Worshiping A New God

[Damaged Eagle]

Here I am!

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, eagle lips, those are your words not anyone else. PC is adopted: fact. PC is a far right religious fact: fact. PC does not do all the evidence: fact. PC does not debate but rather simply reiterates her chatter: fact. Fact: PC is a progressive statist who would use Big Government to reorder the United States to her specification. Fact: like the music you are linking.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The op being a little adapted Asian girl has no understanding of American history nor does she have any ancestral ties to the west nor any understanding of it

I see... So now it makes a difference to the progressive movement as to immigration status and race when it comes to taking a stance on a subject and if the person they have an issue with isn't caucasian they can throw slurs because that person is not progressive.

So now the progressives are saying that progressive bigotry is OK.

We're building up quit the list of things that progressives are culturally insensitive about.

Looks like bigotry comes in many forms.

*****CHUCKLE*****

"So now the progressives are saying that progressive bigotry is OK."


It was always so.

As quoted above, FDR's very first pick for the Supreme Court said this about Japanese Americans:
"They all look alike to a person not a Jap."

...after FDR rounded them up and put them in a concentration camp.


Progressives Franklin Roosevelt and Hugo Black.

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. Welcome to the brave new world of the federal secular religion, one in which American citizens have a constitutional right to force other American citizens to underwrite their sex lives.


a. Princeton philosopher Richard Rorty noted the change in authorship of morality:
“The West has cobbled together, in the course of the last two hundred years, a specifically secularist moral tradition — one that regards the free consensus of the citizens of a democratic society, rather then the Divine Will, as the source of moral imperatives.”
Last Words from Richard Rorty The Progressive


While Rorty considered this a great advance, consider how this fits the actions of Nazi Germany, in tune with its free consensus.




10. The Constitution's Framers always assumed the Judeo-Christian basis in guiding law and morality. In Federalist #51, Madison actually stated that said principals are necessary because men are not angels.

And in not being angels, leaders had no authority to draw up a new standard of morality, a new ten commandments,....

But under Obama's new religion, a secular federal one, his government is the sole arbiter of moral standards, and can overturn, at will, traditional Judeo-Christian principles.


a. Such is "modern Liberalism's radical and implicitly atheistic ideology, and ideology which is tantamount to a man-centered willfulness writ large."
Schlafly, Op. Cit., p. 18.



Liberals/Leftists worship a new god....their version of a golden calf.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

No, eagle lips, those are your words not anyone else. PC is adopted: fact. PC is a far right religious fact: fact. PC does not do all the evidence: fact. PC does not debate but rather simply reiterates her chatter: fact. Fact: PC is a progressive statist who would use Big Government to reorder the United States to her specification. Fact: like the music you are linking.

Sorry but NO. PoliticalChic isn't the one I quoted who's making a thing about where other people come from that would be guno and the other quy. As for reordering the United States to their specifications that appears to be what this thread is talking about the progressives attempting to do. Are you having difficulties accepting the fact that others have differing views than what you consider politically correct? Especially when someone points out how politically incorrect the pronouns you yourself insert are. It must be especially difficult for a liberally educated person such as yourself when the roles are suddenly reversed on you.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[JakeStarkey]

Eagle Lips, yeah PC is all those things. Guno has his own issues as well. And you do too. Such an arrogance and ignorance make up a bubbling stew of commentary as you. You lack context.

Fact: the OP is not founded on anything much and certainly is out of context.

 

[kjw47]

I just read a post demanding "freedom FROM religion"....and noted the terminal misunderstanding therein of both religion, and of the nation.
It requires a closer examination.


The Founders envisioned a God-fearing nation, but one built on the Judeo-Christian tradition. We find references to it in the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.

At no time did they intend hostility, or even indifference, to religion.



