Now what I am saying here is that America was founded by Christians, and throughout history Americans fighting for this country have believed that it was "God's will" for this to happen. "mercy" only exists due to religion, because it is illogical to show mercy to someone who will be a threat if you set them free.
The first point: The founding fathers of the USA were almost entirely deist. If they were Christian, why would they want separation of church and state?
There is nothing in the Constitution which explicitly states "separation of church and state".
The intent is obvious. The prohibition of any religious test for any public office is a pretty good iindicator, and it's in the main body of the Constitution. Look in Article 6.
Furthermore, the First Amendment is explicit in creating a church/state separation. Wise religionists know that this insures that the state will not stick its nose into their business, and it's the basis for the wide variety of faiths and creeds in the US.
To assert otherwise is to outright lie.
However, what they preach and what they practice are not always the same things.
Example, Obama's adoption of christianity as his officially stated religion. He knew full well that he would NEVER stand a chance at becoming president without that qualifier.
And, I wonder how many of you have grown up and lived as a practicioner of a non-christian faith?
Try living life as a Satanist, for example, where people are always trying to take your children away, your testimony in court cases is tossed out, you are harassed by police, and generally made to be miserable as a result of the heavy infusion of christianity in every aspect of the country we live in.
See, religion in government may sound fine to you, and may look good on paper...but in reality it's an abomination, in every way as "wrong" as racism.
You're quite right that even with a formal church-state separation, minority religions do not have an easy time in a culture that is predominantly one generalized religion. Still, that doesn't mean that there are not differences within that one seemingly majority faith. An outsider to Christianity might be mistaken in thinking that Catholics and Protestants are basically the same faith, when there are many "Christians" in this country who consider Catholicism to be as closely related to their faith as Taoism is. Most Americans imagine Islam to be a monolithic faith when it is in fact anything but, as is seen in Iraq with the Sunni/Shia conflict.
Too many Americans think that Christianity is the faith of America. The problem is that they can't agree on what "Chrstianity" means. Which further underscores the wisdom of the Founders in keeping the state out of religion. They were much closer than we are in history to Europe's great wars over religion. They cold still smell the blood from the battlefields where men fought over what version of Christianity was the correct one. The Founders took the view that there is no "correct" faith.
That's the beauty of the separation of church and state. No one faith can claim official sanction. Many faiths can exist side by side without the state interfering in their docrtrinal affairs. Jefferson said something to the effect that what his neighbor believes is not his concern unless his neighbor starts pushing it on him.
CH, Jedi, Commando, Smuggler, BH, Scout, Doctor, Chef, BE...yeah, lots of SWG time invested.
. Why should ONE religion in particular hold more power in the government than any other?
because the founding fathers were christians. And if you want, you can pay all the bills to remove all religion from our currency and etc, because i for sure dont want to.
Jefferson denied outright the divinity of Jesus. Nearly every one of the Founders was a deist, which means that they believed God created the universe, then split. Never again to interfere in the affairs of men.
The "God" on currency is that particular deity.
Again, the assertion that this is a "Christian" nation is an outright lie. There are dozens of examples to the contrary, source examples, from Adams, Madison, Jefferson, Franklin and others.
who ever said this was a christian nation? I just said christians started the nation, but since you say you have done research proving they believed in god and werent christians then ill believe you.
Playing: EVE Online Favorite MMOs: WoW, SWG Pre-cu, Lineage 2, UO, EQ, EVE online Looking forward to: Archeage, Kingdom Under Fire 2 KUF2's Official Website - http://www.kufii.com/ENG/ -
So many people misquote Jefferson. It is getting pretty pathetic. Jefferson never states that Religions doesn't belong in Government and in his later years he even attended Church while in Office. (They had services in the Capital Building)
The letter states that the Government will not interfere in Religion. That is what the protection of the Constitution states. Note that it isn't a two way street. The Constitution states that the Government can not interfere in Religion but it doesn't state that religion can not be involved in Government.
