• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

In God We Divide?


We'll just have to agree to disagree then.

We've each heard the other's argument and simply disagree on the interpretation of the facts at hand.

You’re trying to argue this to an absolute degree when not even the right to life can not be argued to an absolute degree.

The final stroke of the extreme you seek is to tear down the entire capitol city itself. The fact that that will never happen, alone, shows that your conclusion is not an attainable goal.
 

I just want whoever is making the 'In God We Trust,' and 'Under God,' and Judge Roy Moore monument installations to stop, and at least the more recent (from 1789 on - okay, from 1850 on) religious laws reversed. Roy Moore was stopped, and rightly so, because he was going to have his Ten Commandments monolith in his court house and to hell with anybody who saw it as wrong. Besides breaking the law, he was a control freak, and I think people who want American law to support their religion all fit into that category.

Where would you stop the intermixing? Prayer in public school, Intelligent Design, 'Under God,' providing churches with huge sums of taxpayer money? The Constitution has two broad warnings about any religion/government partership, and they are the law, included for good reason.
 
The final stroke of the extreme you seek is to tear down the entire capitol city itself. The fact that that will never happen, alone, shows that your conclusion is not an attainable goal.

Naw, if Ashcroft can cover a naked statue with draperies, we can hang curtains over the worst of the violations.
 
Alright, you guys suck at arguing your own side, so I'll do it for you:

In light of this conversation I logged on to Coast to Coast AM and went back to an interview of David Ovason.

A membership is required to hear the interview and verify my quotation of it below, so if that disqualifies his words as evidence in an online discussion then I accept that.

Here's a link to the page the interview can be found on:
COAST TO COAST AM WITH GEORGE NOORY: SHOWS

Regarding the initial impulse for the experiment in democracy which America is:
Most of the people involved in the design of the Great Seal were in fact Masons; A Christian symbol underpinning most of their beliefs. I mean George Washington himself was one of the most famous Masons, and was certainly a Christian.

Regarding the 4 mottos found on the dollar David Ovason had this to say:


(1) Annuit Coeptis - Origin and Meaning of the Motto Above the Pyramid & Eye
(2) Novus Ordo Seclorum - Origin and Meaning of the Motto Beneath the American Pyramid
(3) E Pluribus Unum - Origin and Meaning of the Motto Carried by the American Eagle
(4) St. Augustus - Catholic Online
(5) IN GOD WE TRUST
 
Last edited:
I thought that it was "freedom OF religion" not "freedom FROM religion" ...with the focus on removing Christianity from the US at any cost and under any stupid "reasoning" while touting and emphasizing any other religion in the same breath. And not by anyone here, just those who are the root of all anti-Christian movements.

The history behind the above phrase was due to the fact (look it up) that those who fled England due to religious persecution knew a government in which someone had to be of a specific faith in order to be in that government. That was not acceptable for the founding fathers. And that's the bottom line.

And to whomever implied that more people=more violence. It's about percentages, not head count. But....how's China doing? How agnostic is that country? What's their population vs. their murder/drug/Britney Spears rate vs. the US? And how religious is that country? And I am willing to be proved wrong. I haven't done enough research to do anything other than throw this out for thought.
 

You don't have "freedom OF religion" unless it includes the right to be "free FROM religion." The goal of separatists is NOT to remove Christianity from the US, but to remove the government sponsorship of Christianity or any other religion.


Those who fled England due to religious persecution set up harsh theocracies with every aspect of religious life regulated and enforced as their own government in this country. Those who wrote the US Constitution were almost 200 years past that development in history. Some separatists were influenced by the Enlightenment in Europe, some were influenced by the corruption in state churches, but whatever the reason, a majority of the founders wanted government to be free from church control.
 

That is precisely why they should be removed. By even mentioning the name 'God' it is suggesting that American governement is putting trust into a non-existent entity. I find it embarassing as an American to suggest that my government is so short-sighted and superstitious, and that it's citizens could be fooled by such clearly insane logic.
 

Good point. China is a great example of how peaceful society can be when there is not this malignant force of monotheism and fundamentalism.
 
I do not understand why this topic is a long drawnout debate. We're a divided nation. Some believe in GOD, others believe in whatever they want
to believe in, and who are we to knock a person because they don't have
the same religious believes we have. Our problem today is our expectations
of others, and most seem to think its their way or no way at all.
 

Well put.

We need neutrality from government regarding religion.

