Wou you vote for them?

[Noir]

I've asked before (both on this board and others) if someone would vote for a non-religious or non-chirstian president. The results have tended toward 'no'

So I was wondering, if any of these men stood for election in the present day, and made these statements that they have made, would you vote for them?

James Madison
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."

"Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and corruption, all of which facilitate the execution of mischievous projects."

John Adams
""I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved-- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"

"Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?"

"Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1,500 years?"

Thomas Jefferson
"It is not to be understood that I am with him (Jesus Christ) in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of Spiritualism, he preaches the efficacy of repentance toward forgiveness of sin; I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it."

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law."

"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology."


"We discover in the gospels a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication ."

Thomas Paine
"What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith."

"We do not admit the authority of the church with respect to its pretended infallibility, its manufactured miracles, its setting itself up to forgive sins.* It was by propagating that belief and supporting it with fire that she kept up her temporal power."

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church. Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."

------------

So, would any of those guys stand a chance of gettin your vote because of their faith (or lack thereof)?

[darin]

Taking quotes out of context doesn't bolster your case:



To the corruptions of Christianity I am indeed opposed, but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian...

it continues, and in the part i emphasized, Jefferson talks about YOU, Noir...


And in confiding it to you, I know it will not be exposed to the malignant perversions of those who make every word from me a text for new misrepresentations and calumnies. I am moreover averse to the communication of my religious tenets to the public, because it would countenance the presumption of those who have endeavored to draw them before that tribunal, and to seduce public opinion to erect itself into that inquisition over the rights of conscience which the laws have so justly proscribed...

Let's place Jefferson's words in context:


he preaches the efficacy of repentance towards forgiveness of sin; I require counterpoise of good works to redeem it, etc., etc. It is the innocence of His character, the purity and sublimity of His moral precepts, the eloquence of His inculcations, the beauty of the apologues in which He conveys them, that I so much admire; sometimes, indeed, needing indulgence to eastern hyperbolism. My eulogies, too, may be founded on a postulate which all may not be ready to grant. Among the sayings and discourses imputed to Him by His biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others, again, of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same Being. I separate, therefore, the gold from the dross; restore to Him the former, and leave the latter to the stupidity of some, and roguery of others of His disciples. Of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and first corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus. These palpable interpolations and falsifications of His doctrines, led me to try to sift them apart. I found the work obvious and easy, and that His past composed the most beautiful morsel of morality which has been given to us by man. The syllabus is therefore of His doctrines, not all of mine. I read them as I do those of other ancient and modern moralists, with a mixture of approbation and dissent...

Jefferson seemed to believe in Christ - but not on those whom, he believes, twists the words.

Big Difference.

Why don't you research the context of the OTHER quotes you've used - because when you remove things from context you betray the intent of the author.

For me - to answer your question? Absolutely. I've found most politicians who CLAIM a particular faith are generally the worst examples thereof.

Christians are inherently conservative - because conservatism is founded in compassion...freedom...trust...faith... Liberalism is founded in control...hate....selfishness...totalitarianism. Thus, there may be law-makers and policy setters taking the 'name' of ANY or NO faith, yet act out their duties with attributes of real Christians...of Christ - whether they know it or not.

[Noir]

I ran most of the quotes through google to try and verify they were atleast said. Though even tag was very time consuming being only able to use my phone. I am quiet unaware how to take Jefferson, he claims to be Christain, and yet my sig would suggest otherwise.

Anyways, you've said you'd vote regardless of religious stance yes? Which was the primary object of this thread.

[actsnoblemartin]

I would vote for an atheist.

does that answer your question mate? :salute:

[Noir]

I would vote for an atheist.

does that answer your question mate? :salute:

It does indeedy :3

[actsnoblemartin]

hown are you mate, hope all is well :)

you = cool person :thumb:

[Pagan]

I ran most of the quotes through google to try and verify they were atleast said. Though even tag was very time consuming being only able to use my phone. I am quiet unaware how to take Jefferson, he claims to be Christain, and yet my sig would suggest otherwise.