It doesn't really matter too me but I find Atheists funny. There are plenty of Countries that do just fine with State Sponsored Religions. Actually the US is one of a few without a State Sponsored religion.
Places like England, Iceland, Ireland, (most of Europe, Asia, etc) all have a State Religion.
So maybe the problem with the United States is a lack of a State Religion.
Currently playing: LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too: Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
LOL! .. yea that one is pretty funny .. Equality .. this is a joke right?
It might be a joke where you live, but for most modern societies it is a common philosophy. Marx and Lenin are perhaps two of the most famous proponents of equality in the history of mankind.
They are the fathers of communism.
If this works so well without morals why is it we have chinese women bringing their children into our clinics here in the US telling us that the reason they risked their lives in order to live at all? China has no moral obligations thus they have no problem in killing children of parents who have more than one child, they have no moral issue with starving their own people because there are no moral implications of doing so.
The first point: The founding fathers of the USA were almost entirely deist. If they were Christian, why would they want separation of church and state? The second point: You do not need religion to teach you morality. You do not need religion to teach you that killing children is bad. Recent studies have shown chimpanzees have morals and a sense of right and wrong. Mercy does not exist only because of religion. Mercy is displayed not only by humans but by many different other animals. Do these animals have religion?
Deists is still religion and belief in God, They were for religious freedom, and against religious persecution. Morality is a result of "social conditioning" from many religions throughout history. Without religion there is no morals. right and wrong are condtioned the same as rats are conditioned by electric shock to do what we want them to do, the same as the puppy tinkling on the carpet is taught to fear his master for not pleasing him, the same as the slaves were conditioned to please their masters or be punished. This is not a "born behavior" it is learned through conditioning of negative and positive reinforcement. The Puppy does not feel bad for tinkling on your carpet, it fears the masters response to the action. Just as many have been conditioned to fear not wearing a seatbelt. Most people drive over the speedlimit, but then only slow down when they see a police officer. why ? because they fear getting a ticket, not because they view it as morally wrong.
Originally posted by deviliscious I am trying to figure out why there has been such an attack on Palin's religion
Because the left is self-hating and self-destructive and they wish to drag everyone else down with them.
Um, way to categorize everyone who is a Liberal. That's like me saying that all Conservatives are religious right rednecks.
You know why we have a problem with Sarah Palin's religion? Because the people in her old church, especially the pastors, are completely fanatical.
"Pastor Kalnins has preached that critics of President Bush will be banished to hell; questioned whether people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to heaven; charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and war in Iraq were part of a war "contending for your faith;"
I wonder what they think of people who don't support Sarah Palin.
From my reckoning, the following Founding Fathers were deists:
Ethan Allen
Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
Thomas Paine
George Washington
The rest were some form of Christian or another. Now, if someone can find a better list (I got this from a Deist website), please do so.
Their Deism came from their Masonic Tradition; which holds that the three monotheistic faiths hold to certain basic truths that all can agree upon. One God, the golden rule, and Divine Providence are the basic tenets they all held to. They held to the Christian Ethic, regardless on their beliefs about Jesus or the Trinity.
If we look at the Masons, most of whom were Christians as well, we see a much larger list:
Signers of the Declaration of Independence who were Masons:
Benjamin Franklin
Robert Treat Paine
John Hancock
Richard Stockton
Joseph Hewes
George Walton
William Hooper
William Whipple
Signers of the U.S. Constitution:
Gunning Bradford, Jr.
John Blair
Benjamin Franklin
David Brearley
Nicholas Gilman
Jacob Broom
Rufus King
Daniel Carroll
James McHenery
Jonathan Dayton
William Paterson
John Dickinson
George Washington
Most appear to have been Masonic Christians. Still, they mostly believed that each man's faith was personal in nature and not to be imposed by the state. that doesn't mean they did not believe in religion or its role in a moral society. Most of them felt such was necessary for the preservation of Liberty.
