Our founding fathers were not Christian

[Amanda]

You need to state where it is that he needs proof for an opinion. Or shut the fuck up. Children do this type of thing. Unless you are a child....Id suggest taking a more mature approach.

Jamie

A more mature approach like saying STFU? Um... ok.

STFU

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Amanda again.

bummer, chica

I'll take a rain check.

 

[Amanda]

jamie, (and i must be talking to myself again, since i must be your sockpuppet, although i am at least a foot taller than you and we have very different posting styles with certain word usages, as all writers exhibit.

Yes, it IS painfully obvious that you're going to considerable trouble to make sure you post "differently". The FAIL is when you write a post Vinny-style and then oopsie, sign it Jamie.

in another thread i had joked with another poster that he/she should try to argue that interior dialogue could be proven to be from "others". i have toyed with making that argument myself, but of course, some twit would run around yapping at my heels for days to source my own thoughts and arguments. Lol!) it is a sad but true thing that there are always going to be certain ppl who cannot rise to others abilities, and so must strive to pull them down.

You mean like wanting them to actually be able to cite their sources? The bastards. Sounds like the same people that wanted transparency in government. Swine, 1 and all.

these ppl are destroyers, and often of low mentality, meally minded and obsessed with their betters...their superiors.

At least you're not encumbered by humility.

these types are best ignored, as they are parasites, almost sociopathic, wanting to drain the energy of others who are very able.

Hey, ignore away. The more you don't answer the questions I raise the more your credibility drains away. There are a handful of posters here that are dismissed out of hand without their posts even being read. You're on the fast track to joining them.

amanda, in her own, very limited way, is actually working to improve your posting style and she acts from her jealousy,

You keep saying I'm jealous. Can you expand on that? Do you have an instance you can point to or is this more of your considered opinion?

and that you ignored her in your suicide thread (causing her feewings to be alll hoited)

Actually "Jamie" didn't ignore me in the suicide thread. Fail.

, but she thinks she is being important, and granted, the more we give the struggling woman the attention she craves to make her small world, the more she will simply puff up with importance. mores the pity, since she can only gain some sense of importance by trying to drag her betters down.

I love your flowery prose when you get your impotent rage on.

her pitiful attempts for attention, lacking intellectual ability, even extends to her having posted a pic of herself as an avatar in her bikini. and then bragging about it. tragic. really tragic.

Bikini's are tragic? Explain.

i am unconcerned if her or her ilk doubt my or your credibility.

That's clearly BS, you can't stop trying to insult me and put me off. But I'm tenacious. And being so simple-minded it's easy for me to keep my focus.

the reality of my-and your-life do not hinge on her ankle biting, obsession that we all prove what she cannot believe.

BTW, it's still amusing that you're posting all of this to someone that is supposedly in the same home. Who is it for? If you wanted to give "Jamie" this little pep talk why wouldn't you just say it instead of typing it out? Don't answer, it's rhetorical. It's obvious this is for the other posters here, not your alter-ego.

if she pines to fill her day and threads with negativity, then power to her. i will do as i have, and that is to ignore her. i dislike ignoring posters, but she has absolutely no content to bring.

You've read all of my 3500+ posts too?

let her pant and whine about credibility. for her and those like her to doubt my credibility or yours we should wear as a badge of honor. apple trees are known by their fruit, as has been said long ago. her fruits are thread derailment, negativity, and sad attempts to insult her betters.

You mean like repeatedly telling others to STFU? I can't recall anyone I'd consider a "better" telling me to STFU. That's so Jr High School.

back on thread, have you read richard h's post?

too funny.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Our founding fathers were not Christian

They weren't "America Haters" or "Blame America Firsters" either. They we're also proponents of "Limited Government" which means they had even less in common with you Libs.

Just sayin'.

 

[vincubus]

Our founding fathers were not Christian

They weren't "America Haters" or "Blame America Firsters" either. They we're also proponents of "Limited Government" which means they had even less in common with you Libs.

