I always thought that the seperation between church and state wasn't mentioned in any of the founding father's records. I haven't read them, but there are always those who say it was and those who say it wasn't.
Anyone know for sure or the exactly document so I can read it?
I always thought that the seperation between church and state wasn't mentioned in any of the founding father's records. I haven't read them, but there are always those who say it was and those who say it wasn't. Anyone know for sure or the exactly document so I can read it? Blessings,
Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists
The Final Letter, as Sent
To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.
Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
If I understood that correctly, Jefferson wasn't thinking clearly that day - at all.
On the contrary, think of it like this- Not a separation of Church and State, a separation of State from Church. He didn't want the govt. getting in between people and their faith.
If Jefferson had been out to kick the Church in the nuts, would he have responded:
"I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem."
You wouldn't want the govt. regulating your faith, and I wouldn't want the faith regulating my govt. (it still does, but whatcha gonna do?).
A nation where murder was accepted, but suggested to not be done. Scary place don't you think?
No, this may be a bit idealistic of me but, like I said I think every person is sovereign over themselves, so if someone tried to murder someone else or steal their things, that would be a breach of sovereignty and therefor they would be punished by society. And if everyone had an understanding of this there wouldn't be that many cases of murder or theft anyway.
Practically speaking though most people need someone to tell them what to do, since they are too stupid to figure out how to do it themselves and how to treat fellow man. There are a great number of us though that can live harmoniously without government intervention.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
You wouldn't want the govt. regulating your faith, and I wouldn't want the faith regulating my govt. (it still does, but whatcha gonna do?).
If it was in line with Scripture, I would want that. But once its gets out of line, I'd speak up. I'd get burnt at the stake, but someone would have to do it
If I understood that correctly, Jefferson wasn't thinking clearly that day - at all.
"our particular principles of religion are a subject of accountability to our god alone. I enquire after no man's and trouble none with mine; nor is it given to us in this life to know whether yours or mine, our friend's or our foe's, are exactly the right."
Remember at that time they lived in a fear of the church of England.The church and the state where one,if you read his papers its clear of the fear he had and rightly so for the church of England was totaly political and major thorn the side for the spirt movement which was to come forth after the founding of the US.Reminds me of moses not making it to the promise land after 40 yrs is the nomans land.jefferson wanted the church to have free reign threw out the new lands with no interferance from the state.here is an example : the church is much better at feeding the poor and clothing the poor than the state why because they deal local and personalable, where as the states way of dealing with this problem is to be vary indifferant.cold ,wasteful,and in the end it promotes poverity.His statement has been twisted over time,as if its a crime to give goverment money to religious groups to help others.
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
So what that phrase had a different meaning back then than it does now? Meaning, people have twisted the original intent of the phrase to make a point?
No you wouldn't need society to govern anything if people respected the idea of individual rights and property.
We all want to survive, the key is educating people in how to survive in the most effecient way possible, which killing or stealing isn't very effiecient, since people will become angry and you could be killed. It is about organizing people so they can all pursue their self interest in an orderly fashion.
The better educated people become the less we need society to interveen til eventually it doesn't anymore, it is a slow weening process.
Like I said though a little too idealistic, it wouldn't work for most people.
I am adamantly opposed to religion and all gods because
They are thought control, they tell you how messed up you are and give you one way to find an exit, insert god/s. They tell you what is good and what is bad, you go longer have to think. And they all, that I know of, hinge on the idea that if you do not believe and obey then you will be severely punished. It is mental slavery keeping you from seeing reality as it is filling your head with lies, making you think that you need something you really don't. They deny human's natural happiness and give false hope. Gods are a neurosis on the mind of the world.
If you feel happy with religion then all the better for you, but I deplore it, I find it the most disgusting invention of man. I find it strange that the same kind of mind that can find a cure for some of the most deadliest diseases can come up with something as horrible as a god.
