The U.S. NOT founded upon Christianity

[peach174]

I totally agree with you Foxfyre. It would be wonderful.

 

[bodecea]

Jefferson did not view property as inviolate as Locke did and conceded ability to the state to regulate property--zoning laws etc.--which would not be the case with unalienable rights. Jefferson believed, as did Locke, that a person's lawful right to occupy and use his own property was inviolate, but did not agree that a debtor could not claim the property if it wasn't paid for and did not see right of inheritance as a natural right but one regulated by the state.

We will have to agree to disagree as to WHY Jefferson changed that part of Locke's theory. I know that he was trying to sell the Dec of Ind to the masses and many of those who were going to pick up arms and fight for independence were not property owners.

The Declaration of Independence was written by the 2nd continental congress and they were not selling it to anybody. They declared freedom from the English Crown and it was voted on unanimously. Towards the end of that document is says;

We,therefore,the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World (meanig God)
It was just like any of things that congress does to this very day, except we have a problem with things passing unanimously with both parties now a days.

Actually they were....the American people. At that point, the rebellion was contained MOSTLY in the North and less than one third of Americans were sold on fighting the British for their rights....one third was actively HELPING the British and about one third to one half needed to be convinced. That's why the Dec of Ind was sent out by horse as fast as possible all over the place including the Continental Army where Washington had it read outloud to the troops.

The Dec of Independence was writing to convince. You can see it by just reading it.

 

[Gadawg73]

<<<<Gong!>>>> You're wrong.

If you are a Christian as you claim, doesn't your particular church have a library that discusses Christian influence in colonial times.

Pity you don't go there.

I took religion in a private military school in the 60s.
No one disputes Christian influences in our society.
The society was majority Christian, the founders were primarily Christian and Christianity is a good thing.
That does not translate in OUR GOVERNMENT being founded on religion.
Your claim that John Witherspoon modeled the Congress after his church is absurd.
He never made that claim so how could that be true? Witherspoon was instrumental in formulating James Madison's strong position to NOT have religion intermingled with government. Madison was one ofmany students he had. Witherspoon instructed almost 100 future politicians and judges in our founded country and you claim his influences put religion into our government?
Well, where is God mentioned ANYWHERE in the laws that this nation was founded on and Witherspoon had a hand in writing?
NO WHERE. Try again.
You sir are the one that does not know your history. I learned it before you were born.

So you were getting much-needed discipline when I was raising my children according to the scriptures?

And what you said I said is not at all what I said.

However, I promise you I will vote for you if you ever decide to vie for the seat of village idiot.

You're a certain shoo-in.

Call me whatever you like.
You have proven you have no facts or knowledge in this matter. All you have is name calling.
I provide facts. You provide nothing.

 

[TheBrain]

That's what Jefferson said in the Dec of Ind...but he took it from John Locke's basic human rights, Life, Liberty, & Property. (I read somewhere that Jefferson toned the property one down because he didn't want it to be too materialistic sounding)

Your missing the point, our government can take away our property for the good of the whole, like highways roads but you must be paid fairly for it. (Amendment V)
It has never been property it has always been pursuit of happiness
Pursuit of Happenss means your own little piece of heaven here on earth. Meaning here in America.

I know that the government can take away property under eminent domain. (From the Constitution....NOT the Dec of Ind)....what I was talking about was how Jefferson changed "property" to "pursuit of happiness" to avoid the perception that the war was all about property...particularly the property of many of the land rich and money rich men in the Constitutional Congress. They had to sell the revolution to everyone...not just the landed gentry. Jefferson knew this.

In order the have a peacful society you must have values and good standing character (self discipline) where do you think that teaching comes from?

Do you think that ONLY comes from Christianity? Be careful...by saying that you might be inferring that a society is not peaceful without Christianity and in order to have values and a good standing character, one has to be a Christian. Is that what you are saying?

Here you go proving yourself wrong again. Don't you EVER tire of being wrong? Jefferson wasn't trying to convince the poor of anything. The people who were actually voting on the DoI were in fact mostly landowners, there was no need to appease anyone else, because they essentially had no voice.

Voting in Early America : The Colonial Williamsburg Official History Site

I wish we'd go back to the days of limiting who we let vote.

Oh, here's another fact for you, a high majority of folks who fought for our independence were in fact slaves or indentured servants. Again, they had no say in anything. They fought to pay off a debt.

You're just not very smart, stop trying to act like you are.

