Citing rise of ‘Christian nationalism,’ Secular Democrats unveil sweeping recommendations for Biden

[struth]

Thomas Paine v John Locke

Tolerance of others, and their faiths, is a Judeo-Christian value.

How many centuries has the world been blessed with Christianity as an organized religion and how many months out of those 17 centuries prior to 1780 were any of the adherents to Christianity tolerant of other beliefs or other sects. It was guys that John Locke challenged the divine rights of Kings but Locke had none of the revolutionary Thomas Paine and his Common Sense.

Its interesting that you embrace John Locke the Bible reader for his inspirational Judeo-Christian / Enlightenment contribution to the founding of America. But you bypass the Bible debunker DEIST Thomas Paine and his direct indispensable role in the revolt against the Crown and the creation of the most egalitarian form of Government created by the human mind.

On individual rights and liberty Paine blew Locke’s doors off when he passed him by.

​

John Locke's thought system reserved political influence for those who were eminent both socially and economically. John Locke believed that economic power in the form of money was the real derivation of political power. He felt that predominate political control should be vested within the aristocracy. Those individuals in society who have conspicuous monetary interests should manage government. Citizens lacking pronounced wealth in either property or money did not deserve a voice in the affairs of state. In fact, the aristocracy feared the lower classes because they were the majority within society. A government and society based upon majority rule would not bode well for the nobility.​

Thomas Paine National Historical Association​

In contrast to Locke, Paine believed in rule by the majority as well as universal suffrage so that all citizens could have a voice in government. Locke's philosophy was not designed to support democracy or the welfare of the common man. His social, political and economic beliefs were the antithesis of Thomas Paine's egalitarian views regarding humanity, government and society.​

FYI Tom Paine 1949

I suspect Locke was limited to his belief in the Bible while Paine was unlimited by his rejection of it as the Word of God.

Yeah i was around for a long time, and not very tolerant....a lot of people abused religion, still do, to maintain power. Not sure what you point is.

There would be no Thomas Paine, but for Locke...I like them both though.

Paine used the Bible, in Common Sense, to argue for the revolution. He used Judeo-Christian values to highlight that a Monarch, disrupted the natural order of things, that came directly from God.

Look, I am not sure what you are trying to prove here.....I never said we were a Christian Nation, I never suggested that all our Founders were devote followers of a Protestant faith.

Paine also believed in God...." I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life. " - The Age of Reason

You can believe in God, and not be a member of a organized religion...you can also be influenced by the readings of the Bible, and gain value from those teachings and not be a member of an organizaed religion.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I'm a Catholic because I believe in the Church's teaching.

Did you know John Locke went to his grave publicly believing Catholics and atheists should not be tolerated in a society where church and State were separate?

excludes atheists and Catholics from toleration. There is no gainsaying that he rejects the possibility of tolerating atheists, whom he claims have no motive for keeping rules, since they lack fear of divine punishment. “Promises, covenants, and oaths, which are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist”​

Locke on Religious Toleration by Mark Goldie | Online Library of Liberty​

What rendered Catholics unable to be tolerated was that they held political and moral positions that fundamentally threatened civil society.
​

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Look, I am not sure what you are trying to prove here..

Paine also believed in God...

Paine was not a Christian in any sense of the word.

His belief in Nature’s God does not make him an example of Judeo Christian values.

You have argued that religious tolerance is a Judeo/Christian value because it was advanced by John Locke because he was a Bible believing Protestant Christian who wouid not tolerate atheists or Papists in his model of civil society.

I’m saying your reasoning for believing America was founded on Judeo Christian values is weak when its based on Locke being a Christian

Paine was much more significant to the founding of America than Locke was and he was Deist. He was called an atheist as was JEFFERSON at the time.

Yet to some contemporary Christians like you, America was founded on the Judeo Christian values of John Locke. The enlightenment philosopher who could have rejected atheists like Paine and Jefferson from being citizens in the society they helped create.

America was founded by much more than Judeo Christian values. A lot more.

I’m just saying Christians could show more toleration by emphasizing that.

 

[struth]

I'm a Catholic because I believe in the Church's teaching.

