Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 4/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   the constitution, it's origins, and the possibility of a christian state
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3918 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 1 of 11 (304239)
04-14-2006 2:17 PM


since the other thread (the "Christian State" thread)isn't about debating history, i'd like to start one that is.
faith claims that the mayflower compact is a basis for the constitution. her contention (i imagine) is that since this is the case, "The early days of America were fundamentalist. Good things came of it such as the first governing principles that ultimately undergirded the US Constitution." [link]
she quotes here
The Compact is often described as America's first constitution, but it is not a constitution in the sense of being a fundamental framework of government. Its importance lies in the belief that government is a form of covenant, and that for government to be legitimate, it must derive from the consent of the governed. The settlers recognized that individually they might not agree with all of the actions of the government they were creating; but they, and succeeding generations, understood that government could be legitimate only if it originated with the consent of those it claimed to govern.
so the mayflower compact, as i said previously, is an example of the social contract theory. at least that's all you're claiming.
i propose in this thread that we look at historical origins of the american government and use those to analyse just what an american theocracy would look like.
the purpose of this thread is to prove that opposition to a christian state is not in fact "historically obtuse" and that ignorance of history is demonstrated by those who would support a christian state rather than those who oppose it.
faith again:
The Puritans ought to be evidence of that, and the Reformation too for that matter, which liberated all kinds of intellectual work, and the Roman Catholic church as well. Universities were founded by Christians for training Christians. You guys are all ignorant of history. Religious freedom was most strongly argued by Puritan theologian John Owen, Dean of Oxford when John Locke was a student there.
the inaccuracies of the conclusions drawn from the above will be shown in my first post.
now. far from being intended as an attack on faith, i intend this thread rather to educate people who hold these opinions and those that would support a christian state, particularly in the US (see thingschange's post 39 and my reply message 46.)
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 04-14-2006 03:43 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-14-2006 2:18 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied
 Message 3 by lfen, posted 04-14-2006 3:31 PM macaroniandcheese has replied
 Message 8 by kuresu, posted 05-10-2006 11:42 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3918 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 2 of 11 (304240)
04-14-2006 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by macaroniandcheese
04-14-2006 2:17 PM


