treaty that included the words “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” if he supposedly believed otherwise.
As I have said... the irony of rabid Christians is that no matter what, they can't bend reality to support their delusions.
-
He can find Google. What he CAN'T FIND is "separation of church and state" in any official documents.
Can't find "Christian Nation" in the Constitution either. But that doesn't stop you from crying about your delusions and claiming it is so. ::)
Too bad the official written document - word for word - doesn't support your insecurities and claims. Living in a secular nation must be frustrating.
-
Can't find "Christian Nation" in the Constitution either. But that doesn't stop you from crying about your delusions and claiming it is so. ::)
Too bad the official written document - word for word - doesn't support your insecurities and claims. Living in a secular nation must be frustrating.
Can we all just agree that this thread is going in circles and circles and circles?
-
Can't find "Christian Nation" in the Constitution either. But that doesn't stop you from crying about your delusions and claiming it is so. ::)
Too bad the official written document - word for word - doesn't support your insecurities and claims. Living in a secular nation must be frustrating.
If I actually lived in one, you might have a point.
-
Can't find "Christian Nation" in the Constitution either. But that doesn't stop you from crying about your delusions and claiming it is so. ::)
Wrong again, Einstein. I never claimed that "Christian Nation" was in the Constitution. What I said was that such was NOT NECESSARY for the FOUNDING FATHERS to deem America a Christian nation, which they've done.
These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation."
"Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian." - US Supreme Court, "Church of the Holy Trinity vs. United States", 1892
Too bad the official written document - word for word - doesn't support your insecurities and claims. Living in a secular nation must be frustrating.
If I actually lived in one, you might have a point.
Too bad for you the men, who WROTE AND SIGNED THAT DOCUMENT, declared that America is a Christian nation.
-
It isn't in there because this isn't a Christian Nation.
Because ....
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
is this your opinion or some fact you can actually prove
show me some proof of this statement otherwise I have no reason to draw the same conclusion as you (i.e. no proof that's its true)
I assume they removed it because it was a statement of the obvious since it was clearly layed out in our constition that we had a secular government.
I'll respond to everything else you've said but we've got to resolve this issue first
If it were a statement of the obvious, there wouldn't have been a Supreme Court ruling saying the exact opposite, less than two years later. Nor, would you have other Founding Fathers, stating the exact opposite AFTER the Treaty of Tripoli was signed.
Add to that, these rulings from the Supreme Court, as well:
" These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation."
"Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian." - Church of the Holy Trinity vs. United States, 1892
So, you have the Founding Fathers, who wrote and signed the Constitution, declaring America to be a Christian nation. And, you have rulings from the Supreme Court doing much the same thing.
-
I've already found it. And, what you repeatedly keep forgetting is that Article 11 of the Treaty is GONE, has been since 1805.
So, obviously your claims about official documents betray you. If the Founding Fathers were intent on declaring America a non-Christian nation, they would NOT have dropped Article 11, when it got renegotiated in the 19th century.
Oh, by the way, the statement of Samuel Chase was NOT just "personal feelings". It was the VERDICT FROM THE SUPREME COURT, of which he was a member, writing the MAJORITY VIEW OF THAT COURT. And that Supreme Court stated (once again),
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty. - Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice, giving the majority opinion in the case, "Runkel v. Winemiller", 1799.
Note the date: 1799, roughly TWO YEARS after the Treaty of Tripoli (with Article 11, which got removed in 1805).
So, much like Lurker, your attempts to dismiss what the Founding Fathers said about America being a Christian nation simply fall flat.
Again – you’re confusing facts with opinion
The quote by Chase in an opinion (that’s actually what it’s called)
You’re aware that Chase was the only Supreme Court justice who was ever impeached right?
The reason for his impeachment was allegedly that he let his partisan leanings effect his court decisions.
Maybe he was the activist judge of his day attempting to legislate from the bench (that would be my opinion)
It’s Chase opinion that the “Christian religion is the established religion” and we don’t even know what he means by “established religion” although again, you have no problem making an assumption and pretending it’s a fact.
I’m still waiting for you to prove your claim about why Article 11 was removed when the treaty was re-written. Treaties get re-written all the time and stuff get’s added or removed. You have no clue why that passage wasn’t included but you have no problem making an assumption and then pretending it’s a fact or loading it up with “meaning” were none exist
I don’t actually come to the board to argue with people but there’s also no point in even talking to people who don’t understand the difference between opinion and fact
-
Again – you’re confusing facts with opinion
The quote by Chase in an opinion (that’s actually what it’s called)
You’re aware that Chase was the only Supreme Court justice who was ever impeached right?
The reason for his impeachment was allegedly that he let his partisan leanings effect his court decisions.
Maybe he was the activist judge of his day attempting to legislate from the bench (that would be my opinion)
It’s Chase opinion that the “Christian religion is the established religion” and we don’t even know what he means by “established religion” although again, you have no problem making an assumption and pretending it’s a fact.
I’m still waiting for you to prove your claim about why Article 11 was removed when the treaty was re-written. Treaties get re-written all the time and stuff get’s added or removed. You have no clue why that passage wasn’t included but you have no problem making an assumption and then pretending it’s a fact or loading it up with “meaning” were none exist
I don’t actually come to the board to argue with people but there’s also no point in even talking to people who don’t understand the difference between opinion and fact
Since Chase wrote the majority opinion, that would indicate that Chase wasn't the only justice who held that "opinion". It's awfully hard for one guy to rule for the entire Supreme Court.
The FACTS are that the Founding Fathers declared that America is a Christian nation.
And, you misread my statement, yet again. I simply stated that, if the Founding Fathers were intent on declaring America a non-Christian nation via that Treaty of Tripoli, they would NOT have dropped Article 11, when it got renegotiated in the 19th century.
Yes, treaties do get written and re-written. And, when a certain item gets removed, that is a BIG HINT that it no longer applies to the current treaty (regardless of the reason for which it was originally placed in the treaty).
-
Since Chase wrote the majority opinion, that would indicate that Chase wasn't the only justice who held that "opinion". It's awfully hard for one guy to rule for the entire Supreme Court.
The FACTS are that the Founding Fathers declared that America is a Christian nation.
And, you misread my statement, yet again. I simply stated that, if the Founding Fathers were intent on declaring America a non-Christian nation via that Treaty of Tripoli, they would NOT have dropped Article 11, when it got renegotiated in the 19th century.
again - your claim of "intent" is unproven therefore only your opinion
the only fact at this point is that it did exist in the first place and was passed with unanimous consent
my opinion would be that we were a new nation and this was one of our first treaties and we wanted to make it clear that our nation was not founded on Christianity (we were dealing with Muslims afterall). Later this statement was unnecessary as it was an obvious and known fact that we were a secular government. That would be my opinion on the matter
Regarding the "Founding Fathers" the only official group opinions would be things like the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and there is no state religion, official religion or anything that remotely suggests any "established religion" so your statement that the "founding fathers" declared that America is a christian nation has no basis in fact
-
again - your claim of "intent" is unproven therefore only your opinion
I didn't claim intent. I simply dismissed the idea that the Treaty of Tripoli's intent was to cite America as not being a Christian nation.
Again, if that were the case, why was Article 11 taken out of the Treaty in 1805?
the only fact at this point is that it did exist in the first place and was passed with unanimous consent
my opinion would be that we were a new nation and this was one of our first treaties and we wanted to make it clear that our nation was not founded on Christianity (we were dealing with Muslims afterall). Later this statement was unnecessary as it was an obvious and known fact that we were a secular government. That would be my opinion on the matter
That opinion is flawed, based on the words of the Founding Fathers BEFORE the Treaty was signed, the rulings and statements made by them shortly AFTER it was signed, and the fact that Article 11 was taken out of the Treaty in 1805.