Don't read this as prescriptive, I am not saying I think we should abolish all religion and governments, if people like them let them have it all, I just do not want it anymore.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
No you wouldn't need society to govern anything if people respected the idea of individual rights and property. We all want to survive, the key is educating people in how to survive in the most effecient way possible, which killing or stealing isn't very effiecient, since people will become angry and you could be killed. It is about organizing people so they can all pursue their self interest in an orderly fashion. The better educated people become the less we need society to interveen til eventually it doesn't anymore, it is a slow weening process. Like I said though a little too idealistic, it wouldn't work for most people. I am adamantly opposed to religion and all gods because They are thought control, they tell you how messed up you are and give you one way to find an exit, insert god/s. They tell you what is good and what is bad, you go longer have to think. And they all, that I know of, hinge on the idea that if you do not believe and obey then you will be severely punished. It is mental slavery keeping you from seeing reality as it is filling your head with lies, making you think that you need something you really don't. They deny human's natural happiness and give false hope. Gods are a neurosis on the mind of the world. If you feel happy with religion then all the better for you, but I deplore it, I find it the most disgusting invention of man. I find it strange that the same kind of mind that can find a cure for some of the most deadliest diseases can come up with something as horrible as a god. Don't read this as prescriptive, I am not saying I think we should abolish all religion and governments, if people like them let them have it all, I just do not want it anymore.
I too have given up on a god who is controlling and the ideals that are past through popchurches. My God is one of love and redistribution, where the last become the first.
Well, the big difference between a government and a group of individuals that are just getting along is the absence of class, where as the rulers of governments dictate what should be done and demand obediance, in an idea society the people would come togehter to figure out how they should treat each other and how they can best live together. One is derived from power that crushes opposition, the other is derived from reason and cannot be logically opposed, especially by an educated person.
Romantic ideas though, akin to Kant
I understand your point about a more benevolent deity, but I would say that the most benevolent thing a deity can do for man is leave him alone, I value freedom above all, come whatever may.
The only truely benevolent deities I would say are the buddist deity, which really isn't a deity at all more like beingness, if you are a buddist that even believes in a deity, Theravadan Buddists don't really. And Odin, my personal favorite
Philosophy aside, religions still have a problem in the scientific realm, so that is one more mark I have against religion.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
No you wouldn't need society to govern anything if people respected the idea of individual rights and property. We all want to survive, the key is educating people in how to survive in the most effecient way possible, which killing or stealing isn't very effiecient, since people will become angry and you could be killed. It is about organizing people so they can all pursue their self interest in an orderly fashion. The better educated people become the less we need society to interveen til eventually it doesn't anymore, it is a slow weening process. Like I said though a little too idealistic, it wouldn't work for most people. I am adamantly opposed to religion and all gods because They are thought control, they tell you how messed up you are and give you one way to find an exit, insert god/s. They tell you what is good and what is bad, you go longer have to think. And they all, that I know of, hinge on the idea that if you do not believe and obey then you will be severely punished. It is mental slavery keeping you from seeing reality as it is filling your head with lies, making you think that you need something you really don't. They deny human's natural happiness and give false hope. Gods are a neurosis on the mind of the world. If you feel happy with religion then all the better for you, but I deplore it, I find it the most disgusting invention of man. I find it strange that the same kind of mind that can find a cure for some of the most deadliest diseases can come up with something as horrible as a god. Don't read this as prescriptive, I am not saying I think we should abolish all religion and governments, if people like them let them have it all, I just do not want it anymore.
So you claim that I live my life bent on a lie? You claim that I've given my entire life to something that doesn't exist? You say I've been enslaved into a chain of mental lies?
You haven't experienced true freedom or love then. This is true in its fullest form, "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom". There is true freedom in Christ. There is no bondage, no 'slavery' or whatever you atheist call it. You do not see clearly and you accuse from that standpoint. You somehow think that humans are good within themselves and we can fix what we have ruined.
Either you had a terrible experience in some religion, or the outside perspective of human life regarding religion has scarred you, IE: radical islam.
Well, all I can say is that I was a mess before I met Jesus and now I have a smile on my face and I'm so happy, even though I'm broke, all my cymbals (I'm a drummer) are cracked, my car is falling apart, and I'm single (which I am actually happy to be..).
The freedom of life itself, free from the binds of material possessions and attachments, it is freedom in its true form.
Thats not the true form at all. I mean, the TRUE form? That is only 1/2 of it. There is an external dimension, but more importantly, is the internal, which was my point. Both are valid and both are apart of experiencing freedom!
More free than the freedom to poses or own. It is the freedom to choose and to be happy with ones station.
