Jefferson believed that rights are granted, even if you believe there is no God. He said that.
![link :link: :link:](/styles/smilies/link.gif)
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Jefferson believed that rights are granted, even if you believe there is no God. He said that.
Overturning Grove versus Wade. It was a theocratic Supreme Court decision pushed by the Catholic Church and evangelical Christians against the will of Liberal Christianity and the rest of American society.I just didn't want it left to the anti religious group to use it as evidence that we evil Christians want a theocracy.
Not exactly. The Founding Father believed our rights come from God and not from any human authority and intended to have a government that would acknowledge, protect, and not interfere with those rights. Whether or not a person believed in God and preferred the term 'natural rights', the principle was the same.The founding fathers - to a man - believed that rights are granted because we have a duty to God; an obligation.
Do you agree with that?
That's what atheists tell themselves to help them sleep at night. George Washington would have considered militant atheists to be unpatriotic. Read his farewell address.Washington was a Freemason he believed that duty of which you speak can be applied to any God.
John Adams was a Unitarian. He didn’t believe in original sin or that Jesus Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead. The duty to God was just to be a good Civic person. That is not Christianity as mankind has experienced the gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the ages.
Our founding fathers believed that our rights are conditional. That we are granted inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God's creatures but that those rights require us to meet our obligation and duty to God.Not exactly. The Founding Father believed our rights come from God and not from any human authority and intended to have a government that would acknowledge, protect, and not interfere with those rights. Whether or not a person believed in God and preferred the term 'natural rights', the principle was the same.
I don't know how many agreed with John Adams that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." But I don't recall anybody arguing with him about that.
I do not buy that at all. I think it was a majority of justices who recognized the error of the Court in making such a law when there is no constitutional authority given the SCOTUS to make law. Such a law should be decided by the people's elected representatives or via referendum and not by the courts. They kept religion entirely out of it as they should.Overturning Grove versus Wade. It was a theocratic Supreme Court decision pushed by the Catholic Church and evangelical Christians against the will of Liberal Christianity and the rest of American society.
You will pay in November, but it still wasn’t an attempt at theocracy on a state by state basis.
I just didn't want it left to the anti religious group to use it as evidence that we evil Christians want a theocracy.
I disagree. Our Founding Fathers believed our rights are unalienable and in no way conditional and wrote a Constitution intended to allow the people to exercise those unalienable rights that the federal government would in no way restrict or restrain. The laws they passed had that principle in mind. Every citizen had the right to bear arms. He/she did not have the right to use those arms to unlawfully deprive another citizen of his/her right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness etc.Our founding fathers believed that our rights are conditional. That we are granted inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God's creatures but that those rights require us to meet our obligation and duty to God.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People.
I get that it bothers you. You're a filthy socialist.hardly a one, those that wrote the constitution considered the european theocracies as - religions. they were primarily deist.
The link I provided says otherwise.I disagree. Our Founding Fathers believed our rights are unalienable and in no way conditional and wrote a Constitution intended to allow the people to exercise those unalienable rights that the federal government would in no way restrict or restrain. The laws they passed had that principle in mind. Every citizen had the right to bear arms. He/she did not have the right to use those arms to unlawfully deprive another citizen of his/her right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness etc.
And one unalienable right they recognized to a man was a person's right to be religious or not, the right to believe in God or not, the right to join a particular religious group or not, the right to choose for oneself what is a person's duty to God. And the government was given zero authority to order or interfere with any of that.
And I want it understood that Christians are citizens who do want a theocracy, but none-the-less have an equal voice and an equal duty to this secular democracy. Trying to shut them out under the guise of "separation of Church and State is intolerable because it is a step in the direction of not allowing people of faith to vote based on "separation of Church and State". All I was ever saying is that people of any/all faiths should be heard on secular matters in our secular government. No one should think that this infringes on separation of Church and State. The fact that people seem to--even in this thread--I find astonishing. Do people not understand we have a secular government? If a person of faith has an opinion on government issues then they must be violating separation of Church and State? Unbelievable.I just didn't want it left to the anti religious group to use it as evidence that we evil Christians want a theocracy.
If you want a theocracy you are honestly the first person claiming Christianity as his faith I have EVER accounted who wanted that. The Constitution first and foremost was to make this a government of, for and by the people who would not be controlled by a monarchy, dictatorship, totalitarian government of any kind, would be subject to dictates of no pope who did not choose to be subject, who would be governed by no religious authority against his/her will, all of which a theocracy would be.And I want it understood that Christians are citizens who do want a theocracy, but none-the-less have an equal voice and an equal duty to this secular democracy. Trying to shut them out under the guise of "separation of Church and State is intolerable because it is a step in the direction of not allowing people of faith to vote based on "separation of Church and State". All I was ever saying is that people of any/all faiths should be heard on secular matters in our secular government. No one should think that this infringes on separation of Church and State. The fact that people seem to--even in this thread--I find astonishing. Do people not understand we have a secular government? If a person of faith has an opinion on government issues then they must be violating separation of Church and State? Unbelievable.
Those who try to make abortion and school choice an encroachment of theocracy into government need to be corrected.
I get my information and arrive at my conclusions from studying the Constitution and the documents the Founding Fathers left us that gives us their perspective on what government should be and give those far more credibility than any link to somebody's opinion on the internet. If you can offer a better argument than the Constitution and founding documents, go for it.The link I provided says otherwise.
That you even wrote that sentence tells me you don't even bother to read what I write.If you want a theocracy you are honestly the first person claiming Christianity as his faith I have EVER accounted who wanted that.
I think I will rely on the words of the founding fathers. The link I provided was from the Washington and Lee Law Review is based upon documented historical facts and the words of the founding fathers.I get my information and arrive at my conclusions from studying the Constitution and the documents the Founding Fathers left us that gives us their perspective on what government should be and give those far more credibility than any link to somebody's opinion on the internet. If you can offer a better argument than the Constitution and founding documents, go for it.
That's what atheists tell themselves to help them sleep at night. George Washington would have considered militant atheists to be unpatriotic. Read his farewell address.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams
My question addresses the fact that citizens of faith (all faiths) may participate in civic issues and should not be intimidated by those snapping, "Separation of Church and State" at them. The primary example of this could be abortion, but it also extends into school choice. People are free to practice their faith. Offering the choice of a Christian, Jewish, Muslim school, etc., is not the Feds pushing a religion, but offering the choices the Constitution guarantees. Because some religions are against abortion, it does not make abortion a religious issue and therefore is not an example for separation of church and state. As mentioned previously, some atheists are also against abortion.
People of faith should be able to voice their opinions on these issues without those on the opposing side of the issue running up the flag of separation of church and state.
You'd have to ask him, but do you suppose that means the rest were atheists or not Christians? Because you are passing over a shitload of historical data of a Christian heritage and direct testimony of an impartial witness who said it was.In 1776 there were only about 20 percent of the residence of the 13 colonies who were members of a Christian church.
Do you think that was religious enough for John Adams Saint_Ding?
It kept going up steadily, but today’s religious right is very despondent
about the state of Christian religion in America.
Frauds Tucker and Laura distance from T 201130 {post•135} NotfooledbyW Churching of America : Membership In America Percentage of population that belongs to a church: 1776 17% 1850 34% 1860 37% 1870 35% 1890 45% 1906 51% 1916 53% 1926 56% 1952 59% 1980 62% 1995 65% * *Estimated. Source: "The Churching of America: 1776-1990" by Roger Finke and Rodney Stark and Gallup Organization data“ •••• nfbw 201130 Vftald00135