If it were an "obvious and known fact that we were a secular government", the US Supreme Court wouldn't have given the following ruling less than TWO YEARS after the Treaty was signed:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty.
That doesn't come from an "obvious" secular government.
Regarding the "Founding Fathers" the only official group opinions would be things like the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and there is no state religion, official religion or anything that remotely suggests any "established religion" so your statement that the "founding fathers" declared that America is a christian nation has no basis in fact
PLEASE!! Supreme Court rulings play a significant role in the matter. And, since the men who actually wrote the Constitution stated, in no uncertain terms, that we are a Christian nation, your conclusion is a faulty one, to say the least.
My statements are based on fact, because we have what they said, in black-and-white. And, as has been shown multiple times, the "no state religion" items is clearly within the context of Christian denominations, not between Christianity and other religion.
Hence the reason, you have our Founders making statements such as,
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty.
And,
These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation."
"Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian"
The Redeemer of Mankind: That ain't a reference to Allah, Buddha, or Krishna. It's to Jesus Christ.
-
I didn't claim intent. I simply dismissed the idea that the Treaty of Tripoli's intent was to cite America as not being a Christian nation.
Again, if that were the case, why was Article 11 taken out of the Treaty in 1805?
I never said or even suggestd that the intent of the treaty was to cite America not being a Christian nation.
It was called a treaty of peace and friendship and it was the first treaty by our country with another nation. The fact that we included a statement explaining saying that "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" in simply part of the treaty but not the purpose of the treaty.
The purpose of the treaty was to secure passage of our ships (and to negotiate a payment for that passage).
You did in fact claim intent on WHY that Article was removed and you even seems to imply it again with your last last askng why it was taken out.
We don't know why it was taken out and neither do you
this is simple point
do you understand this or not?
We do know that "The treaty was broken in 1801 by the Pasha of Tripoli over President Thomas Jefferson's refusal to pay the Pasha's demands for increased payments. The Treaty was renegotiated in 1805 after the First Barbary War."
Thats it.
If you have proof of specific reason for any part of th re-write then show it to me.
-
I never said or even suggestd that the intent of the treaty was to cite America not being a Christian nation.
I know that. YOU did not; a certain cowarly posted DID.
It was called a treaty of peace and friendship and it was the first treaty by our country with another nation. The fact that we included a statement explaining saying that "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" in simply part of the treaty but not the purpose of the treaty.
Agreed!!!
The purpose of the treaty was to secure passage of our ships (and to negotiate a payment for that passage).
Agreed!!! I stated that when the aforementioned cowardly poster made his silly claims.
You did in fact claim intent on WHY that Article was removed and you even seems to imply it again with your last last askng why it was taken out.
No. I didn't. I simply asked why was it taken out, if the purpose of the Treaty was, to show that America was not a Christian nation.
We don't know why it was taken out and neither do you
this is simple point
do you understand this or not?
I made that simple point, LONG before you jumped into this conversation. That's why I stated that, whatever the reason Article 11 was placed into the Treaty, it was dropped eight years later.
We do know that "The treaty was broken in 1801 by the Pasha of Tripoli over President Thomas Jefferson's refusal to pay the Pasha's demands for increased payments. The Treaty was renegotiated in 1805 after the First Barbary War."
Thats it.
If you have proof of specific reason for any part of th re-write then show it to me.
During that renegotiation, Article 11 was gone. I never claimed that I knew exactly why it was taken out. What I actually said (to make the point to the yellow-streaked one) was using the Treaty of Tripoli as proof that America is not a Christian nation, when the very portion of the treaty that he keeps trumpeting GOT DROPPED in 1805, makes no sense.
-
You are a tard. You keep citing the basis of your insecurities salvation to lie in the words of what men said. Where as the official document those men created clearly states the opposite.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
You like to use the word cowardly a lot... (BORRRRRR-ing) but the real coward is you for continuing to deny reality. Such the frustration of living in a secular nation.
-
No. I didn't. I simply asked why was it taken out, if the purpose of the Treaty was, to show that America was not a Christian nation.
No. That is just your OPINION on why it was. Not the facts. You don't know the facts. You only have a skewed opinion rooted in insecurities and the Jebus Infection.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
why do you keep arguing with this fucking moron [mcway]. he's just another babbling idiot
-
why do you keep arguing with this fucking moron [mcway]. he's just another babbling idiot
-
thats right he your partner in crime just 7 years ' you can handle it :D :D :D
-
I know that. YOU did not; a certain cowarly posted DID.
Agreed!!!
Agreed!!! I stated that when the aforementioned cowardly poster made his silly claims.
No. I didn't. I simply asked why was it taken out, if the purpose of the Treaty was, to show that America was not a Christian nation.
I made that simple point, LONG before you jumped into this conversation. That's why I stated that, whatever the reason Article 11 was placed into the Treaty, it was dropped eight years later.
During that renegotiation, Article 11 was gone. I never claimed that I knew exactly why it was taken out. What I actually said (to make the point to the yellow-streaked one) was using the Treaty of Tripoli as proof that America is not a Christian nation, when the very portion of the treaty that he keeps trumpeting GOT DROPPED in 1805, makes no sense.
you just agreed that the purpose of the treaty was about safe passage of our ships so why do you keep repeating the same false question and implying (as it appears to me) that the rewriting of this treaty (seems like the old one of voided due to violations) has some relevence to support your erroneous belief that our country was founded on Christianity or Christian principals. If one were being intellectually honest they wouldn't even need to refer to this treaty. They could just read our Constition and reach the conclusion that the US was a secular government (not a monarchy or theocracy, etc..) but if there was any lignering doubt then this treaty is certainly relevent and is really the nail in the coffin of any claim otherwise
Let’s consider the facts:
1. It was the first treaty ever written by our new government and it would make sense that we would include a clarification on the structure of our government, especially when dealing with a Muslim nation.
2. It was written contemporaneous with the founding of this nation and this form of government (this is hugely relevant)
3. It contained clear and unequivocal language that said the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion
4. It was passed unanimously (not one single Christian at the time voted against it)
The fact that the treaty was violated and eventually re-written at a later date is completely irrelevant to the statement of fact in Article 11 of the original document
-
You are a tard. You keep citing the basis of your insecurities salvation to lie in the words of what men said. Where as the official document those men created clearly states the opposite.
You like to use the word cowardly a lot... (BORRRRRR-ing) but the real coward is you for continuing to deny reality. Such the frustration of living in a secular nation.
The words of the Constitution do not say the opposite. And the words of the men who wrote the Constitution tear your boneheaded claims to piece.
I call you a coward, because when the most basic question are put to you, you run like the spineless simpleton that you are. And that running continues to this day.
-
No. That is just your OPINION on why it was. Not the facts. You don't know the facts. You only have a skewed opinion rooted in insecurities and the Jebus Infection.
Are you really this cracked in the skull, or is it a special performance?
I did not state the purpose of Article 11 being taken out. In fact, O brainless one, I asked YOU the question of exactly why was it taken out, since you mindlessly used the Treaty of Tripoli to prop your dopey claim of America not being a Christian nation.
In true gutless, nutless fashion you ducked the issue.
-
Sarah Palin wants to buy a vowel "Can I have an R?"Is she getting dumber? Where would Sarah Palin be now if she looked like Big Momma----just asking. :D :D :D
Check out her new facelift/eye job. :o
Palin has undergone what is called in the trade a "maintenance" facelift. This kind of surgery is almost a pre-emptive strike against aging. It's normally done between 40 and 45 and it's not a major lift. It does however tighten everything up.
Did Sarah Palin have plastic surgery? Maybe… but the procedures would not be as many or of the magnitude that have been suggested. She may have taken advantage of some of today’s minimally-invasive techniques such as an endoscopic browlift and a tuck-up facelift. The recovery from these would be very quick, less than 7 to 10 days, until one is able to be back in front of the public again.