I don't understand. >.<
If all religious people understood this there would be much less violence in the world. But alas there will always be violence no matter if it is for religion, against religion or neither of these things.
The problem is that several religions encourage violence. If everyone on the planet were Christian, there would be ZERO violence. That isn't a political statement, but its the truth. There would be no more theft, sadness, hunger, grief, war or anything else bad. Thats the truth.
Either you had a terrible experience in some religion, or the outside perspective of human life regarding religion has scarred you, IE: radical islam. Well, all I can say is that I was a mess before I met Jesus and now I have a smile on my face and I'm so happy, even though I'm broke, all my cymbals (I'm a drummer) are cracked, my car is falling apart, and I'm single (which I am actually happy to be..). Wow.. *breath* Blessings, :-)
Well, I am not going to debate you on your belief in Jesus. That is just my opinion on the nature of religion, just an explaination for why I detest it. But do keep in mind that my opinion isn't the opinion of all atheists, we do not have a dogma or creed, so you will find atheists of all types. Even some kinda like religion, but just do not believe.
I wasn't exorcised by a church and I am not worried about radical islam, truth be told I have been an atheist for a while now. My dislike of religion isn't related to my not believing in god which is an intellectual issue, my dislike for religion is emotional, I see how religious people treat others, and how they feel about themselves and I think it is sad that so many religious people are taught to be so hateful towards others and themselves. And yes I do think that there is good in all people, I do not think it is right for religions to accuse people of being evil and sinful, and people having to carry the burden of guilt for wanting to be human.
But hey we are more alike then we know, my family made me feel like crap when I bought into the Christianity thing, They had me conviced that enjoying nude women and not hating gay people was somehow evil and made me evil as well, talk about chronic depression. But then I became educated, reliezed god didn't exist and no longer subscribed to that hateful dogma, and I am happy now. That is an over simplification, but yeah I have a busted amp, my jeep needs tires but I have no money and I am happily single too, and hopefully will be for a long while.
People aren't that different
Emotional testimony doesn't count for much though you still need the evidence :P
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
Wow. I'm very embarassed in regards to the church and how they effected your life. I'm sorry to hear that. There are comments that I'd like to say, but I don't feel like they should be mentioned, as I don't want to argue, but merely talk.
You seem like a very understanding person who actually thinks before you speak. If you'd want to chat about anything, I don't mind, give me a PM. We could even join up in a group on a MMO if we played the same ones.
If I don't get a reply, I'll just PM you, ha! :P You seem interesting, which is a compliment by my standards.
Unfortunatly your comment on everyone being Christian is not true. As there are plenty of people who kill and encoruage violence in gods name Westboro baptist for instance. You may argue that they are not christians, unfortunatly while you would be correct it is a matter of perspective unfortunatly, and while these people continue to believe they are working in gods name they will continue to move along.
When I say by Christian, I mean Christian by biblical standards. Mathew 5 - 7 lifestyle. There would be no war, violence, etc.
Im not sure why you are arguing with me on freedom. I was only agreeing with you entirely. And your responce is really the same as what i said, just using different words. There is the external - life itself, and there is the internal - the freedom of possession to reflect better on the internal.
I wasn't arguing, I was agreeing. We just both made different points.
I am not sure why you would say that "that is not it at all".
No need to be embarassed, you can't be held collectively responsible for the actions of others, and besides that was years ago it is of no concern now. There are many good religious people, the others are just misguided.
But yeah thanks,
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
I do believe in God. I do believe in the teachings of Christianity, and I do everything I can to be the best Christian I can be, and honestly, I feel sorry for those who don't have any faith at all.
No, i deny god or any other higher being. Main reason for that is when i started to ask myself the question "who has the right to decide when someone goes to hell to burn until the end of time?"
for quite some time i took the point of view that i am an agnostic, and on a grumpy day i would be an atheist because i wanted the argument. After watching Richard Dawkins though, i have become more comfortable in saying that i am atheist, not that i believe that all gods have been disproved, but that all gods are defined in a way that makes them impossible but fullfil the many different traits of the natural process of storytelling.
so i don't deny the possibility of things beyond my understanding, i just deny your god.
here is the transcript for the celestial teapot argument as well as the one god more argument.
yes i do simple because we would have to have a supreme being with a sense of humor to have the platypus. It is a mammal that lays eggs, is deaf dumb and blind underwater and guides itself by its bill thats proof enough for me.
i didn't read the whole thread, but the male platypus is also venomous.
which of course means, it's a proper Aussie critter
Comments
I always thought that the seperation between church and state wasn't mentioned in any of the founding father's records. I haven't read them, but there are always those who say it was and those who say it wasn't.