1. "The Founding Fathers did not want the federal government to impose a national religion. They feared replicating in America an institution like the Church of England, which would set at the federal level an official religious denomination for the United States. They wanted not only to protect individual conscience, but also to protect the religious freedom of the states. Six states, in fact, refused to accept the US Constitution until it was made clear that the First Amendment prevented the federal government from imposing a national church on them....those six states that finally signed the Constitution ran established churches."
Schlafly, "No Higher Power," p.15-16


2. As for the famous “separation of church and state,” the phrase appears in no federal document. In fact, at the time of ratification of the Constitution, ten of the thirteen colonies had some provision recognizing Christianity as either the official, or the recommended religion in their state constitutions.


a. From the 1790 Massachusetts Constitution, written by John Adams, includes: [the] good order and preservation of civil government essentially depend(s) upon piety, religion, and morality…by the institution of public worship of God and of the public instruction in piety, religion, and morality…”
Constitution of Massachusetts - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



b. North Carolina Constitution, article 32, 1776: “That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of either the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall b e capable of holding any office, or place of trust or profit, in the civil department, within this State.” Constitution of North Carolina 1776



c. So, the Founders intention was to be sure that the federal government didn’t do the same, and mandate a national religion. And when Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, it was to reassure them the federal government could not interfere in their religious observations, i.e., there is “a wall of separation between church and state.” He wasn’t speaking of religion contaminating the government, but of the government contaminating religious observance.




3. "It is indisputable that the First Amendment was written not to suppress those state churches but to protect them from the fedral government. Leaders of those six states would never have signed the Constitution otherwise. They insisted on the language, 'Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," to make clear that the federal government ha no right to establish its own religion and disestablish theirs."
Schlafly, Op. Cit, p. 16


BTW.....Leftism....Liberalism....has all the requirements that hallmark a "religion,"...

...and like the Islamofascism roiling the world today,,,,

....it demands the dismantling of every other religion.

That's what "freedom from religion" actually means.

The founders did it all for the white man--they didn't know Jesus whatsoever--- first they killed their own former countrymen( british) then they murdered over 100 million native americans for gold and land. then enslaved black men and treated yellow men like dogs--they didn't know Jesus whatsoever.
its as John Lennon said about(especially theirs) words----- Words are flying out like endless rain into a paper cup, they slither while they pass and slip away across the universe.

Not all is as appears in this world. its corrupt to the core.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Eagle Lips, yeah PC is all those things. Guno has his own issues as well. And you do too. Such an arrogance and ignorance make up a bubbling stew of commentary as you. You lack context.

Fact: the OP is not founded on anything much and certainly is out of context.

You're just saying that because you're jealous. Why don't you come up with a counter argument to what I've posted instead of attempting to slander my character? Oh that's right you're just another supposedly enlightened progressive liberal who worships at the alter of progressive theology instead of thinking for yourself. I on the other hand am perfectly willing to sit back and contemplate issues.

FACT: The OP's opening statement about "Freedom from religion" was brought up in another thread. No where does the Constitution guarantee 'freedom from religion'.

I'm also more than willing to be as arrogant as anyone else when dealing with someone that is incapable of thinking for themselves and take all the gold.

WTH!!!!! THERE'S NO PIRATE SMILEY AVAILABLE!

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[JakeStarkey]

kjw47 makes a good point, but we do remember that the name of God was invoked as cover for the terrible events that do occur. And Jews, Christians, Muslims, etc., do the same things today.

 

[HenryBHough]

Where Obama went wrong was the day he decided not to present his agenda on aluminum tablets and claim an angel handed them to him.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Damaged Eagle accuses me of doing, slandering character, what he does to others. Typical actions of an arrogant and ignorant character are what we are seeing from you: absolutely out of context, though you deny it, friend.

Fact: the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and separation of organized religion and state. As such, the religious can worship as they please and the non-religious have every right to not have to listen to the religious rant.

Fact: you, as you point out, are arrogant.

Fact: you are mumbling about taking "all the gold".

 

[Debra K]

I just read a post demanding "freedom FROM religion"....and noted the terminal misunderstanding therein of both religion, and of the nation.
It requires a closer examination.


The Founders envisioned a God-fearing nation, but one built on the Judeo-Christian tradition. We find references to it in the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.