Did you know John Locke went to his grave publicly believing Catholics and atheists should not be tolerated in a society where church and State were separate?

excludes atheists and Catholics from toleration. There is no gainsaying that he rejects the possibility of tolerating atheists, whom he claims have no motive for keeping rules, since they lack fear of divine punishment. “Promises, covenants, and oaths, which are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist”​

​

Locke on Religious Toleration by Mark Goldie | Online Library of Liberty​

​

What rendered Catholics unable to be tolerated was that they held political and moral positions that fundamentally threatened civil society.​

​

Yep I did.

 

[struth]

Look, I am not sure what you are trying to prove here..

Paine also believed in God...

Paine was not a Christian in any sense of the word.

His belief in Nature’s God does not make him an example of Judeo Christian values.

You have argued that religious tolerance is a Judeo/Christian value because it was advanced by John Locke because he was a Bible believing Protestant Christian who wouid not tolerate atheists or Papists in his model of civil society.

I’m saying your reasoning for believing America was founded on Judeo Christian values is weak when its based on Locke being a Christian

Paine was much more significant to the founding of America than Locke was and he was Deist. He was called an atheist as was JEFFERSON at the time.

Yet to some contemporary Christians like you, America was founded on the Judeo Christian values of John Locke. The enlightenment philosopher who could have rejected atheists like Paine and Jefferson from being citizens in the society they helped create.

America was founded by much more than Judeo Christian values. A lot more.

I’m just saying Christians could show more toleration by emphasizing that.

1) I never said he was
2) I didn't say he was an example of Judeo-Christian values.
3) I am not advocating it's a value because is advocated by Locke. It is a value, and Locke did adovate it though
4) I am not advocating it was founded on Judeo-Christian values because Locke was a Christian. He was a Christian, who's ideas and philsophy was developed via his values, and his idea and philsophy was a great influence on the Founders...all of them.
5) Paine, was one of many Founders, all of which were greatly, to the point of near plagiarism, influenced by Locke.
6) yeah..Paine and Jefferson weren't atheist....they were Deist...which is a thought that came out of the Enlightment as well. That however doesn't mean that Judeo-Christian values weren't values that greatly influenced our Founders. I think Paine put it best in Common Sense really, when he argued how a Monarchy, broke the natural order of things, in people's relation with God. Which helped come ujp with the theory, that we use today, that rights, values etc come from God, to man, and man creates Govt....not the other way around that we saw in Monarchs and leftist regimes, were folks believe Govt gives one rights.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

The United States was founded by Christians.

What Christians? And how do you define a Christian?

Someone who believes in Christ...lol

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Yep I did.

Is that a good example from the Judeo-Christian tradition of religious toleration and separation of church and state?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Someone who believes in Christ...lol

Does that belief include original sin and being saved from burning in hell if you don’t?

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

The left is Christophobic.

Actually no. Not at all. But if your idea of a “Good Christian,” and the leader of your religious affairs office, is somebody like THIS [see Paula White video], well then sure .... it gives me the cooties.

Asking congregations and the public for money to fund ministries is ther main method left to them, dumbass. If they use church properties to run businesses then you halfwits would snivel even louder, claiming they're using 'unfair advantages' n stuff'. You simply hate Xians because they stand in the way in unfettered mindless self-indulgence and kiddie raping, is all.

This is the kind of personally insulting and truly ignorant comment that led me to leave this message board awhile ago. You certainly haven’t changed a bit.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Someone who believes in Christ...lol

Does that belief include original sin and being saved from burning in hell if you don’t?

What's the Bible say?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

1) I never said he was

But then you extinguish his Deism here and turn on his Judeo-Christian light:

There would be no Thomas Paine, but for Locke...I like them both though.

Paine used the Bible, in Common Sense, to argue for the revolution. He used Judeo-Christian values to highlight that a Monarch, disrupted the natural order of things, that came directly from God.

I mostly see Judeo-Christian values to be associated with a person believing that Jesus is one’s savior and all that which establishes ones Judeo-Christian values only as a result of faith.


I don’t see why Paine is associated with Judeo-Christian values and John Locke for quoting from the Bible (that he does not believe us the Word of God) to communicate with Christians to stir up passions to fight a war to overthrow a King for an idea.

And why is Paine tied to John Locke’s Judeo Christian values who I’m not so sure would have approved of stirring up the farmers and craftsmen to commit mass treason against the king and his magistrates of the commonwealth.