Just sayin'.

ewe libs? there is a difference betwen LIBertarian,m and LIBeral.

american haters? please. that is a tired phrase. lets see now..... despite monroe and washington, we meddled in a few banana republics, had the ruler before the shaw of iran overthrown and installed the shah so that we could get the oil that rightfully belonged to the iranians and they didnt want to give us, escelated nam using johnsons red flag gulf of tonkin incident, ran arouind in russia for two years after their revolutions because we didn't like the godless communists, etc etc. we have behaved poorly towards other nations, threw our weight around and in doing so earned the hate and dislike of other governments and their ppl. calling attention to these things makes liberals american haters?

americans can easily spot the flaws and shortcomings of other nations governments, but we cannot see our own. to be so blind to our own failings isn't patriotism.

 

[AllieBaba]

We're seeing them now. thats' why thousands are gathering to protest. And a smart minority of elitist assholes would do well to listen.

 

[vincubus]

We're seeing them now. thats' why thousands are gathering to protest. And a smart minority of elitist assholes would do well to listen.

Lol!! jefferson advocated for a revolution every 20 years or so. we are slightly overdue, but that depends on how you define revolution.

seems lincoln, then every president since wilson (except hoover, and it cost him the 'lection) has only increased the size and scope of the federal government. we demand "more" and "more" increases exponentially. more isn't too bad, until it spills into government. the real concern is that more doesnt diminish. it always increases.

an old reporter adage says to follow the money. the money is the key, and the money is controlled by the uber wealthy who do not recognize borders. the pols are merely stooges, bought and paid for, like wilson who then rewarded his ascent into the white house by giving the uber wealthy what they wanted. the federal reserve. (yes, i am one of THOSE)

 

[Ralph]

One of the most common statements from the "Religious Right" is that they want this country to "return to the Christian principles on which it was founded". However, a little research into American history will show that this statement is a lie. The men responsible for building the foundation of the United States had little use for Christianity, and many were strongly opposed to it. They were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were Deists who did not believe the bible was true.

When the Founders wrote the nation's Constitution, they specified that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." (Article 6, section 3) This provision was radical in its day-- giving equal citizenship to believers and non-believers alike. They wanted to ensure that no single religion could make the claim of being the official, national religion, such as England had. Nowhere in the Constitution does it mention religion, except in exclusionary terms. The words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution-- not once.

A clear lie (THE BIG LIE).......as the Constitution uses the date, IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD, with the majority of the Constitution being referenced from the Blackstone Theory of Law, which drafted all its precepts from the Holy Bible....just as are the rights of property, personal rights and public rights, the rights to jury trial, etc. parroted from the Blackstone Format of Jurisprudence in our US CONSTITUTION. Commentaries on the Laws of England - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Declaration of Independence gives us important insight into the opinions of the Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the power of the government is derived from the governed. Up until that time, it was claimed that kings ruled nations by the authority of God. The Declaration was a radical departure from the idea of divine authority.

The 1796 treaty with Tripoli states that the United States was "in no sense founded on the Christian religion" (see below). This was not an idle statement, meant to satisfy muslims-- they believed it and meant it. This treaty was written under the presidency of George Washington and signed under the presidency of John Adams.

None of the Founding Fathers were atheists. Most of the Founders were Deists, which is to say they thought the universe had a creator, but that he does not concern himself with the daily lives of humans, and does not directly communicate with humans, either by revelation or by sacred books. They spoke often of God, (Nature's God or the God of Nature), but this was not the God of the bible. They did not deny that there was a person called Jesus, and praised him for his benevolent teachings, but they flatly denied his divinity. Some people speculate that if Charles Darwin had lived a century earlier, the Founding Fathers would have had a basis for accepting naturalistic origins of life, and they would have been atheists. Most of them were stoutly opposed to the bible, and the teachings of Christianity in particular.

Yes, there were Christian men among the Founders. Just as Congress removed Thomas Jefferson's words that condemned the practice of slavery in the colonies, they also altered his wording regarding equal rights. His original wording is here in blue italics: "All men are created equal and independent. From that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable." Congress changed that phrase, increasing its religious overtones: "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights." But we are not governed by the Declaration of Independence-- it is a historical document, not a constitutional one.