At no time did they intend hostility, or even indifference, to religion.



1. "The Founding Fathers did not want the federal government to impose a national religion. They feared replicating in America an institution like the Church of England, which would set at the federal level an official religious denomination for the United States. They wanted not only to protect individual conscience, but also to protect the religious freedom of the states. Six states, in fact, refused to accept the US Constitution until it was made clear that the First Amendment prevented the federal government from imposing a national church on them....those six states that finally signed the Constitution ran established churches."
Schlafly, "No Higher Power," p.15-16


2. As for the famous “separation of church and state,” the phrase appears in no federal document. In fact, at the time of ratification of the Constitution, ten of the thirteen colonies had some provision recognizing Christianity as either the official, or the recommended religion in their state constitutions.


a. From the 1790 Massachusetts Constitution, written by John Adams, includes: [the] good order and preservation of civil government essentially depend(s) upon piety, religion, and morality…by the institution of public worship of God and of the public instruction in piety, religion, and morality…”
Constitution of Massachusetts - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



b. North Carolina Constitution, article 32, 1776: “That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of either the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall b e capable of holding any office, or place of trust or profit, in the civil department, within this State.” Constitution of North Carolina 1776



c. So, the Founders intention was to be sure that the federal government didn’t do the same, and mandate a national religion. And when Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, it was to reassure them the federal government could not interfere in their religious observations, i.e., there is “a wall of separation between church and state.” He wasn’t speaking of religion contaminating the government, but of the government contaminating religious observance.




3. "It is indisputable that the First Amendment was written not to suppress those state churches but to protect them from the fedral government. Leaders of those six states would never have signed the Constitution otherwise. They insisted on the language, 'Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," to make clear that the federal government ha no right to establish its own religion and disestablish theirs."
Schlafly, Op. Cit, p. 16


BTW.....Leftism....Liberalism....has all the requirements that hallmark a "religion,"...

...and like the Islamofascism roiling the world today,,,,

....it demands the dismantling of every other religion.

That's what "freedom from religion" actually means.

What you fail to understand is the outcome of the Civil War and the passage of the post-war amendments ultimately changed the relationship between our federal government and state governments -- and state governments and the people subject to their jurisdiction. In particular, the Supreme Court subsequently began a process of making the rights and protections set forth in the Bill of Rights applicable to state governments. See: Incorporation of the Bill of Rights - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Once you study the subject of incorporation, come back and revise your thesis. Thank you.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Damaged Eagle accuses me of doing, slandering character, what he does to others.

What????? You're not going to call me Eaglelips this time?

Typical actions of an arrogant and ignorant character are what we are seeing from you: absolutely out of context, though you deny it, friend.

I'm only arrogant. I leave the ignorance solely in purview.

Fact: the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and separation of organized religion and state.

Yes it does guarantee this.

As such, the religious can worship as they please and the non-religious have every right to not have to listen to the religious rant.

I don't recall reading any such thing in the Constitution.

Are you like making things up as you go along?

If you didn't want to listen or look at religious rants why are you in this part of the forum?

Now that's ignorance to the extreme if you ask me.

Fact: you, as you point out, are arrogant.

Thank you!

Fact: you are mumbling about taking "all the gold".

I just did... Again!

*****CHUCKLE*****





Hey!!!!! You wouldn't happen to be Richard of whatever his name was when I used to post on the Des Moines Register when they had a forum? Just asking because you whine like he did.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Damaged Eagle is not making any sense.

But he is fun to read.

What about taking the gold? I don't get that. I have done exceptionally well in life to education, the crossing of opportunity with preparation and hard work, and a personality that likes meeting and working with other people.

There is nothing that says freedom of religion is somehow not part of American liberties. I don't have to listen to anyone I don't want to in my private life, and generally religion cannot be furthered in the public sector.

Back to the OP: PC appears to creating her own 'new god' to worship ~ a religion based solely on her own grasp of it.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Damaged Eagle is not making any sense.

That's what a progressive education will get you. Inability to read of understand what's being posted.