 

[struth]

Yep I did.

Is that a good example from the Judeo-Christian tradition of religious toleration and separation of church and state?

no it’s not a great example of religious tolerance. Locke wasn’t perfect.

 

[struth]

1) I never said he was

But then you extinguish his Deism here and turn on his Judeo-Christian light:

There would be no Thomas Paine, but for Locke...I like them both though.

Paine used the Bible, in Common Sense, to argue for the revolution. He used Judeo-Christian values to highlight that a Monarch, disrupted the natural order of things, that came directly from God.

I mostly see Judeo-Christian values to be associated with a person believing that Jesus is one’s savior and all that which establishes ones Judeo-Christian values only as a result of faith.


I don’t see why Paine is associated with Judeo-Christian values and John Locke for quoting from the Bible (that he does not believe us the Word of God) to communicate with Christians to stir up passions to fight a war to overthrow a King for an idea.

And why is Paine tied to John Locke’s Judeo Christian values who I’m not so sure would have approved of stirring up the farmers and craftsmen to commit mass treason against the king and his magistrates of the commonwealth.

1) i did no such thing
2) then you...and it’s obvious have a narrow view of things

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Thomas Paine v John Locke

Tolerance of others, and their faiths, is a Judeo-Christian value.

How many centuries has the world been blessed with Christianity as an organized religion and how many months out of those 17 centuries prior to 1780 were any of the adherents to Christianity tolerant of other beliefs or other sects. It was great that John Locke challenged the divine rights of Kings but Locke had none of the revolutionary fire of Thomas Paine and his Common Sense.

Its interesting that you embrace John Locke the Bible reader for his inspirational Judeo-Christian / Enlightenment contribution to the founding of America. But you bypass the Bible debunker DEIST Thomas Paine and his direct indispensable role in the revolt against the Crown and the creation of the most egalitarian form of Government created by the human mind.

On individual rights and liberty Paine blew Locke’s doors off when he passed him by.

​

John Locke's thought system reserved political influence for those who were eminent both socially and economically. John Locke believed that economic power in the form of money was the real derivation of political power. He felt that predominate political control should be vested within the aristocracy. Those individuals in society who have conspicuous monetary interests should manage government. Citizens lacking pronounced wealth in either property or money did not deserve a voice in the affairs of state. In fact, the aristocracy feared the lower classes because they were the majority within society. A government and society based upon majority rule would not bode well for the nobility.​

Thomas Paine National Historical Association​

In contrast to Locke, Paine believed in rule by the majority as well as universal suffrage so that all citizens could have a voice in government. Locke's philosophy was not designed to support democracy or the welfare of the common man. His social, political and economic beliefs were the antithesis of Thomas Paine's egalitarian views regarding humanity, government and society.​

FYI Tom Paine 1949

I suspect Locke was limited to his belief in the Bible while Paine was unlimited by his rejection of it as the Word of God.

Thanks for alerting me to this discussion, and especially for the reference to the article comparing Locke and Paine in Thomas Paine National Historical Association . I enjoyed it and agreed with it almost entirely. I do think Thomas Paine was certainly the most radically democratic of all early American revolutionaries. He can rightly be called a premature “social democrat” too. He was of course also an abolitionist. And an internationalist — he played a proud and noble role in the French Revolution, and like Lafayette almost lost his life for his efforts.

Paine could have enjoyed a safe retirement and a government position in the U.S.A., as most famous U.S. revolutionary leaders did, but he preferred to go to France and risk everything to further the cause. He had donated all the money earned from his pamphlets like “Common Sense” to Washington’s desperate Army. His wife and child having died in England, he had committed his whole body and soul to the cause. He was a true working-class radical, an intellectually precocious (but mostly self-educated) “Che Guevara” of his times.

On the issues of religion, I have little to add to what you have said, but it is true in “Common Sense” Paine creatively used references to Bible stories to reach his audience. Remember most Americans learned to read by reading the Bible in those days and for most (if they were literate) it was the only book they ever read — but “Common Sense” was soon to outsell even the Bible. Later, when he wrote “The Age of Reason,” he was writing for a more European audience, one in battle with powerful conservative Churches and state religions, so he was still harsher toward “priestly humbug.” The revolutionary “Founders” were mostly men of property and position, and as they aged and prospered they abandoned any revolutionary edge to their thinking, whether it concerned religion, or slavery. Not Thomas Paine.

