View Full Version : Freedom of Religion, or Freedom FROM Religion?
Outraged Citizen
08-18-2010, 03:43 PM
Very simple. I want opinions on the current state of religion in this country. I agree with both sides. While seperation of Church and State makes reasonable sense, unreasonable people twist it to suit their agendas. Public schools should not have "Prayer Assemblies", where all the students are joined in prayer. But I will be livid the day one of my daughter's gets in trouble for praying over her meal in the school cafeteria.
Extremists atheists (because I never believe that any group of individuals can be all lumped together in opinion...) want to push their beliefs onto the general public. They want to see no sign of any religion, of any kind. They take this so far as to want to change our nation's motto. What would you have it be? "One Nation, Unless You Disagree"?
Leave my country alone. If you want to know what Seperation of Church and State was for, look in a history book, it's perfectly clear.
crin63
08-18-2010, 05:42 PM
Our country was founded on the fundamentals of Christianity. Preachers like George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards fundamentally shaped our country with their preaching of God's word. What was it, 28 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were preachers.
Congress commissioned the printing of a Bible for use in our schools, in fact I think that was the very 1st thing congress ever commissioned to be printed. We use to have national days of prayer and thanksgiving.
The capitol building used to be used for church services and the Marine Corp band played the hymns.
If it were the religious beliefs of our founders I would have no problem with prayer assemblies.
Separation of church and state was meant to be freedom from a state church like the Church of England. Our founders never meant for religion to be kept out of government or our schools. The separation of church and state as commonly argued is just a perversion of leftists to quash morality in this country. That's the only way they can achieve their goals.
Sweetchuck
08-18-2010, 06:07 PM
Our country was founded on the fundamentals of Christianity. Preachers like George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards fundamentally shaped our country with their preaching of God's word. What was it, 28 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were preachers.
Congress commissioned the printing of a Bible for use in our schools, in fact I think that was the very 1st thing congress ever commissioned to be printed. We use to have national days of prayer and thanksgiving.
The capitol building used to be used for church services and the Marine Corp band played the hymns.
If it were the religious beliefs of our founders I would have no problem with prayer assemblies.
Separation of church and state was meant to be freedom from a state church like the Church of England. Our founders never meant for religion to be kept out of government or our schools. The separation of church and state as commonly argued is just a perversion of leftists to quash morality in this country. That's the only way they can achieve their goals.
Our forefathers were also shitting in pits behind their houses, fucking and fathering children with their negro slaves and applying hot iron rods to snakebites.
You advocating that also?
Outraged Citizen
08-18-2010, 07:54 PM
I think you both misinterpret what "Freedom of Religion" means. Honestly, it was meant that the government could not regulate or support one religion, or ban any peacable religion.
And not all atheists are extremist. Some simply do not believe in God, (ANY DEITY) and don't want to be harassed by fundamental christians. Yes, that was where our nation originated, but our forefathers chose to escape to where a man could choose a religion for himself....not where a man would never have to see any form of religion. If a muslim child wants to pray to the east in school, and he does it in a non-disruptive manner, I believe he has that right.
Palin Rider
08-18-2010, 08:43 PM
Extremists atheists (because I never believe that any group of individuals can be all lumped together in opinion...) want to push their beliefs onto the general public. They want to see no sign of any religion, of any kind. They take this so far as to want to change our nation's motto. What would you have it be? "One Nation, Unless You Disagree"?
FYI, our motto was "E Pluribus Unum" (of many, one) until the McCarthy era, when fear of the "godless commies" prompted Congress to change it to "In God We Trust."
I prefer, "In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash." :laugh:
Missileman
08-18-2010, 09:19 PM
Our country was founded on the fundamentals of Christianity.
Then you should have no problem enumerating these principles. I suspect you'll find it a very short list. In fact, our nation's arguably greatest principle is contradictory to the fundamentals of Christianity and renders your claim false.
It goes both ways.
