Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution -- Thanks John
LOL Thanks John :-) John Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Michael Redler wrote: > homey [h#601;#650;mi:]Aadjective1 homelike, homely, homey, homy > having a feeling of home; cozy and comfortable; "the homely everyday > atmosphere"; "a homey little inn" > > Appal Energy wrote: > > Homey doesn't buy this either. Don't know about Todd's age and TV viewing habits, but this may or may not be a variant of the circa 1990 pop culture phrase "Homey don't play dat." Homey the Clown was a disaffected ex-con turned children's clown played by Damon Wayans on the sketch comedy show In Living Color. Homey's typical response to pretty much everything was "I don't think so...Homie don't play dat!" This ends today's lesson in Americana. Now back to the religious war already in progress. jh ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Remember "duck and cover?" and TV viewing habits, I don't. Haven't for fifteen years. Didn't much before that. - Original Message - From: "John Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 9:14 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution Michael Redler wrote: homey [h#601;#650;mi:]Aadjective1 homelike, homely, homey, homy having a feeling of home; cozy and comfortable; "the homely everyday atmosphere"; "a homey little inn" Appal Energy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Homey doesn't buy this either. Don't know about Todd's age and TV viewing habits, but this may or may not be a variant of the circa 1990 pop culture phrase "Homey don't play dat." Homey the Clown was a disaffected ex-con turned children's clown played by Damon Wayans on the sketch comedy show In Living Color. Homey's typical response to pretty much everything was "I don't think so...Homie don't play dat!" This ends today's lesson in Americana. Now back to the religious war already in progress. jh ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005 -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
homey [h#601;#650;mi:]Aadjective1 homelike, homely, homey, homy having a feeling of home; cozy and comfortable; "the homely everyday atmosphere"; "a homey little inn" Appal Energy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Homey doesn't buy this either. Don't know about Todd's age and TV viewing habits, but this may or may not be a variant of the circa 1990 pop culture phrase "Homey don't play dat." Homey the Clown was a disaffected ex-con turned children's clown played by Damon Wayans on the sketch comedy show In Living Color. Homey's typical response to pretty much everything was "I don't think so...Homie don't play dat!" This ends today's lesson in Americana. Now back to the religious war already in progress. jh ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Homey don't buy this one Robert, at least not hook, line and sinker like the author would prefer. The whole point of posting the article was to stimulate discussion. I'm not asking you to accept it. My eldest sister sent me the article in rebuttal to the Brooke Adams essay. I thought that it was typical of a conservative response. Second, the author slightly oversteps reality in the last half of the very first paragraph, when he states that "there is no question about [the states] being founded on Christian principles." Uh...did the author just conveniently forget that most of the colonies (they weren't really calling them states until the mid-1770's) were founded on principles of economic investment and return? Do you think that he could spell "Massachusetts Bay Company," or the numerous other ongoing concerns? Surely he's not saying that pursuit of monetary gain is a Christian principle. Or is he? That would be slightly contradictory to the vignette of the money changers in the temple, now wouldn't it? Excellent point, Todd. However, we cannot overlook the fact that many of the original colonists came to North America to rid themselves of religious intolerance. This principle informs the decision making process of the founding fathers, who strictly divided the realm of government from that of religion. I've not read the individual state constitutions from whence the author derives his thesis that several states were founded on Christian principles, so it would be unfair for me to comment further. My view in this matter is that the United States government has never behaved in a manner consistent with Christian principles. The claim that our founders were God fearing men does nothing to influence the policies our nation has espoused since its inception. I strenuously object to the concept that because our money has the motto "In God We Trust" inscribed thereon, or the fact that our Masonic founding fathers accepted the existence of God, we have somehow managed to transcend the foibles common to humanity and the attendant, messy business of governing people. Third, the author interprets "Year of our Lord" according to his own fancy. The term "lord" is rather all encompassing in the bible, not to mention general societal references, whether contemporary or historical, social or spiritual. To attribute the term to but one leaf of the triune clover is a bit deceptive. While it may work for the author, it would be contextually inaccurate with great frequency. The use of a culturally accepted figure of speech does not necessarily indicate an espousal of divine eminence. That comment raised my eyebrows, too. So what of this? The French revolutionaries reconstructed the seven-day biblical week and turned it into a ten-day metric week in hopes of ridding the nation of every vestige of Christianity. Nothing like this was done in America. Might the refrain on the part of the founding fathers have had something to do with lunar rhythms (seven days) instead of lunacy (abandonment of natural cycles)? Or might it have something to do with a founding principle of inclusion, rather than exclusion? DeMar seems to think, or at least wish others to think, that anything which rubs against a horse must necessarily be a horse. Another good point, Todd. Then, wonder of wonders, DeMar further jumps the tracks with the body of the paragraph that starts, "The U. S. Constitution’s lack of a Christian designation had little to do with a radical secular agenda." Rather than