Those who insist Christians are attempting to establish a theocracy....

[daws101]

There is a big difference between establishing a theocracy and getting aholes to believe in God and salvation and values based living.

really?

funny I live a values based life and god had nothing to do with it ...
btw calling people assholes who don't buy into your sky fairy fantasy is a touch contradictory and petty don't you think?

 

[koshergrl]

Is North Carolina the United States?

And is establishing a state religion the same as establishing a theocracy?

It looks like, again, we have run up against the wall created by your lack of vocabulary, comprehension and overall intelligence:

"
the·oc·ra·cy

noun \thē-ˈä-krə-sē\
plural the·oc·ra·cies

javascript:void(0);






Definition of THEOCRACY

1
: government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided "

PS...you're a retard.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theocracy

And it was to expose how retarded you loons are that this thread was established. Thank you for playing.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

This is what happens when yahoos tell people they don't have a right to practice their religion.

You have the right to practice your religion. You just don't have the right to enact laws which reflect your particular version of morality, based on your religion's beliefs. That's why prayers aren't allowed in public schools. Because everyone's beliefs are different and out of respect for others who's beliefs are not the same as ours, we don't inflict our beliefs on them.

That is one of the most patently ignorant statements that I have heard. And unfortunately, it happens to be one of the most common 'mantras' of the left that defies logic and rationality.

What you believe is right or wrong is ALWAYS shaped by the morality that you hold. And whether you and your friends on the left like it or not, morality is generally shaped by your personally held beliefs such as religion or even the lack of it.

Oklahoma has a constitutional amendment that says marriage is between one man and one woman. It also says that we do not recognize same sex marriages conducted in other states. I worked for that amendment and I gave money to the cause of having that amendment passed. I believed at the time and I still believe that it is right, as did 70%+ of the voting public in Oklahoma. The fact that it may be overturned does not affect my belief.

To say that I should not vote based upon what my religion tells me is right and wrong is a 'talking point'. Totally invalid and completely lacking of rationality...

 

[Political Junky]

This is what happens when yahoos tell people they don't have a right to practice their religion.

You have the right to practice your religion. You just don't have the right to enact laws which reflect your particular version of morality, based on your religion's beliefs. That's why prayers aren't allowed in public schools. Because everyone's beliefs are different and out of respect for others who's beliefs are not the same as ours, we don't inflict our beliefs on them.

That is one of the most patently ignorant statements that I have heard. And unfortunately, it happens to be one of the most common 'mantras' of the left that defies logic and rationality.

What you believe is right or wrong is ALWAYS shaped by the morality that you hold. And whether you and your friends on the left like it or not, morality is generally shaped by your personally held beliefs such as religion or even the lack of it.

Oklahoma has a constitutional amendment that says marriage is between one man and one woman. It also says that we do not recognize same sex marriages conducted in other states. I worked for that amendment and I gave money to the cause of having that amendment passed. I believed at the time and I still believe that it is right, as did 70%+ of the voting public in Oklahoma. The fact that it may be overturned does not affect my belief.

To say that I should not vote based upon what my religion tells me is right and wrong is a 'talking point'. Totally invalid and completely lacking of rationality...

CA voted against gay marriage, too, and the Supreme Court ruled differently.

 

[MsAnthrope]

I don't believe that any one bill would be proposed to end democracy and establish a theocracy. It would never pass as a whole. But the religious right is continuously attempting to legislate based on their (christian) religion.

Let some one of the muslim faith try and propose a law based on the koran and the same righties would freak out.

Proposing a state religion
Sodomy laws
Fornication laws
Adultery laws
Abortion opponents
Same sex marriage opponents
Prostitution laws
In the past, prohibition laws
These are social issues, not political ones. (at least they shouldn't be, imo)

Even our foreign affairs are somewhat determined by christianity. Our policies regarding Israel, for example.

 

[PainefulTruth]

Please provide your evidence. Quotes and links of proposed legislation that seek to establish a theocracy in the US.

Thank you.

You mean besides all the Christians who insist this is a Christian nation? or those who want to establish all the blue laws, and laws prohibiting victimless crimes? Have we forgotten Prohibition, and do we not understand that it was an exact precursor to the War on Drugs, only instituted without the benefit of a constitutional amendment. What do they suppose our being a "Christian nation" means?

