The Founders on Religion

[emilynghiem]

Religion is a wonderful thing, taken in moderation.

Dear Borillar the same way Govt needs to be checked and balanced,
to prevent abuse of collective power over individuals,
the same principles need to be applied to ANY large/collective institution,
whether religious, political party, nonprofit or business corporation.

Otherwise, as long as larger groups have greater collective
power, influence, resources or authority over individuals,
then we risk abuse and violations of equal protections of the laws.

Currently even our govt is hard to check because the legal system
is also monopolized for corporate and monied interests that can afford
to defend their rights and interests unequally compared with individuals
without the same access to legal defense as large corporations.

It's more than just moderation needed, but means of democratic
due process to ensure the right to petition to redress grievances,
so that individuals always have means of checking against abuses.

Regardless of the nature or purpose of the large organization,
govt or nongovt, religious or secular, business or nonprofit,
political or educational. Any large organization lends itself
to abuse or corruption when influence and resources of the
many are concentrated in the hands and power of a few.

 

[emilynghiem]

Prove your religion is the right religion!

Correction yet another left-wing false narrative. This time it is the lie that the founders wanted to build a "secular nation" in which the government was "free from religion".

"And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"

— George Washington Farewell Address (September 19, 1796)

Dear boilermaker55
It is not necessary to prove a religion is right or true
in order to be guaranteed the free exercise of it.

Where proof is necessary is when others choose freely to adopt or comply.

Incidentally that is why so many people are now contesting unproven policies
that are faith based yet being imposed on people through govt, for example:
1. faith or belief that LGBT identity/orientation is either a choice or not a choice of behavior,
it is inborn and cannot be changed or it is unnatural and can be changed
2. faith or belief that health care is either mandatory as a right through govt to regulate
or health care is a personal free choice of individual liberty and not authorized to federal govt to regulate

The issue is whether people are given equal choice to believe or not.

You don't have to prove it for the right for YOU to have that choice.
But for other people to have free choice in beliefs or religion,
they may ask to see proof - NOT for the purpose of justifying
govt imposing that on them, but for the people to CHOOSE freely,
regardless if it is proven or not.

Health care has not been proven to everyone to work better through govt,
but even if it is proven, people still should have free choice in the matter.

"proof" a religious teaching or belief is true or not is NOT justification
for govt either establishing or prohibiting religion through law.
What matters is respecting people's free choice of beliefs,
and not being forced by govt/law to change their beliefs.

 

[emilynghiem]

You didn't really answer that one. You danced around the simple "yes, you're willing to go back to separate lunch counters" answer. Afraid to say it out loud?

Dear Seawytch
not separte lunch counters as in segregation by race which is not a choice,
but separating religious and political beliefs by party instead of imposing either one through govt.

Do you agree we have a healthy "segregation" between groups who CHOOSE
Hindu or Muslim organizations and principles/programs to fund, run and be under?
Free choice of either Catholic or Protestant denominations?

So why not free choice of whether to fund and manage social programs
and benefits through one PARTY or another, depending on taxpayer's free choice of which beliefs they support?

 

[emilynghiem]

There have been no challenges since. Pussies.

Yes and no Seawytch
it depends how you see the conflicts over business owners being forced
to provide services for gay weddings that are against their beliefs.

Some are arguing this is unconstitutional.

It's one thing to require businesses to sell to anyone who enters their store front.
It's another thing entirely to REQUIRE businesses to provide certain services
that involve them personally engaging in, attending or participating in the actual event.

So this is being challenged legally and may end up going all the way to the Supreme Court.

I understand that public accommodations should apply to serving all customers
regardless of their beliefs, including LGBT. But you can still serve the customer
by providing some services, while refusing others. For example, if a gay customer
orders cupcakes for a birthday party, yes, you still serve that customer. But a
same sex wedding is an EVENT, and people can choose not to service such EVENTS.

I can agree to film football games or golf,
but not film baseball, ballet or gymnastics.

If I read your script and decide I don't want to produce a violent movie
that depicts rape, or some movie I don't agree with that preaches how everyone needs to convert to Christianity,
that's entirely my artistic decision and license to choose or refuse that opportunity.

Just because I turn away service to a "Christian" customer
because I don't agree with or believe in the content of the message they want me to produce,
doesn't mean I am refusing to accommodate them on the basis of their religion.

My beliefs count equally as theirs. And if we don't agree,
then neither of us has the right to take our beliefs and abuse govt to force
the other to comply and accommodate ours if they don't want to participate in that event or message.

 

[Cossack1483]

1483. Christian jihad. Local and global Christian Ethno States will be formed. Much like the creation of isreal. A sancuary zone for White People.

 

[boilermaker55]

Thank you for agreeing with me!
My contention is with those on this board that constantly rave about their right to practice their religion is being altered.
That is so blatantly false yet they scream the narrative constantly.

Prove your religion is the right religion!

Correction yet another left-wing false narrative. This time it is the lie that the founders wanted to build a "secular nation" in which the government was "free from religion".

"And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"

— George Washington Farewell Address (September 19, 1796)

Dear boilermaker55
It is not necessary to prove a religion is right or true
in order to be guaranteed the free exercise of it.

Where proof is necessary is when others choose freely to adopt or comply.

Incidentally that is why so many people are now contesting unproven policies
that are faith based yet being imposed on people through govt, for example:
1. faith or belief that LGBT identity/orientation is either a choice or not a choice of behavior,
it is inborn and cannot be changed or it is unnatural and can be changed
2. faith or belief that health care is either mandatory as a right through govt to regulate
or health care is a personal free choice of individual liberty and not authorized to federal govt to regulate

The issue is whether people are given equal choice to believe or not.

