"Complaining about big bus. & then wanting the products they produce is hypocritical. The car you drive is big business. You bought it. TV, refrigerator, computer you use to complain etc. Classic Liberal I am."
I love the way people start name calling without knowing any facts what so ever. I voted for Ron Paul in the primaries and Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution party in the general election. Conservatives want Big business out of the government to. Because as we all know more people in government = bigger government. I don't drive a car but thanks for knowing everything. And I do shop at only certain businesses. I have not stepped foot inside Wal Mart in 7 years. They purposefully hire dumb people in order to keep wages low, so I chose not to shop their. I like shopping in stores that have competent employees and stores that take pride in their products and services. Your statement shows how one sided your views are and is probably a good reason you either voted for a republican or democrat in this past election. To say that its only the democrats fault or only the republicans fault is just silly.
"With all the tools at our disposal today, there is no excuse for being conned, unless you prefer being taken care of by a higher power known as big brother."
Peace and friendship with all mankind is our wisest policy, and I wish we may be permitted to pursue it.
Thomas Jefferson
Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.
Thomas Jefferson
Politics is such a torment that I advise everyone I love not to mix with it.
Thomas Jefferson
Power is not alluring to pure minds.
Thomas Jefferson
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 blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson
"can anyone else think of a area of our society we are troubled in? GOD sees the the end from the beginning. I believe that is called omnipresent or omniscient. in a nutshell, GOD knows everything about everything. don't you think it would be wise to seek his council."
Yea i can think of one, the church. Your telling me God saw those priests molest those kids and did nothing to stop them in HIS HOUSE?? I hope not. God saw people fighting each other in his name and did nothing to stop it? I hope not. Religion has ruined god's reputation in my eyes. Religions have abused the term god. We have had many people seek god's council through religion and millions of people died. God created the Earth in 7 days, BS thats already been proven wrong. Turn water into wine, yea ok.
"don't go postal now! understand i am not FORCING you to do anything. how about we call it free advice. "
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for peanuts
Anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax..
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge T ax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Ser vice FeeTax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge=2 0Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
After being informed at Parkland Hospital that Kennedy was dead, Johnson raced back to Air Force One, where he waited for Mrs. Kennedy and the body of the slain president, and made preparations to take the Oath of Office. Back at the hospital, the Kennedy group loaded the body into a coffin, forced their way past a local justice of the peace, and hurried back to Love Field for the long ride back to Washington.
It was standard practice for the plane to take off as soon as the commander-in-chief was onboard. Even after McHugh had ordered the pilot to take off, however, "nothing happened." According to the newly declassified transcript, Mrs. Kennedy was becoming desperate to leave. "Mrs. Kennedy was getting very warm, she had blood all over her hat, her coat...his brains were sticking on her hat. It was dreadful," McHugh said. She pleaded with him to get the plane off the ground. "Please, let's leave," she said. McHugh jumped up and used the phone near the rear compartment to call Captain James Swindal. "Let's leave," he said. Swindal responded: "I can't do it. I have orders to wait." Not wanting to make a scene in front of Mrs. Kennedy, McHugh rushed to the front of the plane. "Swindal, what on earth is going on?" The pilot told him that "the President wants to remain in this area."
McHugh, like most members of the Kennedy entourage, did not know that Johnson was onboard. They believed that the new president was on his own plane flying back to Washington. If LBJ was on the plane, McHugh wanted to see for himself. Since he had not seen Johnson in the aisle -- and at 6'4" Johnson would be tough to miss -- McHugh assumed that he must then be in the bedroom. When he checked there Johnson was nowhere to be seen. The only place on the plane he had not inspected was the bathroom in the presidential bedroom.
What McHugh claimed to have witnessed next was shocking. "I walked in the toilet, in the powder room, and there he was hiding, with the curtain closed," McHugh recalled. He claimed that LBJ was crying, "They're going to get us all. It's a plot. It's a plot. It's going to get us all.'" According to the General, Johnson "was hysterical, sitting down on the john there alone in this thing."
I soon discovered that McHugh had told a similar story when he spoke by phone with Mark Flanagan, an investigator with the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). Ironically, McHugh gave the interview to the HSCA a week before he sat down with the Kennedy Library in May 1978. "McHugh had encountered difficulty in locating Johnson but finally discovered him alone," Flanagan wrote in his summary to the Committee. Quoting McHugh, the investigator noted that the General found Johnson "hiding in the toilet in the bedroom compartment and muttering, 'Conspiracy, conspiracy, they're after all of us.'"
Author Christopher Anderson claimed that McHugh shared a similar, although slightly more dramatic, version of this story when he interviewed the General for his book Jackie after Jack, published in 1998.
If true, the story is explosive and reveals a completely different side of Johnson than the collected, calm presence he otherwise managed to convey throughout the hours and days following Kennedy's death.
But how credible is McHugh's account?
It is, of course, impossible to confirm or deny whether a private encounter took place between the two men, both of whom are now dead. There are a number of reasons to doubt McHugh's claim. The General intensely disliked Johnson and was fiercely loyal to JFK, and therefore had some reason to invent such a story. Most glaring, McHugh made no mention of what was surely a very memorable encounter in his long interview with William Manchester in 1964. It also stands to reason that if McHugh had witnessed Johnson in a state of utter breakdown, he would have told the story to others within the Kennedy camp. Surely, given how potentially damaging the story would be to LBJ, Kennedy partisans would have leaked it to the media at some point.
Although it is impossible to prove, my gut reaction is that McHugh is telling the truth. We know that Johnson was a man capable of dramatic mood swings, and occasional fits of hysteria were not unusual. McHugh's account of LBJ's behavior is similar to RFK's description of a trembling and tearful Johnson at the 1960 Democratic Convention when it appeared that JFK might renege on his promise to include him on the ticket. It was not surprising behavior to those who knew him best.
