Keith, now you've done it, confusing the poor little entitled victim with facts and logic and not accepting the rantings, bordering on hysteria, based purely on emotion as conclusive. Like I said, pearls cast before swine.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote: >You've thrown no one in jail, period. Nor do you speak for the conscience of >the American people. > > >I've never claimed that our government was anything less than secular, it is >obviously a secular republican form of government. What I did say, and what >I and most all thoughtful Americans know, is that our system of government, >and our laws are based upon Judeo-Christian tenets and principals. This is >fact, and no matter how many Anti-American articles from hate sites you choose >to cut and paste, nothing will ever change that fact/ > > >On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:48 PM, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> >wrote: > >spout all the quotes you want but it won't change the fact that the US >government is secular and will not yield to religious myth believers like >yourself. > > >but hey ... go ahead and take a stand like Kim Davis ... we'll throw your ass >in jail also. > > > >On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 1:08:29 PM UTC-6, KeithInTampa wrote: > >On March 6, 1789, President John Adams called for a national day of fasting >and prayer for the country could "call to mind our numerous offenses against >the most high God, confess them before Him with the sincerest penitence, >implore his pardoning mercy, through the Great Mediator and Redeemer, for our >past transgression, and that through the grace of His Holy Spirit, we may be >disposed and enabled to yield a more suitable obedience. . ." > > >A few other quotes which demonstrate Adams’ thoughts about Jesus are below. > > >On April 18, 1775, a British soldier ordered him, John Hancock, and others to >“disperse in the name of George the Sovereign King of England. Adams responded >to him: > > >“We recognize no sovereign but God, and no king but Jesus!” > > >In an October 13, 1789 address to the military, he said: > > >"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human >passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or >gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes >through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious >people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." > > >In a letter to Thomas Jefferson dated June 28, 1813, Adams said: > > >“The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the >general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now >believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and >immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” –John Adams; June 28, 1813, >in a letter to Thomas Jefferson. > > >"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only >law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there >exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, >frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow >men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, >what a Paradise would this region be." Diary and Autobiography of John Adams, >Vol. III, p. 9 > > >===== > > >"I now offer you the outline of the plan they have suggested. Let an >association be formed to be denominated 'The Christian Constitutional >Society,' its object to be first: The support of the Christian religion. >Second: The support of the United States." Alexander Hamilton, 1802 To John >Baynard > > >===== > > >"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be >thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the >minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are >not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I >reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever; That a >revolution of the wheel of fortune, a change of situation, is among possible >events; that it may become probable by Supernatural influence! The Almighty >has no attribute which can take side with us in that event." Thomas >Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, p. 237. > > >===== > > >"While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, >we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To >the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add >the more distinguished character of Christian." --The Writings of George >Washington, pp. 342-3 > > >===== > > >The plan of education proposed is anti-Christian, and therefore repugnant to >the law....The purest principles of morality are to be taught. Where are they >found? Whoever searches for them must go to the source from which a Christian >man derives his faith -- the Bible...There is an obligation to teach what the >Bible alone can teach, viz. a pure system of morality... > >Both in the Old and New Testaments [religious instruction's] importance is >recognized. In the Old it is said, 'Thou shalt diligently teach them to thy >children,' and the New, 'Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid >them not...' No fault can be found with Girard for wishing a marble college to >bear his name forever, but it is not valuable unless it has a fragrance of >Christianity about it. > > >The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every respect there shall >be a separation of Church and State. Rather, it studiously defines the manner, >the specific ways, in which there shall be no concert or union or dependency >one on the other. Vidal v. Girard's Executors, 43 U.S. 126,132 (1844). > > >Christianity...is not to be maliciously and openly reviled and blasphemed >against, to the annoyance of believers or the injury of the public...It is >unnecessary for us, however, to consider the establishment of a school or >college, for the propagation of...Deism, or any other form of infidelity. > >Such a case is not to be presumed to exist in a Christian country...Why may >not laymen instruct in the general principles of Christianity as well as >ecclesiastics... > > >And we cannot overlook the blessings, which such [lay] men by their conduct, >as well as their instructions, may, nay must, impart to their youthful pupils. >Why may not the Bible, and especially the New Testament, without note or >comment, be read and taught as a divine revelation in the [school] -- its >general precepts expounded, its evidences explained and its glorious >principles of morality inculcated?... > > >Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so >perfectly as from the New Testament? > > >It is also said, and truly, that the Christian religion is a part of the >common law of Pennsylvania... Id. (Emphasis Added) (By Justice Storey) >Vidal v. Girard's Executors, 43 U.S. 126,132-133 (1844). > > > >====== > > > >That is the common sense of the matter. Otherwise the state and religion would >be aliens to each other -- hostile, suspicious, and even unfriendly. Zorach >v. Clauson, (1952) > > >========= > > > >“ > >Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the >teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be >otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our >institutions are emphatically Christian. > > >No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state >or national, because this is a religious people. This is historically true. >From the discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a single >voice making this affirmation. > > >The commission to Christopher Columbus...