|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
09-05-2012, 08:12 PM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,228
|
|
He's topically challenged to boot.
|
09-05-2012, 08:13 PM
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 543
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas
Yeah, mess ain't much when it comes to putting together a coherent sentence. As near as I can figure it has something to do with wearing shower shoes during a mining disaster.
John
|
Oh stop being such a baby. I really didn't have a problem ommitting God from the platform. But putting God back in now after some criticism just looks weak.
__________________
Liberalism: Find a cure.
|
09-05-2012, 08:22 PM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,228
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mezz
Oh stop being such a baby. I really didn't have a problem ommitting God from the platform. But putting God back in now after some criticism just looks weak.
|
You aren't worth the keystrokes. Crickets are the only chorus you deserve.
|
09-06-2012, 06:57 AM
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 785
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas
Yeah, mess ain't much when it comes to putting together a coherent sentence. As near as I can figure it has something to do with wearing shower shoes during a mining disaster.
John
|
Sir...you have a knack of making a person feel like a school bus monitor.
Totally.
__________________
Gov. big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.
|
09-06-2012, 07:31 AM
|
|
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mezz
..... But putting God back in now after some criticism just looks weak.
|
Agreed.
Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
|
09-06-2012, 09:01 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by painter
Sir...you have a knack of making a person feel like a school bus monitor.
Totally.
|
And, madam, you might want to rethink your signature too. Jefferson never said that.
http://www.monticello.org/site/jeffe...ment-quotation
Have a nice day.
John
|
09-06-2012, 09:16 AM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,228
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by painter
Sir...you have a knack of making a person feel like a school bus monitor.
Totally.
|
M'am, that is a hardly a fair opinion. At least the school bus monitor had the good sense not to post a link to a disgustingly racist video about Muslim immigrants in Britain.
|
09-06-2012, 12:03 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,737
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mezz
The cave-in/flip-flop is far more embarrassing than the ommission (which would have been rather easy to defend in my opinion).
|
While in the process of flip-flopping, they tried defending the omission as an oversight, but that was obviously a lie.
Here's some truth- about half of that delegation wants God erased from our government. Some, I'm sure, because they are atheist. Some, because they are Muslim and therefore don't buy in to the concept of religious tolerance. And some, because they truly believe it's wrong for our government to promote one faith over another.
Personally, none of those arguments wash for me. I've spent my life pledging allegiance to a flag that represents "one nation under God". Have all these people been reciting that pledge falsely? What do they propose allegiance to? Anything?
Worship whatever you want, or nothing at all, but this country was and is oriented to Biblical values. Obama wants to fundamentally change America. Well, it don't get much more fundamental than our Christian heritage.
__________________
"You can't always get what you want" -Rolling Stones
|
09-06-2012, 12:33 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wasillaguy
Here's some truth- about half of that delegation wants God erased from our government. Some, I'm sure, because they are atheist. Some, because they are Muslim and therefore don't buy in to the concept of religious tolerance. And some, because they truly believe it's wrong for our government to promote one faith over another.
|
Where's your evidence for this "truth"? By the way, I do happen to believe that "it's wrong for our government to promote one faith over another". So did the founders. That's why they put it in the Constitution.
Quote:
Personally, none of those arguments wash for me. I've spent my life pledging allegiance to a flag that represents "one nation under God".
|
And I'm old enough to have begun reciting the Pledge before Right Wing anti-Communists got "under God" added in. The Pledge of Allegiance was written without "under God" in 1892, officially adopted without "under God" in 1942 out of patriotic fervor in the early months of WWII. "Under God" was added in 1954 during the Cold War as a means of differentiating us from the "Godless communists". It has always been political and never really been religious.
Quote:
Worship whatever you want, or nothing at all, but this country was and is oriented to Biblical values.
|
Why, then, does the word God not appear anywhere in the Constitution?
Also, why did they put this in the Treaty of Tripoli in 1797, a treaty which was unanimously ratified by Congress and signed by President John Adams, one of the Nation's founders:
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 tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan 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.
Quote:
Obama wants to fundamentally change America. Well, it don't get much more fundamental than our Christian heritage.
|
Where's your evidence for that?
John
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
|
09-06-2012, 01:59 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas
Why, then, does the word God not appear anywhere in the Constitution?
Also, why did they put this in the Treaty of Tripoli in 1797, a treaty which was unanimously ratified by Congress and signed by President John Adams, one of the Nation's founders:
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 tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan 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.
|
No one is suggesting that the US Government is a theocracy. However, Treaty you reference settled a dispute between the US and theocratic regimes. To include language that religious opinions should not be the basis of future disputes was deemed a prudent political addition. Also, the US Constitution is a document that proscribes the mechanics of the Federal Government, so there's no need to mention "God" in such a document. Alternatively, I believe some relevance can be attached to the fact that the very first amendment to the constitution is the one that protects religious freedom.
But to use that language from the Treaty to negate the idea that human rights and freedoms flowed "from Laws of Nature and of Nature's God", and that the authors of the Constitution ignored this idea when drafting the Constitution and other founding documents is a false notion. Whey else, then, does the Declaration make reference to "God", "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God", "divine Providence", etc., if these concepts were not relevant to the signatories of that document.
Also, if you want to focus on treaty language, may I refer you to the Treaty with Tunis in 1797, which contains the language which describes the President of the United States as:
"the most distinguished among those who profess the religion of the Messiah, of whom may the end be happy."
Last edited by whell; 09-06-2012 at 02:02 PM.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:02 PM.
|