Attacks on Religion: The Liberal Drumbeat

[Book of Jeremiah]

1. drum·beat
(drŭm′bēt′)
n.
Vehement, persistent advocacy of a cause:
drumbeat


2. Just as our government has no business funding the slaughter of the unborn....public schools should not be funded either based that drumbeat of attacks on religion:

"Student says teacher taught 'God is not real'
A Katy [Texas] seventh grader ...says her teacher asked the class to deny God exists.

... it all happened during a class assignment and now the school is apologizing.

...the teacher that came up with the assignment is distraught, and on Tuesday the principal determined the assignment wasn't something that was necessary for students.

[Jordan] Wooley originally answered the question 'there is no God' in two ways. "I said it was fact or opinion," said Wooley, adding she answered that way because "based on my religion and based on what I think and believe, I do not think it was a common place assertion."

Wooley says her seventh grade reading teacher at West Memorial Junior High School said both her answers were wrong and that she had to admit God wasn't real.
"It was really confusing to me at first because I didn't really know what to do, so the first thing I did was tell my mom," Wooley said.

Her mom Chantel couldn't believe it.
“That a kid was literally graded against her faith in [G]od in a classroom ....
"So the kids were caught in a Catch-22," said Chantel. "If they argued their faith, they were being told they were arguing against their faith and that happened in the classroom." Student says teacher taught 'God is not real'


Recently one of our Liberal pals posted this:

"...bible crazies coming out weekly talking on campus.." Why Liberals Hate Free Speech | Page 3 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


When asked to explain that reference..........he ran off and hid.
Now....where would he have learned that?

Here?
“A Lewis-Palmer High School student who was told she must apologize for mentioning Jesus in a valedictorian speech or not receive a diploma…” Monument teen appeals over Jesus graduation speech




Liberal bigotry and bias openly on public display.

Ah...the real problem is that Christians don't automatically rule the roost with everyone and everything anymore.

If you can put your bias aside for a moment...consider this query from Dennis Prager:

"If you were stranded at the midnight hour in a desolate Los Angeles street and if, as you stepped out of your car with fear and trembling, you were suddenly to hear the weight of pounding footsteps behind you, and you saw ten burly young men who had just stepped out of a dwelling coming toward you, would it or would it not make a difference to you to know that they were coming from a Bible study?"

I love Dennis Prager..

 

[NoNukes]

Why? Because I graduated not believing in invisible beings?

No.

Because you were taught that government school is correct in attacking children's beliefs, and because you never learned about the United States Constitution.

Of course, it may not be the fault of the private school: you might simply be a fool.

Teaching facts over fiction is what a school is all about.

Well, then......consider the USMB your school, and I'll teach your the facts you never learned in school:

The context that explains the antipathy to religion by the Left, is the following:


For an historical perspective....two eras of American history stand out.

This nation was founded by religious individuals, based on a religious foundation, ....

4. First:
"The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh

a. Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.” Coulter

b. "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." - Letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813

John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, June 28th, 1813, from Quincy. The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John Adams, edited by Lester J. Cappon, 1988, the University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, pp. 338-340.




5. Then, the explanation for the great sea change in America:

All of that changed during the Roosevelt Administration, when a widely popular President embraced communist Joseph Stalin, and provided a home for communism in this nation.


a. "There is no God:
This concept is an essential element of Marxism. As Lenin stated: "Atheism is a natural and inseparable portion of Marxism, of the theory and practice of Scientific Socialism." If God exists and is in supreme command of the universe, He possesses discretionary power, and His actions cannot always be calculated accurately in advance. The whole edifice of Marxism collapses.

When Marx and the Communists deny the existence of God, they simultaneously deny the authority of the Ten Commandments, the existence of absolute standards of right and wrong, of good and evil; and man is left on the playing fields of the universe without a referee, without a book of rules. The winning side in any conflict can decide on what rules of conduct to apply. Morality is the creation of the victor. The Schwarz Report | Essays


And this view infected the public schools......and in your limited intellect

Sorry, I don't read long-winded posts. Either say it in a couple of sentences or don't bother.

And here we have the usual explanation for Liberal/Leftist beliefs?