laws of massachusetts colony as example.
well. shall we look at the laws of massachusetts colony since they must be the forbears of our laws? not to mention a great example of a modern (modern is defined by post-1500 in political science btw.) christian state. moreover it's since the oh so wonderous reformation.
http://www.law.du.edu/russell/lh/alh/docs/lawslibertyes.html
the spelling is different, but it's not difficult. this is going to be a long post. hold on to your but. feel free to skip some of the self-righteous bullshit at the front. but do take special note of specific laws and their legal citations. note i use this term loosely.
The Book of the General Lawes and Libertyes Concerning the Inhabitants of the Massachusets (1648; facsimile edition, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1929).
[*iii] TO OUR BELOVED BRETHREN AND NEIGHBOURS the Inhabitants of the Massachusets, the Governour, Assistants and Deputies assembled in the Generall Court of that Jurisdiction with grace and peace in our Lord Jesus Christ.
So soon as God had set up Politicall Government among his people Israel he gave them a body of lawes for judgement both in civil and criminal causes. These mere breif and fundamental principles, yet withall so full and comprehensive as out of them clear deductions were to be drawne to all particular cases in future times.
For a Common-wealth without lawes is like a Ship without rigging and steeradge. Nor is it sufficient to have principles or fundamentalls, but these are to be drawn out into so many of their deductions as the time and condition of that people may have use of. And it is very unsafe & injurious to the body of the people to put them to learn their duty and libertie from generall rules, nor is it enough to have lawes except they be also just. Therefore among other priviledges which the Lord bestowed upon his peculiar people, these he calls them specially to consider of, that God was neerer to them and their lawes were more righteous then other nations. God was sayd to be amongst them or neer to them because of his Ordnances established by himselfe, and their lawes righteous because himselfe was their Law-giver: yet in the comparison are implyed two things, first that other nations had somthing of God's presence amongst them. Secondly that there was also some what of equitie in their lawes, for it pleased the Father (upon the Covenant of Redemption with his Son) to restore so much of his Image to lost man as whereby all nations are disposed to worship God, and to advance righteousnes: which appears in that of the Apostle Rom. I. 21. They knew God &c: and in the 2. 14. They did by nature the things conteined in the law of God. But the nations corrupting his Ordinances (both of Religion, and Justice) God withdrew his presence from them proportionably whereby they were given up to abominable lusts Rom. 2. 21. Whereas if they had walked according to the light & law of nature they might have been preserved from such moral evils and might have injoyed a common blessing in all their natural and civil Ordinances: now, if it might have been so with the nations who were so much strangers to the Covenant of Grace, what advantage have they who have interest in this Covenant, and may injoye the special presence of God in the puritie and native simplicitie of all his Ordinances by which he is so neer to his owne people. This hath been no small priviledge, and advantage to us in New England that our Churches, and civil State have been planted, and growne up (like two twinnes) together like that of Israel in the wildernes by which wee were put in minde (and had opportunitie put into our hands) not only to gather our Churches, and set up the Ordinaces of Christ Jesus in them according to the Apostolick patterne by such light as the Lord graciously afforded us: but also withall to frame our civil Politie, and lawes according to the rules of his most holy word whereby each do help and strengthen other (the Churches the civil Authoritie, and the civil Authoritie the Churches) and so both prosper the better without such amulation, and contention for priviledges or priority as have proved the misery (if not ruine) of both in some other places.
so all laws divine from the mouth of god and those poor bastards who don't know god are lost. ok nothing new.
Ana-Baptists.
Forasmuch as experience hath plentifully & often proved that since the first arising of the Ana-baptists about a hundred years past they have been the Incendiaries of Common-wealths & the Infectors of persons in main matters of Religi, & the Troublers of Churches in most places where they have been, & that they who have held the baptizing of Infants unlawful, have usually held other errors or heresies together therwith (though as hereticks use to doe they have concealed the same untill they espied a fit advantage and opportunity to vent them by way of question or scruple) and wheras divers [*2] of this kinde have since our cming into New-England appeared amongst ourselvs, some wherof as others before them have denied the Ordinance of Magistracy, and the law fulnes of making warre, others the lawfulness of Magistrates, and their Inspection into any breach of the first Table: which opinions if coived at by us are like to be increased among us & so necessarily bring guilt up us, infection, & trouble to the Churches & hazzard to the whole Common-wealth:
It is therfore orderd by this Court & Authoritie therof, that if any person or persons within this Jurisdiction shall either openly condemn or oppose the baptizing of Infants, or goe about secretely to seduce others from the approbation or use therof, or shal purposely depart the Congregation at the administration of that Ordinance; or shal deny the Ordinance of Magistry, or their lawfull right or authoritie to make war, or to punish the outward breaches of the first Table, and shall appear to the Court wilfully and obstinately to continue therin, after due meanes of conviction, everie such person or persons shall be sentenced to Banishment. [1644] * * *
it's illegal to oppose or fail to baptise children. that's a nice secular law. those ana-baptists are such horrible bastards. they should be banished anyways.
below is the stuff you get whacked for. i told you i was right.
CAPITAL LAWES.
IF any man after legal conviction shall HAVE OR WORSHIP any other God, but the LORD GOD: he shall be put to death. Exod. 22. 20. Deut. 13. 6. & 10. Deut. 17. 2. 6.
2. If any man or woman be a WITCH, that is, hath or consulteth with a familiar spirit, they shall be put to death. Exod. 22. 18. Levit. 20. 27. Deut. 18. 10. 11.
3. If any person within this Jurisdiction whether Christian or Pagan shall wittingly and willingly presume to BLASPHEME the holy Name of God, Father, Son or Holy-Ghost, with direct, expresse, presumptuous, or high-handed blasphemy, either by wilfull or obstinate denying the true God, or his Creation, or Government of the world: or shall curse God in like manner, or reproach the holy Religion of God as if it were but a politick device to keep ignorant men in awe; or shal utter any other kinde of Blasphemy of the like nature & degree they shall be put to death. Levit. 24, 15. 16. (emphasis mine)
4. If any person shall commit any wilfull MURTHER, which is Man slaughter, committed upon premeditate malice, hatred, or crueltie not in a mans necessary and just defence, nor by meer casualty against his will, he shall be put to death. Exod. 21. 12. 13. Numb. 35. 31.
5. If any person slayeth another suddenly in his ANGER, or CRUELTY of passion, he shall be put to death. Levit. 24. 17. Numb. 35. 20. 21.
6. If any person shall slay another through guile, either by POYSONING, or other such develish practice, he shall be put to death. Exod. 21. 14.
7. If any man or woman shall LYE WITH ANY BEAST, or bruit creature, by carnall copulation; they shall surely be put to death: and the beast shall be slain, & buried, and not eaten. Lev. 20, 15. 16.
8. If any man LYETH WITH MAN-KINDE as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed abomination, they both shal surely be put to death: unles the one partie were forced (or be under fourteen years of age in which case he shall be seveerly [*6] punished) Levit. 20. 13.
9. If any person commit ADULTERIE with a married, or espoused wife; the Adulterer & Adulteresse shal surely be put to death. Lev. 20. 19. & 18. 20. Deu. 22. 23. 27.
10. If any man STEALETH A MAN, or Man-kinde, he shall surely be put to death. Exodus 21. 16.
11. If any man rise up by FALSE-WITNES wittingly, and of purpose to take away any mans life: he shal be put to death. Deut. 19. 16. 18. 16.
12. If any man shall CONSPIRE, and attempt any Invasion, Insurrection, or publick Rebellion against our Common-Wealth: or shall indeavour to surprize any Town, or Townes, Fort, or Forts therin; or shall treacherously, & persidiously attempt the Alteration and Subversion of our frame of Politie, or Government fundamentally he shall be put to death. Numb. 16. 2 Sam. 3. 2 Sam. 18. 2 Sam. 20.
13. If any child, or children, above sixteen years old, and of sufficient understanding, shall CURSE, or SMITE their natural FATHER, or MOTHER; he or they shall be put to death: unles it can be sufficiently testified that the Parents have been very unchristianly negligent in the eduction of such children; or so provoked them by extream, and cruel correction; that they have been forced therunto to preserve themselves from death or maiming. Exod. 21. 17. Lev. 20. 9. Exod. 21. 15.
14. If a man have a stubborn or REBELLIOUS SON, of sufficient years & uderstanding (viz) sixteen years of age, which will not obey the voice of his Father, or the voice of his Mother, and that when they have chastened him will not harken unto them: then shal his Father & Mother being his natural parets, lay hold on him, & bring him to the Magistrates assembled in Court & testifie unto them that their Son is stubborn & rebellious & will not obey their voice and chastisement, but lives in sundry notorious crimes, such a son shal be put to death. Deut. 21. 20. 21.
15. If any man shal RAVISH any maid or single womn, cmitting carnal copulation with her by force, against her own will; that is above the age of ten years he shal be punished either with death, or with some other greivous punishmet according to circumstances as the Judges, or General court shal determin. [1641]
[*23] Fornication.
It is ordered by this Court and Authoritie therof, That if any man shall commit Fornication with any single woman, they shall be punished either by enjoyning to Marriage, or Fine, or corporall punishment, or all or any of these as the Judges in the courts of Assistants shall appoint most agreeable to the word of God. And this Order to continue till the Court take further order. [1642] * * *
told ya. no pre-marital sex.
Heresie.
ALTHOUGH no humane power be Lord over the Faith & Consciences of men, and therfore may not constrein them to beleive or professe against their Consciences: yet because such as bring in damnable heresies, tending to the subversion of the Christian Faith, and destruction of the soules of men, ought duly to be restreined from such notorious impiety, it is therfore ordered and decreed by this Court;