However, freedom *of* religion is only in respect to beliefs, not acts. You may believe because of your religion that Blacks are lesser people, Homosexuals should be wiped from the face of the earth or that a mans sins can only be forgiven if he has sex with a virgin. But the state can, and should try and get in the way when any of these religious beliefs infringe upon the secular human rights of others if/when they are put into action.
Abbey Marie
08-19-2010, 02:40 PM
Our forefathers were also shitting in pits behind their houses, fucking and fathering children with their negro slaves and applying hot iron rods to snakebites.
You advocating that also?
How delicately put.
One question: Do I own the slaves, or am I just having sex with them? The former is immoral and unconstitutional; the latter depends on the particular circumstances, I suppose.
Annnnyway, other than the slaves, I would hope that I would have the right to do the other things if I wanted, free of government interference. Particularly if the Constitution explicitly said I had a right to freedom from the establishment of flush toilets and forced submission to modern medical care.
But I digress... The real point is this: That our forefathers used their backyards as toilets, and had primitive medical treatments, are more indicative of the inventions available in times they lived, than any predilection on their part for a yard full of feces. Conversely, their attitudes on religion, and the freedom to practice it thereof, were not dependent on anything but their actual convictions.
Outraged Citizen
08-19-2010, 08:15 PM
First, let's discuss the problems in this thread.
E Pluribus Unum was never actually established by any legislation as the national motto. This is a common misconception, because it was on the Seal of the U.S., and on our currency. But, to quote the Congressional Record of 1956: "At the present time the United States has no national motto. The committee deems it most appropriate that 'In God we trust' be so designated as U.S. national motto."
In God We Trust has also been around a lot longer than McCarthy, first being used on the 2 cent coin in 1866.
Just providing facts.
And as for our country not being founded on Christianity, we could debate that until the end of time, but let's concede that Noir is right. Do you still actually think that it is offensive for someone to bow their heads and offer a silent prayer of thanks to the deity of their choice for the blessing of food? Or do you think the government has the right to decide if this is allowed?
Communism.
Palin Rider
08-19-2010, 08:39 PM
First, let's discuss the problems in this thread.
E Pluribus Unum was never actually established by any legislation as the national motto. This is a common misconception, because it was on the Seal of the U.S., and on our currency. But, to quote the Congressional Record of 1956: "At the present time the United States has no national motto. The committee deems it most appropriate that 'In God we trust' be so designated as U.S. national motto."The legislation issue is, to me, a fine point, because E Pluribus Unum appeared on the official seal of the United States as early as 1782.
In God We Trust has also been around a lot longer than McCarthy, first being used on the 2 cent coin in 1866.
Just providing facts.My understanding is that it did not appear on every denomination for quite a while, and in fact a number of people (including Teddy Roosevelt) considered its use on money to be blasphemy.
Sweetchuck
08-19-2010, 09:37 PM
How delicately put.
One question: Do I own the slaves, or am I just having sex with them? The former is immoral and unconstitutional; the latter depends on the particular circumstances, I suppose.
Annnnyway, other than the slaves, I would hope that I would have the right to do the other things if I wanted, free of government interference. Particularly if the Constitution explicitly said I had a right to freedom from the establishment of flush toilets and forced submission to modern medical care.
But I digress... The real point is this: That our forefathers used their backyards as toilets, and had primitive medical treatments, are more indicative of the inventions available in times they lived, than any predilection on their part for a yard full of feces. Conversely, their attitudes on religion, and the freedom to practice it thereof, were not dependent on anything but their actual convictions.
You got my point, I think. It simply was that we live in an exponentially different society than we did 250 or whatever years ago.
Our forefathers planted a seed. We shouldn't kill the plant to preserve the seed.
... man, what a fucking analogy.
:laugh::laugh::laugh:
Outraged Citizen
08-19-2010, 10:00 PM
You got my point, I think. It simply was that we live in an exponentially different society than we did 250 or whatever years ago.