We also know from some eyewitnesses that LBJ's secret service agent, Rufus Youngblood, stood outside the door to the bedroom and controlled the traffic into the room. Aides went in and out, but it is possible that McHugh could have found LBJ alone in the bedroom suite.
If true, though, why did McHugh wait until 1978 to tell this story? When Manchester interviewed him in May 1964, McHugh was still in the military, although only a few months away from retirement. Is it possible that he worried the story would be too damaging to his commander-in-chief?
We will never know for sure, but McHugh's account is sure to add to the controversy surrounding that tragic November day in Dallas.
Go to hell,...Time for a real change, vote for an Independent or Libertarian. I think we have had enough of the two headed monster that is the Democrat/Republican Zionist War machine.
America will never forget the impotent gw bush and the ever threatening prick cheney, Hope they both are killed for what they did to America or allowed to happen if you will.
... Jefferson expressed himself strongly on that larger apocalypse, the Book of Revelation, in a letter to Alexander Smyth of 17 January 1825: it is "merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy, nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams." Apocalyptic writing deserved no commentary, for "what has no meaning admits no explanation"; therefore, apocalyptic prophecies associated with Jesus deserved and would receive no attention from Jefferson in his Life and Morals of Jesus. (E. S. Gaustad, "Religion," in Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Biography, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986, p. 287.)
Jefferson wrote voluminously to prove that Christianity was not part of the law of the land and that religion or irreligion was purely a private matter, not cognizable by the state. (Leonard W. Levy, Treason Against God: A History of the Offense of Blasphemy, New York: Schocken Books, 1981, p. 335.)
A final example of Jefferson's separationism may be drawn from his founding of the University of Virginia in the last years of his life. Prepared to transform the College of William and Mary into the principal university of the state, Jefferson would do so only if the college divested itself of all ties with sectarian religion--that is, with its old Anglicanism now represented by the Protestant Episcopal Church. The college declined to make that break with its past, and Jefferson proceeded with plans for his own university well to the west of Anglican-dominated tidewater Virginia. In Charlottesville this new school ("broad & liberal & modern," as Jefferson envisioned it in a letter to [Joseph] Priestly of 18 January 1800) opened in 1825 with professorships in languages and law, natural and moral philosophy, history and mathematics, but not in divinity. In Jefferson's view, as reported in Robert Healey's Jefferson on Religion in Public Education, not only did Virginia's laws prohibit such favoritism (for divinity or theology was inevitably sectarian), but high-quality education was not well served by those who preferred mystery to morals and divisive dogma to the unities of science. Too great a devotion to doctrine can drive men mad; if it does not have that tragic effect, it at least guarantees that a man's education will be mediocre. What is really significant in religion, its moral content, would be taught at the University of Virginia, but in philosophy, not divinity. If Almighty God has made the mind free, one of the ways to keep it free is to protect young minds from the clouded convolutions of theologians. Jefferson wanted education separated from religion because of his own conclusions concerning the nature of religion, its strengths and its weaknesses, its dark past and its possibly brighter future. (E. S. Gaustad, "Religion," in Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Biography, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986, pp. 282-283.)
John Quincy Adams had a firm faith. If Christianity is proven by character, Adams was surely a Christian. This stubborn man whose motto was "Watch and Pray," spoke openly of his trust in God: but not for that did he win his nickname "Old Eloquence." Rather, it was for championing principle and attacking the institution of slavery.
He was an unyielding patriarch, tough as the granite of his native New England. Every day he read two to five chapters of the Bible in the original Hebrew and Greek and drew strength from them. He prayed daily. Not content merely to read, he acted on what he read. So often did he put principle before party he became highly unpopular with his followers.
John Quincy did not let their disapproval alter his course. "The Sermon on the Mount commends me to lay up for myself treasures, not on earth, but in Heaven. My hopes of a future life are all founded upon the Gospel of Christ..." he had written his father. After his single term as President, he returned to Congress.
Christ was central to John's theology. When Unitarianism emerged, denying the divinity of Christ, Adams flirted with it, but the Bible soon convinced him the doctrine was false. Either Jesus is God incarnate and our path to salvation or we have none. With characteristic rectitude John wrote as much to his parents.
"I find in the New Testament, Jesus Christ accosted in His own presence by one of his disciples as God, without disclaiming the appellation...I see him named in the great prophecy of Isaiah concerning him to be the mighty God."
The Declaration has many references to God throughout the document. The most famous one is that men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.
“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”
Here are more references to God found in the document:
Laws of Nature and of Nature's God”
Appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World”
With a firm Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence”
The Declaration of Independence does not identify the God whom they are addressing. This could be left open to interpretation and opinion.
The Constitution
The body of the Constitution makes no reference to God. The Constitution honors the Christian Sabbath. The President was given 10 days to sign a bill into law. The counting of the 10 days does not include the Sabbath. This is found in Article 1, Section 7, and Clause 2 which in part follows:
“If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law,”
When the Constitution was completed on September 17, 1787, it was signed by the delegates then to be ratified by the states. The delegates signed the Constitution in the “Year of our Lord.” This is a direct reference to Christianity. This is found in Article 7 which in part follows:
“Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names, GO WASHINGTON--Presidt. and deputy from Virginia”
The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783:
The Paris Peace Treaty was the document which formally ended the Revolution and granted the United States independence from Great Britain. In a real sense, the United States formally became a nation on September 3, 1783.
