White Male Voter: Why Do I Have to Change?

[Correll]

THe op made a general point. YOu responded in kind. I responded to your posts the same way.



Why, suddenly, does it bother you to speak of this topic in a general fashion?



LOL!!! We both know why. I already said it. YOu are just pretending to have forgotten.

Speak of it any way you like. We still only have one example of mistreatment.

Weird.

NOpe. We have a general statement and a discussion of the issue in a general manner.



That you feel a need to lie about that, is your brain, trying to defend your world view from the Truth.

A general statement that is bullshit is still bullshit.

Dude. Seriously. YOu lost this one. It is not the end of the world.

What color is the sky in your fantasy world?

You have made a general statement with no support and you think “because I said so” is good enough

You could have explained what was wrong with my statement, and the supporting example I provided, OF YOUR BEHAVIOR.


BUt oddly, instead of taking that obvious step, you suddenly remembered that you hate talking about issues in a general manner, and instead decided to drop that entire debate and start over with a series of personal attacks.

How interesting.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Speak of it any way you like. We still only have one example of mistreatment.

Weird.

NOpe. We have a general statement and a discussion of the issue in a general manner.



That you feel a need to lie about that, is your brain, trying to defend your world view from the Truth.

A general statement that is bullshit is still bullshit.

Dude. Seriously. YOu lost this one. It is not the end of the world.

What color is the sky in your fantasy world?

You have made a general statement with no support and you think “because I said so” is good enough

You could have explained what was wrong with my statement, and the supporting example I provided, OF YOUR BEHAVIOR.


BUt oddly, instead of taking that obvious step, you suddenly remembered that you hate talking about issues in a general manner, and instead decided to drop that entire debate and start over with a series of personal attacks.

How interesting.

So far the outcome is the same for either generally speaking or specifically, we have one example of mistreatment....and that is that you are not allowed to whine about being mistreated.

 

[Correll]

NOpe. We have a general statement and a discussion of the issue in a general manner.



That you feel a need to lie about that, is your brain, trying to defend your world view from the Truth.

A general statement that is bullshit is still bullshit.

Dude. Seriously. YOu lost this one. It is not the end of the world.

What color is the sky in your fantasy world?

You have made a general statement with no support and you think “because I said so” is good enough

You could have explained what was wrong with my statement, and the supporting example I provided, OF YOUR BEHAVIOR.


BUt oddly, instead of taking that obvious step, you suddenly remembered that you hate talking about issues in a general manner, and instead decided to drop that entire debate and start over with a series of personal attacks.

How interesting.

So far the outcome is the same for either generally speaking or specifically, we have one example of mistreatment....and that is that you are not allowed to whine about being mistreated.

We only spoke in generalities. You have no problem with that, for several days. Then suddenly, you did.


Your spin on your actions, of treating white males differently than ever other group, ie not respecting their right to discuss themselves as a group or discuss any group interests,


is noted and dismissed. We had that debate and you lost.


Your actions demonstrated the behavior the OP accused you people of.


In a very big way.


Let me expand on that.


You are now "whining" about a lack of specifics.


BUT, you attacked us, for even identifying as a group and even the idea that we have any group issues.


With that act, you demonstrated that you are unreasonably hostile to white males,


ON EVER SINGLE SPECIFIC.


So, what is the point of discussing any specific, specific, when you have already expressed your hostility to ALL OF THEM?


And by doing so, demonstrating that the OP is right on ALL OF THEM.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

A general statement that is bullshit is still bullshit.

Dude. Seriously. YOu lost this one. It is not the end of the world.

What color is the sky in your fantasy world?

You have made a general statement with no support and you think “because I said so” is good enough

You could have explained what was wrong with my statement, and the supporting example I provided, OF YOUR BEHAVIOR.


BUt oddly, instead of taking that obvious step, you suddenly remembered that you hate talking about issues in a general manner, and instead decided to drop that entire debate and start over with a series of personal attacks.

How interesting.

So far the outcome is the same for either generally speaking or specifically, we have one example of mistreatment....and that is that you are not allowed to whine about being mistreated.