"As the Government of the United States...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 Musselmen--and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan 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."
Also, the words "under god" were added after a campaign by the knights of columbus if i recall correctly.
If it destroys whatever America stands for, well that depends what you think America stands for. If you think America stands for freedom, like many people believe, than it makes more sense to be in favor of seperation of church and state as religion is opposed to freedom.
Originally posted by deviliscious I am trying to figure out why there has been such an attack on Palin's religion
Because the left is self-hating and self-destructive and they wish to drag everyone else down with them.
Um, way to categorize everyone who is a Liberal. That's like me saying that all Conservatives are religious right rednecks.
You know why we have a problem with Sarah Palin's religion? Because the people in her old church, especially the pastors, are completely fanatical.
"Pastor Kalnins has preached that critics of President Bush will be banished to hell; questioned whether people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to heaven; charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and war in Iraq were part of a war "contending for your faith;"
I wonder what they think of people who don't support Sarah Palin.
The thing is here, the same people persecuting Palin for her religion, support Obama regardless of his religious beliefs. His pastor speaks openly about the US, and those that oppose Obama. His pastor has said alot worse yet the same people persecuting Palin choose to ignore the facts about Obamas religion. This religious persecution of Palin is being carried out by hypocrits, but yet people attempt to justify it.
Seperation between church and state is a good thing. And I also don't want any one religious group hijacking my govt and taking away my freedoms based on what they think is "sinful". Do you want to end up like Italy? The Catholic church weilds far too much influence in their govenment.
No I do not want to end up like any other country , that is the point here. I do not want to end up like China where it is okay to starve your people and murder your children . I want our freedom of religion to be perserved where we are not to follow any belief blindly. Our country was founded by religious people that cherished their beliefs and wished to protect that for everyone. Throwing religion out of government entirely does not protect their choice of religion at all, it instead removes their right to religious beliefs. "morality "tempered with logic is what should guide us. Not stripping either from the equation to keep it balanced.
Palin is attacked for her religion not BECAUSE of her religion but how SHE uses her religion. She's a fanatic. The only difference between her and Al Queda is she wouldn't have the balls to blow herself up to take you with her.
Where in her history as governor did she use her religion to force anything upon the people of Alaska? I have not seen this from her at all. Sure she believes strongly in her religion, and i respect her for speaking openly about it. At least she doesn't tell her pastor one thing and the people another like that OTHER GUY. I would rather know what someone is about up front rather than have them attempting to deceive people.
Originally posted by deviliscious Morality is a result of "social conditioning" from many religions throughout history. Without religion there is no morals. right and wrong are condtioned the same as rats are conditioned by electric shock to do what we want them to do, the same as the puppy tinkling on the carpet is taught to fear his master for not pleasing him, the same as the slaves were conditioned to please their masters or be punished. This is not a "born behavior" it is learned through conditioning of negative and positive reinforcement. The Puppy does not feel bad for tinkling on your carpet, it fears the masters response to the action. Just as many have been conditioned to fear not wearing a seatbelt. Most people drive over the speedlimit, but then only slow down when they see a police officer. why ? because they fear getting a ticket, not because they view it as morally wrong.
Religion has not been the only philosophy and ethical code to teach morality throughout history. How would you explain Confucianism in China? That is not a religion but it provided its followers with morals.
Are you saying that people are only moral because they believe they will be punished by God if they do not act accordingly to the morality of a specific religion?
--------------------------------------------- Killer 86%, Socializer 53%, Explorer 33%, Achiever 26%
Places like England, Iceland, Ireland, (most of Europe, Asia, etc) all have a State Religion. So maybe the problem with the United States is a lack of a State Religion.
Please remind me how many people actually practice and attend the services of those state sponsored religions (especially Europe)?