When the United States became a nation, it was done in the “name of the most holy and undivided Trinity.” The preamble to this Treat states it is based upon the “Holy and undivided Trinity.” The concept of the holy Trinity is unique to Christianity. This statement means the United States was founded on the Christian faith. The complete Preamble follows:
“In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity”
The Treaty then ends just like the Constitution with a statement it is being signed in the “Year of our Lord.” The witnesses representing the United States were John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Jay and D. Hartley. The section in part follows:
“In witness whereof we the undersigned, their ministers plenipotentiary, have in their name and in virtue of our full powers, signed with our hands the present definitive treaty and caused the seals of our arms to be affixed thereto.Done at Paris, this third day of September in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three”
D. HARTLEY
JOHN ADAMS
B. FRANKLIN
JOHN JAY
When this concept is applied to the Declaration of Independence, it is clear the reference to “All men are created equal,” was about the holy Trinity. The people of the United States are endowed by their Creator, the holy Trinity, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
The God of the Bible is whom the United States is based upon. The unalienable rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness come from the Judeo/Christian God and no one else. He is the Rock of our Republic.
Psalm 18:2 The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, and my high tower.
So what about the Jefferson Bible, that miracles-free version of the Scriptures? That, too, is a myth. It is not a Bible, but an abridgement of the Gospels created by Jefferson in 1804 for the benefit of the Indians. Jefferson's "Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth Extracted From the New Testament for the Use of the Indians" was a tool to evangelize and educate American Indians. There is no evidence that it was an expression of his skepticism.
Jefferson, who gave his money to assist missionary work among the Indians, believed his "abridgement of the New Testament for the use of the Indians" would help civilize and educate America's aboriginal inhabitants. Nor did Jefferson cut all miracles from his work, as Beliles points out. While the original manuscript no longer exists, the Table of Texts that survives includes several accounts of Christ's healings.
But didn't Jefferson believe in the complete separation of church and state? After all, Jefferson's 1802 letter to the Baptists in Danbury, Conn., in which he cited the First Amendment's creation of a "wall of separation" between church and state, is an ACLU proof-text for its claim that the First Amendment makes the public square a religion-free zone. But if the ACLU is right, why, just two days after he sent his letter to the Danbury Baptists did President Jefferson attend public worship services in the U.S. Capitol building, something he did throughout his two terms in office? And why did he authorize the use of the War Office and the Treasury building for church services in Washington, D.C.?
Please consider - ... Jefferson, who as a careful historian had made a study of the origin of the maxim [that the common law is inextricably linked with Christianity], challenged such an assertion. He noted that "the common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never yet heard the name of Christ pronounced or that such a character existed .... What a conspiracy this, between Church and State." (Leo Pfeffer, Religion, State, and the Burger Court, Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1984, p. 121.)
You state- It is frequently asserted by those seeking to minimize Christianity's central role in our nation's founding and history, that the founders themselves were not practicing Christians, but rather were Deists or Agnostics. In a 1962 speech to Congress, Senator Robert Byrd noted that of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 29 were Anglicans, 16-18 were Calvinists, and among the rest were 2 Methodists, 2 Lutherans, 2 Roman Catholics, 1 lapsed Quaker-sometimes Anglican, and only 1 open Deist — Benjamin Franklin who attended all Christian worships and called for public prayer.
Consider- ... Like his father before him, he [George Washington] served actively for many years as one of the twelve vestrymen for Truro parish, Virginia, in which Mount Vernon was located. According to Charles H. Callahan, "The regularity of his attendance at the meetings of the vestry and the progress of church work throughout the parish during his incumbency is a striking testimonial of the religious zeal and activity of him and his associates." Actually, under the Anglican establishment in Virginia before the Revolution, the duties of a parish vestry were as much civil as religious in nature and it is not possible to deduce any exceptional religious zeal from the mere fact of membership. Even Thomas Jefferson was a vestryman for a while.* [Boller's footnote is shown at the end of this selection.] Consisting of the leading gentlemen of the parish in position and influence (many of whom, like Washington, were also at one time or other members of the County Court and of the House of Burgesses), the parish vestry, among other things, levied the parish taxes, handled poor relief, fixed land boundaries in the parish, supervised the construction, furnishing, and repairs of churches, and hired ministers and paid their salaries. *As Bishop William Meade put it, somewhat nastily, in 1857: "Even Mr. Jefferson, and [George] Wythe, who did not conceal their disbelief in Christianity, took their parts in the duties of vestrymen, the one at Williamsburg, the other at Albermarle; for they wished to be men of influence." (William Meade, Old Churches, Ministers and Families of Virginia, 2 vols.; Philadelphia, 1857, I, 191). (Paul F. Boller, George Washington & Religion, Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, p. 26.)
We think ourselves possessed, or, at least, we boast that we are so, of liberty of conscience on all subjects, and of the right of free inquiry and private judgment in all cases, and yet how far are we from these exalted privileges in fact! There exists, I believe, throughout the whole Christian world, a law which makes it blasphemy to deny or doubt the divine inspiration of all the books of the Old and New Testaments, from Genesis to Revelations. In most countries of Europe it is punished by fire at the stake, or the rack, or the wheel. In England itself it is punished by boring through the tongue with a red-hot poker. In America it is not better; even in our own Massachusetts, which I believe, upon the whole, is as temperate and moderate in religious zeal as most of the States, a law was made in the latter end of the last century, repealing the cruel punishments of the former laws, but substituting fine and imprisonment upon all those blasphemers upon any book of the Old Testament or New. Now, what free inquiry, when a writer must surely encounter the risk of fine or imprisonment for adducing any argument for investigating into the divine authority of those books? Who would run the risk of translating Dupuis? But I cannot enlarge upon this subject, though I have it much at heart. I think such laws a great embarrassment, great obstructions to the improvement of the human mind. Books that cannot bear examination, certainly ought not to be established as divine inspiration by penal laws. It is true, few persons appear desirous to put such laws in execution, and it is also true that some few persons are hardy enough to venture to depart from them. But as long as they continue in force as laws, the human mind must make an awkward and clumsy progress in its investigations. I wish they were repealed. The substance and essence of Christianity, as I understand it, is eternal and unchangeable, and will bear examination forever, but it has been mixed with extraneous ingredients, which I think will not bear examination, and they ought to be separated. Adieu. (John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, January 23, 1825. Adams was 90, Jefferson 81 at the time; both died on July 4th of the following year, on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 234.)
