So your vote is all based on religion?

[Ibanez]

Well there is the whole "My kingdom is not of this world" deal that Jesus spoke about but to look at anybody from the "moral majority" from the 70s onward, they've done just about all they can do to have their own "heaven on earth".

Cat-man is bringing his A-Game shit... just laying SH out...

Cman has stepped it up a notch.

[Cap'n Cat]

Hornet needs a trip back to Junior College for some refreshers.

[89Hen]

Good point, Catter. Was watching Lawrence O'Donnell last night and he broke it all down. More than 80% of people coming out of exit polls in nine states which had primaries this year said that their vote was based at least somewhat on the religious affiliation, i.e. Christian, of the candidate. Our country may be intractably in the Stone Ages.

Would love to see the actual results.

On Super Tuesday, Republican primary voters in Ohio were asked, "How much does it matter to you that a candidate shares your religious beliefs? 1). A great deal 2). Somewhat 3). Not much 4). Not at all."

Only 18-percent of Republican voters in Ohio say they cast their votes without any religious prejudice at all.

My guess is if you add in "not much" the number would be quite different.

[JMU DJ]

Much of what is actually IN the Constitution was based on Biblical principles. So, yes, one could say that to some degree at least, our contry was founded on the Bible.

[SuperHornet]

Show me where I said anything about gay marriage, JMU. My point was that the Constitution's premise of dividing up authority so that one person didn't have all power was Biblically based.

The status of marriage is statutory level at best.

Libs always trying to put words in conservatives' mouths.

[JMU DJ]

Show me where I said anything about gay marriage, JMU. My point was that the Constitution's premise of dividing up authority so that one person didn't have all power was Biblically based.

The status of marriage is statutory level at best.

Libs always trying to put words in conservatives' mouths.

Sure, but then in the next comment you go on to talk about the laws of man, including societal aspects.

For a more direct Biblical influence on society, one must look at the Declaration of Independence ("all men are created equal") and statutory law.

You stated the constitution was largely based on the bible and continued this thought by the discussion statutory laws and the declaration in your next breath. You did not state anything about "Gay marriage," I simply used it as a tool to show how egregious (stupid) your argument is, not to put words in your conk mouth as you so put it. But sure, jump to conclusions.

[mainejeff]

Libs always trying to put words in conservatives' mouths.

As opposed to conservatives always telling liberals who to worship, how to live, who to sleep with, who to breed with, and who to marry.

Fvck U.

[catamount man]

The Holy Bible and the United States Constitution do not correlate to each other in any way. While as a believer I do believe THB to be God's inspired word, in no way were the writers privy to the notion of a future nation known as the USA or its earliest documents. I get so sick of hearing religious pundits act like St Paul et al were prophesying about "Godly America". Really?

Believe you me, Jesus ain't impressed with the Pope, Billy Graham, Billy Sunday, Jimmy Swaggart, Oral Roberts, Robert Tilton, nor the whole lot of them. The fact that Billy Graham has prayed with Presidents before they gave executive orders of war i.e. Gulf War 1991 is nothing to be celebrated.

Jesus gave his two greatest commandments:
1) Love God with all your heart and soul (we all fail at this)
2) Love your neighbor as you love yourself (the GOP REALLY fails at this)

[Vidav]

[Ibanez]

Show me where I said anything about gay marriage, JMU. My point was that the Constitution's premise of dividing up authority so that one person didn't have all power was Biblically based.

The status of marriage is statutory level at best.

Libs always trying to put words in conservatives' mouths.

1. The dominant faith system of Europe and the Colonies was Christianity.
2. The founding fathers called themselves Christians. Many were Diests, which in that time period meant they believed in the importance of Jesus Christ, therefore that made them Christian (in thier view). Diests reject the supernatural, the infallibility of the Bible, etc..
3. I won't do it here, but you have to examine the main contributors individually. The best educated founder is (IMO) Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was brilliant.
As the author of the Declaration of Independence (not a governing charter, I know but people always refer to it) Jefferson mentions a Creator, but this is a creator Deism defines one. The creator has no involvement in the world. He doesn’t suspend the laws of nature to allow water to go to wine or for someone to come to life after being dead for 3 days. Therefore, the Creator also does not intervene and inspire laws.

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society. We have solved ... the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.

T. Jefferson 1808
4. John Adams, another influential founding father, was a very religious person, this is true. But he was a Unitarian. Unitarians abhor creed-based dogmatic religion and reject specific doctrines such as the Trinity, the Virgin Birth.

[kalm]

Show me where I said anything about gay marriage, JMU. My point was that the Constitution's premise of dividing up authority so that one person didn't have all power was Biblically based.