--------------------------------------------- Killer 86%, Socializer 53%, Explorer 33%, Achiever 26%
Originally posted by deviliscious The thing is here, the same people persecuting Palin for her religion, support Obama regardless of his religious beliefs. His pastor speaks openly about the US, and those that oppose Obama. His pastor has said alot worse yet the same people persecuting Palin choose to ignore the facts about Obamas religion. This religious persecution of Palin is being carried out by hypocrits, but yet people attempt to justify it.
I think the main reason that some Democrats are attacking her religion now is because some Republicans attacked the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Now don't get me wrong here, I 100% do NOT support anything that Jeremiah Wright has said. I will even go so far as to say that Rev. Wright is rascist against white people, plain and simple.
I don't agree with either of them because of my own personal beliefs. To me, they are both equally fanatical and undesirable in their own way. But when Republicans attacked Obama for something that his pastor said, it was a dumb move on their part, because Palin's pastor is equally nuts (imo.)
Originally posted by deviliscious Morality is a result of "social conditioning" from many religions throughout history. Without religion there is no morals. right and wrong are condtioned the same as rats are conditioned by electric shock to do what we want them to do, the same as the puppy tinkling on the carpet is taught to fear his master for not pleasing him, the same as the slaves were conditioned to please their masters or be punished. This is not a "born behavior" it is learned through conditioning of negative and positive reinforcement. The Puppy does not feel bad for tinkling on your carpet, it fears the masters response to the action. Just as many have been conditioned to fear not wearing a seatbelt. Most people drive over the speedlimit, but then only slow down when they see a police officer. why ? because they fear getting a ticket, not because they view it as morally wrong.
Religion has not been the only philosophy and ethical code to teach morality throughout history. How would you explain Confucianism in China? That is not a religion but it provided its followers with morals.
Are you saying that people are only moral because they believe they will be punished by God if they do not act accordingly to the morality of a specific religion?
Actually, Christianity says the opposite; moral behavior has nothing to do with punishment since all Sin is forgiven in Christ. Moral behavior, according to Christianity, is the outward expression of the inward change which occurs from a relationship with God. All men Sin, and fall short of this, all their lives. That is why we need forgiveness and Grace.
Confucianism is not a religion in the sense that it requires supernatural entities, but it IS a religion as far as beliefs go. What it does is, instead of grounding natural morality in a Supreme being, it grounds such as being part of "nature." It decides in its own a priori fashion what IS moral, and that is taken from the traditions that Confucious inherited from those before him.
It also contains rituals and practice, more akin to religions than how we would term philsophies, and places great importance on such things. In that sense it is a religion as well. So is Buddhism.
It doesn't as we see in Western Philosophy, make up a morailty based upon premises gathered IN REALITY, such as we see in egoism, existentialism, utilitarianism, and to a lesser extent, stoicism and epicureanism.
It certainly is a religion as devilicious was using the term. The issue is one largely of definition. This is a tough discussion when one goes from Western to Eastern thought. The two cultures don't think in exactly the same categories.
One might say Confuscianism and Buddhism are philosophies that BECAME religions. Once a philosophy becomes ritualized and a part of a culture that identifies itself as such, it certainly is a religion. A religion without a God (as such -- the Universe and Karma perform much the same function as God, but that's another discussion), but religion nonetheless.
Now I'm veering away from the individual discussion; but that's only because I have broad fascination for the topic and a love and respect for ideas.
Originally posted by deviliscious The thing is here, the same people persecuting Palin for her religion, support Obama regardless of his religious beliefs. His pastor speaks openly about the US, and those that oppose Obama. His pastor has said alot worse yet the same people persecuting Palin choose to ignore the facts about Obamas religion. This religious persecution of Palin is being carried out by hypocrits, but yet people attempt to justify it.
I think the main reason that some Democrats are attacking her religion now is because some Republicans attacked the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Now don't get me wrong here, I 100% do NOT support anything that Jeremiah Wright has said. I will even go so far as to say that Rev. Wright is rascist against white people, plain and simple.