Note- He suggests the Bible is not the inerrent word of God. If anyone would suggest that today they would NOT be considered Christian by mainstream Christianity's standards.
So.. that makes 3 ( Jefferson , Washington and Adams) that would not be considered Christian . Your stats only allow for ONE. .......
Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind. (Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, 1794-1795. From Gorton Carruth and Eugene Ehrlich, eds., The Harper Book of American Quotations, New York: Harper & Row, 1988, p. 494.)
Note - He calls the Bible the word of a DEMON ? ! Doesn't SOUND Christian to me...
That makes 4...5 if you count Franklin...
You state - John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court said: "Providence has given to our people the choice of their ruler, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." This was said despite the explicit provision in the federal Constitution forbidding any religious test for federal public office.
Note - Maybe Mr Jay would have been elected President if he had stuck to the core principles of our constitution as the following PRESIDENTS did...
If there is one thing for which we stand in this country, it is for complete religious freedom, and it is an emphatic negation of this right to cross-examine a man on his religion before being willing to support him for public office. (Theodore Roosevelt, 26th U. S. President [1901-1909], letter to J. C. Martin, November 9, 1908, according to Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, compilers, The Great Quotations on Religious Liberty, Long Beach, CA: Centerline Press, 1991, p. 83.)
To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against that liberty of conscience which is one of the foundations of American life. (Theodore Roosevelt, 26th U. S. President [1901-1909], letter to J. C. Martin, November 9, 1908, according to Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, compilers, The Great Quotations on Religious Liberty, Long Beach, CA: Centerline Press, 1991, p. 83.)
There is nothing so despicable as a secret society that is based upon religious prejudice and that will attempt to defeat a man because of his religious beliefs. Such a society is like a cockroach--it thrives in the dark. So do those who combine for such an end. (William Howard Taft, 27th U. S. President [1909-1913], in an address on December 20, 1914, according to Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, compilers, The Great Quotations on Religious Liberty, Long Beach, CA: Centerline Press, 1991, p. 94.)
The fundamental precept of liberty is toleration. We cannot permit any inquisition either from within or from without the law or apply any religious test to the holding of office. The mind of America must be forever free. (Calvin Coolidge, 30th U. S. President [1923-1929], Inaugural Address on March 4, 1925, according to Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, compilers, The Great Quotations on Religious Liberty, Long Beach, CA: Centerline Press, 1991, p. 22.)
You state - Our sixth President, John Quincy Adams said "From the day of the Declaration...they [the American people] were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of The Gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledge as the rules of their conduct"
Consider-
In his youth John Adams (1735-1826) thought to become a minister, but soon realized that his independent opinions would create much difficulty. At the age of twenty-one, therefore, he resolved to become a lawyer, noting that in following law rather than divinity, "I shall have liberty to think for myself without molesting others or being molested myself." (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 88. The Adams quote is from his letter to Richard Cranch, August 29, 1756.)
The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.... (John Adams, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" [1787-1788]; from Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 258.)
So , while you have cited some of the lesser known players I have cited some of the key players. I am not here to assert our forefathers were not Christian. Many were. However , not ALL were, as so many like to lead us to believe as evidenced by the stats you gave and , I have proven to be false or misleading.
The key players, as I have shown, were not or .if it makes you feel better . would not be considered Christian by mainstream Christianity today based on their comments I have given .
Again, I must emphasize, Christianity as the religion of state was NOT written into the constitution. So, it does not seem reasonable to assume our forefathers wished it to be. Based on the quotes I have given and, from the example given of not writing it into the constitution , it would be reasonable to assume they did NOT wish it to be.
Samuel Adams, who has been called 'The Father of the American Revolution' wrote The Rights of the Colonists in 1772, which stated: "The rights of the colonists as Christians...may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institution of the Great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament."
It is frequently asserted by those seeking to minimize Christianity's central role in our nation's founding and history, that the founders themselves were not practicing Christians, but rather were Deists or Agnostics. In a 1962 speech to Congress, Senator Robert Byrd noted that of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 29 were Anglicans, 16-18 were Calvinists, and among the rest were 2 Methodists, 2 Lutherans, 2 Roman Catholics, 1 lapsed Quaker-sometimes Anglican, and only 1 open Deist — Benjamin Franklin who attended all Christian worships and called for public prayer.
Samuel Chase was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a Justice of the US Supreme Court, and, as Chief Justice of the State of Maryland, wrote in 1799 ( Runkel v Winemiller): "By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion... ." (Maryland was one of nine States having established churches supported by taxpayers at the time of the adoption of the Constitution; these churches were gradually disestablished, the last in 1833. The Maryland constitution, typical of many of the States, restricted public office to Christians until, in 1851, it was changed to allow Jews who believed in a future state of rewards and punishments to also serve).
Christianity pervaded the laws and the legal system of the States and the federal government. For example, Judge Nathaniel Freeman in 1802 charged Massachusetts Grand Juries as follows: "The laws of the Christian system, as embraced by the Bible, must be respected as of high authority in all our courts... . [Our government] originating in the voluntary compact of a people who in that very instrument profess the Christian religion, it may be considered, not as republic Rome was, a Pagan, but a Christian republic." In 1811 ( People v Ruggles), New York Chief Justice James Kent held: "'...whatever strikes at the root of Christianity tends manifestly to the dissolution of civil government... .' We are a Christian people, and the morality of the country is deeply engrafted upon Christianity... . Christianity in its enlarged sense, as a religion revealed and taught in the Bible, is part and parcel of the law of the land... ." In 1824, the Pennsylvania Supreme court held ( Updegraph v The Commonwealth): Christianity, general Christianity, is and always has been a part of the common law...not Christianity founded on any particular religious tenets; not Christianity with an established church, but Christianity with liberty of conscience to all men... ."