Our country was almost overturned by an unholy triumvirate during Jackson's presidency under his vice president, John C. Calhoun, the National Bank under its president, Nicholas Biddle, and the Presbyterians with its theocratic leader, Ezra Stiles Ely. All this was swept under carpet by pro-theocratic historians on both sides and given the misleading label of the Nullification Crisis.

And Sen. McCarthy's witch hunts were very thinly disguised theocratic pogroms. The biggest objection they had to communism, besides its anti-American stance, was its atheism.

While theocrats are much less of a threat than socialists at this point, we need to maintain vigilance against both.

 

[Clementine]

Yea, anytime someone repeats the words of some Muslims and reminds people that some have claimed that their plan is to spread out and multiply until they become the majority, the left rushes to their defense. Sharia law around the world is the goal. Someone invariably posts that Christians have done that forever. Hmmm. This country has been predominantly Christian for over 200 years and yet everyone remained free. No terrorist attacks on people for being non-Christian.

The abortion issue continues despite it being law. Most just don't feel that they should have to pay for others to have one and then get the leftie response that they may as well or they will be responsible for paying to raise the child. I just love how the left points at tax payers and says that this or that person is going to make really stupid decisions and that we are responsible for paying, so we better allow the solution that will save us some money. It's all on us no matter what other people do. Never mind what your conscience tells you to do, liberals will decide for you.

It seems that Christianity has been under attack for a long time. Even though the majority claim to believe in God, we are expected to bend over for the minority who claim to be offended by the sight of a nativity scene or a cross. Somehow we are not supposed to be offended when traffic is held up for hours while Muslims pray on the city streets.

Liberals staunchly defend Muslims regardless of the fact that Muslims would see them as the biggest infidels. They like them because they hate Christians. Don't take my word, read some reliable news sources about the continued killing of Christians in Muslim countries.

Muslims have a far more violent record than Christians and have admitted that they want a world that is all Muslim and living under Sharia law. I see no contributions to our country from Muslims. They are not part of our history. If they had been a force in this country from the start, we wouldn't be posting here today. There would be no freedom of religion. There would be no freedom, period.

Yet, with Christians being the founders and keepers for decades, we became the greatest country ever. Only now are we sliding down the same slimy slope that other foolish leaders chose for their people. It's not due to Christianity. It's because of ignorance, laziness and a lack of moral compass.

 

[rdean]

Please provide your evidence. Quotes and links of proposed legislation that seek to establish a theocracy in the US.

Thank you.

Pick your source.

republican party religious theocracy

This reminds me of USMB Republicans insisting gays are welcome in the GOP. Then they rush to support the duck guy who compares gays to humandogfucking.

 

[rdean]

Is North Carolina the United States?

And is establishing a state religion the same as establishing a theocracy?

It looks like, again, we have run up against the wall created by your lack of vocabulary, comprehension and overall intelligence:

"
the·oc·ra·cy

noun \thē-ˈä-krə-sē\
plural the·oc·ra·cies

javascript:void(0);






Definition of THEOCRACY

1
: government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided "

PS...you're a retard.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theocracy

And it was to expose how retarded you loons are that this thread was established. Thank you for playing.

Here, let me get down to your level.

I know you are but what am I?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Yes, they are. In multiple threads. In every Christian bashing thread, it comes up..."Christians are trying to establish a theocracy!" "Politicians must not reference God or make decisions based upon their faith" "Christians are forcing their religion upon us and they must be stopped!"

Ok, so this is their big chance to point out exactly HOW the so-called Christian bloc is attempting to establish a theocracy, and how they're trying to force their religion upon the citizens of the US.

Now I'm done talking to you. You're a troll, I already had you on ignore because this is what you do...you visit threads to post lies meant to derail them. Go away, ankle biter.

See no evidence of this irl. Online's online and a seperate reality. Since we can't push and shove each other in a discussion thread, people hurl insults instead. But the baseless claims or insults don't mean anyone serious is trying to to do whatever the accusations say.