Anyone know for sure or the exactly document so I can read it?
Blessings,
MMO migrant.
Seperation between church and state? Not in the USA. We have americain flags hanging in our pop churches.
Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists
The Final Letter, as Sent
To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.
Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
If I understood that correctly, Jefferson wasn't thinking clearly that day - at all.
MMO migrant.
When given the choice to pay money or they send me to jail, I rather choose money.
This doesn't mean I agree with the concept of taxation at all, I find it unethical.
I am willing to play by their rules in order to not be punished to a degree, but everyone has their breaking point.
Same thing with a deity, I would obey some rules in order to avoid punishment, but there are some things that I consider too important to comprimise.
And I also think there is a difference between following rules to avoid punishment and actually agreeing with the rule makers.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
If Jefferson had been out to kick the Church in the nuts, would he have responded:
"I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem."
You wouldn't want the govt. regulating your faith, and I wouldn't want the faith regulating my govt. (it still does, but whatcha gonna do?).
No, this may be a bit idealistic of me but, like I said I think every person is sovereign over themselves, so if someone tried to murder someone else or steal their things, that would be a breach of sovereignty and therefor they would be punished by society. And if everyone had an understanding of this there wouldn't be that many cases of murder or theft anyway.
Practically speaking though most people need someone to tell them what to do, since they are too stupid to figure out how to do it themselves and how to treat fellow man. There are a great number of us though that can live harmoniously without government intervention.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
Blessings,
MMO migrant.
Remember at that time they lived in a fear of the church of England.The church and the state where one,if you read his papers its clear of the fear he had and rightly so for the church of England was totaly political and major thorn the side for the spirt movement which was to come forth after the founding of the US.Reminds me of moses not making it to the promise land after 40 yrs is the nomans land.jefferson wanted the church to have free reign threw out the new lands with no interferance from the state.here is an example : the church is much better at feeding the poor and clothing the poor than the state why because they deal local and personalable, where as the states way of dealing with this problem is to be vary indifferant.cold ,wasteful,and in the end it promotes poverity.His statement has been twisted over time,as if its a crime to give goverment money to religious groups to help others.
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
So what that phrase had a different meaning back then than it does now? Meaning, people have twisted the original intent of the phrase to make a point?
Blessings,
MMO migrant.
No you wouldn't need society to govern anything if people respected the idea of individual rights and property.
We all want to survive, the key is educating people in how to survive in the most effecient way possible, which killing or stealing isn't very effiecient, since people will become angry and you could be killed. It is about organizing people so they can all pursue their self interest in an orderly fashion.
The better educated people become the less we need society to interveen til eventually it doesn't anymore, it is a slow weening process.
Like I said though a little too idealistic, it wouldn't work for most people.
I am adamantly opposed to religion and all gods because
They are thought control, they tell you how messed up you are and give you one way to find an exit, insert god/s. They tell you what is good and what is bad, you go longer have to think. And they all, that I know of, hinge on the idea that if you do not believe and obey then you will be severely punished. It is mental slavery keeping you from seeing reality as it is filling your head with lies, making you think that you need something you really don't. They deny human's natural happiness and give false hope. Gods are a neurosis on the mind of the world.
If you feel happy with religion then all the better for you, but I deplore it, I find it the most disgusting invention of man. I find it strange that the same kind of mind that can find a cure for some of the most deadliest diseases can come up with something as horrible as a god.
Don't read this as prescriptive, I am not saying I think we should abolish all religion and governments, if people like them let them have it all, I just do not want it anymore.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
I too have given up on a god who is controlling and the ideals that are past through popchurches. My God is one of love and redistribution, where the last become the first.
Well, the big difference between a government and a group of individuals that are just getting along is the absence of class, where as the rulers of governments dictate what should be done and demand obediance, in an idea society the people would come togehter to figure out how they should treat each other and how they can best live together. One is derived from power that crushes opposition, the other is derived from reason and cannot be logically opposed, especially by an educated person.
