The Founders on Religion

[thanatos144]

As I pointed out to you before - those laws can force Microsoft to purchase their computers from Apple. I mean, after all, Microsoft "serves the public". Which means the government can force them into commerce with whoever they want by your own admission. Is that the market you want to live in? Apple greases the palms of a few Congressmen and bam! - Microsoft is forced to purchase all of their hardware from Apple? You ignored this point last time because it proved you were dead wrong on this issue.

It's idiotic, asinine, and unconstitutional Seawytch. And you know it.

Microsoft is a software company not a hardware company.

Microsoft also makes hardware. Now excuse me while I return to my Microsoft Xbox...

It is sold AT A LOSS to move software. They lost billions on the 360. And the Surface is their first true attempt to break into the market pc market.

Link to them losing billions on the 360.

Xbox 360 and PS3 losses total $8 billion, ex-Sony employee paints grim future

Over 2 Billion to be precise

The sooner you nitwits learn to accept what I say as truth the better off you'll be.

The PS3 ran at a loss yes but made a fortune on games... Xbox 360 would have made a fortune in hardware if they didnt **** up the first run of consoles yet still made a ton in games and other applications. Still nothing to do with the fact you are wrong about them only making software.

 

[Seawytch]

So why aren't "some Republicans" trying to get it repealed? Why challenge State law that requires gays to be served in about 25 states and not the law that requires blacks or Jews to be served in all 50? Could it be because the SCOTUS already found it to be Constitutional?

As I pointed out to you before - those laws can force Microsoft to purchase their computers from Apple. I mean, after all, Microsoft "serves the public". Which means the government can force them into commerce with whoever they want by your own admission. Is that the market you want to live in? Apple greases the palms of a few Congressmen and bam! - Microsoft is forced to purchase all of their hardware from Apple? You ignored this point last time because it proved you were dead wrong on this issue.

It's idiotic, asinine, and unconstitutional Seawytch. And you know it.

Microsoft is a software company not a hardware company.

Microsoft also makes hardware. Now excuse me while I return to my Microsoft Xbox...

Now I know you are fucked up in the head... True gamers use Playstations

True gamers don't dis other people's consoles. I have two PS4s, an Xbox One, Xbox 360 and a PS3.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So why aren't "some Republicans" trying to get it repealed? Why challenge State law that requires gays to be served in about 25 states and not the law that requires blacks or Jews to be served in all 50? Could it be because the SCOTUS already found it to be Constitutional?

As I pointed out to you before - those laws can force Microsoft to purchase their computers from Apple. I mean, after all, Microsoft "serves the public". Which means the government can force them into commerce with whoever they want by your own admission. Is that the market you want to live in? Apple greases the palms of a few Congressmen and bam! - Microsoft is forced to purchase all of their hardware from Apple? You ignored this point last time because it proved you were dead wrong on this issue.

It's idiotic, asinine, and unconstitutional Seawytch. And you know it.

Microsoft is a software company not a hardware company.

Microsoft also makes hardware. Now excuse me while I return to my Microsoft Xbox...

Now I know you are fucked up in the head... True gamers use Playstations

True gamers don't dis other people's consoles. I have two PS4s, an Xbox One, Xbox 360 and a PS3.

I sold my XBOX when Microsoft put all their games on the buy anywhere program. I7/GTX 1080 > Xbox. If you have the rig to run them there is literally no reason to own an Xbox. PS4 on the other hand are being smart with their exclusives which pushes their console sales. 60 million so far to Xboxs 20 million

 

[Cecilie1200]

Was the 3/5ths compromise not in the Constitution? Are you denying that?

Goddam that is funny.

Where in the Constitution does it say separation of church and state?

The funny thing is...they all hate Jefferson....until they want to cite his private letter about the Church and State...a private letter that was never part of any official government statement or action...then they love him...

In order for them to achieve their aims they have to control the language, to call up as down and black as white. Hence freedom FROM religion instead of freedom OF religion. Hence the SC being the most powerful branch of the Govt now.

The left loves the court because they only need to get 5 left wing assholes on it to create laws that rule the entire country......that is one reason it was supposed to be so weak, since they were appointed for life....

In fairness we rely on our 5 assholes just as much.

But not in the same way. We rely on them to make Constitutionally appropriate decisions applying duly and legally passed laws. The left relies on them to invent new laws superseding or flat-out ignoring the Constitution.

 

[Cecilie1200]

[QUOTE="P@triot, post: 16766826, member: 30955"...They only wanted the government out of the church.

