Congressman Forbes corrects Obama on Judeo-Christian statement.

[John Schmidt]

I found this clip rather interesting. Congressman Forbes basically asks the question: "at what point in history did we cease to be a Judeo-Christian nation?" as stated by Obama on his national apology tour of Europe a few weeks ago.

Our Judeo-Christian Nation	powered by Aeva

[Chrisj CMA]

AMEN and AMEN....I emailed "president" Obama shortly after his statements mentioned here, but I did not write anything near as profound as this, Mr Forbes has the right stuff, and the guts to stand up for what this country has been all about.  Now dont get me wrong.  From the beginning, the United States of America, its founding fathers, and the laws and documents governing this great land recognized that everyone wouldnt believe in God; that there would be differences of faith.  This was always ok, and all had a right to their beliefs.  BUT, if the nation wasnt one nation under God (IT IS) it would be a one nation broken apart with less tolerance than we have now and NO freedom of religion unless it was the state religion.  And that my friends is the meaning of "seperation of church and state"  "there shall be no state mandatory exclusive religion"  Not that God must never be mentioned on public ground.  We have allowed the twisting of this until some would that God should be removed altogether.  

GO Congressmen Forbes, you are right on!

[¿spoom]

No argument here, but I hope most folks realize the "under God" part was only added in the 50's to annoy the "Godless Commies" and IMHO has no business being in the Pledge of Allegience. Just me, but I think someone who believes in a cosmic muffin can be just as proud and valuable to this country as the next guy. I hate to see God tied in or conditional with pledging loyalty to the US.

[Oss]

+1 chris

The under god was added to pledge of allegiance as spoom says but there is great precedent. and goading the communists doesnt bother me one bit if that is considered goading

Our currency  the star of david, in god we trust

The Supreme Court building with moses carrying the tablets, preamble to the declaration of independence, references to year of our Lord on everything done by congress, and the states before ratification etc.

We are not supposed to bow onto one knee before anyone  well maybe the Mrs when I was proposing but thats its

YMMV

[John Schmidt]

She hit the floor when I asked her so I had to help her up. Still haven't figured out if she did it because she didn't think I'd ever ask and was shocked....or fainted at the thought of being tied to me for the rest of her life.    Actually, at first I didn't ask...I suggested our upcoming trip out west and up into the Canadian Rockies be a honeymoon. That's when she dropped all the tour books and maps, then I'm almost certain slipped when she bent over to pick them up. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Guess it worked out pretty good, we both still have the same address. Maybe it was the Blackfoot ceremony done by a Blackfoot Tribal Judge in front of some waterfalls in Glacier Nat'l. Park. Not a religious ceremony but very Spiritual, since she is part Cherokee we decided to go the Native American route.

[PharmBoy]

I have not always been very religious and do not now practice my religion as I was raised, but I have always believed very deeply.  Those deeply held beliefs and my private prayers to my creator throughout the years have given me strength to continue on when it would have been so easy to quit or lay down and rest instead of continuing the fight.  I have always been a fighter, maybe not so much physically anymore, but there was a day for that too.  However, I have ALWAYS been VERY PATRIOTIC and have always loved this nation and the beliefs and values that were set forth in the writings of this nation's founders.  It surely does my heart good to hear Congressman Forbes rebuke the statement of our present elected leader when he had the nerve to say this is not a Judeo-Christian Nation while standing on foreign soil.  It seems that this man is not a very learned person in the history of the United States of America and I personally have grave doubts about the direction in which he is now leading my beloved America...JTL

[Robert]

Thank you for posting that, I think that this was the one good thing that I have heard coming out of Washington. I  plan to put a call into Forbes office and thank him for speaking the truth. I am only sorry that the place was empty and he did not get a standing ovation. A moment that would have gone unnoticed.

[Strong Eagle]

Once again, you religion boys play fast and loose with the facts.  The US was NOT founded as a "Judeo-Christian" nation.  So, don't talk about 'nerve'.

Chrisj writes, "And that my friends is the meaning of 'seperation (sic) of church and state'", referring to his comment that "there shall be no state mandatory exclusive religion".

But that is simply not correct.  Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State." James Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States." Hard to be clearer than that... no mixing of religion and the government.  But you religionist Christians don't want to take that at face value, do you?

While the Declaration of Independence mentions God, the word is completely absent from the Constitution.  Once again, it is hard to understand that if our founding fathers were interested in founding a religious country, let alone a 'Judeo-Christian' religion, that they would have left out all references to God... unless of course, it was their intention to found a secular country.

In fact, Article VI of the Constitution states, in part, "but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States".  Seems very clear that the intention is to form a secular country, not one founded in "Judeo-Christian" principles (whatever those are).