Dr. Barry Eppley
-
you just agreed that the purpose of the treaty was about safe passage of our ships so why do you keep repeating the same false question and implying (as it appears to me) that the rewriting of this treaty (seems like the old one of voided due to violations) has some relevence to support your erroneous belief that our country was founded on Christianity or Christian principals.
Once again, you don't get it. Our resident coward, Lurker, used the Treaty to prop his claim that America is not a Christian nation. When I brought up the fact that Article 11 was dropped in 1805 and asked him to explain why, he did what he does best.....RUNS AND HIDES LIKE A PUNK.
And, it's not my erroneous belief about America being a Christian nation. It's what the Founding Fathers ACTUALLY SAID. If THEY wrote the Constitution and THEY say America is a Christian nation, then that's what it is, period.
If one were being intellectually honest they wouldn't even need to refer to this treaty. They could just read our Constition and reach the conclusion that the US was a secular government (not a monarchy or theocracy, etc..) but if there was any lignering doubt then this treaty is certainly relevent and is really the nail in the coffin of any claim otherwise
Hardly!!! Especially considering what the men who wrote the Constitution had to say about it. And, claiming that the Treaty is the nail in the coffin, when Article 11 gets REMOVED eight years later, is ridiculous.
Factor into that the continued statements by the Founding Fathers that America is a Christian nation, which occured SHORTLY AFTER the Treaty was signed and your claim makes even less sense.
Let’s consider the facts:
1. It was the first treaty ever written by our new government and it would make sense that we would include a clarification on the structure of our government, especially when dealing with a Muslim nation.
2. It was written contemporaneous with the founding of this nation and this form of government (this is hugely relevant)
3. It contained clear and unequivocal language that said the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion
4. It was passed unanimously (not one single Christian at the time voted against it)
The fact that the treaty was violated and eventually re-written at a later date is completely irrelevant to the statement of fact in Article 11 of the original document
The problems with your assertions continue, particularly statements three and four.
"It contained clear and unequivocal language that said the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"
How clear that language is or was is still subject to debate. Regardless, we STILL have our Founders making statements, such as...
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty.
That's from the Supreme Court. (not one Christian, of which I'm aware, demanded a constitutional amendment to overturn that ruling).
"It was passed unanimously (not one single Christian at the time voted against it)"
The renegotiated treaty in 1805 passed, too. (Not one single Christian at the time, of whom I'm aware, voted against it; if there were some who did, they were obviously in the minority).
-
she definitely had a small facelift since 2008, but so do most people in TV in their 40s.
-
she definitely had a small facelift since 2008, but so do most people in TV in their 40s.
I presume using $arahPAC money.
-
McWay - This language isn't clear enough for you:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries
you keep posting an opinion by a Supreme Court Justice (the only one ever impeached and impeached for letting his partisan opinions influence his decsions) while continuing to ignore the fact that it's an OPINION and not a statement of fact
you keep saying the Founding Fathers declared this to be a Christian Nation and offering nothing more than a quote from individuals rather than a declaration from the group as a whole
you continue to imply that because the treaty was re-written that somehow the original text is no longer relevent which I don't agree with and to which you have offered no valid reason
I'm done with you on this topic unless you've got something new to say
-
McWay - This language isn't clear enough for you:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries
you keep posting an opinion by a Supreme Court Justice (the only one ever impeached and impeached for letting his partisan opinions influence his decsions) while continuing to ignore the fact that it's an OPINION and not a statement of fact.
Straw Man, THIS language isn't clear enough for YOU:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty.
Chase gave the MAJORITY opinion of the Court, not just that of his own. BTW (as you likely know), Chase was ACQUITTED of all charged and returned to work in 1805, the SAME YEAR that Article 11 went bye-bye.
you keep saying the Founding Fathers declared this to be a Christian Nation and offering nothing more than a quote from individuals rather than a declaration from the group as a whole
The posts of the Founding Fathers' statements I've used are HARDLY EXHAUSTIVE. There are PLENTY more from which those came.
And, in case you didn't realize it, the posts of the Founding Fathers' statements I've used are HARDLY EXHAUSTIVE.
you continue to imply that because the treaty was re-written that somehow the original text is no longer relevent which I don't agree with and to which you have offered no valid reason
I'm done with you on this topic unless you've got something new to say
Usually, when someone rewrites a document and a portion of the old version GETS REMOVED, it means that portion is no longer valid (regardless of the reason for which it was placed there, initially).
-
Straw Man, THIS language isn't clear enough for YOU:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty.
Chase gave the MAJORITY opinion of the Court, not just that of his own.
glad to see you finally admit it's an opinion and not a fact (and opinions can be completely contrary to fact as I'm sure you know)
Usually, when someone rewrites a document and a portion of the old version GETS REMOVED, it means that portion is no longer valid (regardless of the reason for which it was placed there, initially).
again - youcontinue to make an assumption and then proclaim it to be fact
-
McWAy - question for you.
You keep implying that becaue Article 11 was removed from a later version of the treaty (which I can't find online nor can I find anything about what was revised and why) that it proves or at least lends credence that the statements in that section are no longer true. Do I understand you correctly?
-
glad to see you finally admit it's an opinion and not a fact (and opinions can be completely contrary to fact as I'm sure you know)
When a Court gives an opinion, that's effectively law, i.e. The "opinion" in the 2002 "Zellman v. Simmons-Harris" case stated that using public school vouchers at religious schools is NOT unconstitutional (under certain conditions).
As a result, if a state decides to have a voucher program, it is LEGAL for vouchers to be used at Christian schools (provided the program is similar to that of Cleveland, Ohio).
-
McWAy - question for you.
You keep implying that becaue Article 11 was removed from a later version of the treaty (which I can't find online nor can I find anything about what was revised and why) that it proves or at least lends credence that the statements in that section are no longer true. Do I understand you correctly?
I posted that here on page 13, with the link:
The Treaty was broken in 1801 by the pasha of Tripoli and renegotiated in 1805 after the First Barbary War, at which time Article 11 was removed
http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Treaty:of:Tripoli.htm (http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Treaty:of:Tripoli.htm)
I can easily produce other links, if you wish.
What I am saying is simply that you CANNOT use the Treaty of Tripoli as a declaration of America not being a Christian nation, especially considering Article 11's removal in 1805 (and the statements made by the Founders prior to and after its removal).
-
When a Court gives an opinion, that's effectively law, i.e. The "opinion" in the 2002 "Zellman v. Simmons-Harris" case stated that using public school vouchers at religious schools is NOT unconstitutional (under certain conditions).
As a result, if a state decides to have a voucher program, it is LEGAL for vouchers to be used at Christian schools (provided the program is similar to that of Cleveland, Ohio).
courts don't make laws
show me a constintutional ammendment and then you'll have something
the case was not about whether our country was founded on the basis of Christianity (or however you want to phrase it).
the statement "By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion" doesn't even have a clear meaning
how, "by our form of goverment" is the christian religion the established religion and what does "established religion" mean?
Again, a simple statment (really just an ambiguous phrase) does not over-ride the consitituion no matter how much you'd like to believe it
-
I posted that here on page 13, with the link:
The Treaty was broken in 1801 by the pasha of Tripoli and renegotiated in 1805 after the First Barbary War, at which time Article 11 was removed
http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Treaty:of:Tripoli.htm (http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Treaty:of:Tripoli.htm)
I can easily produce other links, if you wish.
What I am saying is simply that you CANNOT use the Treaty of Tripoli as a declaration of America not being a Christian nation, especially considering Article 11's removal in 1805 (and the statements made by the Founders prior to and after its removal).
you continue to make a specious argument that the removal must mean something and you tie it to the statements by "The Founders" with no proof of any correlation.
How many times have I asked you to show me proof of why it was removed to support your belief?
-
you continue to make a specious argument that the removal must mean something and you tie it to the statements by "The Founders" with no proof of any correlation.