We only spoke in generalities. You have no problem with that, for several days. Then suddenly, you did.


Your spin on your actions, of treating white males differently than ever other group, ie not respecting their right to discuss themselves as a group or discuss any group interests,


is noted and dismissed. We had that debate and you lost.


Your actions demonstrated the behavior the OP accused you people of.


In a very big way.


Let me expand on that.


You are now "whining" about a lack of specifics.


BUT, you attacked us, for even identifying as a group and even the idea that we have any group issues.


With that act, you demonstrated that you are unreasonably hostile to white males,


ON EVER SINGLE SPECIFIC.


So, what is the point of discussing any specific, specific, when you have already expressed your hostility to ALL OF THEM?


And by doing so, demonstrating that the OP is right on ALL OF THEM.

That was a very long winded way of saying you have no examples of white males being mistreated by anyone but me...and I pretty much mistreat every group!

You keep invalidating your whining with every post

 

[Correll]

Dude. Seriously. YOu lost this one. It is not the end of the world.

What color is the sky in your fantasy world?

You have made a general statement with no support and you think “because I said so” is good enough

You could have explained what was wrong with my statement, and the supporting example I provided, OF YOUR BEHAVIOR.


BUt oddly, instead of taking that obvious step, you suddenly remembered that you hate talking about issues in a general manner, and instead decided to drop that entire debate and start over with a series of personal attacks.

How interesting.

So far the outcome is the same for either generally speaking or specifically, we have one example of mistreatment....and that is that you are not allowed to whine about being mistreated.

We only spoke in generalities. You have no problem with that, for several days. Then suddenly, you did.


Your spin on your actions, of treating white males differently than ever other group, ie not respecting their right to discuss themselves as a group or discuss any group interests,


is noted and dismissed. We had that debate and you lost.


Your actions demonstrated the behavior the OP accused you people of.


In a very big way.


Let me expand on that.


You are now "whining" about a lack of specifics.


BUT, you attacked us, for even identifying as a group and even the idea that we have any group issues.


With that act, you demonstrated that you are unreasonably hostile to white males,


ON EVER SINGLE SPECIFIC.


So, what is the point of discussing any specific, specific, when you have already expressed your hostility to ALL OF THEM?


And by doing so, demonstrating that the OP is right on ALL OF THEM.

That was a very long winded way of saying you have no examples of white males being mistreated by anyone but me...and I pretty much mistreat every group!

You keep invalidating your whining with every post

No, it is not.


You have expressed unreasonable hostility to the very idea that white males can have ANY issues as a group.



That means that ANY specific example, you are unreasonably hostile to it.


That demonstrates the OP's point completely.


We already have covered ALL OF THEM.


That is my point. It is a completely reasonable point.

But you need it spelled out for you?


Here, fine, I'll demonstrate.



Specific complaint number one.


1. White males are discriminated against by programs to increase diversity.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.


Do you want to do that again?


Here. it is easy peasy.



Number two.


2. <insert issue>


YOur response.


Cut and pasted from above.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.





Read it as many times as you like. Every time, your general response that we already know, is the same, to every specific example so it just doesn't matter.


YOU ARE ALL THE PROOF THAT THE OP NEEDS.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What color is the sky in your fantasy world?

You have made a general statement with no support and you think “because I said so” is good enough

You could have explained what was wrong with my statement, and the supporting example I provided, OF YOUR BEHAVIOR.


BUt oddly, instead of taking that obvious step, you suddenly remembered that you hate talking about issues in a general manner, and instead decided to drop that entire debate and start over with a series of personal attacks.

How interesting.

So far the outcome is the same for either generally speaking or specifically, we have one example of mistreatment....and that is that you are not allowed to whine about being mistreated.

We only spoke in generalities. You have no problem with that, for several days. Then suddenly, you did.


Your spin on your actions, of treating white males differently than ever other group, ie not respecting their right to discuss themselves as a group or discuss any group interests,


is noted and dismissed. We had that debate and you lost.