That if any Christian within this Jurisdiction shall go about to subvert and destroy the christian Faith and Religion, by broaching or mainteining any damnable heresie; as denying the immortalitie of the Soul, or the resurrection of the body, or any sin to be repented of in the Regenerate, or any evil done by the outward man to be accounted sin: or denying that Christ gave himself a Ransom for our sins, or shal affirm that wee are not justified by his Death and Righteousnes, but by the perfection of our own works; or shall deny the moralitie of the fourth commandement, or shall indeavour to seduce others to any the herisies aforementioned, everie such person continuing obstinate therin after due means of conviction shal be sentenced to Baishment. [1646] * * *
oy.
Jesuits.
THIS Court taking into consideration the great wars, combustions and divisions which are this day in Europe: and that the same are observed to be raysed and fomented chiefly by the secret underminings, and solicitations of those of the Jesuiticall Order, men brought up and devoted to the religion and court of Rome; which hath occasioned divers States to expell them their territories; for prevention wherof among our selves, It is ordered and enacted by Authoritie of this Court,
That no Jesuit, or spiritual or ecclesiastical person [as they are termed] ordained by the authoritie of the Pope, or Sea of Rome shall henceforth at any time repair to, or come within this Jurisdiction: And if any person shal give just cause of suspicion that he is one of such Societie or Order he shall be brought before some of the Magistrates, and if he cannot free himselfe of such suspicion he shall be committed to prison, or bound over to the next Court of Assistants, to be tryed and proceeded with by Baishment or otherwise as the Court shall see cause: and if any person so banished shall be taken the second time within this Jurisdiction upon lawfull tryall and conviction he shall be put to death. Provided this Law shall not extend to any such Jesuit, spiritual or ecclesiasticall person as shall be cast upon our shoars, by ship-wrack or other accident, so as he continue no longer then till he may have opportunitie of passage for his departure; nor to any such as shall come in company with any Messenger hither up publick occasions, or any Merchant or Master of any ship, belonging to any place not in emnitie with the State of England, or our selves, so as they depart again with the same Messenger, Master of Merchant, and behave themselves in-offensively during their aboad heer. [1647] * * *
jesuits are catholics by the way. so catholics are forbidden from the colony. great religious freedom.
Poor.
It ordered by this Court and Authoritie therof; that any Shire Court, or any two Magistrates out of Court shall have power to determin all differences about lawfull setling, and providing for poor persons; and shall have power to dispose of all unsetled persons into such towns as they shall judge to be most fit for the maintainance, and imployment of such persons and families, for the ease of the Countrie. [1639] * * *
oh the christians will take care of the poor all right. see how they describe them? unsettling persons? they want to get rid of the poor because they are unsavory. nice.
[*49] Strangers.
It is ordered by this Court and the Authoritie therof; that no Town or person shal receive any stranger resorting hither with intent to reside in this Jurisdiction, nor shall allow any Lot or Habitation to any, or entertain any such above three weeks, except such person shall have allowance under the hand of some one Magistrate, upon pain of everie Town that shall give, or sell any Lot or Habitation to any not so licenced such Fine to the Countrie as that County Court shall impose, not exceeding fifty pounds, nor lesse then ten pounds. And of everie person receiving any such for longer time then is heer expressed or allowed, in some special cases as before, or in case of entertainment of friends resorting from other parts of this Country in amitie with us, shall forfeit as aforesaid, not exceeding twenty pounds, nor lesse then four pounds: and for everie month after so offending, shal forfeit as aforesaid not exceeding ten pounds, nor lesse then fourty shillings. Also, that all Constables shall inform the Courts of new commers which they know to be admitted without licence, from time to time. [1637 1638 1647] See Fugitives, Lib. com: Tryalls. ***
no strangers. remember what the old testament says about caring for the alien within your gates? apparently these people don't.
Torture
It is ordered, decreed, and by this Court declared; that no man shall be forced by torture to confesse any crime against himselfe or any other, unles it be in some Capital case, where he is first fully convicted by clear and sufficient evidence to be guilty. After which, if the Case be of that nature that it is very apparent there be other Conspirators or Confoederates with him; then he may be tortured, yet not with such tortures as be barbarous and inhumane.
2 And that no man shall be beaten with above fourty stripes for one Fact at one time. Nor shall any man be punished with whipping, except he have not othewise to answer the Law, unles his crime be very shamefull, and his course of life vitious and profligate. [1641]
ok. here it would be better than bush.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-14-2006 2:17 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by MangyTiger, posted 04-15-2006 10:17 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4667 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 3 of 11 (304261)
04-14-2006 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by macaroniandcheese
04-14-2006 2:17 PM