[recited] that 'it is hoped that by >God's assistance some of the continents and islands in the ocean will be >discovered...' > > >The first colonial grant made to Sir Walter Raleigh in 1584...and the grant >authorizing him to enact statutes for the government of the proposed colony >provided that they 'be not against the true Christian faith...' > > >The first charter of Virginia, granted by King James I in 1606...commenced the >grant in these words: '...in propagating of Christian religion to such people >as yet live in darkness...' > > >Language of similar import may be found in the subsequent charters of that >colony...in 1609 and 1611; and the same is true of the various charters >granted to the other colonies. In language more or less emphatic is the >establishment of the Christian religion declared to be one of the purposes of >the grant. The celebrated compact made by the Pilgrims in the Mayflower, 1620, >recites: 'Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and advancement of the >Christian faith...a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of >Virginia...' > > >The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, under which a provisional government >was instituted in 1638-1639, commence with this declaration: 'And well knowing >where a people are gathered together, the Word of God requires that to >maintain the peace and union...there should be an orderly and decent >government established according to God...to maintain and preserve the liberty >and purity of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus which we now profess...of the said >Gospel [which] is now practiced amongst us.' > > >In the Charter of Privileges granted by William Penn to the province of >Pennsylvania, in 1701, it is recited: '...No people can be truly happy, though >under the greatest enjoyment of civil liberties, if abridged of...their >religious profession and worship...' > > >Coming nearer to the present time, the Declaration of Independence recognizes >the presence of the Divine in human affairs in these words: > > >'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that >they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights...appealing >to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions...And >for the support of this Declaration, with firm reliance on the Protection of >Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, >and our sacred honor.' > > >We find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth...because of a >general recognition of this truth [that we are a Christian nation], the >question has seldom been presented to the courts... > > >There is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language >pervading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is >a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private >persons: they are organic utterances; they speak the voice of the entire >people. > > >While because of a general recognition of this truth the question has seldom >been presented to the courts, yet we find that in Updegraph v. the >Commonwealth, it was decided that, Christianity, general Christianity, is, and >always has been, a part of the common law...not Christianity with an >established church...but Christianity with liberty of conscience to all men. > > >And in The People v. Ruggles, Chancellor Kent, the great commentator on >American law, speaking as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New York, >said: 'The people of this State, in common with the people of this country, >profess the general doctrines of Christianity, as the rule of their faith and >practice...We are a Christian people, and the morality of the country is >deeply engrafted upon Christianity, and not upon the doctrines or worship of >those impostors [other religions].' > > >And in the famous case of Vidal v. Girard's Executors, this court observed: >'It is also said, and truly, that the Christian religion is a part of the >common law...' > > >If we pass beyond these matters to a view of American life as expressed by its >laws, its business, its customs and its society, we find everywhere a clear >recognition of the same truth. Among other matters note the following: The >form of oath universally prevailing, concluding with an appeal to the >Almighty; the custom of opening sessions of all deliberative bodies and most >conventions with prayer; the prefatory words of all will, 'In the name of God, >amen', the laws respecting the observance of the Sabbath, with the general >cessation of all secular business, and the closing of courts, legislatures, >and other similar public assemblies on that day; the churches and church >organizations which abound in every city, town and hamlet; the multitude of >charitable organizations existing everywhere under Christian auspices; the >gigantic missionary associations, with general support, and aiming to >establish Christian missions in every quarter of the globe. > > >These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of >unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a >Christian nation...we find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth. > > >The happiness of a people and the good order and preservation of civil >government essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality. > > >Religion, morality, and knowledge [are] necessary to good government, the >preservation of liberty, and the happiness of mankind. > >” Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, (1892) > > > >Issued by President George Washington, at the request of Congress, on October >3, 1789 > > >By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation. > > >Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of >Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to >implore His protection and favor; and—Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by >their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United >States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by >acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, >especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of >government for their safety and happiness:” > > >Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November >next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great >and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that >is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our >sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of >this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold >mercies and the favor, able interpositions of His providence in the course and >conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquillity, union, and >plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in >which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our >safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted; >for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means >we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all >the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us. > > >And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and >supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to >pardon our national and other trangressions; to enable us all, whether in >public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties >properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all >the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional >laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all >sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to >bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge >and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among >them and us; and, generally, to grant unto all mankind such a degree of >temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best. > > >Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the >year of our Lord 1789. > >George Washington > > > > > > > > >On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:50 PM, plainolamerican <plainol...@gmail.com> wrote: > >No amount of revisionist history is going to change what we are as a Nation > >--- > >back at you. > > >Benjamin Franklin > >Although Franklin received religious training, his nature forced him to rebel >against the irrational tenets of his parents Christianity. His Autobiography >revels his skepticism, “My parents had given me betimes religions impressions, >and I received from my infancy a pious education in the principles of >Calvinism. But scarcely was I arrived at fifteen years of age, when, after >having doubted in turn of different tenets, according as I found them combated >in the different books that I read, I began to doubt of Revelation itself. > >“. . . Some books against Deism fell into my hands. . . It happened that they >wrought an effect on my quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the >arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much >stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a through Deist.” > >In an essay on “Toleration,” Franklin wrote: > >“If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in >Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, >and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution >extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first >Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish church, >but practiced it upon the Puritans. These found it wrong in the Bishops, but >fell into the same practice themselves both here [England] and in New England.” > >Dr. Priestley, an intimate friend of Franklin, wrote of