Our forefathers planted a seed. We shouldn't kill the plant to preserve the seed.
... man, what a fucking analogy.
:laugh::laugh::laugh:
Great analogy. But will you dig up the roots to preserve the leaves? Not as good, but here's the point...We need a combination of new and old, not a complete dismissal of either.
What did I say about extremists? They's the devil, momma...
Sweetchuck
08-19-2010, 10:09 PM
Great analogy. But will you dig up the roots to preserve the leaves? Not as good, but here's the point...We need a combination of new and old, not a complete dismissal of either.
What did I say about extremists? They's the devil, momma...
Totally agree.
But when I hear the religious right suggest that our forefathers wanted us to jam Christianity down everyone's throat, I'm calling bullshit.
Outraged Citizen
08-19-2010, 10:10 PM
Totally agree.
But when I hear the religious right suggest that our forefathers wanted us to jam Christianity down everyone's throat, I'm calling bullshit.
Agreed.
Freedom to choose.
SassyLady
08-21-2010, 01:55 AM
Our forefathers were also shitting in pits behind their houses, fucking and fathering children with their negro slaves and applying hot iron rods to snakebites.
You advocating that also?
What a stupid question.
SassyLady
08-21-2010, 02:13 AM
Very simple. I want opinions on the current state of religion in this country. I agree with both sides. While seperation of Church and State makes reasonable sense, unreasonable people twist it to suit their agendas. Public schools should not have "Prayer Assemblies", where all the students are joined in prayer. But I will be livid the day one of my daughter's gets in trouble for praying over her meal in the school cafeteria.
Extremists atheists (because I never believe that any group of individuals can be all lumped together in opinion...) want to push their beliefs onto the general public. They want to see no sign of any religion, of any kind. They take this so far as to want to change our nation's motto. What would you have it be? "One Nation, Unless You Disagree"?
Leave my country alone. If you want to know what Seperation of Church and State was for, look in a history book, it's perfectly clear.
Freedom Of.....not From.
Abbey Marie
08-23-2010, 01:07 AM
Totally agree.
But when I hear the religious right suggest that our forefathers wanted us to jam Christianity down everyone's throat, I'm calling bullshit.
I am pretty sure that I qualify as the religious right, but I am well aware of the fact that our founding fathers were not in the "jamming" business. The thing is, the 1st Amendment pendulum has swung so far in the opposite direction, as to bear no resemblance to the founders' intent. In the name of freedom of religion, we've become ridiculous.
bullypulpit
08-25-2010, 06:45 AM
Then you should have no problem enumerating these principles. I suspect you'll find it a very short list. In fact, our nation's arguably greatest principle is contradictory to the fundamentals of Christianity and renders your claim false.
Especially th' parts of Leviticus which advocate the death penalty for wearing cotton/poly blends, eating shell fish, stoning adulterers...like Newt Gingrich...to death. Yes...Let's make that part and parcel of American law. :laugh:
PostmodernProphet
08-25-2010, 07:30 AM
Especially th' parts of Leviticus which advocate the death penalty for wearing cotton/poly blends, eating shell fish, stoning adulterers...like Newt Gingrich...to death. Yes...Let's make that part and parcel of American law. :laugh:
wrong religion, BP....you're talking extreme Orthodox Judaism, not Christianity......seriously, if you want to be taken seriously when you mock a religion, you ought to put some effort into it.....
Pagan
08-28-2010, 07:32 PM
Our country was founded on the fundamentals of Christianity. Preachers like George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards fundamentally shaped our country with their preaching of God's word. What was it, 28 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were preachers.
Congress commissioned the printing of a Bible for use in our schools, in fact I think that was the very 1st thing congress ever commissioned to be printed. We use to have national days of prayer and thanksgiving.
The capitol building used to be used for church services and the Marine Corp band played the hymns.
If it were the religious beliefs of our founders I would have no problem with prayer assemblies.