If the Christian Right Extremists wish to return this country to its beginnings, so be it... because it was a climate of Freethought. The Founders were students of the European Enlightenment. Half a century after the establishment of the United States, clergymen complained that no president up to that date had been a Christian. In a sermon that was reported in newspapers, Episcopal minister Bird Wilson of Albany, New York, protested in October 1831: "Among all our presidents from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism." The attitude of the age was one of enlightened reason, tolerance, and free thought. The Founding Fathers would turn in their graves if the Christian Extremists had their way with this country.

James Madison The fourth president of the United States, James Madison, was much like the other Virginia presidents--Washington and Jefferson--who went before him. Like them, he loved his home state only a little less than his country. Like them, he was a rich man who gave his whole life to public service. He was an able student of politics and government who brought real knowledge and skill to his job.
In public office Madison was a calm, reasoning statesman who governed by force of logic. In a time when emotions ran high, he made common sense prevail. He was not always successful in dealing with foreign nations, but history has shown that he had right and justice on his side.
He entered the presidency at a time when war clouds hung over the young nation. He saw his country through the disastrous War of 1812, and his final months in office produced the "era of good feeling" that lasted for many years. He did well as secretary of state and as president, but his greatest record was made earlier. For his outstanding work on the nation's charter, Madison is known as the Father of the Constitution. .---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia Deluxe

.

"It may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to unsurpastion on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will be best guarded agst. by an entire abstinence of the Gov't from interfence in any way whatsoever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, and protecting each sect agst. trespasses on its legal rights by others."
James Madison, "James Madison on Religious Liberty",
edited by Robert S. Alley, ISBN 0-8975-298-X. pp. 237-238
.

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."
- "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785
.

"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
- "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785
.

"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."
-letter to Wm. Bradford, April 1, 1774
.

"Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and corruption, all of which facilitate the execution of mischievous projects."
.

"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries."
-1803 letter objecting use of gov. land for churches
.

.
John Adams The second president of the United States was John Adams, lawyer and diplomat. Adams' public career lasted more than 35 years. He was second only to George Washington in making a place for the young United States among the nations of the world. In his devotion to the country he was second to none..
---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia Deluxe

.

"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
-letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816
.

"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved-- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"
-letter to Thomas Jefferson
.

"The priesthood have, in all ancient nations, nearly monopolized learning. And ever since the Reformation, when or where has existed a Protestant or dissenting sect who would tolerate A FREE INQUIRY? The blackest billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooish brutality, is patiently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded. But touch a solemn truth in collision with a dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest proof, and you will find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm about your eyes and hand, and fly into your face and eyes."
- letter to John Taylor
.

"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole cartloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity."
.

"The question before the human race is, whether the God of Nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles?"
.

"Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?"
-letter to Thomas Jefferson
.

"God is an essence that we know nothing of. Until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there will never be any liberal science in the world."
.

"Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1,500 years?"

". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."
.

"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it."

Thomas Jefferson The third president of the United States was Thomas Jefferson. He had been the author of the Declaration of Independence and the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. In an age of great men Jefferson was remarkable for his wide-ranging curiosity on many subjects. He helped the United States get started, and his plans for the future helped it grow. Many of the good things Americans enjoy today have come from Jefferson's devotion to human rights.
Jefferson is often called the founder of the Democratic party. Many other groups also claim to follow his principles. He developed the theory of states' rights, which was against giving much authority to the federal government. He is known to everyone as the author of the ringing statement in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal, that among their inalienable rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. His writings have stood as a torch to the defenders of individual freedom, in spiritual as well as in worldly affairs. .---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia Deluxe

.

"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose."
- to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814
.

"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth."
- "Notes on Virginia"
.

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.
- letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787
.

"It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one. But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests."
- to John Adams, 1803
.

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
- to Baron von Humboldt, 1813
.

"On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind."
- to Carey, 1816
.

"Gouverneur Morris had often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system (Christianity) than did he himself."
-in his private journal, Feb. 1800
.

