Was America founded on Judeo-Christian Values or Secular Values?

[Topsez]

The public school system was created by law and is run by the government. Conducting religious rituals in public schools would be endorsement of religion by government and acknowledgement of a God in a setting that should be neutral. It would be state establishment of religion, an official statement that there is a God and the state itself is sure of his existence, and the state will post religious dogma and install religious symbols and monuments in its buildings just because it desires to do so.

Let me clear up something before proceeding, you seem to me, to profess that Prez Jefferson was a progressive secular and in your mind that results in a belief that he did not believe in God in any form… Many refer to the age of enlightenment as the birth of recognition that science has determined that God is a myth and therefore secular thinking was evolved in the likes of Washington and Jefferson that created this government free of God. That is a myth argued by atheists using Jefferson words and the constitution out of context.

Above you state “would be endorsement of religion by government and acknowledgement of a God in a setting that should be neutral.” The government never refused to acknowledge God… it has merely stated it, the government will not establish a religion (inside the government)… I will not choose a flavor or denomination, but it certainly doesn’t refuse the existence of God. You argue the Senate prayer is unconstitutional… what fact do you base that on? No religion was established, simply acknowledgement of God and Judeo Christian values inherent within the government.

To understand the “secular” Prez Jefferson and the clause in the US Constitution you need to understand the roots of Nature’s God that Jefferson acknowledged… Nature’s God is not a God separate from the religious God the Judeo Christians place values in. Read the following links in intireity to understand that it is, in the mind of the religious philosophers God that gives us these rights. Jefferson based his Nature’s God on this document: Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. (Read the footnote below 17 which indicates Marquis de Lafayette influenced him…

Therefore the National Assembly recognizes and proclaims, in the presence and under the auspices of the Supreme Being, the following rights of man and of the citizen:

Source:http://www.constitution.org/fr/fr_drm.htm

Selection 23 of below link…
Source: http://www.constitution.org/cs_found.htm

Lafayette was influenced by John Locke who was influenced by Hooker …

unless the lord and master of them all should, by any manifest declaration of his will, set one above another, and confer on him, by an evident and clear appointment, an undoubted right to dominion and sovereignty.

http://www.constitution.org/jl/2ndtr02.htm
It goes on to read:

The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one another's pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another's uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for our's. Every one, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.

Now what parts of these references prove your views are correct and me wrong. The government is neutral to denomination of religion but open to recognition of GOD… I don’t see how anyone could conclude otherwise our constitution and bill of rights reads out of John Locke and Conservatism that is also based on the higher being.

 

[Columbusite]

Problem is, no where in the Constitution do we have a recognition of God, any God for that matter. That is the document we base our government on and it is void of religion and God, thereby leaving religious matters up to individuals.

 

[Voidwar]

Well, no the morals in the Judeo Christian understanding and teaching is much different than Bhuddists or Islamic or secular pre Christian morals...

Bullshit, as I am CERTAIN one can find PLENTY of examples of Christians not giving two shits about their neighbors.

Anne Frank ring a bell ?

You are quite simply wrong. Neither good citizenship, nor compassion are particular to the Abrahamic religions, and the rel;igions themselves contradict each other, so , as I stated, the term "Judeo Christian" is a meaningless oxymoron.

 

[Topsez]

Bullshit, as I am CERTAIN one can find PLENTY of examples of Christians not giving two shits about their neighbors.

Anne Frank ring a bell ?

You are quite simply wrong. Neither good citizenship, nor compassion are particular to the Abrahamic religions, and the rel;igions themselves contradict each other, so , as I stated, the term "Judeo Christian" is a meaningless oxymoron.

This nation survived without government compassion until the great depression and did so because of the strong communities of shared values. That means compassion was administered by the family, church and community and not the government since there aren’t vast reports of people living in sub human lifestyles. Actually, still now the church provides much of the compassion to the homeless and exports compassion through NGO’s around the world. America is the most generous nations on earth and the most Judeo Christian populated.

This entire thread is based on values and I think America has excellent values, more so in the past but still today in comparison to other nations. The secular progressives try ever so hard to tear down the values and yet America remains a Christian nation.

Judeo-Christian Values= collective values represented by each group; Christian values traits and ethics(found in each flavor) & Judaism value traits and ethics.

 

[Columbusite]

America is the most generous nations on earth and the most Judeo Christian populated.

This entire thread is based on values and I think America has excellent values, more so in the past but still today in comparison to other nations. The secular progressives try ever so hard to tear down the values and yet America remains a Christian nation.