How many times have I asked you to show me proof of why it was removed to support your belief?
I make the argument that the Founding Fathers declared America a Christian nation. The attempt to refute that, using the Treaty of Tripoli, is feeble, because the very article you cite to make your point is GONE.
The Founders made that declaration about America as a Christian nation, before the treaty was made, after it was made, and after Article 11's removal.
My belief is based on the statements OF THE FOUNDERS, NOT the Treaty of Tripoli.
-
I make the argument that the Founding Fathers declared America a Christian nation. The attempt to refute that, using the Treaty of Tripoli, is feeble, because the very article you cite to make your point is GONE.
The Founders made that declaration about America as a Christian nation, before the treaty was made, after it was made, and after Article 11's removal.
My belief is based on the statements OF THE FOUNDERS, NOT the Treaty of Tripoli.
The "Founding Fathers" were a big, diverse group.
The only group "declaration" they made was the Declaration of Indenpendence and the Consitution
Why do you keep saying the Founding Fathers when what you mean are the individual opinions of individual people?
Check out how many people are included in that group: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States
-
Re-post:
McWAy - question for you.
You keep implying that becaue Article 11 was removed from a later version of the treaty (which I can't find online nor can I find anything about what was revised and why) that it proves or at least lends credence that the statements in that section are no longer true. Do I understand you correctly?
-
The "Founding Fathers" were a big, diverse group.
The only group "declaration" they made was the Declaration of Indenpendence and the Consitution
Why do you keep saying the Founding Fathers when what you mean are the individual opinions of individual people?
Check out how many people are included in that group: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States
I keep saying the Founding Fathers, because the men, whose statements I used, were among the Founding Fathers.
I already have a list of people in that group. I posted that link several days ago. Again, the quotes I used ARE NOT EXHAUSTIVE.
-
I keep saying the Founding Fathers, because the men, whose statements I used, were among the Founding Fathers.
I already have a list of people in that group. I posted that link several days ago. Again, the quotes I used ARE NOT EXHAUSTIVE.
ok - so you're saying individual quotes by men supercede and contradict the only documents that they actually produced as a group?
-
Re-post:
McWAy - question for you.
You keep implying that becaue Article 11 was removed from a later version of the treaty (which I can't find online nor can I find anything about what was revised and why) that it proves or at least lends credence that the statements in that section are no longer true. Do I understand you correctly?
No, you do not!!!
First, I don't know why you keep claiming that you can't find it. Perhaps, I should clarify further:
Technically, there is an Article 11 in the Treaty of Tripoli from 1805 and onward. But, the phrase, "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.. is GONE.
Instead, it reads:
The Commerce between the United States of America and the Regency of Tripoli; The Protections to be given to Merchants, Masters of Vessels and Seamen; The reciprocal right of establishing Consuls in each Country; and the priviledges, immunities and jurisdictions to be enjoyed by such Consuls, are declared to be on the same footing, with those of the most favoured Nations respectively.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/bar1805t.asp (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/bar1805t.asp)
-
No, you do not!!!
First, I don't know why you keep claiming that you can't find it. Perhaps, I should clarify further:
Technically, there is an Article 11 in the Treaty of Tripoli from 1805 and onward. But, the phrase, "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.. is GONE.
Instead, it reads:
The Commerce between the United States of America and the Regency of Tripoli; The Protections to be given to Merchants, Masters of Vessels and Seamen; The reciprocal right of establishing Consuls in each Country; and the priviledges, immunities and jurisdictions to be enjoyed by such Consuls, are declared to be on the same footing, with those of the most favoured Nations respectively.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/bar1805t.asp (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/bar1805t.asp)
so you 're saying this PROVES the statemets in the former Article 11 are no longer true and in fact the absense of the statement proves it was either not true or no longer true?
-
ok - so you're saying individual quotes by men supercede and contradict the only documents that they actually produced as a group?
Nope!!! Try again.
What I've said is:
1) The quotes I've used are not exhaustive (meaning that those are hardly the only ones in which the Founders reflect such views).
2) They don't contradict the Constitution.
Of course, a Supreme Court ruling, citing America as a Christian nation just two years after the Treaty doesn't help matters for those citing the treaty to deny America's being such.
-
so you 're saying this PROVES the statemets in the former Article 11 are no longer true and in fact the absense of the statement proves it was either not true or no longer true?
Please read what I actually posted and you won't have to ask me what I'm saying.
IF you claim that the Treaty of Tripoli is proof that America isn't a Christian nation, you must come to the conclusion that you just mentioned, with that particular portion of Article 11 removed as of 1805.
-
Nope!!! Try again.
What I've said is:
1) The quotes I've used are not exhaustive (meaning that those are hardly the only ones in which the Founders reflect such views).
2) They don't contradict the Constitution.
so quotes from individuals don't supercede the constitution and you think the constitution supports this statement by you?
I make the argument that the Founding Fathers declared America a Christian nation.
can you show me what part of the constitution supports that statement
-
Please read what I actually posted and you won't have to ask me what I'm saying.
IF you claim that the Treaty of Tripoli is proof that America isn't a Christian nation, you must come to the conclusion that you just mentioned, with that particular portion of Article 11 removed as of 1805.
I said before that one doesn't even need the treaty because all they have to do is read the Constitution.
I do believe that Article 11 is clear proof that this country was not in any way whatsover founded on Christian principals.
the absense of that statement in a future version of the treaty does not make that statement untrue and does not in any way prove the contrary is true
-
so quotes from individuals don't supercede the constitution and you think the constitution supports this statement by you?
can you show me what part of the constitution supports that statement
These aren't just individuals. Many of them are the men who actually wrote and signed the Constitution. If they say America's a Christian nation, why would you think that their statements are false?
can you show me what part of the constitution supports that statement
I can show what the Constitution's writers said about this country.
-
I said before that one doesn't even need the treaty because all they have to do is read the Constitution.
I do believe that Article 11 is clear proof that this country was not in any way whatsover founded on Christian principals.
I disagree with that, especially with the Founding Fathers stating the opposite, i.e.:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." - Samuel Chase
Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
the absense of that statement in a future version of the treaty does not make that statement untrue and does not in any way prove the contrary is true
The Founding Fathers said this was a Christian nation BEFORE the Treaty of Tripoli ever existed; they continued to state such and rule as such DURING the treaty; and they YET CONTINUED to do that long after that portion of Article 11 was stricken from the treaty.
-
These aren't just individuals. Many of them are the men who actually wrote and signed the Constitution. If they say America's a Christian nation, why would you think that their statements are false? I can show what the Constitution's writers said about this country.
Show me where the Constitution supports your statement. You said it doesn't contradict it so that means it must support it.
Show it to me
I haven't even bothered to show you all the quotes from the Founding Father who completey contradict your point of view but I'll give you a couple now. Let's start with James Madison (one of the 7 key founders, chronicler of the Constitutional Convention and Father of the Constitution, Fourth President of the United States). Surely you value his opinion and he obviosly
"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." --- James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785
"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." --- James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785
-
Show me where the Constitution supports your statement. You said it doesn't contradict it so that means it must support it.
Show it to me
The Constitution doesn't state that the Founding Fathers declared this a Christian nation. That doesn't erase the fact that it's what they said.
I haven't even bothered to show you all the quotes from the Founding Father who completey contradict your point of view but I'll give you a couple now. Let's start with James Madison (one of the 7 key founders, chronicler of the Constitutional Convention and Father of the Constitution, Fourth President of the United States). Surely you value his opinion and he obviosly
"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." --- James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785
"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." --- James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785
One, Madison's references to ecclesiatical establishments are references to institutions like the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Church, which he appears to be criticizing for not going their job, regarding the faith.
Two, this same James Madison also noted that,
Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe. And to the same Divine Author of every good and perfect gift we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages, religious as well as civil, which are so richly enjoyed in this favored land."
