Professor Teaches Religious People Are Retarded

Bullypulpit said:
Dear lady, if the Founding Father's were such ardent Christians, why did they make no mention of a Chrisitan God in the Constitution? Why did they not establish a Christian state?

The did not do so because they had first hand experience with the horrors spawned by a government based upon religious principles. That expereince was with the Massachusett's Bay Colony, which was under Puritan rule. And while the Puritans orginally fled England in pursuit of religious freedom abroad...they did not tolerate religious freedom within their colony. The penalty for following any other religion or 'blasphemy' was death. Children of 16 years of age could be put to death for cursing or striking their parents. Similarly sons who would not heed the remonstrances of their parents could be put to death.

In essence, Puritan rule was no different from that of a theocracy. For a modern version of that we need look no further than Afghanistan under Taliban rule.

Bully there is a huge difference between moral/ religious inclusion in our government body and religious tyranny that was going on in Europe and with the Puritans here. True the founding fathers did not advocate specifically for one religion over another which was wise of them to do, they however also did not exclude religion from their decision making, nor did they intend to completely shut out religion and morals from the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. They believed that freedom itself was not something any person or country could give to another, but came specifically and naturally from our heavenly creator. Their ideas of religion and freedom were based on inclusion of all faiths not the exclusion of all faiths in favor of secularism.
 
Bullypulpit said:
Dear lady, if the Founding Father's were such ardent Christians, why did they make no mention of a Chrisitan God in the Constitution? Why did they not establish a Christian state?

Because the goal of American Christianity is not the establishment of a theonomy.
 
gop_jeff said:
Because the goal of American Christianity is not the establishment of a theonomy.

Christian Reconstructionists are little different for the radical Islamic Mullahs who have helped spark anti-western sentiment throughout the Muslim world. The only difference being that they are claim to be Christian.

One of the founding fathers of this movement was the <a href=http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/053105A.shtml>Rev. Rousas J. Rushdoony</a>... A man who makes James Dobson seem a limp-wristed milquetoast by comaprison.
 
Bullypulpit said:
Christian Reconstructionists are little different for the radical Islamic Mullahs who have helped spark anti-western sentiment throughout the Muslim world. The only difference being that they are claim to be Christian.

One of the founding fathers of this movement was the <a href=http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/053105A.shtml>Rev. Rousas J. Rushdoony</a>... A man who makes James Dobson seem a limp-wristed milquetoast by comaprison.


If Rushdoony preached that Christ would only return after virtuous Christians had established His rule on earth - or that God's law must be acheived through coercion - he was operating in apostasy, and so were his followers. To intimate that the Christian Right are somehow "osmosing" this false teaching is a pathetic scare tactic, and could only be the work of.....hmmm, let's see - oh, yeah. From the link:

"A veteran of the Berkely Free Speech movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts..." .

Nice try, Bully. Back to the drawing board.
 
musicman said:
If Rushdoony preached that Christ would only return after virtuous Christians had established His rule on earth - or that God's law must be acheived through coercion - he was operating in apostasy, and so were his followers. To intimate that the Christian Right are somehow "osmosing" this false teaching is a pathetic scare tactic, and could only be the work of.....hmmm, let's see - oh, yeah. From the link:

"A veteran of the Berkely Free Speech movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts..." .

Nice try, Bully. Back to the drawing board.

Ever really listened to James Dobson..? Or Randall Terry...? Or Pat Robertson...? They, and others, are Rushdoony's intellectual heirs. They seem moderate in comparison to Rushdoony as they have watered down Rushdoony's rhetoric. That being the case, there are many in the reiligious right in this country who are "operating in apostasy".
 
Yeah, but this is coming from you, Bully - a man who loathes Christianity so deeply that you believe its practitioners should hide their belief as if it were a piece of child pornography. If memory serves, you have stated that you were raised Christian, am I right? All I can say is that - having been exposed to its teachings, you have failed as completely to understand them as - having read the U.S. Constitution - you've managed to miss the essence of the devolution of power. Your hatred blinds you.
 
musicman said:
Yeah, but this is coming from you, Bully - a man who loathes Christianity so deeply that you believe its practitioners should hide their belief as if it were a piece of child pornography. If memory serves, you have stated that you were raised Christian, am I right? All I can say is that - having been exposed to its teachings, you have failed as completely to understand them as - having read the U.S. Constitution - you've managed to miss the essence of the devolution of power. Your hatred blinds you.

Sorry, I really hate to disappoint you, but I don't hate Christianity or any other religion for that matter. The many and diverse religions of the world serve the many and diverse needs of their followers. But when those who seek to use religion to serve their own ends...The pharisees...the hypocrites...the prophets seeking only their own self-aggrandisement...the politicians seeking to sow fear amongst the followers of a given religion for political gain...These I despise.
 