And even in the Declaration of Independence, written in the majority by Thomas Jefferson. the Declaration describes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God", with no mention whatsoever of any Christian God.  But folks like Forbes just ignore the facts and reality.

Let us not forget the Treaty of Tripoli, signed Nov 4, 1796.  In part, it said, "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.".

This treaty was approved by the Senate, signed by President John Adams, and publicized in many newspapers without so much as one recorded word in opposition to the language in any newspaper of the day.  So much for a "Christian" foundation.

Yah... I know... you Christians will next attempt to say that our system of laws is "Christian based" or "bible based", but you are way off the mark again.  It was Saxon law, culminating in the Magna Carta in the 5th century, that defined the common law of Britain, and our common law.  Christianity was not introduced until the 7th century.

So, no, Forbes is not to be congratulated, he is to be scorned and dismissed, for he takes one small part of an excellent speech out of context and interprets it in the light of false historical evidence and context... just so he can be divisive.

After watching that idiot Forbes once again, he ought to take a look at (amongst many other sources):  http://www.borndigital.com/founders.htm and/or try reading some history... John Adams, the Federalist Papers, Thomas Jefferson... at least he would not be speaking out of such ignorance.

Obama is clearly correct on this one.

[lacon]

And you know what is really sad folks?  Strong Eagle here represents the majority of voters in this country.

Heil, Obama

[Strong Eagle]

And you know what is really sad folks?  Strong Eagle here represents the majority of voters in this country.

Heil, Obama

No, what is truly sad is that you do not have the integrity to accept the majority decision and instead, like so many others on this board, must deride and call the voters stupid because, obviously, you are brilliant, and if others don't agree, they must be stupid.  I've lost count of the number of times posters on this board have called people stupid or worse because they support Obama.  You're just one more tick mark in that column.

[Oss]

I find it interesting the choices of words and references used Strong Eagle

Back in the days of founding fathers a jew could not hold office, vote or walks as a truly free person in many "states" and in some areas were severely prejudicedand harassed. Quakers, Protestants, Catholics, Baptists, were all depending on where they lived ostracized or punished for their beliefs.

Interesting how one religion in those days would go to war over people not following their views  Europe was decimated by these wars for centuries

Here is a link you may find interesting
http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showtopic.php?org_id=1551&kb_header_id=15791


Rhode Island was founded to ensure freedom for certain religious groups which were discriminated against as were many other states if you take the time to look.

Here is the letter to Washington and his response which is the foundation of my opinions on the matter

George Washington’s 1790 Letter To Touro Synagogue
During a visit to Newport, R.I., in 1790, a year before the Bill of Rights was ratified, President George Washington received a letter from Moses Sexias, warden of the Touro Synagogue, seeking assurance of religious freedom for
Jews.
President Washington gave an unequivocal guarantee, returning a letter stating that the new government would
“give to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance.”
Below is the transcript of each letter. Original spelling, punctuation and capitalization have been retained.
The letter from Moses Seixas to President George Washington
To the President of the United States of America.
Sir:
Permit the children of the stock of Abraham to approach you with the most cordial affection and esteem for your
person and merits ~~ and to join with our fellow citizens in welcoming you to NewPort.
With pleasure we reflect on those days ~~ those days of difficulty, and danger, when the God of Israel, who
delivered David from the peril of the sword, ~~ shielded Your head in the day of battle: ~~ and we rejoice to think,
that the same Spirit, who rested in the Bosom of the greatly beloved Daniel enabling him to preside over the
Provinces of the Babylonish Empire, rests and ever will rest, upon you, enabling you to discharge the arduous duties
of Chief Magistrate in these States.
Deprived as we heretofore have been of the invaluable rights of free Citizens, we now with a deep sense of gratitude
to the Almighty disposer of all events behold a Government, erected by the Majesty of the People ~~ a Government,
which to bigotry gives no sanction, to persecution no assistance ~~ but generously affording to all Liberty of
conscience, and immunities of Citizenship: ~~ deeming every one, of whatever Nation, tongue, or language equal
parts of the great governmental Machine: ~~ This so ample and extensive Federal Union whose basis is
Philanthropy, Mutual confidence and Public Virtue, we cannot but acknowledge to be the work of the Great God,
who ruleth in the Armies of Heaven, and among the Inhabitants of the Earth, doing whatever seemeth him good.
For all these Blessings of civil and religious liberty which we enjoy under an equal benign administration, we desire
to send up our thanks to the Ancient of Days, the great preserver of Men ~~beseeching him, that the Angel who
conducted our forefathers through the wilderness into the promised Land, may graciously conduct you through all
the difficulties and dangers of this mortal life: ~~ And, when, like Joshua full of days and full of honour, you are
gathered to your Fathers, may you be admitted into the Heavenly Paradise to partake of the water of life, and the tree
of immortality.
Done and Signed by order of the Hebrew Congregation in NewPort, Rhode Island August 17th 1790.
Moses Seixas, Warden
The letter from George Washington in response to Moses Seixas
To the Hebrew Congregation in Newport Rhode Island.
Gentleman.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State
- 2 -
While I receive, with much satisfaction, your Address replete with expressions of affection and esteem; I rejoice in
the opportunity of assuring you, that I shall always retain a grateful remembrance of the cordial welcome I
experienced in my visit to Newport, from all classes of Citizens.
The reflection on the days of difficulty and danger which are past is rendered the more sweet, from a consciousness
that they are succeeded by days of uncommon prosperity and security. If we have wisdom to make the best use of
the advantages with which we are now favored, we cannot fail, under the just administration of a good Government,
to become a great and happy people.
The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind
examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and
immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class
of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent national gifts. For happily the Government of the
United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under
its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.
It would be inconsistent with the frankness of my character not to avow that I am pleased with your favorable
opinion of my Administration, and fervent wishes for my felicity. May the children of the Stock of Abraham, who
dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in
safety under his own vine and figtree, and there shall be none to make him afraid. May the father of all mercies
scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due
time and way everlastingly happy.
G. Washington
I