Add to that the words of John Adams,
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: 'It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity"
"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be."
And Alexandar Hamilton, who after that same Constitutional Convention you mentioned, said,
For my own part, I sincerely esteem it a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests.
-
That doesn't erase the fact that it's what they said.
when did I dispute the individuals made those statements?
I disputed that they were accurate
have you actually been confused about that this entire time?
Let's review:
I make the argument that the Founding Fathers declared America a Christian nation.
2) They don't contradict the Constitution.
The Constitution doesn't state that the Founding Fathers declared this a Christian nation.
-
when did I dispute the individuals made those statements?
I disputed that they were accurate
have you actually been confused about that this entire time?
Hardly!!!
Let's review:
Show me where the Constitution supports your statement. You said it doesn't contradict it so that means it must support it.
My statement was that the Founding Fathers declared America a Christian nation. The Constitution says nothing to the contrary.
-
Hardly!!!
Let's review:
My statement was that the Founding Fathers declared America a Christian nation. The Constitution says nothing to the contrary.
do you think that is proof that the statement is true?
-
do you think that is proof that the statement is true?
The Constitution appears to quite neutral in the matter.
That is why I've relied on what the men who wrote and signed the Constitution had to say, regarding this country being a Christian nation.
-
The Constitution appears to quite neutral in the matter.
That is why I've relied on what the men who wrote and signed the Constitution had to say, regarding this country being a Christian nation.
Other men who wrote the Constitution made statements about the horrors of combining religion and government so by the same standard I assume you take those to be true also
you haven't answered the question.
you say the statement is not explicity contradicted by the Constitution and you're presenting that as proof that the statements are true
Yes or No
-
McWay, Straw is making u look like a fool. Stop while u still have some dignity.
-
McWay, Straw is making u look like a fool. Stop while u still have some dignity.
This thread =
-
Other men who wrote the Constitution made statements about the horrors of combining religion and government so by the same standard I assume you take those to be true also
And those statements do NOT clash with the ones I've posted. The key, once again, is that the church is the conscience of the state.
Hence the reason, you have statements like this:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty."
you haven't answered the question.
you say the statement is not explicity contradicted by the Constitution and you're presenting that as proof that the statements are true
Yes or No
One more time, MY statement is that the Founding Fathers declared that America is a Christian nation. The Constitution DOES NOT CONTRADICT that statement.
Do the Founding Fathers declare America a Christian nation? YES!!!
Does the Constitution say anything to the contrary? NO!
Does the Constitution claim the Founding Fathers said anything to the contrary? NO!!
-
And those statements do NOT clash with the ones I've posted. The key, once again, is that the church is the conscience of the state.
Hence the reason, you have statements like this:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty."
One more time, MY statement is that the Founding Fathers declared that America is a Christian nation. The Constitution DOES NOT CONTRADICT that statement.
Do the Founding Fathers declare America a Christian nation? YES!!!
Does the Constitution say anything to the contrary? NO!
Does the Constitution claim the Founding Fathers said anything to the contrary? NO!!
one more time
do you think the lack an an explicit statement to the contrary in the constitution mean that the statement is true
yes or no?
-
one more time
do you think the lack an an explicit statement to the contrary in the constitution mean that the statement is true
yes or no?
I've answered that, at least twice.
The answer is YES. The statement is true, because that's what the Founding Fathers (THE MEN WHO WROTE THAT CONSTITUTION) said about this nation.
Why is that such a problem for you to grasp?
-
I've answered that, at least twice.
The answer is YES. The statement is true, because that's what the Founding Fathers (THE MEN WHO WROTE THAT CONSTITUTION) said about this nation.
Why is that such a problem for you to grasp?
you're not answering the question that I asked.
let's try something easier.
Did you make the following statement - YES or NO (this should be an easy one for you)?
The Constitution doesn't state that the Founding Fathers declared this a Christian nation.
-
you're not answering the question that I asked.
let's try something easier.
Did you make the following statement - YES or NO (this should be an easy one for you)?
You may be suffering from the same myopic ailments as Lurker.
YES, I made the statement; I explained what I mean by that statement.
I will re-state my position, yet again, since you can't quite get it.
The Founding Fathers (the men who wrote and signed the Constitution) declared that America is a Christian nation.
The Constitution that they wrote and signed does NOT explicitly or implicitly contradict those declarations.
-
You may be suffering from the same myopic ailments as Lurker.
YES, I made the statement; I explained what I mean by that statement.
I will re-state my position, yet again, since you can't quite get it.
The Founding Fathers (the men who wrote and signed the Constitution) declared that America is a Christian nation.
The Constitution that they wrote and signed does NOT explicitly or implicitly contradict those declarations.
and because you see no explicit or implicit contradiction of the statement "America is a Christian Nation" you think that makes it true
YES or NO
-
and because you see no explicit or implicit contradiction of the statement "America is a Christian Nation" you think that makes it true
YES or NO
For the nth time, the answer is YES. There is no contradiction in the Constitution, AND the men who wrote and signed it, stated that America is a Christian nation.
Among them,
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
-
For the nth time, the answer is YES. There is no contradiction in the Constitution, AND the men who wrote and signed it, stated that America is a Christian nation.
ok, bear with me here for a moment
I just want to confirm that you're saying lack of a statement in the Constitution to the contrary proves that the statement "America is a Christian nation" is true
-
ok, bear with me here for a moment
I just want to confirm that you're saying lack of a statement in the Constitution to the contrary proves that the statement "America is a Christian nation" is true
By itself, a lack of statement to the contrary does not. But, combined with the expressed statements of its drafters and signees, it does.
-
By itself, a lack of statement to the contrary does not. But, combined with the expressed statements of its drafters and signees, it does.
wait - you're telling me the statements you're trying to prove to be true are the very things that prove themself to be true?
you've mentioned many times that the Constitution does not (in your words) explicity or implicitly contradict the statement "We are a Christian Nation" and now you're telling me that lack of contrary statement in the Constitution proves those statements to be true but only when combined with the very statements you're trying to prove true?
How does that work?
I'm going to give you a hint where I'm going - the lack of a statement in the Constitution that we're not a Christian Nation is not in any way proof that the statement "We're a Christian Nation" is true.
-
wait - you're telling me the statements you're trying to prove to be true are the very things that prove themself to be true?
you've mentioned many times that the Constitution does not (in your words) explicity or implicitly contradict the statement "We are a Christian Nation" and now you're telling me that lack of contrary statement in the Constitution proves those statements to be true but only when combined with the very statements you're trying to prove true?
How does that work?
Try that again!!!
The Constitution doesn't contradict what the Founding Fathers said. The Constitution and the Founding Fathers' statements support America being a Christian nation.
I'm going to give you a hint where I'm going - the lack of a statement in the Constitution that we're not a Christian Nation is not in any way proof that the statement "We're a Christian Nation" is true.
What part of "The Founding Fathers declared that America is a Christian nation" aren't you understanding?
I know exactly where you're going. And I've addressed that already. You're of the impression that the only way America can be called a Christian nation is if the Constitution states that outright.
-
Try that again!!! The Constitution doesn't contradict what the Founding Fathers said. The Constitution and the Founding Fathers' statements support America being a Christian nation.
What part of "The Founding Fathers declared that America is a Christian nation" aren't you understanding?
I know exactly where you're going. And I've addressed that already. You're of the impression that the only way America can be called a Christian nation is if the Constitution states that outright.
as usual - you completely confused.
1. The "Founding Fathers" did not declare that America is a Christian Nation (I thought we had already cleared that up).
A few guys made statements like that but they don't speak for the group as a whole
2. Lack of a statement does not prove the opposite to be true (this goes for anything).
-
as usual - you completely confused.