Agreed, which means not forcing church on anyone or having a government-backed church.[/QUOTE]

And if anyone starts herding people to Sunday School at gunpoint, I certainly hope the left will take the time to let us know.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the Supreme Being in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. ... But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding....~ Thomas Jefferson

Are you sure you want to discuss Thomas Jefferson with me?!?

“The varieties in the structure and action of the human mind, as in those of the body, are the work of our Creator, against which it cannot be a religious duty to erect the standard of uniformity. The practice of morality being necessary for the well-being of society, He has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral precepts of Jesus". – Thomas Jefferson in a letter to James Fishback (September 27, 1809.)

Founders Online: Thomas Jefferson to James Fishback (Draft), 27 September 1809

Check out this book on the iBooks Store: The Real Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson edited a Bible in which he omitted all miracles.

So.....the point was that Jefferson believed in a God who judged humans......wether he supported the divinity of Jesus isn't an issue.

Jefferson was a deist.

Definition of deism

1. : a movement or system of thought advocating natural (see 1natural 8b) religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe

Yeah....not quite...

Historian: Thomas Jefferson was pro-religion

Barton argued Jefferson did not believe in the “clockmaker god” who simply wound up the universe and didn’t intervene in human affairs. At the same time, Barton explained, Jefferson was not a follower of conventional orthodox Christian belief, especially late in his life.

Yet despite these doctrinal departures, Barton claimed “there never was a time when he was not pro-Jesus, pro-Christian or pro-religion.”




Read more at Historian: Thomas Jefferson was pro-religion

Leftists never think about or question their own religious doctrine (leftism), so they have trouble comprehending the idea that other people can believe something, and still question and wonder and explore what they believe and why.

 

[thanatos144]

So why aren't "some Republicans" trying to get it repealed? Why challenge State law that requires gays to be served in about 25 states and not the law that requires blacks or Jews to be served in all 50? Could it be because the SCOTUS already found it to be Constitutional?

As I pointed out to you before - those laws can force Microsoft to purchase their computers from Apple. I mean, after all, Microsoft "serves the public". Which means the government can force them into commerce with whoever they want by your own admission. Is that the market you want to live in? Apple greases the palms of a few Congressmen and bam! - Microsoft is forced to purchase all of their hardware from Apple? You ignored this point last time because it proved you were dead wrong on this issue.

It's idiotic, asinine, and unconstitutional Seawytch. And you know it.

Microsoft is a software company not a hardware company.

Microsoft also makes hardware. Now excuse me while I return to my Microsoft Xbox...

Now I know you are fucked up in the head... True gamers use Playstations

True gamers don't dis other people's consoles. I have two PS4s, an Xbox One, Xbox 360 and a PS3.

I keep forgetting progressives dont have a sense of humor.

 

[Divine Wind]

Now I know you are fucked up in the head... True gamers use Playstations

True gamers don't dis other people's consoles. I have two PS4s, an Xbox One, Xbox 360 and a PS3.

I keep forgetting progressives dont have a sense of humor.

LOL. Funny and agreed. Besides, only kids play games.....and those young at heart. At 61, I'd never consider myself a "gamer", but I do enjoy the interaction in playing "Kill Shot Bravo". Menace2Sobriety alliance.

 

[Cecilie1200]

As I pointed out to you before - those laws can force Microsoft to purchase their computers from Apple. I mean, after all, Microsoft "serves the public". Which means the government can force them into commerce with whoever they want by your own admission. Is that the market you want to live in? Apple greases the palms of a few Congressmen and bam! - Microsoft is forced to purchase all of their hardware from Apple? You ignored this point last time because it proved you were dead wrong on this issue.

It's idiotic, asinine, and unconstitutional Seawytch. And you know it.

Microsoft is a software company not a hardware company.

Microsoft also makes hardware. Now excuse me while I return to my Microsoft Xbox...

Now I know you are fucked up in the head... True gamers use Playstations

True gamers don't dis other people's consoles. I have two PS4s, an Xbox One, Xbox 360 and a PS3.

I keep forgetting progressives dont have a sense of humor.

Well, see, a sense of humor requires the ability to understand the joke, and perception is REALLY not one of their strong points.

 

[Seawytch]

Microsoft is a software company not a hardware company.

Microsoft also makes hardware. Now excuse me while I return to my Microsoft Xbox...

Now I know you are fucked up in the head... True gamers use Playstations

True gamers don't dis other people's consoles. I have two PS4s, an Xbox One, Xbox 360 and a PS3.

I keep forgetting progressives dont have a sense of humor.

Well, see, a sense of humor requires the ability to understand the joke, and perception is REALLY not one of their strong points.

Since you have such amazing perception, what was "the joke"?

