By Constitution, USA is a country of Christianity!

[misterman]

What you claim may be partly true, unfortunately to America. The part may be true is: “You don't get to have what you want. Deal with it. It's my government too,” the rest of your claim is only crying with anger without any intelligence input.

I am not going to “get to make it (the government) a Christian one”, I only want the American government getting back its sense of defending what the Constitution pledges to defend.

As much as you can see “It's my government too,” there are many followers of Christianity see the same way. Hope that they are still keeping reasonable population in the nation and then tell you “You don't get to have what you want”

If time has been too late even beyond our awareness, dude, I think I must submit to some socialist gangster someday and share a socialist country with you.

I said give it up.

 

[danarhea]

With open words, The American Constitution so obliges this country:

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation. (Article VI)

On the land called America, what bigger debt and engagement can anyone find to have been contracted and entered obliging this nation than what is stressed in the following?

The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

This sacred contract term of debt and engagement can be exactly found in Article III, The Articles of Confederation.

Given that all signers of the Articles of Confederation are followers of Christianity, and given that all signers of the American Constitution are followers of Christianity, logic must allow the word religion found in the above quotation to mean nothing else but only the teaching of Christianity. Besides logic, indeed, religion, namely Christianity, is hereby indisputably listed as the number one account prior to anything else for all these Christian signers to enter a firm league, namely a firm government, to defend.

As quoted, with the bold expression on the unaltered inheritance of a sacred debt and engagement, the American Constitution must permanently oblige every citizen receiving her protection with the recognition of the supreme dominance of the Christian teaching in this nation, regardless of this citizen’s background, natural, ethnical, or cultural. Excuse can be given to no one who fails in such recognition. Any idea in contrast to this obligation, or action releasing anyone from this obligation, must be found unacceptable by the Constitution.

To put things in context, I give you this:

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.

-Thomas Jefferson

And infidel, of course, refers to those who have NO religion.

But, if that isn't enough, I also give you this:

No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

-US Constitution, Article 6, Section 3

Case closed.

 

[Thunder]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

its written in English. Clear English.

an establishment of religion includes churches. Christian churches.

'nuff said. debate over.

 

[1029066]

It looks like someone gets scared if the true explanation of the Constitution can be read. If you do not have “outlandish, convoluted, and incoherent argument”, explain the debt and engagement that the Constitution pledges to inherit from The Articles of Confederation. If you want to leave this country, leave! If you want to come back to see America as a non-religious country, launch a movement to have current Constitution toppled, at least to have the Article VI removed!

That has NOTHING to do with christianity. What on earth does the debt inherited from the Articles have to do with religon at all?? And this country already is non-religious! Well, not as non-religious as it should be, but it is.

 

[AdminX]

The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

This sacred contract term of debt and engagement can be exactly found in Article III, The Articles of Confederation.

Given that all signers of the Articles of Confederation are followers of Christianity, and given that all signers of the American Constitution are followers of Christianity, logic must allow the word religion found in the above quotation to mean nothing else but only the teaching of Christianity. Besides logic, indeed, religion, namely Christianity, is hereby indisputably listed as the number one account prior to anything else for all these Christian signers to enter a firm league, namely a firm government, to defend.

As quoted, with the bold expression on the unaltered inheritance of a sacred debt and engagement, the American Constitution must permanently oblige every citizen receiving her protection with the recognition of the supreme dominance of the Christian teaching in this nation, regardless of this citizen’s background, natural, ethnical, or cultural. Excuse can be given to no one who fails in such recognition. Any idea in contrast to this obligation, or action releasing anyone from this obligation, must be found unacceptable by the Constitution.

No actually, the authors intentionally kept the broad term 'religion' to signal to the people that freedom of religious choice should be inherently kept as the right of each citizen. That was intentionally. You've got to understand that there isn't a word in that document that isn't strategically meant to be there, just like a legal contract.

I'm sorry but your position is a Fail. You grossly misinterpret the use of the word 'religion' and make the leap that it is a specific reference to Christianity.

 

[SerenityChuck]

Nonsense. Jefferson and others were conversant with the bible but many (including Jefferson) were NOT Christian. Read the history.

 

[crebigsol]

They weren't stupid… that balance so everyone's happy (which is an illusion)

If they weren’t stupid, they would realize what illusion was and would not allow the illusion to exist in a common agreement. No political contract mutually agreed between signers at free will, regardless whether it can be realized or not in reality, will knowingly allow illusion to be produced, although many one-sided political documents just force people to accept illusion. The Article of Confederation shows no such forcing.

You're taking 'religion' as a 'religious belief' and blending it with the other uses of the term 'religion' … you must recognize one as a theological base and the other as a lifestyle base

Religion or religious belief are functioning the same in the society; the only difference between them is the style of spelling of these two terms. They are just interpretation of human faith, and dominated by human faith.

Evolution is science and can coincide with many different religious beliefs.