1. The "Founding Fathers" did not declare that America is a Christian Nation (I thought we had already cleared that up).
A few guys made statements like that but they don't speak for the group as a whole
2. Lack of a statement does not prove the opposite to be true (this goes for anything).
It's far more than "a few guys", as you repeatedly assume that the examples I used were exhaustive.
-
It's far more than "a few guys", as you repeatedly assume that the examples I used were exhaustive.
yep and I gave you quotes from James Madison and I can provide many more too that talk about the horrors of religion combined with government. I assume since they are also founders that you must agree with them too (afterall by your illogical standards - their statements are also not explicitly refuted in the Constitution although there is more implicit support than there are for the statements that you prefer)
What matters is the Constitution and anyone who reads it can see we are a secular goverment that allows freedom of religion
that's it
end of story
everything else is just your imagination or misunderstanding
-
For the love of God, no pun intended, what is it going to take to end this thread?
-
For the love of God, no pun intended, what is it going to take to end this thread?
Simple - McWay can admit we have a secular government or provide some valid proof to the contrary
Arguments from Ignorance (Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen hypothesis is therefore considered proven) or statements from individuals of their own personal beliefs don't work so all he's got to do is find something that does work or even better just join the rest of us back in reality
-
yep and I gave you quotes from James Madison and I can provide many more too that talk about the horrors of religion combined with government. I assume since they are also founders that you must agree with them too (afterall by your illogical standards - their statements are also not explicitly refuted in the Constitution although there is more implicit support than there are for the statements that you prefer)
Those quotes from Madison do nothing to refute my point, especially when you consider the statement from Madison that I posted.
What matters is the Constitution and anyone who reads it can see we are a secular goverment that allows freedom of religion
that's it
end of story
everything else is just your imagination or misunderstanding
Wrong again, Straw Man.
You don't grasp the Constitution, without looking at the men who wrote and signed it, as well as viewing their insights.
Otherwise, you get silliness like your assertions and those of Lurker.
If the men who wrote and signed the Constitution state that America is a Christian nation, it's quite difficult to listen to claims to the contrary by folks like you without laughing.
-
Simple - McWay can admit we have a secular government or provide some valid proof to the contrary
MCWAY doesn't have to do the former, because he's already done the latter, courtesy of what the men who wrote and signed the Constitution ACTUALLY SAID about our country.
Arguments from Ignorance (Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen hypothesis is therefore considered proven) or statements from individuals of their own personal beliefs don't work so all he's got to do is find something that does work or even better just join the rest of us back in reality
The ignorance appears to be coming from YOU. The statements made aren't merely (as you so inaccurately cliam) "personal beliefs". It's what they said about this nation, point blank.
The fact that you keep denying that, even with their own words staring you in the face, makes YOU the one, out of touch with reality.
Words, such as,
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe. And to the same Divine Author of every good and perfect gift we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages, religious as well as civil, which are so richly enjoyed in this favored land." – James Madison
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: 'It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity"
"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
For my own part, I sincerely esteem it a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests. – Alexandar Hamilton
-
McWay - just because you declare something does not make it so.
We're back to the point I was trying to get at about ten pages ago.
If you don't understand the difference between fact and opinion that there's no point in having a dialogue
I've said it before. I'm not here to argue with you. This is not called an argument board.
If you have a point then prove it or admit it's just an opinion
So far all you have is an opinion.
It's your opinion that we're a Christian Nation (whatever the fuck that even means)
It's a fact that we are a secular government (see prior pages for proof as listed by myelf and others)
-
McWay - just because you declare something does not make it so.
That's true. Thankfully, the men who wrote and signed the Constitution stated that America is a Christian nation.
We're back to the point I was trying to get at about ten pages ago.
No, YOU'RE back to that point....Lord knows why!!!
If you don't understand the difference between fact and opinion that there's no point in having a dialogu
I've said it before. I'm not here to argue with you. This is not called an argument board.
If you have a point then prove it or admit it's just an opinion
So far all you have is an opinion.
It's your opinion that we're a Christian Nation (whatever the fuck that even means)
It's a fact that we are a secular government (see prior pages for proof as listed by myelf and others)
It is FACT that our Founders declared that America was a Christian nation. That's what they said and they are the ones who WROTE AND SIGNED THE CONSTITUTION, not YOU, not me.
It is your opinion that the Constitution must state that America is a Christian nation and that, if it did such, that would be tanamount to a theocracy, ala Saudi Arabia or some other Muslim country.
Said another way, you seem to think that, if America ain't a theocracy (which it's not), it can't be a Christian nation.
-
all you've got to do is show me something in the Constitution to prove you point
simple request
still waiting
other than that it's just you're just expressing freedom of speech as protected in that same document
btw - what is your definition of a Christian Nation?
-
all you've got to do is show me something in the Constitution to prove you point
simple request
still waiting
other than that it's just you're just expressing freedom of speech as protected in that same document
btw - what is your definition of a Christian Nation?
Just my .02 - Straw - what is your take on the Declaration of Independence wherein it was states that "We are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights"?
-
Just my .02 - Straw - what is your take on the Declaration of Independence wherein it was states that "We are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights"?
what about it
no one ever said that the people who founded this country weren't religious or didn't have spiritual beliefs.
As you well know, or can read on Wiki, the founders had a variety of religous beliefs, including some who had no belief
Nothing prevents religious people from founding a secular government
The two are not mutually exclusive
-
Hey McWay - I know you think quotes from the founders are significant.
Here's one from Jefferson that's pretty easy to understand:
Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
-
what about it
no one ever said that the people who founded this country weren't religious or didn't have spiritual beliefs.
As you well know, or can read on Wiki, the founders had a variety of religous beliefs, including some who had no belief
Nothing prevents religious people from founding a secular government
The two are not mutually exclusive
Ok. It was just a question.
But, our inalienable rights, those being codified in the Constitution and the BOR, are granted by who since we know the constituion is one of negative rights, that meaning what the govt CANT do, not what it has to do?
I'm not agreeing that we are a "chrisitian" nation in the sense that it specifically says so in the constitution, however, under what authority do we say we have certain "inalienable rights", those being life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
Maybe my question is not precise, but what I am getting at is what or who grants us "inalienable rights" as defined in the BOR?
-
like i said before you can't argue with these far right religious nut jobs, their all brainwashed ;D so i woundn't wast your time
-
like i said before you can't argue with these far right religious nut jobs, their all brainwashed ;D so i woundn't wast your time
Blacken - how old are you?
-
The Constitution doesn't state that the Founding Fathers declared this a Christian nation.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Welcome to the facts from Page 2 of this thread!!!!
The Constitution is the establishing document of this nation. If it doesn't declare this is a Christian Nation, it isn't. Plain and simple.
Otherwise might as well claim this is a Caucasian nation since all the Founding Fathers were white. After all, even though they didn't say it, it is obvious. ::) And since the Constitution doesn't say otherwise, it must be true. ::) ::)
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Welcome to the facts from Page 2 of this thread!!!!
The Constitution is the establishing document of this nation. If it doesn't declare this is a Christian Nation, it isn't. Plain and simple.
Otherwise might as well claim this is a Caucasian nation since all the Founding Fathers were white. After all, even though they didn't say it, it is obvious. ::) And since the Constitution doesn't say otherwise, it must be true. ::) ::)
And the men who wrote that Constitution declared that this is a Christian nation, PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
It amazes me that your silliness increases with each increasing page. And you continue to run like the clucker that you are.
We have what the Founders said, in black and white. And, as usual, when you asked the basic questions about such, you continue to cower.
-
And the men who wrote that Constitution declared that this is a Christian nation, PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
Not in the Constitution they didn't. The Constitution establishes this nation and if it isn't in there, then it isn't part of the establishing and governmental process.
Quote from: MCWAY on January 30, 2010, 12:41:31 PM
The Constitution doesn't state that the Founding Fathers declared this a Christian nation.