I think rather a lot of the time what's credited with being religious is also already in law in some form, and very often verbatim to what's in Scripture.

Best arranged list of G-d's Law I've seen online. Skim through it and theocratic law will sound very familar indeed.

Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)

 

[TemplarKormac]

Please provide your evidence. Quotes and links of proposed legislation that seek to establish a theocracy in the US.

Thank you.

Pick your source.

republican party religious theocracy

This reminds me of USMB Republicans insisting gays are welcome in the GOP. Then they rush to support the duck guy who compares gays to humandogfucking.

That isn't an attempt to establish one. If anything, you are trying to establish secularism within America, when you compare Christians to the Taliban.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Is North Carolina the United States?

And is establishing a state religion the same as establishing a theocracy?

It looks like, again, we have run up against the wall created by your lack of vocabulary, comprehension and overall intelligence:

"
the·oc·ra·cy

noun \thē-ˈä-krə-sē\
plural the·oc·ra·cies

javascript:void(0);






Definition of THEOCRACY

1
: government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided "

PS...you're a retard.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theocracy

And it was to expose how retarded you loons are that this thread was established. Thank you for playing.

Here, let me get down to your level.

I know you are but what am I?

Actually, to get 'down' to her level, you'd have to go up.

 

[PainefulTruth]

Yet, with Christians being the founders and keepers for decades, we became the greatest country ever. Only now are we sliding down the same slimy slope that other foolish leaders chose for their people. It's not due to Christianity. It's because of ignorance, laziness and a lack of moral compass.

The most influential founders were deists, but this was a new experiment and they felt the only moral compass available for the uneducated masses was the church. Thus they publicly supported it. Paine was the only one to openly claim deism and he was socially crucified for it--by Christians.

Pointing to the evils of Sharia Law doesn't excuse Christian theocracy which inhabited both sides of the slavery issue, and still has reams of theocratic laws on the books such as the blue laws, the War on Drugs, the War on Poverty, the Great Society and on and on.

Christianity and other revealed religions, such as Islam, pay lip service to true morality (The Golden Rule), but then pile on, emphasize and exploit issues of individual virtue as they deem fit to maintain their particular religion's influence, power and wealth.

Deism proclaims a God that can't be bought or influenced to intervene or even reveal It’s existence. But what good does that do the man in the pew?

 

[Pogo]

First time visitor to this thread. Is this what you were looking for?

Thanks for this resource. I look forward to reading the rest of the thread.

 

[daws101]

First time visitor to this thread. Is this what you were looking for?

Thanks for this resource. I look forward to reading the rest of the thread.

btw kosher hag claims the theocracy in new England in the 17th century does not count because it was not yet the united states ....weakest argument ever!

 

[koshergrl]

First time visitor to this thread. Is this what you were looking for?

Thanks for this resource. I look forward to reading the rest of the thread.

Explain to me how that incident is evidence of Christians attempting to establish a theocracy.

Do you know what a theocracy is?

 

[koshergrl]

First time visitor to this thread. Is this what you were looking for?

Thanks for this resource. I look forward to reading the rest of the thread.

btw kosher hag claims the theocracy in new England in the 17th century does not count because it was not yet the united states ....weakest argument ever!

That's because THIS thread is a repository of evidence of Christians attempting to establish a theocracy in the UNITED STATES...which is something we are accused of day in and day out by know-nothing ignorami who obviously don't know #1, what a theocracy is, #2, what the United States is, #3, what constitutes *evidence* and #4 What "attempting to establish a theocracy" actually entails (legislation).

You should never use the phrase "weakest argument ever". You obviously don't even know what the topic of this thread is. I'm certain you aren't capable of understanding it. When you are able to understand the topic, and you are able to come to this thread with actual evidence of Christians attempting to establish a THEOCRACY in the US, you will be welcomed.

I created this thread a long time ago. And it has effectively stopped all the ridiculous and untrue accusations that Christians are attempting to establish a theocracy in the US. Because it isn't true. There's zero evidence of it, zero legislation either in existence or being proposed, and there are no movements as such within the christian community seeking to overthrow our current government and establish a theocracy in it's place.