"It is not to be understood that I am with him (Jesus Christ) in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of Spiritualism, he preaches the efficacy of repentance toward forgiveness of sin; I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it." - to Carey, 1816
.

"The priests of the superstition, a bloodthirsty race, are as cruel and remorseless as the being whom they represented as the family God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob, and the local God of Israel. That Jesus did not mean to impose himself on mankind as the son of God, physically speaking, I have been convinced by the writings of men more learned than myself in that lore."
- to Story, Aug. 4, 1820
.

"The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man. But compare with these the demoralizing dogmas of Calvin.
1. That there are three Gods.
2. That good works, or the love of our neighbor, is nothing.
3. That faith is every thing, and the more incomprehensible the proposition, the more merit the faith.
4. That reason in religion is of unlawful use.
5. That God, from the beginning, elected certain individuals to be saved, and certain others to be damned; and that no crimes of the former can damn them; no virtues of the latter save."
- to Benjamin Waterhouse, Jun. 26, 1822
.

"Difference of opinion is advantageous in religion. The several sects perform the office of a common censor over each other. Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth."
"Notes on Virginia"
.

"Creeds have been the bane of the Christian church ... made of Christendom a slaughter-house."
- to Benjamin Waterhouse, Jun. 26, 1822
.

"Let us, then, fellow citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect that having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of a bitter and bloody persecutions."
.

"I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature."
.

"It has been fifty and sixty years since I read the Apocalypse, and then I considered it merely the ravings of a maniac."
.

"The truth is, that the greatest enemies of the doctrine of Jesus are those, calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them to the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come, when the mystical generation [birth] of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation [birth] of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."
- to John Adams, Apr. 11, 1823
.

"They [preachers] dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversions of the duperies on which they live."
.

"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology."
.

"We discover in the gospels a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication ."
.

"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever."
-Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
.

"... I am not afraid of priests. They have tried upon me all their various batteries of pious whining, hypocritical canting, lying and slandering. I have contemplated their order from the Magi of the East to the Saints of the West and I have found no difference of character, but of more or less caution, in proportion to their information or ignorance on whom their interested duperies were to be played off. Their sway in New England is indeed formidable. No mind beyond mediocrity dares there to develop itself."
- letter to Horatio Spofford, 1816
.

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
.
.
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law."
-letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, 1814
.

"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot.... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose."
- to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814
.

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."
-letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT
"The Complete Jefferson" by Saul K. Padover, pp 518-519

**************************************************************

Discuss.

Jamie

Strange since one the first official act of Congress was to order the Printing of Bibles at the government expense to use as teaching aids. {Sept. 10, 1782...from the Congressional Record} -- "Resolved....That the United States in Congress Assembled highly approve the undertaking of Mr. Atken...and...recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby AUTHORIZE him to publish this recommendation."

And ALL 50 states acknowledge God in their state constitutions. And it is the States that ARE the United States of America.

Noah Webster furnished the TEXT books used for history in the Class Rooms across America...for the first 60 years after this nation was founded. And in those books for instruction to the youth of this nation we find, "The moral principles and precepts contained in the Scriptures (Holy Bible) ought to form the basis for our civil constitutions and laws." and "All the miseries and evils which men suffer from -- vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery, and war -- proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Holy Bible." -- Noah Webster

And my favorite from the person who actually wrote the 1st amendment, "It has been the custom of late years to put a number of little books into the hands of children, containing fables and moral issues. Why then, if these books for children must be retained, .... should not the Bible regain its place it once held as a SCHOOL BOOK? Its morals are pure, its examples captivating and noble. The reverence for the sacred book that is impressed lasts long. The Bible will justly remain the standard of language as well as faith." and "We are spending less time in the class room on the Bible, which should be the principle text book in our schools. The Bible states these great noble lessons better than any other manmade book." -- Fisher Ames, author of the 1st amendment to the United States Constitution.