Our sixth President, John Quincy Adams said "From the day of the Declaration...they [the American people] were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of The Gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledge as the rules of their conduct"
John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court said: "Providence has given to our people the choice of their ruler, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." This was said despite the explicit provision in the federal Constitution forbidding any religious test for federal public office.
Justice Joseph Story, who was appointed to the US Supreme Court by President Madison, said in an 1829 speech at Harvard: "There never has been a period of history, in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying at its foundation." Story wrote several respected treatises or Commentaries on Constitutional Law, in which are found the following: "Probably, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and of the [First] Amendment...the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the State so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience and the freedom of religious worship. Any attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation."
"The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance, much less to advance Mohammedanism, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical patronage of the national government".
Justice Story wrote for a unanimous Supreme Court in 1844 ( Vidal v Girard's Executors): "It is also said, and truly that the Christian religion is a part of the common law... ."
Christianity has enjoyed many courtesies extended to them from society and this has led many Christians to consider those courtesies as rights. Courtesies such as prayer in school . The courtesy has been abused and so it is being rescinded . You are nto losing rights ,you are losing courtesy. You can pray anywhere you want. You can read your Bible anywhere you want. What you can not do is force other people to put their lives on hold and watch the show you put on to be seen of men. You can not force others to bow their heads in prayer and embrace your religon and customs.
The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, specifically article XI, is commonly misused in editorial columns, articles, as well as in other areas of the media, both Christian and secular. We have received numerous questions from people who have been misled by the claims that are being made, namely, that America was not founded as a Christian nation. Advocates of this idea use the Treaty of Tripoli as the foundation of their entire argument, and we believe you deserve to know the truth regarding this often misused document. The following is an excerpt from David Barton's book Original Intent:
To determine whether the "Founding Fathers" were generally atheists, agnostics, and deists, one must first define those terms. An "atheist" is one who professes to believe that there is no God; 1 an "agnostic" is one who professes that nothing can be known beyond what is visible and tangible; 2 and a "deist" is one who believes in an impersonal God who is no longer involved with mankind. (In other words, a "deist" embraces the "clockmaker theory" 3 that there was a God who made the universe and wound it up like a clock; however, it now runs of its own volition; the clockmaker is gone and therefore does not respond to man.) Today the terms "atheist," "agnostic," and "deist" have been used together so often that their meanings have almost become synonymous. In fact, many dictionaries list these words as synonym. 4
Those who advance the notion that this was the belief system of the Founders often publish information attempting to prove that the Founders were irreligious. 5 One of the quotes they set forth is the following:
The government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion. GEORGE WASHINGTON
The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli is the source of Washington's supposed statement. Is this statement accurate? Did this prominent Founder truly repudiate religion? An answer will be found by an examination of its source. That treaty, one of several with Tripoli, was negotiated during the "Barbary Powers Conflict," which began shortly after the Revolutionary War and continued through the Presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison. 6 The Muslim Barbary Powers (Tunis, Morocco, Algiers, and Tripoli) were warring against what they claimed to be the "Christian" nations (England, France, Spain, Denmark, and the United States). In 1801, Tripoli even declared war against the United States, 7 thus constituting America's first official war as an established independent nation.
Throughout this long conflict, the four Barbary Powers regularly attacked undefended American merchant ships. Not only were their cargoes easy prey but the Barbary Powers were also capturing and enslaving "Christian" seamen 8 in retaliation for what had been done to them by the "Christians" of previous centuries (e.g., the Crusades and Ferdinand and Isabella's expulsion of Muslims from Granada 9). In an attempt to secure a release of captured seamen and a guarantee of unmolested shipping in the Mediterranean, President Washington dispatched envoys to negotiate treaties with the Barbary nations. 10 (Concurrently, he encouraged the construction of American naval warships 11 to defend the shipping and confront the Barbary "pirates" – a plan not seriously pursued until President John Adams created a separate Department of the Navy in 1798.)
The American envoys negotiated numerous treaties of "Peace and Amity" 12 with the Muslim Barbary nations to ensure "protection" of American commercial ships sailing in the Mediterranean. 13 However, the terms of the treaty frequently were unfavorable to America, either requiring her to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars of "tribute" (i.e., official extortion) to each country to receive a "guarantee" of safety or to offer other "considerations" (e.g., providing a warship as a "gift" to Tripoli, 14 a "gift" frigate to Algiers, 15 paying $525,000 to ransom captured American seamen from Algiers, 16 etc. 17). The 1797 treaty with Tripoli was one of the many treaties in which each country officially recognized the religion of the other in an attempt to prevent further escalation of a "Holy War" between Christians and Muslims. 18 Consequently, Article XI of that treaty stated:
As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity [hatred] against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] and as the said States [America] have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. 19
This article may be read in two manners. It may, as its critics do, be concluded after the clause "Christian religion"; or it may be read in its entirety and concluded when the punctuation so indicates. But even if shortened and cut abruptly ("the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion"), this is not an untrue statement since it is referring to the federal government.
Recall that while the Founders themselves openly described America as a Christian nation (demonstrated in chapter 2 of Original Intent), they did include a constitutional prohibition against a federal establishment; religion was a matter left solely to the individual States. Therefore, if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is not a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation.