Anyways, you've said you'd vote regardless of religious stance yes? Which was the primary object of this thread.

Jefferson is best described as a Deist and rather loathed religion as a whole, but let's have the man speak for himself eh?

Say nothing of my religion. It is known to my god and myself alone.
-- Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams, 11 January 1817,

I have ever judged of the religion of others by their lives.... It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. By the same test the world must judge me. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest. The artificial structures they have built on the the purest of all moral systems, for the purpose of deriving from it pence and power, revolt those who think for themselves, and who read in that system only what is really there.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Mrs. M Harrison Smith, August 6, 1816

[revelarts]

That's an interesting question.
There are other ideas that Jefferson held, and actions that weren't that wonderful, slavery for instance. We could probably find some interesting quotes about the Native Americans as well that wouldn't line up with my ideas.

That being said, As a Born Again Bible Bible believing Christian of the Southern persuasion I can tell you that i don't believe I've voted for any President that I thought was honestly aligned with my faith. Frankly I didn't vote for Carter but I think his faith is closer to mine than anyone that followed. However I believed at the time that despite the fact they where off theologically or bluffing their way though it for the votes that they where culturally and ethically closer to my beliefs than any of the democratic candidates. And those you mentioned, Jefferson and the others, Are closer to my way of thinking politically than ANYONE today.

In the thread here about freedom of religion I think they would lean toward freedom Of and the federal Gov't would be disabled to hinder most religious activities.
And would have no say about prayer in school because it's not in the federal purview
no say in health care , it's not in the federal purview
no say in bailing out the banks or wall street or taking over the auto industry, it's not in the federal purview.
And , if they were president today, would probably shut down half of the executive branch, if they weren't shot for trying, because they NEVER intended a welfare state or a LARGE federal Gov't. With a military stretched across the globe.

And I can't imagine they'd ever dream the federal gov't would be involved in marriage let alone "alternative" marriage. it's not in the federal purview.

So yes I'd vote for them. As long as gave up Slavery.

Would you vote vote them if they said they would do those things?

but what about you. It's always interesting to me that atheist like to exalt the founding fathers, from time to time, but thoroughly discount or ignore the ubiquitous and heavy christian ethos and air of the times that influenced the them all deeply. And inspired many of the themes and ideas they've promoted. and inspired the people and soldiers of the day.

I guess my question for you is would you vote for a Hardcore Christian?

[Pagan]

That's an interesting question.
There are other ideas that Jefferson held, and actions that weren't that wonderful, slavery for instance. We could probably find some interesting quotes about the Native Americans as well that wouldn't line up with my ideas.

That being said, As a Born Again Bible Bible believing Christian of the Southern persuasion I can tell you that i don't believe I've voted for any President that I thought was honestly aligned with my faith. Frankly I didn't vote for Carter but I think his faith is closer to mine than anyone that followed. However I believed at the time that despite the fact they where off theologically or bluffing their way though it for the votes that they where culturally and ethically closer to my beliefs than any of the democratic candidates. And those you mentioned, Jefferson and the others, Are closer to my way of thinking politically than ANYONE today.

In the thread here about freedom of religion I think they would lean toward freedom Of and the federal Gov't would be disabled to hinder most religious activities.
And would have no say about prayer in school because it's not in the federal purview
no say in health care , it's not in the federal purview
no say in bailing out the banks or wall street or taking over the auto industry, it's not in the federal purview.
And , if they were president today, would probably shut down half of the executive branch, if they weren't shot for trying, because they NEVER intended a welfare state or a LARGE federal Gov't. With a military stretched across the globe.

And I can't imagine they'd ever dream the federal gov't would be involved in marriage let alone "alternative" marriage. it's not in the federal purview.

So yes I'd vote for them. As long as gave up Slavery.

Would you vote vote them if they said they would do those things?

but what about you. It's always interesting to me that atheist like to exalt the founding fathers, from time to time, but thoroughly discount or ignore the ubiquitous and heavy christian ethos and air of the times that influenced the them all deeply. And inspired many of the themes and ideas they've promoted. and inspired the people and soldiers of the day.

