America Founded as a Christian Nation

[Correll]

America was founded by white, males


Does that make us a “White, Male Nation”?

Maybe. How do you define a group?

 

[Correll]

I have to post the entire exchange because the OP has falsely accused me of trolling and lying.

You said:

There is no conflict between the statements,
"America was set up to have a government that would be neutral in dealing with internal sectarian religious issues."

and,

"America was set up to be a Christian Nation."

I called nonsense;

America is a nation defined exactly by the system of government that was established at the founding. they are inseparable.

You are saying;

YOu read "nation" and think "government".

No, you moron. You started this by saying a government that would be neutral on religious matters is not in conflict with that same government being set up as a Christian Nation.

And I explained to you that America is a nation defined exactly by the system of government that was established at the founding.

Note that I used the term ”system” to define government.

it’s very important that you recognize my use of the words “system of government”.

Your failure to comprehend what I wrote makes it obvious you are stupid.

The government is the servant of the People, not the other way around. The people choose the government, and regularly choose another one.

If your statement represented the context of my comments it would read like this:

(The system of government is the servant of the People, not the other way around.)

It makes no sense that I would be saying

(“the people are the servants of the system of government that was chosen at the founding.“)

And what you said is even more ridiculous when corrected to refer to system of government.

(“The people choose the SYSTEM OF government, and regularly choose another one.”)

Do you see what an idiot you are when the facts and the truth are presented clearly to you.

We have not chosen a new SYSTEM of GOVERNMENT since the founding over two centuries ago.

When it comes to very subjective matters, like religion, I almost always try to respect, if not the Faith of people, at least their right to have whatever Faith they wish to have.

i don’t try to respect it I do respect everyone’s choice of religion. But the OP is not arguing for his religion. He is arguing for a tyranny of the majority to identify our secular nation as a Christian nation. I can’t stomach tyranny by the majority or a single tyrant.

The vast majority or all of the Founders self identified as Christians.

So do you support the OP support for the tyranny of the majority being memorialized by Declaration that America is a Christian nation.


It’s too Americans like you and the OP don’t have respect for non-religious, non-Christian Americans like me by trying to falsely label my country of birth a CHRISTIAN NATION.

1. The NATION was created as a collection of already existing States. To claim that the GOVERNMENT defined the NATION, is just you showing how much of a communist you are. The NATION, that was created, was built on generations of culture and society here, that was built on centuries of tradition and culture brought from Europe and even more religion and culture and tradition from Christianity stretching back in time, ect ect ect. The GOVERNMENT was at that time, just a few guys talking to each other, who had barely begun to fight, let alone govern.



2. Thank you for admitting that your opposition is not based on what the OP is claiming, but what you fear he is planning to DO with that fact.


2a. That shows that your opposition is dishonest. YOu are not arguing based on what you think about the historical facts, but based on your political agenda.

2b. The founders were very clear that a Majority should not impose a tyranny on the minority. They were all about that. That you don't seem to know that, is telling. And raises interesting questions about your agenda.


3. There is nothing inherent in admitting that the nation was founded as a Christian Nation, that means you have to support any political agenda moving forward. It just means that anyone arguing in the interests of Christians or for a Christian serving political agenda, has SOME measure of traditional credibility to draw on. That you cannot honestly give such a little thing to your enemies, shows how insecure you are, in the merits of your own political agenda and ability to argue their support.

 

[Correll]

There is no conflict between the statements,


"America was set up to have a government that would be neutral in dealing with internal sectarian religious issues."


and,


"America was set up to be a Christian Nation."

Nonsense, you Christian Fool, America is a nation defined exactly by the system of government that was established at the founding.

they are inseparable.

Wow. What a commie thing to say.

The government is the servant of the People, not the other way around. The people choose the government, and regularly choose another one.


BUT, this is showing the basis of your confusion on this issue. YOu read "nation" and think "government".


Now that I have corrected you, is this all making more sense to you?

Correll:

I wanted to thank you for hearing me out on this. Like I said I wanted to make a lot of points that most people never consider. Unless these guys see Jesus or God in every sentence, then they say there is no connection to the Bible and our government.

One last thing I wanted to cover and just so you could think about it.

Consider that our forefathers left the persecution of King George to escape religious persecution. We're all pretty much agreed on that point. Did you ever think that in the 11 years we went from Declaration of Independence to Constitution that the founders / framers never suggested a departure from the common law?

Our courts still relied on the decisions made by the very people we defeated in a war in order to have our own government. For example, United States Supreme Court still relies on precedents set by the English Bill of Rights cases. Check out how, in the 2008 Heller decision, the high Court relied on the 1689 English Bill of Rights as a pretext to marginalize our Second Amendment:

District of Columbia v. Heller | Summary, Ruling, & Facts

Sometimes the law goes our way; sometimes not, but we did not divorce ourselves from our Christian roots; we integrated the process into our own system of jurisprudence in the United States. That did not make us a theocracy and 231 years after the Constitution was ratified, we are not a theocracy.... but in the last few years my critics have excelled at turning us into a socialistic democracy and locking Christians and constitutionalists out.

Porter.

Thank you. You are doing a very good job of representing a point of view that rarely is seriously argued. I agree with you on many points, especially this one, ie, this nation was obviously founded as a Christian nation.