addressing the individual beliefs of the founding fathers as Allen did, he not only creates a strawman on which to focus, but completely sidesteps that part of the Allen's thesis and brings in 'evidence to the contrary' which has essentially nothing to do with their personal holdings. And the reader is expected to continue reading in this thick haze of intentionally layed smoke and obfuscation? There were some problems with the Brooke Adams essay, especially in her contention that the Constitution writers did not personally espouse religious beliefs. However, I believe she was trying to address the current fantasy among many Americans that the Constitution is divinely inspired to the same degree that Christians maintain for the scriptures, and that this level of inspiration could ONLY have derived from men who were deeply committed to Jesus Christ. This problem is widespread, it's patently false, and the defensive reaction characteristic of Mr. DeMar's rebuttal is an excellent example of what motivates my concern. He's written a number of statements that indicate he is projecting a modern, evangelical view upon the Constitution writers; including the blatantly ridiculous claim that giving the president Sunday off when counting the days before a bill must be signed was done in deference to the fourth commandment. (The fourth commandment specifies the seventh day a
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Walt, I am confused, are you suggesting that documents could not be written before 1200 to 1500 and are you suggesting that manual production of documents (books) were not done? That's the generally accepted understanding, that the only groups capable of making a written record prior to 1500 were down in central America. None of the Six Nations had a system of written records, at least not that I've heard tell of. In fact, what are you trying to tell us? I can not figure out what you mean. Keith seems to have the same problem ;-) Are you sure that Six Nations had no way to document things, or that it had not been documented by someone else at the time. If so, I'd love to hear about it. Walt ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Jesse, I hadn't even heard of it. I'm so glad you brought it up. I'm hoping that it was recorded by someone at some time. As you know, there were and are some efforts to record native traditions and languages before they are all lost. These efforts are not nearly as timely or vigorous as I would like. The efforts to record this information were rigorous indeed since lives and fortunes depended on it. Some background: 1) In the first half of the 18th century, the copyright laws were an effective way to control the proliferation of those seditious devices otherwise known as printing presses. By restricting the printing of material to only those presses which were licensed by the author, the Crown was able to limit the number of them. One side effect was that this placed a premium on new content, since popular works could only be printed by shops in contract with the author. 2) In the first half of the 18th century, the largest army on the continent belonged to the Iroquois Confederacy which just happened to be situated smack in between the French settlements on the Great Lakes, and the British Colonies along the Atlantic seaboard. The fate of the colonies, British and French alike, hinged on whether the Confederacy decided to remain neutral, or come in on one side or the other. 3) The British colonial delegates had to learn the customs and procedures of the Confederacy in order to be able to argue their case effectively. When success is a matter of life or death, one tends to pay very close attention indeed. 4) The colonials were very interested in the proceedings of the Confederate conclaves because the Confederacy was the primary buffer between them and the French, but it also went far beyond that - there was also a tremendous interest in the raw fact that such an organization could even exist as a voluntary association without a king. It wasn't the democratic aspects of the Confederacy that fascinated the colonials, but rather the fact that it was non-aristocratic - that it's prestigious men were recognized by virtue of their demonstrated merit rather than by their bloodline. 5) This was the age of Rousseau and the dream of the "noble savage" unspoiled by tyrannical kings and predatory aristocrats. The fact that "savages" had manifestly created a system of governance that had been stable for centuries was very heady stuff to Europeans eager for any lever they could use to topple the towers of aristocratic privilege. 6) The clerks who attended the delegates sent to fourteen of the Confederate conclaves took full and careful notes, which upon their return were snapped up by an eager young printer in Philadelphia who cranked out hundreds and hundreds of copies that were immediate best sellers - high priced volumes which sold out as soon as they hit the docks of Europe. Indeed, it was the incredible financial success reaped by his aggressive printer which allowed him to later indulge his interests in science and politics. 7) Two other points for those interested in the behind the scenes details. The first is that the Confederacy was too eager to confine its power to the six tribes, and by refusing to allow others to join into the Confederacy, they weakened themselves and set the stage for the"divide and conquer" end game that worked out the only way it could. 