I am perplexed not only by the fact you say we have excellent values compared to other countries, which I will demonstrate is false, but your statement that we had better values in the past. In the past, children worked long days in factories, women couldn't vote, domestic violence was OK, gay people were beaten & killed, blacks were lynched and segregated from whites, and list goes on, all was supported by good, god-fearing Christians simply following the Bible. Today, gay people are still 2nd class citizens and if you're an Atheist 60% of Americans won't vote for you simply for that reason. There were no golden days. Things are better now by far.

If you want to give credit when your religion does good, you also have to give it credit for the bad that comes from it. The states with the most conservatively religious people also have higher rates of murder, rape, divorce, and the like than liberal states. We excel over all other 1st world countries like Japan and Sweden when it comes to the above. Both are heavily non-Christian, and yet they do a better job than real-life Christians in a majority Christian country! But if you want a handout, assuming you are correct, then we are the ones to go to. Just don't come here if you you don't like being raped, want a successful marriage, or want to live. I don't know about you, but personally, I'd rather we had the stats found in other industrialized nations (and they accept evolution to boot!).

 

[Topsez]

I am perplexed not only by the fact you say we have excellent values compared to other countries, which I will demonstrate is false, but your statement that we had better values in the past. In the past, children worked long days in factories, women couldn't vote, domestic violence was OK, gay people were beaten & killed, blacks were lynched and segregated from whites, and list goes on, all was supported by good, god-fearing Christians simply following the Bible. Today, gay people are still 2nd class citizens and if you're an Atheist 60% of Americans won't vote for you simply for that reason. There were no golden days. Things are better now by far.

If you want to give credit when your religion does good, you also have to give it credit for the bad that comes from it. The states with the most conservatively religious people also have higher rates of murder, rape, divorce, and the like than liberal states. We excel over all other 1st world countries like Japan and Sweden when it comes to the above. Both are heavily non-Christian, and yet they do a better job than real-life Christians in a majority Christian country! But if you want a handout, assuming you are correct, then we are the ones to go to. Just don't come here if you you don't like being raped, want a successful marriage, or want to live. I don't know about you, but personally, I'd rather we had the stats found in other industrialized nations (and they accept evolution to boot!).

So I take from your rant that you are possibly either black, atheist, gay or are in love with one. Or, maybe you are a black atheist gay person?

Regardless, I take the above rant as a vote of support that America was based on Judeo Christian values and that you are very positively uplifted by the progressive secularism movement that is using judges to change America’s origin of Judeo Christian value based.

I don’t know if I want you on my side or not?

 

[Voidwar]

Judeo-Christian Values= collective values represented by each group; Christian values traits and ethics(found in each flavor) & Judaism value traits and ethics.

Too vague to mean anything.

India had Hindu culture, and communities and neighbors, in a word, good citizenship, without ever hearing of Jehovah or Christ.

Name one , specific, "judeo christian" value.

An example might be "Thou shalt not steal", , ,
and an example of its refutation would be the fact that the Hammurabic code predates the "commandments".

The term "Judeo Christian Values" is meaningless in and of itself.
In practice, the phrase is voiced in an attempt by Christianity to take undeserved credit for inventing good citizenship.

 

[Topsez]

Too vague to mean anything.

India had Hindu culture, and communities and neighbors, in a word, good citizenship, without ever hearing of Jehovah or Christ.

Name one , specific, "judeo christian" value.

An example might be "Thou shalt not steal", , ,
and an example of its refutation would be the fact that the Hammurabic code predates the "commandments".

The term "Judeo Christian Values" is meaningless in and of itself.
In practice, the phrase is voiced in an attempt by Christianity to take undeserved credit for inventing good citizenship.

Well, I’m aware there were common law predating Christ and am aware of several societies that applied rule of law without religion associated… This is the rule of absolute where ethics-morals absolute value is one that is good in itself rather than useful for obtaining something else, and an absolute principle is one that permits of no exceptions. In metaphysics and theology the term Absolute usually refers to God. In fact King Hammurabi acquired his absolute authority from the sun God.


A couple posts back I posted links with historic basis for the bill of rights, which were based on religious philosophy refined over several decades that determined the rights of man are those similar to those Hammurabi gleaned from his God but in this case it came from the Christian God. The importance of the difference is that the absolute was that of God or god given rights. At the time in Europe the Pope and Kings ruled and neither were directly appointed by God. The absolute is God in the god given rights and short of God returning to earth and proclaiming a King then the rights were the absolute of the people.

The people based their rights on “their god” as they viewed “their god” within their denomination… The founders didn’t want to involve sorting out what couldn’t be proven… which denomination possesses the absolute of God… Therefore the adoption of the common law reflected absolute law as viewed by the religious denomination dominate in the state or group of states.

