I thought obama was supposed to be transparent?

[3devious]

Now if only that congressman who is so worried that Guam is going to capsize would get his...

 

[scoty777]

I love debate as long as it remains intelligent and civil. You can look up many sources that refer to those founding Fathers as being devout men of faith, and they were; yet on one site, there were writing of their criticism of "orthodox" Christianity. This site used their criticism as a point in fact that our nation was not built on Christian principles when in fact it was. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is a basic Christian and biblical principle; another point, if I asked does the constitution state anywhere: "separation of church and state"? It does not; the Russian Constitution does. The purpose of separation of church and state was to allow everyone the freedom to follow their own faith, not to eliminate faith from the state. We forget our or we are being taught bad history. As we banter our points of view, lets back our opinions up with facts. I'm not going to here because it is irrelevant to the topic. I would like to ask another question: "Why would we boycott BP? IF we do, they will go bankrupt and we will all have to pay for the damage with more debt and increased gas prices as the burden is shifted to other oil companies. I say buy BP as much as you can so they can honor their contract to pay their debt and promise of repair. But hey, I hate to make sense. Why support global warming when the science has been proven to be faked and the emails have been published to prove it? The formulas used were placed to make them work to the favor of those wanting to push this agenda, and the studies were not verified as all research should be; of the thousands of tree samples taken around the world to prove global warming; only those which proved their outcome were used and published; the other-'normal' trees were not used in the research. Why is OK to allow illegals to work? That means if someone commits any crime, they should be allowed to work-how do you put a 'value' on one crime over another? crime is crime and illegal is illegal. Why is that if I shoot a lady who is pregnant today and kill her and her baby I am liable for 2 murders, but if she gets an abortion the next day that is OK? I am not trying to give one point over another-merely questions for discussion. Thanks

 

[hakr100]

I love debate as long as it remains intelligent and civil. You can look up many sources that refer to those founding Fathers as being devout men of faith, and they were; yet on one site, there were writing of their criticism of "orthodox" Christianity. This site used their criticism as a point in fact that our nation was not built on Christian principles when in fact it was. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is a basic Christian and biblical principle; another point, if I asked does the constitution state anywhere: "separation of church and state"? It does not; the Russian Constitution does.

I think you have every right to promote your beliefs in a civil manner, but i don't believe you have the right to try to force your beliefs or your religion on me.

 

[scoty777]

I think you have every right to promote your beliefs in a civil manner, but i don't believe you have the right to try to force your beliefs or your religion on me.

I'm not forcing anything hakr100; that's the point of separation of church and state is so no one can force religion on you, it was not to take religion out of the state but to allow men to practice what ever they believed..Sorry if the reply sounded "in typed word" any different-don't be so defensive...I love ya man!! In a friendly brotherly or sisterly sort a way I personally don't allow parking in the rear...but to each his own...I AM NOT IMPLICATING ANYTHING...JUST TRYING TO BE FUNNY....SMILE Dude or Dudette...SMILE

 

[Zenze]

I love debate as long as it remains intelligent and civil. You can look up many sources that refer to those founding Fathers as being devout men of faith, and they were; yet on one site, there were writing of their criticism of "orthodox" Christianity. This site used their criticism as a point in fact that our nation was not built on Christian principles when in fact it was. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is a basic Christian and biblical principle; another point, if I asked does the constitution state anywhere: "separation of church and state"? It does not; the Russian Constitution does. The purpose of separation of church and state was to allow everyone the freedom to follow their own faith, not to eliminate faith from the state. We forget our or we are being taught bad history. As we banter our points of view, lets back our opinions up with facts. I'm not going to here because it is irrelevant to the topic. I would like to ask another question: "Why would we boycott BP? IF we do, they will go bankrupt and we will all have to pay for the damage with more debt and increased gas prices as the burden is shifted to other oil companies. I say buy BP as much as you can so they can honor their contract to pay their debt and promise of repair. But hey, I hate to make sense. Why support global warming when the science has been proven to be faked and the emails have been published to prove it? The formulas used were placed to make them work to the favor of those wanting to push this agenda, and the studies were not verified as all research should be; of the thousands of tree samples taken around the world to prove global warming; only those which proved their outcome were used and published; the other-'normal' trees were not used in the research. Why is OK to allow illegals to work? That means if someone commits any crime, they should be allowed to work-how do you put a 'value' on one crime over another? crime is crime and illegal is illegal. Why is that if I shoot a lady who is pregnant today and kill her and her baby I am liable for 2 murders, but if she gets an abortion the next day that is OK? I am not trying to give one point over another-merely questions for discussion. Thanks

