America’s Founders Were Deeply Religious

[PoliticalChic]

I'll assume your are retracting this claim:


"There is zero reference to Jesus in the Constitution, dope."



You can run, but you can't hide, dunce.

Again, you are incapable of debate.

Maybe this is what trump meant when he assured me I’d be ‘winning’.

I don't debate....I simply prove I am right.


I'll assume your are retracting this claim:


"There is zero reference to Jesus in the Constitution, dope."



You can run, but you can't hide, dunce.

Why would I retract my correct statement?

Because I just proved you to be a liar?

No, you claimed that the Constitution referred to Jesus. That’s clearly false as Jesus is not mentioned.

but hey, liars gonna lie.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven

Is any possible explanation for the above that doesn't specify....SPECIFY... Jesus Christ?


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

 

[Pogo]

It's pretty damned entertaining watching Political Chick chew you pathetic wimps up and spit you out over here . The ladys a master at grinding leftest idiots into gutter sludge . And you snowflakes keep coming back for more , it shows how easily owned they are .

More christianity right there, folks.

I'd call it blatant Noobism if he thinks Stuporgirl has any cred on this board at all.
The intoxication of the echo chamber I guess.

your going by the name "Pogo" for chris sakes . Your kidding right
View attachment 286611

And you have no clue who Pogo was, amirite?

Didn't I spank you on this very point yesterday? Or was that Nostril-dumbass?

Back for more you loser ? I can set the hook anytime and you bite . Did you talk to your boyfriend about that toilet bowl cleaning job I offered you ? And no , it doesn't come with a little row boat .

You seem to be pretty much an empty suit here, that about right?

C'mon, string yourself up again like you did in post 2. The audience demands it.

 

[Hollie]

No. But I’m waiting for you to answer my questions.

I'll assume your are retracting this claim:


"There is zero reference to Jesus in the Constitution, dope."



You can run, but you can't hide, dunce.

Where?

The line concluding article seven.

Quote it please, with a link.

Here is the true quote.


done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

If you obtained your version from wikipedia, it is proof that Liberals corrupted and lie about the Constitution.

The same is the case for government school.


Clearly, the Constitution references Jesus




Or....

in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.



Liberals never have the class, honesty, or character to admit when they're proven wrong.
Thank goodness, I never have to.

No mention of Jesus.

Focus like a laser and provide the exact citation where Jesus is spelled out.

You’re a Harun Yahya academy graduate, right?

Skewered you with that one.

 

[G.T.]

Again, you are incapable of debate.

Maybe this is what trump meant when he assured me I’d be ‘winning’.

I don't debate....I simply prove I am right.


I'll assume your are retracting this claim:


"There is zero reference to Jesus in the Constitution, dope."



You can run, but you can't hide, dunce.

Why would I retract my correct statement?

Because I just proved you to be a liar?

No, you claimed that the Constitution referred to Jesus. That’s clearly false as Jesus is not mentioned.

but hey, liars gonna lie.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven

Is any possible explanation for the above that doesn't specify....SPECIFY... Jesus Christ?


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

You are reaching. Year of our lord was the common way they referred to the date, and it didn't mandate a belief you fuckin goof

 

[Pogo]

Where?

The line concluding article seven.

Quote it please, with a link.

Here is the true quote.


done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

If you obtained your version from wikipedia, it is proof that Liberals corrupted and lie about the Constitution.

The same is the case for government school.


Clearly, the Constitution references Jesus


Or....

in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.



Liberals never have the class, honesty, or character to admit when they're proven wrong.
Thank goodness, I never have to.

‘Year of our lord’ was the standard way dating of a document. No one in the 1700s or the 2000s argues that we shouldn’t use the Gregorian calendar, or that it’s ‘fake news’.

Sorry for your latest fail, wingnut.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

Do you actually have no clue at all what the word "Jesus" means? Are you that retarded?

 

[G.T.]

I'll assume your are retracting this claim:


"There is zero reference to Jesus in the Constitution, dope."



You can run, but you can't hide, dunce.

Where?

The line concluding article seven.

Quote it please, with a link.

Here is the true quote.


done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

If you obtained your version from wikipedia, it is proof that Liberals corrupted and lie about the Constitution.

The same is the case for government school.


Clearly, the Constitution references Jesus




Or....

in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.



Liberals never have the class, honesty, or character to admit when they're proven wrong.
Thank goodness, I never have to.

No mention of Jesus.

Focus like a laser and provide the exact citation where Jesus is spelled out.

You’re a Harun Yahya academy graduate, right?

Skewered you with that one.

She's the most brain dead parakeet on this site. Copy paste copy paste / partisan blinders partisan blinders is all she knows. Objective knowledge, to her, is like playing Pokemon Go

 

[Hollie]

Again, you are incapable of debate.