As you recall, I disagree with you on what to do NOW, but I think that you and these liberals could have a very good and educational debate, if they can get their act together enough to present their side, as well as it can be presented.


I seriously doubt that they can. I fully expect that this thread will be bogged down with trolling until the libs can get the thread locked, but I will be here and try to steer the debate forwards in the hope that it will not.


Best of luck. You are crushing it, and I will certainly point out to the libs, that they cannot make their case.

 

[rightwinger]

Some

Other Christians defended slavery and quoted parts of the Bible about slaves loyally serving their masters

I have questioned the motives of the critics of this thread. When confronted with facts they cannot refute, they make bogus arguments much like what you've been doing.

Jumping into a discussion and trying to insinuate lies that were already refuted to be the truth and only truth was a damn stupid approach. What you are now saying narrows down your real problem. You are in a discussion that is over your head.

There are NO moral implications regarding slavery. For the left, the atheists, non-believers, or anyone else to keep arguing over slavery is dishonest, disingenuous, and complete idiocy that you'd have to have an IQ less than your shoe size to accept.

"rightwinger," You can put a little bit of lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. NOBODY on this board, including you, has a problem with slavery. The only problem is how we dress it up. Right or left; conservative or liberal; Democrat or Republican, EVERYBODY supports slavery. It is biblical and it is normal. I'd like to give you a few examples.

Thomas Jefferson once said, " Take not from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned." Yet, knowing that, the Republicans illegally ratified the 16th Amendment and today everybody is comfortable with the income tax. The income tax is a plank out of the Communist Manifesto and nothing, from an economics point of view is more indicative of slavery than communism. Nobody in this country respects the tax resister.

The Declaration of Independence lists Liberty is an unalienable Right. Yet it is the "right wing" that pushes the notion that one must become a citizen in order to work in the United States. Of course, those advocating are getting their wish and will soon be pushed into oblivion as the left increases in numbers. Yet, to deny people an unalienable Right is slavery.

The Democrats and leftists want to force those who produce to pay for those who do not produce. Putting your hand in my pocket to take money to give to someone I don't want to pay for is robbery. And our example here is simple:

The state of California wants to have sanctuary cities to protect the undocumented foreigners in their state. I'm okay with that. It's legal. But, the state wants the federal government to help fund the undocumented foreigners it invited. Forcing a man in Georgia to pay for the guests in California that they invited is a form of economic slavery. That is the same principle with Obamacare and socialized medicine.

The Democrats and atheists (most of which vote for Democrats) wail about slavery, but the Democrats were the ones who perpetuated slavery in this country. The hue of the skin has changed since democracy is all about majority rule. They just put a little lipstick on that pig and keep making emotion laden buzz word arguments to stay in control. Soooo,... when both sides of the political spectrum are comfortable with their forms of slavery, they are absolute hypocrites to use it as an issue ESPECIALLY when it does not even apply.

Slavery was a Christian institution

"Slavery was practiced in every ancient Middle Eastern society: Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Roman and Israelite. Slavery was an integral part of ancient commerce, taxation, and temple religion..."

Christian views on slavery - Wikipedia

but abolition still had its roots in the Christian church.

Some

Other Christians defended slavery and quoted parts of the Bible about slaves loyally serving their masters

I have questioned the motives of the critics of this thread. When confronted with facts they cannot refute, they make bogus arguments much like what you've been doing.

Jumping into a discussion and trying to insinuate lies that were already refuted to be the truth and only truth was a damn stupid approach. What you are now saying narrows down your real problem. You are in a discussion that is over your head.

There are NO moral implications regarding slavery. For the left, the atheists, non-believers, or anyone else to keep arguing over slavery is dishonest, disingenuous, and complete idiocy that you'd have to have an IQ less than your shoe size to accept.

"rightwinger," You can put a little bit of lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. NOBODY on this board, including you, has a problem with slavery. The only problem is how we dress it up. Right or left; conservative or liberal; Democrat or Republican, EVERYBODY supports slavery. It is biblical and it is normal. I'd like to give you a few examples.

Thomas Jefferson once said, " Take not from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned." Yet, knowing that, the Republicans illegally ratified the 16th Amendment and today everybody is comfortable with the income tax. The income tax is a plank out of the Communist Manifesto and nothing, from an economics point of view is more indicative of slavery than communism. Nobody in this country respects the tax resister.

The Declaration of Independence lists Liberty is an unalienable Right. Yet it is the "right wing" that pushes the notion that one must become a citizen in order to work in the United States. Of course, those advocating are getting their wish and will soon be pushed into oblivion as the left increases in numbers. Yet, to deny people an unalienable Right is slavery.

The Democrats and leftists want to force those who produce to pay for those who do not produce. Putting your hand in my pocket to take money to give to someone I don't want to pay for is robbery. And our example here is simple:

The state of California wants to have sanctuary cities to protect the undocumented foreigners in their state. I'm okay with that. It's legal. But, the state wants the federal government to help fund the undocumented foreigners it invited. Forcing a man in Georgia to pay for the guests in California that they invited is a form of economic slavery. That is the same principle with Obamacare and socialized medicine.