Your actions demonstrated the behavior the OP accused you people of.


In a very big way.


Let me expand on that.


You are now "whining" about a lack of specifics.


BUT, you attacked us, for even identifying as a group and even the idea that we have any group issues.


With that act, you demonstrated that you are unreasonably hostile to white males,


ON EVER SINGLE SPECIFIC.


So, what is the point of discussing any specific, specific, when you have already expressed your hostility to ALL OF THEM?


And by doing so, demonstrating that the OP is right on ALL OF THEM.

That was a very long winded way of saying you have no examples of white males being mistreated by anyone but me...and I pretty much mistreat every group!

You keep invalidating your whining with every post

No, it is not.


You have expressed unreasonable hostility to the very idea that white males can have ANY issues as a group.



That means that ANY specific example, you are unreasonably hostile to it.


That demonstrates the OP's point completely.


We already have covered ALL OF THEM.


That is my point. It is a completely reasonable point.

But you need it spelled out for you?


Here, fine, I'll demonstrate.



Specific complaint number one.


1. White males are discriminated against by programs to increase diversity.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.


Do you want to do that again?


Here. it is easy peasy.



Number two.


2. <insert issue>


YOur response.


Cut and pasted from above.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.





Read it as many times as you like. Every time, your general response that we already know, is the same, to every specific example so it just doesn't matter.


YOU ARE ALL THE PROOF THAT THE OP NEEDS.

The problem with your flawed conclusion is that I treat all groups equally. It is not only white males that I ridicule for being drama queens.

 

[Correll]

You could have explained what was wrong with my statement, and the supporting example I provided, OF YOUR BEHAVIOR.


BUt oddly, instead of taking that obvious step, you suddenly remembered that you hate talking about issues in a general manner, and instead decided to drop that entire debate and start over with a series of personal attacks.

How interesting.

So far the outcome is the same for either generally speaking or specifically, we have one example of mistreatment....and that is that you are not allowed to whine about being mistreated.

We only spoke in generalities. You have no problem with that, for several days. Then suddenly, you did.


Your spin on your actions, of treating white males differently than ever other group, ie not respecting their right to discuss themselves as a group or discuss any group interests,


is noted and dismissed. We had that debate and you lost.


Your actions demonstrated the behavior the OP accused you people of.


In a very big way.


Let me expand on that.


You are now "whining" about a lack of specifics.


BUT, you attacked us, for even identifying as a group and even the idea that we have any group issues.


With that act, you demonstrated that you are unreasonably hostile to white males,


ON EVER SINGLE SPECIFIC.


So, what is the point of discussing any specific, specific, when you have already expressed your hostility to ALL OF THEM?


And by doing so, demonstrating that the OP is right on ALL OF THEM.

That was a very long winded way of saying you have no examples of white males being mistreated by anyone but me...and I pretty much mistreat every group!

You keep invalidating your whining with every post

No, it is not.


You have expressed unreasonable hostility to the very idea that white males can have ANY issues as a group.



That means that ANY specific example, you are unreasonably hostile to it.


That demonstrates the OP's point completely.


We already have covered ALL OF THEM.


That is my point. It is a completely reasonable point.

But you need it spelled out for you?


Here, fine, I'll demonstrate.



Specific complaint number one.


1. White males are discriminated against by programs to increase diversity.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.


Do you want to do that again?


Here. it is easy peasy.



Number two.


2. <insert issue>


YOur response.


Cut and pasted from above.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.





Read it as many times as you like. Every time, your general response that we already know, is the same, to every specific example so it just doesn't matter.


YOU ARE ALL THE PROOF THAT THE OP NEEDS.

The problem with your flawed conclusion is that I treat all groups equally. It is not only white males that I ridicule for being drama queens.

GIve me a specific example. Your best one. The one that will impress me.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So far the outcome is the same for either generally speaking or specifically, we have one example of mistreatment....and that is that you are not allowed to whine about being mistreated.

We only spoke in generalities. You have no problem with that, for several days. Then suddenly, you did.


