faithful_servant
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2006
- Messages
- 12,533
- Reaction score
- 5,660
- Location
- Beautiful Central Oregon
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Not all, just you.... :mrgreen:
We're all immoral deviants.
Let me get this straight the vast majority of the early settlers moved here for religious reasons, the vast majority identifed as Christians, but these same people had little influence on what direction the country would go? So these same people that moved to escape to maybe a better life here. ( it cost many their lives) just were not that involved and had very little interest in the Constitution, Bill of rights and the zillion other things that went on at the founding of the country?? But now the religious right is fervently involved in all aspects of this country trying to ram things down everyone's throat? Did they ram the bake a cake thing? Chick with a dick in our daughters bathrooms? Redfine what marriage has always been? Advocate the stealing of one's property to give to another group? The right to kill the most innocent? or very limited choice on where to send ones kids for school? The placing of the environment in society as a religion? I could go on and on. Is this the zealot religious right you are talking about now that is ramming stuff down ones throat?In that post I was pointing out that very few of the men we refer to as founders of this country were Christians. What other religion do you ascribe to the "religious right"?
The Religious Right would never have written the First using the wording, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," like the Founders did. They would have declared this a Christian Nation, if they were RR like you claim.
Sure. That affirms separation of church and state.
"Thomas Jefferson's response, dated January 1, 1802, concurs with the Danbury Baptists' views on religious liberty, and the accompanying separation of civil government from concerns of religious doctrine and practice."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptists_in_the_history_of_separation_of_church_and_state
There is no mention of Christ or Christianity in the Founding Documents. God, yes. Christ, no.
he address of the Danbury Baptist Association in the State of Connecticut,
assembled October 7, 1801.
To Thomas Jefferson, Esq., President of the United States of America
Sir,
Among the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your election
to office, we embrace the first opportunity which we have enjoyed in our collective
capacity, since your inauguration , to express our great satisfaction in your
appointment to the Chief Magistracy in the Unite States. And though the mode
of expression may be less courtly and pompous than what many others clothe
their addresses with, we beg you, sir, to believe, that none is more sincere.
Our sentiments are uniformly on the side of religious liberty: that Religion
is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals, that no man
ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious opinions,
[and] that the legitimate power of civil government extends no further than
to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor. But sir, our constitution
of government is not specific. Our ancient charter, together with the laws
made coincident therewith, were adapted as the basis of our government at
the time of our revolution. And such has been our laws and usages, and such
still are, [so] that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation,
and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State)
we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights. And these favors
we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgments, as are inconsistent
with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at therefore, if those
who seek after power and gain, under the pretense of government and Religion,
should reproach their fellow men, [or] should reproach their Chief Magistrate,
as an enemy of religion, law, and good order, because he will not, dares not,
assume the prerogative of Jehovah and make laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ.
Sir, we are sensible that the President of the United States is not the
National Legislator and also sensible that the national government cannot
destroy the laws of each State, but our hopes are strong that the sentiment
of our beloved President, which have had such genial effect already, like
the radiant beams of the sun, will shine and prevail through all these States–and
all the world–until hierarchy and tyranny be destroyed from the earth. Sir,
when we reflect on your past services, and see a glow of philanthropy and
goodwill shining forth in a course of more than thirty years, we have reason
to believe that America’s God has raised you up to fill the Chair of State
out of that goodwill which he bears to the millions which you preside over.
May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence and the voice
of the people have called you–to sustain and support you and your Administration
against all the predetermined opposition of those who wish to rise to wealth
and importance on the poverty and subjection of the people.
And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last
to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.
Signed in behalf of the Association,
Neh,h Dodge }
Eph’m Robbins } The Committee
Stephen S. Nelson }
No it doesn't, it confirms that the State is not allowed to stick it's nose into the Church's business.
Messrs. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, and Stephen s. Nelson
A Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association, in the State of Connecticut.
Washington, January 1, 1802
Gentlemen,–The affectionate sentiment of esteem and approbation which you
are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist Association,
give me the highest satisfaction. My duties dictate a faithful and zealous
pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are
persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more
and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man
and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship,
that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions,
I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people
which declared that their legislature would “make no law respecting an establishment
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall
of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the
supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall
see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend
to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right
in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common
Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious
association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.
Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802
No it doesn't, it confirms that the State is not allowed to stick it's nose into the Church's business.
Quoting Dodge, Robbins and Nelson does not support your assertion. Jefferson's response doesn't either. The "wall" works both ways.
We would not want a state religion, but we do want religious people to vote their conscience, just as the atheist zealots vote theirs. That is what this country is about.
Oh this is rich (in irony).... someone who constantly stirs the pot from all sides making a thread about haters.
Correct, that's why pilgrims fled England because of the state religion.......We would not want a state religion, but we do want religious people to vote their conscience, just as the atheist zealots vote theirs. That is what this country is about.
Ok...we have all heard the Right calling the Left Libtards, Commies and unAmerican Muslim sympathizers for years. Now we have the Left rightfully calling the Right out as partisan hacks who would hand the country to Putin if it meant keeping their Right Wing fantasies alive.
Do you hate the other side?
Why?
I'll start. Even before this Trump fiasco, I developed a strong hate for the Religious Right. I'd probably be a Republican (at least up until Trump showed up) if not for them. Their constant insistence on pushing their religious values on the rest of us has been turning me off for about 20 years, and it's only getting worse. I hate those bastards.
Actually, the religious right has always called the left evil. And since at least 1980, they have been a major force within the right.
Ok...we have all heard the Right calling the Left Libtards, Commies and unAmerican Muslim sympathizers for years. Now we have the Left rightfully calling the Right out as partisan hacks who would hand the country to Putin if it meant keeping their Right Wing fantasies alive.
Do you hate the other side?
Why?
I'll start. Even before this Trump fiasco, I developed a strong hate for the Religious Right. I'd probably be a Republican (at least up until Trump showed up) if not for them. Their constant insistence on pushing their religious values on the rest of us has been turning me off for about 20 years, and it's only getting worse. I hate those bastards.
Seems to me that the religious right of which you refer is a rather small segment of the electorate, rather than a large one.
It also seems that the part of the left which calls the right evil is larger than that.
In the end, people calling others evil because of their political positions probably needs to stop. It's not constructive in the least.
The, "religious right", is right up there with the alt-right...neither really exist.
Weeell, I won't go that far as to say that. Clearly there are some who hold to very conservitive religious beliefs, and there are some right wing nut job web sites and those who visit them.
But if there's anything to take away from the leftist / anarchist uprising and rioting as well as the biased main stream media's pissing, moaning, and wailing since the election, it's the there does seem to be a pretty significant alt-left / leftist problem here in the USA.
In the end, people calling others evil because of their political positions probably needs to stop. It's not constructive in the least.
Ok...we have all heard the Right calling the Left Libtards, Commies and unAmerican Muslim sympathizers for years. Now we have the Left rightfully calling the Right out as partisan hacks who would hand the country to Putin if it meant keeping their Right Wing fantasies alive.
Do you hate the other side?
Why?
I'll start. Even before this Trump fiasco, I developed a strong hate for the Religious Right. I'd probably be a Republican (at least up until Trump showed up) if not for them. Their constant insistence on pushing their religious values on the rest of us has been turning me off for about 20 years, and it's only getting worse. I hate those bastards.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?