my wish my brothers and sisters is that all of us should have safety under his or her own vine and figtree or apple tree, and there shall be none to make our people afraid.  Now go out and ride your Valkyries into the sweet air of the Blue Grey ride and celebrate our freedom this weekend  Hope to see you all there.   Bring it Lets RIde

Oss

[solo1]

Once again, you religion boys play fast and loose with the facts.  The US was NOT founded as a "Judeo-Christian" nation.  So, don't talk about 'nerve'.

Chrisj writes, "And that my friends is the meaning of 'seperation (sic) of church and state'", referring to his comment that "there shall be no state mandatory exclusive religion".

But that is simply not correct.  Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State." James Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States." Hard to be clearer than that... no mixing of religion and the government.  But you religionist Christians don't want to take that at face value, do you?

While the Declaration of Independence mentions God, the word is completely absent from the Constitution.  Once again, it is hard to understand that if our founding fathers were interested in founding a religious country, let alone a 'Judeo-Christian' religion, that they would have left out all references to God... unless of course, it was their intention to found a secular country.

In fact, Article VI of the Constitution states, in part, "but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States".  Seems very clear that the intention is to form a secular country, not one founded in "Judeo-Christian" principles (whatever those are).

And even in the Declaration of Independence, written in the majority by Thomas Jefferson. the Declaration describes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God", with no mention whatsoever of any Christian God.  But folks like Forbes just ignore the facts and reality.

Let us not forget the Treaty of Tripoli, signed Nov 4, 1796.  In part, it said, "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.".

This treaty was approved by the Senate, signed by President John Adams, and publicized in many newspapers without so much as one recorded word in opposition to the language in any newspaper of the day.  So much for a "Christian" foundation.

Yah... I know... you Christians will next attempt to say that our system of laws is "Christian based" or "bible based", but you are way off the mark again.  It was Saxon law, culminating in the Magna Carta in the 5th century, that defined the common law of Britain, and our common law.  Christianity was not introduced until the 7th century.

So, no, Forbes is not to be congratulated, he is to be scorned and dismissed, for he takes one small part of an excellent speech out of context and interprets it in the light of false historical evidence and context... just so he can be divisive.

After watching that idiot Forbes once again, he ought to take a look at (amongst many other sources):  http://www.borndigital.com/founders.htm and/or try reading some history... John Adams, the Federalist Papers, Thomas Jefferson... at least he would not be speaking out of such ignorance.

Obama is clearly correct on this one.

Wayne, when you quoted Article VI as stating " no religious test"  you were correct. However, in Article VI, it also states that an oath or affirmation is required (But not for the president, that is covered under Article II).  ALL oaths, except the president's, today end with "So Help Me God".  Whatever process that was put in place to add "So Help Me God" to the oath, is immaterial, "So Help Me God" has endured.

It seems to me that you only state what will "make your case" Therefore, in my opinion, all of your post is suspect.

I hardly wish to use my time to refute the rest of your statements.  Please refrain from name calling.

[Strong Eagle]

"So help me, God" has be added as a part of free choice of the person being sworn in, as is placing a hand on a bible.  There is no statutory requirement for the same and it in no way supports the idea that somehow the US is a "Judeo-Christian" nation.

