Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Christian State.
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5854 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 9 of 65 (303490)
04-12-2006 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Faith
04-12-2006 9:23 AM


Nonsense
Again, I have to follow Faith around cleaning up her nonsense posts.
As has been stated in many other threads... The US constitution has absolutely NOTHING to do with fundamentalist principles and any claim that is does is uninformed nonsense.
Again from the writer of the US constitution, Thomas Jefferson:
"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose." - Thomas Jefferson, to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814
"Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth." - Thomas Jefferson, from "Notes on Virginia"
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787
"It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one. But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests." - Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1803
"But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State." - Thomas Jefferson to S. Kercheval, 1810
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." - Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813
"On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind." - Thomas Jefferson to Carey, 1816
"But the greatest of all reformers of the depraved religion of his own country, was Jesus of Nazareth. Abstracting what is really his from the rubbish in which it is buried, easily distinguished by its lustre from the dross of his biographers, and as separable from that as the diamond from the dunghill, we have the outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man. The establishment of the innocent and genuine character of this benevolent morality, and the rescuing it from the imputation of imposture, which has resulted fro artificial systems, invented by ultra-Christian sects (The immaculate conception of Jesus, his deification, the creation of the world by him, his miraculous powers, his resurrection and visible ascension, his corporeal presence in the Eucharist, the Trinity; original sin, atonement, regeneration, election, orders of the Hierarchy, etc.) is a most desirable object." - Thomas Jefferson to W. Short, Oct. 31, 1819
"It is not to be understood that I am with him (Jesus Christ) in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of Spiritualism; he preaches the efficacy of repentence toward forgiveness of sin; I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it.
Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others, again, of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being. I separate, therefore, the gold from the dross; restore him to the former, and leave the latter to the stupidity of some, the roguery of others of his disciples. Of this band of dupes and imposters, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and the first corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus." - Thomas Jefferson to W. Short, 1820
"The office of reformer of the superstitions of a nation, is ever more dangerous. Jesus had to work on the perilous confines of reason and religion; and a step to the right or left might place him within the grasp of the priests of the superstition, a bloodthirsty race, as cruel and remorseless as the being whom they represented as the family God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob, and the local God of Israel. That Jesus did not mean to impose himself on mankind as the son of God, physically speaking, I have been convinced by the writings of men more learned than myself in that lore." - Thomas Jefferson to Story, Aug. 4, 1820
"The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man. But compare with these the demoralizing dogmas of Calvin.
1. That there are three Gods.
2. That good works, or the love of our neighbor, is nothing.
3. That faith is every thing, and the more incomprehensible the proposition, the more merit the faith.
4. That reason in religion is of unlawful use.
5. That God, from the beginning, elected certain individuals to be saved, and certain others to be damned; and that no crimes of the former can damn them; no virtues of the latter save." - Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Waterhouse, Jun. 26, 1822
"Creeds have been the bane of the Christian church ... made of Christendom a slaughter-house." - Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Waterhouse, Jun. 26, 1822
"The truth is, that the greatest enemies of the doctrine of Jesus are those, calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them to the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come, when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." - Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, Apr. 11, 1823
"The metaphysical insanities of Athanasius, of Loyola, and of Calvin, are, to my understanding, mere lapses into polytheism, differing from paganism only by being more unintelligible." - Thomas Jefferson to Jared Sparks, 1820
Sorry Faith, I'm going to refute everyone of your ridiculous assertions that are contradicted by evidence everything I see one. Hopefully it will motivate you to actually learn some history instead of inventing it.
As for Europe... If you knew your history you would know that Europe was able to emerge from the dark ages by adopting a more secular outlook and getting out from under the control of the church. We've had a secular society for only a few hundred years and we have already put a man on the moon.... Compare that to the 1500+ years that the church ruled western society

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 9:23 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by AdminModulous, posted 04-12-2006 11:09 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 11:30 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5854 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 14 of 65 (303520)
04-12-2006 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Faith
04-12-2006 11:30 AM


Re: Nonsense
The occupants of the Mayflower were fundamentalists, meaning Bible-believing Christians. The Mayflower Compact was a basis for the Constitution.
First of all the mayflower compact was NOT the basis for the constitution.
What was?
Many of the framers, especially Madison, studied history and political philosophy. Two political theorists had great influence on the creation of the Constitution. John Locke, an important British political philosopher, had a large impact through his Second Treatise of Government (1690). Locke argued that sovereignty resides in individuals, not rulers. A political state, he theorized, emerged from a social contract among the people, who consent to government in order to preserve their lives, liberties, and property. In the words of the Declaration of Independence, which also drew heavily on Locke, governments derive “their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Locke also pioneered the idea of the separation of powers. The French writer Baron de Montesquieu, who was the second major intellectual influence on the Constitution, further developed the concept of a separation of powers in his treatise The Spirit of the Laws (1748).
Secondly, the only part of the Mayflower compact that provided any inspiration was the section concerning consent of the governed. If you knew anything about John Adams you would know that he was speaking figuratively and not literally when discussing the Mayflower compact.
Please stop making assertions about subjects that you know little to nothing about. If you want to debate any of these issues start a new thread....
This is what you are clamining is the basis of the constitution:
In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereigne Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britaine, France, and Ireland king, defender of the faith, etc., having undertaken, for the glory of God and the advancement of the Christian faith, and honour of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northerne parts of Virginia, doe, by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politick, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enacte, constitute, and frame such just and equall laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time as shall be thought most meete and convenient for the generall good of the Colonie unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cap-Codd the II. of November, in the year of the reign of our sovereigne lord, King James of England, France, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fiftie-fourth. Anno. Dom. 1620.
I didn't know that the constitution put King James in charge.
Now that you actually know the content of the Mayflower compact you can clearly see that it has almost nothing in common with the constitution at all. I'm glad I could clear this up.
This message has been edited by SuperNintendo Chalmers, 04-12-2006 11:51 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 11:30 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 12:22 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5854 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 17 of 65 (303535)
04-12-2006 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Faith
04-12-2006 12:22 PM