 

[TheBrain]

I took religion in a private military school in the 60s.
No one disputes Christian influences in our society.
The society was majority Christian, the founders were primarily Christian and Christianity is a good thing.
That does not translate in OUR GOVERNMENT being founded on religion.
Your claim that John Witherspoon modeled the Congress after his church is absurd.
He never made that claim so how could that be true? Witherspoon was instrumental in formulating James Madison's strong position to NOT have religion intermingled with government. Madison was one ofmany students he had. Witherspoon instructed almost 100 future politicians and judges in our founded country and you claim his influences put religion into our government?
Well, where is God mentioned ANYWHERE in the laws that this nation was founded on and Witherspoon had a hand in writing?
NO WHERE. Try again.
You sir are the one that does not know your history. I learned it before you were born.

So you were getting much-needed discipline when I was raising my children according to the scriptures?

And what you said I said is not at all what I said.

However, I promise you I will vote for you if you ever decide to vie for the seat of village idiot.

You're a certain shoo-in.

Call me whatever you like.
You have proven you have no facts or knowledge in this matter. All you have is name calling.
I provide facts. You provide nothing.

You still haven't answered my question I asked of you pages ago. Do you recognize that a country founded on religious principles is NOT the same thing as a theocracy?

 

[Gadawg73]

Bodecea it's -The right to Life,Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness
Not right to property.

That's what Jefferson said in the Dec of Ind...but he took it from John Locke's basic human rights, Life, Liberty, & Property. (I read somewhere that Jefferson toned the property one down because he didn't want it to be too materialistic sounding)

Your missing the point, our government can take away our property for the good of the whole, like highways roads but you must be paid fairly for it. (Amendment V)
It has never been property it has always been pursuit of happiness
Pursuit of Happenss means your own little piece of heaven here on earth. Meaning here in America.
In order the have a peacful society you must have values and good standing character (self discipline) where do you think that teaching comes from?

"paid fairly for it" LOL.
Brother, believe me, the government NEVER offers a fair price when they condemn or use eminent domain to seize property.
My neighbor is an atheist. He is the most Christlike person I know.
Values and good standing character have nothing to do with religion.

 

[bodecea]

Your missing the point, our government can take away our property for the good of the whole, like highways roads but you must be paid fairly for it. (Amendment V)
It has never been property it has always been pursuit of happiness
Pursuit of Happenss means your own little piece of heaven here on earth. Meaning here in America.

I know that the government can take away property under eminent domain. (From the Constitution....NOT the Dec of Ind)....what I was talking about was how Jefferson changed "property" to "pursuit of happiness" to avoid the perception that the war was all about property...particularly the property of many of the land rich and money rich men in the Constitutional Congress. They had to sell the revolution to everyone...not just the landed gentry. Jefferson knew this.

In order the have a peacful society you must have values and good standing character (self discipline) where do you think that teaching comes from?

Do you think that ONLY comes from Christianity? Be careful...by saying that you might be inferring that a society is not peaceful without Christianity and in order to have values and a good standing character, one has to be a Christian. Is that what you are saying?

Here you go proving yourself wrong again. Don't you EVER tire of being wrong? Jefferson wasn't trying to convince the poor of anything. The people who were actually voting on the DoI were in fact mostly landowners, there was no need to appease anyone else, because they essentially had no voice.

Voting in Early America : The Colonial Williamsburg Official History Site

I wish we'd go back to the days of limiting who we let vote.

Oh, here's another fact for you, a high majority of folks who fought for our independence were in fact slaves or indentured servants. Again, they had no say in anything. They fought to pay off a debt.

You're just not very smart, stop trying to act like you are.

He most certainly wrote the Dec as a persuasive argument for those, mostly poor farmers, to take up arms for the new country.

And your comment about indentured servants...slaves....I look forward to your evidence.

 

[Gadawg73]

So you were getting much-needed discipline when I was raising my children according to the scriptures?

And what you said I said is not at all what I said.

However, I promise you I will vote for you if you ever decide to vie for the seat of village idiot.

You're a certain shoo-in.

Call me whatever you like.
You have proven you have no facts or knowledge in this matter. All you have is name calling.
I provide facts. You provide nothing.

You still haven't answered my question I asked of you pages ago. Do you recognize that a country founded on religious principles is NOT the same thing as a theocracy?

You remind me of the people that claim corporations do not pay enough taxes. I point out to them that corporations NEVER pay taxes. PEOPLE pay taxes.
The government has NO religous principles. PEOPLE have religous principles.
The nation was founded starting a NEW GOVERNMENT. A government that is founded on religion is a theocracy. Our nation was founded on THE LAW. The US Constitution was not founded on Christian principles. PEOPLE here have Christian principles.
The fact that our government was not founded on Christian principles HAS NOTHING to do with the FACT that we are a primarily a Christian believing nation.