Too bad you don't have the time.  I'd like to see you refute the statements of our founding fathers, and much more.

PS:  Name calling?  Are you referring to my characterizing Forbes as an idiot?  That's not calling names.  That's an accurate description of this boy's faculties.

And... it might help if you listened to Obama's words...

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.	powered by Aeva

 

He is right... this is a nation of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, and many others.  He would have been wrong to have characterized this as a Christian nation, no matter where it was 200 years ago.

[Chrisj CMA]

old mr eagle holds true to form.........Im not going to argue with him any more, he just spews that garbage to get us worked up.  He just loves to bash anything Christian, there will always be those like him, they should sharpen us that know truth and we shouldnt lower ourselves to his level anymore.

I for one am tired of every point of view being acceptable to put their belief out except the Christian view.  For some reason we have allowed the athiests to silence a great many believers.  Well I hope many follow Congressman Forbes and find the guts to stand proudly for God again

This was a powerful presentation Congressman Forbes delivered....he used plenty of facts and it was good.  Thats probably what pissed off our little friend here, so let him rant his on his own, out there in whinersville.

[solo1]

Calling Forbes an idiot is not a fact, unless proven, it's an opinion.  That would be the same as if I called you an overbearing pompous ass.  That would not be a fact,  until proven, merely my opinion.    Opinions are like arseholes, everbody has one.

[PharmBoy]

Little Chicken, you, like your newly elected "Savior" speak well, but neither of you have any background on which to base your decisions or your actions.  As I have once before asserted and was correct, that neither you or your "Savior" have any military experience.  Yet, he is almost totally entrusted with the safety of this nation.  That is a fact that either escaped most of his supporters or they were unconcerned with the safety of this nation in a time of war.  The most serious war that this nation has faced since the Revolutionary War.  96% of his race voted for him and they are not considered racists.  Strange?  I could only guess as could anyone else, but I would say that at least half of those voters thought that they were voting themselves a paycheck as were a goodly number of his other supporters after he announced, quite by accident, that he did indeed intend to "spread the wealth".

Where did these people think that their jobs come from and how are their jobs sustained year after year.  Jobs are created and sustained by people with money and sustained just as long as these entrepreneurs can generate enough profit so that they can pay the workers and purchase more raw materials or new equipment when needed.  I think that it is called "CAPITALISM",  not "spread the wealth".  in any country where there are no rich people, everyone is dirt poor.  Look no farther than Cuba.  Also, people should have to "WORK" for a lining.  Sorrowfully, our system has evolved to where many people can lay on their butt all day and collect more money in a check from the government than they can earn by working.  These people either did not prepare themselves for life or they are just too lazy to work.  Don't tell me that there have not been jobs to be had.  I know whole families who are 3rd & 4th generation welfare recipients.  I see it daily in my profession.  And don't tell me that all of these people did not vote for a continuation of that "check in the mail".  Someone much wiser than I once said, "Democracy will only last until the majority finds out that they can vote themselves a paycheck", or something to that effect.  I think that they just figured it out.  Hopefully, that majority will not get that paycheck and they will come to realize what is really happening; if any of them really care?

I am sorry about it, but the Obama/Democrat strategy cannot help but fail in the long run.  You cannot print all the "valueless money" that you please without runaway inflation such as was created by the Carter administration.  Also, you can only borrow so much money until your creditors call in their notes.  That will be a fateful day!  18-20% interest rates shuts down all capital investment and robs the people of their purchasing power.  Thus fewer products are produced because the people no longer have the purchasing power to buy products.  With fewer products being produced, more jobs are lost.  It is really simple.  It is strange that so many supposedly educated people cannot and did not understand.

What got us into this mess in the first place was the notion that everyone here in the "land of milk & honey" were ENTITLED to milk and honey whether or not they could show that they were able to pay for it.  I wonder who's idea that was?  It is hard to blame the people for driving a Cadillac when all they can really afford is a beat-up second hand Chevy.  However, most of the people should have known the value of the house that they could afford and what kind of payments they could make if one of the two-job-family suddenly lost their job.  The idiots in government squeezed the financial institutions into making all these unsecured loans, so when the bottom fell out of the housing industry, the financial institutions were left holding the empty bag.  While those in government all but disavowed as having any implicitness in the whole mess.

What is happening now is nothing more than a "POWER GRAB", plain and simple!  Our government is attempting to gain control of our major financial institutions and some of our major manufacturing facilities with our own tax dollars while handing out favors to those who are in their political camp and punishing those who are not.  And they are doing it with our taxpayer dollars (and all those worthless dollars they are printing).  Those in control at the present time want complete control and continued complete control of all facets of our lives.