"... I don't read..."

We don't cut and paste, but we do read.

 

[Mudda]

Actually, sweetie, the vision of the Founding Fathers was genius in that they knew to keep you bible thumpers out of matters of the State, including public schools.

Thump all you wish in Sunday school, just not in the public schools.

Thanks for understanding.

LMFAO... Yes, I guess that explains why every school of that time was operated by the Church?

Here's a hint, sweetie. Have you read any of the court decisions resulting from the attempts of fundie Christians to impose their dogma as part of the public school syllabus? LMFAO.

What I know is, ever since we stripped God from schools we've had major problems.

I also know you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the Founding Fathers. They certainly did not think schools should be devoid of God since every school in the country was being sponsored by a church, classes conducted in the church and taught by church people. This Godless Schools thing is relatively new, and what we see as a result is a generation or two of absolute morons devoid of spirituality, returning to shoot up the schools and kill people because they have no moral regard for life.

You see... YOU are our problem.

God made the school shooters sick in the head.

Well He certainly made you sick in the head, that's for sure.

Is that a quote from your god?

 

[PoliticalChic]

No.

Because you were taught that government school is correct in attacking children's beliefs, and because you never learned about the United States Constitution.

Of course, it may not be the fault of the private school: you might simply be a fool.

Teaching facts over fiction is what a school is all about.

Well, then......consider the USMB your school, and I'll teach your the facts you never learned in school:

The context that explains the antipathy to religion by the Left, is the following:


For an historical perspective....two eras of American history stand out.

This nation was founded by religious individuals, based on a religious foundation, ....

4. First:
"The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh

a. Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.” Coulter

b. "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." - Letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813

John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, June 28th, 1813, from Quincy. The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John Adams, edited by Lester J. Cappon, 1988, the University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, pp. 338-340.




5. Then, the explanation for the great sea change in America:

All of that changed during the Roosevelt Administration, when a widely popular President embraced communist Joseph Stalin, and provided a home for communism in this nation.


a. "There is no God:
This concept is an essential element of Marxism. As Lenin stated: "Atheism is a natural and inseparable portion of Marxism, of the theory and practice of Scientific Socialism." If God exists and is in supreme command of the universe, He possesses discretionary power, and His actions cannot always be calculated accurately in advance. The whole edifice of Marxism collapses.

When Marx and the Communists deny the existence of God, they simultaneously deny the authority of the Ten Commandments, the existence of absolute standards of right and wrong, of good and evil; and man is left on the playing fields of the universe without a referee, without a book of rules. The winning side in any conflict can decide on what rules of conduct to apply. Morality is the creation of the victor. The Schwarz Report | Essays


And this view infected the public schools......and in your limited intellect

Sorry, I don't read long-winded posts. Either say it in a couple of sentences or don't bother.

And here we have the usual explanation for Liberal/Leftist beliefs?

"... I don't read..."

We don't cut and paste, but we do read.

Are the facts presented via the cut and paste too difficult for you to either read or to understand?

No?

Then....what's your gripe with it?

 

[Meriweather]

3. I relate this issue to this NYTimes piece by a secular philosopher, called"Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts." http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0


Most children who weren't brought up in a religious household, with a clear recognition of God, fail to recognize the difference between moral facts, and opinions.

While the author of the article bemoans, as do most of us, that "the overwhelming majority of college freshmen in their classrooms view moral claims as mere opinions that are not true or are true only relative to a culture" he fails to grasp the reason for this situation..

".... if you found out that our public schools were teaching children that it is not true that it’s wrong to kill people for fun or cheat on tests? Would you be surprised?....many college-aged students don’t believe in moral facts."


While raising an excellent point, our philosopher misses the brass ring, here: "What I didn’t know was where this attitude came from. Given the presence of moral relativism in some academic circles, some people might naturally assume that philosophers themselves are to blame."

Our philosopher seems shocked to find that the Enlightenment ideas, those of David Hume, have been accepted, wholesale, in society.
" When I went to visit my son’s second grade open house, I found a troubling pair of signs hanging over the bulletin board. They read:

Fact:Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven.