him: > >“It is much to be lamented that a man of Franklin’s general good character and >great influence should have been an unbeliever in Christianity, and also have >done as much as he did to make others unbelievers” (Priestley’s Autobiography) > >Thomas Paine > >This freethinker and author of several books, influenced more early Americans >than any other writer. Although he held Deist beliefs, he wrote in his famous >The Age of Reason: > >“I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman >church, by the Greek church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that >I know of. My own mind is my church. “ > >“Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more >derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, >and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. “ > >The U.S. Constitution > >The most convincing evidence that our government did not ground itself upon >Christianity comes from the very document that defines it– the United States >Constitution. > >If indeed our Framers had aimed to found a Christian republic, it would seem >highly unlikely that they would have forgotten to leave out their Christian >intentions in the Supreme law of the land. In fact, nowhere in the >Constitution do we have a single mention of Christianity, God, Jesus, or any >Supreme Being. There occurs only two references to religion and they both use >exclusionary wording. The 1st Amendment’s says, “Congress shall make no law >respecting an establishment of religion. . .” and in Article VI, Section 3, “. >. . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office >or public trust under the United States.” > >Thomas Jefferson interpreted the 1st Amendment in his famous letter to the >Danbury Baptist Association in January 1, 1802: > >“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.” > >Some Religious activists try to extricate the concept of separation between >church and State by claiming that those words do not occur in the >Constitution. Indeed they do not, but neither does it exactly say “freedom of >religion,” yet the First Amendment implies both. > >As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia >Act for Religious Freedom: > >“Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of >the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus >Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the >holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great >majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its >protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo >and Infidel of every denomination.” > >James Madison, perhaps the greatest supporter for separation of church and >State, and whom many refer to as the father of the Constitution, also held >similar views which he expressed in his letter to Edward Livingston, 10 July >1822: > >“And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one >has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, >the less they are mixed together.” > >Today, if ever our government needed proof that the separation of church and >State works to ensure the freedom of religion, one only need to look at the >plethora of Churches, temples, and shrines that exist in the cities and towns >throughout the United States. Only a secular government, divorced from >religion could possibly allow such tolerant diversity. > >The Declaration of Independence > >Many Christians who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually >present the Declaration as “proof.” The reason appears obvious: the document >mentions God. However, the God in the Declaration does not describe >Christianity’s God. It describes “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” >This nature’s view of God agrees with deist philosophy but any attempt to use >the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone. > > > >Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli > >Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli > >More significantly, the Declaration does not represent the law of the land as >it came before the Constitution. The Declaration aimed at announcing their >separation from Great Britain and listed the various grievances with the >“thirteen united States of America.” The grievances against Great Britain no >longer hold, and we have more than thirteen states. Today, the Declaration >represents an important historical document about rebellious intentions >against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our independent >government. Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may >inspire the lofty thoughts of poets, and judges may mention it in their >summations, it holds no legal power today. Our presidents, judges and >policemen must take an oath to uphold the Constitution, but never to the >Declaration of Independence. > >Of course the Declaration depicts a great political document, as it aimed at a >future government upheld by citizens instead of a religious monarchy. It >observed that all men “are created equal” meaning that we all come inborn with >the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That “to secure >these rights, governments are instituted among men.” The Declaration says >nothing about our rights secured by Christianity, nor does it imply anything >about a Christian foundation. > >Treaty of Tripoli > >Unlike governments of the past, the American Fathers set up a government >divorced from religion. The establishment of a secular government did not >require a reflection to themselves about its origin; they knew this as an >unspoken given. However, as the U.S. delved into international affairs, few >foreign nations knew about the intentions of America. For this reason, an >insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s >explicitly reveals the secular nature of the United States to a foreign >nation. Officially called the “Treaty of peace and friendship between the >United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary,” >most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states: > > > >Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers > >Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers >Copyright National Portait Gallery Smithsonian Institution/Art Resource NY > >“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.” > >The preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end of >George Washington’s last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American >diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty >negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the >revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read >Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for >rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Barlow, along with >his associate, Captain Richard O’Brien, et al, translated and modified the >Arabic version of the treaty into English. From this came the added Amendment >11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval in 1797. >Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams >concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate. >The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the >Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this >multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest >concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The >Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797. > >So here we have a clear admission by the United States that our government did >not found itself upon Christianity. Unlike the Declaration of Independence, >this treaty represented U.S. law as all treaties do according to the >Constitution (see Article VI, Sect. 2). > >Although the Christian exclusionary wording in the Treaty of Tripoli only >lasted for eight years and no longer has legal status, it clearly represented >the feelings of our Founding Fathers at the beginning of the U.S. government. > >Common Law > >... > >-- >-- >Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > >* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >* Read the latest breaking news, and more. > >--- >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >"PoliticalForum" group. >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > >-- >-- >Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > >* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >* Read the latest breaking news, and more. > >--- >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >"PoliticalForum" group. >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
