Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.
Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.
So you are all in when it comes to concerns about the "establishment clause" being violated, but you and your ilk ignore routinely the words of the First Amendment that states "OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF"Originally Posted by SicEmBaylor
It is so clear that the Framers had no intentions of keeping religious expression out of sight, out of the main stream. You see it in their words, you see it in the monuments around DC that cite scripture, you see it with the Senate Chaplain. Big difference in keeping the Government out of religion, versus keeping religion out of the government.
The Danbury Baptist's letter to Thomas Jefferson dated October 7, 1801 was asking for reassurance from Jefferson that the federal government would not interfere with them practicing their religion. Jefferson's response on January 1st, 1802 did just that, assuring the Baptists that the government could not come between them and their religion, and thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. What the Supreme Court did later was took Jefferson's words completely out of context, to mean exactly the opposite of what his letter intended.
Why this portion of the First Amendment "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" was ignored in subsequent Supreme Court rulings is a travesty, as they became a tool of the seculars in this nation to remove religious influence in America.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
Bingo, you are the winner of the silliest statement made on this forum all week. Congrats!
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
That is quite a stretch coming from the likes of you.
Wasn't the under God part added in 1953?
a well regulated militia....
mic drop
I read some rambling screed about how stupid we liberals are on about page 12 of this thread on my phone. I didn't know who it was and was about to scroll left to see and then I realized that I didn't really need to...
Some of the FFs, like Jefferson and Thomas Paine, were Deists but they knew they needed the pious fundamentalist Christians in the original 13 Colonies to take up the cause of the Revolution against the British. That is why Thomas Paine alluded to Christian principles in so many of his publications before and during the Revolutionary War appealing to Chrisitians on religious grounds to join the cause. Without those early American Chrisitians there would be no United States of America....at least not in its present form. We would probably be more like Canada or Australia.
To assert this country's founding was not heavily influenced by Chrisitanity is nothing more than revisionist history.
Last edited by FaninAma; 8/28/2015 at 08:49 PM.
Beware the man who would rule you for your own good. He will never cease. He will regulate every aspect of your life, destroy your liberty and enslave you, and sleep well convinced that he has made the world a better place.
Quote Originally Posted by SoonerProphet
Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.Dang it, he's? on iggy. Now do you see why?
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
I'm not stopping anyone at all from exercising religion.
Who on Earth is suggesting that Baptists shouldn't be free to practice their religion? Of course, and obviously, the Federal government cannot and should not prevent the free exercise of religion. That isn't what we're talking about here.The Danbury Baptist's letter to Thomas Jefferson dated October 7, 1801 was asking for reassurance from Jefferson that the federal government would not interfere with them practicing their religion. Jefferson's response on January 1st, 1802 did just that, assuring the Baptists that the government could not come between them and their religion, and thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. What the Supreme Court did later was took Jefferson's words completely out of context, to mean exactly the opposite of what his letter intended.
Why this portion of the First Amendment "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" was ignored in subsequent Supreme Court rulings is a travesty, as they became a tool of the seculars in this nation to remove religious influence in America.
What are you talking about? Sure the government, led by the watchdog ACLU, files lawsuits everyday about religious symbols being displayed on government property. I am making the point that since the Supreme Court rulings, based on the phony "Separation of Church and State" ruling, that religious expressions are limited all the time. Any of you walk around the DC mall, look at the monuments, read the inscriptions, and come back and tell me why and how this Nation could erect such monuments on Federal Government property if that indeed is what they meant? If this was their intent, why wasn't it addressed that way in the First Amendment? Again "OR PROHIBITNG THE FREE EXERCISE THEROF" So why doesn't the First Amendment go on and state....as to private property?
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
well regulated militia
Keep trolling I think you might get a nibble soon.
Quote
If God wanted Men to look women in the eyes, He wouldnt have gave em Boobs !
You guys ignore that one. It's classic.Keep trolling I think you might get a nibble soon.
Not ignoring, thats been discussed so many times here its a boring topic. We mainly just ignoring YOU.
Quote
If God wanted Men to look women in the eyes, He wouldnt have gave em Boobs !
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/28/politi...ber/index.html
Liar.
Two things the right ignores here: 1. The Reagan/Iran connection. 2. The words "well regulated"
The same Paine who wrote in his Age of Reason wrote,
"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turk church, or by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.
"All institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."
I agree the FF were diests and perhaps more influenced by the tenets of Freemasonry than Christianity. The only folks engaging in revisionism are those who refuse to deal with the fact that in God we trust and the insertion of under God in pledge in the 1950s. The simple fact remains that there is no mention of god or christmin our founding document. A document influenced by common law more than anything else btw.
Ah yes, the head up anus approach political discourse. Very effective.
Quote
If God wanted Men to look women in the eyes, He wouldnt have gave em Boobs !
Iran/Contra was a mistake. On one hand, supporting the freedom fighters was a good thing. The manner in which the Reagan Administration went about it...not so good.
Well regulated? This has been brought up before the US Supreme Court many times, and their rulings have been consistent. I know you lefties entrust the government to behave themselves, but even if they did, what do you propose, that all honest citizens turn in their firearms, because they would be the only ones to turn them in.
Since we are on the subject, why is it that libs like you NEVER hold people responsible for their actions? If a lunatic kills ten people, it was the guns fault. If a person (and there are millions) sits around, doing nothing, wasting his life away, taking no initiative, doing nothing to help himself, and subsists on government payments, paid for by hardworking folks that do take responsibility for their actions, then it's not the welfare recipients fault either. To libs, the state is responsible for you, you are NOT responsible for yourself. I've seen that for decades and I never could understand the mindset associated with it. I guess I never will.
I do know this, personal responsibility, along with self reliance, are bedrocks of a free society, are the virtues that made us great. And the Democratic Party, along with an assist by spineless Republicans, have created this mess we have today, where millions have no hope, are angry, have no future, and I don't think it bothers liberals one iota. If it did, they wouldn't go along with the teacher's unions over vouchers to provide an escape for inner city kids from lousy schools. That's when their true colors show through. And that is sick.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
If you put the Prophet on ignore then you really have a problem with the whole idea of critical thinking.
Posting Permissions