You don't have to prove it for the right for YOU to have that choice.
But for other people to have free choice in beliefs or religion,
they may ask to see proof - NOT for the purpose of justifying
govt imposing that on them, but for the people to CHOOSE freely,
regardless if it is proven or not.

Health care has not been proven to everyone to work better through govt,
but even if it is proven, people still should have free choice in the matter.

"proof" a religious teaching or belief is true or not is NOT justification
for govt either establishing or prohibiting religion through law.
What matters is respecting people's free choice of beliefs,
and not being forced by govt/law to change their beliefs.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

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

Thomas Jefferson was a bad-ass motherfucker!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

“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.)

Hey, the moral precepts of Jesus (if he even existed) are perfectly fine. That does not mean Thomas Jefferson believed in Jesus.

He, in fact, did not. He was a deist.

 

[regent]

“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.)

Hey, the moral precepts of Jesus (if he even existed) are perfectly fine. That does not mean Thomas Jefferson believed in Jesus.

 

[Cecilie1200]

“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.)

Hey, the moral precepts of Jesus (if he even existed) are perfectly fine. That does not mean Thomas Jefferson believed in Jesus.

He, in fact, did not. He was a deist.

Who told you Deism is mutually exclusive to belief in Jesus?

And most historians believe that Jesus was an actual historical figure. Obviously, there's some disagreement on whether or not He was God.

 

[P@triot]

He, in fact, did not. He was a deist.

You, in fact, are completely and totally clueless about Thomas Jefferson...

“To the corruptions of Christianity I am indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished anyone to be – sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others.” - Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803

He was a devout Christian to his core. He hated the corruption found in organized religion and he was committed to preventing government from controlling organized religion, but that didn’t make him a “deist”.

Excerpt From The Real Thomas Jefferson: The True Story of America's Philosopher of Freedom
Andrew M. Allison. This material may be protected by copyright.

 

[JBond]

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

Just to add something to the topic.

"No one can deny that many of the founding fathers of the United States of America were men of deep religious convictions based in the Bible and faith in Jesus Christ. Of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence, nearly half (24) held seminary or Bible school degrees.

These Christian quotes of the founding fathers on religion will give you an overview of their strong moral and spiritual convictions which helped form the foundations of our nation and our government."

Hear the Founding Fathers on Faith, Jesus, and the Bible

 

[Lakhota]

Correction yet another left-wing false narrative. This time it is the lie that the founders wanted to build a "secular nation" in which the government was "free from religion".

"And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"

— George Washington Farewell Address (September 19, 1796)

They gave us a "Godless" Constitution. End of story.

 

[thanatos144]

Correction yet another left-wing false narrative. This time it is the lie that the founders wanted to build a "secular nation" in which the government was "free from religion".

"And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"

— George Washington Farewell Address (September 19, 1796)

They gave us a "Godless" Constitution. End of story.

What ever gave you that stupid idea when freedom of worship is so prevalent in it? By the way before you ignorantly say it there is no separation of church and state in the constitution

Sent from my LGMP260 using Tapatalk

 

[Issa]

So how come the cons keep voting for sinners , adulterers, child molesters, non practicing pussy grabbers? Where is Jesus in all of this?
Also where is your compassion towards to those who come here for a better life? And wassup with being too racist, aggessive and war hungry? Is that what the gospel is all about?

 

[mikegriffith1]

Yeah, the record is overwhelmingly clear that the founders recognized the importance of religion for the health of society and that their concept of separation of church and state was the polar opposite of the liberal concept of it. For every one quote that liberals can find, we have 10 that say the opposite, and the vast majority of their few quotes come from Jefferson and Madison much later in their lives after both became bitter toward religion because of personal tragedies.

In reality, liberals could not care less what the founding fathers said on the matter. They view most of the founders as bigoted, racist, disreputable snobs, and they view our nation's founding as dishonorable and shameful. (Of course, one would like to see them find another country's founding that meets their standards for reputable and honorable.)

 

[P@triot]

They gave us a "Godless" Constitution. End of story.

How would you know? You’ve literally never read the U.S. Constitution.

Furthermore, “they” gave us an inalienable right to keep and bear arms - end of story. Yet you have an entirely thread dedicated to why guns should be confiscated and outlawed.

Hypocrite much?

 

[regent]

A new set of beliefs had begun in Europe even before America was taking form. Some of the new beliefs were adopted by Colonial America and some of the world is still in the process of accepting those new beliefs. The beliefs are called the Age of Enlightenment, or the Age of Reason. Not all of the world has accepted or even dabbled in the new beliefs, but it is a most interesting age, and understanding the age helps us understand some of our turmoil.

 

[regent]

They gave us a "Godless" Constitution. End of story.

How would you know? You’ve literally never read the U.S. Constitution.

Furthermore, “they” gave us an inalienable right to keep and bear arms - end of story. Yet you have an entirely thread dedicated to why guns should be confiscated and outlawed.

Hypocrite much?

There was no inalienable right given to keep guns. The right could be removed by amendment or Court decision.

 

[P@triot]

There was no inalienable right given to keep guns. The right could be removed by amendment or Court decision.

Rights don’t come from government, snowflake. Rights are protected and defended by government. Rights come from God.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”

Psst...Regent...“their Creator” means God. My rights come from God. I don’t answer to man. What a shame that you do. Man is flawed. Man is unethical. Man can even be evil. Dumbocrats prove all of that every day.

Excerpt From United States Declaration of Independence
United States. This material may be protected by copyright.