Very interesting. I would find it helpful to know what the other thread was and who you have quoted.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-14-2006 2:17 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-14-2006 3:32 PM lfen has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3918 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 4 of 11 (304262)
04-14-2006 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by lfen
04-14-2006 3:31 PM


right. amending momentarily.
...
better?
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 04-14-2006 03:40 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by lfen, posted 04-14-2006 3:31 PM lfen has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6344 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 5 of 11 (304515)
04-15-2006 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by macaroniandcheese
04-14-2006 2:18 PM


I think you are misinterpreting 'settled'
Poor.
It ordered by this Court and Authoritie therof; that any Shire Court, or any two Magistrates out of Court shall have power to determin all differences about lawfull setling, and providing for poor persons; and shall have power to dispose of all unsetled persons into such towns as they shall judge to be most fit for the maintainance, and imployment of such persons and families, for the ease of the Countrie. [1639] * * *
oh the christians will take care of the poor all right. see how they describe them? unsettling persons? they want to get rid of the poor because they are unsavory. nice.
I may be wrong but my reading of this is that it means settled and unsettled in the sense of having somewhere to live rather than meaning anything about them unsettling the nice folks (who of course are the ones who do have a place to live).
Apart from that I think you make your point fairly comprehensively

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-14-2006 2:18 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-15-2006 10:39 PM MangyTiger has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3918 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 6 of 11 (304518)
04-15-2006 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by MangyTiger
04-15-2006 10:17 PM


Re: I think you are misinterpreting 'settled'
quite poosible. and i think i noticed that but brushed it off. i admit the error.
but does being homeless make someone valueless? jesus was homeless. he was never without a place to stay, but he had no place of his own. at least according to standard interpretation.
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 04-15-2006 11:28 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by MangyTiger, posted 04-15-2006 10:17 PM MangyTiger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by MangyTiger, posted 04-16-2006 12:00 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6344 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 7 of 11 (304528)
04-16-2006 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by macaroniandcheese
04-15-2006 10:39 PM


Re: I think you are misinterpreting 'settled'
but does being homeless make someone valueless?
Indeed not - although I strongly suspect the worthies of Massachusetts saw it differently.
In fact the section you quoted seems to me to be basically setting up pretty much total control of the vagrants and the poor - where they live, what they do in terms of employment and so on.
And it probably didn't end in a good way for those people...