The Democrats and atheists (most of which vote for Democrats) wail about slavery, but the Democrats were the ones who perpetuated slavery in this country. The hue of the skin has changed since democracy is all about majority rule. They just put a little lipstick on that pig and keep making emotion laden buzz word arguments to stay in control. Soooo,... when both sides of the political spectrum are comfortable with their forms of slavery, they are absolute hypocrites to use it as an issue ESPECIALLY when it does not even apply.

Slavery was a Christian institution

"Slavery was practiced in every ancient Middle Eastern society: Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Roman and Israelite. Slavery was an integral part of ancient commerce, taxation, and temple religion..."

Christian views on slavery - Wikipedia

but abolition still had its roots in the Christian church.

Some

Other Christians defended slavery and quoted parts of the Bible about slaves loyally serving their masters

I have questioned the motives of the critics of this thread. When confronted with facts they cannot refute, they make bogus arguments much like what you've been doing.

Jumping into a discussion and trying to insinuate lies that were already refuted to be the truth and only truth was a damn stupid approach. What you are now saying narrows down your real problem. You are in a discussion that is over your head.

There are NO moral implications regarding slavery. For the left, the atheists, non-believers, or anyone else to keep arguing over slavery is dishonest, disingenuous, and complete idiocy that you'd have to have an IQ less than your shoe size to accept.

"rightwinger," You can put a little bit of lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. NOBODY on this board, including you, has a problem with slavery. The only problem is how we dress it up. Right or left; conservative or liberal; Democrat or Republican, EVERYBODY supports slavery. It is biblical and it is normal. I'd like to give you a few examples.

Thomas Jefferson once said, " Take not from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned." Yet, knowing that, the Republicans illegally ratified the 16th Amendment and today everybody is comfortable with the income tax. The income tax is a plank out of the Communist Manifesto and nothing, from an economics point of view is more indicative of slavery than communism. Nobody in this country respects the tax resister.

The Declaration of Independence lists Liberty is an unalienable Right. Yet it is the "right wing" that pushes the notion that one must become a citizen in order to work in the United States. Of course, those advocating are getting their wish and will soon be pushed into oblivion as the left increases in numbers. Yet, to deny people an unalienable Right is slavery.

The Democrats and leftists want to force those who produce to pay for those who do not produce. Putting your hand in my pocket to take money to give to someone I don't want to pay for is robbery. And our example here is simple:

The state of California wants to have sanctuary cities to protect the undocumented foreigners in their state. I'm okay with that. It's legal. But, the state wants the federal government to help fund the undocumented foreigners it invited. Forcing a man in Georgia to pay for the guests in California that they invited is a form of economic slavery. That is the same principle with Obamacare and socialized medicine.

The Democrats and atheists (most of which vote for Democrats) wail about slavery, but the Democrats were the ones who perpetuated slavery in this country. The hue of the skin has changed since democracy is all about majority rule. They just put a little lipstick on that pig and keep making emotion laden buzz word arguments to stay in control. Soooo,... when both sides of the political spectrum are comfortable with their forms of slavery, they are absolute hypocrites to use it as an issue ESPECIALLY when it does not even apply.

Slavery was a Christian institution

"Slavery was practiced in every ancient Middle Eastern society: Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Roman and Israelite. Slavery was an integral part of ancient commerce, taxation, and temple religion..."

Christian views on slavery - Wikipedia

but abolition still had its roots in the Christian church.

The poster's concern blames Christians for starting slavery. I was pointing out that there is no validity to that statement.

Of course not
Anyone who has read the Bible knows about Moses freeing the slaves of Egypt.

But when God gave Moses the Ten Commandments, not one of them said slavery was a sin

 

[NotfooledbyW]

To claim that the GOVERNMENT defined the NATION, is just you showing how much of a communist you are. T

First of all I EXPLAINED quite clearly that I am speaking about our system of government.

So now you are lying when you claim I said our government defines us as a nation.

if you think our 230 year old system of government does not define our national identity and our nation, you are an absolutely ignorant moron in the nth degree.

it’s no wonder you seem to argue that inhabitants who were immersed in Christian dogmatic culture in the New World must be solely credited with the founding of the nation and system of government that was established for us. Enlightenment philosophers and the founding fathers who studied them in your arguments in this thread had nothing to do with what you think Christian culture created. Your arguments are absurd.

 

[james bond]

Of course not
Anyone who has read the Bible knows about Moses freeing the slaves of Egypt.

But when God gave Moses the Ten Commandments, not one of them said slavery was a sin

The Bible does not condemn slavery, but discusses how to treat slaves. It was a class of working people where the master would provide what they needed. It is a sin to be a slave to sin which you seem to enjoy. You couldn't get past the 1st commandment.

Today, we have forced labor, sex trade, still considered inheritable property in some countries, illegal immigration, and more. This kind of behavior would be considered sin or exploitation.

Maybe we can put the homeless in a class of slavery so they are forced to work. They get slave status and get their needs taken care of. I suppose it includes medical benefits. Better than prison.