 

[LuckyDuck]

"

WASHINGTON (RNS) — A Democratic group dedicated to representing secular values unveiled a slate of recommendations for President-elect Joe Biden’s incoming administration on Monday (Nov. 30), outlining a sweeping agenda designed to roll back many of President Trump’s actions involving religion and to “restore a vision of constitutional secularism.”

The 28-page document, crafted by the Secular Democrats of America PAC, is being presented to the incoming administration by Democratic Representatives Jamie Raskin and Jared Huffman — both co-chairs of the Congressional Freethought Caucus.

The SDA’s agenda offers a wide range of policy recommendations to push back against the so-called “Christian nationalist movement,” which the the group describes as an “extraordinarily well-funded and well-organized” phenomenon whose “extreme and sectarian agenda (was) on constant display under the Trump-Pence administration.”

Citing rise of 'Christian nationalism,' Secular Democrats unveil sweeping recommendations for Biden

WASHINGTON (RNS) — Authors suggested Biden use ‘E Pluribus Unum’ — Latin for ‘out of many, one’ — instead of ‘In God We Trust’ and repeal the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

religionnews.com

Work with Congress to incentivize states to increase their vaccination rates by repealing all nonmedical exemptions to mandatory vaccination for children in schools and day care centers. States like California and New York have taken such actions, but only after experiencing severe outbreaks of measles and whooping cough. Parents and children have the right to a school environment free of vaccine preventable diseases. The most vulnerable among us who are medically ineligible for vaccination depend on herd immunity to protect them.

https://seculardems.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/SecularDemocratsofAmerica_Blueprint_BidenHarrisTransition_11-30-20_FINAL.pdf

Move along, nothing see here....well except for a direct attack on Religious Liberties that is.

I'm an Atheist and here is my stance on "the church," regardless of what religion one practices. Islam is more dangerous than Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism and Buddhism combined. That said, Christianity in and of itself, has no more influence over our government than they did twenty years ago. Fundamental Christians (Evangelicals), have always tried to push for religion in our public schools. The obvious reason is a hope for converts to their ideology. But, the separation of church and state has prevailed and as I have said, they really don't have more influence over the government than they have had over the many years.
If one is looking for a non-religious threat, look no further than the pro-Marxist, George Soros puppets that speak out against maintaining an actual "nation state." Those people try to paint anyone preferring borders and border control as racist by attaching some word in front of the word Nationalism, which is falsely being bantered around as a racist. Example: White Nationalists (as if only whites in the nation prefer borders and border control, plenty of Hispanics and blacks want borders) and in this case, Christian Nationalists (as being a Christian is somehow negative).
The only problem I had was with the zealot Christians I've met and they are in the very small minority. The vast majority of the Christians I've met are what you'd call, "Jack Christians." People that would pick and choose what they believe in their book, or don't actually practice the religion, only claim it as their religion.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

IF you did not believe in a God who will punish you with eternal damnation for wrongdoing you cannot keep an oath - you cannot be trusted to have rights in Locke’s ideal Judeo Christian Commonwealth.

There would be no Thomas Paine, but for Locke...I like them both though.

Open your mind a bit. Your conformist mind has a Judeo-Christian bias for John Locke.

IF IT WERE NOT FOR DEIST REVOLUTIONARY WINTER PATRIOT THOMAS PAINE there would be NO UNITED STATES of AMERICA but There would be a dusty olde Locke holding an imaginary model of his imagined commonwealth; that imagined (only) “refined, rational, well mannered, and harmonious social order founded upon a traditional belief in limited monarchy” New World commonwealth. - with no atheists, Deists or Papists.


I think you had it backwards.

......and by the way as a Catholic with Judeo-Christian values, do you often accuse a peaceful protest movement on a mission for racial justice and against police excessive use of force (BLM) of setting churches on fire when they or unassociated ANTIFA or the Democratic Party were no where near the burning church which may have been struck by lighting in real life

I do...ANTIFA and BLM. It was pretty obvious at the time.,...and they had the backing of the Dems..