Opinion: What someone thinks, feels, or believes."

You can see where this leaves 'God' or 'religion.'

First, the definition of a fact waffles between truth and proof — two obviously different features. Things can be true even if no one can prove them. ... it could be true that there is life elsewhere in the universe even though no one can prove it.


... students are taught that claims areeitherfacts or opinions. They are given quizzes in which they must sort claims into one camp or the other but not both.But if a fact is something that is true and an opinion is something that is believed, then many claims will obviously be both. "http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0

Schools were/are discouraged from teaching morality. Our legislatures are hog tying us, or that's what many of us feel. Schools do try to fight/work around it. If we are discouraged from saying, "Cheating is wrong," then we switch to, "Cheating will not be accepted." If we can't speak about morals, we speak about ethics. What we have to work around every single working day is that the public school is supposed to teach "facts" and parents are supposed to teach morals.

I am not your enemy here. It helps no one to twist a regular lesson that went wrong into liberals attacking Christianity. It just makes us seem unreasonably hysterical to liberals.

On the other hand, we are doing our children a horrible disservice by not having schools reinforcing and validating morals taught by parents. Students end up concluding that morals are something he/she not only follows at home, they are something they leave at home. It takes something like a higher suicide rate among children being bullied (and most children feel bullied) before people start yelling at schools to do something! It seems outside bullying schools cannot teach anything that resembles a moral.

All I am saying is that if parents would like schools to help reinforce morals and values, their focus should be on morals and ethics. They shouldn't take out their frustration about morals and values not being taught and encouraged in school by jumping all over a regular school lesson that got muddied. We may need to be as wily as a fox, by doing some of our own word switching. Instead of asking for morals and values to be taught, suggest schools teach ethics. For some reason there is a lot less opposition to teaching ethics than there is for teaching morals and values.

 

[Mudda]

Teaching facts over fiction is what a school is all about.

Well, then......consider the USMB your school, and I'll teach your the facts you never learned in school:

The context that explains the antipathy to religion by the Left, is the following:


For an historical perspective....two eras of American history stand out.

This nation was founded by religious individuals, based on a religious foundation, ....

4. First:
"The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh

a. Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.” Coulter

b. "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." - Letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813

John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, June 28th, 1813, from Quincy. The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John Adams, edited by Lester J. Cappon, 1988, the University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, pp. 338-340.




5. Then, the explanation for the great sea change in America:

All of that changed during the Roosevelt Administration, when a widely popular President embraced communist Joseph Stalin, and provided a home for communism in this nation.


a. "There is no God:
This concept is an essential element of Marxism. As Lenin stated: "Atheism is a natural and inseparable portion of Marxism, of the theory and practice of Scientific Socialism." If God exists and is in supreme command of the universe, He possesses discretionary power, and His actions cannot always be calculated accurately in advance. The whole edifice of Marxism collapses.

When Marx and the Communists deny the existence of God, they simultaneously deny the authority of the Ten Commandments, the existence of absolute standards of right and wrong, of good and evil; and man is left on the playing fields of the universe without a referee, without a book of rules. The winning side in any conflict can decide on what rules of conduct to apply. Morality is the creation of the victor. The Schwarz Report | Essays


And this view infected the public schools......and in your limited intellect

Sorry, I don't read long-winded posts. Either say it in a couple of sentences or don't bother.

And here we have the usual explanation for Liberal/Leftist beliefs?

"... I don't read..."

We don't cut and paste, but we do read.

Are the facts presented via the cut and paste too difficult for you to either read or to understand?

No?

Then....what's your gripe with it?

It's repetitive and boring.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. Government (read 'Liberal/Democrat') schools take every opportunity to shear religion away from the culture, and indicate it as a pejorative.


"Washington high school coach placed on leave for praying on field
(CNN)A Seattle-area assistant high school football coach has been placed on paid leave for continuing to pray on the field after games, weeks after his school district warned him not to do so.

Bremerton High School assistant coach Joe Kennedy, whose suspension Wednesday came a day before the school's final regular game of the season, cannot resume his job until he agrees not to pray while on duty as a coach,the Bremerton School District said in a letter posted online.