I guess my question for you is would you vote for a Hardcore Christian?

Jefferson said it best as I quoted above -

Say nothing of my religion. It is known to my god and myself alone.
-- Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams, 11 January 1817,

One has only to not only look at history but at present times when Religion and Government is joined. I cannot understand why so called religious people push so hard to not only say that the U.S. is a Christian nation in order to push the joining of religion and government.

REALITY PEOPLE the ONLY way to safe guard your freedom of religion is for the government to be a secular government and by adhering to the Constitution.

I bring this up numerous times and I'm called a "Liberal" and and "Atheist". So I can only ask, what is conservative about expanding government power into ones personal life or what is Atheist about defending religious freedom?

I already know the answer, people just don't have a clue and can only Parrot what they're told ....

[Noir]

I guess my question for you is would you vote for a Hardcore Christian?

Well I have had to (such is the politics of Northern Ireland >,>)

But if I did have the choice then it would really depend on what role they think their religion should have. If someone was a hardcore chiristain who believed in a secular state and respected the first amendment, fair enough. But if they thought it was their duty to say promote their religion on the state, then no, not in a million years.

Btw. I would ofcourse also not vote for an atheist who thought it was their duty to trash the 1st amendment.

[revelarts]

Jefferson said it best as I quoted above -

Say nothing of my religion. It is known to my god and myself alone.
-- Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams, 11 January 1817,

One has only to not only look at history but at present times when Religion and Government is joined. I cannot understand why so called religious people push so hard to not only say that the U.S. is a Christian nation in order to push the joining of religion and government.

REALITY PEOPLE the ONLY way to safe guard your freedom of religion is for the government to be a secular government and by adhering to the Constitution.

I bring this up numerous times and I'm called a "Liberal" and and "Atheist". So I can only ask, what is conservative about expanding government power into ones personal life or what is Atheist about defending religious freedom?

I already know the answer, people just don't have a clue and can only Parrot what they're told ....

Frankly I'm never sure exactly what those on the left are afraid of.

seems like to me the only thing that's been happening for the past 40+ years or so that the left has been so afraid of the Cristian right is.

1. that the right wants to outlaw Abortion, which was illegal in the 70's in most states.
2. that we DO NOT want to Change the laws concerning Marriage.
3. That we won't take down Christian monuments that have been on public property for decades.
3. we might put up new monuments on Public property that say thing like "thou shall not kill" a horrible Christian Ideal.
4. that Children might have a moment of silence in School to pray.
5. Children could hear that idea that freely debate here that Evolution is not a proven fact but a collection of ideas. God forbid that the children here what the adults are talking about they might be scared for life. If it's religion, Soft Porns OK though.

Sure there are those that might want more than that. but that's really been where the fights been hottest.

The Left act as if any one of those things throws the constitution out the window.

but none of those things violate any of the bill of rights.

it doesn't establish a religion. especially not on a federal level. NO ONE is forced to or even asked to become a christian or read the Bible or pray or denied a gov't, job or a diploma or anything close to it. it's a phantom crime.

And Abortion can and has been proven a crime without the Biblical argument.

But all of the items mentioned in the my previous post are clearly outside of the federal purview and yet liberals promote those without any consideration for the constitution. And Actually defend it by saying that it doesn't matter.

[revelarts]

Well I have had to (such is the politics of Northern Ireland >,>)

But if I did have the choice then it would really depend on what role they think their religion should have. If someone was a hardcore chiristain who believed in a secular state and respected the first amendment, fair enough. But if they thought it was their duty to say promote their religion on the state, then no, not in a million years.

Btw. I would ofcourse also not vote for an atheist who thought it was their duty to trash the 1st amendment.

I can respect that.

[Pagan]

Frankly I'm never sure exactly what those on the left are afraid of.

Both the right and the left d have both surrendered their most personal freedoms over to the Government in the attempt to push their own morals and beliefs onto others. What they don't get is that the only way to protect your own freedom is to protect those of who you oppose.


seems like to me the only thing that's been happening for the past 40+ years or so that the left has been so afraid of the Cristian right is.