I don't agree with either of them because of my own personal beliefs. To me, they are both equally fanatical and undesirable in their own way. But when Republicans attacked Obama for something that his pastor said, it was a dumb move on their part, because Palin's pastor is equally nuts (imo.)
I do think both are relevant for discussion. I think Obama needs to explain what he agrees and disagrees with (partially done already), as does Palin.
What I can see is NEITHER of them has ever evidenced trying to impose their religious views on others, which is what is most important here.
There needs to be a seperation. Churches also need to be taxed. And i feel that if anymore oppressing religious-based laws go into effect, we will see revolt by many. Ok, not many, but put it this way, who would win a revolt? Limp-wristed liberals, "sit on my ass until jesus comes" bible thumpers, or pissed off logical thinkers? I'll bet on a handful of pissed off logical thinkers any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
This. Right. Here.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?
And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"
"I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that "except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service."
"[I]t is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue."
"[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
"The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If "Thou shalt not covet," and "Thou shalt not steal," were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free."
Times have changed. Reason and logic have become commonplace. The dark ages, and the religions that governed them have passed.
It is time to move forward, now. It is time for americans to put down their security blanket and move forward out of superstition, into intelligence.
TIme to discard religions that teach that one man is superior to another simply because of his preference in sexual partners, or what books he reads.
Wasn't it said in the declaration of independance that "all men are created equal"? Religion in government works cross-purposes to this basic tenant that the US was founded on.
Enough is enough. Keep your gods in your homes and your churches, and OUT of our government and municipal institutions.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
Comments
The first point: The founding fathers of the USA were almost entirely deist. If they were Christian, why would they want separation of church and state?
There is nothing in the Constitution which explicitly states "separation of church and state".
The intent is obvious. The prohibition of any religious test for any public office is a pretty good iindicator, and it's in the main body of the Constitution. Look in Article 6.
Furthermore, the First Amendment is explicit in creating a church/state separation. Wise religionists know that this insures that the state will not stick its nose into their business, and it's the basis for the wide variety of faiths and creeds in the US.
To assert otherwise is to outright lie.
However, what they preach and what they practice are not always the same things.
Example, Obama's adoption of christianity as his officially stated religion. He knew full well that he would NEVER stand a chance at becoming president without that qualifier.
And, I wonder how many of you have grown up and lived as a practicioner of a non-christian faith?
Try living life as a Satanist, for example, where people are always trying to take your children away, your testimony in court cases is tossed out, you are harassed by police, and generally made to be miserable as a result of the heavy infusion of christianity in every aspect of the country we live in.
See, religion in government may sound fine to you, and may look good on paper...but in reality it's an abomination, in every way as "wrong" as racism.
You're quite right that even with a formal church-state separation, minority religions do not have an easy time in a culture that is predominantly one generalized religion. Still, that doesn't mean that there are not differences within that one seemingly majority faith. An outsider to Christianity might be mistaken in thinking that Catholics and Protestants are basically the same faith, when there are many "Christians" in this country who consider Catholicism to be as closely related to their faith as Taoism is. Most Americans imagine Islam to be a monolithic faith when it is in fact anything but, as is seen in Iraq with the Sunni/Shia conflict.
Too many Americans think that Christianity is the faith of America. The problem is that they can't agree on what "Chrstianity" means. Which further underscores the wisdom of the Founders in keeping the state out of religion. They were much closer than we are in history to Europe's great wars over religion. They cold still smell the blood from the battlefields where men fought over what version of Christianity was the correct one. The Founders took the view that there is no "correct" faith.
That's the beauty of the separation of church and state. No one faith can claim official sanction. Many faiths can exist side by side without the state interfering in their docrtrinal affairs. Jefferson said something to the effect that what his neighbor believes is not his concern unless his neighbor starts pushing it on him.
CH, Jedi, Commando, Smuggler, BH, Scout, Doctor, Chef, BE...yeah, lots of SWG time invested.