 

[GaryDog]

Just about every one of the founders believed in God....and not a God who simply made the earth and ignored it...a God who would judge individuals on their actions...even Benjamin Franklin and T. Jefferson believed it......

Separation of church and state was supposed to be the state leaving religions alone...not religious people leaving the state alone.

Uh, Jefferson was a deist who absolutely did not believe in a personal god.

Regardless, Franklin said THIS about organized religion:

“Were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."

 

[2aguy]

Just about every one of the founders believed in God....and not a God who simply made the earth and ignored it...a God who would judge individuals on their actions...even Benjamin Franklin and T. Jefferson believed it......

Separation of church and state was supposed to be the state leaving religions alone...not religious people leaving the state alone.

Uh, Jefferson was a deist who absolutely did not believe in a personal god.

Regardless, Franklin said THIS about organized religion:

“Were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."

You have no idea what you are talking about.....their words on the matter have already been posted.....especially Franklin's.....but keep lying...then go to confession...

 

[Seawytch]

Just about every one of the founders believed in God....and not a God who simply made the earth and ignored it...a God who would judge individuals on their actions...even Benjamin Franklin and T. Jefferson believed it......

Separation of church and state was supposed to be the state leaving religions alone...not religious people leaving the state alone.

Uh, Jefferson was a deist who absolutely did not believe in a personal god.

Regardless, Franklin said THIS about organized religion:

“Were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."

You have no idea what you are talking about.....their words on the matter have already been posted.....especially Franklin's.....but keep lying...then go to confession...

Okay, so what is your perception of what the founders wanted in regard to religion and the government ? What, today, does not gel with your perception of what they foresaw?

 

[2aguy]

Just about every one of the founders believed in God....and not a God who simply made the earth and ignored it...a God who would judge individuals on their actions...even Benjamin Franklin and T. Jefferson believed it......

Separation of church and state was supposed to be the state leaving religions alone...not religious people leaving the state alone.

Uh, Jefferson was a deist who absolutely did not believe in a personal god.

Regardless, Franklin said THIS about organized religion:

“Were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."

You have no idea what you are talking about.....their words on the matter have already been posted.....especially Franklin's.....but keep lying...then go to confession...

Okay, so what is your perception of what the founders wanted in regard to religion and the government ? What, today, does not gel with your perception of what they foresaw?

The Founders wanted no state religion,that is a religion created by the government with the power to tax in order to support it....as happened in England, ....they also wanted the government to stay out of the business of the various religions. Forcing religious people to bake cakes against their religious beliefs is exactly what they were trying to prevent.....

Also.....churches should be free to exercise their political opinions without losing their tax exempt status......government was to stay out of religion.....not religion out of government.

 

[Seawytch]

Just about every one of the founders believed in God....and not a God who simply made the earth and ignored it...a God who would judge individuals on their actions...even Benjamin Franklin and T. Jefferson believed it......

Separation of church and state was supposed to be the state leaving religions alone...not religious people leaving the state alone.

Uh, Jefferson was a deist who absolutely did not believe in a personal god.

Regardless, Franklin said THIS about organized religion:

“Were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."

You have no idea what you are talking about.....their words on the matter have already been posted.....especially Franklin's.....but keep lying...then go to confession...

Okay, so what is your perception of what the founders wanted in regard to religion and the government ? What, today, does not gel with your perception of what they foresaw?

The Founders wanted no state religion,that is a religion created by the government with the power to tax in order to support it....as happened in England, ....they also wanted the government to stay out of the business of the various religions. Forcing religious people to bake cakes against their religious beliefs is exactly what they were trying to prevent.....

Also.....churches should be free to exercise their political opinions without losing their tax exempt status......government was to stay out of religion.....not religion out of government.

So why did laws requiring religious people to go against their religious beliefs pass Constitutional scrutiny?

 

[bendog]

Just about every one of the founders believed in God....and not a God who simply made the earth and ignored it...a God who would judge individuals on their actions...even Benjamin Franklin and T. Jefferson believed it......

Separation of church and state was supposed to be the state leaving religions alone...not religious people leaving the state alone.

Uh, Jefferson was a deist who absolutely did not believe in a personal god.

Regardless, Franklin said THIS about organized religion:

“Were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."

You have no idea what you are talking about.....their words on the matter have already been posted.....especially Franklin's.....but keep lying...then go to confession...

Okay, so what is your perception of what the founders wanted in regard to religion and the government ? What, today, does not gel with your perception of what they foresaw?

