The future of the Republican Party.

[Knight Templar]

[Also this country is not based on your "beliefs", instead they are based on laws that are carefully created and voted on. Not the ramblings and fairy tales of bronze age idiots who hated women. I put my trust in reality, not ancient ghost stories.

Really?

Do we have to go into all the references the founding fathers made to God?

Apparently, most of the founding fathers (and no, the majority of them were not deists) believed in those "ancient ghost stories".

That doesn't make them real. I don't care if they believed in Big Bird, it has no bearing on the discussion. They didn't base the country on any religious beliefs, a point made clear in their writings, letters, and treaties. Ignore history and facts all you want, it doesn't make you right.

Really?

I suppose you forgot the entire "endowed by their creator" part.

I doubt they envisioned Charles Darwin when they were referring to "their creator".

 

[Kemaiku]

I doubt they envisioned Charles Darwin when they were referring to "their creator".

It would have been a neat trick, what with Darwin not having been born yet. And why pick on him anyway?

 

[Awesome Possum]

Really?

Do we have to go into all the references the founding fathers made to God?

Apparently, most of the founding fathers (and no, the majority of them were not deists) believed in those "ancient ghost stories".

That doesn't make them real. I don't care if they believed in Big Bird, it has no bearing on the discussion. They didn't base the country on any religious beliefs, a point made clear in their writings, letters, and treaties. Ignore history and facts all you want, it doesn't make you right.

Really?

I suppose you forgot the entire "endowed by their creator" part.

I doubt they envisioned Charles Darwin when they were referring to "their creator".

I don't see God or Jesus mentioned, just some creator. Given that we barely understood science, Darwin hadn't been born, and anything other than the book of Genesis was seen as impossible, it makes sense for the time. Now we know better.

Still it doesn't imply that we are a Christian nation. You're just grasping at straws now.

 

[horatio83]

Would you adopt a child begotten in rape? Would you love raise him, love him,?

Of course. Why not? I love children.

Hardly an coincidence that you ignored the ugly part, having to tell him one day who his parents are.

[Also this country is not based on your "beliefs", instead they are based on laws that are carefully created and voted on. Not the ramblings and fairy tales of bronze age idiots who hated women. I put my trust in reality, not ancient ghost stories.

Really?

Do we have to go into all the references the founding fathers made to God?

Apparently, most of the founding fathers (and no, the majority of them were not deists) believed in those "ancient ghost stories".

Yeah, that's why you read God and Jesus on every second page. ^^
The Founding Fathers were enlightenment folks who knew precisely why they kept religion out of the social contract. You might not be aware of it but the American constitution has inspired democratic reforms worldwide, including my own country. Not because of the religious believes of the people who wrote it or because of their diet preferences but because of the principles which enable a peaceful and democratic living together.
I am not a religious-hating liberal, I actually believe that the monotheistic revolution was important for the human race and I love to talk about theological stuff. But it has nothing to do with politics, they way we want to live together.
My position is not an extremist position but actually one quite sympathetic to Christianity. But the people who wanna force it down the throats of their fellows, well, they definitely are extremists and violate by the way everything Christianity should be about.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I do love that a bunch of slave owners said that all men are created equal, that's a laugh riot.

 

[Kemaiku]

I do love that a bunch of slave owners said that all men are created equal, that's a laugh riot.

Quite like modern day Republicans, "Freedom for all, except you lot over there."

 

[horatio83]

I do love that a bunch of slave owners said that all men are created equal, that's a laugh riot.

The two Greek giants, Aristoteles and Plato even favoured slavery in their writings. We nonetheless still read them.
I think the most important point is not that those among the Founding Fathers who owned slaves were hypocrites and only Ben Franklin was a good guy but that the very text they wrote later inspired the liberation of black folks.

If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions. Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they hadn't committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. - MLK in his last speech

 

[Knight Templar]

I do love that a bunch of slave owners said that all men are created equal, that's a laugh riot.

The two Greek giants, Aristoteles and Plato even favoured slavery in their writings. We nonetheless still read them.
I think the most important point is not that those among the Founding Fathers who owned slaves were hypocrites and only Ben Franklin was a good guy but that the very text they wrote later inspired the liberation of black folks.

If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions. Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they hadn't committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. - MLK in his last speech

^Watch it!! You just quoted a BAPTIST minister.

 

[horatio83]

Unlike the homophobic anti-abortion, pro-war, anti-welfare, anti-enlightenment crowd somebody I would actually call a Christian. Picked up his cross, lost his life in order to gain it, died for the right thing. Neither Jesus, Ghandi or MLK had a reactionary attitude.
Oh, and about you having issues with minorities, you might wanna take a look at the Gospels and early Christianity. It spread precisely because it was not exclusive but universal, a belief for everybody independent of tribal identity and social position.

 

[Knight Templar]

That doesn't make them real. I don't care if they believed in Big Bird, it has no bearing on the discussion. They didn't base the country on any religious beliefs, a point made clear in their writings, letters, and treaties. Ignore history and facts all you want, it doesn't make you right.

Really?

I suppose you forgot the entire "endowed by their creator" part.

I doubt they envisioned Charles Darwin when they were referring to "their creator".