1. that the right wants to outlaw Abortion, which was illegal in the 70's in most states.

The Supreme Court has ruled on it, if you don't like it take it to the Court and have it changed.


2. that we DO NOT want to Change the laws concerning Marriage.

Marriage laws violate the Constitution, look at the 14th amendment. Government should get out of marriage completly.

What is "Conservative" about government dictating the most personal aspect of your life?


3. That we won't take down Christian monuments that have been on public property for decades.

Put them on the historical registry or sell them to a private party, problem solved


3. we might put up new monuments on Public property that say thing like "thou shall not kill" a horrible Christian Ideal.

Remove the religious spin on it, why are so many trying to invalidate freedom of religion?


4. that Children might have a moment of silence in School to pray.

There's Study Hall, Lunch Breaks, etc. why are some demanding others participate in their religious time? They can do it on their own time which is more approprate.


5. Children could hear that idea that freely debate here that Evolution is not a proven fact but a collection of ideas. God forbid that the children here what the adults are talking about they might be scared for life. If it's religion, Soft Porns OK though.

Both sides are pushing "Social Engineering" to conform with their beliefs. School just needs to be teaching Reading, Writing, Science, Math and Social Engineering belongs in the home period.


Sure there are those that might want more than that. but that's really been where the fights been hottest.

The Left act as if any one of those things throws the constitution out the window.

The Right so willing does it also and those in power continue to stir up the pot in order to seize more power. They play the Right and the Left for suckers.


but none of those things violate any of the bill of rights.

Yes they do, look at response above


it doesn't establish a religion. especially not on a federal level. NO ONE is forced to or even asked to become a christian or read the Bible or pray or denied a gov't, job or a diploma or anything close to it. it's a phantom crime.

And Abortion can and has been proven a crime without the Biblical argument.

But all of the items mentioned in the my previous post are clearly outside of the federal purview and yet liberals promote those without any consideration for the constitution. And Actually defend it by saying that it doesn't matter.

[revelarts]

Um Pagan you never quoted the bill of rights in your arguments.

And you never mentioned any harm or forced behaviors.
my points still stand.

But I do agree the religious of the right, like myself, have been played by the right politicians.

and that the left has been played as well to fear the right. And Believed that the left politicos are anti-war and anti big biz and for freedom in the hippie sense.
When the right really have done nothing substantial legally to do any of the things the left has been taught to be Frightened out of there minds about in 40 years.

[Noir]

The main bit I have a problem with there is...



Originally Posted by revelarts
5. Children could hear that idea that freely debate here that Evolution is not a proven fact but a collection of ideas. God forbid that the children here what the adults are talking about they might be scared for life. If it's religion, Soft Porns OK though.

Care to explain Retro-viral DNA? or how the summation of thousands of different scientific fields all create philogenetic tress that's not only seamlessly link together but provide a basis for predictions via evolutionary knowledge?

And anyways, when I was in school we where brainwashed into sex theory for babies, never once was stalk theory mentioned! Are they scared to have such ideas even mentioned in the classroom? Amiright...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ7mKkbi0Rs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[revelarts]

the next time you read about the retro viral dna please note how many times the terms, "we think" we "it may have" and "it's possible" are used to explains its origin and place in on in animals. That's called theory, hypothesis or conjecture not proof.

"philogenetic tress" is that a new hair style?

Look with all my misspelling, I can't talk, but i couldn't resist that one.

but those trees change every 5 years (among the scientist that used them) they don't prove anything. They assert connections.


ok
um , the stock theory... riiiiiight. Now where actually talking rationally about what each others the views here.

Can you even talk about an apposing ideas without making a joke. If not there's no reason to me to say much more.

But I'd rather not go into that stuff in detail but you see we could and have but in school it's taboo. unconstitutional even? that's a joke.

[Noir]

the next time you read about the retro viral dna please note how many times the terms, "we think" we "it may have" and "it's possible" are used to explains its origin and place in on in animals. That's called theory, hypothesis or conjecture not proof.

