Continuation of the Founding Fathers debate...

---

I'm sure this will annoy some of you who are "sick and tired" of these types of discussions, but... well, I don't care.Thor, you like to believe that the USA was founded on Christianity and Christian beliefs. Then please explain this:"The Government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion."John Adams, 2nd President of the United States of America

the "new world" was originally an attempt to escape the "old world". Sadly, today's America is becoming, in some ways, more oppressive than old world Europe.Here's what I don't understand...one of the original precepts of America was "freedom". This is a very good aspiration!! But, why are there so many freedoms that are harshly judged while others are promoted? "the right to bare arms" so, Joe Q Public can own a lethal weapon yet can't marry his boyfriend. I must dare to say this... the right wing, conservative, Christian movement in the US is totally at odds with the hopes and dreams of their founders and of the teachings of Christ himself

Originally Posted By: unsupervisedI must dare to say this... the right wing, conservative, Christian movement in the US is totally at odds with the hopes and dreams of their founders and of the teachings of Christ himself For a start, it's the Christian desire to worship freely that brought them to what we now call the US. That freedom is granted to those of any religion, or no religion at all. But there are certain things we, as a free people cannot allow. We can't allow folks to have the freedom to go running around killing other people, for example. In other words, there are certain freedoms that malign the freedom that exists, tearing it down over time to the point where freedom is lost altogether. Freedom comes at a price. Conserving the status quo, as far as our freedom is concerned, is what conservativism is all about. It comes from the word "conserve". Liberals are not interested in maintaining what we have...they think they can do better. They will find out that they are wrong.Tomato plants are actually vines...we train them to grow upright with poles, which keeps the fruit (tomato is actually a fruit) from spoiling. Left to their own, they'll crawl on the ground...much of the fruit will rot before it becomes ripe, as a result. Should we allow our society the kind of freedom that will allow it to rot?

There is a big difference between not being founded on Christianity, and placing Christian morals and concepts into documents and policies. (Who do you think, traditionally, Americans are giving thanks to on Thanksgiving, for example?) The quote you cited came from a document regarding the Muslims of Tripoli...we, as a country, wanted to be sure they understood we would not be inciting some kind of "holy war" against them. There was good reason to include that specific language in there. Does it nullify how this country came to be? Only in the dreams of an athiest.On athiesm, let's be clear. If you talk long enough to most any athiest, you will eventually hear them say something to the effect of "there is no God, and I hate him". The bottom line is that athiest do believe there is a God...they just hate the idea of having to do as somebody else says. They probably are rebellious against most other forms of authority, too. They have gone so far into denial that they grasp, based on nothing more than faith, concepts like natural selection and life starting on its own here on this planet...things that have never been proven; not even in a lab where conditions are controlled. They'll grasp anything, proven or not, that helps them to deny (to themselves, mostly) the existance of God. But the very act shows that they do, in fact, believe in the existance of God. Why would they care so much about grasping things that they believe disprove God if they thought God didn't exist? They wouldn't. Christians believe as they do largely on faith, too...but at least they're honest about it. Agnostics are also honest...they are beginning with the statement "I do not know". But athiests are merely in denial...they lie to themselves every moment of every day because they think they can escape by doing so. They love the idea of inbridled freedom because, to them, it means that they can do whatever they want. It's a selfish kind of freedom because it is unconcerned about the rights and freedoms of others...it will erode our society over time, until there is little freedom left. (Something true conservatives have always understood.) So...now that you've all been uncovered/discovered...let the flaming begin.

Thor, I love ya man but you really are nuts.go back and read your post. See if you can pick out your own contradictions.let me know if you need a few hints

OK Thor, this is going to be a kind of a long post. I understand that it may frighten you slightly but please do read it. I address EVERY point you made in your post. If I missed one, please highlight which one and I'll get right on it.

Originally Posted By: thor

There is a big difference between not being founded on Christianity, and placing Christian morals and concepts into documents and policies.

And what Christian morals and policies were originally put into the constitution? I know this argument well and trust me when I say that you'll have to do a lot better better than the usual quotes of Isaiah 33:22 that I get when given this argument.