The absolute ethic moral had been transferred from Pope and King to each man and the majority of Americans were Judeo-Christian therefore our nation is a Christian nation and laws are based on Judeo-Christian values of the Judeo-Christian God. I think even Columbusite figured that out and determined he would prefer a king (judge) decide right and wrong verses the absolute of God. Our government made us all equal absolute judges of law and some don’t like the way the absolute treats gays and other moral issues but the absolute is not an appointed judge but the people. Ours is the only system in the world of its kind.

 

[Columbusite]

So I take from your rant that you are possibly either black, atheist, gay or are in love with one. Or, maybe you are a black atheist gay person?

Regardless, I take the above rant as a vote of support that America was based on Judeo Christian values and that you are very positively uplifted by the progressive secularism movement that is using judges to change America’s origin of Judeo Christian value based.

I don’t know if I want you on my side or not?

Rant? Those are statements of facts. You can take them to mean that Americans, particularly Christians, have ignored parts our secular Constitution whenever they wanted throughout our history and now that the Constitution is actually being followed they percieve this as some sort of attack. Some (those who don't understand nuance) see government neutrality as anti-Christian. What is really happening is that those Christians being favored over others is becoming a thing of the past and they didn't like the fact that they were put on equal footing with ni**ers and even worse in the near future, fa**ots (if they aren't already living in Massachusetts). FYI, you don't have to be an Atheist for Atheist equality, gay for gay equality, black for black equality, and to suggest otherwise is idiotic. It's called being a good American, i.e., one that stands up for the Constitution.

 

[Duke]

Let me clear up something before proceeding, you seem to me, to profess that Prez Jefferson was a progressive secular and in your mind that results in a belief that he did not believe in God in any form… Many refer to the age of enlightenment as the birth of recognition that science has determined that God is a myth and therefore secular thinking was evolved in the likes of Washington and Jefferson that created this government free of God. That is a myth argued by atheists using Jefferson words and the constitution out of context.

Of course Jefferson and his buddies were Christian. But they weren't idiots. They knew better than to infuse the government with religious laws, discriminatory principles and intolerant precepts. He knew that a government that put God before freedom was an awful one indeed. If only he could be here to teach you these things.


Duke

 

[Voidwar]

Well, I’m aware there were common law predating Christ and am aware of several societies that applied rule of law without religion associated… This is the rule of absolute where ethics-morals absolute value is one that is good in itself rather than useful for obtaining something else, and an absolute principle is one that permits of no exceptions. In metaphysics and theology the term Absolute usually refers to God. In fact King Hammurabi acquired his absolute authority from the sun God.


A couple posts back I posted links with historic basis for the bill of rights, which were based on religious philosophy refined over several decades that determined the rights of man are those similar to those Hammurabi gleaned from his God but in this case it came from the Christian God. The importance of the difference is that the absolute was that of God or god given rights. At the time in Europe the Pope and Kings ruled and neither were directly appointed by God. The absolute is God in the god given rights and short of God returning to earth and proclaiming a King then the rights were the absolute of the people.

The people based their rights on “their god” as they viewed “their god” within their denomination… The founders didn’t want to involve sorting out what couldn’t be proven… which denomination possesses the absolute of God… Therefore the adoption of the common law reflected absolute law as viewed by the religious denomination dominate in the state or group of states.

The absolute ethic moral had been transferred from Pope and King to each man and the majority of Americans were Judeo-Christian therefore our nation is a Christian nation and laws are based on Judeo-Christian values of the Judeo-Christian God. I think even Columbusite figured that out and determined he would prefer a king (judge) decide right and wrong verses the absolute of God. Our government made us all equal absolute judges of law and some don’t like the way the absolute treats gays and other moral issues but the absolute is not an appointed judge but the people. Ours is the only system in the world of its kind.

Um, thats a lotta typin but its . . .

Too vague to mean anything.

Name one , specific, "judeo christian" value.

( btw, trial by jury is not unique to Christianity either )

 

[tryreading]

Of course Jefferson and his buddies were Christian. But they weren't idiots. They knew better than to infuse the government with religious laws, discriminatory principles and intolerant precepts. He knew that a government that put God before freedom was an awful one indeed. If only he could be here to teach you these things.


Duke

No, they were not all Christians. Thomas Jefferson was a confirmed non-Christian. He didn't believe in the Trinity, but believed only in God. He believed Jesus was just a man, and even wrote a book about the teachings of Jesus and his life, but deliberately omitted any hint of miracules and divinity.

Washington was a deist too. Yes, he went to church with his wife, who was a Christian, but he never took communion, always leaving beforehand.

James Madison? I wouldn't say he's a Christian. There are many conflicting statements in his writings about belonging to a specific sect. But he did believe in God.