I don't see God or Jesus mentioned, just some creator. Given that we barely understood science, Darwin hadn't been born, and anything other than the book of Genesis was seen as impossible, it makes sense for the time. Now we know better.

Still it doesn't imply that we are a Christian nation. You're just grasping at straws now.

You're picking and choosing. On the one hand you want me to respect what the founding fathers DID NOT say about God and Jesus, but at the same time NOT RESPECT what they DID SAY about a creator because

"now we know better".

It does not work that way.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I do love that a bunch of slave owners said that all men are created equal, that's a laugh riot.

The two Greek giants, Aristoteles and Plato even favoured slavery in their writings. We nonetheless still read them.
I think the most important point is not that those among the Founding Fathers who owned slaves were hypocrites and only Ben Franklin was a good guy but that the very text they wrote later inspired the liberation of black folks.

If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions. Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they hadn't committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. - MLK in his last speech

There is a line between reading someone's work and accepting all their beliefs. Jefferson is some of his writings seemed to realize that slavery was a problem that would have to be dealt with. They were humans and like all of us, have problems.

 

[Knight Templar]

Unlike the homophobic anti-abortion, pro-war, anti-welfare, anti-enlightenment crowd somebody I would actually call a Christian. Picked up his cross, lost his life in order to gain it, died for the right thing. Neither Jesus, Ghandi or MLK had a reactionary attitude.[/QUOTor

Martin Luther King Jr. was not a fan of abortion either.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Really?

I suppose you forgot the entire "endowed by their creator" part.

I doubt they envisioned Charles Darwin when they were referring to "their creator".

I don't see God or Jesus mentioned, just some creator. Given that we barely understood science, Darwin hadn't been born, and anything other than the book of Genesis was seen as impossible, it makes sense for the time. Now we know better.

Still it doesn't imply that we are a Christian nation. You're just grasping at straws now.

You're picking and choosing. On the one hand you want me to respect what the founding fathers DID NOT say about God and Jesus, but at the same time NOT RESPECT what they DID SAY about a creator because

"now we know better".

It does not work that way.

Yes it does. I can find sayings from a lot of historical figures that I agree with, it does not mean that I have to accept everything they did or said.

 

[horatio83]

Really?

I suppose you forgot the entire "endowed by their creator" part.

I doubt they envisioned Charles Darwin when they were referring to "their creator".

I don't see God or Jesus mentioned, just some creator. Given that we barely understood science, Darwin hadn't been born, and anything other than the book of Genesis was seen as impossible, it makes sense for the time. Now we know better.

Still it doesn't imply that we are a Christian nation. You're just grasping at straws now.

You're picking and choosing. On the one hand you want me to respect what the founding fathers DID NOT say about God and Jesus, but at the same time NOT RESPECT what they DID SAY about a creator because

"now we know better".

It does not work that way.

Yes it does. Read your friggin' constitution and count how often the words God, Jesus or Lord occur.
And about "Christian nation", did Jesus want a country to be created in his name, a country that excludes Jews, Muslims, Buddhists or whatever? Did he want to be an earthly king? Certainly not. Read the friggin' gospels.

 

[horatio83]

Martin Luther King Jr. was not a fan of abortion either.

Yeah, that's why he received and accepted the Margaret Sanger Award.
I understand that you feel cornered and become desperate but lying doesn't work here. This ain't FOX news but a Trek board with moderately informed and intelligent people.

 

[Awesome Possum]

If the Founding Fathers did want a Christian nation, then I guess they were lying when the Senate unanimosily passed the Treaty of Tripoli.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion...

So either they truly did not intend for America to be a Christian nation or they were lying to a bunch of Muslims. How Christian of them.

 

[137th Gebirg]

I do love that a bunch of slave owners said that all men are created equal, that's a laugh riot.

You're assigning 21st century beliefs to conventional 17th and 18th century thought. As distressing and distasteful as this may be to us today, slaves were not considered human, but commodities to be bought and sold. The D of I and Constitution did not apply to them, and with the exception of a select few, the authors didn't really see fault in this at the time. Right or wrong, it was what it was.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I accept beliefs that have stood the tests of 2,000 years and horrendous persecutions over the current "morals of the day".

No need to bring religion into it.

lol wut

To reintroduce social stigma to abortions.

What about reintroducing social stigma to mixed-race marriage? Miscegenation? Associating with unbelievers? Teaching to read to women and other lesser people? What a swell guy we have here.

Don't get so uppity and hostile. I"ve been quite courteous here.

You seem to be under the impression that because you don't use swearwords while advocating taking away people's rights, you have the higher moral ground here. That is gravely mistaken. You might be the polite guy; doesn't mean you are the good guy.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I do love that a bunch of slave owners said that all men are created equal, that's a laugh riot.

You're assigning 21st century beliefs to conventional 17th and 18th century thought. As distressing and distasteful as this may be to us today, slaves were not considered human, but commodities to be bought and sold. The D of I and Constitution did not apply to them, and with the exception of a select few, the authors didn't really see fault in this at the time. Right or wrong, it was what it was.

I completely understand. They like all of us are the products of their time. Even the most enlightened man will one day be seen as backwards. But it doesn't mean we should glorify it. They were right about a lot of things, but not everything.

 

[137th Gebirg]

^^^ Agreed.