Once a denizen of Ahazi
If that stops you from killing human beings in the name of that strange God you have, that will be good.
because the founding fathers were christians. And if you want, you can pay all the bills to remove all religion from our currency and etc, because i for sure dont want to.
Jefferson denied outright the divinity of Jesus. Nearly every one of the Founders was a deist, which means that they believed God created the universe, then split. Never again to interfere in the affairs of men.
The "God" on currency is that particular deity.
Again, the assertion that this is a "Christian" nation is an outright lie. There are dozens of examples to the contrary, source examples, from Adams, Madison, Jefferson, Franklin and others.
who ever said this was a christian nation? I just said christians started the nation, but since you say you have done research proving they believed in god and werent christians then ill believe you.
Playing: EVE Online
Favorite MMOs: WoW, SWG Pre-cu, Lineage 2, UO, EQ, EVE online
Looking forward to: Archeage, Kingdom Under Fire 2
KUF2's Official Website - http://www.kufii.com/ENG/ -
So many people misquote Jefferson. It is getting pretty pathetic. Jefferson never states that Religions doesn't belong in Government and in his later years he even attended Church while in Office. (They had services in the Capital Building)
The letter states that the Government will not interfere in Religion. That is what the protection of the Constitution states. Note that it isn't a two way street. The Constitution states that the Government can not interfere in Religion but it doesn't state that religion can not be involved in Government.
It doesn't really matter too me but I find Atheists funny. There are plenty of Countries that do just fine with State Sponsored Religions. Actually the US is one of a few without a State Sponsored religion.
Places like England, Iceland, Ireland, (most of Europe, Asia, etc) all have a State Religion.
So maybe the problem with the United States is a lack of a State Religion.
Currently playing:
LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too:
Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
It might be a joke where you live, but for most modern societies it is a common philosophy. Marx and Lenin are perhaps two of the most famous proponents of equality in the history of mankind.
They are the fathers of communism.
If this works so well without morals why is it we have chinese women bringing their children into our clinics here in the US telling us that the reason they risked their lives in order to live at all? China has no moral obligations thus they have no problem in killing children of parents who have more than one child, they have no moral issue with starving their own people because there are no moral implications of doing so.
Deists is still religion and belief in God, They were for religious freedom, and against religious persecution. Morality is a result of "social conditioning" from many religions throughout history. Without religion there is no morals. right and wrong are condtioned the same as rats are conditioned by electric shock to do what we want them to do, the same as the puppy tinkling on the carpet is taught to fear his master for not pleasing him, the same as the slaves were conditioned to please their masters or be punished. This is not a "born behavior" it is learned through conditioning of negative and positive reinforcement. The Puppy does not feel bad for tinkling on your carpet, it fears the masters response to the action. Just as many have been conditioned to fear not wearing a seatbelt. Most people drive over the speedlimit, but then only slow down when they see a police officer. why ? because they fear getting a ticket, not because they view it as morally wrong.
Because the left is self-hating and self-destructive and they wish to drag everyone else down with them.
Um, way to categorize everyone who is a Liberal. That's like me saying that all Conservatives are religious right rednecks.
You know why we have a problem with Sarah Palin's religion? Because the people in her old church, especially the pastors, are completely fanatical.
"Pastor Kalnins has preached that critics of President Bush will be banished to hell; questioned whether people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to heaven; charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and war in Iraq were part of a war "contending for your faith;"
I wonder what they think of people who don't support Sarah Palin.
From my reckoning, the following Founding Fathers were deists:
Ethan Allen
Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
Thomas Paine
George Washington
The rest were some form of Christian or another. Now, if someone can find a better list (I got this from a Deist website), please do so.
Their Deism came from their Masonic Tradition; which holds that the three monotheistic faiths hold to certain basic truths that all can agree upon. One God, the golden rule, and Divine Providence are the basic tenets they all held to. They held to the Christian Ethic, regardless on their beliefs about Jesus or the Trinity.