Self contradiction. Once again. ::)
You've been shit on and made to look like the fool you are for the last 16+ pages and yet you still cling to your delusions. Is this a Christian trait or just one of stupidity?
-
like i said before you can't argue with these far right religious nut jobs, their all brainwashed ;D so i woundn't wast your time
Their religion requires belief in the absence of evidence and some really ridiculous ideas (for example - the earth is 6000 years old) requires belief contrary to evidence.
McWays beliefs on this matter fall into the 2nd category. If he had any intellectual honesty this would have ended with a quick review of the Constitution.
-
Not in the Constitution they didn't. The Constitution establishes this nation and if it isn't in there, then it isn't part of the establishing and governmental process.
That's patently false, as indicated by the very men who wrote the Constitution. They stated on what they based that document. The fact that you can't grasp that speak of how pathetically myopic you are.
Self contradiction. Once again. ::)
You've been shit on and made to look like the fool you are for the last 16+ pages and yet you still cling to your delusions. Is this a Christian trait or just one of stupidity?
In your dreams, Lurker. Time and time again, I've pointed out what the Founding Fathers have stated and asked you to defend some of your warped claims. Time and time again, you've run like a punk.
A prime example is your repeated ducking that whole Treaty of Tripoli thing, namely why the very portion that you touted as proof of America not being a Christian nation got DROPPED in 1805.
-
Their religion requires belief in the absence of evidence and some really ridiculous ideas (for example - the earth is 6000 years old) requires belief contrary to evidence.
McWays beliefs on this matter fall into the 2nd category. If he had any intellectual honesty this would have ended with a quick review of the Constitution.
Absence of evidence? You must be smoking a different type of "Straw".
The evidence that this is a Christian nation comes from the VERY MEN WHO WROTE AND SIGNED THE CONSTITUTION, evidence that I've posted repeatedly, right here in black-and-white.
That is what they said of this nation and its Constitution. The fact that both you and Lurker continue to make buffoons of yourself, by not observing what they said about the document THAT THEY WROTE AND SIGNED shows that the intellectual dishonesty (and boneheadedness, for that matter) falls on you.
So, in typical "Straw Man" fashion, you (and Lurker) prop up a bogus requirement, claiming that the Constitution must state America is a Christian nation.
Obviously, the Founding Fathers didn't get that crackpot memo, or they wouldn't have made statements like.....
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe. And to the same Divine Author of every good and perfect gift we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages, religious as well as civil, which are so richly enjoyed in this favored land.– James Madison (No, Lurker, he ain't talking about Allah or Krishna!! ::) )
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: 'It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity"
"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." - John Adams
For my own part, I sincerely esteem it a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests. – Alexandar Hamilton (the "it", of course, IS THE CONSTITUTION, as Hamilton made this statement after the Constitutional Convention).
-
Absence of evidence? You must be smoking a different type of "Straw".
The evidence that this is a Christian nation comes from the VERY MEN WHO WROTE AND SIGNED THE CONSTITUTION, evidence that I've posted repeatedly, right here in black-and-white.
That is what they said of this nation and its Constittution. The fact that both you and Lurker continue to make buffoons of yourself, by not observing what they said about the document THAT THEY WROTE AND SIGNED shows that the intellectual dishonesty (and boneheadedness, for that matter) falls on you.
yeah and other men who wrote it, and in fact the key figures (not an obsure figure like Chase) have said the exact opposite. Anyone who is being intellectually honest would admit that the only thing that is relevent is the Constitutaion and that document not only doesn't mention Jesus, and it fact, it specifcally eliminates religion from the structure of our government.
Your brain is infected wth fundamental religions belief so I don't expect you to understand this in another 18 pages or 1800 pages.
-
yeah and other men who wrote it, and in fact the key figures (not an obsure figure like Chase) have said the exact opposite. Anyone who is being intellectually honest would admit that the only thing that is relevent is the Constitutaion and that document not only doesn't mention Jesus, and it fact, it specifcally eliminates religion from the structure of our government.
Your brain is infected wth fundamental religions belief so I don't expect you to understand this in another 18 pages or 1800 pages.
One, Chase was hardly an obscure figure (and he was among the MAJORITY of the Supreme Court who made the ruling I posted).
Two, I mentioned some of the key figures and they are AMONG the ones, who made such a declaratin.
Once again, you're going the "Straw Man" routine. My "fundamental religious beliefs" aren't the subject here. It's about what the Founders said about this country. And, contrary to your claims, they weren't obscure figures.
We know what they said about religion. In fact, I posted an example of that, which went something like:
By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty
-
Anyone who is being intellectually honest would admit that the only thing that is relevent is the Constitutaion and that document not only doesn't mention Jesus, and it fact, it specifcally eliminates religion from the structure of our government.
Your brain is infected wth fundamental religions belief so I don't expect you to understand this in another 18 pages or 1800 pages.
Exactly. It is right there. Spelled out plain as day in the Constitution and yet she still has to run around with this tired he said/she said bullshit trying to pass opinions off as fact. Amazing. Logic and fact can't penetrate that little delusion bubble she is living in.
It's one thing to sit around basing your life and thoughts on some invisible man sitting on a cloud, but when you start to attempt to encapsulate every single aspect of the lives of others and an entire nation under rabid beliefs rooted in insecurities, well you just become nothing more than a delusional religious nut. The exact kind of nut the founding fathers had in mind when they pointly excluded religious bearing on the establishment of our nation through the Constitution. Which is EXACTLY why they established this country as a secular nation.
-
This country was not established by what the Founding Father's said. It was established through what the Founding Fathers created. Which is the Constitution. And the Constitution.... well, we all know what it does and does NOT contain.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Chase is the only Supreme Court justice to ever be impeached and he was impeached for letting his partisan opinions influence his decisions.
The fact that Chase issued a statement of opinion is meaningless as proof of anything.
Haven't we been over this before. You're still confused by the difference between opinion and fact ?
Just to entertain your delusion for a moment, Chase wrote "By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion"
What does this statement actually mean? What exactly in "our form of government" can you point to to support this statement? Since the Constitution establishes our form of government can you show me something in there that supports this statement? If not, where else should we look for proof that this statement is true and not merely a misguided opinion?
-
Chase is the only Supreme Court justice to ever be impeached and he was impeached for letting his partisan opinions influence his decisions.
The fact that Chase issued a statement of opinion is meaningless as proof of anything.
Haven't we been over this before. You're still confused by the difference between opinion and fact ?
Just to entertain your delusion for a moment, Chase wrote "By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion"
What does this statement actually mean? What exactly in "our form of government" can you point to to support this statement? Since the Constitution establishes our form of government can you show me something in there that supports this statement? If not, where else should we look for proof that this statement is true and not merely a misguided opinion?
Like I said a few pages ago.
This thread =
-
Like I said a few pages ago.
This thread =
Since facts and logic do not change, it requires little effort on our part.
-
Chase is the only Supreme Court justice to ever be impeached and he was impeached for letting his partisan opinions influence his decisions.
AND.....the other justices that concurred with him (unanimously, was it not?) weren't impeached. What's your point?
The fact that Chase issued a statement of opinion is meaningless as proof of anything.
Haven't we been over this before. You're still confused by the difference between opinion and fact ?
YOU'RE still confused that an "opinion" by the Supreme Court is hardly the same an opinion by Joe Blow on the street. If at least 5 justices give their opinion on a certain issue, that opinion, for all practical purposes, is LAW (see the most recent Supreme Court decision on campaing finance).
Just to entertain your delusion for a moment, Chase wrote "By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion"
What does this statement actually mean? What exactly in "our form of government" can you point to to support this statement? Since the Constitution establishes our form of government can you show me something in there that supports this statement? If not, where else should we look for proof that this statement is true and not merely a misguided opinion?