Benjamin Franklin said he was a deist.

Anyway, many people assume the Founders were all Christians. Probably the majority of the men in the First Continental Congress were, but some were not.

Regardless, you are right about them not being idiots, because they did create a Constitution of law, not a religious document.

 

[Topsez]

Um, thats a lotta typin but its . . .




( btw, trial by jury is not unique to Christianity either )

It is filled with facts is the reason it is difficult to refute... In post 101, I think I posted links to origin of rights in the bill of rights that were based on the Christian God... Earlier in this thread I put into context that there was a bible revival of epic proportion going on at the time... MA was a theocracy among other states... Think timeline with this secular Jefferson mindset and ask yourself if you are sane or brainwashed by the far left... The links in post 101 basing Jefferson's position were presented to the King, the master or what ever authority rulled France on that date in 1789... The King, the master or what ever authority you liketo call him rulling France had been deposed in 1793 when a dude took over, in your image of Jefferson, restarted the calandar to year 0000 and declared a ten day week to f&*k with the Christians.... the period was known as the "Reign of Terror". Now you would have to be an idiot, ignorant to think that someone in 1789 would present this ruller a secular progressive document of people's individual rights after just being reinstated to the throan... The progressive secular period in France was the Reign of Terror... the stained glass of the chruch filled the street and Minsiters were stoned during the ten day weeks... faithful Christians in the south of France revolted causing it possible for this joker to return to the throan.

The rights of man based on Christian philosophers was introduced as it was to Washington who was a FEDERALIST, who didn't support the bill of rights... The Christians supporting the anti federalist Jefferson caused Washington to buckle and give the people their individual rights... Stop with the talking points of atheists and address the FACTS that such introduction of a Reign of Terror progressive movement would not have been supported by the overwhelming MAJORITY of bible thumpers that had to rattify the Constitution... It was NEUTRAL to a denomination of the Christian faith not Reign of TError origin! Are you slow or what?

 

[Duke]

No, they were not all Christians. Thomas Jefferson was a confirmed non-Christian. He didn't believe in the Trinity, but believed only in God. He believed Jesus was just a man, and even wrote a book about the teachings of Jesus and his life, but deliberately omitted any hint of miracules and divinity.

Washington was a deist too. Yes, he went to church with his wife, who was a Christian, but he never took communion, always leaving beforehand.

James Madison? I wouldn't say he's a Christian. There are many conflicting statements in his writings about belonging to a specific sect. But he did believe in God.

Benjamin Franklin said he was a deist.

Anyway, many people assume the Founders were all Christians. Probably the majority of the men in the First Continental Congress were, but some were not.

Regardless, you are right about them not being idiots, because they did create a Constitution of law, not a religious document.

Interesting, thank you for the information.


Duke

 

[Voidwar]

It is filled with facts is the reason it is difficult to refute... In post 101, I think I posted links to origin of rights in the bill of rights that were based on the Christian God... Earlier in this thread I put into context that there was a bible revival of epic proportion going on at the time... MA was a theocracy among other states... Think timeline with this secular Jefferson mindset and ask yourself if you are sane or brainwashed by the far left... The links in post 101 basing Jefferson's position were presented to the King, the master or what ever authority rulled France on that date in 1789... The King, the master or what ever authority you liketo call him rulling France had been deposed in 1793 when a dude took over, in your image of Jefferson, restarted the calandar to year 0000 and declared a ten day week to f&*k with the Christians.... the period was known as the "Reign of Terror". Now you would have to be an idiot, ignorant to think that someone in 1789 would present this ruller a secular progressive document of people's individual rights after just being reinstated to the throan... The progressive secular period in France was the Reign of Terror... the stained glass of the chruch filled the street and Minsiters were stoned during the ten day weeks... faithful Christians in the south of France revolted causing it possible for this joker to return to the throan.

The rights of man based on Christian philosophers was introduced as it was to Washington who was a FEDERALIST, who didn't support the bill of rights... The Christians supporting the anti federalist Jefferson caused Washington to buckle and give the people their individual rights... Stop with the talking points of atheists and address the FACTS that such introduction of a Reign of Terror progressive movement would not have been supported by the overwhelming MAJORITY of bible thumpers that had to rattify the Constitution... It was NEUTRAL to a denomination of the Christian faith not Reign of TError origin! Are you slow or what?

Again, tons of typing in an attempt to avoid the question.

Name one specific "Judeo-Christian" value.

The reason you can't is because the term is a meaningless oxymoron.

Your little history editorial is not relevant to the question you were asked.

 

[Topsez]

Again, tons of typing in an attempt to avoid the question.

Name one specific "Judeo-Christian" value.

The reason you can't is because the term is a meaningless oxymoron.