 

[norwegen]

An observation by Ben Franklin in his autobiography:

From being thoughtless or indifferent about religion, it seem'd as if all the world were growing religious, so that one could not walk thro' the town in an evening without hearing psalms sung in different families of every street.​

Eventually, in this society, the people formed a government.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

AMERICA WAS FOUNDED AS A CHRISTIAN NATION

This the EPILOGUE of the relevant posts # 1 , 2, 7, 17, 35, 39, 56, 91, 109 153, and 198 and 223:

America was founded as a Christian nation. To the atheists, non-believers, trolls, and dishonest people criticizing this, NONE of them had the courage to cite any fact presented and challenge it. They refused to even READ the relevant posts, so they live in their own little world.

Benjamin Franklin once said, "Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants."

America was founded as a Christian nation. Does that mean it was founded as a theocracy? No. Does it mean it was required to be a Christian to be here? No. Do you have to believe in Christianity? No. So, what does it mean?

America was founded on the twin pillars of race and religion. Whites founded the country. Founded it means that they established the form of government and wrote the rules when it began. The country was founded on Christianity. That means that our sense of right and wrong; good and bad were predicated upon biblical precepts.

Only Christians could hold elective office. Children were taught from Christian books. Our laws were consistent with the same standards of right and wrong as in the Bible. Even small things were consistent with the Bible. Our system of a just weights and measurements is consistent with the Bible. We have twelve people on a jury in commemoration of the Lord's supper. Our understanding of Liberty was consistent with the biblical definition.

Despite all the facts presented, the best the critics can do is that "separation of church and state" thing that appeared in a letter to the Danbury Baptists and it means 180 degrees opposite of what the atheists claim (went into depth on that one in one of my relevant posts on this thread.)

About six months after the ratification of the United States Constitution, Congress fulfilled their duty to pass an uniform Rule of Naturalization. They specified that only whites could be citizens. MILLIONS of non-whites came here anyway. They took advantage of opportunities willingly offered. THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE, SOLITARY, EXAMPLE OF OUR LAW TRYING TO CHANGE THOSE PEOPLE INTO CAUCASIANS. Likewise, we do not try and convert people to Christianity. Believe, don't believe... it's up to you.

When people come to America, if they are judged in our courts, it will be according to our culture. And our sense of right and wrong is based on the Bible. If we attempted to interpret our laws to be consistent with Sharia Law, atheism, Hinduism, humanism, Christianity, etc. it would be a giant (excuse the bluntness) one big clusterphuck. Ultimately man is ruled by God or by tyrants.

Those who hate Christianity wanted to take down Nativity scenes, remove the Ten Commandments from public display, and get rid of crosses,and eliminate the Pledge of Allegiance. Why? It was a reflection of who we are and those who waged that war, at all other times, claim to be about democracy - aka majority rule.

Those who hate Christianity have gone out of their way to maintain a lie. They tell us there is a wall of separation between church and state. But, if the Christian does not bow down to majoritarians, they can expect their church to be padlocked; their tax exempt status revoked. Yet our society is supposed to be tolerant of the atheist, the Muslim and anyone else with an ax to grind. The Muslim can wear their headgear in public; the Christian cannot wear their cross. Respecting the Muslim shows our tolerance and commitment to Religious Freedom while any displays of Christianity violates the separation of church and state.

The objective of the atheist and other non-believer is that they want control. Secular humanism is our unofficial state religion now and its implementation has been disastrous for this country. In 1947 the United States Supreme Court created that "separation of church and state out of thin air in the case of Everson v. Board of Education. I know of one source that measured the impact that decision on our country's culture:

The Supreme Court's Decisions on the Separation of Church and State Are Flawed | Encyclopedia.com
Due to the trolls - the Disclaimer - My views do not reflect all the positions taken by this one man. On the issue in question, he has researched a sufficient number of facts.

I'd like to say a lot more here, but over the last 75 years, the atheists and other non-believers have hijacked the Republic and we are not a Christian nation, but a reflection of what atheists, humanists and other non-Christians have instituted. We consume over 80 percent of the world's opioid supply; we have more people in prison than any nation on this planet - both in raw numbers and per capita. More of our children are diagnosed with phony emotional and psychological disorders than any other country (and IF such a disparate number of those conditions exist, it is attributable to the humanist / secularist control the atheists lobbied for - otherwise the rise would be world wide) Murder, rape, incest, pedophilia, burglary, infanticide, robbery, genocide, and other crimes and outrages have soared out of control since Christians acquiesced to the demands of these people.

There is much more I wanted to say, but if you read the relevant posts, you already know what is wrong in America and why our culture was founded on Christian precepts. The atheists don't want to discuss it; they only want control, but on this thread I am not giving it to them. So, I will only repeat the relevant posts each day. Thank you and God bless.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

The Bible in the Political Culture of the American Founding – SHEAR

I could do hundreds of examples of exactly how many of the framers felt, but one of the people who said it so unequivocally was when John Adams wrote a letter to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813 and said

“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.”

From your link:

• Drawing attention to the Bible’s contributions to the founding is not meant to diminish, much less dismiss, other intellectual influences on the founders.

But you, educated genius that you claim to be has reserved the right to dismiss all the other intellectual influences on the founders
In order to righteously and religiously declare that America was founded as a Christian nation, And anyone that disagrees with Professor Rockwell is an enemy of the Christian Faith.