8) And second, while it is true that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are littered with Confederate principles, it shouldn't be forgot that the founders also leaned heavily on the history of the Republic of Venice, a powerful and independent entity which, while lacking the leadership of a King, still was able to dominated European affairs for almost a thousand years. It later fell to Napoleon's cannons, but back when the founders were founding, it's history as an independent republic made it the envy of libertarians everywhere. Walt ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Hallo Dave, No, Allen specifically states that the founders were not religious men. I quoted that in my first mail to Todd and that was my only beef with the article. It is patently false. Where he is right he is right and where he is wrong he is wrong and he was wrong in that statement. Sorry to butt into your discussion, Gustl, but the author was a woman. Brooke Allen has an axe to grind, and you're right about her errors. However, she does make some excellent points. The contemporary tendency to view America's founding fathers as evangelical, dispensationalist believing, "born again" Bible thumpers is the perspective she tried to counter. robert luis rabello "The Edge of Justice" Adventure for Your Mind http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782> Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Walt, I am confused, are you suggesting that documents could not be written before 1200 to 1500 and are you suggesting that manual production of documents (books) were not done? In fact, what are you trying to tell us? I can not figure out what you mean. Are you sure that Six Nations had no way to document things, or that it had not been documented by someone else at the time. Democracy by itself is an old Greek definition and since then there are many variations that had been tried. It is very hard to find any variation that not been tried and documented, even before the Americas was discovered. The founding fathers did not create anything new and had a very large and documented knowledge base to draw from. What is it that is new in the US constitution or unique in the US version of democracy? It might be that the US corporations have extended rights, compared to the people and in reality the US in a "Corpracy" not a "Democracy". LOL I have no idea, but if it was something called democracy in US before its discovery, it is a quite remarkable discovery. Hakan At 12:42 AM 2/17/2005, you wrote: Of course it wasn't then a written document but an oral tradition and a model of a working democracy from which the founding fathers drew more than heavily Jess > From: Walt Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:41:04 -0800 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution > > At 10:57 AM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >> Has anyone else ever seen a copy of the Six Nations Constitution? > > It's hard to imagine that any such document could exist. The > agreement was formulated sometime between 1200 and 1500, long before the > Six Nations had a way to write such an agreement down. Any document > prepared in modern times would be analogous to a modern copy of the works > of Homer; i.e. the product of a long oral tradition separating the author > from the present age. > > Walt ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
- Original Message - From: "Kirk McLoren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : Noahide or Noachide law is actually Jewish although : some "Christians" apparently want to practice Judaism. : : I'm afraid it will only get worse at least for a time. : : Kirk * Well there is no profit in following Christ's instructions. But then after following the link provided I'm confused way my Congress and President would, declare as the law of the land, law they routinely and habitually break or ignore. I agree it will only get worse and I hope you are correct in least for a time. Doug ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Of course it wasn't then a written document but an oral tradition and a model of a working democracy from which the founding fathers drew more than heavily Rather than facts and substance, the prejudice (which is all it amounts to) against oral traditions and oral history, dating from the colonial era, has been shown to be without much basis. No doubt there are exceptions but generally, oral peoples with no written language were and are most rigorous in maintaining the veracity and accuracy of what enters their traditions. African historians have shown that on many occasions the oral histories have been more accurate than the written ones were, such as for instance Lord Lugard's much-hailed establishment of "indirect rule" in Nigeria a hundred years ago, admired at the time and long afterwards, even now, as a shining example of colonial liberalism. In fact it was intended to destabilise, divide and conquer and was established at the barrel of a Gatling gun with widespead loss of life - but Lord Lugard's wife was foreign editor of The Times, don't you know, and a different story thus entered the history books, as intended. The African oral histories told the truth of it, since proven and corroborated, and were consistent, furthermore, more so than written historians tend be. It's not a safe assumption that print and literacy are necessarily superior. If it's just an automatic assumption and not based on the facts of the case, it's quite likely to be not only wrong but arrogant. Best wishes Keith Jess > From: Walt Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:41:04 -0800 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution > > At 10:57 AM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >> Has anyone else ever seen a copy of the Six Nations Constitution? > > It's hard to imagine that any such document could exist. The > agreement was formulated sometime between 1200 and 1500, long before the > Six Nations had a way to write such an agreement down. Any document > prepared in modern times would be analogous to a modern copy of the works > of Homer; i.e. the product of a long oral tradition separating the author > from the present age. > > Walt ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
- Original Message - From: "robert luis rabello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 9:40 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution : : Allen’s article is filled with so many half truths that it would take : a book to deal with them adequately. For those of you who are new to : the work of American Vision, there are numerous books on the subject : that easily refute Allen’s assertions. The words that where attributed to the founding brothers in the article are accurate as are the words of the same founding brothers that, morally ambiguous moral majority use to make their case. The problem is that the body of the recorded words of the founding brothers is like, the Bible and would seem the Koran as well. By picking and choosing one can find support/ justification for most everything. Many of the first Christians coming to the Americas came fleeing religious oppression only to become the oppressors themselves here in the Americas. IMO opinion they are still at it. To call the USA "Christian is to insult God become man and his teachings, still IMO. Doug ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
