California overturned gay-marriage ban today!

Post Reply New Topic

They knew more about the Bible than you do.

Do you have dismissive sarcastic comments for the rest of my points?

citing past wrongs doesn't make the current one any more acceptable.

You obviously did not read my post all the way through.

Well, I know you would not agree with Spooner's ideas, however, I am not much of social contract theory as it is practically a blank check to the state. I have probably already stated my take on the government though.

Well, then it would have to define violations of that contract.

okay but to say that it was founded on christian principles isn't being completely honest. the christian influences more reflected the culture of the time than it did the founding fathers or the intent within their writings.

edit: also, i was doing this in between builds at work...can't read everything fast enough to respond to every point.

Last edited by skafather84 on 19 May 2008, 9:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

10+ years of catholic school. i know the history, the context, and core contents of the bible. i may not be able to cite bible verses by heart but i know more than enough of it to hold my own against most christian nutjobs.

What does Christian principles mean to you?

WRONG, TOTALLY WRONG!! ! Most of the founders were Deists and secularists, THAT IS A FACT.

I thought only a handful were deists? I thought the deists that the atheists love were also part of Christian congregations?


You are acting as if being a Deist doesn't mean you can't build a nation on Christian principles.

It certainly is more accurate than claiming secularism from the Founders.

AND CAPITAL LETTERS MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT MORE CONVINCING!! !

"Most?" Give me numbers then. And "deist" is not the same thing as "secularist." Feel free to respond to the rest of my post, even if you want to reject the first sentence. Somehow I doubt you'll be able to argue against my other points.

I'll let their words speak for them (#'s 2, 3, and 4).



"What havoc has been made of books through every century of the Christian era? Where are fifty gospels condemned as spurious by the bull of Pope Gelasius? Where are forty wagon-loads of Hebrew manuscripts burned in France, by order of another pope, because of suspected heresy? Remember the Index Expurgato-rius, the Inquisition, the stake, the axe, the halter, and the guillotine; and, oh! horrible, the rack! This is as bad, if not worse, than a slow fire. Nor should the Lion's Mouth be forgotten. Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1,500 years." John Adams in a letter to John Taylor, 1814, quoted in In God We Trust and 2000 Years of Disbelief

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes" Thomas Jefferson in a letter to von Humboldt, 1813


"Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together" James Madison in a letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

Misleading at best. John Adams said a lot of things, and tended to be a bit too extremist for most people's tastes. After he served his purpose in getting the American people enraged enough to go to war, he was rightly shoved aside. The Founders considered religion to be an important part of national life, but they didn't want to have the system that England had with the Anglican church. Still, neither you nor Odin has been willing to address the other points I made. And realize, I don't even necessarily disagree with your conclusions about how America should be run today; I just don't want you to rewrite history to claim more traditional support for your positions than exists. I don't want any "donations of Constantine" to be the basis of any reforms we carry out. If we break with the past, let us be honest about it.

their opinion on how religion should help and impact the private citizen had nothing to do with their views on how religion should impact the government and its laws directly. that's more what i was trying to illustrate...that they were secularists with regards to the government...not that they were about abolishing religion or anything like that.

And yet America only had limited religious toleration until fairly recently. I'll concede the point of the Founders if you'll address the rest of my post rather than just the first sentence.