The "Christian Right"

[ChristopherHall]

Chris,

have you happened to chew on my prior posts at all?

I must have missed it.

Please share how your rights have been violated?

 

[libertarian_knight]

I must have missed it.

Please share how your rights have been violated?

Different conversations with different posters.

You and I, I believe on Saturday (maybe friday) though were talking a little bit about the Calvanist reconstruction in this thread.

 

[tryreading]

If atheists or agnostics have time to worry about what is printed on money or what words are in the Pledge of Alligiance, we as a nation are doing pretty good.

Can you give me an example of an atheist being denied a liberty?

I believe all Americans should worry about Constitutional issues relating to religion and everything else. It is a duty.

I can't speak for athiests, but to answer, and I believe you are asking from a religion standpoint, freedom from religion is as important as freedom of religion, so a government employee leading a public school class in the 'Under God' pledge would be a violation of an athiests right to be free of this government imposed religious oath established in his school.

 

[ChristopherHall]

I believe all Americans should worry about Constitutional issues relating to religion and everything else. It is a duty.

I can't speak for athiests, but to answer, and I believe you are asking from a religion standpoint, freedom from religion is as important as freedom of religion, so a government employee leading a public school class in the 'Under God' pledge would be a violation of an athiests right to be free of this government imposed religious oath established in his school.

How is the pledge a "religious oath"? The pledge is a pledge of alligiance to the flat and the republic for which it stands, not a religion.

 

[tryreading]

How is the pledge a "religious oath"? The pledge is a pledge of alligiance to the flat and the republic for which it stands, not a religion.

The Pledge was non-religious for the first ninety years it was recited, then religion, monotheism, was inserted, and, in my opinion, it became religious. I do understand that it was originally written as an oath to the flag and our country.

I'm not for removing any right a Christian may have, but there is no reason to expect all children in a public classroom to recite the Pledge with 'Under God' added. Why impose this on them? It is unnecessary, untrue for some of the kids, and illegal in my humble opinion.

 

[ChristopherHall]

The Pledge was non-religious for the first ninety years it was recited, then religion, monotheism, was inserted, and, in my opinion, it became religious. I do understand that it was originally written as an oath to the flag and our country.

I'm not for removing any right a Christian may have, but there is no reason to expect all children in a public classroom to recite the Pledge with 'Under God' added. Why impose this on them? It is unnecessary, untrue for some of the kids, and illegal in my humble opinion.

How is "God" defined?

Webster's dictionary defines "God" as:

Main Entry: 1god
Pronunciation: 'gäd also 'god
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German got god
1 : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshiped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind
2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality
3 : a person or thing of supreme value
4 : a powerful ruler

The term "God" doesn't have to mean anything religious at all. If you see it as "religious", that's your choice.

 

[Robodoon]

Maybe someone could clear this up for me: Why does the Christian Right in the USA behave like Jews gone wrong?

Who is that? The Jews are Gods people who are sleeping and will wake up.

I see so much of the religious political debate involving Christianity in this country focusing on Old Testement theology that Jews themselves don't treat the same way.

Christians should focus on the new not the old for we are not Jews, and many Jews have forgotten who they are.

So much furor developed and remains concerning displays of the 10 Commandments given to the Jews by Moses being displayed on Public Buildings and courts. But no Christian furor (or at least large public movement) in favor of public displays of the beatitudes.

Christians aren't doing much of nothing lately , and some have got rapture train on the brain and aren't moving...very sad.

Why is that? Why are Christians fighting for Judeaism?

Well the Christian should protect the Jew, as we have found mercy...but..a JEW who finds Christ has a right and a duty to do what the rest of us can not. Parts of the body.

I don't have a problem with Jews or the Jewish faith at all, but NONE of the jews I have ever met espoused the Jewish Religion the way Christians espouse the Old Testement. After all, I would defer to the Jewish interpretation of the Old Testement. (Mind you, I haven't ever met a Israeli Jewish Settler though, I live in NY state after all, and they may be different, I don't know).

they are cold, asleep, blinded.