But he is fun to read.

You're lots of fun yourself.

What about taking the gold? I don't get that.

I'm sure you'll figure it out sooner or later...

I have done exceptionally well in life to education, the crossing of opportunity with preparation and hard work, and a personality that likes meeting and working with other people.

...Or maybe not.

*****CHUCKLE*****

There is nothing that says freedom of religion is somehow not part of American liberties. I don't have to listen to anyone I don't want to in my private life,...

But yet here you are in the section of a forum about religion.

...and generally religion cannot be furthered in the public sector.

So what's that mean... You going to forbid churches from being built or something dumb like that?

Back to the OP: PC appears to creating her own 'new god' to worship ~ a religion based solely on her own grasp of it.

I believe she's accusing people like you about building that new religion... Yep! That's what the OP is saying.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[JoeB131]

Now....as I was saying about Liberals/Leftists looking for a new god to worship....

and she ignores all the arguments and just continues on with her crazy rants... that's awesome.

7. But Obama still believes he is god. Probably always did.
And he will not rest until all bend the neck and the knee to a federal religion of Liberalism/Leftism/secularism.

And she goes full metal jacket crazy.

 

[JoeB131]

Really????? You sound like some sort of fundamentalist with your unquestioning faith in science being an end all to your beliefs even though you've admitted you know little about the subject...

So what makes you any better than a religious fundamentalist who follows his/her doctrine/dogma with unswerving devotion?

BTW your use of belittling pronouns only makes your argument the lesser in any debate on the issue.

you do understand the difference between a noun and a pronoun, right. Funditard is a noun.

I don't have unquestioning faith in science. The thing about Science is that it always questions.

The thing about "Faith" is that it doesn't allow questions. There's always an excuse why the Magic Sky Fairy doesn't pull through.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Damaged Eagle continues to mumble and stumble. Only you are talking about churches being forbidden to be built. And your arrogance and ignorance continues to churn the stew of your silliness. No one on the far right has been able to show that Americans do not have a right to be free from religion. No one's child should have to listen to some one else's prayer in school, for instance.

The OP has completely failed, and DE's bumbling has only magnified that fact.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Really????? You sound like some sort of fundamentalist with your unquestioning faith in science being an end all to your beliefs even though you've admitted you know little about the subject...

So what makes you any better than a religious fundamentalist who follows his/her doctrine/dogma with unswerving devotion?

BTW your use of belittling pronouns only makes your argument the lesser in any debate on the issue.

you do understand the difference between a noun and a pronoun, right. Funditard is a noun.

I never claimed to be an English major... Is that what you are?

I don't have unquestioning faith in science. The thing about Science is that it always questions.

Yet you rely on science for your answers from what you've posted so far without ever questioning it.

Have you figured out what kick started the universe yet?

I'm still going with a miracle happened.

The thing about "Faith" is that it doesn't allow questions.

Is that why you use the standard progressive liberal phraseology?

It must be comforting to have a 'Faith' to rely on that provides all your answers for you.

There's always an excuse why the Magic Sky Fairy doesn't pull through.

And you've been proving that your progressive magic sky fairy does that with every word you post.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Damaged Eagle continues to mumble and stumble.

I doubt that. If your current post is any indication you're the one mumbling and stumbling.

Only you are talking about churches being forbidden to be built.

I simply asked a question and this is not an answer.

And your arrogance and ignorance continues to churn the stew of your silliness.

We discussed this already. I'm arrogant and you're ignorant. Which explains why you have nothing substantial to say other than your pathetic insinuations.

No one on the far right has been able to show that Americans do not have a right to be free from religion.

Is someone forcing you to join their religion?

No one's child should have to listen to some one else's prayer in school, for instance.

No one should have to listen to your progressive rambling either but it still happens.

The OP has completely failed, and DE's bumbling has only magnified that fact.

I highly doubt that... Don't you need to contact the home office to get advice/orders on how to handle this situation..... I'm sure it's out of your pay grade.

*****CHUCKLE*****