Why Do Liberals Deny America's Christian Founding and Heritage?

[2aguy]

Christianity is not by itself a plan for democratic government.

Who the fuck said that it was.....? We were founded on Christian principals but have a secular government, influenced by those principals with religious freedom that used to be protected and cherished....

What Christian principles were we founded on that aren't also Jewish principles that came first?

Islam has set of commandments that mirror almost exactly the Ten Commandments of the Bible.

The problem....they only apply to muslims...that is the one thing the "experts" fail to point out when they bring that up......Sharia only applies to muslims...all others are either Dhimmi.....under muslim control.....or Infidel.....who are to be killed when found............and muslims are commanded by Islam to spread Sharia by any means necessary and are exempted from anything they need to be exempted from to make this happen......they are not supposed to lie to other muslims...but can if it furthers the cause of spreading sharia.....

People need to learn about islam......or you won't understand what we are facing....

I wasn't aware that all Muslims in America are killing people. Shouldn't that have been on the news?

They are not "good" muslims.....the actual "good" muslims are the ones spreading Sharia by any means necessary.....

 

[JakeStarkey]

Life terms are appropriate to insulate justices from pressure from folks like Lahota and 2aguy or Muslims or Christians or whatever.

 

[2aguy]

2aguy, none of your posts forward the OP.

We are a nation of Christians, generally, less so than 50 years ago.

We have never been, since 1787, a Christian nation.

And, no, the 10 Commandments do not protect minority rights. The Bill of Rights does.

I responded to a point that said the Commandments didn't protect minorities....that was an untrue statement...the Bill of Rights also protects minority rights.......they both do......and the 10 are bigger than the Bill of Rights...

 

[2aguy]

Life terms are appropriate to insulate justices from pressure from folks like Lahota and 2aguy or Muslims or Christians or whatever.

Sorry.....they can do their thing for 10 to 20 years then out.......have you read some of the stories about these Justices...some of them have been senile on the court.....

 

[2aguy]

Whatever the founders thought matters not today. Whatever SCOTUS thinks matters today.

Like when the Supreme Court said fugitive slaves had to be returned to their owner, or that separate was equal, or that it was okay to put Americans of Japanese descent into internment camps and confiscate their property.........you mean that Supreme Court, the Supreme Court that said that if a town thinks it can make more tax money from your property by taking it from you and selling it to someone who will make them more tax money...that is okay.....that Supreme Court...

As Mark Levin pointed out in his book, "Men In Black," they are human beings, and often times they are deeply, deeply flawed human beings.......

When you come up with a better idea than a Supreme Court, you might have a point.

Mark Levin thinks they should have term limits...so they can do less damage....get rid of them before they turn senile......I could go with that....and a 2/3 over ride in say, the House of Representatives...for any stupid, anti Constitutional ruling they make...I could go with that too.....why should 9 lawyers made far reaching decisions for 320 million people....often resting on one vote...

So you think the Founders made some mistakes.

Yeah.....they didn't put in a term limit for the house and Senate, and they didn't realize what a Charlie Foxtrot the Supreme Court would become......

 

[JakeStarkey]

Removing term limits won't happen.

The Bill of Rights is superior to the Ten Commandments in protecting the minorities.

A 2/3 override by the House and the Senate not requiring the President's signature is interesting. FDR would have loved that power in 1937 and 1938.

 

[2aguy]

2aguy, none of your posts forward the OP.

We are a nation of Christians, generally, less so than 50 years ago.

We have never been, since 1787, a Christian nation.

And, no, the 10 Commandments do not protect minority rights. The Bill of Rights does.

I'll let Mike determine what forwards his thread.......mind your own posts....

 

[NYcarbineer]

Islam has set of commandments that mirror almost exactly the Ten Commandments of the Bible.

key word...., "almost".., like 180* out of context.

would you care to post them or would those commandments shame you ?

oooh shit..., i used a word that liberfools do not recognize....., "SHAME"!!

Ten Commandments in the Quran All parts - The Religion of Islam

 

[2aguy]

Islam has set of commandments that mirror almost exactly the Ten Commandments of the Bible.

key word...., "almost".., like 180* out of context.

would you care to post them or would those commandments shame you ?

oooh shit..., i used a word that liberfools do not recognize....., "SHAME"!!

Ten Commandments in the Quran All parts - The Religion of Islam

You do realize...again that Islam only applies to muslims.......they don't have to treat non muslims according to Sharia...they can do whatever they want to infidels, and can run roughshod over dhimmi.......

You really need to understand that....

 

[NYcarbineer]

Whatever the founders thought matters not today. Whatever SCOTUS thinks matters today.

Like when the Supreme Court said fugitive slaves had to be returned to their owner, or that separate was equal, or that it was okay to put Americans of Japanese descent into internment camps and confiscate their property.........you mean that Supreme Court, the Supreme Court that said that if a town thinks it can make more tax money from your property by taking it from you and selling it to someone who will make them more tax money...that is okay.....that Supreme Court...