Separation of church and state was meant to be freedom from a state church like the Church of England. Our founders never meant for religion to be kept out of government or our schools. The separation of church and state as commonly argued is just a perversion of leftists to quash morality in this country. That's the only way they can achieve their goals.
I seriously get tired of people Parroting the likes of the Political Preachers like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, etc. ..
Treaty of Tripoli
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
The treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation.
That and the ONLY way to protect the peoples freedom of religion is to insure the "Separation" of Church and State.
PostmodernProphet
08-29-2010, 08:02 AM
I seriously get tired of people Parroting the likes of the Political Preachers like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, etc. ..
that's the main problem of the critics of Christianity....their only knowledge of the subject comes from a half dozen or so tele-evangelists.....
it's no surprise that you find no critics of the religion who actually have knowledge of it......the criticism disappears along with the ignorance.....
Pagan
08-29-2010, 08:24 AM
that's the main problem of the critics of Christianity....their only knowledge of the subject comes from a half dozen or so tele-evangelists.....
it's no surprise that you find no critics of the religion who actually have knowledge of it......the criticism disappears along with the ignorance.....
It's only superseded by the ignorance of the likes who state the U.S. was founded on Christianity and the Bible.
Like I stated
<snip>
That and the ONLY way to protect the peoples freedom of religion is to insure the "Separation" of Church and State.
that's the main problem of the critics of Christianity....their only knowledge of the subject comes from a half dozen or so tele-evangelists.....
it's no surprise that you find no critics of the religion who actually have knowledge of it......the criticism disappears along with the ignorance.....
You see, thats a load of tosh, you know it, i know it, why say it?
Pagan
08-29-2010, 08:36 PM
You see, thats a load of tosh, you know it, i know it, why say it?
Religious nutjobs who keep saying "The U.S. is Founded on the Bible and Christianity" just can't get by what our Founding Fathers clearly stated -
"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"
These people also can't get through their thick skulls that the only way to insure religious freedom IS the Separation of Church and State. The U.S. Government is a secular government and it being a secular government maintains religious freedom.
PostmodernProphet
08-29-2010, 10:05 PM
You see, thats a load of tosh, you know it, i know it, why say it?
???....I know nothing of the sort....I said it because it's obviously true....by the way, go back to your old avatar, this one makes you look 14.....
PostmodernProphet
08-29-2010, 10:07 PM
It's only superseded by the ignorance of the likes who state the U.S. was founded on Christianity and the Bible.
Like I stated
I seriously doubt your ignorance could be superseded by anyone.....and you aren't using the law to maintain religious freedom, you're using it to promote denial of it.....
Pagan
08-29-2010, 10:27 PM
I seriously doubt your ignorance could be superseded by anyone.....and you aren't using the law to maintain religious freedom, you're using it to promote denial of it.....
Really, OK if you say so.
Coming from someone with nothing but their ignorant "opinions" sure carry's a lot of weight. http://www.rejecttheherd.net/sites/rejecttheherd.net/files/smileys/rub.gif
PostmodernProphet
08-30-2010, 10:44 AM
I carry a lot of weight AND I'm light on my feet.....:dance:
Pagan
08-30-2010, 10:55 AM
I carry a lot of weight AND I'm light on my feet.....:dance:
Really?
http://www.livevideo.com/video/A62418937D38495D9634D669D98511E0/fat-guy-dancing.aspx
Pagan
08-30-2010, 01:46 PM
Freedom Of.....not From.
That also includes from "From" if one so chooses.
PostmodernProphet
08-30-2010, 05:21 PM
Really?
http://www.livevideo.com/video/A62418937D38495D9634D669D98511E0/fat-guy-dancing.aspx
I was thinking more along the lines of
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQKnJwwib40&feature=related
???....I know nothing of the sort....I said it because it's obviously true....by the way, go back to your old avatar, this one makes you look 14.....