One topic can have enough power to sentence evolution with death penalty as a science: Eugenics. Eugenics is critically related to the acceptance of human value by biological inheritance. Will evolution be applicable to human beings, sifting them into different grades through natural selection? If this topic cannot be solved and settled, believing how evolution works out is completely determined by human faith, subsequently a religion, through and through. If evolution must be forced to accept as a science, the most value it deserves is no better than one of the theories found in stock market analysis, it can earn many credit in analyzing the past, but must fall flat in predicting the future. Should human beings with reasonable mind allow such fortune telling theory to dominate our education system?
Do you know that evolution must side with the idea that the universe is created from nothing for its own survival? Why is such belief more valuable to the society than the belief that the universe is created because of God?

You don't see me pushing for the teaching of evolution in Sunday School

It does not give evolution the credit of science; I am sure your will not preach Buddhism in Sunday school either.

Since the majority of people in the US claim adherance to one of the Abrahamic faiths I believe you're looking at small references to those who are opposed to religion and are rude about it - and then presuming that it's a dominating activity that we all thrive on or something. It's not - most people are actually religious in this nation so, truly, what are you worried about? Do the actions of the few non-religious really have that strong of a hold over everyone?

This is a very crappy argument, while I am in no way to say you are crappy, but for sure you have been poisoned by this belief too much. The Socialists, who are not yet overwhelmingly popular in America as you believe, are working hard to diminish the population of the Christian people. Expelling the teaching of Christianity from our public school is one big step of their scheme. One hundred years ago, more than 95% of the American population is from Christianity, now it has become 70%, and it can only continue to dwindle if the Socialists’ scheme is not curbed. Don’t ask me not to worry while you feel comfort about what happens; it is even possible you are just one of the persons who takes part in creating the dwindling of the Christian population but just give me some anesthesia now. Drop it.

 

[crebigsol]

Surely though, if religion solely denotes Christianity, then there is no obligation, as non-Christian religions are specifically and deliberately excluded, according to you.

The logic you follow is the same as shown in the following:
A asks: what is 2+2?
B answers: 4
A replies: See how wrong B is, he concludes 2+2=5!

His faulty reason, apparently being obliged to defend the other states under the Articles is to be construed as a debt as mentioned in the Constitution.

Show people some courage that you can deal with the term engagement!

 

[crebigsol]

According to this interpretation, slavery is still legal, since the 13th Amendment didn't actually change the fact that slavery was tacitly condoned in the original Constitution. .

You are damn right, slavery is legal and should be fully enforced if Amendment 13 is faithfully carried out in the case that this amendment considers exception in which slavery must be a norm: “punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted”. Abandoning this exception is 100% unconstitutional. Don’t want slavery done on you? Don’t commit crime. Each citizen has full freedom to make his smart choice.

As far as the 18th goes, it was repealed by the the 21st. In fact, if you read the 21st, that's all it really says.

Thank you very much for your logic. To remove the religion of Christianity, make another amendment with precise words to have it remove from the Constitution, just like what the 21th did to the 18th.

 

[crebigsol]

I said give it up.

If your canine or fangs are not working, do not expect your breath works better. Give it up. Come back when you show you have trained yourself a true lover of the First Amendment “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech”. Retaining freedom of speech to only himself and those agreeing with him is a typical socialist idea: Freedom to me, not you!
Why do you expose your true face? It is not worth it.

 

[MadLib]

With open words, The American Constitution so obliges this country:

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation. (Article VI)

On the land called America, what bigger debt and engagement can anyone find to have been contracted and entered obliging this nation than what is stressed in the following?

The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

So, that means that the states will defend themselves from attacks made on them on account of religion. Did you also see the word "pretense" in the exact same sentence.

Given that all signers of the Articles of Confederation are followers of Christianity, and given that all signers of the American Constitution are followers of Christianity,

Evidence, please.

 

[crebigsol]

To put things in context, I give you this:
And infidel, of course, refers to those who have NO religion.
But, if that isn't enough, I also give you this:
Case closed.

You have not slightly touched how the debt and engagement is to be satisfied. Besides, when aiming at dismantling Christianity, some people must quote what Jefferson said, as if not knowing what is said by another person with far higher prestige. Here is what Washington said: “Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” Whatever Jefferson said privately concerning religion carried no official seriousness, what Washington said above is delivered in Congress. People who like to disgrace Christianity never hesitate to use examples of the wrong doing of some Christians in order to devalue this religion. However, the story of Jefferson having bastards with a black slave woman seems never bother them. To me, I do not concern if Jefferson has done as what the story told, but those who use Jefferson should follow the same standard. But they don’t. It only means that, to them, whatever can pull down Christianity works. Principle? What the hell is it? But they must pretend they follow principle closely.

 

[crebigsol]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
its written in English. Clear English.
an establishment of religion includes churches. Christian churches.
'nuff said. debate over.