Re: Nonsense
No this is what you said:
The early days of America were fundamentalist. Good things came of it such as the first governing principles that ultimately undergirded the US Constitution. Sheesh.
Number one is clearly false. There were a few fundie colonies, but they were far from the majority and some of them were horribly oppressive (the puritans). Your second claim here is total nonsense. The constitution had nothing to do with fundamentalism and in fact the main writers of the constitution were not even fans of religion in general, much less fundamentalism.
The fact that the constitution is directly opposed to fundamentalist priciples should have been your first clue.
Do Not Enter OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
AdminPD Magic Wand
This message has been edited by AdminPD, 04-12-2006 02:09 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 12:22 PM Faith has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5854 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 22 of 65 (303574)
04-12-2006 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Faith
04-12-2006 2:46 PM


You guys are all ignorant of history
HAHAHAHAHA, Faith, I've forgotten more high school level history than you will ever know (we won't even get into more advanced historical subjects). I'm not sure where you get all these bizarre ideas, but I would love to find out
This message has been edited by SuperNintendo Chalmers, 04-12-2006 03:03 PM
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message. --AdminPD
This message has been edited by AdminPD, 04-14-2006 06:41 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 2:46 PM Faith has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5854 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 40 of 65 (303850)
04-13-2006 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by ThingsChange
04-13-2006 9:50 AM


Re: Fundamentalist State not as bad as you think
I see that many folks on this thread are trying to take Bible verses and having fun with how that would be deployed/enforced. That's fun to you, but not really representative of what the state would be.
Here is what it would likely be, IMO:
1. Sexual businesses (such as topless bars, bath spas, internet porn, etc.) would be banned, or at least "suffocated" (example: cannot be located within 100 miles of a school or church or a public place)
2. Illegal drugs would be more suppressed and penalties stiffer, although there probably would be more preventative programs and help for people to break their habit.
3. Alcohol and bars would be more restricted, but not banned. There would be stronger consequences for drunks, though.
4. Some Sunday activites might be discouraged with laws, so that there would be more incentive to go to church. (in my case, I would take the opportunity to sleep late)
5. TV and movies would be restricted more.
6. The Hollywood rich and corporate over-paid executives would probably be limited in compensation and taxed more heavily.
7. The strategy for helping the poor probably would shift towards more temporary welfare along with programs to help people get off their feet and support themselves (i.e. the old "teach a man to fish" philosophy)
8. Education would incorporate Creationism as the truth, and an ignorant portrayal of Evolution. Prayer would be re-introduced. Teachers would be given more power to discipline (I am not sure if spanking would be allowed, though).
9. Advancement in science would suffer indirectly (from uninspiring education and policy like banning stem cell research)
10. Gay rights would not be established, but gays would not be imprisoned.
11. The establishment of religion clause would be struck, so that "separation of church and state" would no longer be a legal issue.
12. Oh yes, I almost forgot, abortion would be outlawed.
A lot of those points are pretty horrible dude. You seem like an reasonably well-educated guy who enjoys freedom of speech. I don't think you would enjoy this new world order much.
Things... One thing I might be interested in discussing with you in another thread is why you still support the republican party. I used to be a big republican, but left the party once I decided they had completely sold out to the religious right. I am curious as to what you think about this. I ask because I still have a lot of friends that are republicans but even they are starting to pull away because of the religious right (almost all of them voted for a democrat for the first time in the last election: barack obama over alan keyes).
Maybe we could start a new thread on this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 9:50 AM ThingsChange has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5854 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 43 of 65 (303952)
04-13-2006 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by ThingsChange
04-13-2006 3:01 PM


Re: The Christian State (according to TC)
deleted: dupe
This message has been edited by SuperNintendo Chalmers, 04-13-2006 03:08 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 3:01 PM ThingsChange has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5854 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 44 of 65 (303953)
04-13-2006 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by ThingsChange
04-13-2006 3:01 PM


Re: The Christian State (according to TC)
Would you rather live under Taliban or the Christian State (as I figured it would be)?
Neither.
The taliban might be more brutal but the christians could be much more efficient about executions, arrests and the like (think nazis... and NO I AM NOT COMPARING ALL CHRISTIANS TO NAZIS!!!! The comment is more about the potential of an advanced society to oppress)
edit: on further thought, the fundamentalist x-tian state would probably be the lesser of two evils (for many of the reasons EZ states).
That's one thing I don't get about some of my fellow liberals. The rail against the chrsitian right and then preach tolerance for fundamentalist muslims who are EVEN WORSE!
This message has been edited by SuperNintendo Chalmers, 04-13-2006 03:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 3:01 PM ThingsChange 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