Your little history editorial is not relevant to the question you were asked.

Actually it is relevant to the question... Have you heard the term A man is the King of his castle? Google it!
I tend to go into probably way too much detail because when communication with someone who has a firm position requires it in order to make a point that is understood. A little while back I rambled about “absolute” until I even got tired of repeating myself… My point on the US Constitution without the bill of rights was it was a simple document establishing the US Federal government… This document was the work of the federalist who desired a strong central government in order to resolve a number of issues including the debt for the war of independence and a means of taxation for support of the federal functions.

The anti federalist on the other hand insisted individual rights and did so based on the documents I posted earlier which were based on religious philosophy dating back to Locke, formerly the governor of NC and before that a religious scholar.

The point in Jefferson and fellow anti federalist pushing the bill of rights was to clearly state who gives the “person” or citizen freedom and right to property… the point was it was a god given right or “absolute right based on the natural god” Locke and others had asserted.

The secular pre Christianity ruler assumed his rights to write law from the sun god… The King of England, France and others proclaiming power over the people had claimed god, through the Catholic Church had endowed them with the right to issue out freedoms to citizens. The anti federalist argued for personal property and individual rights given from god and not from man or king. The land Jefferson and Washington homes sat on was titled to the King of England granting it to them and prior to the war their individual rights were the same… something the King controlled and issued out at his will.

Back to your question now “Name one specific "Judeo-Christian" value.” One would be the death penalty, another, limitations on marriage. But as I pointed out earlier all laws in America like property rights are titled by god and not King and the “absolute” of the law is in the way the population views values, right and wrong… good and evil… The law and the execution of the law are in the hands of man and not King or document created by man. Thus the laws, all laws of the US reflect the values of its majority that is in fact to this day Christian. All laws must pass a test of meeting nature’s gods rights to each man as they are created by the elected majority at state and federal level so clearly they are based on Judeo Christian values.

 

[Voidwar]

One would be the death penalty,

LOL Turn the other cheek ring a bell ? Vengeance is mine ?

This is not a specifically "Judeo Christian" practice, as many other cultures used it. Sorry.

another, limitations on marriage.

Bible contains honorable men with multiple wives, and both monogamy and polygamy, and the rules governing each, predate the Torah. Again, not specifically "Judeo Christian", and not even consistant within the "Judeo" and "Christian" groups.

But as I pointed out earlier all laws in America like property rights are titled by god and not King and the “absolute” of the law is in the way the population views values, right and wrong… good and evil… The law and the execution of the law are in the hands of man and not King or document created by man.

More vague crap, The Senate and People of Rome worshipped Jupiter Optimus Maximus, yet obeyed documents created by man.

It is also revealing that you attempt to talk about right and wrong, good and evil. It is evidence of my earlier contention, that . . .

The term "Judeo Christian Values" is meaningless in and of itself.
In practice, the phrase is voiced in an attempt by Christianity to take undeserved credit for inventing good citizenship.

 

[justone]

India had Hindu culture, and communities and neighbors, in a word, good citizenship, without ever hearing of Jehovah or Christ. .

As usual an atheist throws statements based on blind faith and ignorance. Casts and “untouchables”” in Hindu culture. A friend of mine travels all over the world on business. He brings back photos. He said he could not make himself to take pictures in India, - how inhumanly miserable it was. Christians would go to India to help them to get out of misery through Christians values. Indians would run to US to get a piece of Christian pie baked on Christian values.

The states with the most conservatively religious people also have higher rates of murder, rape, divorce, and the like than liberal states. We excel over all other 1st world countries like Japan and Sweden when it comes to the above. Both are heavily non-Christian, and yet they do a better job than real-life Christians in a majority Christian country! I don't know about you, but personally, I'd rather we had the stats found in other industrialized nations (and they accept evolution to boot!)..

As usual an atheist throws statements based on blind faith and ignorance, not even looking at the rate of suicide in Sweden and Japan. Not even looking how non-religious countries lead in the rates. Yes, in US we have a lot more rapes, because in Sweden they do not even consider the same acts as a rape. And non-Christian countries lead heavily in what we consider a rape. Sweden – 3rd place in divorces, US- the 12th,… if to consider that Swedish do not see a reason to get married..

Just don't come here if you you don't like being raped, want a successful marriage, or want to live. I don't know about you, but personally, I'd rather we had the stats found in other industrialized nations (and they accept evolution to boot!). .

But millions and millions are coming and dreaming to come… And would you please just go, to free some place for them..

btw, trial by jury is not unique to Christianity either .

He would say so, but he would never back it up by a fact.

Name one specific "Judeo-Christian" value. .