This indeed is a strange position that is taken for someone that SUPPOSEDLY had drafted this Amendment to erect a wall of separation between Church and State "According to the opinion handed down by the SCOTS in 1947...that used the 1st amendment in an OPINED declaration of having freedom "from" religion instead of the original statement of having freedom "of" religion. It was a liberal......Hugo Black that constructed this imagined wall of separation that is not found in any writing of the US CONSTITUTION, He did so by opinion only in the 1947 SCOTUS decision rendered in Everson v. Board of Education. Clearly...anyone can see.....this was not the intent of the 1st amendment, the true intent was to keep the Federal Government from writing any or legislating any law in relation to religion and thus endorsing a single religion upon all the states...as was the practice in Europe.

Did You Know?

 

[vincubus]

This indeed is a strange position that is taken for someone that SUPPOSEDLY had drafted this Amendment to erect a wall of separation between Church and State "According to the opinion handed down by the SCOTS in 1947...that used the 1st amendment in an OPINED declaration of having freedom "from" religion instead of the original statement of having freedom "of" religion. It was a liberal......Hugo Black that constructed this imagined wall of separation that is not found in any writing of the US CONSTITUTION, He did so by opinion only in the 1947 SCOTUS decision rendered in Everson v. Board of Education. Clearly...anyone can see.....this was not the intent of the 1st amendment, the true intent was to keep the Federal Government from writing any or legislating any law in relation to religion and thus endorsing a single religion upon all the states...as was the practice in Europe.

Did You Know?

um...huh???

 

[Intense]

Ralph, Most of them were christian. The Diest influence I too recognize and respect, seeing it as a reflection against Religious Tyranny. Lets distinguish between God and what the Churches did in His Name. Madison and Jefferson show a heavy influence from John Locke, who was a strong christian, yet extremelly outspoken in relation to abuse. They believed conversion to be voluntary and optional, not force fed. The best course, by example, not mandate. True the Jeferson virtually blacked out pretty much everything but, Psalms, Proverbs, and what we would refer to the red letter wtitting of the New Testament, an onorthodox move to be polite. They still saw Conscience as the vehicle.

 

[Ralph]

This indeed is a strange position that is taken for someone that SUPPOSEDLY had drafted this Amendment to erect a wall of separation between Church and State "According to the opinion handed down by the SCOTS in 1947...that used the 1st amendment in an OPINED declaration of having freedom "from" religion instead of the original statement of having freedom "of" religion. It was a liberal......Hugo Black that constructed this imagined wall of separation that is not found in any writing of the US CONSTITUTION, He did so by opinion only in the 1947 SCOTUS decision rendered in Everson v. Board of Education. Clearly...anyone can see.....this was not the intent of the 1st amendment, the true intent was to keep the Federal Government from writing any or legislating any law in relation to religion and thus endorsing a single religion upon all the states...as was the practice in Europe.

Did You Know?

um...huh???

Obviously...."YOU" are an example of why the United States has dropped to the bottom of the food chain in relation to world wide education. You have never been exposed to the true history of this nation. Like the true history just presented in demonstration of the stance held by the ACTUAL author of the 1st amendment on Religion and Government......He endorsed using Bibles as teaching aids, not a separating wall being erected between religion and our government.

 

[Ralph]

Ralph, Most of them were christian. The Diest influence I too recognize and respect, seeing it as a reflection against Religious Tyranny. Lets distinguish between God and what the Churches did in His Name. Madison and Jefferson show a heavy influence from John Locke, who was a strong christian, yet extremelly outspoken in relation to abuse. They believed conversion to be voluntary and optional, not force fed. The best course, by example, not mandate. True the Jeferson virtually blacked out pretty much everything but, Psalms, Proverbs, and what we would refer to the red letter wtitting of the New Testament, an onorthodox move to be polite. They still saw Conscience as the vehicle.

Indeed....when the 1st amendment is read and comprehended...IN CONTEXT, we find that it is ONLY CONGRESS (The Federal Government) that is prohibited from drafting law in relation to religion. This mandate was not incorporated to include state and local government until such was opined into place in 1947...by who? The Federal Government and its very own Judicial Branch. What Mr. Black and his opinion did was circumvent the very authority of the 1st amendment and used it as a tool to allow the Central Federal Government to make an end run around the ban from making law on the subject of religion............they did not make it, THEY IMAGINED it into place....from the bench. Congress is not allowed to make new law........but SCOTUS is?