"While the district appreciates Kennedy's many positive contributions to the BHS football program ... Kennedy's conduct poses a genuine risk that the district will be liable for violating the federal and state constitutional rights of students or others," the letter reads.

Kennedy's case made headlines after the district ordered him in September to stop on-field post-game prayers, saying his years-long practice could be perceived as district endorsement of religion in violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.
[Of course that's a Liberal lie: it in no way violates the first amendment- it actually is a result of same.]


Kennedy, who says he has prayed at the 50-yard line after games since he was hired in August 2008, initially abided by the directive. But, with a religious freedom legal organization asserting that he had a right to do so, he prayed at midfield after the school's October 16 homecoming game.


The coach says that his prayers are private, and that while some students end up joining him, they do so of their own volition.
[Totally voluntary, no one is coerced to join in.]


The Liberty Institute, the Texas-based group representing Kennedy, said it will sue the school on his behalf, arguing the school was violating his rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, saying it wasn't honoring his request for religious accommodation.
[Yipppeeee!]


"We tried to meet with the school officials in person, but they refused to meet. We were only able to have a brief hour and a half call with their lawyer, and the result was a letter banning private prayer just a few hours before last Friday's game," the institute's deputy chief counsel Hiram Sasser said in a post reacting to Kennedy's suspension. "It is unfortunate this school district is choosing litigation instead of a simple meeting." Bremerton High School coach placed on leave for praying on field - CNN.com



Remember...contrary to the Liberal lie above, there is no such prescription as 'separation of church and state' in any......any....of the memorializing documents of the United States.

The phrase was inserted into jurisprudence by an official of the KKK.


First amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

 

[PoliticalChic]

3. I relate this issue to this NYTimes piece by a secular philosopher, called"Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts." http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0


Most children who weren't brought up in a religious household, with a clear recognition of God, fail to recognize the difference between moral facts, and opinions.

While the author of the article bemoans, as do most of us, that "the overwhelming majority of college freshmen in their classrooms view moral claims as mere opinions that are not true or are true only relative to a culture" he fails to grasp the reason for this situation..

".... if you found out that our public schools were teaching children that it is not true that it’s wrong to kill people for fun or cheat on tests? Would you be surprised?....many college-aged students don’t believe in moral facts."


While raising an excellent point, our philosopher misses the brass ring, here: "What I didn’t know was where this attitude came from. Given the presence of moral relativism in some academic circles, some people might naturally assume that philosophers themselves are to blame."

Our philosopher seems shocked to find that the Enlightenment ideas, those of David Hume, have been accepted, wholesale, in society.
" When I went to visit my son’s second grade open house, I found a troubling pair of signs hanging over the bulletin board. They read:

Fact:Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven.

Opinion: What someone thinks, feels, or believes."

You can see where this leaves 'God' or 'religion.'

First, the definition of a fact waffles between truth and proof — two obviously different features. Things can be true even if no one can prove them. ... it could be true that there is life elsewhere in the universe even though no one can prove it.


... students are taught that claims areeitherfacts or opinions. They are given quizzes in which they must sort claims into one camp or the other but not both.But if a fact is something that is true and an opinion is something that is believed, then many claims will obviously be both. "http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0

Schools were/are discouraged from teaching morality. Our legislatures are hog tying us, or that's what many of us feel. Schools do try to fight/work around it. If we are discouraged from saying, "Cheating is wrong," then we switch to, "Cheating will not be accepted." If we can't speak about morals, we speak about ethics. What we have to work around every single working day is that the public school is supposed to teach "facts" and parents are supposed to teach morals.

I am not your enemy here. It helps no one to twist a regular lesson that went wrong into liberals attacking Christianity. It just makes us seem unreasonably hysterical to liberals.

On the other hand, we are doing our children a horrible disservice by not having schools reinforcing and validating morals taught by parents. Students end up concluding that morals are something he/she not only follows at home, they are something they leave at home. It takes something like a higher suicide rate among children being bullied (and most children feel bullied) before people start yelling at schools to do something! It seems outside bullying schools cannot teach anything that resembles a moral.