Reading the clause of the treaty in its entirety also fails to weaken this fact. Article XI simply distinguished America from those historical strains of European Christianity which held an inherent hatred of Muslims; it simply assured the Muslims that the United States was not a Christian nation like those of previous centuries (with whose practices the Muslims were very familiar) and thus would not undertake a religious holy war against them.
This latter reading is, in fact, supported by the attitude prevalent among numerous American leaders. The Christianity practiced in America was described by John Jay as "wise and virtuous," 20 by John Quincy Adams as "civilized," 21 and by John Adams as "rational." 22 A clear distinction was drawn between American Christianity and that of Europe in earlier centuries. As Noah Webster explained:
The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it. 23
Daniel Webster similarly explained that American Christianity was:
Christianity to which the sword and the fagot [burning stake or hot branding iron] are unknown – general tolerant Christianity is the law of the land! 24
Those who attribute the Treaty of Tripoli quote to George Washington make two mistakes. The first is that no statement in it can be attributed to Washington (the treaty did not arrive in America until months after he left office); Washington never saw the treaty; it was not his work; no statement in it can be ascribed to him. The second mistake is to divorce a single clause of the treaty from the remainder which provides its context. It would also be absurd to suggest that President Adams (under whom the treaty was ratified in 1797) would have endorsed or assented to any provision which repudiated Christianity. In fact, while discussing the Barbary conflict with Jefferson, Adams declared:
The policy of Christendom has made cowards of all their sailors before the standard of Mahomet. It would be heroical and glorious in us to restore courage to ours. 25
Furthermore, it was Adams who declared:
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature. 26
Adams' own words confirm that he rejected any notion that America was less than a Christian nation.
Additionally, the writings of General William Eaton, a major figure in the Barbary Powers conflict, provide even more irrefutable testimony of how the conflict was viewed at that time. Eaton was first appointed by President John Adams as "Consul to Tunis," and President Thomas Jefferson later advanced him to the position of "U. S. Naval Agent to the Barbary States," authorizing him to lead a military expedition against Tripoli. Eaton's official correspondence during his service confirms that the conflict was a Muslim war against a Christian America.
For example, when writing to Secretary of State Timothy Pickering, Eaton apprised him of why the Muslims would be such dedicated foes:
Taught by revelation that war with the Christians will guarantee the salvation of their souls, and finding so great secular advantages in the observance of this religious duty [the secular advantage of keeping captured cargoes], their [the Muslims'] inducements to desperate fighting are very powerful. 27
Eaton later complained that after Jefferson had approved his plan for military action, he sent him the obsolete warship "Hero." Eaton reported the impression of America made upon the Tunis Muslims when they saw the old warship and its few cannons:
[T]he weak, the crazy situation of the vessel and equipage [armaments] tended to confirm an opinion long since conceived and never fairly controverted among the Tunisians, that the Americans are a feeble sect of Christians. 28
In a later letter to Pickering, Eaton reported how pleased one Barbary ruler had been when he received the extortion compensations from America which had been promised him in one of the treaties:
He said, "To speak truly and candidly . . . . we must acknowledge to you that we have never received articles of the kind of so excellent a quality from any Christian nation." 29
When John Marshall became the new Secretary of State, Eaton informed him:
It is a maxim of the Barbary States, that "The Christians who would be on good terms with them must fight well or pay well." 30
And when General Eaton finally commenced his military action against Tripoli, his personal journal noted:
April 8th. We find it almost impossible to inspire these wild bigots with confidence in us or to persuade them that, being Christians, we can be otherwise than enemies to Musselmen. We have a difficult undertaking! 31
May 23rd. Hassien Bey, the commander in chief of the enemy's forces, has offered by private insinuation for my head six thousand dollars and double the sum for me a prisoner; and $30 per head for Christians. Why don't he come and take it? 32
Shortly after the military excursion against Tripoli was successfully terminated, its account was written and published. Even the title of the book bears witness to the nature of the conflict:
The Life of the Late Gen. William Eaton . . . commander of the Christian and Other Forces . . . which Led to the Treaty of Peace Between The United States and The Regency of Tripoli 33
The numerous documents surrounding the Barbary Powers Conflict confirm that historically it was always viewed as a conflict between Christian America and Muslim nations. Those documents completely disprove the notion that any founding President, especially Washington, ever declared that America was not a Christian nation or people. (Chapter 16 of Original Intent will provide numerous additional current examples of historical revisionism.)
Endnotes
American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd College Edition, s.v. "atheism."
Id., s.v. "agnostic."
Id., s.v. "deism"; see also American College Dictionary (1947), s.v. "deism."
Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language (1964), see synonym for "deist"; Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary (1963), see synonym for "atheism"; The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia (1895), Vol. I, see synonym for "atheist"; Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary of the English Language (1966), see synonyms for "skeptic."
Society of Separationists, "Did you know that these great American thinkers all rejected Christianity?" (Austin, TX: American Atheist Center); see also Los Angeles Times, August 3, 1995, p. B-9, "America's Unchristian Beginnings," Steven Morris.
Naval Documents Related to the United States Wars with the Barbary Powers, Claude A. Swanson, editor (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1939), Vol. I, p. V.
Glen Tucker, Dawn Like Thunder: The Barbary Wars and the Birth of the U. S. Navy (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1963), p. 127.
A General View of the Rise, Progress, and Brilliant Achievements of the American Navy, Down to the Present Time (Brooklyn, 1828), pp. 70-71.
Tucker, p. 50.
