Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Religioustolerance.org? What, you couldn't find a nice article from Mother Jones?
Can't dispute it so you attack the source? That's typical for a Trumptard, but weak for you.
Spurious Quotations
The quote is frequently misattributed to Washington, particularly in regards to his farewell address of 1796. The origin of the misquote is, perhaps, a mention of a similar statement in a biography of Washington first published in 1835. However, the quote that appeared in the biography has never been proven to have come from Washington.
Sorry, Charlie, but you have to EARN the right to be refuted by citing credible sources. The fact that you're blowing wind doesn't automatically mean it deserves to be taken seriously. If you want to waste time believing everything on the Internet (as long as it agrees with your worldview), that's your business, but it doesn't obligate ME to waste time on it. I also find it uproariously funny that you have your knickers in a knot about misquotes and faulty sourcing, and you argue your side by citing religioustolerance.org. The irony is too delicious.
And trying to associate me with Trump supporters, even in passing, just makes you look even more illiterate.
Religioustolerance.org? What, you couldn't find a nice article from Mother Jones?
Can't dispute it so you attack the source? That's typical for a Trumptard, but weak for you.
Spurious Quotations
The quote is frequently misattributed to Washington, particularly in regards to his farewell address of 1796. The origin of the misquote is, perhaps, a mention of a similar statement in a biography of Washington first published in 1835. However, the quote that appeared in the biography has never been proven to have come from Washington.
Sorry, Charlie, but you have to EARN the right to be refuted by citing credible sources. The fact that you're blowing wind doesn't automatically mean it deserves to be taken seriously. If you want to waste time believing everything on the Internet (as long as it agrees with your worldview), that's your business, but it doesn't obligate ME to waste time on it. I also find it uproariously funny that you have your knickers in a knot about misquotes and faulty sourcing, and you argue your side by citing religioustolerance.org. The irony is too delicious.
And trying to associate me with Trump supporters, even in passing, just makes you look even more illiterate.
So how does one earn this "right"? I've never seen you challenge any link provided anyone on the right (feel free to link to a post proving me wrong). Religioustolerance.org actually cites their sources had you bothered to look. That you did not makes you seem Trumptard-like.
Religioustolerance.org? What, you couldn't find a nice article from Mother Jones?
Can't dispute it so you attack the source? That's typical for a Trumptard, but weak for you.
Spurious Quotations
The quote is frequently misattributed to Washington, particularly in regards to his farewell address of 1796. The origin of the misquote is, perhaps, a mention of a similar statement in a biography of Washington first published in 1835. However, the quote that appeared in the biography has never been proven to have come from Washington.
Sorry, Charlie, but you have to EARN the right to be refuted by citing credible sources. The fact that you're blowing wind doesn't automatically mean it deserves to be taken seriously. If you want to waste time believing everything on the Internet (as long as it agrees with your worldview), that's your business, but it doesn't obligate ME to waste time on it. I also find it uproariously funny that you have your knickers in a knot about misquotes and faulty sourcing, and you argue your side by citing religioustolerance.org. The irony is too delicious.
And trying to associate me with Trump supporters, even in passing, just makes you look even more illiterate.
So how does one earn this "right"? I've never seen you challenge any link provided anyone on the right (feel free to link to a post proving me wrong). Religioustolerance.org actually cites their sources had you bothered to look. That you did not makes you seem Trumptard-like.
I just told you, Einstein. Is English not your first language?
You earn the right to be taken seriously by citing serious, credible sources. You know, the same thing you're demanding from your opponents.
I criticize people who believe themselves to be on the right all the time. The fact that you've been reading my posts all this time and still haven't picked up on the fact that I have no patience with idiots of any stripe is disturbingly indicative of how deep in the leftist echo chamber you've gone.
I DID bother to look at religioustolerance.org's sources. They cited Wiki-fucking-pedia. 'Nuff said.
Oh sweetie...the internet continues to illustrate why it is the preferred tool of the simple minded. Google is not your friend.
And it proves what the world already knows - that the left lies about everything. It hasn’t long been the false narrative of the left that the founders were atheists who abhorred religion.
And it proves what the world already knows - that the left lies about everything. It hasn’t long been the false narrative of the left that the founders were atheists who abhorred religion.
Hell, the phrase “separation of church and state” doesn’t even exist in the U.S. Constitution. It is not constitutional to keep faith out of government.