As Mark Levin pointed out in his book, "Men In Black," they are human beings, and often times they are deeply, deeply flawed human beings.......

This fails as a false comparison fallacy, you're making references to various rulings that are completely unrelated to each other.

You're also exhibiting your comprehensive ignorance of the Supreme Court, the role of the Court in the Federal system, the doctrine of judicial review, and Constitutional case law itself – this is an inane and ridiculous post.

Okay asshole...deny that this was at one time Constitutional law as declared by the Supreme Court....

A case Mark Levin pointed out.....

Plessy v. Ferguson - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of state laws requiring racial segregationin public facilities under the doctrine of "separate but equal".[1] The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1 with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan.

So?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Islam has set of commandments that mirror almost exactly the Ten Commandments of the Bible.

key word...., "almost".., like 180* out of context.

would you care to post them or would those commandments shame you ?

oooh shit..., i used a word that liberfools do not recognize....., "SHAME"!!

Ten Commandments in the Quran All parts - The Religion of Islam

You do realize...again that Islam only applies to muslims.......they don't have to treat non muslims according to Sharia...they can do whatever they want to infidels, and can run roughshod over dhimmi.......

You really need to understand that....

Really? And to whom do the Ten Commandments of the Bible apply?

 

[2aguy]

Whatever the founders thought matters not today. Whatever SCOTUS thinks matters today.

Like when the Supreme Court said fugitive slaves had to be returned to their owner, or that separate was equal, or that it was okay to put Americans of Japanese descent into internment camps and confiscate their property.........you mean that Supreme Court, the Supreme Court that said that if a town thinks it can make more tax money from your property by taking it from you and selling it to someone who will make them more tax money...that is okay.....that Supreme Court...

As Mark Levin pointed out in his book, "Men In Black," they are human beings, and often times they are deeply, deeply flawed human beings.......

This fails as a false comparison fallacy, you're making references to various rulings that are completely unrelated to each other.

You're also exhibiting your comprehensive ignorance of the Supreme Court, the role of the Court in the Federal system, the doctrine of judicial review, and Constitutional case law itself – this is an inane and ridiculous post.

Okay asshole...deny that this was at one time Constitutional law as declared by the Supreme Court....

A case Mark Levin pointed out.....

Plessy v. Ferguson - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of state laws requiring racial segregationin public facilities under the doctrine of "separate but equal".[1] The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1 with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan.

So?

Islam only applies to muslims...they can do whatever they want to non muslims......that is why you see such brutality happening with these muslims........the 10 commandments are the way Jews and Christians are to treat everyone, not just Jews and Christians....see the difference, the non muslims are not protected in any way under islam...

 

[guno]

Islam has set of commandments that mirror almost exactly the Ten Commandments of the Bible.

key word...., "almost".., like 180* out of context.

would you care to post them or would those commandments shame you ?

oooh shit..., i used a word that liberfools do not recognize....., "SHAME"!!

Ten Commandments in the Quran All parts - The Religion of Islam

You do realize...again that Islam only applies to muslims.......they don't have to treat non muslims according to Sharia...they can do whatever they want to infidels, and can run roughshod over dhimmi.......

You really need to understand that....

Really? And to whom do the Ten Commandments of the Bible apply?

Thank you for bringing that up

God never brought non Jews ancestors out of Egypt, Ex 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery."
The Lord has not given non Jews the promised land of Canaan! Ex 20:12 "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the Lord your God gives you"
Since the Sabbath is a sign between God and fleshly Israel, there is nothing requiring non-Jews to keep it! (Ex. 31:13,17; Ezek. 20:12, 20)
If it was intended for all mankind, then why specifically say "strangers within your gates". Obviously the Gentiles (strangers) were never required at any point in history to keep the Sabbath or ten commandments

 

[guno]

Whatever the founders thought matters not today. Whatever SCOTUS thinks matters today.

Like when the Supreme Court said fugitive slaves had to be returned to their owner, or that separate was equal, or that it was okay to put Americans of Japanese descent into internment camps and confiscate their property.........you mean that Supreme Court, the Supreme Court that said that if a town thinks it can make more tax money from your property by taking it from you and selling it to someone who will make them more tax money...that is okay.....that Supreme Court...

As Mark Levin pointed out in his book, "Men In Black," they are human beings, and often times they are deeply, deeply flawed human beings.......

This fails as a false comparison fallacy, you're making references to various rulings that are completely unrelated to each other.

You're also exhibiting your comprehensive ignorance of the Supreme Court, the role of the Court in the Federal system, the doctrine of judicial review, and Constitutional case law itself – this is an inane and ridiculous post.

Okay asshole...deny that this was at one time Constitutional law as declared by the Supreme Court....

A case Mark Levin pointed out.....