 

[TheBrain]

Call me whatever you like.
You have proven you have no facts or knowledge in this matter. All you have is name calling.
I provide facts. You provide nothing.

You still haven't answered my question I asked of you pages ago. Do you recognize that a country founded on religious principles is NOT the same thing as a theocracy?

You remind me of the people that claim corporations do not pay enough taxes. I point out to them that corporations NEVER pay taxes. PEOPLE pay taxes.
The government has NO religous principles. PEOPLE have religous principles.
The nation was founded starting a NEW GOVERNMENT. A government that is founded on religion is a theocracy. Our nation was founded on THE LAW. The US Constitution was not founded on Christian principles. PEOPLE here have Christian principles.
The fact that our government was not founded on Christian principles HAS NOTHING to do with the FACT that we are a primarily a Christian believing nation.

And what do you think those laws are based on? For the most part our legal system is based on English common law, which oh that's right comes from a Christian theocracy.

I just don't see how you can't see that it's obvious that a group of people who are mostly Christians would draw from that Christianity when creating the documents which created this country.

When in the DoI Jefferson wrote of God, do you think he meant anything but the Christian God?

We were absolutely founded on Christian principles, but admitting that is so scares the hell out of some people. For some reason.

 

[AllieBaba]

What difference does it make that it was written to persuade? Most writers write to persuade. That's the purpose of writing.

It doesn't mean they were lying when they said they were founding the country on Christian principle, however.

 

[TheBrain]

What difference does it make that it was written to persuade? Most writers write to persuade. That's the purpose of writing.

It doesn't mean they were lying when they said they were founding the country on Christian principle, however.

She's wrong again, as usual, the DoI wasn't written to persuade anyone. By the time it was written, the founders KNEW it was a shoo in; AND only land owners got a vote anyway.

 

[Gadawg73]

You still haven't answered my question I asked of you pages ago. Do you recognize that a country founded on religious principles is NOT the same thing as a theocracy?

You remind me of the people that claim corporations do not pay enough taxes. I point out to them that corporations NEVER pay taxes. PEOPLE pay taxes.
The government has NO religous principles. PEOPLE have religous principles.
The nation was founded starting a NEW GOVERNMENT. A government that is founded on religion is a theocracy. Our nation was founded on THE LAW. The US Constitution was not founded on Christian principles. PEOPLE here have Christian principles.
The fact that our government was not founded on Christian principles HAS NOTHING to do with the FACT that we are a primarily a Christian believing nation.

And what do you think those laws are based on? For the most part our legal system is based on English common law, which oh that's right comes from a Christian theocracy.

I just don't see how you can't see that it's obvious that a group of people who are mostly Christians would draw from that Christianity when creating the documents which created this country.

When in the DoI Jefferson wrote of God, do you think he meant anything but the Christian God?

We were absolutely founded on Christian principles, but admitting that is so scares the hell out of some people. For some reason.

The DOI is not the a legal document.
You know that. End of that argument.
We are not governed by the DOI
You know that. End of that argument.
"No religous test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office OR PUBLIC TRUST UNDER THE UNITED STATES."
You now know that as you have been ignoring that. End of that argument.
No religous test means we are not a nation founded on Christianity. If we were they would have required one. And oh, they did try. But that was voted down. They lost. We won.
The govenment was not founded and, as evidence by the no religous test clause, THEY DIDN'T WANT the nation founded on Christian principles.
Don't blame me, blame the Founders. They wrote it, not me.

 

[TheBrain]

You remind me of the people that claim corporations do not pay enough taxes. I point out to them that corporations NEVER pay taxes. PEOPLE pay taxes.
The government has NO religous principles. PEOPLE have religous principles.
The nation was founded starting a NEW GOVERNMENT. A government that is founded on religion is a theocracy. Our nation was founded on THE LAW. The US Constitution was not founded on Christian principles. PEOPLE here have Christian principles.
The fact that our government was not founded on Christian principles HAS NOTHING to do with the FACT that we are a primarily a Christian believing nation.

And what do you think those laws are based on? For the most part our legal system is based on English common law, which oh that's right comes from a Christian theocracy.

I just don't see how you can't see that it's obvious that a group of people who are mostly Christians would draw from that Christianity when creating the documents which created this country.