How does that change the fact that the original quote about the bible was not George Washington, poodle puppy?Oh sweetie...the internet continues to illustrate why it is the preferred tool of the simple minded. Google is not your friend.
All Nations Should Pay Homage to GOD
“It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor.” — George Washington Thanksgiving Proclamation (1789.)
Excerpt From
The Real George Washington: The True Story of America's Most Indispensable Man
Jay A. Parry .This material may be protected by copyright.
And it proves what the world already knows - that the left lies about everything. It hasn’t long been the false narrative of the left that the founders were atheists who abhorred religion.
Hell, the phrase “separation of church and state” doesn’t even exist in the U.S. Constitution. It is not constitutional to keep faith out of government.
Because it’s paraphrased, sweetie. George Washington has hundreds of quotes about how God is required to guide a nation.How does that change the fact that the original quote about the bible was not George Washington, poodle puppy?Oh sweetie...the internet continues to illustrate why it is the preferred tool of the simple minded. Google is not your friend.
All Nations Should Pay Homage to GOD
“It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor.” — George Washington Thanksgiving Proclamation (1789.)
Excerpt From
The Real George Washington: The True Story of America's Most Indispensable Man
Jay A. Parry .This material may be protected by copyright.
One of your many lies...I've never seen a poster here post the claim that the founders were atheists, or that they abhorred religion.
Exactly. You dimwit progressives think people are welcome. Not the faith itself. Thanks for playing.Faith isn't. People of ALL faiths are welcome in it.
Religioustolerance.org? What, you couldn't find a nice article from Mother Jones?
Can't dispute it so you attack the source? That's typical for a Trumptard, but weak for you.
Spurious Quotations
The quote is frequently misattributed to Washington, particularly in regards to his farewell address of 1796. The origin of the misquote is, perhaps, a mention of a similar statement in a biography of Washington first published in 1835. However, the quote that appeared in the biography has never been proven to have come from Washington.
Sorry, Charlie, but you have to EARN the right to be refuted by citing credible sources. The fact that you're blowing wind doesn't automatically mean it deserves to be taken seriously. If you want to waste time believing everything on the Internet (as long as it agrees with your worldview), that's your business, but it doesn't obligate ME to waste time on it. I also find it uproariously funny that you have your knickers in a knot about misquotes and faulty sourcing, and you argue your side by citing religioustolerance.org. The irony is too delicious.
And trying to associate me with Trump supporters, even in passing, just makes you look even more illiterate.
So how does one earn this "right"? I've never seen you challenge any link provided anyone on the right (feel free to link to a post proving me wrong). Religioustolerance.org actually cites their sources had you bothered to look. That you did not makes you seem Trumptard-like.
I just told you, Einstein. Is English not your first language?
You earn the right to be taken seriously by citing serious, credible sources. You know, the same thing you're demanding from your opponents.
I criticize people who believe themselves to be on the right all the time. The fact that you've been reading my posts all this time and still haven't picked up on the fact that I have no patience with idiots of any stripe is disturbingly indicative of how deep in the leftist echo chamber you've gone.
I DID bother to look at religioustolerance.org's sources. They cited Wiki-fucking-pedia. 'Nuff said.
That was ONE of the sources, not the only one. Point is moot since I provided you an additional link. Washington cannot be credited with the quote.
Where is the post of you calling into question a link from a right leaning poster? Please, prove me wrong.
Can't dispute it so you attack the source? That's typical for a Trumptard, but weak for you.
Spurious Quotations
The quote is frequently misattributed to Washington, particularly in regards to his farewell address of 1796. The origin of the misquote is, perhaps, a mention of a similar statement in a biography of Washington first published in 1835. However, the quote that appeared in the biography has never been proven to have come from Washington.
Sorry, Charlie, but you have to EARN the right to be refuted by citing credible sources. The fact that you're blowing wind doesn't automatically mean it deserves to be taken seriously. If you want to waste time believing everything on the Internet (as long as it agrees with your worldview), that's your business, but it doesn't obligate ME to waste time on it. I also find it uproariously funny that you have your knickers in a knot about misquotes and faulty sourcing, and you argue your side by citing religioustolerance.org. The irony is too delicious.
And trying to associate me with Trump supporters, even in passing, just makes you look even more illiterate.