As you feel you are so good in English, you must know that the above is to mean individual church, not the entire religious teaching. If you feel "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" being so powerful in conducting our political affair, can you use this quotation to stop the partisan politics in this country? Partisian politics is a typical practice respecting establishment of religion, although atheistic, and is enforced in this country every day. Debate is over, on your part, though.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

As you feel you are so good in English, you must know that the above is to mean individual church, not the entire religious teaching. If you feel "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" being so powerful in conducting our political affair, can you use this quotation to stop the partisan politics in this country? Partisian politics is a typical practice respecting establishment of religion, although atheistic, and is enforced in this country every day. Debate is over, on your part, though.

Listen to how silly you sound: you're suggesting that we should use the 1st Amendment religious-establishment clause to stop partisan politics.

By what measure are partisan politics purely religious or only adherant to one individual religion?

I don't think you're grasping half of what you claim to be reading.

 

[winston53660]

WOW this thread is better than drugs!

 

[tryreading]

Or maybe Pagan:



Pagan America

 

[rocket88]

WOW this thread is better than drugs!

This is your brain reading this thread:

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Or maybe Pagan:

View attachment 67120325

Pagan America

The Greeks and Egyptians were Pagans?

Obviously with that link they're using 'Pagan' to generically refer to all non-Christian sects of belief. ??

 

[rocket88]

You are damn right, slavery is legal

If you want to know where you jumped the shark, this is it.

Thank you very much for your logic. To remove the religion of Christianity, make another amendment with precise words to have it remove from the Constitution, just like what the 21th did to the 18th.

Really? How many times do the words "Jesus," "Christ," or "Christianity" appear in the Constitution?

The 18th Amendment specifically prohibited the production of alcohol, and the 21st specifically repealed it. YOU CAN'T AMEND THE CONSTITUTION TO REMOVE SOMETHING THAT ISN'T THERE!

 

[Thunder]

Or maybe Pagan:

View attachment 67120325

Pagan America

Thursday= Day of Thor.

 

[rocket88]

Thursday= Day of Thor.

Tuesday = day of Tiu

Saturday= day of Saturn.

I think actually most of the days were named for a pagan god.

 

[tryreading]

The Greeks and Egyptians were Pagans?

Obviously with that link they're using 'Pagan' to generically refer to all non-Christian sects of belief. ??

The page is satirical. But I guess the point is there is lots of history of use of non-Christian symbols/gods in this country.

 

[tryreading]

Tuesday = day of Tiu

Saturday= day of Saturn.

I think actually most of the days were named for a pagan god.

I don't know how accurate this is, but it agrees with you:


Sunday
The name comes from the Latin dies solis, meaning "sun's day": the name of a pagan Roman holiday. It is also called Dominica (Latin), the Day of God. The Romance languages, languages derived from the ancient Latin language (such as French, Spanish, and Italian), retain the root.

French: dimanche; Italian: domenica; Spanish: domingo
German: Sonntag; Dutch: zondag. [both: 'sun-day']

Monday
The name comes from the Anglo-Saxon monandaeg, "the moon's day". This second day was sacred to the goddess of the moon.

French: lundi; Italian: lunedi. Spanish: lunes. [from Luna, "Moon"]
German: Montag; Dutch: maandag. [both: 'moon-day']

Tuesday
This day was named after the Norse god Tyr. The Romans named this day after their war-god Mars: dies Martis.

French: mardi; Italian: martedi; Spanish: martes.
The Germans call Dienstag (meaning "Assembly Day"), in The Netherlands it is known as dinsdag, in Danmark as tirsdag and in Sweden tisdag.

Wednesday
The day named to honor Wodan (Odin).
The Romans called it dies Mercurii, after their god Mercury.

French: mercredi; Italian: mercoledi; Spanish: miércoles.
German: Mittwoch; Dutch: woensdag.

Thursday
The day named after the Norse god Thor. In the Norse languages this day is called Torsdag.
The Romans named this day dies Jovis ("Jove's Day"), after Jove or Jupiter, their most important god.

French: jeudi; Italian: giovedi; Spanish: jueves.
German: Donnerstag; Dutch: donderdag.

Friday
The day in honor of the Norse goddess Frigg.
In Old High German this day was called frigedag.
To the Romans this day was sacred to the goddess Venus, and was known as dies veneris.

French: vendredi; Italian: venerdi; Spanish: viernes.
German: Freitag ; Dutch: vrijdag.

Saturday
This day was called dies Saturni, "Saturn's Day", by the ancient Romans in honor of Saturn. In Anglo-Saxon: sater daeg.

French: samedi; Italian: sabato; Spanish: sábádo.
German: Samstag; Dutch: zaterdag.
Swedish: Lördag; and in Danish and Norse: Lørdag ("washing day").

Encyclopedia Mythica: Origin of the names of the days

 

[StillBallin75]

Tuesday = day of Tiu

Saturday= day of Saturn.

I think actually most of the days were named for a pagan god.

Most are named after English/Norse/Roman gods, and Sunday and Monday are named after the Sun and the Moon.

 

[rocket88]

Most are named after English/Norse/Roman gods, and Sunday and Monday are named after the Sun and the Moon.

Well since the ancient Egyptians worshipped the Sun, I'm going to put it in the category of a pagan god.