- Original Message - From: "Legal Eagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 4:07 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution : G'day Ken; : Nice of you to denigrate CHRISTians like that . We are not "X" anything : thank you very much. Either learn some respect or please keep your crap to : yourself. You don't have to agree, but you don't get to denigrate either. : Someone had a whack at "sacred cows" a while back, you should have learned : from that. : Luc * Ah Luc? Respectfully, don't be so quick to feel disrespected by a centuries old practice and the modern day adaptation of that practice. X, XP and P super-imposed over X is understood to represent the word and the man Christ. The P super-imposed over the X is a symbol found in many church buildings. See http://landru.i-link-2.net/shnyves/Christian_Symbolism.html [ http://tinyurl.com/4lxr9 ] and http://landru.i-link-2.net/shnyves/xp.gif [ http://tinyurl.com/6saa7 ] Doug, N0LKK [EMAIL PROTECTED] E Pluribus Unum Motto of the USA since 1776 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Of course it wasn't then a written document but an oral tradition and a model of a working democracy from which the founding fathers drew more than heavily Jess > From: Walt Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:41:04 -0800 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution > > At 10:57 AM 2/15/2005, you wrote: >> Has anyone else ever seen a copy of the Six Nations Constitution? > > It's hard to imagine that any such document could exist. The > agreement was formulated sometime between 1200 and 1500, long before the > Six Nations had a way to write such an agreement down. Any document > prepared in modern times would be analogous to a modern copy of the works > of Homer; i.e. the product of a long oral tradition separating the author > from the present age. > > Walt > > > ___ > Biofuel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ > ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Has anyone else ever seen a copy of the Six Nations Constitution? It's hard to imagine that any such document could exist. The agreement was formulated sometime between 1200 and 1500, long before the Six Nations had a way to write such an agreement down. Any document prepared in modern times would be analogous to a modern copy of the works of Homer; i.e. the product of a long oral tradition separating the author from the present age. Walt ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
author would prefer. First, if the author is going to give references, how about not giving an entire littany of books. And notice the source of the littany no less. No bias or bent there, eh? Generally page and paragraph are sufficient. Leave it to those who would like to further indoctrinate others in their peculiar perceptions to force them to weed through multiple volumes of mental briars, brambles, doctrine and manipulations to find the frisbee. Second, the author slightly oversteps reality in the last half of the very first paragraph, when he states that "there is no question about [the states] being founded on Christian principles." Uh...did the author just conveniently forget that most of the colonies (they weren't really calling them states until the mid-1770's) were founded on principles of economic investment and return? Do you think that he could spell "Massachusetts Bay Company," or the numerous other ongoing concerns? Surely he's not saying that pursuit of monetary gain is a Christian principle. Or is he? That would be slightly contradictory to the vignette of the money changers in the temple, now wouldn't it? And with that "minor" oversight he has the gall to accuse the author of the article he's attempting to discredit of "not [having] done a thorough study of American history as it relates to its founding documents? It would appear that he's the one that hasn't researched too many founding charters. Third, the author interprets "Year of our Lord" according to his own fancy. The term "lord" is rather all encompassing in the bible, not to mention general societal references, whether contemporary or historical, social or spiritual. To attribute the term to but one leaf of the triune clover is a bit deceptive. While it may work for the author, it would be contextually inaccurate with great frequency. And then DeMar chooses to largely forego what was actually written by Brooke Allen, not to mention the very words of the founders whom he's attempting to enlist in his convoluted attempt at persuasion. So what of this? The French revolutionaries reconstructed the seven-day biblical week and turned it into a ten-day metric week in hopes of ridding the nation of every vestige of Christianity. Nothing like this was done in America. Might the refrain on the part of the founding fathers have had something to do with lunar rhythms (seven days) instead of lunacy (abandonment of natural cycles)? Or might it have something to do with a founding principle of inclusion, rather than exclusion? DeMar seems to think, or at least wish others to think, that anything which rubs against a horse must necessarily be a horse. Then, wonder of wonders, DeMar further jumps the tracks with the body of the paragraph that starts, "The U. S. Constitution’s lack of a Christian designation had little to do with a radical secular agenda." Rather than addressing the individual beliefs of the founding fathers as Allen did, he not only creates a strawman on which to focus, but completely sidesteps that part of the Allen's thesis and brings in 'evidence to the contrary' which has essentially nothing to do with their personal holdings. And the reader is expected to continue reading in this thick haze of intentionally layed smoke and obfuscation? Apparently Mr. DeMar is so accustomed to preaching to the choir that he must think that everyone else is simply going to nod their heads accordingly rather than exercising a prudent measure of discernment. Thank you no. Humans aren't sheep and this nation was founded upon on a good bit more than "one way" principles. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: "robert luis rabello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 10:40 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution Ken Provost wrote: A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- ence for decades now.. While I agree in substance with much of the article Brooke Allen composed, here is a rebuttal that my eldest sister (the one who is happy to stay in Oakland, where she lives) sent for my perusal: http://www.americanvision.org/articlearchive/02-09-05.asp Did George Bush Lie About America Being Founded on Christian Principles? By Gary DeMar “The lesson the President has learned best—and certainly the one that has been the most useful to him—is the axiom that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administ