All I am saying is that if parents would like schools to help reinforce morals and values, their focus should be on morals and ethics. They shouldn't take out their frustration about morals and values not being taught and encouraged in school by jumping all over a regular school lesson that got muddied. We may need to be as wily as a fox, by doing some of our own word switching. Instead of asking for morals and values to be taught, suggest schools teach ethics. For some reason there is a lot less opposition to teaching ethics than there is for teaching morals and values.

"...It should not be a surprise that there is rampant cheating on college campuses:If we’ve taught our students for 12 years that there is no fact of the matter as to whether cheating is wrong, we can’t very well blame them for doing so later on.


If it’s not true that it’s wrong to murder a cartoonist with whom one disagrees, then how can we be outraged?


If there are no truths about what is good or valuable or right, how can we prosecute people for crimes against humanity?If it’s not true that all humans are created equal, then why vote for any political system that doesn’t benefit you over others?"
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0




"... we are doing our children a horrible disservice by not having schools reinforcing and validating morals taught by parents."

Couldn't agree more.

 

[TimothysAlaska]

I always found that atheist know more about the bible then christians.

Knowing the Bible and understanding it from the view point/intent of the authors is quite different.

How can you understand from the view of the authors intent over 3k years removed? THe only intent i could see was to cause fear and coerce to the view point of that religion through threats of death according to the Old Testament. How can anyone really understand what the authors were going through as you sit in your air conditioning car driving 20 miles down the road to best buy to buy computer to talk with people on the other side of the world. You would be a god to those people.

Knowing the bible and understanding it from the viewpoint/ intent of the authors....what the heck does that even mean?

 

[Mudda]

8. Government (read 'Liberal/Democrat') schools take every opportunity to shear religion away from the culture, and indicate it as a pejorative.


"Washington high school coach placed on leave for praying on field
(CNN)A Seattle-area assistant high school football coach has been placed on paid leave for continuing to pray on the field after games, weeks after his school district warned him not to do so.

Bremerton High School assistant coach Joe Kennedy, whose suspension Wednesday came a day before the school's final regular game of the season, cannot resume his job until he agrees not to pray while on duty as a coach,the Bremerton School District said in a letter posted online.

"While the district appreciates Kennedy's many positive contributions to the BHS football program ... Kennedy's conduct poses a genuine risk that the district will be liable for violating the federal and state constitutional rights of students or others," the letter reads.

Kennedy's case made headlines after the district ordered him in September to stop on-field post-game prayers, saying his years-long practice could be perceived as district endorsement of religion in violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.
[Of course that's a Liberal lie: it in no way violates the first amendment- it actually is a result of same.]


Kennedy, who says he has prayed at the 50-yard line after games since he was hired in August 2008, initially abided by the directive. But, with a religious freedom legal organization asserting that he had a right to do so, he prayed at midfield after the school's October 16 homecoming game.


The coach says that his prayers are private, and that while some students end up joining him, they do so of their own volition.
[Totally voluntary, no one is coerced to join in.]


The Liberty Institute, the Texas-based group representing Kennedy, said it will sue the school on his behalf, arguing the school was violating his rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, saying it wasn't honoring his request for religious accommodation.
[Yipppeeee!]


"We tried to meet with the school officials in person, but they refused to meet. We were only able to have a brief hour and a half call with their lawyer, and the result was a letter banning private prayer just a few hours before last Friday's game," the institute's deputy chief counsel Hiram Sasser said in a post reacting to Kennedy's suspension. "It is unfortunate this school district is choosing litigation instead of a simple meeting." Bremerton High School coach placed on leave for praying on field - CNN.com



Remember...contrary to the Liberal lie above, there is no such prescription as 'separation of church and state' in any......any....of the memorializing documents of the United States.

The phrase was inserted into jurisprudence by an official of the KKK.


First amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Cool, more copy&paste nobody's going to read. Keep up the good work.

 

[Mudda]

"... we are doing our children a horrible disservice by not having schools reinforcing and validating morals taught by parents."

Couldn't agree more.

You're the one who desperately needs your whacky views to be validated.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"... we are doing our children a horrible disservice by not having schools reinforcing and validating morals taught by parents."