I am not responding to any post over 12 paragraphs (see post # 1)

I am not responding to you unless and until you apologize for initiating the name calling - especially when you refuse to read this freaking thread

You need to quit looking for things in posts that I cite that seem supportive to your position as above, focus on what is in those posts that prove you wrong AND READING THE FREAKING THREAD AS THOSE POINTS TO WHICH YOU ALLUDE HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AND REFUTED

 

[NotfooledbyW]

you were the first to throw in an insult.

Your reply to my very first post:

(1001) Porter Rockwell, post: 23869436
↑
You certainly made no point there except for one of ignorance regarding any knowledge of the Bible. Had you read the thread, I proved you wrong about Jefferson as well. Ignorance is bliss, brother and you seem to enjoy it.




I’m not waiting for your response.

I’ll continue to summarize some of the more exchanges, specifically where you were the first to respond with insults and where you lied about what I wrote.

that’s for clarity for other readers,

If you can specifically point out errors and falsehoods on my part please do and I will reply.

if you are ever capable of addressing my point about the once of the Enlightenment on many of our founders, please do.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

There is no conflict between the statements,


"America was set up to have a government that would be neutral in dealing with internal sectarian religious issues."


and,


"America was set up to be a Christian Nation."

Nonsense, you Christian Fool, America is a nation defined exactly by the system of government that was established at the founding.

they are inseparable.

Wow. What a commie thing to say.

The government is the servant of the People, not the other way around. The people choose the government, and regularly choose another one.


BUT, this is showing the basis of your confusion on this issue. YOu read "nation" and think "government".


Now that I have corrected you, is this all making more sense to you?

Correll:

I wanted to thank you for hearing me out on this. Like I said I wanted to make a lot of points that most people never consider. Unless these guys see Jesus or God in every sentence, then they say there is no connection to the Bible and our government.

One last thing I wanted to cover and just so you could think about it.

Consider that our forefathers left the persecution of King George to escape religious persecution. We're all pretty much agreed on that point. Did you ever think that in the 11 years we went from Declaration of Independence to Constitution that the founders / framers never suggested a departure from the common law?

Our courts still relied on the decisions made by the very people we defeated in a war in order to have our own government. For example, United States Supreme Court still relies on precedents set by the English Bill of Rights cases. Check out how, in the 2008 Heller decision, the high Court relied on the 1689 English Bill of Rights as a pretext to marginalize our Second Amendment:

District of Columbia v. Heller | Summary, Ruling, & Facts

Sometimes the law goes our way; sometimes not, but we did not divorce ourselves from our Christian roots; we integrated the process into our own system of jurisprudence in the United States. That did not make us a theocracy and 231 years after the Constitution was ratified, we are not a theocracy.... but in the last few years my critics have excelled at turning us into a socialistic democracy and locking Christians and constitutionalists out.

Porter.

Thank you. You are doing a very good job of representing a point of view that rarely is seriously argued. I agree with you on many points, especially this one, ie, this nation was obviously founded as a Christian nation.


As you recall, I disagree with you on what to do NOW, but I think that you and these liberals could have a very good and educational debate, if they can get their act together enough to present their side, as well as it can be presented.


I seriously doubt that they can. I fully expect that this thread will be bogged down with trolling until the libs can get the thread locked, but I will be here and try to steer the debate forwards in the hope that it will not.


Best of luck. You are crushing it, and I will certainly point out to the libs, that they cannot make their case.

We have a troll that is doing his best to obscure this thread with postings exceeding 12 paragraphs - what I said I would respond to. I've tried to keep my posts within that range. So I'm repeating some posts with a list of my relevant posts, excluding the personal back and forth.

I think that by anticipating the liberals objections we have nullified their arguments before they made them and now they are trying to defend that which was already refuted. That shows me they did not read the thread and are due no further response. If the mods lock the thread, they cannot undo what we're doing here and maybe some new perspective will come out of this from someone who finds the discussion useful.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

I have questioned the motives of the critics of this thread. When confronted with facts they cannot refute, they make bogus arguments much like what you've been doing.

Jumping into a discussion and trying to insinuate lies that were already refuted to be the truth and only truth was a damn stupid approach. What you are now saying narrows down your real problem. You are in a discussion that is over your head.

There are NO moral implications regarding slavery. For the left, the atheists, non-believers, or anyone else to keep arguing over slavery is dishonest, disingenuous, and complete idiocy that you'd have to have an IQ less than your shoe size to accept.

"rightwinger," You can put a little bit of lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. NOBODY on this board, including you, has a problem with slavery. The only problem is how we dress it up. Right or left; conservative or liberal; Democrat or Republican, EVERYBODY supports slavery. It is biblical and it is normal. I'd like to give you a few examples.

Thomas Jefferson once said, " Take not from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned." Yet, knowing that, the Republicans illegally ratified the 16th Amendment and today everybody is comfortable with the income tax. The income tax is a plank out of the Communist Manifesto and nothing, from an economics point of view is more indicative of slavery than communism. Nobody in this country respects the tax resister.

The Declaration of Independence lists Liberty is an unalienable Right. Yet it is the "right wing" that pushes the notion that one must become a citizen in order to work in the United States. Of course, those advocating are getting their wish and will soon be pushed into oblivion as the left increases in numbers. Yet, to deny people an unalienable Right is slavery.