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Hi Stephan, Gruss Gott I concur. I can also relate to what you are saying. Christian symbols in government (like in Bavaria) are everywhere. I happened to be in Vienna on Ash Wednesday a few years ago. I counted the percentage of people who have been to mass that day (easy to do on Ash Wednesday). It was more than 1/3. Despite all that, governments appear to be more secular than in the United States. It seems as though generations of former Europeans growing up in the US have forgotten the atrocities done in the name of religion. ** Strictly my opinion ** Religion is an exercise in faith. Everyone has an interpretation but there is no evidence that everyone can use (or see) that causes them to agree on a particular set of beliefs. So, in my opinion, religion can be the motivation to both help and hurt people, depending on one's interpretation. Based on at least one interpretation, even the bible shows both sides of the same coin. Teach a man to fish and he can become healthy enough to stone his wife. Mike stephan torak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear fellow enthusiasts, please forgive me, again, for interfering with your truly excellent discourse on the American heritage. I am a naturalized citizen, from Austria, and I studied things American in great quantity at our University in Vienna before I finally came over here in the hand luggage of a liberal school teacher from California. I became a US citizen as one of those who are willing to pick up the luggage and carry it, too. Funny, how this discourse on the authors of the constitution and their religious angles and beliefs just couldn't be happening in Europe (well Austria, anyway) because we know they were all practicing Catholics. But for Europeans of today to try to write ones' religious beliefs and Dogma into the constitution, no way, or to argue whether the constitution is following Christian principles, or for a presidential candidate to announce that he is or is not a practicing whatever, so who would listen to that? And who would vote for someone who puts so much emphasis on this issue? After a recent visit I vividly remember a bunch of kids sitting in the subway in Vienna discussing robotics projects and micro controllers and the girl, maybe 12 ys old saying that she hoped her parents wouldn't make her go to the Mosque again next weekend, speaking without any accent. I don't know my friends, it just drives home to me the need to set aside this self righteousness that plagues America and to concentrate on furthering the peace (now that sounds like a Christian principle, doesn't it) and to talk of some REAL ISSUES, and I believe this is exactly what we are doing most of the time. . So, I have no intention to move back to Europe, but I do want to make BD and I discussed with my son (14) your article on the constitution just to instill some healthy scepticism in the boy. Thank you immensly for your work, Gentlemen.! Regards, Stephan > Ken Provost wrote: > > >> >> A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an >> unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's >> great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't >> even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), >> much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you >> believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out >> of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our >> Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- >> ence for decades now.. > > > While I agree in substance with much of the article Brooke Allen > composed, here is a rebuttal that my eldest sister (the one who is > happy to stay in Oakland, where she lives) sent for my perusal: > > http://www.americanvision.org/articlearchive/02-09-05.asp > > Did George Bush Lie About America Being Founded on Christian Principles? > By Gary DeMar > > The lesson the President has learned bestand certainly the one that > has been the most useful to himis the axiom that if you repeat a lie > often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administrations > current favorites is the whopper about America having been founded on > Christian principles. Our nation was founded not on Christian > principles but on Enlightenment ones. God only entered the picture as > a very minor player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent. Thus > begins an article by Brooke Allen that was posted on the website of > The Nation on February 3, 2005.1 Its obvious that Allen has not > done a thorough study of American history as it relates to its > founding documents. There is much more to Americas founding than the > Constitution. America was not born in 1877 or even in 1776. The > Constitution did not create America, America created the Constitution. > More specifically, the states created the national government. The > states (colonial governments) were a reality long before the > Constitution was conceived, and there is no question about their being > founded on Christian principles. > > Allen
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Keith et. al.,
When you quote Frank Zappa from the first Frank Zappa album I ever
purchased and listened to from beginning to end (rinse, repeat,) it
reminds me that when folks start publically espouse their faith, keep
one hand on your wallet and the other on your wife (or husband.) They
want something from you and they will do anything to get it.