One cannot argue that it is not NEW LAW......as the precedent held firm for almost 200 years prior to this 1947 decision...that prohibited the FEDS from sticking their noses into local business. Once the gate was opened......the ACLU has used this 1947 opinion to use as precedence to make many other FALSE interpretations of the CONSTITUTION, based upon this first egregious breach of the 1st amendment.

Historically, what many fail to realize is the fact of the Supreme Court during that time period was 'SALTED' with Roosevelt appointments left over from his NEW DEAL which had attempted to use SCOTUS to bypass Congress on many occasions in order to have Roosevelt's NEW DEAL implemented.....in many instances directly against Constitutional wording.

 

[vincubus]

This indeed is a strange position that is taken for someone that SUPPOSEDLY had drafted this Amendment to erect a wall of separation between Church and State "According to the opinion handed down by the SCOTS in 1947...that used the 1st amendment in an OPINED declaration of having freedom "from" religion instead of the original statement of having freedom "of" religion. It was a liberal......Hugo Black that constructed this imagined wall of separation that is not found in any writing of the US CONSTITUTION, He did so by opinion only in the 1947 SCOTUS decision rendered in Everson v. Board of Education. Clearly...anyone can see.....this was not the intent of the 1st amendment, the true intent was to keep the Federal Government from writing any or legislating any law in relation to religion and thus endorsing a single religion upon all the states...as was the practice in Europe.

Did You Know?

um...huh???

Obviously...."YOU" are an example of why the United States has dropped to the bottom of the food chain in relation to world wide education. You have never been exposed to the true history of this nation. Like the true history just presented in demonstration of the stance held by the ACTUAL author of the 1st amendment on Religion and Government......He endorsed using Bibles as teaching aids, not a separating wall being erected between religion and our government.

when i posted "huh" i did so because the paragraph i quoted made little sense to me. perhaps it did to you though. i am thinking that you attempt brevity at the sacrifice of clarity.

the "real" history... hmmm....

Every new & successful example of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters is of importance.
-- James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822 (more complete excerpt given below)

And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.
-- James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822, in Saul K Padover, ed, The Complete Madison: His Basic Writings (1953), also; from Jack N Rakove, ed, James Madison: Writings, (1999), p. 789, quoted from Ed and Michael Buckner, "Quotations that Support the Separation of State and Church"

The civil government ... functions with complete success ... by the total separation of the Church from the State.
-- James Madison, 1819, Writings, 8:432, quoted from Gene Garman, "Essays In Addition to America's Real Religion"

Because the bill in reserving a certain parcel of land in the United States for the use of said Baptist Church comprises a principle and a precedent for the appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that "Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment."

-- James Madison, veto message, February 28, 1811. Madison vetoed a bill granting public lands to a Baptist Church in Mississippi Territory. Quoted from Albert J Menendez and Edd Doerr, The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom. Also in Gaillard Hunt, The Writings of James Madison, Vol. 8, (1908), p. 133.


pay careful attention to this last quote. and to point out the obvious, the first amendment says CONGRESS shall make no law. that doesn't bind the supreme court that body being charged with interpreting the constitution and matters pertaining to it. you do realize there are three branches of the federal government, and they function autonomously, right? that is the REAL history that you managed to overlook and garble badly.

 

[Ralph]

um...huh???

Obviously...."YOU" are an example of why the United States has dropped to the bottom of the food chain in relation to world wide education. You have never been exposed to the true history of this nation. Like the true history just presented in demonstration of the stance held by the ACTUAL author of the 1st amendment on Religion and Government......He endorsed using Bibles as teaching aids, not a separating wall being erected between religion and our government.

when i posted "huh" i did so because the paragraph i quoted made little sense to me. perhaps it did to you though. i am thinking that you attempt brevity at the sacrifice of clarity.

the "real" history... hmmm....