Erm, okay, well i'm a critic of Christianity and i don't know the name of a single tele-evangelist (though i will admit to having watched them on the god channel for some lulz.
My knowledge of Christianity comes from my teachers, family and folks on the net like yourself. So obviously "critics of Christianity....their only knowledge of the subject comes from a half dozen or so tele-evangelists....." isn't true in the slightest sense.
annnnd i know, shorter hair + clean shaven takes about 5 years of me, but but but don't you think i'm a cutie when i look young :wink2:
PostmodernProphet
08-31-2010, 05:56 AM
Erm, okay, well i'm a critic of Christianity and i don't know the name of a single tele-evangelist (though i will admit to having watched them on the god channel for some lulz.
My knowledge of Christianity comes from my teachers, family and folks on the net like yourself. So obviously "critics of Christianity....their only knowledge of the subject comes from a half dozen or so tele-evangelists....." isn't true in the slightest sense.
annnnd i know, shorter hair + clean shaven takes about 5 years of me, but but but don't you think i'm a cutie when i look young :wink2:
sorry on two counts, Noir but 1) I don't consider you knowledgeable about Christianity in even the slightest way (obviously you weren't paying attention in your youth) and 2) no, I don't think you're cute....
sorry on two counts, Noir but 1) I don't consider you knowledgeable about Christianity in even the slightest way (obviously you weren't paying attention in your youth) and 2) no, I don't think you're cute....
How convienient xD But i guess i'm in good company, afterall i guess you'd say the same about Carl Sagan, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and so forth.
And Mkay, i get it, you like the older look, i'll see what i can do for you ;D
PostmodernProphet
09-01-2010, 07:06 AM
afterall i guess you'd say the same about Carl Sagan, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and so forth.
I'm basing it on the obvious errors about Christianity you've posted on this board, but I will admit, I've seen obvious errors in things quoted from them as well.......
I'm basing it on the obvious errors about Christianity you've posted on this board, but I will admit, I've seen obvious errors in things quoted from them as well.......
Look, it's undeniable that some of the greatest intellectuals that have ever lived have been critics of Christianity. Don't do them, and so yourself, the diservice of stupid comments like "that's the main problem of the critics of Christianity....their only knowledge of the subject comes from a half dozen or so tele-evangelists....." When that is clearly not the case.
PostmodernProphet
09-01-2010, 09:12 AM
Look, it's undeniable that some of the greatest intellectuals that have ever lived have been critics of Christianity. Don't do them, and so yourself, the diservice of stupid comments like "that's the main problem of the critics of Christianity....their only knowledge of the subject comes from a half dozen or so tele-evangelists....." When that is clearly not the case.
I don't find it to be "clearly not the case"....can you identify a single instance on this board, for example, where the criticism of Christianity was not based on something clearly false?......including those in which the above "greatest intellectuals who have ever lived" were significantly quoted?......
I don't find it to be "clearly not the case"....can you identify a single instance on this board, for example, where the criticism of Christianity was not based on something clearly false?......including those in which the above "greatest intellectuals who have ever lived" were significantly quoted?......
Why would I even bother, you have made your thoughts clear, and some remarkably prejudice ones at that, which only shows your own idiocy for want of showing it in others. TBH it's quiet bemusingly funny to see someone who is obviously intelligent decided to keep digging into a hole to confrim a previous mistake rather than just admit that not all critic of his faith are fueled only by TV-evangelism xD
PostmodernProphet
09-01-2010, 12:24 PM
Why would I even bother
I expect, to make some effort to show the rest of your comment has validity.......
I expect, to make some effort to show the rest of your comment has validity.......
Look, you said critics of Christainity only get their knowledge of it from tele-evangelists. If you really want to believe that, fair enough but any man and his dog knows that's a load of tosh.
PostmodernProphet
09-02-2010, 06:48 AM
Look, you said critics of Christainity only get their knowledge of it from tele-evangelists. If you really want to believe that, fair enough but any man and his dog knows that's a load of tosh.