The status of marriage is statutory level at best.

Libs always trying to put words in conservatives' mouths.

1. The dominant faith system of Europe and the Colonies was Christianity.
2. The founding fathers called themselves Christians. Many were Diests, which in that time period meant they believed in the importance of Jesus Christ, therefore that made them Christian (in thier view). Diests reject the supernatural, the infallibility of the Bible, etc..
3. I won't do it here, but you have to examine the main contributors individually. The best educated founder is (IMO) Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was brilliant.
As the author of the Declaration of Independence (not a governing charter, I know but people always refer to it) Jefferson mentions a Creator, but this is a creator Deism defines one. The creator has no involvement in the world. He doesn’t suspend the laws of nature to allow water to go to wine or for someone to come to life after being dead for 3 days. Therefore, the Creator also does not intervene and inspire laws.

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society. We have solved ... the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.

T. Jefferson 1808
4. John Adams, another influential founding father, was a very religious person, this is true. But he was a Unitarian. Unitarians abhor creed-based dogmatic religion and reject specific doctrines such as the Trinity, the Virgin Birth.

[Ibanez]

SH, you have yet to give us hard evidence of how the Bible is reflected in our Constitution.

I'll let the lawyers of the board correct me, but If I am remembering correctly, our laws are Common Laws. We have a set of laws based off precendent. Our laws are based off of English Common Law, which has origins in Germanic Law. History has shown us that Germanic people developed a “common law” legal system of their prior to their contact with Christianity. As Germanic tribes fell back, England kept the common laws, even though France and Spain reverted to a more Roman Law system (that is after the Germans fell back).

I'm not up to date on law history, but I think there is some truth in there.

[Baldy]

Show me where I said anything about gay marriage, JMU. My point was that the Constitution's premise of dividing up authority so that one person didn't have all power was Biblically based.

The status of marriage is statutory level at best.

Libs always trying to put words in conservatives' mouths.

1. The dominant faith system of Europe and the Colonies was Christianity.
2. The founding fathers called themselves Christians. Many were Diests, which in that time period meant they believed in the importance of Jesus Christ, therefore that made them Christian (in thier view). Diests reject the supernatural, the infallibility of the Bible, etc..
3. I won't do it here, but you have to examine the main contributors individually. The best educated founder is (IMO) Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was brilliant.
As the author of the Declaration of Independence (not a governing charter, I know but people always refer to it) Jefferson mentions a Creator, but this is a creator Deism defines one. The creator has no involvement in the world. He doesn’t suspend the laws of nature to allow water to go to wine or for someone to come to life after being dead for 3 days. Therefore, the Creator also does not intervene and inspire laws.

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society. We have solved ... the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.

T. Jefferson 1808
4. John Adams, another influential founding father, was a very religious person, this is true. But he was a Unitarian. Unitarians abhor creed-based dogmatic religion and reject specific doctrines such as the Trinity, the Virgin Birth.

FWIW...Jefferson wasn't a Diest.

[Ibanez]

1. The dominant faith system of Europe and the Colonies was Christianity.
2. The founding fathers called themselves Christians. Many were Diests, which in that time period meant they believed in the importance of Jesus Christ, therefore that made them Christian (in thier view). Diests reject the supernatural, the infallibility of the Bible, etc..
3. I won't do it here, but you have to examine the main contributors individually. The best educated founder is (IMO) Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was brilliant.
As the author of the Declaration of Independence (not a governing charter, I know but people always refer to it) Jefferson mentions a Creator, but this is a creator Deism defines one. The creator has no involvement in the world. He doesn’t suspend the laws of nature to allow water to go to wine or for someone to come to life after being dead for 3 days. Therefore, the Creator also does not intervene and inspire laws.



T. Jefferson 1808
4. John Adams, another influential founding father, was a very religious person, this is true. But he was a Unitarian. Unitarians abhor creed-based dogmatic religion and reject specific doctrines such as the Trinity, the Virgin Birth.

FWIW...Jefferson wasn't a Diest.

And you say that because....?

[Ibanez]

I submit the following, from Dumas Malone. Malone is probably the most celebrated Jefferson scholar there was.

Some time after 1764, perhaps, he began to apply historical tests to the Bible, lost faith in conventional religion

Malone even refers to him as an "apostle of enlightment". Deism has it roots in the Age of Enlightenment.

Jefferson altered the Bible to remove all the supernatural angels, miracles, healings, etc.. This is in accordance with a Deist view. I believe he was a Christian, but his actions give us a great insight to how he percieved religion.