President Washington selected Col. David Humphreys in 1793 as sole commissioner of Algerian affairs to negotiate treaties with Algeria, Tripoli and Tunis. He also appointed Joseph Donaldson, Jr., as Consul to Tunis and Tripoli. In February of 1796, Humphreys delegated power to Donaldson and/or Joel Barlow to form treaties. James Simpson, U. S. Consul to Gibraltar, was dispatched to renew the treaty with Morocco in 1795. On October 8, 1796, Barlow commissioned Richard O'Brien to negotiate the treaty of peace with Tripoli. See, for example, Ray W. Irwin, The Diplomatic Relations of the United States with the Barbary Powers (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1931), p. 84.
J. Fenimore Cooper, The History of the Navy of the United States of America (Philadelphia: Thomas, Cowperthwait & Co., 1847), pp. 123-124; see also A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents: 1789-1897, James D. Richardson, editor (Washington, DC: Published by Authority of Congress, 1899), Vol. I, pp. 201-202, from Washington's Eighth Annual Address of December 7, 1796.
See, for example, the treaty with Morocco: ratified by the United States on July 18, 1787. Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of America: 1776-1949, Charles I. Bevans, editor (Washington, DC: Department of State, 1968-1976), Vol. IX, pp. 1278-1285; Algiers: concluded September 5, 1795; ratified by the U. S. Senate March 2, 1796; see also, "Treaty of Peace and Amity" concluded June 30 and July 6, 1815; proclaimed December 26, 1815, Treaties and Conventions Concluded Between the United States of America and Other Powers Since July 4, 1776 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1889), pp. 1-15; Tripoli: concluded November 4, 1796; ratified June 10, 1797; see also, "Treaty of Peace and Amity" concluded June 4, 1805; ratification advised by the U. S. Senate April 12, 1806. Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers: 1776-1909, William M. Malloy, editor (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1910), Vol. II, pp. 1785-1793; Tunis: concluded August 1797; ratification advised by the Senate, with amendments, March 6, 1798; alterations concluded March 26, 1799; ratification again advised by the Senate December 24, 1799. Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers: 1776-1909, William M. Malloy, editor (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1910), Vol. II, pp. 1794-1799.
Gardner W. Allen, Our Navy and the Barbary Corsairs (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1905), pp. 33, 45, 56, 60.
Allen, p. 66.
Allen, p. 57.
Allen, p. 56.
See, for example, Report of the Committee of Claims, to Whom was Referred, on the Twentieth Instant the Petition of William Eaton (Washington, DC: A&G Way, 1804), pp. 6-34, “Statement Supported by Document Accompanying the Petition of William Eaton, presented the 20th of February, 1804,” Documents Respecting the Application of Hamet Caramalli, Ex-Bashaw of Tripoli (Washington, DC: Dwane & Son), pp. 53-54, letter from Secretary of State to James Cathcart, April 9, 1803, Documents Respecting the Application of Hamet Caramalli, Ex-Bashaw of Tripoli (Washington, DC: Dwane & Son), pp. 54-55, letter from the Secretary of State to Tobias Lear, June 6, 1804, Documents Respecting the Application of Hamet Caramalli, Ex-Bashaw of Tripoli (Washington, DC: Dwane & Son), pp. 71- 72, letter from Tobias Lear to James Madison, Secretary of State, July 5, 1805, Documents Respecting the Application of Hamet Caramalli, Ex-Bashaw of Tripoli (Washington, DC: Dwane & Son), pp. 80-81, letter from Tobias Lear to James Madison, July 5, 1805. All of these mention specific amounts paid to the Barbary powers for ransoms, as well as the numbers of ships and other supplies that was sent.
(See general bibliographic information from footnote 16 for each of these references) Morocco: see Articles 10, 11, 17, and 24; Algiers: See Treaty of 1795, Article 17, and Treaty of 1815, Article 17; Tripoli: See Treaty of 1796, Article 11, and Treaty of 1805, Article 14; Tunis: See forward to Treaty.
Acts Passed at the First Session of the Fifth Congress of the United States of America (Philadelphia: William Ross, 1797), pp. 43-44.
John Jay, Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry Johnston, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1893), Vol. IV, p. 491, Address to the Annual Meeting of the American Bible Society, May 8, 1823.
John Quincy Adams,An Oration Delivered Before the Inhabitants of the Town of Newburyport at Their Request on the Sixty-First Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence (Newburyport: Charles Whipple, 1837), p. 17.
John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1856), Vol. IX, p. 121, in a speech to both houses of Congress, November 23, 1797.
Noah Webster, History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), p. 339.
Daniel Webster, Mr. Webster's Speech in Defence of the Christian Ministry and In Favor of the Religious Instruction of the Young. Delivered in the Supreme Court of the United States, February 10, 1844, in the Case of Stephen Girard's Will (Washington, DC: Gales and Seaton, 1844), p. 52.
John Adams, Works, Vol. VIII, p. 407, to Thomas Jefferson on July 3, 1786.
John Adams, Works, Vol. X, pp. 45-46, to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813.
Charles Prentiss, The Life of the Late Gen. William Eaton: Several Years an Officer in the United States' Army Consul at the Regency of Tunis on the Coast of Barbary, and Commander of the Christian and Other Forces that Marched from Egypt Through the Desert of Barca, in 1805, and Conquered the City of Derne, Which Led to the Treaty of Peace Between the United States and the Regency of Tripoli (Brookfield: Merriam & Company, 1813), pp. 92-93, from General Eaton to Timothy Pickering, June 15, 1799.
Prentiss, p. 146, from General Eaton to Mr. Smith, June 27, 1800.
Prentiss, p. 150, from General Eaton to Timothy Pickering on July 4, 1800.
Prentiss, p. 185, from General Eaton to General John Marshall, September 2, 1800.
Prentiss, p. 325, from Eaton's journal, April 8, 1805.
Prentiss, p. 334, from Eaton's journal, May 23, 1805.
Prentiss. See also, Report of the Committee to Whom was Recommended on the Twenty-Sixth Ultimo A Resolution Respecting William Eaton (Washington, DC: A&C Way, 1806), January 8, 1806.