/shrugs....any man and his dog that has seen what passes for criticism of Christianity around here also knows that IT is a load of tosh......what generally happens is some atheist makes up a lie about Christianity, posts his criticism, gets shown the truth and disappears without admitting his dishonesty.......
take this Pagan guy, for instance.....the thinks a treaty negotiated with diplomatic delicacy with a Muslim power trumps the express language of the Declaration of Independence....
Pagan
09-07-2010, 12:45 AM
/shrugs....any man and his dog that has seen what passes for criticism of Christianity around here also knows that IT is a load of tosh......what generally happens is some atheist makes up a lie about Christianity, posts his criticism, gets shown the truth and disappears without admitting his dishonesty.......
take this Pagan guy, for instance.....the thinks a treaty negotiated with diplomatic delicacy with a Muslim power trumps the express language of the Declaration of Independence....
You display your yet ignorance again :lame2:
PostmodernProphet
09-07-2010, 07:32 AM
You display your yet ignorance again :lame2:
well?.....do you think a treaty negotiated with diplomatic delicacy with a Muslim power trumps the express language of the Declaration of Independence?......otherwise, why did you bother to post it?.......I can't think of anything more ignorant than that, yet you accuse ME of ignorance?......
/shrugs....any man and his dog that has seen what passes for criticism of Christianity around here also knows that IT is a load of tosh......what generally happens is some atheist makes up a lie about Christianity, posts his criticism, gets shown the truth and disappears without admitting his dishonesty.......
take this Pagan guy, for instance.....the thinks a treaty negotiated with diplomatic delicacy with a Muslim power trumps the express language of the Declaration of Independence....
Well you don't have to be a Atheist to be a critic of Christianity, you could just as easily be a deist, or believe in a different theist god.
Also, as a reference to my sig, both Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson only critics because of tele-evanglists, right?
Pagan
09-07-2010, 08:59 AM
well?.....do you think a treaty negotiated with diplomatic delicacy with a Muslim power trumps the express language of the Declaration of Independence?......otherwise, why did you bother to post it?.......I can't think of anything more ignorant than that, yet you accuse ME of ignorance?......
Really?
So Treaty's aren't the Law of the Land?
Please show me ANYWHERE in the DoI where it states we're a Christian Nation founded on the Bible.
Yes your ignorance is blatantly obvious
PostmodernProphet
09-07-2010, 09:46 AM
Please show me ANYWHERE in the DoI where it states we're a Christian Nation founded on the Bible.
did I raise that claim?.....I merely pointed out that it was ridiculous to raise the Treaty of Tripoli as an example of what the founding fathers believed, as it was obviously drafted for a particular purpose that had nothing to do with the founding of our country.....the Declaration of Independence, on the other hand, obviously does have something to do with the founding of our country.....
http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/doi/text.html
and, it indicates a deference to both a Creator and a Supreme Judge that is impossible to ignore.....
And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
Pagan
09-07-2010, 11:14 AM
did I raise that claim?.....I merely pointed out that it was ridiculous to raise the Treaty of Tripoli as an example of what the founding fathers believed, as it was obviously drafted for a particular purpose that had nothing to do with the founding of our country.....the Declaration of Independence, on the other hand, obviously does have something to do with the founding of our country.....
Well you might wanna look at what my post was in response to. The Treaty of Tripoli is an excellent example since the early Government of the U.S. was made up of our Founding Fathers AND Treaty's are the Law of the Land.
Again show me ANYWHERE in the DoI where not only it being based on Christianity or ANYWHERE in the Constitution?
http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/doi/text.html
and, it indicates a deference to both a Creator and a Supreme Judge that is impossible to ignore.....
So Creator and Supreme Judge is exclusive to the Philosophy of Christianity?
:lol::lol:
Your ignorance is showing even greater, can you dig your hole any deeper?
