'don't Impose Your Values' Argument Is Bigotry In Disguise

[rtwngAvngr]

The founders were christian, they did a good job abstracting principle from various sources, including christianity. But we're not a theocracy and I would die fighting one. Know that, aj.

 

[ajwps]

That was a joke. It's what libs say about all the red staters. I like you in general aj, but your continual agitation against christianity is annoying. No one is going to round you up again.

The fact that someone questions your own beliefs somehow finds a direct attack on your faith. Paranoia is a psychological term that describes this feeling of other's seeming to find your beliefs in question.

You say that no one is going to round me up AGAIN. In that statement you are correct for I will never go like a sheep to the slaughter. Unfortunately history has proven you wrong that I will not be the target because of my birth faith. Your current fear of that I am some how denigrating Christianity is proof certain of this fact.

The most civilized and moral countries have at one time or another changed suddenly to find those Jews the source of all their troubles. I hold no illusion that my America will never change for there is nothing that changes but change.

Right now, the Jews of the world have Israel as a haven. The Jews of civilized France today are being persecuted and attacked. So many of Frances Jews are beginning their exodus from this most liberal of European countries.

 

[ajwps]

The founders were christian, they did a good job abstracting principle from various sources, including christianity. But we're not a theocracy and I would die fighting one. Know that, aj.

That's nice of you to say that you personally would die fighting a theocracy. But the fact remains that you are not everyone or even the majority of America.

The founders had different belief forms of Christianity but apparently they so fit not to include the name Jesus Christ or Christian country out of the body of the US Constitution or Declaration of Independence.

I don't think that this was an oversight.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The fact that someone questions your own beliefs somehow finds a direct attack on your faith. Paranoia is a psychological term that describes this feeling of other's seeming to find your beliefs in question.

You're wanting to rewrite history and drive all expression of religion from public view, how boring the world would be.

You say that no one is going to round me up AGAIN. In that statement you are correct for I will never go like a sheep to the slaughter. Unfortunately history has proven you wrong that I will not be the target because of my birth faith. Your current fear of that I am some how denigrating Christianity is proof certain of this fact.

Good for you and no it doesn't

The most civilized and moral countries have at one time or another changed suddenly to find those Jews the source of all their troubles. I hold no illusion that my America will never change for there is nothing that changes but change.

So really, it's you who are paranoid.

Right now, the Jews of the world have Israel as a haven. The Jews of civilized France today are being persecuted and attacked. So many of Frances Jews are beginning their exodus from this most liberal of European countries.

I'd leave france too.

 

[Gem]

AJPS Wrote:

Oh I see. The old cry that America is a CHRISTIAN country after all. That the foundation of America was not liberty, justice and the pursuit of happiness but a Christian Constitutional State of America founded by Christians for Christians.

Now I ask you, exactly where in the Constitution of the United States does it specifically say that this United States is based on the Judeo-Christian religion morality as stated by the founders?

Yes some seem to be running towards this mistake as quickly as possible with their arms thrown wide open that this is really a country based on the concepts of St. Paul of Tarsus.

Real nice....

Firstly, this has the potential of being an interesting conversation...lets keep the tone polite and not get smarmy with eachother. Its unneccesary and counter-productive.

You ask where in the Constitution does it specifically say that the US was based on Judeo-Christian morality...obviously, it doesn't. However...this is a moot point...the Constitution was a document set up to attempt to keep religion safe from the tyranny of government...and the government safe from religion...they specifically avoided using specific religious wording in the Constitution for that very reason...when you remember what they were struggling against when they wrote the document you will understand why.

HOWEVER...

This in no way means that this nation was not founded by Christians who used Judeo-Christian values as their basis...why you and so many others have trouble grasping that is beyond me.