Romantic ideas though, akin to Kant
I understand your point about a more benevolent deity, but I would say that the most benevolent thing a deity can do for man is leave him alone, I value freedom above all, come whatever may.
The only truely benevolent deities I would say are the buddist deity, which really isn't a deity at all more like beingness, if you are a buddist that even believes in a deity, Theravadan Buddists don't really. And Odin, my personal favorite
Philosophy aside, religions still have a problem in the scientific realm, so that is one more mark I have against religion.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
So you claim that I live my life bent on a lie? You claim that I've given my entire life to something that doesn't exist? You say I've been enslaved into a chain of mental lies?
You haven't experienced true freedom or love then. This is true in its fullest form, "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom". There is true freedom in Christ. There is no bondage, no 'slavery' or whatever you atheist call it. You do not see clearly and you accuse from that standpoint. You somehow think that humans are good within themselves and we can fix what we have ruined.
Either you had a terrible experience in some religion, or the outside perspective of human life regarding religion has scarred you, IE: radical islam.
Well, all I can say is that I was a mess before I met Jesus and now I have a smile on my face and I'm so happy, even though I'm broke, all my cymbals (I'm a drummer) are cracked, my car is falling apart, and I'm single (which I am actually happy to be..).
Wow.. *breath*
Blessings, :-)
MMO migrant.
MMO migrant.
I wasn't exorcised by a church and I am not worried about radical islam, truth be told I have been an atheist for a while now. My dislike of religion isn't related to my not believing in god which is an intellectual issue, my dislike for religion is emotional, I see how religious people treat others, and how they feel about themselves and I think it is sad that so many religious people are taught to be so hateful towards others and themselves. And yes I do think that there is good in all people, I do not think it is right for religions to accuse people of being evil and sinful, and people having to carry the burden of guilt for wanting to be human.
But hey we are more alike then we know, my family made me feel like crap when I bought into the Christianity thing, They had me conviced that enjoying nude women and not hating gay people was somehow evil and made me evil as well, talk about chronic depression. But then I became educated, reliezed god didn't exist and no longer subscribed to that hateful dogma, and I am happy now. That is an over simplification, but yeah I have a busted amp, my jeep needs tires but I have no money and I am happily single too, and hopefully will be for a long while.
People aren't that different
Emotional testimony doesn't count for much though you still need the evidence :P
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
Wow. I'm very embarassed in regards to the church and how they effected your life. I'm sorry to hear that. There are comments that I'd like to say, but I don't feel like they should be mentioned, as I don't want to argue, but merely talk.
You seem like a very understanding person who actually thinks before you speak. If you'd want to chat about anything, I don't mind, give me a PM. We could even join up in a group on a MMO if we played the same ones.
If I don't get a reply, I'll just PM you, ha! :P You seem interesting, which is a compliment by my standards.
Blessings,
MMO migrant.
MMO migrant.
No need to be embarassed, you can't be held collectively responsible for the actions of others, and besides that was years ago it is of no concern now. There are many good religious people, the others are just misguided.
But yeah thanks,
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
I do believe in God. I do believe in the teachings of Christianity, and I do everything I can to be the best Christian I can be, and honestly, I feel sorry for those who don't have any faith at all.
.:jaytheunseen:.
No, i deny god or any other higher being. Main reason for that is when i started to ask myself the question "who has the right to decide when someone goes to hell to burn until the end of time?"
Would be nice, but.. seeing how there are tons of religions, and they all think they are right.. who is to know for sure?
--------------------------------------------------
No
for quite some time i took the point of view that i am an agnostic, and on a grumpy day i would be an atheist because i wanted the argument. After watching Richard Dawkins though, i have become more comfortable in saying that i am atheist, not that i believe that all gods have been disproved, but that all gods are defined in a way that makes them impossible but fullfil the many different traits of the natural process of storytelling.
so i don't deny the possibility of things beyond my understanding, i just deny your god.
here is the transcript for the celestial teapot argument as well as the one god more argument.
which of course means, it's a proper Aussie critter
No. I've always considered religion to be a search for a simple answer to the meaning of something very complex, the meaning of life.