The Democrats and leftists want to force those who produce to pay for those who do not produce. Putting your hand in my pocket to take money to give to someone I don't want to pay for is robbery. And our example here is simple:

The state of California wants to have sanctuary cities to protect the undocumented foreigners in their state. I'm okay with that. It's legal. But, the state wants the federal government to help fund the undocumented foreigners it invited. Forcing a man in Georgia to pay for the guests in California that they invited is a form of economic slavery. That is the same principle with Obamacare and socialized medicine.

The Democrats and atheists (most of which vote for Democrats) wail about slavery, but the Democrats were the ones who perpetuated slavery in this country. The hue of the skin has changed since democracy is all about majority rule. They just put a little lipstick on that pig and keep making emotion laden buzz word arguments to stay in control. Soooo,... when both sides of the political spectrum are comfortable with their forms of slavery, they are absolute hypocrites to use it as an issue ESPECIALLY when it does not even apply.

Slavery was a Christian institution

"Slavery was practiced in every ancient Middle Eastern society: Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Roman and Israelite. Slavery was an integral part of ancient commerce, taxation, and temple religion..."

Christian views on slavery - Wikipedia

but abolition still had its roots in the Christian church.

I have questioned the motives of the critics of this thread. When confronted with facts they cannot refute, they make bogus arguments much like what you've been doing.

Jumping into a discussion and trying to insinuate lies that were already refuted to be the truth and only truth was a damn stupid approach. What you are now saying narrows down your real problem. You are in a discussion that is over your head.

There are NO moral implications regarding slavery. For the left, the atheists, non-believers, or anyone else to keep arguing over slavery is dishonest, disingenuous, and complete idiocy that you'd have to have an IQ less than your shoe size to accept.

"rightwinger," You can put a little bit of lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. NOBODY on this board, including you, has a problem with slavery. The only problem is how we dress it up. Right or left; conservative or liberal; Democrat or Republican, EVERYBODY supports slavery. It is biblical and it is normal. I'd like to give you a few examples.

Thomas Jefferson once said, " Take not from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned." Yet, knowing that, the Republicans illegally ratified the 16th Amendment and today everybody is comfortable with the income tax. The income tax is a plank out of the Communist Manifesto and nothing, from an economics point of view is more indicative of slavery than communism. Nobody in this country respects the tax resister.

The Declaration of Independence lists Liberty is an unalienable Right. Yet it is the "right wing" that pushes the notion that one must become a citizen in order to work in the United States. Of course, those advocating are getting their wish and will soon be pushed into oblivion as the left increases in numbers. Yet, to deny people an unalienable Right is slavery.

The Democrats and leftists want to force those who produce to pay for those who do not produce. Putting your hand in my pocket to take money to give to someone I don't want to pay for is robbery. And our example here is simple:

The state of California wants to have sanctuary cities to protect the undocumented foreigners in their state. I'm okay with that. It's legal. But, the state wants the federal government to help fund the undocumented foreigners it invited. Forcing a man in Georgia to pay for the guests in California that they invited is a form of economic slavery. That is the same principle with Obamacare and socialized medicine.

The Democrats and atheists (most of which vote for Democrats) wail about slavery, but the Democrats were the ones who perpetuated slavery in this country. The hue of the skin has changed since democracy is all about majority rule. They just put a little lipstick on that pig and keep making emotion laden buzz word arguments to stay in control. Soooo,... when both sides of the political spectrum are comfortable with their forms of slavery, they are absolute hypocrites to use it as an issue ESPECIALLY when it does not even apply.

Slavery was a Christian institution

"Slavery was practiced in every ancient Middle Eastern society: Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Roman and Israelite. Slavery was an integral part of ancient commerce, taxation, and temple religion..."

Christian views on slavery - Wikipedia

but abolition still had its roots in the Christian church.

I have questioned the motives of the critics of this thread. When confronted with facts they cannot refute, they make bogus arguments much like what you've been doing.

Jumping into a discussion and trying to insinuate lies that were already refuted to be the truth and only truth was a damn stupid approach. What you are now saying narrows down your real problem. You are in a discussion that is over your head.

There are NO moral implications regarding slavery. For the left, the atheists, non-believers, or anyone else to keep arguing over slavery is dishonest, disingenuous, and complete idiocy that you'd have to have an IQ less than your shoe size to accept.

"rightwinger," You can put a little bit of lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. NOBODY on this board, including you, has a problem with slavery. The only problem is how we dress it up. Right or left; conservative or liberal; Democrat or Republican, EVERYBODY supports slavery. It is biblical and it is normal. I'd like to give you a few examples.

Thomas Jefferson once said, " Take not from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned." Yet, knowing that, the Republicans illegally ratified the 16th Amendment and today everybody is comfortable with the income tax. The income tax is a plank out of the Communist Manifesto and nothing, from an economics point of view is more indicative of slavery than communism. Nobody in this country respects the tax resister.

The Declaration of Independence lists Liberty is an unalienable Right. Yet it is the "right wing" that pushes the notion that one must become a citizen in order to work in the United States. Of course, those advocating are getting their wish and will soon be pushed into oblivion as the left increases in numbers. Yet, to deny people an unalienable Right is slavery.