It just seems to me, Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell etc all seem to be Angry Jews, not Merciful, Peace Loving, Humble Christians. And I have no idea why, it's almost like Christ's Teachings were meaningless to them, and that all that matters, especially to the pentacostals, is simply saying, something to the effect, that Jesus is God's Doorman.

Well the above listed don't stand for the truth much of the time and are very willing to go along for the ride IMO.

When I read the words attributed to Christ I get the sense of Peace, Honesty, Charity and all the things that make people Good and want to do Good.

I watch the 700 Club, and I sense evil and hatred pouring out of those gawdy monstrosities. I don't believe in the devil, but damn I am all but convinced those poeple are in fact the devil incarnate.

Why don't you believe in the devil? The Bible talks about him, our leaders follow him



Manly P. Hall clarified Albert Pike's

When the Mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his Craft. The seeth*ing energies of Lucifer are in his hands. . . ,58`

most of our leaders are masonic based.

ITS ON OUR MONEY

Thats a symbol for Lucifers power and folly, around it it says , he has approved or he has provided for the new order of the ages.

AND OUR LEADERS GO TO DEVIL RITES ...ON FILM

http://www.infowars.com/bg1.html

AND who they are pushing is the UN, and the UN has "LUCIFER PUBLISHING" running its meditation/prayer room, today they are called Lucis Trust
www.lucistrust.org.

Why don't you believe in the Devil when every one of power on earth is calling to him, and they do it in the open many times.

What does the Church of Satan Say?
The Church of Satan talks about the New World Order.

The Church of Satan summarizes this yin-yang philosophy well:

"Our objective? Closure to this unnatural dichotomy.... Bringing flesh and spirit together. The establishment of a New World Order, free of guilt, self-loathing and shame, where every man and woman is the god of his or her own life."

"The Satanist does not worship evil. We honor ourselves and nature and respect opposition in balance! Evil... is simply a convenient label we slap on those who are politically incorrect. The ascended masters of Eastern Philosophy are the fallen angels of Western Philosophy. One man's ‘demons’ are another man's ‘saints.’ Yes, we inhabit a universe of conflict and duality, but the source of all life is the One, whose center is everywhere.... [7]"

7. "www.churchofsatan.org/


This is just what the men of power on Earth talk about and SEEK ..RIGHT NOW! in plan sight of man.

 

[libertarian_knight]

How is "God" defined?

Webster's dictionary defines "God" as:

Main Entry: 1god
Pronunciation: 'gäd also 'god
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German got god
1 : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshiped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind
2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality
3 : a person or thing of supreme value
4 : a powerful ruler

The term "God" doesn't have to mean anything religious at all. If you see it as "religious", that's your choice.

I think 1a satisfies it. As of course, man creates the religion around God.

 

[tryreading]

How is "God" defined?

Webster's dictionary defines "God" as:

Main Entry: 1god
Pronunciation: 'gäd also 'god
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German got god
1 : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshiped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind
2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality
3 : a person or thing of supreme value
4 : a powerful ruler

The term "God" doesn't have to mean anything religious at all. If you see it as "religious", that's your choice.

I don't think I have ever in my life met anyone who doesn't think God is a religious term. God was inserted into the Pledge for religious reasons, and likewise it was printed on money and made part of the latest national motto for religious reasons. Congress mandated the use of the term in these instances for religious reasons, no question.

One dictionary definition of 'God' includes 'an extremely handsome man.' I don't think Congress intended the Pledge to translate as 'one nation, indivisible, under an extremely handsome man.' Of course I'm trying to be humorous here, but I'm sure I know which definition of God you think is appropriate.

 

[ChristopherHall]

I think 1a satisfies it. As of course, man creates the religion around God.

Ahhh...but you "chose" that definition? Obviously you believe in God or want to be offended.

 

[ChristopherHall]

I don't think I have ever in my life met anyone who doesn't think God is a religious term. God was inserted into the Pledge for religious reasons, and likewise it was printed on money and made part of the latest national motto for religious reasons. Congress mandated the use of the term in these instances for religious reasons, no question.