So how does one earn this "right"? I've never seen you challenge any link provided anyone on the right (feel free to link to a post proving me wrong). Religioustolerance.org actually cites their sources had you bothered to look. That you did not makes you seem Trumptard-like.
I just told you, Einstein. Is English not your first language?
You earn the right to be taken seriously by citing serious, credible sources. You know, the same thing you're demanding from your opponents.
I criticize people who believe themselves to be on the right all the time. The fact that you've been reading my posts all this time and still haven't picked up on the fact that I have no patience with idiots of any stripe is disturbingly indicative of how deep in the leftist echo chamber you've gone.
I DID bother to look at religioustolerance.org's sources. They cited Wiki-fucking-pedia. 'Nuff said.
That was ONE of the sources, not the only one. Point is moot since I provided you an additional link. Washington cannot be credited with the quote.
Where is the post of you calling into question a link from a right leaning poster? Please, prove me wrong.
It was the first source, and I discount anyone as serious and legitimate if they think it's a source AT ALL. That's completely aside from the fact that religioustolerance.org is itself barely more than a blog.
YOUR point is moot, since I never credited Washington with any quote. Your discussion with me is completely and totally about the fact that you presented your argument like an ignorant hypocrite by doing the exact same thing you were raging at others for doing.
I have no obligation to prove fuck-all to you, twerp. YOU made the accusation, YOU get to prove yourself right. You do NOT get to accuse me of things and then demand that I prove you wrong. It would also require me to give a damn what you think about me, and I don't.
One of your many lies...I've never seen a poster here post the claim that the founders were atheists, or that they abhorred religion.
I just did. For you to claim that you’ve “never” seen a poster on USMB claim that the founders were atheists or that they abhorred religion is an egregious lie. USMB is filled with that stuff from the left and I know you’ve seen it.One of your many lies...I've never seen a poster here post the claim that the founders were atheists, or that they abhorred religion.
Show us a few of them.
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
Sorry, Charlie, but you have to EARN the right to be refuted by citing credible sources. The fact that you're blowing wind doesn't automatically mean it deserves to be taken seriously. If you want to waste time believing everything on the Internet (as long as it agrees with your worldview), that's your business, but it doesn't obligate ME to waste time on it. I also find it uproariously funny that you have your knickers in a knot about misquotes and faulty sourcing, and you argue your side by citing religioustolerance.org. The irony is too delicious.
And trying to associate me with Trump supporters, even in passing, just makes you look even more illiterate.
So how does one earn this "right"? I've never seen you challenge any link provided anyone on the right (feel free to link to a post proving me wrong). Religioustolerance.org actually cites their sources had you bothered to look. That you did not makes you seem Trumptard-like.
I just told you, Einstein. Is English not your first language?
You earn the right to be taken seriously by citing serious, credible sources. You know, the same thing you're demanding from your opponents.
I criticize people who believe themselves to be on the right all the time. The fact that you've been reading my posts all this time and still haven't picked up on the fact that I have no patience with idiots of any stripe is disturbingly indicative of how deep in the leftist echo chamber you've gone.
I DID bother to look at religioustolerance.org's sources. They cited Wiki-fucking-pedia. 'Nuff said.
That was ONE of the sources, not the only one. Point is moot since I provided you an additional link. Washington cannot be credited with the quote.
Where is the post of you calling into question a link from a right leaning poster? Please, prove me wrong.
It was the first source, and I discount anyone as serious and legitimate if they think it's a source AT ALL. That's completely aside from the fact that religioustolerance.org is itself barely more than a blog.
YOUR point is moot, since I never credited Washington with any quote. Your discussion with me is completely and totally about the fact that you presented your argument like an ignorant hypocrite by doing the exact same thing you were raging at others for doing.
I have no obligation to prove fuck-all to you, twerp. YOU made the accusation, YOU get to prove yourself right. You do NOT get to accuse me of things and then demand that I prove you wrong. It would also require me to give a damn what you think about me, and I don't.
Your lack of a link is my proof. You're a partisan hack like the rest of us.
All a distraction from the FACT that Washington never said it.
Faith isn't. People of ALL faiths are welcome in it.
No my dear. It is clear that our founders didn't want the government in the church. But they absolutely wanted the church in government.It's clear the founders didn't want religion interfering in government and vice versa regardless of their personal beliefs.