When in the DoI Jefferson wrote of God, do you think he meant anything but the Christian God?

We were absolutely founded on Christian principles, but admitting that is so scares the hell out of some people. For some reason.

The DOI is not the a legal document.
You know that. End of that argument.
We are not governed by the DOI
You know that. End of that argument.
"No religous test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office OR PUBLIC TRUST UNDER THE UNITED STATES."
You now know that as you have been ignoring that. End of that argument.
No religous test means we are not a nation founded on Christianity. If we were they would have required one. And oh, they did try. But that was voted down. They lost. We won.
The govenment was not founded and, as evidence by the no religous test clause, THEY DIDN'T WANT the nation founded on Christian principles.
Don't blame me, blame the Founders. They wrote it, not me.

The DoI is not a legal document?

Eh, I've given you chance after chance, you're no more honest than Bodecia . I'm done debating with you.

 

[freedombecki]

I took religion in a private military school in the 60s.
No one disputes Christian influences in our society.
The society was majority Christian, the founders were primarily Christian and Christianity is a good thing.
That does not translate in OUR GOVERNMENT being founded on religion.
Your claim that John Witherspoon modeled the Congress after his church is absurd.
He never made that claim so how could that be true? Witherspoon was instrumental in formulating James Madison's strong position to NOT have religion intermingled with government. Madison was one ofmany students he had. Witherspoon instructed almost 100 future politicians and judges in our founded country and you claim his influences put religion into our government?
Well, where is God mentioned ANYWHERE in the laws that this nation was founded on and Witherspoon had a hand in writing?
NO WHERE. Try again.
You sir are the one that does not know your history. I learned it before you were born.

So you were getting much-needed discipline when I was raising my children according to the scriptures?

And what you said I said is not at all what I said.

However, I promise you I will vote for you if you ever decide to vie for the seat of village idiot.

You're a certain shoo-in.

Call me whatever you like.
You have proven you have no facts or knowledge in this matter. All you have is name calling.
I provide facts. You provide nothing.

You drew first blood, sir, and that is precisely why you omitted your first post to me, laden with insults of every kind, and I quote you:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gadawg73 View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by freedombecki View Post

Congress is modeled after the Presbyterian (Christian) system of representation. The only minister to sign the Declaration of Independence was a Presbyterian (Christian) minister.

Congress itself is the consequence of Christianity.

God bless the USA.

Anyone that believes that is beyond stupid.

You initiated the name-calling, and you tried to hide it and play like you didn't. You also another Alynski tactic: claim the person is worthless and pretend the other person is "cuckoo".

Boring, boring, boring.

 

[bodecea]

What difference does it make that it was written to persuade? Most writers write to persuade. That's the purpose of writing.

It doesn't mean they were lying when they said they were founding the country on Christian principle, however.

She's wrong again, as usual, the DoI wasn't written to persuade anyone. By the time it was written, the founders KNEW it was a shoo in; AND only land owners got a vote anyway.

First of all..the Declaration of Independence was most certainly written to persuade the American people....you don't think it was written to persuade the English King, do you?
Have you ever read the entire thing? The biggest part is the 2nd part...listing all the wrongs done to us...the very core of a persuasive essay.

Second...it was not a shoo in...many of the colonies were still thinking to fight as Englishmen just to regain rights as Englishmen, NOT to become completely independent. The concept of independence was not there at Lexington and Concord...it took a while (and Common Sense)

Finally, if only landowners get to vote, they are the only ones with a stake in a new country...why should anyone else get involved? That is what Jefferson was trying to address.


Still waiting for your evidence about slaves and indentured servants.

 

[Spoonman]

You remind me of the people that claim corporations do not pay enough taxes. I point out to them that corporations NEVER pay taxes. PEOPLE pay taxes.
The government has NO religous principles. PEOPLE have religous principles.
The nation was founded starting a NEW GOVERNMENT. A government that is founded on religion is a theocracy. Our nation was founded on THE LAW. The US Constitution was not founded on Christian principles. PEOPLE here have Christian principles.
The fact that our government was not founded on Christian principles HAS NOTHING to do with the FACT that we are a primarily a Christian believing nation.

And what do you think those laws are based on? For the most part our legal system is based on English common law, which oh that's right comes from a Christian theocracy.

I just don't see how you can't see that it's obvious that a group of people who are mostly Christians would draw from that Christianity when creating the documents which created this country.

When in the DoI Jefferson wrote of God, do you think he meant anything but the Christian God?

We were absolutely founded on Christian principles, but admitting that is so scares the hell out of some people. For some reason.