If we look at the Masons, most of whom were Christians as well, we see a much larger list:
Signers of the Declaration of Independence who were Masons:
Benjamin Franklin
Robert Treat Paine
John Hancock
Richard Stockton
Joseph Hewes
George Walton
William Hooper
William Whipple
Signers of the U.S. Constitution:
Gunning Bradford, Jr.
John Blair
Benjamin Franklin
David Brearley
Nicholas Gilman
Jacob Broom
Rufus King
Daniel Carroll
James McHenery
Jonathan Dayton
William Paterson
John Dickinson
George Washington
Most appear to have been Masonic Christians. Still, they mostly believed that each man's faith was personal in nature and not to be imposed by the state. that doesn't mean they did not believe in religion or its role in a moral society. Most of them felt such was necessary for the preservation of Liberty.
fishermage.blogspot.com
www.thenation.com/doc/20050221/allen
Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli:
"As the Government of the United States...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 Musselmen--and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan 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."
Also, the words "under god" were added after a campaign by the knights of columbus if i recall correctly.
If it destroys whatever America stands for, well that depends what you think America stands for. If you think America stands for freedom, like many people believe, than it makes more sense to be in favor of seperation of church and state as religion is opposed to freedom.
Seperation between church and state is a good thing.
And I also don't want any one religious group hijacking my govt and taking away my freedoms based on what they think is "sinful".
Do you want to end up like Italy? The Catholic church weilds far too much influence in their govenment.
Because the left is self-hating and self-destructive and they wish to drag everyone else down with them.
Um, way to categorize everyone who is a Liberal. That's like me saying that all Conservatives are religious right rednecks.
You know why we have a problem with Sarah Palin's religion? Because the people in her old church, especially the pastors, are completely fanatical.
"Pastor Kalnins has preached that critics of President Bush will be banished to hell; questioned whether people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to heaven; charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and war in Iraq were part of a war "contending for your faith;"
I wonder what they think of people who don't support Sarah Palin.
The thing is here, the same people persecuting Palin for her religion, support Obama regardless of his religious beliefs. His pastor speaks openly about the US, and those that oppose Obama. His pastor has said alot worse yet the same people persecuting Palin choose to ignore the facts about Obamas religion. This religious persecution of Palin is being carried out by hypocrits, but yet people attempt to justify it.
No I do not want to end up like any other country , that is the point here. I do not want to end up like China where it is okay to starve your people and murder your children . I want our freedom of religion to be perserved where we are not to follow any belief blindly. Our country was founded by religious people that cherished their beliefs and wished to protect that for everyone. Throwing religion out of government entirely does not protect their choice of religion at all, it instead removes their right to religious beliefs. "morality "tempered with logic is what should guide us. Not stripping either from the equation to keep it balanced.
Where in her history as governor did she use her religion to force anything upon the people of Alaska? I have not seen this from her at all. Sure she believes strongly in her religion, and i respect her for speaking openly about it. At least she doesn't tell her pastor one thing and the people another like that OTHER GUY. I would rather know what someone is about up front rather than have them attempting to deceive people.
Religion has not been the only philosophy and ethical code to teach morality throughout history. How would you explain Confucianism in China? That is not a religion but it provided its followers with morals.
Are you saying that people are only moral because they believe they will be punished by God if they do not act accordingly to the morality of a specific religion?
---------------------------------------------
Killer 86%, Socializer 53%, Explorer 33%, Achiever 26%
Please remind me how many people actually practice and attend the services of those state sponsored religions (especially Europe)?
---------------------------------------------
Killer 86%, Socializer 53%, Explorer 33%, Achiever 26%
I think the main reason that some Democrats are attacking her religion now is because some Republicans attacked the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Now don't get me wrong here, I 100% do NOT support anything that Jeremiah Wright has said. I will even go so far as to say that Rev. Wright is rascist against white people, plain and simple.