The fire that destroyed the Walker Community United Methodist Church in south Minneapolis on May 27 was officially listed as “accidental” Tuesday. The most probable cause was lightning, an investigator wrote in a supplemental report obtained by the Star Tribune.Apr 20, 2021​

bringmethenews.com › fire-hea...​

Fire heavily damages century-old church in northeast Minneapolis - Bring Me The​

News​

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Thanks for alerting me to this discussion,

you are welcome. I look forward to seeing your comments from time to time.

 

[justinacolmena]

Move along, nothing see here....well except for a direct attack on Religious Liberties that is.

They're atheists. They don't have the faith to carry them through the tough times.

 

[struth]

IF you did not believe in a God who will punish you with eternal damnation for wrongdoing you cannot keep an oath - you cannot be trusted to have rights in Locke’s ideal Judeo Christian Commonwealth.

There would be no Thomas Paine, but for Locke...I like them both though.

Open your mind a bit. Your conformist mind has a Judeo-Christian bias for John Locke.

IF IT WERE NOT FOR DEIST REVOLUTIONARY WINTER PATRIOT THOMAS PAINE there would be NO UNITED STATES of AMERICA but There would be a dusty olde Locke holding an imaginary model of his imagined commonwealth; that imagined (only) “refined, rational, well mannered, and harmonious social order founded upon a traditional belief in limited monarchy” New World commonwealth. - with no atheists, Deists or Papists.


I think you had it backwards.

......and by the way as a Catholic with Judeo-Christian values, do you often accuse a peaceful protest movement on a mission for racial justice and against police excessive use of force (BLM) of setting churches on fire when they or unassociated ANTIFA or the Democratic Party were no where near the burning church which may have been struck by lighting in real life

I do...ANTIFA and BLM. It was pretty obvious at the time.,...and they had the backing of the Dems..

The fire that destroyed the Walker Community United Methodist Church in south Minneapolis on May 27 was officially listed as “accidental” Tuesday. The most probable cause was lightning, an investigator wrote in a supplemental report obtained by the Star Tribune.Apr 20, 2021​

bringmethenews.com › fire-hea...​

Fire heavily damages century-old church in northeast Minneapolis - Bring Me The​

News​

Paine believed in God

 

[NotfooledbyW]

"Nature's God: The Heretical Origins Of The American Republic,"

2) then you...and it’s obvious have a narrow view of things

no, This reply comes from a mind so narrow it lets in only one concept of God:

Paine believed in God

That’s NATURE’s God .. Please recall my statement to which you posted your erroneous and narrow-minded reply:

IF you did not believe in a God who will punish you with eternal damnation for wrongdoing

The Deists and Unitarian and Freemason concept of God was not the vengeful God of Judeo-Christian belief of Catholics such as yourself and of John Locke:

I’m saying your reasoning for believing America was founded on Judeo Christian values is weak when its based on Locke being a Christian

And already explained the difference between fearing and believing in Yahweh vs the Deist belief in NATURE’s GOD that was cited in the Declaration of Independence

Paine was much more significant to the founding of America than Locke was and he was Deist. He was called an atheist as was JEFFERSON at the time.

What we know of Locke I believe he would have sided with his fellow Bible Thumping Evangelical Protestants in consideration of - - Jefferson and Paine’s radical belief in Nature’s God and their rejection of the concept of original sin - to be atheistic because punishment by the Biblical God for sin as I understand it was very important to Locke.

A wise man once said:

America was founded by much more than Judeo Christian values. A lot more.

So I will leave you with something to open your mind. The first few paragraphs from an interview on NPR with the author of “ "Nature's God: The Heretical Origins Of The American Republic,"

Founders Claimed A Subversive Right To 'Nature's God' July 13, 20149:51 AM ET ARUN RATH, HOST:​

There is a peculiar phrase up high in the Declaration of Independence that asserts the right of the American people to assume, quote, "the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's God entitle them." What exactly is nature's God?​

The founding fathers were all at least nominally Christian. And a lot of modern historians have run with the idea that the phrase nature's God is an indication that the founders were basing the country on Christian morality. But historian Matthew Stewart says that's totally wrong.​

In his new book, "Nature's God: The Heretical Origins Of The American Republic," he argues that the founders' concept of God was as revolutionary as their ideas about self determination and democracy. Matthew Stewart joins us to explain. Hi, Matthew.​

to be continued ..