Let's look at some of the Founding Fathers own words:

"The God who gave us life gave us liberty... Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction... That these liberties are the gift of God? The bible is the cornerstone for American liberty." -Thomas Jefferson

"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 Quincy Adams

"We've staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all our heart." -James Madison

"You can't have national morality apart from religious principle." -George Washington

"Our country was founded on the Gosple of Jesus Christ." -Patrick Henry


These were Christian men, AJPS, no better or worse than men of any other religion...men who felt that the teachings of the Bible had some good points that could be used as a foundation.

They realized however, that MEN were going to be running this nation...and that men always mess things up...especially when religion is involved. They wanted ALL people to be able to practice their own religions...Christian or other...they did not want one faith to have precedence over another...they did not want religious leaders to rule gov't...so they made sure that their founding documents...while based on many of the best sections of Judeo-Christian dogma...was free of being bound to any one religion.

They included, however, the most important section...that all men have rights that are endowed by "Our Creator." Why is this important? Because it states that you have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...not from the government...not because you are a citizen of the United States...not because a man says so...but because GOD says so...now which God? They don't say...because it doesn't really matter...what matters is that no man can take those rights away.

Fast forward to today...where numerous people would LOVE to remove references like those from our core documents...what does that mean? That your rights no longer come from your Creator...but rather from man...and what a man has given you...another man can take away...hence why the Founding Fathers made sure your rights can never be taken away by a man...because they come from a higher power.

These men were very smart...or perhaps...they were both very smart and very wary of what happens when too many people following one religion get together...we should all be that wary. Nevertheless, the men were Christian...and when they sat down and imagined this nation...the values and morals they invisioned for it came from their Judeo-Christian values, morals, and beliefs....they were just smart enough to word it in a way that left it up to the individual.


***
To give you an overly simplified example of the point I am making here, AJPS...

Lets say a romance novelist happens to have a BA in English Literature. When she writes, she often is inspired to reference in little ways, classic works and personal favorites...Shakespeare, Milton, the Bible, Joyce, Faulkner, Greek and Roman Mythology, etc.

Now, she knows that her basis for her romance novels comes from her classic training...but she is well aware that her target audience isn't interested in reading James Joyce, their are interested in reading a romance...so she makes sure that her references, while obvious to those who are familiar with Joyce...are equally enjoyable and logical to those who have no clue who he is.

Now...she is created literature that can be enjoyed by all...but her foundation is still the classic literature she studied and loved at university.
***

The Founding Fathers were dedicated to making sure that this country could be lived in by all people of all religions...they were dedicated to giving these people all the same rights and privledges...however...they were Christian...and the ideas and values they pulled from, came from, in some part, that influence on their lives.

 

[rei_t_ex]

The Founding Fathers were dedicated to making sure that this country could be lived in by all people of all religions...they were dedicated to giving these people all the same rights and privledges...however...they were Christian...and the ideas and values they pulled from, came from, in some part, that influence on their lives.

This is true, though with one caveat. The Christian values that the Founding Fathers wrote into the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, while present in Christianity, are by no means unique to it. They are present in religions (such as Hinduism) that are much older than Christianity, and indeed are so ubiquitous due to their being rather commonsensical. To continue your analogy to literature, it is well known that Shakespeare, among other things, wrote sonnets. To claim that this country has an inherent link to Christianity and not any other religion, would be akin to claiming that anyone who writes sonnets is emulating Shakespeare.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

This is true, though with one caveat. The Christian values that the Founding Fathers wrote into the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, while present in Christianity, are by no means unique to it. They are present in religions (such as Hinduism) that are much older than Christianity, and indeed are so ubiquitous due to their being rather commonsensical. To continue your analogy to literature, it is well known that Shakespeare, among other things, wrote sonnets. To claim that this country has an inherent link to Christianity and not any other religion, would be akin to claiming that anyone who writes sonnets is emulating Shakespeare.

She said christianity was used as a starting point. That's a real link. She's not saying the U.S. is therefore a Christian Theocracy. Unbunch yourself.