I do realize that I am but one very unimportant voice shouting in the gale force wind of those who are now in power.  Hopefully, some of those in government will see the light before it is too late for our beloved America.  Congress is still in charge, whether or not Obama realizes it or not...JTL  

[Strong Eagle]

old mr eagle holds true to form.........Im not going to argue with him any more, he just spews that garbage to get us worked up.  He just loves to bash anything Christian, there will always be those like him, they should sharpen us that know truth and we shouldnt lower ourselves to his level anymore.

I for one am tired of every point of view being acceptable to put their belief out except the Christian view.  For some reason we have allowed the athiests to silence a great many believers.  Well I hope many follow Congressman Forbes and find the guts to stand proudly for God again

This was a powerful presentation Congressman Forbes delivered....he used plenty of facts and it was good.  Thats probably what pissed off our little friend here, so let him rant his on his own, out there in whinersville.

There you go again, Chrisj... the best you can do is call what I post 'garbage'.  You have no rebuttal, that is clear.

And who is this 'we' stuff, Chrisj?  The mouse in your pocket?  Stand up for yourself... use I statements... don't try to make it appear that there is a crowd around you that somehow gives your statements more validity (it doesn't).

I don't 'love to bash anything Christian'.  I am fine with anything Christian... so long as you Christians don't start pushing yourselves as the superior religion... as you do when you attempt to call the US a 'Judeo-Christian' nation... or anything like that.

But, you don't want it that way... you want to push and push and push... you want Christian prayer in schools, you want Christian symbols in government offices... then you go on whining about be persecuted.  Give me a break.

PS:  I am no atheist.  I just don't like people who presume to have the right answer.  Practice religion in your life but leave it the hell of out of public schools and government.

Cheers.

[Strong Eagle]

Calling Forbes an idiot is not a fact, unless proven, it's an opinion.  That would be the same as if I called you an overbearing pompous ass.  That would not be a fact,  until proven, merely my opinion.    Opinions are like arseholes, everbody has one.

Agreed.  And I say that Mr. Forbes has proved up my point with his YouTube rant.

[Strong Eagle]

HEY PHARMBOY!  HE'S NOT MY "SAVIOR", HE'S MY PRESIDENT!  YOURS, TOO.

I absolutely disagree with you that military service is a prerequisite to be a good president... and clearly the founding fathers did as well... for there was discussion on this issue and you will notice such qualification is absent in the constitution.

It takes more that a military policy to run this country, and Obama has surrounded himself with some of the best military minds... something that cannot be said for George Bush.

The Obama strategy is far preferable to the failed Bush strategy.  Belligerence is not strength, saber rattling and threats of military force is not power.  Bush severely damaged this country, and Obama is on the right track.

Exactly who is ENTITLED, by the way... or who is it that thinks that?  You spew this stuff all the time but never actually note who it is that feels entitled, or what it is they feel entitled to.  How many of them are there?  C'mon, fess up.

And finally... you want to use Little Chicken... piss off!  Can you do a bit better than that?  Like provide a few facts for your wandering assertions?


 

[PharmBoy]

I can tell you one thing, straight from me to you, I will NEVER read anything else you write here.  Nor will I ever again lower myself to answer any of your posts.  Consider yourself as "ostracized" as far as I am concerned.  If everyone else here did the same, you would just be "farting in the wind".  You could never create the stink that you so joyfully spew upon this board from time to time.  Yes, you have the right to say what ever you want to say, but I do not have to read it, nor do I have to answer your asinine statements...JTL     RIDE ON GANG!

[John Schmidt]

Looks like I stirred up a hornet's nest.    Guess it got a few people thinking, which is good. However, I'll not get involved in the discussion. As for the voting public, it has been shown (not by Fox News, Wayne ) that 96% of the something like 12 million African-Americans voted for him because of his race. Don't ask for a source, at this point I could no longer give it but I first read it and later heard it on various news forums. Granted, that doesn't make it so, I simply find it an "interesting" statistic. Somewhat like the statistics from Cook County, Illinois that got JFK elected.

I was fortunate to have been raised by teachers/school administrators. As an aside....if you think your youth was rough, try having your mother as a teacher for two years in a public school. I'd get disciplined at school, then when I got home my dad(School Superintendent) gave it to me again. Talk about "double jeopardy!" But, I digress. My father was, among many other things, a history and economics professor, later moving into administration. The history of our nation's founding was a favorite subject of his, he knew it well and could give you much of the "behind the scenes" workings that went into the formation and writing of the founding "papers." I only wish I still had some of his reference books and his copies of the original writings of some of the founders. There was from the very beginning, references to God and Spiritual guidance requested within the correspondence passed back and forth between those responsible for the final "construction" of our Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and other works penned at the time. It was agreed that "these papers" are not perfect, that men will continue to attempt to subjugate the masses through their own greed and quest for power within their office. As a result, much of the Constitution was written to prevent this from happening as much as possible.