[SuperHornet]

I don't deny anything you said, Mark. My point about the Constitution was that the fact that it separates the powers reflects the order Moses was given to delegate power. One person cannot handle it all. He tried, and he "only" had about 2M people with him (counting women and children), and that doesn't even count flocks and gear. Imagine one person trying to make ALL the decisions for a nation of this size. It just wouldn't work.

No, the Bible doesn't say "Thou shalt have a bicameral legislature, an executive branch, and a court system." But it certainly seems to me that having such is ONE possible way to keep one person from having all power, and while we may not agree with everything it has done, the arrangement has been fairly effective over the years.

[Vidav]

I don't deny anything you said, Mark. My point about the Constitution was that the fact that it separates the powers reflects the order Moses was given to delegate power. One person cannot handle it all. He tried, and he "only" had about 2M people with him (counting women and children), and that doesn't even count flocks and gear. Imagine one person trying to make ALL the decisions for a nation of this size. It just wouldn't work.

No, the Bible doesn't say "Thou shalt have a bicameral legislature, an executive branch, and a court system." But it certainly seems to me that having such is ONE possible way to keep one person from having all power, and while we may not agree with everything it has done, the arrangement has been fairly effective over the years.

correlation doesn't imply causation.

[Cap'n Cat]

SuperBee,
Every time you post, you become a bigger asshole no-mind than you were before. Stop while you still have a scintilla of dignity.

[SuperHornet]

The extremely biased opinion of one of the poli troll brothers means absolutely NOTHING to me. The posts of others in this thread (see Mark and Vidav) are MUCH more constructive.

YOU are the one who should stop.

[Baldy]

FWIW...Jefferson wasn't a Diest.

And you say that because....?

Because Jefferson called himself a Christan.

I, too, have made a wee-little book from the same materials, which I call the Philosophy of Jesus; it is a paradigma of his doctrines, made by cutting the texts out of the book, and arranging them on the pages of a blank book, in a certain order of time or subject. A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call me infidel and themselves Christians and preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw...

PLUS, Diests tend to be ones who don't worship God. Jefferson attended church services inside the chamber of the House of Representatives every Sunday during his presidency.

[Ibanez]

And you say that because....?

Because Jefferson called himself a Christan.

I, too, have made a wee-little book from the same materials, which I call the Philosophy of Jesus; it is a paradigma of his doctrines, made by cutting the texts out of the book, and arranging them on the pages of a blank book, in a certain order of time or subject. A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call me infidel and themselves Christians and preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw...

PLUS, Diests tend to be ones who don't worship God. Jefferson attended church services inside the chamber of the House of Representatives every Sunday during his presidency.

It was common for Deists to call themselves Christians. He was a Christian and a Diest. Deists weren't atheists, they held a natural view of the world and that includes how they viewed religion. Catholics, Methodists, baptists and other call them selves Christians. If a Christian can be Catholic, why not a Diest.

The excerpt you quote proves my point. He cut all the magic out of the bible and left the natural which is consistent with Diesm.

[Ibanez]

I don't deny anything you said, Mark. My point about the Constitution was that the fact that it separates the powers reflects the order Moses was given to delegate power. One person cannot handle it all. He tried, and he "only" had about 2M people with him (counting women and children), and that doesn't even count flocks and gear. Imagine one person trying to make ALL the decisions for a nation of this size. It just wouldn't work.

No, the Bible doesn't say "Thou shalt have a bicameral legislature, an executive branch, and a court system." But it certainly seems to me that having such is ONE possible way to keep one person from having all power, and while we may not agree with everything it has done, the arrangement has been fairly effective over the years.

this is all your opinion. Our constitution is Common law, not authoritative law. Islamic countries have authoritative law. We don't. Research the Magna Carta.

[Cap'n Cat]

Jefferson was, indeed, a Diest.

[Cap'n Cat]

I don't deny anything you said, Mark. My point about the Constitution was that the fact that it separates the powers reflects the order Moses was given to delegate power. One person cannot handle it all. He tried, and he "only" had about 2M people with him (counting women and children), and that doesn't even count flocks and gear. Imagine one person trying to make ALL the decisions for a nation of this size. It just wouldn't work.

No, the Bible doesn't say "Thou shalt have a bicameral legislature, an executive branch, and a court system." But it certainly seems to me that having such is ONE possible way to keep one person from having all power, and while we may not agree with everything it has done, the arrangement has been fairly effective over the years.

this is all your opinion. Our constitution is Common law, not authoritative law. Islamic countries have authoritative law. We don't. Research the Magna Carta.

I did and I got this:

No nudity Capn

[Ibanez]

Jefferson was, indeed, a Diest.

like many of his day. It's no doubt he was a follower of Christ, but I think the greatest evidence I his bible which is 100% inspired by Enlighten thinking and is in accordance with 18th century Deism.