Just a few qoutes: Natural law is law that exists independently of the positive law of a given political order, society or nation-state. It is simultaneously a legal perspective, and a genre of law - depending on the jurisdiction in which the term is used. The theory of natural law was … developed within a Christian context by St Thomas Aquinas.

As a philosophical perspective, especially in the English and American legal traditions, the principles of natural law are expressed, obliquely or openly, in such documents as Magna Carta and the United States Declaration of Independence, when rights are discussed, explicitly or implicitly, as being inherent. For example, the expression "...that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..." expresses such a right that is discussed as being inherent. The words that immediately precede that expression: "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, ..." express a natural law philosophy.
… influence of Magna Carta outside England can be seen in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Indeed just about every common law state has been influenced by Magna Carta, making it one of the most important legal documents in the history of democracy.

Clause 1 of Magna Carta (the original 1215 edition) guarantees the freedom of the English Church…
Magna Carta was the most significant early influence on the long historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today.

Civil law is the predominant system of law in the world….The civil law is based on Roman law, especially the Corpus Juris Civilis of Emperor Justinian, as later developed through the Middle Ages by mediæval legal scholars. Emperor Justinian is considered a saint in the Orthodox Church...

Jeudeo Christian values are those which are found in the rule of constitutional law, Declaration of Independance, US Constitution, Bill of rights, most important legal documents in the history of democracy.. . Jeudeo Christian values are those which are based on centuries of developing of human thoughts, real achievents through experience, education and refference to the most brillant thinkers who have influenced humanity for a proven good and a proven progress. They are not good ideas, but they are ideas which have been applied as foundation of laws and societies and ways of human interaction and co-existance, developing through eliminating mistakes and getting out from the dead ends, and achiving real life results.They have no refference to good citizenship of different casts in India or to Chinese folk mythology, or African ritual dances and trials around a fire.. They have no refference to ideas of enlightement leading to the French revolotution and the first introduction of terrorism as we know it today, as the real life result, as the proven bad. Terrorism of the French revolution, based on values of enlightement is not shown to be in foundatition of the USA; because the social ideas of enlighetement lead to the bloody terrorism and wars and these the only proven influence of them on humanity, - as the matter of fact, but not a college/school programs.

Francis Bacon was the first to try to use Clause 39 of Magna Carta to guarantee due process in a trial.
Francis Bacon writes in "The Essays: Of Atheism" that "a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion"..

But it was long time ago, when atheism had some little philoshophy in it; today it has nothing, but total ignorance and blind faith in words, but not facts, not in even self evident reality and documents.

 

[Voidwar]

As usual an atheist throws statements based on blind faith and ignorance.

How would you even know if I was an athiest or not ?

I might have responded if you weren't a flailing namecaller in your first sentence :doh

Oh, and if you could have given one , SPECIFIC "Judeo-Christian" value, rather than a bunch of quotes of someone else.

Mebbe I will refute some of this tripe on second thought . . .

Casts and “untouchables”” in Hindu culture.

Ever hear the word . . "Serf" ?
Ever read / seen Pride and Prejudice ?
Christianity and Judaism have both been RIFE with classism for a long time.

A friend of mine travels all over the world on business. He brings back photos. He said he could not make himself to take pictures in India, - how inhumanly miserable it was.

This is comparing a poor overpopulated country to the world's wealthiest. Religion, has little to do with it, money, everything.

Christians would go to India to help them to get out of misery through Christians values.

Charity. It is not the sole invention and perlieu of Christianity.

Indians would run to US to get a piece of Christian pie baked on Christian values.

How Christian to condescend to the Haji . . .
Notice also, that now you have forgotten the "Judeo", so you are off topic.

As usual an atheist throws statements based on blind faith and ignorance, not even looking at the rate of suicide in Sweden and Japan.

Here we have more ad hominem namecalling, followed by some real "tinfoil helmet", unrelated, left field statistics, and you end with a bunch of quotes from someone else, who is dead.
Yay for you and your search engine, but too bad that . . .
Not one bit ,
of that plagiaristic spam ,
is an example of . . .
one, SPECIFIC "Judeo-Christian" value.

 

[Duke]

Look at all this Holier-Than Thou! It's very amusing.

But to add my two cents: No religion is any better than another, they all have their unjust principles; they've all caused enough deaths.


Duke

 

[Topsez]

LOL Turn the other cheek ring a bell ? Vengeance is mine ?

This is not a specifically "Judeo Christian" practice, as many other cultures used it. Sorry.



Bible contains honorable men with multiple wives, and both monogamy and polygamy, and the rules governing each, predate the Torah. Again, not specifically "Judeo Christian", and not even consistant within the "Judeo" and "Christian" groups.