Plessy v. Ferguson - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of state laws requiring racial segregationin public facilities under the doctrine of "separate but equal".[1] The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1 with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan.

So?

Islam only applies to muslims...they can do whatever they want to non muslims......that is why you see such brutality happening with these muslims........the 10 commandments are the way Jews and Christians are to treat everyone, not just Jews and Christians....see the difference, the non muslims are not protected in any way under islam...

The ten commandments were not given to pork eating statue bowers and incense huffing rosary swingers

see my previous post

 

[JakeStarkey]

2aguy, none of your posts forward the OP.

We are a nation of Christians, generally, less so than 50 years ago.

We have never been, since 1787, a Christian nation.

And, no, the 10 Commandments do not protect minority rights. The Bill of Rights does.

I'll let Mike determine what forwards his thread.......mind your own posts....

I do. And I will mind yours when they are inaccurate, as they have been generally in this thread.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"the 10 commandments are the way Jews and Christians are to treat everyone, not just Jews and Christians."

An assertion only, of course.

If it is true, then it violates the 1st Amendment. America is neither a Jewish nor a Christian nation.

 

[paddymurphy]

Who the fuck said that it was.....? We were founded on Christian principals but have a secular government, influenced by those principals with religious freedom that used to be protected and cherished....

What Christian principles were we founded on that aren't also Jewish principles that came first?

Islam has set of commandments that mirror almost exactly the Ten Commandments of the Bible.

The problem....they only apply to muslims...that is the one thing the "experts" fail to point out when they bring that up......Sharia only applies to muslims...all others are either Dhimmi.....under muslim control.....or Infidel.....who are to be killed when found............and muslims are commanded by Islam to spread Sharia by any means necessary and are exempted from anything they need to be exempted from to make this happen......they are not supposed to lie to other muslims...but can if it furthers the cause of spreading sharia.....

People need to learn about islam......or you won't understand what we are facing....

I wasn't aware that all Muslims in America are killing people. Shouldn't that have been on the news?

They are not "good" muslims.....the actual "good" muslims are the ones spreading Sharia by any means necessary.....

You know as much about being a good Muslim as you know about being a good Christian: dick.

 

[rightwinger]

The founders of our country were Christian. They were also white, European and aristocrats

Does that make us an aristocratic nation?

No, because they put safeguards in to keep us from becoming Europe....sadly, the democrats keep wanting to get rid of those safeguards because they love the top down government model of Europe.

Actually, they put safeguards in to prevent us from becoming a Christian nation

You are so wrong.......they put safeguards in to protect the free expression of religions....

The government shall pass no laws pertaining to the establishment of religion

They specifically didn't want us to be a Christian nation

 

[initforme]

If we are founded on Christian principles we sure have vacated them. Christian principles revolve around helping the poor and destitute among us and that having alot of wealth is not part of Christianity. Yet we live in a most greedy nation. This is indisputable.

 

[rightwinger]

Whatever the founders thought matters not today. Whatever SCOTUS thinks matters today.

Like when the Supreme Court said fugitive slaves had to be returned to their owner, or that separate was equal, or that it was okay to put Americans of Japanese descent into internment camps and confiscate their property.........you mean that Supreme Court, the Supreme Court that said that if a town thinks it can make more tax money from your property by taking it from you and selling it to someone who will make them more tax money...that is okay.....that Supreme Court...

As Mark Levin pointed out in his book, "Men In Black," they are human beings, and often times they are deeply, deeply flawed human beings.......

This fails as a false comparison fallacy, you're making references to various rulings that are completely unrelated to each other.

You're also exhibiting your comprehensive ignorance of the Supreme Court, the role of the Court in the Federal system, the doctrine of judicial review, and Constitutional case law itself – this is an inane and ridiculous post.

Okay asshole, tell me this is right........and it is Constitutional because the Supreme Court said so....right?


Another case cited by Mark Levin....

Kelo v. City of New London - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)[1] was a case decided by theSupreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development. In a 5–4 decision, the Court held that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified private redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

The case arose in the context of condemnation by the city of New London, Connecticut, of privately owned real property, so that it could be used as part of a “comprehensive redevelopment plan.” However, the private developer was unable to obtain financing and abandoned the redevelopment project, leaving the land as an undeveloped empty lot.[2]

Taking property from one private citizen.....to transfer it to a private citizen favored by the local government for tax revenue............and that was deemed Constitutional...

they are just as corrupt and fallible as any other human......that is why we need an override of their stupid decisions.....

How else would be determined constitutional or unconstitutional?

If the Supreme Court messes up...as they have done over the years in big...big ways.......then, as Mark Levin suggests, removing their life time tenure...term limits.....and as I have heard suggested, some sort of over ruling mechanism...I would favor a 2/3 vote in the House or Senate or both would overturn their decision........another check on the power of government......

Just amend the Constitution to do that

Easy enough