Your spin on your actions, of treating white males differently than ever other group, ie not respecting their right to discuss themselves as a group or discuss any group interests,


is noted and dismissed. We had that debate and you lost.


Your actions demonstrated the behavior the OP accused you people of.


In a very big way.


Let me expand on that.


You are now "whining" about a lack of specifics.


BUT, you attacked us, for even identifying as a group and even the idea that we have any group issues.


With that act, you demonstrated that you are unreasonably hostile to white males,


ON EVER SINGLE SPECIFIC.


So, what is the point of discussing any specific, specific, when you have already expressed your hostility to ALL OF THEM?


And by doing so, demonstrating that the OP is right on ALL OF THEM.

That was a very long winded way of saying you have no examples of white males being mistreated by anyone but me...and I pretty much mistreat every group!

You keep invalidating your whining with every post

No, it is not.


You have expressed unreasonable hostility to the very idea that white males can have ANY issues as a group.



That means that ANY specific example, you are unreasonably hostile to it.


That demonstrates the OP's point completely.


We already have covered ALL OF THEM.


That is my point. It is a completely reasonable point.

But you need it spelled out for you?


Here, fine, I'll demonstrate.



Specific complaint number one.


1. White males are discriminated against by programs to increase diversity.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.


Do you want to do that again?


Here. it is easy peasy.



Number two.


2. <insert issue>


YOur response.


Cut and pasted from above.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.





Read it as many times as you like. Every time, your general response that we already know, is the same, to every specific example so it just doesn't matter.


YOU ARE ALL THE PROOF THAT THE OP NEEDS.

The problem with your flawed conclusion is that I treat all groups equally. It is not only white males that I ridicule for being drama queens.

GIve me a specific example. Your best one. The one that will impress me.

You mean like ridiculing Christians for whining about being persecuted in America?

 

[Correll]

We only spoke in generalities. You have no problem with that, for several days. Then suddenly, you did.


Your spin on your actions, of treating white males differently than ever other group, ie not respecting their right to discuss themselves as a group or discuss any group interests,


is noted and dismissed. We had that debate and you lost.


Your actions demonstrated the behavior the OP accused you people of.


In a very big way.


Let me expand on that.


You are now "whining" about a lack of specifics.


BUT, you attacked us, for even identifying as a group and even the idea that we have any group issues.


With that act, you demonstrated that you are unreasonably hostile to white males,


ON EVER SINGLE SPECIFIC.


So, what is the point of discussing any specific, specific, when you have already expressed your hostility to ALL OF THEM?


And by doing so, demonstrating that the OP is right on ALL OF THEM.

That was a very long winded way of saying you have no examples of white males being mistreated by anyone but me...and I pretty much mistreat every group!

You keep invalidating your whining with every post

No, it is not.


You have expressed unreasonable hostility to the very idea that white males can have ANY issues as a group.



That means that ANY specific example, you are unreasonably hostile to it.


That demonstrates the OP's point completely.


We already have covered ALL OF THEM.


That is my point. It is a completely reasonable point.

But you need it spelled out for you?


Here, fine, I'll demonstrate.



Specific complaint number one.


1. White males are discriminated against by programs to increase diversity.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.


Do you want to do that again?


Here. it is easy peasy.



Number two.


2. <insert issue>


YOur response.


Cut and pasted from above.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.





Read it as many times as you like. Every time, your general response that we already know, is the same, to every specific example so it just doesn't matter.


YOU ARE ALL THE PROOF THAT THE OP NEEDS.

The problem with your flawed conclusion is that I treat all groups equally. It is not only white males that I ridicule for being drama queens.

GIve me a specific example. Your best one. The one that will impress me.

You mean like ridiculing Christians for whining about being persecuted in America?

Nope. One that will impress me.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That was a very long winded way of saying you have no examples of white males being mistreated by anyone but me...and I pretty much mistreat every group!

You keep invalidating your whining with every post

No, it is not.


You have expressed unreasonable hostility to the very idea that white males can have ANY issues as a group.



That means that ANY specific example, you are unreasonably hostile to it.