More vague crap, The Senate and People of Rome worshipped Jupiter Optimus Maximus, yet obeyed documents created by man.

It is also revealing that you attempt to talk about right and wrong, good and evil. It is evidence of my earlier contention, that . . .

Your rebuttal is simply nonsense...

I pointed out the laws of America are made by "the people", ajudicated by the people and weighed against the bill of rights which was created by Christian philosophy... Therefore, one could only conclude all laws are based on the values of the majority of citizens and only constrained by the requirements in the bill of rights.

American values and ethics determine law and how law changes over time. You can look at any state laws and find very strange laws still on the books that are no longer being enforced. Some states have laws on what positions of copulation is permissable by law... others have laws prohibiting oral sex in any situation...

The constitution and bill of rights were formed to guide a moral society in creating laws as they see fit within the confines of the document's basic god protected individual rights. If the bill of rights is based on Christian philosophy and the population is Christian by majority the law values are based on Judeo Christian values... Laws created by government inside of the gold border flag are outside of the bill of rights protections but are still based on the values of our nations values even though they affect the US and the world through trade and comerce.

The old laws on the state books support conservatism and morals reflected by the citizens of the time... conservatism determines change should take place over a long period of time...

To go one by one saying is this law secular or Christian based is stupid because of how our freedoms are gained and how our laws are made. Our freedoms come from god according to the government and the laws are made by the people according to the government and according to this concept the government only can take away rights not give them... the bill of rights is there to prohibit the government from taking away rights.

Oddly, I've been to Korea, Germany, Holland, France, Sweeden, Italy, Austria and Brussels where such guarantees don't exist. Clearly there are laws and rights examples in each country that reflect the countries values that differ American values... Korea, you must never leave your home unoccupied or you will not be protected by law if a thief enters the property... exception: if you are a police or government official you may leave your home unoccupied and the penalty for a thief breaking in is having his fingers, hands and wrists crushed with a car tool and released to die... I know I saw it happen. In Germany bra commercials began with a naked woman and end with the bra on the pups... totally normal to change clothes in public... one locker room one shower in government operated fitness centers... but I am being long winded again...

 

[rathi]

Back then the majority of our poulation was christian, they certainly were part of the founding of our government. However, the political leaders that created our governmental structure (ie the constitution) were also great believers in enlightment values. Its easy to say that our constitution and government were founded on BOTH values.

The end result is who really cares? If a bunch of crazy satanists came up with something as great as the constitution, would it matter? It has served us well for more than 200 years.

 

[Topsez]

Back then the majority of our poulation was christian, they certainly were part of the founding of our government. However, the political leaders that created our governmental structure (ie the constitution) were also great believers in enlightment values. Its easy to say that our constitution and government were founded on BOTH values.

The end result is who really cares? If a bunch of crazy satanists came up with something as great as the constitution, would it matter? It has served us well for more than 200 years.

You have to care because humans in the position of judgement will judge the purpose and intent of the founders and change it 180 degrees from what was established. I parallel the government of the US with the bible... the belief of the values are how you see them or more importantly how those in authority see them.

I avoided Christianity because of conflict... I was told by a Baptist minister that all that don't follow the Baptist belief will burn in hell once they accept Christ... I didn't believe him because I couldn't comprehend a god so cold. Yet, I believe in truth and seek it every day. The tendency of man is to use documents to serve their objective and not to follow the spirit and intent of the document.

 

[justone]

How would you even know if I was an athiest or not ?

I might have responded if you weren't a flailing namecaller in your first sentence


Mebbe I will refute some of this tripe on second thought . . .

So, if I did not call you an atheist ( is it a bad name?) on the basis of you demonstrating your atheism, you would answer…. OK. I am withdrawing my calling an atheist. I guess you are saying you are not an atheist.

This is comparing a poor overpopulated country to the world's wealthiest. Religion, has little to do with it, money, everything.

It did have in your statement, which was not based on facts, but now it does not have, because I have answered your statement with a factul example? OK, you a free to see it in your perverted mind as money, - but first you have to withdraw your original statement '' India had Hindu culture, and communities and neighbors, in a word, good citizenship, without ever hearing of Jehovah or Christ. '' You can take your own answer ‘’Religion, has little to do with it, money, everything’’ to your own statement whatever stupid the both are .

Ever hear the word . . "Serf" ?
Ever read / seen Pride and Prejudice ?

I have heard many words. How does my knowledge make your statement that '' India had Hindu culture, and communities and neighbors, in a word, good citizenship'' right? It does not matter that serfs cannot be compared with the “untouchables” - as you are trying to do in order to distract the public from your original statement, - the matter is that Hindu culture cannot be set as an example of ''good communities and neighbors, in a word, good citizenship.''