Wow you kinda went off on a bunch of different tangents but I'll just comment on the one you started with... religion and how it relates to government.

First of all the quotes "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" does not come from any Christian source. Where in the bible does it say this? It is common knowledge that it originated with the philosopher John Locke when he wrote about the rights every man has to "life, liberty, and property." They just changed property to happiness. In fact there are quite a few ideas in our constitution borrowed from Locke.

Also to say that the founding fathers were devout Christians is either inaccurate or a gross overexploitation. There is significant evidence to suggest that most of the founding fathers were Deists, including Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and George Washington.

For example Benjamin Franklin wrote in his autobiography:

"Some books against Deism fell into my hands; they were said to be the substance of sermons preached at Boyle's lectures. It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist. My arguments perverted some others, particularly Collins and Ralph; but each of them having afterwards wrong'd me greatly without the least compunction, and recollecting Keith's conduct towards me (who was another freethinker) and my own towards Vernon and Miss Read, which at times gave me great trouble, I began to suspect that this doctrine, tho' it might be true, was not very useful."

Also I don't care what any person's religious beliefs, or lack of, happen to be. However as soon as it is incorporated into any part of the government it is inherently going to have a effect on the citizens of that government, and I am strongly against that.

Also, use the enter key. A wall of text is really annoying to read

 

[scoty777]

Wow you kinda went off on a bunch of different tangents but I'll just comment on the one you started with... religion and how it relates to government.

First of all the quotes "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" does not come from any Christian source. Where in the bible does it say this? It is common knowledge that it originated with the philosopher John Locke when he wrote about the rights every man has to "life, liberty, and property." They just changed property to happiness. In fact there are quite a few ideas in our constitution borrowed from Locke.


Also to say that the founding fathers were devout Christians is either inaccurate or a gross overexploitation. There is significant evidence to suggest that most of the founding fathers were Deists, including Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and George Washington.



For example Benjamin Franklin wrote in his autobiography:
Also I don't care what any person's religious beliefs, or lack of, happen to be. However as soon as it is incorporated into any part of the government it is inherently going to have a effect on the citizens of that government, and I am strongly against that.


Also, use the enter key. A wall of text is really annoying to read

I didn't say it came from a biblical source, I said it was a principle as in freedom of bondage and the establishment of a people and nation; fortunately and unfortunately they felt a need for a king to rule over them which was both beneficial and non-beneficial. I am sure the strife for freedom is in many religious doctrines. John Locke did say life, liberty, and the pursuit of property and the original writers wanted to place that in the constitution as written.

I also know that there was deep prayer prior to each 'session' where the founding fathers looked for guidance as they proceeded with their decisions on behalf of the colonies and the colonists. Do you feel or believe many of them were Free Mason's?

I disagree here just a little I don't agree with social relativism or humanism as social mores change; I feel without some conscience of morality; society dwindles as seen with many previous republics such as Greek and Roman societies. Here lies the dilemma faced by many philosophers. How and who dictates and oversees this factor of the governed?; Religion should not but precepts of humanity from religious kindness and how to treat each other should be. Many Laws are changed as societal mores change; is this good or bad? An adulterous woman can still be beheaded for her transgressions in Islam; Old Testament Law she was stoned to death; today, she has many secret partners or is divorced.

At what point does a society say this is enough or that is enough? I don't think women should be beheaded by the way; stoning on the other hand...kidding!!! I learned during my Master's degree to sometime just write stuff to stir debate and controversy-it's fun that way... OMG would someone actually do that?