Couldn't agree more.

You're the one who desperately needs your whacky views to be validated.

I can see that the solitary thing you've learned in school is to ignore the shame of being a dunce.

 

[Mudda]

"... we are doing our children a horrible disservice by not having schools reinforcing and validating morals taught by parents."

Couldn't agree more.

You're the one who desperately needs your whacky views to be validated.

I can see that the solitary thing you've learned in school is to ignore the shame of being a dunce.

Says the guy who believes in invisible superbeings.

 

[Meriweather]

How can you understand from the view of the authors intent over 3k years removed? THe only intent i could see was to cause fear and coerce to the view point of that religion through threats of death according to the Old Testament. How can anyone really understand what the authors were going through as you sit in your air conditioning car driving 20 miles down the road to best buy to buy computer to talk with people on the other side of the world. You would be a god to those people.

Knowing the bible and understanding it from the viewpoint/ intent of the authors....what the heck does that even mean?

You can know from studying the history, culture, and language of those times. Read through that lens rather than through the lenses of current events, modern American culture, and the English language.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I always found that atheist know more about the bible then christians.

Knowing the Bible and understanding it from the view point/intent of the authors is quite different.

How can you understand from the view of the authors intent over 3k years removed? THe only intent i could see was to cause fear and coerce to the view point of that religion through threats of death according to the Old Testament. How can anyone really understand what the authors were going through as you sit in your air conditioning car driving 20 miles down the road to best buy to buy computer to talk with people on the other side of the world. You would be a god to those people.

Knowing the bible and understanding it from the viewpoint/ intent of the authors....what the heck does that even mean?

And yet our culture, and our very Constitution are based on the doctrines you've been taught to disparage.

 

[Hollie]

I always found that atheist know more about the bible then christians.

Knowing the Bible and understanding it from the view point/intent of the authors is quite different.

How can you understand from the view of the authors intent over 3k years removed? THe only intent i could see was to cause fear and coerce to the view point of that religion through threats of death according to the Old Testament. How can anyone really understand what the authors were going through as you sit in your air conditioning car driving 20 miles down the road to best buy to buy computer to talk with people on the other side of the world. You would be a god to those people.

Knowing the bible and understanding it from the viewpoint/ intent of the authors....what the heck does that even mean?

And yet our culture, and our very Constitution are based on the doctrines you've been taught to disparage.

I must have missed any of the bibles being referenced in the Constitution.

Can you point out any of those citations?

 

[bodecea]

I always found that atheist know more about the bible then christians.

Knowing the Bible and understanding it from the view point/intent of the authors is quite different.

How can you understand from the view of the authors intent over 3k years removed? THe only intent i could see was to cause fear and coerce to the view point of that religion through threats of death according to the Old Testament. How can anyone really understand what the authors were going through as you sit in your air conditioning car driving 20 miles down the road to best buy to buy computer to talk with people on the other side of the world. You would be a god to those people.

Knowing the bible and understanding it from the viewpoint/ intent of the authors....what the heck does that even mean?

And yet our culture, and our very Constitution are based on the doctrines you've been taught to disparage.

The Enlightenment, you mean....which was a breaking away from the superstitions of religion.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I always found that atheist know more about the bible then christians.

Knowing the Bible and understanding it from the view point/intent of the authors is quite different.

How can you understand from the view of the authors intent over 3k years removed? THe only intent i could see was to cause fear and coerce to the view point of that religion through threats of death according to the Old Testament. How can anyone really understand what the authors were going through as you sit in your air conditioning car driving 20 miles down the road to best buy to buy computer to talk with people on the other side of the world. You would be a god to those people.

Knowing the bible and understanding it from the viewpoint/ intent of the authors....what the heck does that even mean?

And yet our culture, and our very Constitution are based on the doctrines you've been taught to disparage.

The Enlightenment, you mean....which was a breaking away from the superstitions of religion.

I don't mean that at all.

1. The Enlightenment gave birth to the savagery that produced the abattoir called the French Revolution.
It was the result of replacing religion with "reason."

2. In the course of France's short revolution, 600,000 French citizens were killed, and another 145,000 fled the country. Schom, "Napoleon Bonaparte," p. 253.