Oh Look now we have a new religion: Fuck the Holocaust cause it was not successful, bring on the New and Complete Holocaust.
kill em all, who cares if god sorts em out or not.
Is The Holocaust A New 'Religion'
w/10 Commandments?
Db.com
10-29-9
Jerusalem -- According to the Israeli philosophy professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz (photo), the 'Holocaust' is a new religion. Leibowitz' countrymen Shraga Elam, Gilad Atzmon, Yoshua Shalev and others have further developed this concept, reasoning like this: Most Jews today are either atheists or shun the religion of Judaism. Therefore, the Jewish people had to adopt belief in the 'Holocaust' as their new religion. They have spread this religion all over the world. 'Holocaust' museums are the new houses of worship and are present in most major cities. The new religion has its commandments, its decrees, its prophets, its high priests, its circle of saints, its rituals and its pilgrimages. It knows neither mercy, nor forgiveness, nor clemency but only the duty of vengeance. If you question the 'Holocaust Religion', you will go to prison.
The 'Ten Commandments' of this 'Holocaust Religion' may be enunciated as follows:
1. Remember what Amalek (the Non-Jews) has done to thee.
2. Thou shalt never compare THE HOLOCAUST with any other Genocide.
3. Thou shalt never compare the Nazi crimes with those of Israel.
4. Thou shalt never doubt the number of 6 million Jewish victims.
5. Thou shalt never doubt that the majority of them died in gas chambers.
6. Thou shalt not doubt the central role of SATAN Hitler in the extermination of the Jews.
7. Thou shalt never doubt the right of Israel to exist as the Jewish state.
8. Thou shalt not criticize the leading Jewish organizations and the Israeli government.
9. Thou must never criticize Jewish organizations and the Zionist leadership for abandoning the European Jewry in the Nazi era
10. Thou shalt take these commandments literally and never shew mercy to them that doubt!
And on a side note. how can anyone believe that "god" created the earth in 7 days?? I mean come on now. If religion wants to stand any kind of shot at being credible it has to get more realistic. Why not say 7 thousand years?? that sounds alittle bit more realistic, not much but some. And Jesus turning water into wine... Come on... Heaven and Hell?? that is just silly.... If god wanted everyone to believe in him or her or it, then why hasn't he or she or it done or put something on earth to prove "god" exists. Because to date nothing has ever been proven. I keep hearing: well, you just have to have faith.... and then those same people call evolutionist crazy for thinking we evolved from apes or micro organisms. at least science has something of substance to go on. something that has definition atoms, electrons, protons, neutrons, etc... With faith you have a book written thousands of years ago in a different language that has been rewritten and translated, which as we all know its hard to translate emotion and certain phrases from one language to another. I give muslims and jews alittle more credit though. books were written once and most of their followers read the scripture in the original language.
The most ignorant of the human species grasps at religions and look what it has given them. Shit Drugs are the God in Mexico not god or jesus.
In fact Money IS the God of Mankind at this time in history and it's influence is far greater than any 'god'.
The most ignorant of the human species grasps at religions and look what it has given them. Shit Drugs are the God in Mexico not god or jesus.
In fact Money IS the God of Mankind at this time in history and it's influence is far greater than any 'god'.
Below is just one definition from the merriam-webster dictionary. Putting Christianity in the group of religions does not make it wrong or a bad thing. You can believe its not a religion if you want but by all accounts mankind has, through thousands of years of studying, creating and describing language and social behavior, defined Christianity as a religion. The sky is blue dude. Don't let anyone tell you different. Blue is defined as "of the color blue". Dispute it all you want. Blue is the color blue and the sky is a hue of that color. It is how we describe it. Everything has a definition. Its OK. Part of what defines me is that I'm opinionated. Regardless of how I feel about that it remains part of the definition.
A little disclaimer because some on craigslist take things waaaaay out of context and get super pissed when a countering opinion is presented.
I try to incorporate Christian values in my daily life and at no time wrote any of this in anger or in an attempt to demean any Christians. Just trying to present some info to the debate but somebodys going to get pissed anyway. But like I wrote earlier I am opnionated and can't help myself. Are there any support groups for this affliction? Being opinionated, not Christianity. I have to write this because somebody might take the previous sentence out of context.
In 1797 America made a treaty with Tripoli, declaring that "the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." This reassurance to Islam was written under Washington's presidency, and approved by the Senate under John Adams.
What about the Declaration of Independence? We are not governed by the Declaration. Its purpose was to "dissolve the political bands," not to set up a religious nation. Its authority was based on the idea that "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," which is contrary to the biblical concept of rule by divine authority. It deals with laws, taxation, representation, war, immigration, and so on, never discussing religion at all. The references to "Nature's God," "Creator," and "Divine Providence" in the Declaration do not endorse Christianity. Thomas Jefferson, its author, was a Deist, opposed to orthodox Christianity and the supernatural.
Thomas Jefferson, explaining the phrase to the Danbury Baptists, said, "the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions." Personal religious views are just that: personal. Our government has no right to promulgate religion or to interfere with private beliefs.
What about "One nation under God" and "In God We Trust?"
The words, "under God," did not appear in the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954, when Congress, under McCarthyism, inserted them. Likewise, "In God We Trust" was absent from paper currency before 1956. It appeared on some coins earlier, as did other sundry phrases, such as "Mind Your Business." The original U.S. motto, chosen by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson, is E Pluribus Unum ("Of Many, One"), celebrating plurality, not theocracy.
From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mothers race.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name name s.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'
From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'
I Didn't make or invent this shit, These R factual real Words from his Book which He sanctioned and ProofRead. So that means He Approved it B 4 Publication!!