Again, we're not a perfect nation, never will be. But, with all its faults, I'll take the USA over any others on this spaceship called Earth. Some time ago, a foreign diplomat commented to one of our 'crats; "You call yourselves a Christian nation, yet look at all the crime and corruption you have." His answer was something like; "Yes, you're right. But just think how much worse it would be if we weren't." My feelings are that we are fast moving in that direction and with a slow dissolution of public mores, I feel it will only get worse. In a way, I'm glad I'm the age I am.

[cutter]

No, what is truly sad is that you do not have the integrity to accept the majority decision and instead, like so many others on this board, must deride and call the voters stupid because, obviously, you are brilliant, and if others don't agree, they must be stupid.  I've lost count of the number of times posters on this board have called people stupid or worse because they support Obama.  You're just one more tick mark in that column.

 

To accept the majority decision just because.... has nothing to do with my integrity. I wil not be assimilated and follow like sheep. To change my beliefs and giive in to the majority is not how I roll.
You aren't doing any better than those you chastise for speaking out, your just more fluid in writing it.

Time for a putt.........

[Strong Eagle]

I can tell you one thing, straight from me to you, I will NEVER read anything else you write here.  Nor will I ever again lower myself to answer any of your posts.  Consider yourself as "ostracized" as far as I am concerned.  If everyone else here did the same, you would just be "farting in the wind".  You could never create the stink that you so joyfully spew upon this board from time to time.  Yes, you have the right to say what ever you want to say, but I do not have to read it, nor do I have to answer your asinine statements...JTL     RIDE ON GANG!

You're breaking me up!  Please...no... no... no.  The only stink that gets created is your inability to provide any sort of factual response to the allegations you make.

I'll ask it again:  Exactly who is ENTITLED... or who is it that thinks they are entitled?  Entitled to what?  And how many of them are there?  Have you been getting this from Faux News?

[¿spoom]

+1 chris

The under god was added to pledge of allegiance as spoom says but there is great precedent. and goading the communists doesnt bother me one bit if that is considered goading

Our currency  the star of david, in god we trust

The Supreme Court building with moses carrying the tablets, preamble to the declaration of independence, references to year of our Lord on everything done by congress, and the states before ratification etc.

We are not supposed to bow onto one knee before anyone  well maybe the Mrs when I was proposing but thats its

YMMV

I'm all for goading commies, too I was just pointing out the reasoning behind adding it years after the original Pledge was written. Lest anyone get the wrong impression, I'm not anti-God or anti-anything-I just admire our founding fathers' intent to give us freedom FROM religion as much as freedom OF religion. They had seen the evils of a state religion in their native England. From earliest time to the present we've had blood running rivers from folks arguing about religion, and the middle east is a perfect example of why I don't want any country run by religious leaders of any kind.
PS I think Obama will further destroy the country, but let's face it Bush did a great start on that and didn't leave much left to knock down.

[DeathWishBikerDude]

I find it funny people bring up seperation of church and state.
I see documentation stating goverment should stay out of religion,not the other way around.
I hope this hole gets nuked to hell,and we can find out.
 

[3fan4life]

When I first read the original post in this thread I knew that you would be the one person to rant against it.


Go ahead and rant all you wish.

It won't make you correct.

[Varmintmist]

SE, you are cherry picking quotes. EX

But that is simply not correct.  Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State."

This is true, as far as it goes. The entire sentence is
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate 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 should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.

And to put it in context it is a letter written to Baptists in Conn. who were worried about a state religion because in Conn. their religious freedoms were viewed by the state as privileges granted by the state.
It is freedom of religion, not freedom from it.
http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html more info

Secondly,

Let us not forget the Treaty of Tripoli, signed Nov 4, 1796.  In part, it said, "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Is again, true, as far as it goes.
In context, the treaty was to reaffirm to the Muslims that the US was not going to go Holy War on them. For the reasons of economics and strength we couldn’t. We were still fledglings, that is why we paid tribute BECAUSE of these treaties to the tune of 20% GDP. At that time, there was a faction of anti-navalists who fought tooth and nail not to fund warships. Once we rebuilt the navy and Jefferson became pres, he started the second war. He basically said that pandering to them would increase attacks. He was right. The principal stands today, or at least it did in the last presidency.