That demonstrates the OP's point completely.


We already have covered ALL OF THEM.


That is my point. It is a completely reasonable point.

But you need it spelled out for you?


Here, fine, I'll demonstrate.



Specific complaint number one.


1. White males are discriminated against by programs to increase diversity.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.


Do you want to do that again?


Here. it is easy peasy.



Number two.


2. <insert issue>


YOur response.


Cut and pasted from above.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.





Read it as many times as you like. Every time, your general response that we already know, is the same, to every specific example so it just doesn't matter.


YOU ARE ALL THE PROOF THAT THE OP NEEDS.

The problem with your flawed conclusion is that I treat all groups equally. It is not only white males that I ridicule for being drama queens.

GIve me a specific example. Your best one. The one that will impress me.

You mean like ridiculing Christians for whining about being persecuted in America?

Nope. One that will impress me.

That will never happen, I am not a whiney bitch so nothing I do will resonate with you and your fellow whiners.

 

[Correll]

No, it is not.


You have expressed unreasonable hostility to the very idea that white males can have ANY issues as a group.



That means that ANY specific example, you are unreasonably hostile to it.


That demonstrates the OP's point completely.


We already have covered ALL OF THEM.


That is my point. It is a completely reasonable point.

But you need it spelled out for you?


Here, fine, I'll demonstrate.



Specific complaint number one.


1. White males are discriminated against by programs to increase diversity.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.


Do you want to do that again?


Here. it is easy peasy.



Number two.


2. <insert issue>


YOur response.


Cut and pasted from above.


YOur response? We already know. YOu are hostile to the very act of referring to white males as a group, or them having any valid issues.


Which demonstrates the op.





Read it as many times as you like. Every time, your general response that we already know, is the same, to every specific example so it just doesn't matter.


YOU ARE ALL THE PROOF THAT THE OP NEEDS.

The problem with your flawed conclusion is that I treat all groups equally. It is not only white males that I ridicule for being drama queens.

GIve me a specific example. Your best one. The one that will impress me.

You mean like ridiculing Christians for whining about being persecuted in America?

Nope. One that will impress me.

That will never happen, I am not a whiney bitch so nothing I do will resonate with you and your fellow whiners.

If you truly do as you say, ie treat all groups equally, then you would find it mindless simple to give me an example that would impress me.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The problem with your flawed conclusion is that I treat all groups equally. It is not only white males that I ridicule for being drama queens.

GIve me a specific example. Your best one. The one that will impress me.

You mean like ridiculing Christians for whining about being persecuted in America?

Nope. One that will impress me.

That will never happen, I am not a whiney bitch so nothing I do will resonate with you and your fellow whiners.

If you truly do as you say, ie treat all groups equally, then you would find it mindless simple to give me an example that would impress me.

I cannot help that you do not pay attention to my postings. Open any thread and read my post for a change

 

[DBA]

America was founded as a white Christian country. Were not just going to hand it over to the blacks and Hispanics.

America was founded as a nation of laws. All faiths are welcome.

Yes, laws based in Christianity. Not sure why anti-religious folks argue this rather obvious point with so much ferver.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

America was founded as a white Christian country. Were not just going to hand it over to the blacks and Hispanics.

America was founded as a nation of laws. All faiths are welcome.

Yes, laws based in Christianity. Not sure why anti-religious folks argue this rather obvious point with so much ferver.

Or could it be that Christianity is based upon these common sense laws?

None of the laws require religion to be valid.

 

[DBA]

America was founded as a white Christian country. Were not just going to hand it over to the blacks and Hispanics.

America was founded as a nation of laws. All faiths are welcome.

Yes, laws based in Christianity. Not sure why anti-religious folks argue this rather obvious point with so much ferver.

Or could it be that Christianity is based upon these common sense laws?

None of the laws require religion to be valid.

Have you read any of the writings of our founders? The left is always twisting words in an attempt to validate their anti-Christian agenda. It is very clear where the loyalties of the majority of our founders lay.