PostmodernProphet
09-07-2010, 01:14 PM
Well you might wanna look at what my post was in response to. The Treaty of Tripoli is an excellent example since the early Government of the U.S. was made up of our Founding Fathers AND Treaty's are the Law of the Land.
Again show me ANYWHERE in the DoI where not only it being based on Christianity or ANYWHERE in the Constitution?
So Creator and Supreme Judge is exclusive to the Philosophy of Christianity?
:lol::lol:
Your ignorance is showing even greater, can you dig your hole any deeper?
apparently you have difficulty in reading.....I repeat, I have never made the claim that this nation was founded on Christianity.....I do, however, think it's rather foolish for any atheist to claim that it was founded in a deity-neutral atmosphere.....of course, I've yet to meet an atheist who wasn't foolish.....
now that I've filled in that hole with you at the bottom, would you care to continue the debate?.....
SassyLady
09-07-2010, 01:22 PM
apparently you have difficulty in reading.....I repeat, I have never made the claim that this nation was founded on Christianity.....I do, however, think it's rather foolish for any atheist to claim that it was founded in a deity-neutral atmosphere.....of course, I've yet to meet an atheist who wasn't foolish.....
now that I've filled in that hole with you at the bottom, would you care to continue the debate?.....
:clap:
Pagan
09-07-2010, 01:26 PM
apparently you have difficulty in reading.....I repeat, I have never made the claim that this nation was founded on Christianity.....I do, however, think it's rather foolish for any atheist to claim that it was founded in a deity-neutral atmosphere.....of course, I've yet to meet an atheist who wasn't foolish.....
now that I've filled in that hole with you at the bottom, would you care to continue the debate?.....
Well then it's blatantly obvious you're the one who has reading comprehensions when you reply to a post I made in response (which btw I quoted in that post) which that is the very topic. Suggestion, read a subject before you make a comment on it, especially when you criticize it.
So I'm an Atheist eh?
OK if you say so, who's to argue with your divine intellect http://www.rejecttheherd.net/sites/rejecttheherd.net/files/smileys/rub.gif
PostmodernProphet
09-07-2010, 10:49 PM
Well then it's blatantly obvious you're the one who has reading comprehensions when you reply to a post I made in response (which btw I quoted in that post) which that is the very topic. Suggestion, read a subject before you make a comment on it, especially when you criticize it.
my criticism of your statement was accurate.....it's not my fault that you assumed that therefore I agreed with the person you were arguing with....while it may be argued that the enemy of your enemy is your friend, you should not assume that your enemies are friends with your enemies.....
Pagan
09-07-2010, 11:25 PM
my criticism of your statement was accurate.....it's not my fault that you assumed that therefore I agreed with the person you were arguing with....while it may be argued that the enemy of your enemy is your friend, you should not assume that your enemies are friends with your enemies.....
OK if you say so http://www.rejecttheherd.net/sites/rejecttheherd.net/files/smileys/harp.gif
bullypulpit
09-08-2010, 07:18 AM
Very simple. I want opinions on the current state of religion in this country. I agree with both sides. While seperation of Church and State makes reasonable sense, unreasonable people twist it to suit their agendas. Public schools should not have "Prayer Assemblies", where all the students are joined in prayer. But I will be livid the day one of my daughter's gets in trouble for praying over her meal in the school cafeteria.
Extremists atheists (because I never believe that any group of individuals can be all lumped together in opinion...) want to push their beliefs onto the general public. They want to see no sign of any religion, of any kind. They take this so far as to want to change our nation's motto. What would you have it be? "One Nation, Unless You Disagree"?
Leave my country alone. If you want to know what Seperation of Church and State was for, look in a history book, it's perfectly clear.
Religion is a personal matter. And it should remain personal...and private.
"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." - Matthew 6:6
PostmodernProphet
09-08-2010, 07:58 AM
Religion is a personal matter. And it should remain personal...and private.
"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." - Matthew 6:6
ah, but that's what he said about praying....there's also what he said about the law...
Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. 7 Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. 8 Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. 9 Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.
and about the good news...
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.
Pagan
09-09-2010, 06:00 PM
my criticism of your statement was accurate.....it's not my fault that you assumed that therefore I agreed with the person you were arguing with....while it may be argued that the enemy of your enemy is your friend, you should not assume that your enemies are friends with your enemies.....
Aaaah yeah, right .........
Our country was founded on the fundamentals of Christianity. Preachers like George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards fundamentally shaped our country with their preaching of God's word. What was it, 28 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were preachers.
Congress commissioned the printing of a Bible for use in our schools, in fact I think that was the very 1st thing congress ever commissioned to be printed. We use to have national days of prayer and thanksgiving.
The capitol building used to be used for church services and the Marine Corp band played the hymns.
If it were the religious beliefs of our founders I would have no problem with prayer assemblies.
Separation of church and state was meant to be freedom from a state church like the Church of England. Our founders never meant for religion to be kept out of government or our schools. The separation of church and state as commonly argued is just a perversion of leftists to quash morality in this country. That's the only way they can achieve their goals.
I seriously get tired of people Parroting the likes of the Political Preachers like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, etc. ..
Treaty of Tripoli
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
The treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation.
That and the ONLY way to protect the peoples freedom of religion is to insure the "Separation" of Church and State.
DragonStryk72
09-10-2010, 12:52 AM
Okay, I'm catholic, and I went to catholic school, so I'm not exactly unfamiliar with religion being in my daily school life.
First off, the impact of it on our children is being drastically overstated by both sides. Most of us in school were giving it lip service at best, while others were just moving said lips in a way that kind of looked like prayers or hymns. So, really, we're making a bigger deal of it on that end than needs be.
In any case, I see it like this: If the christian students want to start a christian group within the school, that's purely free speech, so go for it, whatever the religion. Should there be school-led prayer? No, this oversteps the boundary, since teachers are in a respected position, and can influence the children in seeing one religion or the other as "right".
The right to pray individually in school, however, should be protected. If someone wants to pray because they genuinely feel the power of prayer, then that works. Otherwise, religions matter are better at the kid's home parish/temple/mosque.
Dante
09-10-2010, 01:09 AM
Our country was founded on the fundamentals of Christianity. Preachers like George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards fundamentally shaped our country with their preaching of God's word. What was it, 28 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were preachers.
Like the Taliban? Preachers of those days were usually educated men. The Great Awakening was crazy. Preachers? so what? Many were slave holders or approved of slavery.
Why would preachers in the way you view good holy men NOT object to separating Church and State? I know the Massachusetts State Constitution had religious crap in it that was later amended.
These preachers did not trust Christians to do the right thing. :laugh::laugh:
Dante
09-10-2010, 01:13 AM
Okay, I'm catholic, and I went to catholic school, so I'm not exactly unfamiliar with religion being in my daily school life.
First off, the impact of it on our children is being drastically overstated by both sides. Most of us in school were giving it lip service at best, while others were just moving said lips in a way that kind of looked like prayers or hymns. So, really, we're making a bigger deal of it on that end than needs be.
In any case, I see it like this: If the christian students want to start a christian group within the school, that's purely free speech, so go for it, whatever the religion. Should there be school-led prayer? No, this oversteps the boundary, since teachers are in a respected position, and can influence the children in seeing one religion or the other as "right".
The right to pray individually in school, however, should be protected. If someone wants to pray because they genuinely feel the power of prayer, then that works. Otherwise, religions matter are better at the kid's home parish/temple/mosque.
People can pray -- silently and without interfering with school activities. If we allow this, the next thing we get is Muslims and others asking to stop everything so they can follow their worship during school hours. Seen it at work. I supervised Muslims. The offenders and demand-ers of all sorts of accommodations were usually American converts, not foreign born Muslims.
Christians beware what you push for. You just may get it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.