Them going Holy War on us was of course the whole reason that we have the second line in the Marine Corps hymn in the first place. They attacked our shipping and enslaved our people because, wait for it, we were not Muslim.
The article of the treaty you reference was so important that it is after the articles on passport and sale of goods in port. Again, it is not freedom FROM religion. It is a statement that the US is not a Christian country bent on a Crusade so as to pander to the muslims and continue to pay tribute.
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html



We are NOT a "Christian" country. We are sure as heck not Muslim either. We were founded on Christian principals. That can be easily figured out when you go look at "The Ten Really Good Ideas To Lead A Moral Life" (10 commandments) and compare them to our basis in law. We do go to English common law for a lot of definitions (ex, poaching) and are similar in a lot of ways, however there is no state religion,,, except global warming, that is anything like the Church of England the FF were trying to avoid.

..............................................

No, what is truly sad is that you do not have the integrity to accept the majority decision and instead, like so many others on this board, must deride and call the voters stupid because, obviously, you are brilliant, and if others don't agree, they must be stupid.

Pot to kettle, come in please. Your team is always in favor of democracy, unless it doesnt go your way, they you go to court. Re CA, and MA

....................................

Opinion time.

As a not real religious person, I will say that christianity is superior to a lot of religions. EX. Christians dont stone women because they got raped, there is no page in the bible that has a rock speaking to a believer telling him that there is a Jew behind it, come kill him. Last I heard, lillyorectomies were not a part of growing up christian.  (hmm, lilly apparently fills the void to describe bad word  :'(  (sorry))

Yep, I think it is superior. As is western civilization.

[Willow]

... So, no, Forbes is not to be congratulated, he is to be scorned and dismissed, for he takes one small part of an excellent speech out of context and interprets it in the light of false historical evidence and context... just so he can be divisive.

After watching that idiot Forbes once again, he ought to take a look at ...

... instead, like so many others on this board, must deride and call the voters stupid because, obviously, you are brilliant, and if others don't agree, they must be stupid.  I've lost count of the number of times posters on this board have called people stupid or worse because they support Obama.  You're just one more tick mark in that column.

Wow! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black (or is it the other way around?  I always get confused over that pot and kettle stuff.)

Anyone else see any irony in Wayne's anger over people being called stupid just because they have a different point of view or his ire over the lack of respect shown for a sitting president?

Strong Eagle, I would like to sympathize with you over the disrespect shown you at times, but it seems that in the respect transactions you get about what you give.

I thin I'll start a poll.  (It's my Ricky Ricardo voice.)

[MP]

What does Obama base his stand on the detainees that are now in Gitmo on?  He wants them all tried in the US.  But then he goes on to say, that there are some there who w cannot try, and we will have to hold them forever, even though convicted of nothing.  Where does this come from?  How can he hold someone forever without a trial?
Seems like that is what Bush was raked over the coals for by liberals.

[MP]

How about Obama shredding our laws?
He is now appointing a pay czar, to determine if you are paying someone too much.
He shreds the law, by taking secured bondholders, who are at the head of the list to be paid in case of default, and removing them to the end of the line.
That has been bankruptcy law for many decades.  He just changes it with a wave of his wand.
He is tearing apart our laws every day.
He takes a 1 trillion dollar shortfall, and turns it into a 4 trillion shortfall, and it is going up.
Now, he will dictate our health care for us.  And the cost????? Who knows.
Dems attacked Bush for spending too much.  And I agree.
But, he was a piker compared to these guys.

[Chrisj CMA]

How about Obama shredding our laws?
He is now appointing a pay czar, to determine if you are paying someone too much.
He shreds the law, by taking secured bondholders, who are at the head of the list to be paid in case of default, and removing them to the end of the line.
That has been bankruptcy law for many decades.  He just changes it with a wave of his wand.
He is tearing apart our laws every day.
He takes a 1 trillion dollar shortfall, and turns it into a 4 trillion shortfall, and it is going up.
Now, he will dictate our health care for us.  And the cost????? Who knows.
Dems attacked Bush for spending too much.  And I agree.
But, he was a piker compared to these guys.

Its amazing what they can get away with since they "WON"  what about the Cow Fart tax.......a couple hundred bucks per cow because they fart methane gas...(this is real, you cant make this stuff up)...milk and meat will be like gold if this passes.....Oh, pigs too, but the tax is lower on the swine maybe they dont fart as much

[Willow]

Once again, you religion boys play fast and loose with the facts.  ...

Yah... I know... you Christians will next attempt to say that our system of laws is "Christian based" or "bible based", but you are way off the mark again.  It was Saxon law, culminating in the Magna Carta in the 5th century, that defined the common law of Britain, and our common law.  Christianity was not introduced until the 7th century.