Every new & successful example of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters is of importance.
-- James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822 (more complete excerpt given below)

And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.
-- James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822, in Saul K Padover, ed, The Complete Madison: His Basic Writings (1953), also; from Jack N Rakove, ed, James Madison: Writings, (1999), p. 789, quoted from Ed and Michael Buckner, "Quotations that Support the Separation of State and Church"

The civil government ... functions with complete success ... by the total separation of the Church from the State.
-- James Madison, 1819, Writings, 8:432, quoted from Gene Garman, "Essays In Addition to America's Real Religion"

Because the bill in reserving a certain parcel of land in the United States for the use of said Baptist Church comprises a principle and a precedent for the appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that "Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment."

-- James Madison, veto message, February 28, 1811. Madison vetoed a bill granting public lands to a Baptist Church in Mississippi Territory. Quoted from Albert J Menendez and Edd Doerr, The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom. Also in Gaillard Hunt, The Writings of James Madison, Vol. 8, (1908), p. 133.


pay careful attention to this last quote. and to point out the obvious, the first amendment says CONGRESS shall make no law. that doesn't bind the supreme court that body being charged with interpreting the constitution and matters pertaining to it. you do realize there are three branches of the federal government, and they function autonomously, right? that is the REAL history that you managed to overlook and garble badly.

And obviously these quotes cherry picked and arranged in the order that you wish to present them NEGATE the actual Chronological record of Congress and History Actual. Can you spell D E F L E C T I O N ? The retort that you presented in no way proves this nation was not established with a total respect of religion and all peoples of faith. As evidenced by the First Legal Document this nation engaged in drafting.....The Declaration of Independence that called upon the Judge of the World..aka God in appeal to validate this document of separation from Great Britain.

The US Constitution is not the FOUNDING DOCUMENT of the United States of America......the Declaration of Independence preceded the Constitution by more than a Decade, and directly after signing an endorsement of that VERY LEGAL act of CONGRESS those signers rushed home and helped draft their STATE CONSTITUTIONS....which Also preceded the US CONSTITUTION by more than a decade......These STATES are the UNITED STATES of AMERICA.....THE US CONSTITUTION is nothing but a common agreement between these STATES that make up the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. It is WE THE PEOPLE that established or founded this nation and it is we the people that have the final authority to AMEND that common agreement of ratification.

The first state governments of this nation which indeed preceded the US Constitution by 10 years and served as THE FOUNDING governments of this nation. Clearly used PROVERB 29 as a guideline in choosing those they would have represent them in this new REPUBLIC, which states "When the righteous rule......the people rejoice".

On the same day they signed the Declaration of Independence these founding fathers underwent a transformation to being a servant of a higher government (England) to an independent government capable of establishing their own laws. And the first legal document endorsed and signed by our founders indeed agreed that rights are given NOT BY THE GOVERNMENT nor a piece of paper drafted with subjective guidelines...but these HUMAN RIGHTS were granted by the TRANSCENDING authority of the CREATOR.

As mentioned.....right after endorsing the Declaration of Independence...men such as Benjamin Rush and James Wilson of Pa., Samuel Adams of Mass. George Reed and Thomas McKean of Del. ....All went to their home states and helped draft their Constitutions......and in those Constitutions, not only are the Holy Scriptures referenced, they are mandated to be upheld by anyone that might wish to serve in these State Governments, with these same Constitutions directly mentioning Jesus Christ, and Father God.

It is now strange that some....... many years removed are attempting to rewrite history and declare the Federal Constitution as the only founding document of this nation, and falsely attempting to rewrite history and declare that no religious standards of Christianity were invoked in the establishment of this nation.......When our history books are doted with over 5000 pieces of documentation clearly declaring Christianity as the source to which our system of Republican Government was directly referenced.

Thus YOU HAVE the CARRIAGE in front of the horse. It was the STATE CONSTITUTIONS that were used in reference to write the US CONSTITUTION......not the inverse, as these state constitutions were used as legal precedent. And all these STATE CONSTITUTIONS stayed within the bounds of the Blackstone theory of Law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentaries_on_the_Laws_of_England

 

[Liability]

BREAKING NEWS!

The Founding Fathers' birth certificates have at long last just been released.

It turns out, most of them were born in what we now call Kenya

and they were mostly adherents of Islam!