The Founders wanted no state religion,that is a religion created by the government with the power to tax in order to support it....as happened in England, ....they also wanted the government to stay out of the business of the various religions. Forcing religious people to bake cakes against their religious beliefs is exactly what they were trying to prevent.....

Also.....churches should be free to exercise their political opinions without losing their tax exempt status......government was to stay out of religion.....not religion out of government.

So why did laws requiring religious people to go against their religious beliefs pass Constitutional scrutiny?

Did those laws exist prior to the Civil Rights movement? I honestly don't know. I know conscientious objector status dates back to the Revolution. And imo Ali got unfair treatment too.

 

[Seawytch]

Uh, Jefferson was a deist who absolutely did not believe in a personal god.

Regardless, Franklin said THIS about organized religion:

“Were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."

You have no idea what you are talking about.....their words on the matter have already been posted.....especially Franklin's.....but keep lying...then go to confession...

Okay, so what is your perception of what the founders wanted in regard to religion and the government ? What, today, does not gel with your perception of what they foresaw?

The Founders wanted no state religion,that is a religion created by the government with the power to tax in order to support it....as happened in England, ....they also wanted the government to stay out of the business of the various religions. Forcing religious people to bake cakes against their religious beliefs is exactly what they were trying to prevent.....

Also.....churches should be free to exercise their political opinions without losing their tax exempt status......government was to stay out of religion.....not religion out of government.

So why did laws requiring religious people to go against their religious beliefs pass Constitutional scrutiny?

Did those laws exist prior to the Civil Rights movement? I honestly don't know. I know conscientious objector status dates back to the Revolution. And imo Ali got unfair treatment too.

No, but that doesn't change the question. Laws requiring religious people to serve those (blacks) they didn't feel their religion wanted them to, lost at the Supreme Court level. Seems like the system is working just as the founders intended.

 

[Divine Wind]

No, but that doesn't change the question. Laws requiring religious people to serve those (blacks) they didn't feel their religion wanted them to, lost at the Supreme Court level. Seems like the system is working just as the founders intended.

Just so we're clear, SCOTUS rules on law. Congress makes the law. The President signs or vetoes laws. If Congress passes a law might be unConstitutional, SCOTUS makes the decision. If Congress rewrites the law to make it Constitutional, then SCOTUS cannot object.

SCOTUS, however, isnt' always right. The classic example being the Dred Scott Decision. Neither is Congress or any President. In the end, however, I do have faith our system of government prevails for truth and justice. Sure, it may take more time that some people like, but it's still progress even if we always take two steps forward and one step back.

 

[Seawytch]

No, but that doesn't change the question. Laws requiring religious people to serve those (blacks) they didn't feel their religion wanted them to, lost at the Supreme Court level. Seems like the system is working just as the founders intended.

Just so we're clear, SCOTUS rules on law. Congress makes the law. The President signs or vetoes laws. If Congress passes a law might be unConstitutional, SCOTUS makes the decision. If Congress rewrites the law to make it Constitutional, then SCOTUS cannot object.

SCOTUS, however, isnt' always right. The classic example being the Dred Scott Decision. Neither is Congress or any President. In the end, however, I do have faith our system of government prevails for truth and justice. Sure, it may take more time that some people like, but it's still progress even if we always take two steps forward and one step back.

Yeah, yeah. Dred Scott blah, blah. So why no challenges since the first "I shouldn't have to serve blacks because my religion tells me to" challenge to the FEDERAL public accommodation laws? Seriously, if y'all really do want separate lunch counters, why go after state law?

 

[Divine Wind]

Yeah, yeah. Dred Scott blah, blah. So why no challenges since the first "I shouldn't have to serve blacks because my religion tells me to" challenge to the FEDERAL public accommodation laws? Seriously, if y'all really do want separate lunch counters, why go after state law?

Translation: I refuse to respect your presentation of facts in this discussion and seek to keep it strictly in the realm of emotional argument.

No worries. Most partisans, especially LWers, are highly emotional so you're "normal".

As for forcing shop owners to serve certain people but not others, I see that as overreach by the Federal government for the same reasons Rand Paul made a few years ago. While I think it's stupid for a businessperson to base their customer base on racist or any other reasons, I respect their right to do so. I also respect the right of others to boycott or protest their business.

Rather than force them to comply with the total weight of the Federal government, I'd rather persuade them to do the right thing. One way to do this is to allow them to serve whomever they want, but not give them Federally-backed small business loans or tax-breaks unless they comply with Federal guidelines.

BTW, is this referencing Hillary's and the DNC's leaked emails?
"The Empire reminds Alderaan survivors that the leaked Death Star plans was the real war crime here. ~ John Fugelsang"