I don't agree with either of them because of my own personal beliefs. To me, they are both equally fanatical and undesirable in their own way. But when Republicans attacked Obama for something that his pastor said, it was a dumb move on their part, because Palin's pastor is equally nuts (imo.)
Religion has not been the only philosophy and ethical code to teach morality throughout history. How would you explain Confucianism in China? That is not a religion but it provided its followers with morals.
Are you saying that people are only moral because they believe they will be punished by God if they do not act accordingly to the morality of a specific religion?
Actually, Christianity says the opposite; moral behavior has nothing to do with punishment since all Sin is forgiven in Christ. Moral behavior, according to Christianity, is the outward expression of the inward change which occurs from a relationship with God. All men Sin, and fall short of this, all their lives. That is why we need forgiveness and Grace.
Confucianism is not a religion in the sense that it requires supernatural entities, but it IS a religion as far as beliefs go. What it does is, instead of grounding natural morality in a Supreme being, it grounds such as being part of "nature." It decides in its own a priori fashion what IS moral, and that is taken from the traditions that Confucious inherited from those before him.
It also contains rituals and practice, more akin to religions than how we would term philsophies, and places great importance on such things. In that sense it is a religion as well. So is Buddhism.
It doesn't as we see in Western Philosophy, make up a morailty based upon premises gathered IN REALITY, such as we see in egoism, existentialism, utilitarianism, and to a lesser extent, stoicism and epicureanism.
It certainly is a religion as devilicious was using the term. The issue is one largely of definition. This is a tough discussion when one goes from Western to Eastern thought. The two cultures don't think in exactly the same categories.
One might say Confuscianism and Buddhism are philosophies that BECAME religions. Once a philosophy becomes ritualized and a part of a culture that identifies itself as such, it certainly is a religion. A religion without a God (as such -- the Universe and Karma perform much the same function as God, but that's another discussion), but religion nonetheless.
Now I'm veering away from the individual discussion; but that's only because I have broad fascination for the topic and a love and respect for ideas.
fishermage.blogspot.com
I think the main reason that some Democrats are attacking her religion now is because some Republicans attacked the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Now don't get me wrong here, I 100% do NOT support anything that Jeremiah Wright has said. I will even go so far as to say that Rev. Wright is rascist against white people, plain and simple.
I don't agree with either of them because of my own personal beliefs. To me, they are both equally fanatical and undesirable in their own way. But when Republicans attacked Obama for something that his pastor said, it was a dumb move on their part, because Palin's pastor is equally nuts (imo.)
I do think both are relevant for discussion. I think Obama needs to explain what he agrees and disagrees with (partially done already), as does Palin.
What I can see is NEITHER of them has ever evidenced trying to impose their religious views on others, which is what is most important here.
fishermage.blogspot.com
This. Right. Here.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
This, I do, agree with.
An interesting quote from George Washington:
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?
And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"
fishermage.blogspot.com
And from Benjamin Franklin:
"I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that "except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service."
fishermage.blogspot.com
Of course, we know how John Adams felt:
"[I]t is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue."
"[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
"The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If "Thou shalt not covet," and "Thou shalt not steal," were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free."
fishermage.blogspot.com
And Jefferson on Jesus:
"I concur with the author in considering the moral precepts of Jesus as more pure, correct, and sublime than those of ancient philosophers."
fishermage.blogspot.com
Times have changed. Reason and logic have become commonplace. The dark ages, and the religions that governed them have passed.
It is time to move forward, now. It is time for americans to put down their security blanket and move forward out of superstition, into intelligence.
TIme to discard religions that teach that one man is superior to another simply because of his preference in sexual partners, or what books he reads.
Wasn't it said in the declaration of independance that "all men are created equal"? Religion in government works cross-purposes to this basic tenant that the US was founded on.
Enough is enough. Keep your gods in your homes and your churches, and OUT of our government and municipal institutions.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"