The Democrats and leftists want to force those who produce to pay for those who do not produce. Putting your hand in my pocket to take money to give to someone I don't want to pay for is robbery. And our example here is simple:

The state of California wants to have sanctuary cities to protect the undocumented foreigners in their state. I'm okay with that. It's legal. But, the state wants the federal government to help fund the undocumented foreigners it invited. Forcing a man in Georgia to pay for the guests in California that they invited is a form of economic slavery. That is the same principle with Obamacare and socialized medicine.

The Democrats and atheists (most of which vote for Democrats) wail about slavery, but the Democrats were the ones who perpetuated slavery in this country. The hue of the skin has changed since democracy is all about majority rule. They just put a little lipstick on that pig and keep making emotion laden buzz word arguments to stay in control. Soooo,... when both sides of the political spectrum are comfortable with their forms of slavery, they are absolute hypocrites to use it as an issue ESPECIALLY when it does not even apply.

Slavery was a Christian institution

"Slavery was practiced in every ancient Middle Eastern society: Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Roman and Israelite. Slavery was an integral part of ancient commerce, taxation, and temple religion..."

Christian views on slavery - Wikipedia

but abolition still had its roots in the Christian church.

The poster's concern blames Christians for starting slavery. I was pointing out that there is no validity to that statement.

Of course not
Anyone who has read the Bible knows about Moses freeing the slaves of Egypt.

But when God gave Moses the Ten Commandments, not one of them said slavery was a sin

Slavery isn't a sin. Furthermore, those who make much ado about it usually belong in the camp with Democrats who, historically, perpetuate slavery as they do now. Adding insult to injury, the liberals generally employ some form of slavery as a solution to most of their problems.

Slavery is not the issue for liberals. It's only that in the instant case they don't like the hue of skin of the person they blame for their plight - while letting others off the hook for benefiting off it.

 

[rightwinger]

View attachment 300796

Those quotes are about as worthless as tits on a boar hog since there is no verification mechanism (i.e. link; name of the speech, book, etc.)

You're wasting bandwidth.

The quotes show how our founders felt about a Christian nation

 

[Porter Rockwell]

you were the first to throw in an insult.

Your reply to my very first post:

(1001) Porter Rockwell, post: 23869436
↑
You certainly made no point there except for one of ignorance regarding any knowledge of the Bible. Had you read the thread, I proved you wrong about Jefferson as well. Ignorance is bliss, brother and you seem to enjoy it.




I’m not waiting for your response.

I’ll continue to summarize some of the more exchanges, specifically where you were the first to respond with insults and where you lied about what I wrote.

that’s for clarity for other readers,

If you can specifically point out errors and falsehoods on my part please do and I will reply.

if you are ever capable of addressing my point about the once of the Enlightenment on many of our founders, please do.

Sir, you began name calling. I DID address your Enlightenment issue. AND, what you interpreted as an insult was actually YOU insulting me. I had already addressed your issue, anticipated it, and gave the answer. All you had done was to prove post # 1 to be accurate.

I'm not wasting my day arguing with you. Other posters can read the thread and see I'm being honest and accurate.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

View attachment 300796

Those quotes are about as worthless as tits on a boar hog since there is no verification mechanism (i.e. link; name of the speech, book, etc.)

You're wasting bandwidth.

The quotes show how our founders felt about a Christian nation

Your quotes do not link to a verifiable source so that it can be verified for accuracy and to make sure you are quoting things in context.

Additionally, HAD YOU READ THE THREAD, I pointed out that people say many different things in the course of their lives so what was going on at a specific time and in what context is relevant.

Another point I have not made is that sometimes politicians tell the people one thing and cast their vote in Congress (or in the Constitutional Convention) another way. I look at the final product. The final product is that America has a system of jurisprudence based on Christian laws and that our values derive from the Bible. As a personal note: I'm like Patrick Henry. I did not like the final product and his predictions were proven accurate. But, like Patrick Henry, I accepted the Constitution as originally written and intended. Nobody asked so I gave you that one for free.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

3. There is nothing inherent in admitting that the nation was founded as a Christian Nation, that means you have to support any political agenda moving forward. It just means that anyone arguing in the interests of Christians or for a Christian serving political agenda, has SOME measure of traditional credibility to draw on.

You want anyone arguing in the interests of Christians or for a Christian serving political agenda, has SOME measure of traditional credibility to draw on.

Revising the multitude of factors that went into the founding of America into a simple phrase that America was founded as a Christian nation, When it is not true, gives no measure of traditional credibility to be drawn upon.

i haven’t seen anyone say Christianity had no contribution to the founding? It’s that other things such as The Enlightenment philosophers in my mind has more to do with counting the numbers of Christians that lived here when our great nation was born,

if a Christian can’t make an a argument without Having some kind of official mandate that it be Universally known that America was founded as a Christian nation maybe they should start looking for a new line of work.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Sir, you began name calling.

Not True.

This was my first post. Where is there an insult?

Due to popular request I am starting a thread covering the fact that America was begun as a Christian nation.

There were Christians involved in the founding and revolt against the King,

How many currently immersed and obsessed with Christianity today would have appreciated one if the greatest minds of all the founders declaring that the Christian Bible is full of political dung. Nice word for bullshit.