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-15-2006 10:39 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2503 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 8 of 11 (310919)
05-10-2006 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by macaroniandcheese
04-14-2006 2:17 PM


yay. american history, that topic that no one in the US is no longer taught becasue we so desparately need to focus on science and math. If we want a good education, I say throw in a real history course.
As to the topic.
The United States is not a christian nation. It's laws are not christian. In fact, the only reference to God in our grand constitution is where it says "In the Year of Our Lord 1789 (or does it say Anno Domino? same thing, really).
US law is based off of English Common Law. English Common Law is determined by precedents set in court (and our court sytem is based off of this court system). ECL set up many things, such as Habeus Corpus. Also, ECL is based off of an earlier code of law dating from the non-romans, pre-christians of England (I put it like that because England has had roughly five "invasions" in the last couple thousand years). Please note that ECL is NOT based off of christianity.
THe constitution was written by a bunch of Deists. These do not believe that Jesus is the savior, but they aren't Jews or Muslims. They also stuck in that tricky little amendment, amendment number one:free speech, free press, freedom to assembly, freedom to petition, and no law shall be written concerning the establishment of any religion. IOW, no state religion. In the truest techical sense, a christian nation would have to have christianity as it's state religion.
I do admit that the US is full of christians, but this does not make the nation a christian state. Kind of like how Iran is a Islamic state, but is non-arab.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-14-2006 2:17 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by macaroniandcheese, posted 05-11-2006 8:41 AM kuresu has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3918 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 9 of 11 (310975)
05-11-2006 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by kuresu
05-10-2006 11:42 PM


The United States is not a christian nation. It's laws are not christian. In fact, the only reference to God in our grand constitution is where it says "In the Year of Our Lord 1789 (or does it say Anno Domino? same thing, really).
more to the point, we learned long before we became an independant nation that christian laws (like in mass colony) were very detrimental to society and did not preserve the rights and freedoms we valued. i don't know if america as a whole still values these.
I do admit that the US is full of christians, but this does not make the nation a christian state. Kind of like how Iran is a Islamic state, but is non-arab.
sorry to nitpick, but that's a very silly thing to say. iran is persian. remember persia? and yes, they're muslims. pakistan is muslim too and they aren't arabs. they're punjabi. and indonesia is the largest muslim country in the world. they're not arab either. bosnian muslims aren't arab, they're slavs.
no matter what fox news may tell you, islam is not an arab religion based on dressing women up in black curtains. it has many followers of many colors and with many different cultures. muslim women in pakistan and india? they show off their bellies just like non-muslim women in pakistan and india. muslim women in indonesia wear bright colors and metallic fabrics.
it's a religion. and it's one that brings a freedom of knowledge to those who practice it in that manner. just as for some people, christianity helped them to see other people as their equals. it has pecisely the same faults as christianity and precisely the same strengths. there are crazy christians in this country who don't cut their hair or wear makeup and wear full length dresses and beat their children and their wives. and don't forget the amish. oh sure, they're cute and they make great furniture, but they're serious religious fundamentalists and if you found the right political-type person to rally them, they might be convinced to start sabotaging our technology instead of just shunning it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by kuresu, posted 05-10-2006 11:42 PM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by kuresu, posted 05-11-2006 4:33 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2503 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 10 of 11 (311079)
05-11-2006 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by macaroniandcheese
05-11-2006 8:41 AM


i didn't know that Iran was persian. Should have, considering that nation is right on top of the old persian empire, but my geographical facts tend to escape me.
I know that islam is not arab based, and for the reasons you stated. It's just that there are a lot of arabs in the religion, and that is where people get messed up.
I hope we still value freedom and rights. Otherwise we will soon be losing to the terrorists as well as having our culture fall apart. Contrary to what some may believe, our culture isn't based off of our ethnicity, but rather the value we place in freedoms and rights and the sovereignty of the PEOPLE.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by macaroniandcheese, posted 05-11-2006 8:41 AM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by macaroniandcheese, posted 05-11-2006 4:46 PM kuresu has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3918 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 11 of 11 (311086)
05-11-2006 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by kuresu
05-11-2006 4:33 PM


well. there are a lot of arabs period. they cover a good quarter of the old world or so.
i also hope that we still value freedom. but i think lately too many value morals and pep rally bullshit. not to mention the people pushing for the sovereignty of the president. wtf?
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 05-11-2006 04:46 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by kuresu, posted 05-11-2006 4:33 PM kuresu has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024