3. "That's in a country with between 24 and 26 million people, about the current population of Texas. In terms of population loss, that would be the equalivalent of the United States having a 9/11 attack every day for seven years." Coulter, "Demonic," p. 266.

4. A very solid argument can be made that, while the American Revolution was created by and for ‘classical liberals,’ the French Revolution was by and for what those now called ‘liberals’ or progressives.

1. “The American intellectual class from the mid 19th century onward has disliked liberalism (which originally referred to individualism, private property, and limits on power) precisely because the liberal society has no overarching goal.” http://fff.org/freedom/fd0203c.asp
2. The French Revolution is the godless antithesis of the founding of America.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I always found that atheist know more about the bible then christians.

Knowing the Bible and understanding it from the view point/intent of the authors is quite different.

How can you understand from the view of the authors intent over 3k years removed? THe only intent i could see was to cause fear and coerce to the view point of that religion through threats of death according to the Old Testament. How can anyone really understand what the authors were going through as you sit in your air conditioning car driving 20 miles down the road to best buy to buy computer to talk with people on the other side of the world. You would be a god to those people.

Knowing the bible and understanding it from the viewpoint/ intent of the authors....what the heck does that even mean?

And yet our culture, and our very Constitution are based on the doctrines you've been taught to disparage.

I must have missed any of the bibles being referenced in the Constitution.

Can you point out any of those citations?

Of course I can.

1. "The most quoted source was the Bible.
Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches.

2. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

3. When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women.

4. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”.
The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died."
Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7



And this..."Montesquieu was the man quoted most often by the founding fathers, with 8.3 percent of the Founders’ quotes being taken from his writings. Sir William Blackstone was the second most-quoted individual with 7.9 percent of the Founder’s quotes, and John Locke was third with 2.9 percent.

Surprisingly, the researchers discovered that the founders quoted directly out of the bible 4 times more than they quoted Montesquieu, 4 times more often than they quoted Blackstone, and 12 times more often than they quoted John Locke. Thirty four percent of the Founders’ quotes came directly out of the bible."
Sources:
David Barton, Original Intent, 1997
Donald Lutz, The Origins of American Constitutionalism 1988
“The Relative Influence of European Writers on Late Eighteenth Century American Political Thought” American Political Science Review

 

[Hollie]

I always found that atheist know more about the bible then christians.

Knowing the Bible and understanding it from the view point/intent of the authors is quite different.

How can you understand from the view of the authors intent over 3k years removed? THe only intent i could see was to cause fear and coerce to the view point of that religion through threats of death according to the Old Testament. How can anyone really understand what the authors were going through as you sit in your air conditioning car driving 20 miles down the road to best buy to buy computer to talk with people on the other side of the world. You would be a god to those people.

Knowing the bible and understanding it from the viewpoint/ intent of the authors....what the heck does that even mean?

And yet our culture, and our very Constitution are based on the doctrines you've been taught to disparage.

I must have missed any of the bibles being referenced in the Constitution.

Can you point out any of those citations?

Of course I can.

1. "The most quoted source was the Bible.
Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches.

2. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

3. When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women.

4. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”.
The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died."
Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7



And this..."Montesquieu was the man quoted most often by the founding fathers, with 8.3 percent of the Founders’ quotes being taken from his writings. Sir William Blackstone was the second most-quoted individual with 7.9 percent of the Founder’s quotes, and John Locke was third with 2.9 percent.

Surprisingly, the researchers discovered that the founders quoted directly out of the bible 4 times more than they quoted Montesquieu, 4 times more often than they quoted Blackstone, and 12 times more often than they quoted John Locke. Thirty four percent of the Founders’ quotes came directly out of the bible."
Sources:
David Barton, Original Intent, 1997
Donald Lutz, The Origins of American Constitutionalism 1988
“The Relative Influence of European Writers on Late Eighteenth Century American Political Thought” American Political Science Review

So, not a single reference to any of the bibles in the Constitution.

I'm afraid your usual cutting and pasting won't help your continued, failed arguments.... consisting of endless cutting and pasting.