• Jefferson was most comfortable with Deism, rational religion, and Unitarianism.[3] He was sympathetic to and in general agreement with the moral precepts of Christianity.[4] He considered the teachings of Jesus as having "the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man,"[5] yet he held that the pure teachings of Jesus appeared to have been appropriated by some of Jesus' early followers, resulting in a Bible that contained both "diamonds" of wisdom and the "dung" of ancient political agendas.[6]. Religious views of Thomas Jefferson - Wikipedia

You insulted me on your very first reply to my very first post.

You wrote “ Ignorance is bliss, brother and you seem to enjoy it.”

 

[Correll]

To claim that the GOVERNMENT defined the NATION, is just you showing how much of a communist you are. T

First of all I EXPLAINED quite clearly that I am speaking about our system of government.

So now you are lying when you claim I said our government defines us as a nation.

if you think our 230 year old system of government does not define our national identity and our nation, you are an absolutely ignorant moron in the nth degree.

it’s no wonder you seem to argue that inhabitants who were immersed in Christian dogmatic culture in the New World must be solely credited with the founding of the nation and system of government that was established for us. Enlightenment philosophers and the founding fathers who studied them in your arguments in this thread had nothing to do with what you think Christian culture created. Your arguments are absurd.

1. Our system of government did not, and does not define who we are. It is a relatively small part of who and what we are. That you think it does, is just you being a state worshiping lefty.


2. The inhabitants who founded this nation, were overwhelmingly Christian. Your use of the term, "dogmatic" as spin, is dismissed. THe Enlightenment philosophers and the Founding Fathers, were overwhelmingly Christians. They were all had EVERYTHING to do with the Christian cultures they came from and were part of creating. Your unsupported denials of these obvious facts, is insane.

 

[Correll]

3. There is nothing inherent in admitting that the nation was founded as a Christian Nation, that means you have to support any political agenda moving forward. It just means that anyone arguing in the interests of Christians or for a Christian serving political agenda, has SOME measure of traditional credibility to draw on.

You want anyone arguing in the interests of Christians or for a Christian serving political agenda, has SOME measure of traditional credibility to draw on.

Revising the multitude of factors that went into the founding of America into a simple phrase that America was founded as a Christian nation, When it is not true, gives no measure of traditional credibility to be drawn upon.

i haven’t seen anyone say Christianity had no contribution to the founding? It’s that other things such as The Enlightenment philosophers in my mind has more to do with counting the numbers of Christians that lived here when our great nation was born,

if a Christian can’t make an a argument without Having some kind of official mandate that it be Universally known that America was founded as a Christian nation maybe they should start looking for a new line of work.

So, you admit that traditionally, this has been a Christian nation, founded by Christians, for the benefit of it's citizens, who have traditionally been overwhelmingly Christian, and further more, that it would be valid to want to maintain traditional Christian culture(s) here, and argue for that, in public and in the context of policy?

 

[bodecea]

Due to popular request I am starting a thread covering the fact that America was begun as a Christian nation. Be forewarned, I will not respond to posts that are more than twelve or so paragraphs. If we are going to discuss the issue, it has to be a few things at a time. Bottom line: America was founded as a Christian nation.

As soon as one says that the atheists and other non-believers will start with their lies and straw man arguments. They will tell you that I just said America was founded as a theocracy. AMERICA WAS NOT FOUNDED AS A THEOCRACY. IT WAS FOUNDED AS A REPUBLIC BASED UPON CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES.

Politics is nothing more than religion in action. Our sense of right and wrong are all predicated on moral values and we got from biblical precepts. The very first governing document of the New World was the Mayflower Compact. It states:

In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, defender of the Faith, etc.


Having undertaken, for the Glory of God, and “advancements of the Christian faith”

Okay, I’m well aware that St. Augustine is the oldest city in the U.S, the Spaniards were there before the colonists and that other colonists preceded those on the Mayflower. That Mayflower Compact was the first GOVERNING document of the New World. Colonization and founding are synonymous.

The First Charter of Virginia of 1606 stated:

“We greatly commending, and graciously accepting of, their Desires for the Furtherance of so noble a Work, which may, by the Providence of Almighty God, hereafter tend to the Glory his Divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian Religion to such People, as yet live in Darkness and miserable Ignorance of the true Knowledge and Worship of God, and may in time bring the Infidels and Savages, living in those parts, to human Civility, to a settled and quiet government.”

Similar language attesting to our Christian roots during this period would be the Second Charter of Virginia of 1609, Third Charter of Virginia 1611 – 1612, The Charter of New England 1620, Ordinances For Virginia, July 24, 1621, The Charter of Massachusetts Bay 1629, and I will add more to the chorological order each time I post.

In 1630, John Winthrop delivered a sermon aboard the Arbella as it sailed toward the New World. That sermon has been cited by U.S. statesmen including, but not limited to JFK and Ronald Reagan. It defines WHO the colonists were and what their objective was in the New World. Any sermon being quoted by American politicians 300 years later deserves to be examined. Here is a link to it and it is a must read if you want to add intelligent commentary to this thread:

https://www.casa-arts.org/cms/lib/PA01925203/Centricity/Domain/50/A Model of Christian Charity.pdf More to come

Nope. It was not.