Originally Posted By: thor

(Who do you think, traditionally, Americans are giving thanks to on Thanksgiving, for example?)

Thanksgiving was traditionally a harvest festival to thank God (for Christians) for a good harvest and for their material possessions. But this was celebrated long before the US government was created. And just like Christianity adopted pagan festivals into its own dogma, the US government adopted Thanksgiving as a federal holiday. A holiday that was not always celebrated by the US government, such as during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson.

Originally Posted By: thor

Does it nullify how this country came to be?

Again, please show how Christian morals and policies were originally put into the constitution?

Originally Posted By: thor

On athiesm, let's be clear. If you talk long enough to most any athiest, you will eventually hear them say something to the effect of "there is no God, and I hate him". The bottom line is that athiest do believe there is a God...they just hate the idea of having to do as somebody else says.

Thats like saying that you don't believe in Zeus because you don't like the idea of playing sports naked. I do not believe in gods, so how can I hate them or love them? Do you hate Zeus?

What I don't understand is how you can completely accept and understand your own non-belief of ancient Greek gods and goddesses, yet you can't seem to comprehend that my non-belief just goes one god more. I am not afraid of your god nor do I hate "him". Just as I don't hate the Easter Bunny, even though I didn't get an Easter egg this year! :frowning: .

Originally Posted By: thor

They probably are rebellious against most other forms of authority, too. They have gone so far into denial that they grasp, based on nothing more than faith, concepts like natural selection and life starting on its own here on this planet...things that have never been proven; not even in a lab where conditions are controlled.

I love this. How many times does it have to be loaded onto your screen before you actually read responses to your posts? How many times do we have to go over this before you accept that all the evidence points to evolution by natural selection? How many times will you ignore the responses that you wish we didn't have?

I'll post THIS LINK for you so maybe you'll have a look at it. Don't worry, its not a link to some random website you can just ignore. Its to one of my previous posts that you tried to ignore and lost any last trace of respect for doing so.

Originally Posted By: thor

They'll grasp anything, proven or not, that helps them to deny (to themselves, mostly) the existance of God. But the very act shows that they do, in fact, believe in the existance of God. Why would they care so much about grasping things that they believe disprove God if they thought God didn't exist? They wouldn't.

You seem to be incapable of understanding that science is the quest to discover knowledge, not to disprove gods. Its just a fun coincidence that a lot of what science has discovered goes against what you believe about your god. But if tomorrow there was a dramatic scientific discovery that proved the existence of god then wonderful, we've learnt something new. But until then, there is no reason to believe in one.

Originally Posted By: thor

Christians believe as they do largely on faith, too...but at least they're honest about it. Agnostics are also honest...they are beginning with the statement "I do not know". But athiests are merely in denial...

You don't seem capable of grasping the differences between not believing there is a god and believing there is no god. The latter, as you say, is a declaration of faith as is subject to as much scrutiny as any other declaration of faith or knowledge. Its Gnostic-Atheism and is just as bad as Gnostic-Theism. But the former is simply a non-belief, just as you don't believe in Zeus. This view is known as Agnostic-Atheism and is held by the vast majority of Atheists including Richard Dawkins. Even he, your anti-christ, doesn't say that there is definitely no god.

Originally Posted By: thor

...they lie to themselves every moment of every day because they think they can escape by doing so. They love the idea of inbridled freedom because, to them, it means that they can do whatever they want. It's a selfish kind of freedom because it is unconcerned about the rights and freedoms of others...it will erode our society over time, until there is little freedom left. (Something true conservatives have always understood.) So...now that you've all been uncovered/discovered...let the flaming begin.

Yes, damn liberal minded atheists, unconcerned with the rights of people, especially homosexuals.

Your argument here seems to be that Christians are more moral than Atheists. Oh, how I love this argument!

Would you go around killing people if it was proven that there is no God? Would you cheat on your spouse? Would you abandon your children? Would you sleep with 10 year old prostitutes? Would you set a house on fire, destroying everything and everyone inside?

A belief in God is not what stops you from doing these things. And if it is, then you are a very sick individual.

thor always ignores the questions for wich he has no answer. I guess it's a faith thing.