Charity. It is not the sole invention and perlieu of Christianity.

Let’s see – I have not meant, I have not referred to charity. But if I had it would be a Christian value, wouldn't ? And if it was not a sole invention of Christianity, you would show other inventors and how they go to India to help without any goal of a personal gain.

Here we have more ad hominem namecalling, followed by some real "tinfoil helmet", unrelated, left field statistics, .

So you are saying that field statistics given by me is wrong, and your statement based on no statistics is right? If you cannot understand basic numbers you don’t deserve name calling, it would be to cruel to name your disabilities outloud.

Here we have more ad hominem namecalling, followed by some real "tinfoil helmet", unrelated, left field statistics, and you end with a bunch of quotes from someone else, who is dead.
Yay for you and your search engine, but too bad that . . .
Not one bit ,
of that plagiaristic spam ,
is an example of . . .
one, SPECIFIC "Judeo-Christian" value. .

Let me post what statement of me you quoted replaying with your attack : justone :
‘’As usual an atheist throws statements based on blind faith and ignorance, not even looking at the rate of suicide in Sweden and Japan.’’

1.Are you arguing saying “’Here we have more ad hominem namecalling,”” is that I called you an atheist?
2. Are you arguing saying “followed by some real "tinfoil helmet", unrelated, left field statistics, “ that suicide rates in Japan and Sweden are not higher that in US?
3. Are you arguing that your reference to divorce rates are related to the subject and my reference to suicide rates are not?
4. Are you still supporting your lie that divorce rates are higher in US than in Sweden?
5. Was your statement based on statistics, facts and numbers or on blind faith and ignorance? Anyone can check to see that divorce rates in Sweden are higher than divorce rates in US, therefore your statement represented blind faith and ignorance.

6. What is that plagiaristic spam in my statement? Do you understand what is plagiarism?
7. Where did you find “a bunch of quotes” from somebody who is dead in this statement and in my whole post. Do you understand the difference between a single and a bunch?
8. What is wrong with the only quote of somebody who was dead in my post?
9. Was I supposed to quote only somebody who was alive? Was I supposed not to use any quotes? Is Wikipedia with its cross-references less reliable source than your statements leading to no references?

but too bad that . . .
Not one bit ,
of that plagiaristic spam ,
is an example of . . .
one, SPECIFIC "Judeo-Christian" value. .

You cannot understand difference between a single and a bunch, you cannot understand basic statistics numbers, - it is no surprise you have missed the whole point. Simple facts from wiki (which may be confirmed by anyone capable of search: key words Natural law, Magna Carta, common law, civil law) show you the following expressions of the values:
1. Declaration of independence - is an expression of Christian values.
2. Constitution – is an expression of Christian values.
3. Bill of rights – is an expression of Christian values.
4. Civil law - is an expression of Christian values.
5. Common law - is an expression of Christian values.
6. democracy - is an expression of Christian values.
They are all counted in my post, all have roots and all are results of development of Christian values and thoughts by Christians. Can you find any other values which have done 4 things: 1. Declared: ''these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..." 2. made sure that the declaration was based on previous experience and ideas (such as Magna Carta or Natural law) 3. Put it in foundation of a social and state organisation of the men. 4. Made such organisation successful and thus meeting the declared truth?

 

[tryreading]

How would you even know if I was an athiest or not ?

I might have responded if you weren't a flailing namecaller in your first sentence :doh

Oh, and if you could have given one , SPECIFIC "Judeo-Christian" value, rather than a bunch of quotes of someone else.

Mebbe I will refute some of this tripe on second thought . . .



Ever hear the word . . "Serf" ?
Ever read / seen Pride and Prejudice ?
Christianity and Judaism have both been RIFE with classism for a long time.



This is comparing a poor overpopulated country to the world's wealthiest. Religion, has little to do with it, money, everything.



Charity. It is not the sole invention and perlieu of Christianity.



How Christian to condescend to the Haji . . .
Notice also, that now you have forgotten the "Judeo", so you are off topic.



Here we have more ad hominem namecalling, followed by some real "tinfoil helmet", unrelated, left field statistics, and you end with a bunch of quotes from someone else, who is dead.
Yay for you and your search engine, but too bad that . . .
Not one bit ,
of that plagiaristic spam ,
is an example of . . .
one, SPECIFIC "Judeo-Christian" value.

I don't know if you've talked with Just-Stoned before, but if you argue that the Founding Fathers didn't base the Constitution on the Bible and dedicate it to Jesus, then you are an atheist in his world. The proof, for him, that all the Founders recognized Jesus as Savior is the dating system of the time (...the year of our Lord...).