I think the main confusion with people like Pogo and duhs is just that they don't understand what a theocracy is. No, a teacher who calls a Buddhist kid stupid for not believing in God is not evidence of Christians attempting to establish a theocracy in the US.

And no, the existence of theocracy in England in the 18th century is not evidence that Christians are attempting to establish a theocracy in the US.

Carry on now.

 

[Pogo]

First time visitor to this thread. Is this what you were looking for?

Thanks for this resource. I look forward to reading the rest of the thread.

Explain to me how that incident is evidence of Christians attempting to establish a theocracy.

Do you know what a theocracy is?

I mulled over whether to link to one of the articles or to the thread; I opted for the latter, since that would contain all the articles plus the reasoning. But I'll be happy to repeat what's there in pertinent part:

The plot sickens:

>> The lawsuit describes hallways with “[p]aintings of Jesus Christ, Bible verses, and Christian devotional phrases adorn the walls of many classrooms and hallways . . . A lighted, electronic marquee placed just outside the building scrolls Bible verses every day . . . . . . several posters urging students to “Pray,” “Worship,” and “Believe,” while a poster displayed near the waiting area of the main office announces that “t’s okay to pray.”

The ACLU says that staff members “routinely lead students in Christian prayer” and teachers have been known to distribute religious literature like the bible readings contained in Truth for Youth” literature which denounce evolution, birth control and other evil influences in society. The lawsuit also alleges that Sabine Parish superintendent Sara Ebarb asked the family about whether they could “change” their boy’s religious beliefs and whether it might the better to enroll in a school some 25 miles down the road where “there are more Asians.”

[from the suit]: Roark also routinely requires students to provide written professions of faith on science exams and other tests and assignments. Verif. Compl. ¶ 30. The required religious professions have typically consisted of fill-in-the-blank Bible verses or religious affirmations as test questions. Id. On one occasion, the final question on an exam presented students with the following fill-in-the-blank question: “ISN’T IT AMAZING WHAT THE _____________ HAS MADE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

Having been raised a Buddhist, C.C. did not know the expected answer and left the question blank. Id. ¶ 32. Roark marked it incorrect, wrote “LORD” in the blank in red ink, and returned the test to C.C. Id., Ex. A. She also scolded C.C., with the entire class listening, for not writing in the correct answer. Id. C.C.’s sister, who is also in Roark’s class, jumped to her brother’s defense, explaining that C.C. is a Buddhist and does not believe in God. Id. Roark returned to her desk, at which point a student remarked that “you’re stupid if you don’t believe in God.” Roark looked up and shook her head “yes” in affirmation of the student’s remark. Id.

... If even a fraction of these allegations are true, the district is looking at major liability in this litigation. While the district says it would have liked more time, these are open and egregious violations. This may be &#8220;the Bible belt&#8221; as the parents were allegedly informed, but it is also part of the United States and subject to basic constitutional limitations under the First Amendment. <<

-- Jonathan Turley

As the same article notes, "If the allegations are true, the district is engaging in astonishing levels of entanglement with religion in one of the most extreme violations of constitutional law in decades." The writer is a Constitutional law professor. And went to Tulane. And the court has decided that the allegations are indeed true.

 

[koshergrl]

Yeah I read it the first time.

It is absolutely not evidence of any attempt to establish theocracy in the US.

Here let me help you:

"the·oc·ra·cy

noun \th&#275;-&#712;ä-kr&#601;-s&#275;\ : a form of government in which a country is ruled by religious leaders
: a country that is ruled by religious leaders

plural the·oc·ra·cies


Full Definition of THEOCRACY

1
: government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided

2
: a state governed by a theocracy "


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theocracy

And here is some more, to help you:

"
theocracy

noun (Concise Encyclopedia)
"Government by divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided. In many theocracies, government leaders are members of the clergy, and the state's legal system is based on religious law. Theocratic rule was typical of early civilizations. The Enlightenment marked the end of theocracy in most Western countries. Contemporary examples of theocracies include Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the Vatican. "

 

[Pogo]

Yeah I read it the first time.

It is absolutely not evidence of any attempt to establish theocracy in the US.

Ok well if we're gonna just deny what's right in front of us there's not much point in posting here, is there?
I can only lead you to the water.

Toodles.