Originally Posted By: unsupervised

Thor, I love ya man but you really are nuts.

go back and read your post. See if you can pick out your own contradictions.

let me know if you need a few hints

Not sure what you mean by "contradictions", but please...go ahead and point to some things I said. I'm not surprised at all that a liberal doesn't see things the same way I do...that's OK. Just means there's something to discuss...which is largely why I don't respond to much of what bob writes (refering to your second post): Nothing worth discussing.

The Constitution was drafted by what are historically referred to as the "55 Constitutional Framers". They were all believers in Jesus Christ (except, possibly, for Franklin) and, except for Franklin, Jefferson and one other, were all orthodox (meaning "standard for the times") Christians. Orthodox Christianity at the time meant believing in Jesus Christ and God, as the father, and going to church on Sundays, etc, etc. Many of the concepts found in both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence can be found on the net if one looks...but it does help, I admit, to be familiar with the Bible in order to find them. The Bible was rarely directly quoted, but the ideas found in it were lifted again and again for inclusion in these (argueably) two most important documents in US history. Here's a little of what I quickly found:
________________________________________________________________
On the Declaration of Independence:

The "Spirit of 76" has been the central rallying point for American patriotism since her violent inception over 200 years ago. This, of course, is in reference to the Declaration of Independence. From the time of our embryonic national birth pains, Christians have pondered just what the "Spirit of 76" means. Are the dominant themes depicted in this historic document born from Christian orthodoxy, or is the anthem of Enlightenment rationalism the clarion cry?
Certainly, if one is searching for an explicit creedal confession of the lordship of Jesus Christ, the Declaration is woefully lacking. Too, the effects of the Enlightenment and of deistic notions give the accent of the day in the wording of our founding charter. However, the acknowledgment of the transcendent Creator-God granting certain unalienable rights and the reliance upon Divine Providence are themes which cannot be ignored. So too, the definition of these rights, "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness," are concepts older than the Enlightenment and owe their genesis to Christian Orthodoxy as defined by the first four Ecumenical Creeds of the church. Also, the sway of Protestantism regarding the doctrine of the lesser civil magistrate and interposition is a clearly evidenced apologetic throughout the document.
Examining the Nicene Creed, we find strains that surface themselves in the Declaration.
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made; Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary and was made man; and as crucified under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right of the Father; and he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead; Whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, Who spake by the Prophets. And I believe in one holy Christian and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection of the dead; and the life of the world to come. Amen.
As depicted in the First Article, God's transcendent nature is conclusively rendered. Meaning that God is the sovereign Creator who established all things visible and invisible, and who is distinct and apart from His creation (Gen. 1:1, Col. 1:16,17). Hence, the God who created you is the Lord and giver of life. It is He who sustains your body, your soul, your senses, and your reasoning faculties. It is God who provides your sustenance, your house and home, your family and property. It is God who nurtures you and protects you from all evil. He does all of these things expressly for His divine pleasure and purpose.
The concepts of liberty and freedom derived from the first article or the notion of the transcendent Creator- God are as follows:
1. The right to life is a liberty granted by God. It is God alone who gives life. Any unlawful taking of life is murder. Therefore, if state sanctioned, state-sponsored murder in the form of abortion is codified, you have a denial of God's transcendence and tyranny to the unborn. Yet, this abomination is done under the aegis of a kind of "liberty" whose rhetoric is "pro-choice." This so-called "liberty" is humanistic and God-denying, and thus ends in the persecution and the death of the unborn. Beyond the immediacy of the horrid deed itself, such tyranny leads to the destruction of whole generations, and thus a culture of death is perpetuated until that nation or culture is annihilated. Therefore, unless liberty under God is recognized, tyranny and death are the results not only for the unborn, but, eventually, for the elderly, the sick, the infirmed, and finally society as a whole.
2. Another principle of liberty derived from the first article is that provision, and thus personal property comes from God and God alone. The same God that created the earth gave man dominion over it. Genesis 1:26-28 depicts man possessing, ruling, and reordering the earth. Also, throughout God's law, the possession of land is a mark of God's blessing and provision. Therefore, your family, your home, your property, is a freedom and blessing that comes from God and not from the state!
It is plain that the truths articulated in the First Article of the Nicene Creed are reflected in the Declaration of Independence. While this does not make it a Christian confession, it does illustrate that Christianity, in its most crystalline sense, was a powerful influence on the document. This is not confined to mere rhetorical pleasantries which acknowledge the existence of God, but form the backbone and the crux of the revolutionary argument--"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
The National Reform Association holds that an explicit confession of the lordship of Jesus Christ is necessary for all of our founding national documents. While such a confession is conspicuously absent from both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the Declaration nonetheless exhibits Christian influences which have a profound effect on the pursuit of liberty.
________________________________________________________________
On the Constitution:

Our U.S. Constitution was founded on Biblical principles and it was the intention of the authors for this to be a Christian nation. The Constitution had 55 people work upon it, of which 52 were evangelical Christians. We can go back in history and look at what the founding fathers wrote to know where they were getting their ideas. This is exactly what two professors did. Donald Lutz and Charles Hyneman reviewed an estimated 15,000 items with explicit political content printed between 1760 and 1805 and from these items they identified 3,154 references to other sources. The source they most often quoted was the Bible, accounting for 34% of all citations. Sixty percent of all quotes came from men who used the Bible to form their conclusions. That means that 94% of all quotes by the founding fathers were based on the Bible. The founding fathers took ideas from the Bible and incorporated them into our government. If it was their intention to separate the state and church they would never have taken principles from the Bible and put them into our government. An example of an idea taken from the Bible and then incorporated into our government is found in Isaiah 33:22 which says, "For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king..." The founding fathers took this scripture and made three major branches in our government: judicial, legislative, and executive. As mentioned earlier, the founding fathers strongly believed that Man was by nature corrupt and therefore it was necessary to separate the powers of the government. For instance, the President has the power to execute laws but not make them, and Congress has the power to make laws but not to judge the people. The simple principle of checks and balances came from the Bible to protect people from tyranny.
________________________________________________________________

While I admit that saying that 94% of the founding fathers quotes came from the Bible is a stretch, there is absolutely no denying that the Bible, and their Christianity, figured very strongly in their thought processes while developing the Constitution.

Athiests, liberals and the like have Christians to thank for the liberty that exists here, as in no other country, that they live under.

Quote: Conserving the status quo, as far as our freedom is concerned, is what conservativism is all about. It comes from the word "conserve". Liberals are not interested in maintaining what we have...they think they can do better. They will find out that they are wrong.  Quote: Left to their own, they'll crawl on the ground...much of the fruit will rot before it becomes ripe, as a result. Should we allow our society the kind of freedom that will allow it to rot?so, are you a proponent of change or not?btw, in 1893 the US supreme couts declared that tomatos were a vegitable, despite the botanical facts. (stoopid science)

I am a proponent of change when said change means returning to the ways that have been proven to work...which is not the direction we're currently headed in (speaking for the US).

Originally Posted By: thorJust means there's something to discuss...which is largely why I don't respond to much of what bob writes (refering to your second post): Nothing worth discussing. Originally Posted By: bobalicious Originally Posted By: thorThere is a big difference between not being founded on Christianity, and placing Christian morals and concepts into documents and policies. And what Christian morals and policies were originally put into the constitution? I know this argument well and trust me when I say that you'll have to do a lot better better than the usual quotes of Isaiah 33:22 that I get when given this argument. Originally Posted By: thorAn example of an idea taken from the Bible and then incorporated into our government is found in Isaiah 33:22 which says, "For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king..." The founding fathers took this scripture and made three major branches in our government: judicial, legislative, and executive.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!!You really should try reading my posts, if only to prevent embarrassment...

no, actually, you are only human.We humans see the world through the filter of our perceptions and beliefs. Your beleifs are not in accordance with all christians, fundamentalist christians, fundamentalists of any faith, Americans, conservatives, internet users, men, Norse gods, etc etc etc etc etcNo matter what group you align with, you are still you and you will have a different picture of "the truth" than your closest ally.Gay christians get married. Christians kill people. Jews kill people, Muslems kill people.Christians owned slaves. American forefathers owned slaves.And so, society and people and beliefs continue to evolve. If you honestly believe that you have it all right, that you are the ultimate, the alpha and the omega, then you sir need to take a deep and long look at your faith.You want to condemm "liberals" for constantly looking for a better way? There is a better way. There will always be a better way.Can you deny that?