I assume you think the same about the *theory* of gravity?
The word theory is the strongest possible term you can use in science. So to dismiss something because it is a theory is to miss the point totally.
And I can't not recall ever hearing the words 'we think' about RDNA, because so much research has been done into it we *know* about it, not think. But if you have quotes suggesting otherwise do post them.


"philogenetic tress" is that a new hair style?

Look with all my misspelling, I can't talk, but i couldn't resist that one.

but those trees change every 5 years (among the scientist that used them) they don't prove anything. They assert connections.

I think you're thinking of the wrong trees, they are certainly added to as more genomes are decoded, but they are in no way changed at a fundamental level. And when you have thousands of independent scientific fields that all match perfectly don't you think those 'connections' tell you something?



ok
um , the stock theory... riiiiiight. Now where actually talking rationally about what each others the views here.

Can you even talk about an apposing ideas without making a joke. If not there's no reason to me to say much more.

But I'd rather not go into that stuff in detail but you see we could and have but in school it's taboo. unconstitutional even? that's a joke.

Righto, it was a joke, forget about it.

[SassyLady]

I've asked before (both on this board and others) if someone would vote for a non-religious or non-chirstian president. The results have tended toward 'no'

So I was wondering, if any of these men stood for election in the present day, and made these statements that they have made, would you vote for them?

James Madison
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."

"Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and corruption, all of which facilitate the execution of mischievous projects."

John Adams
""I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved-- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"

"Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?"

"Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1,500 years?"

Thomas Jefferson
"It is not to be understood that I am with him (Jesus Christ) in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of Spiritualism, he preaches the efficacy of repentance toward forgiveness of sin; I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it."

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law."

"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology."


"We discover in the gospels a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication ."

Thomas Paine
"What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith."

"We do not admit the authority of the church with respect to its pretended infallibility, its manufactured miracles, its setting itself up to forgive sins.* It was by propagating that belief and supporting it with fire that she kept up her temporal power."

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church. Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."

------------

So, would any of those guys stand a chance of gettin your vote because of their faith (or lack thereof)?

First of all, I am not religious and have not let it decide how I vote for an individual ... at any level of government.

Honestly, Noir, I couldn't tell you if I would vote for anyone that I didn't hear in a debate with the opponent. I would never vote for someone based just on their writings like you presented above (too easy to think about the popular viewpoint)....I like hearing how they handle opposition and off the wall questions. Gives me a better feel about them.

[Abbey Marie]

Noir worrying about Christians being elected in a country in which he isn't even eligible to vote. Seriously, the Christianphobia knows no bounds. :rolleyes:

[BoogyMan]

These men had felt the effects that a state run religion had wrought in quite direct fashion. The church of England was the cause of such commentary. It is VERY hard to ignore hypocrisy as was evidenced by the practitioners of such hypocrisy in the day.

The state has no business involving itself with religion.

The filth that accompanies the hands of men in government should never be construed to have any input to religion.

Those who desire it to be so cannot support their conclusions with scripture.


I've asked before (both on this board and others) if someone would vote for a non-religious or non-chirstian president. The results have tended toward 'no'

So I was wondering, if any of these men stood for election in the present day, and made these statements that they have made, would you vote for them?

James Madison
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."

"Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and corruption, all of which facilitate the execution of mischievous projects."

John Adams
""I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved-- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"

"Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?"

"Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1,500 years?"

Thomas Jefferson
"It is not to be understood that I am with him (Jesus Christ) in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of Spiritualism, he preaches the efficacy of repentance toward forgiveness of sin; I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it."

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law."

"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology."


"We discover in the gospels a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication ."

Thomas Paine
"What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith."

"We do not admit the authority of the church with respect to its pretended infallibility, its manufactured miracles, its setting itself up to forgive sins.* It was by propagating that belief and supporting it with fire that she kept up her temporal power."

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church. Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."

------------

So, would any of those guys stand a chance of gettin your vote because of their faith (or lack thereof)?