Maybe this is what trump meant when he assured me I’d be ‘winning’.

I don't debate....I simply prove I am right.


I'll assume your are retracting this claim:


"There is zero reference to Jesus in the Constitution, dope."



You can run, but you can't hide, dunce.

Why would I retract my correct statement?

Because I just proved you to be a liar?

No, you claimed that the Constitution referred to Jesus. That’s clearly false as Jesus is not mentioned.

but hey, liars gonna lie.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven

Is any possible explanation for the above that doesn't specify....SPECIFY... Jesus Christ?


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

The common salutation of the time was ”in the year of our lord”.

Give your alternate explanation as to why there is no mention of jesus in the constitution.

Maybe you’re just befuddled?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I don't debate....I simply prove I am right.


I'll assume your are retracting this claim:


"There is zero reference to Jesus in the Constitution, dope."



You can run, but you can't hide, dunce.

Why would I retract my correct statement?

Because I just proved you to be a liar?

No, you claimed that the Constitution referred to Jesus. That’s clearly false as Jesus is not mentioned.

but hey, liars gonna lie.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven

Is any possible explanation for the above that doesn't specify....SPECIFY... Jesus Christ?


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

You are reaching. Year of our lord was the common way they referred to the date, and it didn't mandate a belief you fuckin goof

Post again sans the juvenile vulgarity and I may award you a response.

 

[Synthaholic]

Where?

The line concluding article seven.

Quote it please, with a link.

Here is the true quote.


done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

If you obtained your version from wikipedia, it is proof that Liberals corrupted and lie about the Constitution.

The same is the case for government school.


Clearly, the Constitution references Jesus




Or....

in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.



Liberals never have the class, honesty, or character to admit when they're proven wrong.
Thank goodness, I never have to.

‘Year of our lord’ was the standard way dating of a document. No one in the 1700s or the 2000s argues that we shouldn’t use the Gregorian calendar, or that it’s ‘fake news’.

Sorry for your latest fail, wingnut.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

It references a calendar that is based on Christianity. It was the only calendar we were using at the time. It’s a very nice calendar. The custom of the day in documents was to use the official ‘the year of our lord’.

Using your faulty thinking, if a Jew today tells you the date, they’re really espousing Christianity.

Stomping your feet won’t change the facts, dear.

 

[G.T.]

Why would I retract my correct statement?

Because I just proved you to be a liar?

No, you claimed that the Constitution referred to Jesus. That’s clearly false as Jesus is not mentioned.

but hey, liars gonna lie.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven

Is any possible explanation for the above that doesn't specify....SPECIFY... Jesus Christ?


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

You are reaching. Year of our lord was the common way they referred to the date, and it didn't mandate a belief you fuckin goof

Post again sans the juvenile vulgarity and I may award you a response.

Your entire existence is vulgar, you friggin lunatic.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"But there's that reference in Article VII of the U.S. Constitution: "Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth." (Interesting that this includes both the religiously linked dating and the utterly secular age of the nation itself.)

Some four score and seven years later, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation is dated "on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three."

And just a couple of weeks ago, Barack Obama ended his proclamation for National Park Week with: "IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixteenth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth."
HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost

 

[Hollie]

"But there's that reference in Article VII of the U.S. Constitution: "Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth." (Interesting that this includes both the religiously linked dating and the utterly secular age of the nation itself.)

Some four score and seven years later, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation is dated "on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three."

And just a couple of weeks ago, Barack Obama ended his proclamation for National Park Week with: "IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixteenth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth."
HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost

So you agree. There is not a single reference to Jesus in the constitution.

About that continuing lack of factual data you offer...

 

[PoliticalChic]

The line concluding article seven.

Quote it please, with a link.

Here is the true quote.


done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

If you obtained your version from wikipedia, it is proof that Liberals corrupted and lie about the Constitution.

The same is the case for government school.


Clearly, the Constitution references Jesus




Or....

in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.



Liberals never have the class, honesty, or character to admit when they're proven wrong.
Thank goodness, I never have to.

‘Year of our lord’ was the standard way dating of a document. No one in the 1700s or the 2000s argues that we shouldn’t use the Gregorian calendar, or that it’s ‘fake news’.

Sorry for your latest fail, wingnut.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

It references a calendar that is based on Christianity. It was the only calendar we were using at the time. It’s a very nice calendar. The custom of the day in documents was to use the official ‘the year of our lord’.

Using your faulty thinking, if a Jew today tells you the date, they’re really espousing Christianity.

Stomping your feet won’t change the facts, dear.

Funny how you numbskulls pretend.....