Originally Posted By: unsupervisedChristians kill people. Jews kill people, Muslems kill people.Atheists kill people.

yes, thank youvegans kill people, Masons kill people, Boy scouts kill peopleis there a group that has never included a murderer?

Originally Posted By: thorThe Constitution was drafted by what are historically referred to as the "55 Constitutional Framers". They were all believers in Jesus Christ (except, possibly, for Franklin) and, except for Franklin, Jefferson and one other, were all orthodox (meaning "standard for the times") Christians. Orthodox Christianity at the time meant believing in Jesus Christ and God, as the father, and going to church on Sundays, etc, etc........The Constitution had 55 people work upon it, of which 52 were evangelical Christians.The early presidents and patriots were generally Deists or Unitarians, believing in some form of impersonal Providence but rejecting the divinity of Jesus and the absurdities of the Old and New testaments (none, that I'm aware of, openly admitted to being atheists).

Yes, most where Deists perhaps the reason more weren't atheist or agnostics was because given the viewable scope of the universe and the relative infancy of natural sciences creation was still the best explanation for existence.If I remember correctly, Abraham Lincoln was somewhat a Deist. He was somewhere between a Deist and a Christan. He was a scholar on the bible and new it intimately but refused to adhere to any organized religion nor did he find any great moral council beyond what he believed was innately do humanity anyway.

Originally Posted By: unsupervised

No matter what group you align with, you are still you and you will have a different picture of "the truth" than your closest ally.
Gay christians get married. Christians kill people. Jews kill people, Muslems kill people.
Christians owned slaves. American forefathers owned slaves.
And so, society and people and beliefs continue to evolve. If you honestly believe that you have it all right, that you are the ultimate, the alpha and the omega, then you sir need to take a deep and long look at your faith.
You want to condemm "liberals" for constantly looking for a better way? There is a better way. There will always be a better way.
Can you deny that?

First, I don't say I think I have the best way...I was speaking in general. My meaning is conservative ways that have proven themselves over time.

There are always options and choices to be made. What most don't understand is that, in order to get something in this life, you usually have to give up something else. So, in answer to your question, I will ask you one. Can you deny that there is a best way for doing something? A way in which what you've given up is minimized and what you've achieved is maximized?

I think the biggest differences in our opinions on the answers to those questions may be based on our focus. Conservatives focus on society as a whole, while liberals are generally focussed on the individual. Can you deny that the best focus should be society as a whole? If not, then which individual or group of individuals do you think deserve more focus than others?

Originally Posted By: bobalicious Originally Posted By: thorThe Constitution was drafted by what are historically referred to as the "55 Constitutional Framers". They were all believers in Jesus Christ (except, possibly, for Franklin) and, except for Franklin, Jefferson and one other, were all orthodox (meaning "standard for the times") Christians. Orthodox Christianity at the time meant believing in Jesus Christ and God, as the father, and going to church on Sundays, etc, etc........The Constitution had 55 people work upon it, of which 52 were evangelical Christians.The early presidents and patriots were generally Deists or Unitarians, believing in some form of impersonal Providence but rejecting the divinity of Jesus and the absurdities of the Old and New testaments (none, that I'm aware of, openly admitted to being atheists). You should do a better study of your resources...internet athiest sites are only going to tell you what you want to hear. The true historical documents show that Franklin was a Diest, and there may have been one other (can't remember off hand). Jefferson was a Materialist...which is a bit different. The rest were all church-going, Bible-believing Christians. That's 52 out of 55...in case you have trouble with the math.

Actually my research came from Steven Morris in a paper that strongly criticised left-wing secularists for trying to claim the majority of the founding fathers as atheists.Where, dare I ask, did you get your information from?

Yippee!More talking around each other!