KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Get out the Medieval ages no country but the Muslim countries base their laws and principles on Religion anymore. The day America becomes a Theocracy is the day America becomes a joke' date=' By the way which sect of Christianity will America follow?[/quote'] Not a big fan of history there are you? American and most western law is largely based on Judeo-Christian law and Hammurabi's code....Read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and some American history. Take your hate schtick somewhere else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicked1 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I would tend to agree with that....but for VERY different reasons!!! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Hand Grenade Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Not a big fan of history there are you? American and most western law is largely based on Judeo-Christian law and Hammurabi's code....Read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and some American history. Take your hate schtick somewhere else... Oh i am sorry where did i say America was not founded on Christian values you petulant moron? I said most countries are not "Based" Keyword "Based" on them anymore you dipshit. England was once a Roman Catholic Empire but guess what it is not anymore, Denmark started off as a pagan kingdom but guess what it is not anymore. You are a ****ing tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Get out the Medieval ages no country but the Muslim countries base their laws and principles on Religion anymore. The day America becomes a Theocracy is the day America becomes a joke' date=' By the way which sect of Christianity will America follow?[/quote'] No actually all of our modern laws are based on Christian principles. Are you so blinded by your hate for God and Christianity that you can't see that? I'm not even going to give you an example of a law that was based on Judeo-Christianity. You're either ignorant or blinded by hate. You're worse than Buddy Light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Oh i am sorry where did i say America was not founded on Christian values you petulant moron? I said most countries are not "Based" Keyword "Based" on them anymore you dipshit. England was once a Roman Catholic Empire but guess what it is not anymore' date=' Denmark started off as a pagan kingdom but guess what it is not anymore. You are a ****ing tool. [/quote'] Oh... ooh, name calling. Typical ignorant response. "I'll show them Christians! I'll call them petulant morons and dipshits and ****ing tools." Real nice. Real civil. I digress. My original point proven again and again over and over by the likes of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Hand Grenade Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 No actually all of our modern laws are based on Christian principles. Are you so blinded by your hate for God and Christianity that you can't see that? I'm not even going to give you an example of a law that was based on Judeo-Christianity. You're either ignorant or blinded by hate. You're worse than Buddy Light. Are you so blinded to see that America is not the whole world? The reason you believe your country is based on "Judeo-Christian" principles is because your country has no History most of those laws were already placed here in Europe long before Christianity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Thomas Jefferson also took out all the parts of the Bible that dealt with miracles and the resurrection. Whatever you want to think of the Founding Fathers' date=' they were politically savvy enough to know that if they were openly non-Christian, they would probably be shot in the street. Read their private papers and you'll see what they *really* believed. In fact, in his original text of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote "All men are created equal and independent. From that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable." The idea was to ensure that the U.S. would never have a single state religion as there was in England. Quite a radical idea at the time--both believers and non-believers could be citizens. WOW And the wall of separation comes directly from Jefferson's writings in his explanation of how they meant the 1st Amendment to be interpreted. As they saw it, both government and religion were best served by keeping out of each other's business. This was further clarified in the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796 which states the United States is "in no way founded on Christianity." Half a century after the U.S. was founded, clergymen were complaining that no President up to that time had been a Christian. In a sermon quoted in newspapers, an Episcopal minister lamented in 1831, "Among all our presidents from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism." So those "activist" judges are doing exactly what most conservatives say they want--they are looking within the words of the Constitution itself and the available writings to determine the *intention* behind them. It's not a matter of forcing a minority belief on the majority. Our country is based on a fundamental belief that even though "majority rules," minority rights must be protected.[/quote'] Thomas Jefferson was just one of the founders...MOST were Christian...I've studied quite a bit about it, you should too! Minority rights are protected. You and your revolutionary atheist pals want eminority RULE...that ain't going to happen! The fact of the matter is that Thomas Jefferson allowed and participated in Christian services in government buildings...you can't change that. Supreme court justices are supposed to measure laws against the constitution to insure that they do not violate the words as written...when the words are not plain, they are supposed to look at what the common words and language meant at the time they were written...they are NOT supposed to substitute their beliefs for the words in the constitution. If the court operated the way that you and the other progressives wanted it to, then there wouldn't be three coequal branches of the government, instead the Supreme court would be in charge of everything. The same activism and substitution of personal values for the written constitution that rules in a way that you like on issues like Roe v Wade and the display of the 10 commandments, also gave us the Dred Scott decision....It's a shame you can't/won't see the danger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Hand Grenade Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Oh... ooh' date=' name calling. Typical ignorant response. "I'll show them Christians! I'll call them petulant morons and dipshits and ****ing tools." Real nice. Real civil. I digress. My original point proven again and again over and over by the likes of you.