In simply post the truth and force you Leftists to lie, pretend, ignore the facts, and refuse to admit the truth even when it is documented.....e.g., the line from the Constitution itself.



Now....those who do not accept Christianity have many ways to not the date without 'in the year of our Lord.'



"If the Framers were interested in being pluralistic, multi-cultural, and politically correct, they would have refrained from using the B.C./A.D. designation. Or they would have used the religionless designations “C.E.,” Common Era, and “B.C.E.,” Before the Common Era (see “Common Era,” 2008). In so doing, they would have avoided offending Jews, atheists, agnostics, and humanists. Or they could have used “A.H.” (anno hegirae—which means “in the year of the Hijrah” and refers to Muhammad’s flight from Mecca in A.D. 622), the date used by Muslims as the commencement date for the Islamic calendar.

Instead, the Framers chose to utilize the dating method that indicated the worldview they shared. What’s more, their reference to “our Lord” does not refer to a generic deity, nor does it refer even to God the Father. It refers to God the Son—an explicit reference to Jesus Christ. Make no mistake: the Constitution of the United States contains an explicit reference to Jesus Christ—not Allah, Buddha, Muhammad, nor the gods of Hindus or Native Americans!

Let’s get this straight: The Declaration of Independence contains four allusions to the God of the Bible. The U.S. Constitution contains allusions to the freedom to practice the Christian religion unimpeded, the significance and priority of Sunday worship, as well as the place of Jesus Christ in history.

So, according to the thinking of the ACLU and a host of liberal educators, politicians, and judges, the Constitution is—unconstitutional! Go figure."
Christianity is in the Constitution



No one forced the Founders to sign their names after in the year of our Lord.


Hurts????


Excellent.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Because I just proved you to be a liar?

No, you claimed that the Constitution referred to Jesus. That’s clearly false as Jesus is not mentioned.

but hey, liars gonna lie.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven

Is any possible explanation for the above that doesn't specify....SPECIFY... Jesus Christ?


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

You are reaching. Year of our lord was the common way they referred to the date, and it didn't mandate a belief you fuckin goof

Post again sans the juvenile vulgarity and I may award you a response.

Your entire existence is vulgar, you friggin lunatic.

Another brilliant post, Einstein.

 

[G.T.]

Yeah.

WAY more likely that they'd ONLY reference Jesus by referencing the colloquial way to state the DATE ...

Then..oh, I dont know....outright professing their undying love for Jesus in the document...





If they wanted it to read as dufus-chick proclaims.



This is the level of retardation and deep psychosis becoming a sheep for a political party gets you, folks.

 

[G.T.]

No, you claimed that the Constitution referred to Jesus. That’s clearly false as Jesus is not mentioned.

but hey, liars gonna lie.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven

Is any possible explanation for the above that doesn't specify....SPECIFY... Jesus Christ?


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

You are reaching. Year of our lord was the common way they referred to the date, and it didn't mandate a belief you fuckin goof

Post again sans the juvenile vulgarity and I may award you a response.

Your entire existence is vulgar, you friggin lunatic.

Another brilliant post, Einstein.

You couldn't carry my jock strap if it was to save your worthless partisan blahblahblah life, nutbar

 

[Hollie]

Quote it please, with a link.

Here is the true quote.


done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

If you obtained your version from wikipedia, it is proof that Liberals corrupted and lie about the Constitution.

The same is the case for government school.


Clearly, the Constitution references Jesus




Or....

in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.



Liberals never have the class, honesty, or character to admit when they're proven wrong.
Thank goodness, I never have to.

‘Year of our lord’ was the standard way dating of a document. No one in the 1700s or the 2000s argues that we shouldn’t use the Gregorian calendar, or that it’s ‘fake news’.

Sorry for your latest fail, wingnut.

Answer the question, dope.


in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven


...give your alternate explanation for whom the reference describes.

It references a calendar that is based on Christianity. It was the only calendar we were using at the time. It’s a very nice calendar. The custom of the day in documents was to use the official ‘the year of our lord’.

Using your faulty thinking, if a Jew today tells you the date, they’re really espousing Christianity.

Stomping your feet won’t change the facts, dear.

Funny how you numbskulls pretend.....

In simply post the truth and force you Leftists to lie, pretend, ignore the facts, and refuse to admit the truth even when it is documented.....e.g., the line from the Constitution itself.



Now....those who do not accept Christianity have many ways to not the date without 'in the year of our Lord.'



"If the Framers were interested in being pluralistic, multi-cultural, and politically correct, they would have refrained from using the B.C./A.D. designation. Or they would have used the religionless designations “C.E.,” Common Era, and “B.C.E.,” Before the Common Era (see “Common Era,” 2008). In so doing, they would have avoided offending Jews, atheists, agnostics, and humanists. Or they could have used “A.H.” (anno hegirae—which means “in the year of the Hijrah” and refers to Muhammad’s flight from Mecca in A.D. 622), the date used by Muslims as the commencement date for the Islamic calendar.