The DOI is not the a legal document.
You know that. End of that argument.
We are not governed by the DOI
You know that. End of that argument.
"No religous test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office OR PUBLIC TRUST UNDER THE UNITED STATES."
You now know that as you have been ignoring that. End of that argument.
No religous test means we are not a nation founded on Christianity. If we were they would have required one. And oh, they did try. But that was voted down. They lost. We won.
The govenment was not founded and, as evidence by the no religous test clause, THEY DIDN'T WANT the nation founded on Christian principles.
Don't blame me, blame the Founders. They wrote it, not me.

 

[bodecea]

And what do you think those laws are based on? For the most part our legal system is based on English common law, which oh that's right comes from a Christian theocracy.

I just don't see how you can't see that it's obvious that a group of people who are mostly Christians would draw from that Christianity when creating the documents which created this country.

When in the DoI Jefferson wrote of God, do you think he meant anything but the Christian God?

We were absolutely founded on Christian principles, but admitting that is so scares the hell out of some people. For some reason.

The DOI is not the a legal document.
You know that. End of that argument.
We are not governed by the DOI
You know that. End of that argument.
"No religous test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office OR PUBLIC TRUST UNDER THE UNITED STATES."
You now know that as you have been ignoring that. End of that argument.
No religous test means we are not a nation founded on Christianity. If we were they would have required one. And oh, they did try. But that was voted down. They lost. We won.
The govenment was not founded and, as evidence by the no religous test clause, THEY DIDN'T WANT the nation founded on Christian principles.
Don't blame me, blame the Founders. They wrote it, not me.

The DoI is not a legal document?

Eh, I've given you chance after chance, you're no more honest than Bodecia . I'm done debating with you.

That is correct...it is a Founding document...but it is NOT a legal document. What law does it establish? It is a DECLARATION....not a law, not a constitution, not an amendment.

We are not GOVERNED by the Dec of Ind. If we were...why write the Articles of Confederation?

I'm afraid you are one of those people who simply don't know what the Dec of Ind was all about...and what it was NOT about.

 

[froggy]

Was stealing the land from the Indians and then slaughtering their women and children founded on Christianity?
Was that wicked? What recent wicked events compare with that?

we Indians sure racked up in the past few years in restitution.

Tell us your secret in being able to still be alive at 178 years of age.

Ever gamble in one of our casinos?

 

[bodecea]

we Indians sure racked up in the past few years in restitution.

Tell us your secret in being able to still be alive at 178 years of age.

Ever gamble in one of our casinos?

 

[TheBrain]

What difference does it make that it was written to persuade? Most writers write to persuade. That's the purpose of writing.

It doesn't mean they were lying when they said they were founding the country on Christian principle, however.

She's wrong again, as usual, the DoI wasn't written to persuade anyone. By the time it was written, the founders KNEW it was a shoo in; AND only land owners got a vote anyway.

First of all..the Declaration of Independence was most certainly written to persuade the American people....you don't think it was written to persuade the English King, do you?
Have you ever read the entire thing? The biggest part is the 2nd part...listing all the wrongs done to us...the very core of a persuasive essay.

Second...it was not a shoo in...many of the colonies were still thinking to fight as Englishmen just to regain rights as Englishmen, NOT to become completely independent. The concept of independence was not there at Lexington and Concord...it took a while (and Common Sense)

Finally, if only landowners get to vote, they are the only ones with a stake in a new country...why should anyone else get involved? That is what Jefferson was trying to address.


Still waiting for your evidence about slaves and indentured servants.

You just can't prove how stupid you are often enough, can you?

The DoI absolutely was not written to persuade ANYONE of anything. It was instead written to DECLARE that the decision was made. PERIOD

Again, read a damned history book, or just the link I provided. In the beginning of our nation ONLY white male landowners voted. There is a reason why the right to vote is not included in the Bill of Rights.

Now , for the final time. You are beneath contempt as a person, and as a debater. You are dishonest in EVERY WAY. I will have nothing to do with debating you further in this thread nor any other. And just to be clear , my contempt for you has NOTHING to do with you being gay. I have known gay people before who are honest, so I realize that your dishonesty is not a symptom of you being gay.

Of course you will respond by saying you don't care what I , or anyone else thinks about you, but if that were true, you wouldn't feel compelled to lie continuously to try to make yourself appear smarter than you are, when the truth is you're too stupid to even admit to an error even once in awhile.

I feel sorry for ANYONE who is being influenced by you in anyway; be it on here or in real life. You're pathetic.