One dictionary definition of 'God' includes 'an extremely handsome man.' I don't think Congress intended the Pledge to translate as 'one nation, indivisible, under an extremely handsome man.' Of course I'm trying to be humorous here, but I'm sure I know which definition of God you think is appropriate.

My point is that the term "God" can have any meaning any individual wishes to assign to it. For our Founding Fathers, who were deists, they most likely saw the term "God" in a more philosophical sense.

 

[ChristopherHall]

How does saying the Pledge of Allegiance endanger anyone's life, liberty, or property?

Most likely students are for more worried about being forced to take a midterm exam than say the pledge.

If one can prove that more students feel compelled to "pray" when forced to take an exam than when forced to say the pledge...should we ban exams? :lol:

 

[tryreading]

My point is that the term "God" can have any meaning any individual wishes to assign to it. For our Founding Fathers, who were deists, they most likely saw the term "God" in a more philosophical sense.

It can. But it doesn't with the situations I brought up.

You could write your second sentence over and over, and I would appreciate it every time.

How much intermixing of religion and government do you think would be okay in this country? Serious question. There is the fact that many members of Congress are religious, and their religion does not disappear from their minds while in session, and they can be reverent and express their beliefs at any time, ending a speech with 'God bless the American people,' for instance, or embracing their Bible or Torah. These expressions of faith are good, right, legal, proper and no one should have a problem with that. But when religious monuments are installed in public buildings and laws are made endorsing religion, I think the line has been crossed per establishment. Where should separation begin in your opinion?

 

[libertarian_knight]

My point is that the term "God" can have any meaning any individual wishes to assign to it. For our Founding Fathers, who were deists, they most likely saw the term "God" in a more philosophical sense.

But our founders did not put "under God" in the pledge, anti-soviet communists fervor did. (Matthew 6:1)

"In God We Trust" though printed on SOME coins, also became the national motto as anti-soviet rieghteousness.
"
God certainly can have different meanings, and the "behavior" of God can be manifest or explained in and endless tream of ways. However, the most common and popular usage, especially during the 1950s and today, is that God is a single supremely divine being.

Bear in mind, that as wise as the founder were concerning the interactions of man related to man, they were ignorant of the electron.

 

[ChristopherHall]

It can. But it doesn't with the situations I brought up.

You could write your second sentence over and over, and I would appreciate it every time.

How much intermixing of religion and government do you think would be okay in this country? Serious question. There is the fact that many members of Congress are religious, and their religion does not disappear from their minds while in session, and they can be reverent and express their beliefs at any time, ending a speech with 'God bless the American people,' for instance, or embracing their Bible or Torah. These expressions of faith are good, right, legal, proper and no one should have a problem with that. But when religious monuments are installed in public buildings and laws are made endorsing religion, I think the line has been crossed per establishment. Where should separation begin in your opinion?

Great question. I believe in the Constitution of the United States of America. Regarding the establishment of religion it reads:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Unless Congress has made a "law" to establish a specific national religion I would say the first Amendment hasn't been violated. In addition, I believe any laws passed by Congress that would prohibit the free exercise of religion for any American citizen in any way is UnConstitutional.

 

[ChristopherHall]

Here's just a tid-bit of trivia most on the right of this debate typically don't know. The Pledge of Allegiance was written by Francis Bellamy. Rev. Bellamy was a Baptist minister. He was also a Christian Socialist.

All you Christians on the left...let me hear ya cheer! :lol:

 

[tryreading]

Great question. I believe in the Constitution of the United States of America. Regarding the establishment of religion it reads:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Unless Congress has made a "law" to establish a specific national religion I would say the first Amendment hasn't been violated. In addition, I believe any laws passed by Congress that would prohibit the free exercise of religion for any American citizen in any way is UnConstitutional.

That's why I bring up the 'Pledge and 'In God We Trust.'

Both were mandated by Congress last century, like LK said below. Congress also changed our national motto from 'E Pluribus Unum' to 'In God We Trust,' last century. These are laws 'respecting an establishment of religion,' are they not?