Instead, the Framers chose to utilize the dating method that indicated the worldview they shared. What’s more, their reference to “our Lord” does not refer to a generic deity, nor does it refer even to God the Father. It refers to God the Son—an explicit reference to Jesus Christ. Make no mistake: the Constitution of the United States contains an explicit reference to Jesus Christ—not Allah, Buddha, Muhammad, nor the gods of Hindus or Native Americans!

Let’s get this straight: The Declaration of Independence contains four allusions to the God of the Bible. The U.S. Constitution contains allusions to the freedom to practice the Christian religion unimpeded, the significance and priority of Sunday worship, as well as the place of Jesus Christ in history.

So, according to the thinking of the ACLU and a host of liberal educators, politicians, and judges, the Constitution is—unconstitutional! Go figure."
Christianity is in the Constitution



No one forced the Founders to sign their names after in the year of our Lord.


Hurts????


Excellent.

Still no citation where the term “Jesus” appears in the constitution.

Excellent!

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Our nation's history provides overwhelming evidence that America was birthed upon Judeo-Christian principles.

The first act of America's first Congress in 1774 was to ask a minister to open with prayer and to lead Congress in the reading of four chapters of the Bible.

In 1776, in approving the Declaration of Independence, our founders acknowledged that all men "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..." and noted that they were relying "on the protection of Divine Providence" in the founding of this country.

John Quincy Adams said, "The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity."

Also, the signers of the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which ended the Revolutionary War, insisted the treaty begin with the phrase, "In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity."


While America has always welcomed individuals of diverse faiths and nonfaith, we have never ceased to be a Judeo-Christian nation. That small minority could tear references of faith off of every building and document across our nation, but it would not change the fact that we were built on Judeo-Christian principles. Indeed, these beliefs are so interwoven into the tapestry of freedom and liberty upon which our nation is built that to begin to unravel one is to begin to unravel the other."
Obama Is Wrong When He Says We're Not a Judeo-Christian Nation - US News and World Report




Did you haters find any errors here?

No?

Excellent.

 

[Hollie]

"Our nation's history provides overwhelming evidence that America was birthed upon Judeo-Christian principles.

The first act of America's first Congress in 1774 was to ask a minister to open with prayer and to lead Congress in the reading of four chapters of the Bible.

In 1776, in approving the Declaration of Independence, our founders acknowledged that all men "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..." and noted that they were relying "on the protection of Divine Providence" in the founding of this country.

John Quincy Adams said, "The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity."

Also, the signers of the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which ended the Revolutionary War, insisted the treaty begin with the phrase, "In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity."


While America has always welcomed individuals of diverse faiths and nonfaith, we have never ceased to be a Judeo-Christian nation. That small minority could tear references of faith off of every building and document across our nation, but it would not change the fact that we were built on Judeo-Christian principles. Indeed, these beliefs are so interwoven into the tapestry of freedom and liberty upon which our nation is built that to begin to unravel one is to begin to unravel the other."
Obama Is Wrong When He Says We're Not a Judeo-Christian Nation - US News and World Report




Did you haters find any errors here?

No?

Excellent.

That long, tedious cut and paste was a failed attempt to sidestep your dishonest claim that Jesus was referenced in the constitution.

That was a false claim.

Your frantic cutting and pasting of walls of text doesn’t change your false claim to something other than a false claim.

Excellent.

 

[Voiceover]

More christianity right there, folks.

I'd call it blatant Noobism if he thinks Stuporgirl has any cred on this board at all.
The intoxication of the echo chamber I guess.

your going by the name "Pogo" for chris sakes . Your kidding right
View attachment 286611

And you have no clue who Pogo was, amirite?

Didn't I spank you on this very point yesterday? Or was that Nostril-dumbass?

Back for more you loser ? I can set the hook anytime and you bite . Did you talk to your boyfriend about that toilet bowl cleaning job I offered you ? And no , it doesn't come with a little row boat .

You seem to be pretty much an empty suit here, that about right?

C'mon, string yourself up again like you did in post 2. The audience demands it.

Nah , I'm the new one here so I'm just hanging out and seeing who has that blue ribbon as the biggest douchbag . You seem to have it all sewed up so I want to commend you for being a complete loser and knowingly being proud of it . You'll probably hold that distinction a few more years seeing as you excel at it . He carefull with that corkgun you got for your birthday last year ,you'll break mommy's favorite vase and you'll lose your allowance paying for it .