Bullypulpit said:
Sorry, I really hate to disappoint you, but I don't hate Christianity or any other religion for that matter. The many and diverse religions of the world serve the many and diverse needs of their followers. But when those who seek to use religion to serve their own ends...The pharisees...the hypocrites...the prophets seeking only their own self-aggrandisement...the politicians seeking to sow fear amongst the followers of a given religion for political gain...These I despise.
Am i correct in assuming that you would object to anyone using anything for thier own personal gain ?
 
dilloduck said:
Am i correct in assuming that you would object to anyone using anything for thier own personal gain ?

Well, most spiritual or religious people, including myself, would object to "selling God," and trying to exploit God for your own benefit is distasteful.
 
Bullypulpit said:
Sorry, I really hate to disappoint you, but I don't hate Christianity

I believe that YOU believe that. But, have you ever noticed that you ascribe to Christians - and Christians only - the worst possible motives for anything we do?

Bullypulpit said:
But when those who seek to use religion to serve their own ends...

Self-interest is the most trustworthy of all human motivations. Our founding fathers understood that; that's why they didn't harbor any preposterous utopian pipe-dreams about the perfectibility of human nature. That's why they loathed elitist tyranny in all its forms. That's why they left matters of religion - and education on the topic of religion - in the capable hands of the community. That is the exquisite wisdom being attacked and undermined by secular humanists and their intolerant, statist religion.

Bullypulpit said:
...the politicians seeking to sow fear amongst the followers of a given religion for political gain...

Right - it's all just politics. Sleazy puppeteers are grabbing power by playing on the superstitions of weak-minded Christians. Poor little retards - what could we possibly have to fear from the relentless onslaught of vulgar barbarianism, the elimination of any and all restraints on human behavior, and the increasingly overt and vicious attacks on any aspect of our beliefs that fails to coincide with the ACCEPTABLE state religion - secular humanism? Whew - thanks for clearing that up, Bully!
 
musicman said:
Self-interest is the most trustworthy of all human motivations. Our founding fathers understood that; that's why they didn't harbor any preposterous utopian pipe-dreams about the perfectibility of human nature. That's why they loathed elitist tyranny in all its forms. That's why they left matters of religion - and education on the topic of religion - in the capable hands of the community. That is the exquisite wisdom being attacked and undermined by secular humanists and their intolerant, statist religion.

You know, now your arguments are really starting to sound like Nietzsche. I just thought that was ironic :D.
 
Bullypulpit said:
Sorry, I really hate to disappoint you, but I don't hate Christianity or any other religion for that matter. The many and diverse religions of the world serve the many and diverse needs of their followers. But when those who seek to use religion to serve their own ends...The pharisees...the hypocrites...the prophets seeking only their own self-aggrandisement...the politicians seeking to sow fear amongst the followers of a given religion for political gain...These I despise.

I don't know that Dobson or Robertson would come under the same umbrella as the Pharisees. Sure there have been some truly corrupt so called Christians, we all know who they are, and they have been exposed as such. While I don't espouse everything Robertson does, he does do many good things with his ministry including supporting many charitable organizations.

I can't get a lid on whether you think those who have and practice Christian morality are just inately corrupt simply by their beliefs, or is it just any time a Christian speaks out publicly they cross that line with you??

I don't consider myself an extremeist at all simply because I thought he starvation of Terry Schiavo was barbaric and wrong, or because I stated so many times on this board, nor do I think anyone else who stated as much is. Randall Terry is most definately an activist who has lost his home and has been embroiled in ridiculous legal actions filed by among many the ACLU for leading praying in front of Abortion clinics under Ricco Laws orginally designed for mobsters and ressurected by Frauline Reno to go after pro-life protesters.
 
IControlThePast said:
You know, now your arguments are really starting to sound like Nietzsche. I just thought that was ironic :D.

Could be worse, I guess. You might have said my arguments sound like "shietzsche". So - thanks, I guess...
 
musicman said:
Could be worse, I guess. You might have said my arguments sound like "shietzsche". So - thanks, I guess...

Well I'll leave the interpretation of whether Nietzsche is good or bad up to you. Nietzsche is what this college professor who started the debate was espousing.
 
Bullypulpit said:
They can use their own labor and wits...But then what more does one need to make it.

Politicians will use lies, the media, tragedies, fear, illness, age, youth etc etc to serve thier own gain. Are these somehow worse than using religion? Not in my book!
 

Forum List

Back
Top