What that statement meant is that those who governed our country, who wrote and penned the Constitution did so, from a Judeo-Christian framework, as indicated by their very statements.
Since facts and logic do not change, it requires little effort on our part.
Yep!! Being dead wrong and painfully silly comes so naturally for you guys!!!
-
This country was not established by what the Founding Father's said. It was established through what the Founding Fathers created. Which is the Constitution. And the Constitution.... well, we all know what it does and does NOT contain.
Since, the only edict that the Constitution must contain a reference to Christ for America to be a Christian nation exists only in the weak strawmen that both you and Straw Man have erected, your continued cowardly clucking does little more than provide slapstick comedy.
If those who wrote the Constitution declared this nation to be a Christian one, then that's what it is, point blank.
The only issue in the Constitution was ensuring one Christian denomination didn't get favored over another. Perhaps, a few more "Hooked on Phonics" sessions on your part will drill that part home.
-
Since, the only edict that the Constitution must contain a reference to Christ for America to be a Christian nation exists only in the weak strawmen that both you and Straw Man have erected, your continued cowardly clucking do little more than provide slapstick comedy.
If those who wrote the Constitution declared this nation to be a Christian one, then that's what it is, point blank.
The only issue in the Constitution was ensuring one Christian denomination didn't get favored over another. Perhaps, a few more "Hooked on Phonics" sessions on your part will drill that part home.
hey - I simply asked you to show me where in "our form of government" can you point to to support this statement made by Chase.
I mean if it's a fact and not just his nutty opinion then you should be able where to show me "IN OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT" that his statement is supported by fact.
Lets see it
-
hey - I simply asked you to show me where in "our form of government" can you point to to support this statement made by Chase.
I mean if it's a fact and not just his nutty opinion then you should be able where to show me "IN OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT" that his statement is supported by fact.
Lets see it
One, I already have: Our legal system, for starters. That would explain why John Quincy Adams cited the Ten Commandments as the source of our civil laws.
Two, Chase gave the UNANIMOUS RULING of the Supreme Court on this issue. So, your pitiful attempts to dismiss that ruling, harping on his impeachment (he was acquitted, anyway, and returned to the Supreme Court until his death) continue to fall flat.
Then, there's that James Madison guy, you mentioned earlier:
We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to The Ten Commandments of God."
-
The nation was established by the Constitution. If the Constitution doesn't declare it a Christian Nation, then it isn't.
Plain and simple. If you are too stupid to understand that, then I don't know what to tell you. Considering your constant contradictions and delusions that have ran on for over a week and over 18 pages, I honestly don't think you have the brain cells to ever understand something so simple.
Thank God our Founding Fathers saw the potential of having a great nation ruined by religion and thus established it as a secular nation.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
The nation was established by the Constitution. If the Constitution doesn't declare it a Christian Nation, then it isn't.
Plain and simple. If you are too stupid to understand that, then I don't know what to tell you. Considering your constant contradictions and delusions that have ran on for over a week and over 18 pages, I honestly don't think you have the brain cells to ever understand something so simple.
Thank God our Founding Fathers saw the potential of having a great nation ruined by religion and thus established it as a secular nation.
You mean Founding Fathers like:
We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to The Ten Commandments of God." - James Madison
or
"By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty " - Samuel Chase, giving the UNANIMOUS verdict from the Supreme Court, 1799 "Runkel v. Winemiller"
Or
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
or
I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
or
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
or
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: 'It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity" - John Adams
or
"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it (the Constitution) a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests. - Alexandar Hamilton
Stop me anytime you like.....
That's what the FOUNDING FATHERS SAID ABOUT THIS COUNTRY. They wrote it, signed it, judged by it, and governed by it. Excuse me if I have a hard time, taking your crack-headed view over theirs.
Apparently, your short-circuited skull can't process such simple information. Deal with it, for once. And maybe, just MAYBE, you'll grow a set and address that Treaty of Tripoli issue, that was put to you over a week ago.
-
I mean the Constitution that...
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
If it isn't IN the Constitution, it wasn't established BY the Constitution.
Reality must be a harsh place for you to have to live in.
-
McWay - why didn't you include this quote in your list:
Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
-
I mean the Constitution that...
If it isn't IN the Constitution, it wasn't established BY the Constitution.
I mean the men who wrote, signed, and governed by the Constitution who said....
We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to The Ten Commandments of God." - James Madison
"By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty " - Samuel Chase, giving the UNANIMOUS verdict from the Supreme Court, 1799 "Runkel v. Winemiller"
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” - John Jay
I had the honor of being one who framed that Constitution. In order effectually to accomplish these great ends set forth in the Constitution, it is especially the duty of those who bear rule to promote and encourage respect for God and virtue and to discourage every degree of vice and immorality" - Henry Laurens
The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal code as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every Nation which ever professed any code of laws. Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of secular history to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as the Ten Commandments lay down." - John Quincy Adams
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: 'It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity" - John Adams
"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it (the Constitution) a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests. - Alexandar Hamilton
If that's what the Founding Fathers said about this country, then that's the nature of this country.
And, to answer YOUR question, Straw Man, there are more statements resembling those above, than resemble those of Jefferson.
Then again, that same guy said something to the tune of.....
Among the most inestimable of our blessings, also, is that... of liberty to worship our Creator in the way we think most agreeable to His will; a liberty deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support."
Reality must be a harsh place for you to have to live in.
Hardly!! I like it here, especially when it has the added benefit of making you look like a complete fool.
-
every body on msnbc with the exception of morning joe takes stupid to a new level every time they open their mouth
-
Retardation must be an asset when attempting to push one's delusions onto the rest of the nation as evident by MCWAY.
This country was not established by what the Founding Father's said. It was established through what the Founding Fathers created. Which is the Constitution. And the Constitution.... well, we all know what it does and does NOT contain.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Retardation must be an asset when attempting to push one's delusions onto the rest of the nation as evident by MCWAY.
This country was not established by what the Founding Father's said. It was established through what the Founding Fathers created. Which is the Constitution. And the Constitution.... well, we all know what it does and does NOT contain.
Smoking crack must be an asset to you, Lurker, to suggest that the Founding Fathers would state, point blank, that America is a Christian nation, only to write a Constitution that contradicts their words and intent.
But, making a fool out of yourself is hardly anything new to you, Lurker. Nor are cowardice and lacking a set of stones, when asked direct questions about your bone-brained claims.
The Founding Fathers clearly state that this country is a Christian nation, and that their drafting, sigining, and ruling by the Constitution is a testament to that. The fact that you can't deal with that reality and continue to duck and hide from it is your problem.
To this day, you haven't answered the questions I put to you. But, again, that's to be expected. Your lack of spine is evident. Your yellow streak glows from sea to shining sea.
-
Are you arguing with yourself?
Quote from: MCWAY on January 30, 2010, 12:41:31 PM
The Constitution doesn't state that the Founding Fathers declared this a Christian nation.
Retarded people seem to do that.
So once again for the benefit of the slow ones on board...
--God was purposely left out of the Constitution
--Jesus - the icon of Christianity - was left out of the Constitution
--America has no established church
-- Every religion and sect known to Man is at home here;
-- Religious and scriptural arguments are invalid in our courts;
-- Religious tests for public office are barred by the Constitution.
--Church and state is separated
America is not a Christian nation.
Pretending it is simply because of your own insecurities and lack of independent thought process is not going to make it so.
Baby Jeebus is weeping over your stupidity right now.
-
Are you arguing with yourself?
Retarded people seem to do that.
Nope!! I'm merely citing what the Founding Fathers said about this country, along with your sniveling cowardice, regarding what was asked of you, which you're too scared to address.
-
Are you arguing with yourself?
Quote from: MCWAY on January 30, 2010, 12:41:31 PM
The Constitution doesn't state that the Founding Fathers declared this a Christian nation.
Retarded people seem to do that.
Or are you just lying with the above statement?