 

[Intense]

The commonwealth seems to me to be a society of men constituted only for the procuring, preserving, and advancing their own civil interests.

Civil interests I call life, liberty, health, and indolency of body; and the possession of outward things, such as money, lands, houses, furniture, and the like.

It is the duty of the civil magistrate, by the impartial execution of equal laws, to secure unto all the people in general and to every one of his subjects in particular the just possession of these things belonging to this life. If anyone presume to violate the laws of public justice and equity, established for the preservation of those things, his presumption is to be checked by the fear of punishment, consisting of the deprivation or diminution of those civil interests, or goods, which otherwise he might and ought to enjoy. But seeing no man does willingly suffer himself to be punished by the deprivation of any part of his goods, and much less of his liberty or life, therefore, is the magistrate armed with the force and strength of all his subjects, in order to the punishment of those that violate any other man's rights.

Now that the whole jurisdiction of the magistrate reaches only to these civil concernments, and that all civil power, right and dominion, is bounded and confined to the only care of promoting these things; and that it neither can nor ought in any manner to be extended to the salvation of souls, these following considerations seem unto me abundantly to demonstrate.

First, because the care of souls is not committed to the civil magistrate, any more than to other men. It is not committed unto him, I say, by God; because it appears not that God has ever given any such authority to one man over another as to compel anyone to his religion. Nor can any such power be vested in the magistrate by the consent of the people, because no man can so far abandon the care of his own salvation as blindly to leave to the choice of any other, whether prince or subject, to prescribe to him what faith or worship he shall embrace. For no man can, if he would, conform his faith to the dictates of another. All the life and power of true religion consist in the inward and full persuasion of the mind; and faith is not faith without believing. Whatever profession we make, to whatever outward worship we conform, if we are not fully satisfied in our own mind that the one is true and the other well pleasing unto God, such profession and such practice, far from being any furtherance, are indeed great obstacles to our salvation. For in this manner, instead of expiating other sins by the exercise of religion, I say, in offering thus unto God Almighty such a worship as we esteem to be displeasing unto Him, we add unto the number of our other sins those also of hypocrisy and contempt of His Divine Majesty. - John Locke

 

[Smartt33]

jethro tull rules.

christian appearance and being a christian aren't the same thing. most ppl had one book in their house-the bible. in the face of this superstition, it would not do for an atheist to tout their atheism, but pander to the ignorant masses in order to establish a system (heavily corrupted today) that was the desire of many of the revolutionaries who wanted power.

having attended church for over 25 years, i can certainly believe that many who claimed to be christian in fact were not. but then, only your god is capable of judging if someone is truly a christian or not, but concerning the founders, i am highly skeptical.

you will need to excuse amanda. she is jealous because jamie threatens to take away attention from her. jamie does it by using her intellect, while amanda can only deploy vapid repartie that falls flat and a flirtatious manner. she will hump anyones leg to get her ears scratched.

btw, the case could be made using kantian dignity to support unalienable rights and so removing some "creator" from the equation

This is an issue that will not be solved any time soon, because both sides believe the other infrenges on their personal rights , or environments in some way. I cannot argue that because I stand on a high moral step, and basically refuse to step off by lowering my standards to allow some things to be practiced. If I am in the minority on an issue, I will lose, but I do not have to associate with immoral behavior. I am not trying to be mean. I am just saying that I want the very best for my children's environment, and will do my best to make sure that happens. If America lowers her standards, I just need to stand firm and not tolerate an accociation with the new standards.

i appreciate your post. i suspect you and i differ ideologically, but i too am moral, and also do not want standards lowered. especially when it comes to education. i also think it is possible to debate without rancor, should the two (or more) be somewhat civilized and accept the validity of the opposition to the pleasure of their opinion.

i would be willing to discuss matters with you, and do so respectfully, providing you can accept that one should hate the sin, but not the sinner, and accord me the same respect you also desire.

The debates here do get a little raunchy. I try to be respectful. I have learned over the years that the kinder I am the better I get at being kind in response to hate posts.

As for hate the sin and love the sinner, that has been my belief all along.