People are religious, or not, and they have the complete freedom to be either per their individual conscience.

Government must be separate, taking no actions regarding the existence or non-existence of a God.
 
Now Tryreading we're on the same soundwave pattern. I agree that there is
no place for politics in any church. The government has mixed politics bigtime
in the middle east holy wars. Which has mixed the bullshit so strong until its
smell is at a level where it can be smelled all over the world.

Again...yes in GOD we are divided, and as long as the Priests,Preachers,and
others is money greedy we will always be divided.
 
You don't have "freedom OF religion" unless it includes the right to be "free FROM religion."

Only if the absence of religion is a religion, so if you have a good argument showing how Atheism is a religion lets hear it.

The goal of separatists is NOT to remove Christianity from the US, but to remove the government sponsorship of Christianity or any other religion.

Then since IGWT is not government censorship you don't object to it.


Then since IGWT established no state religion, nor grants any church judicial power, you have no objection to it.
 

IGWT only shows that the citizens of the country trust in God, not the government.

The entire subject over rather or not God exists is entirely irrelevant, as even if He didn't exist citizens are still putting trust Him.
 
Only if the absence of religion is a religion, so if you have a good argument showing how Atheism is a religion lets hear it.

Not so. FREEDOM OF includes ALL options, not just a selected few choices.



Then since IGWT is not government censorship you don't object to it.

I do object to government sponsorship or favoritism toward ANY religion.



Then since IGWT established no state religion, nor grants any church judicial power, you have no objection to it.

It grants a church special privileges, the privilege of using government property to express their theology. Why do you think Christians are USING such examples to claim special favor such as in claiming a right to taxpayer support for their programs, by asserting "The founders intended this to be a Christian (only) nation, that inscription proves it?"
 



Good point. China is a great example of how peaceful society can be when there is not this malignant force of monotheism and fundamentalism.



Asian Marketing, Market Research and Economic Capsule Review

You look up to a communist country as an example of how this capitalist country should become, and argue in favor of what makes a communist country possible and durable and advocate the implementation of that cornerstone here.

One can only assume that you favor communism.
 
Not so. FREEDOM OF includes ALL options, not just a selected few choices.

…..and "bald" is a hair color…..

I do object to government sponsorship or favoritism toward ANY religion.

That's just too bad.
I haven't seen your proposal of what the new dollar should look like, so let’s see it.


Any King Nimrod can come along and claim that some obscure engraving, picture, etc., somehow establishes a right or privilege for this or that.

A motto is not a law so they must show a law which establishes what they want, or they don’t have anything to claim.

Enumerate these "special privileges" in the act which established IGWT.
 

What's wrong with Communism? Ever since the 1950s, America has used Communism as an excuse for war, emergency action, and displays of inane patriotism. True communism is not practiced by any communsistic countries in which government officials wallow in luxury- communism entails that all people are equal and recieve equal resources.
 
IGWT only shows that the citizens of the country trust in God, not the government.

The entire subject over rather or not God exists is entirely irrelevant, as even if He didn't exist citizens are still putting trust Him.

Many of the citizens in this country trust in God.

Whether he exists or not is not the argument.

Any citizen can put his trust in God, that's his right. But the government has no place in trusting and establishing him.
 
Only if the absence of religion is a religion, so if you have a good argument showing how Atheism is a religion lets hear it.

You speaketh in tongues, I think.

I don't believe in a God. Is that my right, or not?
 
Any King Nimrod can come along and claim that some obscure engraving, picture, etc., somehow establishes a right or privilege for this or that.

Obscure? I thought it was being claimed that such engravings were displayed in prominent places, and so frequently that it was unmistakable that the founders meant this to be a Christian nation.

A motto is not a law so they must show a law which establishes what they want, or they don’t have anything to claim.

All they have to do is convince enough people that their INTERPRETATION is correct.

Enumerate these "special privileges" in the act which established IGWT.

The special privileges which resulted are placing declarations from one religion to the exclusion of others in public places using public money to do so and public money to maintain the sites.
 

It's a conspiracy theory I receive flack for subscribing to....on the one hand I flamed for seeing the rise of the communist’s agenda executing in America; on the other folks are like "yeah, so what".
 
Many of the citizens in this country trust in God.

Whether he exists or not is not the argument.

Any citizen can put his trust in God, that's his right. But the government has no place in trusting and establishing him.

IGWT created no state religion nor gave any church judicial power.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…