But also, what about the intermixing thing?

 

[libertarian_knight]

How does saying the Pledge of Allegiance endanger anyone's life, liberty, or property?

Most likely students are for more worried about being forced to take a midterm exam than say the pledge.

If one can prove that more students feel compelled to "pray" when forced to take an exam than when forced to say the pledge...should we ban exams? :lol:

The bold part. LMAO. got my good laugh of the day out of that. thanks.

The pledge, other than being a form of socialist indoctrination, when voluntarily recited, of course does not violate anyone's rights.

The question, of course, is whether it violates the Constitution as by created a law, defining what the pledge shall be, that concerns the institution of religion.

I personally, think there is a problem with the socialist indoctrination that the pledge facilitates that is much more insidious than the "under God" portion of it.

Matthew 6:1

 

[ChristopherHall]

That's why I bring up the 'Pledge and 'In God We Trust.'

Both were mandated by Congress last century, like LK said below. Congress also changed our national motto from 'E Pluribus Unum' to 'In God We Trust,' last century. These are laws 'respecting an establishment of religion,' are they not?

But also, what about the intermixing thing?

What religion is it establishing?

 

[ChristopherHall]

The bold part. LMAO. got my good laugh of the day out of that. thanks.

The pledge, other than being a form of socialist indoctrination, when voluntarily recited, of course does not violate anyone's rights.

The question, of course, is whether it violates the Constitution as by created a law, defining what the pledge shall be, that concerns the institution of religion.

I personally, think there is a problem with the socialist indoctrination that the pledge facilitates that is much more insidious than the "under God" portion of it.

Matthew 6:1

Well, I would need to know what religion it is establishing. And I have a love hate relationship with the state. I lean center left on economics and very conservative on moral issues. I can't find anyone I feel comfortable voting for! :doh

Since the Pledge was written by a socialist, I feel I have an awsome inside joke when hanging out with my rightwing friends. :lol:

 

[Engimo]

What religion is it establishing?

Any religion. It is "respecting an establishment" of religion by recognizing it in a state-sponsored pledge.

 

[libertarian_knight]

I do want to point out, even though I have also been part of it, this thread has deviated some. My concern was not "god in government" more so it was about the desire and influence of the "Christian Right" in American society, not limited to the political sphere only.

 

[ChristopherHall]

Any religion. It is "respecting an establishment" of religion by recognizing it in a state-sponsored pledge.

Again, what religion. The term "God" is philosophical to a deist, principle for an agnostic, perhaps it means just a higher sense of goodness for an atheist. As I pointed out before the following defintions for God are acceptable:

Main Entry: 1god
Pronunciation: 'gäd also 'god
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German got god
1 : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshiped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind
2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality
3 : a person or thing of supreme value
4 : a powerful ruler

If you choose a religious defintion...that's your choice. It just shows you're choosing to be offended.

 

[tryreading]

How does saying the Pledge of Allegiance endanger anyone's life, liberty, or property?

Most likely students are for more worried about being forced to take a midterm exam than say the pledge.

If one can prove that more students feel compelled to "pray" when forced to take an exam than when forced to say the pledge...should we ban exams? :lol:

That is the thing. When students feel they should pray, that's when they should pray. They can do that anytime, as long as they don't disrupt class. Their rights are preserved, they can worship their God. But government cannot lead or compel them in any way. I think the Founders intended a clearcut separation, especially Jefferson, who wrote the establishment clause.

 

[ChristopherHall]

That is the thing. When students feel they should pray, that's when they should pray. They can do that anytime, as long as they don't disrupt class. Their rights are preserved, they can worship their God. But government cannot lead or compel them in any way. I think the Founders intended a clearcut separation, especially Jefferson, who wrote the establishment clause.

Jefferson was running for President. One thing I learned a long time ago...never believe a man running for President, he'll say almost anything. :lol:

Here's a link to some very interesting statements made by many of our founding fathers.

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/founding.html#ja