[/quote'] Oh yes and you are a saint? Get off your high horse you pompous, self righteous prick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Are you so blinded to see that America is not the whole world? The reason you believe your country is based on "Judeo-Christian" principles is because your country has no History most of those laws were already placed here in Europe long before Christianity. OBJECTION! Conjecture and hear-say your Honor. SUSTAINED. The witness will show proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Oh yes and you are a saint? Get off your high horse you pompous' date=' self righteous prick.[/quote'] Again with the name calling. Do you believe this guy? He can't even formulate a decent, comprehensible proof. And by the way, I'm the worse kind of sinner you can think of, "A Forgiven Sinner." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 No don't go away mad. Just go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Hand Grenade Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Again with the name calling. Do you believe this guy? He can't even formulate a decent' date=' comprehensible proof. And by the way, I'm the worse kind of sinner you can think of, "A Forgiven Sinner." [/quote'] So you can call me an Amoral, Agnostic, Anti-Christ but as soon as i start the name calling you get all pissy? You and KSG can go **** each other in Double Standard island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Did you bring proof or some kind of facts with you this time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 So you can call me an Amoral' date=' Agnostic, Anti-Christ but as soon as i start the name calling you get all pissy? You and KSG can go **** each other in Double Standard island.[/quote'] Well there you go again, proving my point over and over again throughout this post. You even admitted it. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Time for family now. It's the National Day of Prayer. We're going to eat and spend some quality time in prayer tonight. Good night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Hand Grenade Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Well there you go again' date=' proving my point over and over again throughout this post. You even admitted it. Thank you.[/quote'] I admitted it because i am not a Self Righteous moron disguised as a Christian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicked1 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Thomas Jefferson was just one of the founders...MOST were Christian...I've studied quite a bit about it' date=' you should too! Minority rights are protected. You and your revolutionary atheist pals want eminority RULE...that ain't going to happen! The fact of the matter is that Thomas Jefferson allowed and participated in Christian services in government buildings...you can't change that. Supreme court justices are supposed to measure laws against the constitution to insure that they do not violate the words as written...when the words are not plain, they are supposed to look at what the common words and language meant at the time they were written...they are NOT supposed to substitute their beliefs for the words in the constitution. If the court operated the way that you and the other progressives wanted it to, then there wouldn't be three coequal branches of the government, instead the Supreme court would be in charge of everything. The same activism and substitution of personal values for the written constitution that rules in a way that you like on issues like Roe v Wade and the display of the 10 commandments, also gave us the Dred Scott decision....It's a shame you can't/won't see the danger.[/quote'] And where in the Constitution is that part about examining laws to ensure they are Constitutional? Let me help you out. It's not. It's the product of one of those "activist judges." The USSC had no authority to declare a law unconstitutional until Marbury v. Madison provided for judicial review. Ok, so perhaps MOST of the people living in the U.S. at the time were Christian. The men who wrote the Constitution were most certainly not. Washington--NOT. Jefferson--NOT. Franklin--NOT. Madison--NOT. Adams--NOT. You can also add Thomas Paine to the list of NOT Christian. And I am NOT trying to advocate for minority rule. As for Jefferson...plenty of Presidents walked into churches and privately railed against the religion. Just a few examples of what he was *really* thinking: "Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law." -letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, 1814 "They [preachers] dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversions of the duperies on which they live." "I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology." "We discover in the gospels a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication ." "Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear. - letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787 "Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth." - "Notes on Virginia" "No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever." -Virginia Act for Religious Freedom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 So you can call me an Amoral' date=' Agnostic, Anti-Christ but as soon as i start the name calling you get all pissy? You and KSG can go **** each other in Double Standard island.[/quote'] Great post junior!;) Isn't it past your bedtime? Are you in your parent's basement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776 The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. — John Hancock New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.