 

[musicman]

Fair enough, rei t ex - but, let's not get into such a mad rush for "inclusiveness" that we succumb to politically correct silliness. No - Gem has it right. This nation was founded by Christians, but they did not found a Christian nation.

Let's dispense with this notion of a "Christian theocracy" once and for all. The founding, bedrock principle of Christianity - the whole POINT of this wild, wacky exercise we call life - is man's free will. A Christian would, therefore, be a poor theocrat, and a theocrat a poor Christian. There could be no Christian theocracy; it is a contradiction in terms.

 

[Gem]

I do think that we all need to unclench just a bit here.

This nation, the United States, was founded by Christians...therefore the moral values they based our initial system of government and laws on was taken from their background in Christianity...

You are right in your statement that many religions respect and value different things...however, the line of contention with some here isn't whether or not Christianity has the monopoly on these issues (which it doesnt), but rather that the Christians who created this nation thought about their Christianity at all while making the nation. I find it strange that some seem to assume that these men gave no thought to a religion they obviously valued very much...when beginning a new nation after leaving a nation they felt was incorrect in many ways...not the least of which being the way they dealt with both religion and government...

If the nation had been founded by Hindus, we might have a very similar looking country today...and perhaps someone would be here arguing about it

 

[DaTroof]

Posted by Dilloduck :
"What makes you think it is just the government that wants to keep MJ illegal ?"

I don't believe that it's just the government that want to keep MJ illegal. My point is that plenty of people have coctail hour or put down a couple of brewskis and that seems to be just fine. Yet MJ that was legal until the early 70s is now illegal. Any particular reason why ?!? I would accept it if alcohol was prohibited as well, but we all know how well prohibition worked. The US government is destroying some peoples' lives over something that was legal just a few years ago. It's not a narcotic and it has yet to show physicaly addictive qualities even remotely like alcohol or tobacco. So one more time .. Why is MJ illegal ?! Just keep your opinions and religious morals off the legislative books.

 

[Deornwulf]

Well done. That is a great counter argument, however, do not forget the crusades. They essentially argued the eradication of Muslims everywhere. While I am in favor of states rights, I am also a believer in the separation of church and state. Also, extend my argument beyond school prayer and particular religious beliefs. I used the example of school prayer as a matter of convenience. If however one permits their imagination to wonder a bit it becomes clear that the separation of church and state is significantly more fundamental to our way of life than it initially appears.

The Crusades were about two things - land and power. European Kings needed new ways of distracting young nobles and also thought that access to the Oriental Trade Routes would bring great wealth. Religion was used as an excuse.

The issue I have is with how the "Separation Clause" has been extended beyond the Federal Government to dictate the actions of the States and Municipalities, clearly violating the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

AJ - The article you posted is frightening. To suggest that the Constitution mentions the State as a metaphor meaning Civil Authority is too Anti-Federalist to imagine. The Framers certainly meant for the Federal Government to have certain powers and the rest for the State Governments and individuals.

 

[Said1]

The Crusades were about two things - land and power. European Kings needed new ways of distracting young nobles and also thought that access to the Oriental Trade Routes would bring great wealth. Religion was used as an excuse.

Although that may be true of later less successful cursades, it was originally the Byzantines who appealed to Urban for help.

 

[dilloduck]

Although that may be true of later less successful cursades, it was originally the Byzantines who appealed to Urban for help.

Is that how we got the term "Urban sprawl " ?

 

[Said1]

Is that how we got the term "Urban sprawl " ?

In the Middle East, yes.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Turban Sprawl?

 

[Said1]

Turban Sprawl?

Yes, that's it. I was wrong. :spank3:

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Urban Sprawl Vs. Turban Sprawl.

 

[dilloduck]

Bourbon sprawl can be painful too !

 

[Said1]

Urban Sprawl Vs. Turban Sprawl.

Mini-malls are good.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Mini-malls are good.

Malls kick ass. the free flow of goods and services makes me hot!