 

[Seawytch]

America was founded as a white Christian country. Were not just going to hand it over to the blacks and Hispanics.

America was founded as a nation of laws. All faiths are welcome.

Yes, laws based in Christianity. Not sure why anti-religious folks argue this rather obvious point with so much ferver.

Weird that other countries, where Christianity is not the predominant faith, have the same laws. How is welcoming all faiths "anti religious"?

 

[Seawytch]

America was founded as a white Christian country. Were not just going to hand it over to the blacks and Hispanics.

America was founded as a nation of laws. All faiths are welcome.

Yes, laws based in Christianity. Not sure why anti-religious folks argue this rather obvious point with so much ferver.

Or could it be that Christianity is based upon these common sense laws?

None of the laws require religion to be valid.

Have you read any of the writings of our founders? The left is always twisting words in an attempt to validate their anti-Christian agenda. It is very clear where the loyalties of the majority of our founders lay.

Have you?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
​

But that's the low hanging fruit.

Thomas Jefferson:

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....
​

Have you read the Federalist papers? No mention of god anywhere in them.

The Founding fathers did not want a Christian nation. They wanted a nation where all faiths are welcome to participate in our secular governance.

 

[DBA]

America was founded as a white Christian country. Were not just going to hand it over to the blacks and Hispanics.

America was founded as a nation of laws. All faiths are welcome.

Yes, laws based in Christianity. Not sure why anti-religious folks argue this rather obvious point with so much ferver.

Or could it be that Christianity is based upon these common sense laws?

None of the laws require religion to be valid.

Have you read any of the writings of our founders? The left is always twisting words in an attempt to validate their anti-Christian agenda. It is very clear where the loyalties of the majority of our founders lay.

Have you?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
​

But that's the low hanging fruit.

Thomas Jefferson:

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....
​

Have you read the Federalist papers? No mention of god anywhere in them.

The Founding fathers did not want a Christian nation. They wanted a nation where all faiths are welcome to participate in our secular governance.

I refuse to spend time quoting a well established fact. I have been around and around on this before with leftist. Not matter the topic, they will spin until they are blue in the face. The sky is blue they say it is black and will defend it til their dying day. It is the main reason we have such morons running on the Democratic side now and many who actually support them. Some with intellilect, none with an ounce of wisdom.

 

[Seawytch]

America was founded as a nation of laws. All faiths are welcome.

Yes, laws based in Christianity. Not sure why anti-religious folks argue this rather obvious point with so much ferver.

Or could it be that Christianity is based upon these common sense laws?

None of the laws require religion to be valid.

Have you read any of the writings of our founders? The left is always twisting words in an attempt to validate their anti-Christian agenda. It is very clear where the loyalties of the majority of our founders lay.

Have you?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
​

But that's the low hanging fruit.

Thomas Jefferson:

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....
​

Have you read the Federalist papers? No mention of god anywhere in them.

The Founding fathers did not want a Christian nation. They wanted a nation where all faiths are welcome to participate in our secular governance.

I refuse to spend time quoting a well established fact. I have been around and around on this before with leftist. Not matter the topic, they will spin until they are blue in the face. The sky is blue they say it is black and will defend it til their dying day. It is the main reason we have such morons running on the Democratic side now and many who actually support them. Some with intellilect, none with an ounce of wisdom.

In other words you refuse to be provided with actual facts because you have your feelings on the issue.

When whining about others intellect, you might consider spelling the word "intellect" properly...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

America was founded as a white Christian country. Were not just going to hand it over to the blacks and Hispanics.

America was founded as a nation of laws. All faiths are welcome.

Yes, laws based in Christianity. Not sure why anti-religious folks argue this rather obvious point with so much ferver.

Or could it be that Christianity is based upon these common sense laws?

None of the laws require religion to be valid.

Have you read any of the writings of our founders? The left is always twisting words in an attempt to validate their anti-Christian agenda. It is very clear where the loyalties of the majority of our founders lay.

I am not left and I am not anti-Christian. Our founders were loyal to freedom and worked hard to ensure there was no government favored religion.