... out of context and interprets it in the light of false historical evidence and context... just so he can be divisive.

... at least he would not be speaking out of such ignorance.

Is this a case of someone ranting about false historical evidence and in the same post placing the Magna Carta in the 5th century?

[John Schmidt]

Is this a case of someone ranting about false historical evidence and in the same post placing the Magna Carta in the 5th century?


+++++++++++++++++++++++++
I was wondering if anyone caught that. Seems I recall it was in the 1100-1200's but don't quote me on that without checking.

[Duffy]

Strong Eagle - thanks for posting the part of Obama's speach that everyone is raving about. 

I'd have to say you are right. Many of our past presidents have been christian and some (like Bush) were not shy about it.

But, this country was founded on the principal of free religion. We as a people haven't objected much when christian leaders in politcal positions promote their beliefs, and that is ok.

But Obama said nothing inaccurate there. 

Did you leave out any juicy parts?  

[2tonevalk]

Oh yeah, I can see now.  Revisionist history. The NObama way.    Just make up anything your want, people are sheep and dont read history books.   
I guess it was simitar carrying Muslims that came ashore on Plymouth rock and Jamestown and Charleston, SC.  They were looking for a place they can worship without being molested by those "bad ole Christians".  Right?????  And all these court cases we see in the news almost daily are to remove statements from the Kuran from public buildings. 
Let's see Weak Chicken......It was a Kuran that George Washington and EVERY OTHER President places their hand on when taking the oath of office.  And all these ANTIQUATED buildings all over this country with verses from the bible are evolutionary in nature??????  These words just formed and appeared on the building entrances and the caretakers just could not bring themselves to "scrape" em off.
Your in a really good place there Chicken.  I also am seeing.  Answer me a question.  Your in Phillipines right?????  What is your tax burden here in the United States?  Can you give me an idea just how much you pay in taxes......HERE in the USA??????
Just curious.  As you apparently are a worker in a foreign nation, I am sure the number is zero.  Just a guess.  I had an opportunity to work in American Samoa and the draw to the job was paying no income tax.  So I am figuring your in the same place here.
My point being, this IS a Judeo-Christian nation FOUNDED on those values.  I dont remember ANYTHING in my American History class about some idiot in a turban coming into the Continental Congress with a bomb strapped to his chest.
So give it up.  YOu obviously don not know what your talking about.  So please sit in the corner and drink your Kool Aid and let the grown-ups talk.

Ride safe
Robert

[SANDMAN5]

But, you don't want it that way... you want to push and push and push... you want Christian prayer in schools, you want Christian symbols in government offices... then you go on whining about be persecuted.  Give me a break.

Just a quick reminder..."Christians" and "religious people" are two entirely different groups. And a
brief statement...Christian symbols(?) and prayer in schools were the "norm" not too long ago.
Then, when the whiners started having them removed because it hurt their feelings, this great
country of ours started going downhill...fast. Just another step toward the demise of the USA.
Another quick one, when Obama quoted the Koran in his speech the other day, wonder why
he didn't quote the part about a man being allowed to beat his wife?

[Bob E.]

Another quick one, when Obama quoted the Koran in his speech the other day, wonder why
he didn't quote the part about a man being allowed to beat his wife?

Does it really say that?  I'm serious...does it really say that??

[Serk]

Another quick one, when Obama quoted the Koran in his speech the other day, wonder why
he didn't quote the part about a man being allowed to beat his wife?

Does it really say that?  I'm serious...does it really say that??

Depends on which translation you wanna believe of Qur'an 4:34... Of course, I could dig up some hum-dingers in the christian bible too...

One particular translation of this passage reads thusly:

"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Shakir's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)

For more translations, and some discussion of this passage, see here - http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-wife-beating-koran-4-34.htm

[SANDMAN5]

Does it really say that?  I'm serious...does it really say that??

The translation I remember, and this is not word for word(but real close).."If a
woman disobeys her husband, he is allowed to beat her in public, as long as
he beats her lightly."

[Bob E.]

Another quick one, when Obama quoted the Koran in his speech the other day, wonder why
he didn't quote the part about a man being allowed to beat his wife?

Does it really say that?  I'm serious...does it really say that??

Depends on which translation you wanna believe of Qur'an 4:34... Of course, I could dig up some hum-dingers in the christian bible too...

One particular translation of this passage reads thusly:

"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Shakir's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)

For more translations, and some discussion of this passage, see here - http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-wife-beating-koran-4-34.htm

Thanks...I did not know that.