When they start bringing it into politics they are more determined to
take it rather than ask. "Become a member of the flock or you will
not get your government funds for "
Religion and politics bring out the absolute worst in people!!
Perhaps that is why it should be avoided by people as a general rule.
(And no, I am not an Athiest.)
fred
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:42:40 +0900, Keith Addison
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >http://www.americanvision.org/articlearchive/02-09-05.asp
> > >
> > >Did George Bush Lie About America Being Founded on Christian Principles?
> > >By Gary DeMar
> > >
> >
> >Its interesting to note that this article makes the very foolish
> >leap from god to jesus. God is referenced several times but jesus
> >is only refernced 3 times and the author claims that the words lord
> >and god really mean jesus.
> >
> >Further, the bulk of christian principles are also reflected in
> >every other major (and minor) religon. So, while the country was
> >founded by primarily christians, and such principles were present, I
> >read the message authors like DeMar are sending as, "We should
> >emulate the Bible and as such persecute those who don't endorse it."
> >
> >Last I checked, my country (USA) was founded on principles that
> >stood in defiance of just such persecutions.
>
> Aarghhh! I can't stand it! I just got to do this...
>
> From previous:
>
> >I don't think we can casually dismiss
> >these folks as a minor fruitcake fringe anymore.
>
> Only now???
>
> Let's go back 23.5 years, to...
>
> Frank Zappa, September 1981
>
> Dumb All Over
> http://globalia.net/donlope/fz/lyrics/You_Are_What_You_Is.html#Dumb
>
> Whoever we are
> Wherever we're from
> We shoulda noticed by now
> Our behavior is dumb
> And if our chances
> Expect to improve
> It's gonna take a lot more
> Than tryin' to remove
> The other race
> Or the other whatever
> From the face
> Of the planet altogether
>
> They call it THE EARTH
> Which is a dumb kinda name
> But they named it right
> 'Cause we behave the same . . .
> We are dumb all over
> Dumb all over,
> Yes we are
> Dumb all over,
> Near 'n far
> Dumb all over,
> Black 'n white
> People, we is not wrapped tight
>
> Nurds on the left
> Nurds on the right
> Religious fanatics
> On the air every night
> Sayin' the Bible
> Tells the story
> 'N makes the details
> Sound real gory
> 'Bout what to do
> If the geeks over there
> Don't believe in the book
> We got over here
>
> You can't run a race
> Without no feet
> 'N pretty soon
> There won't be no street
> For dummies to jog on
> Or doggies to dog on
> Religious fanatics
> Can make it be all gone
> (I mean it won't blow up
> 'N disappear
> It'll just look ugly
> For a thousand years . . . )
>
> You can't run a country
> By a book of religion
> Not by a heap
> Or a lump or a smidgeon
> Of foolish rules
> Of ancient date
> Designed to make
> You all feel great
> While you fold, spindle
> And mutilate
> Those unbelievers
> From a neighboring state
>
> TO ARMS! TO ARMS!
> Hooray! That's great
> Two legs ain't bad
> Unless there's a crate
> They ship the parts
> To mama in
> For souvenirs: two ears (Get Down!)
> Not his, not hers (but what the hey?)
> The Good Book says:
> "It gotta be that way!"
> But their book says:
> "REVENGE THE CRUSADES . . .
> With whips 'n chains
> 'N hand grenades . . . "
> TWO ARMS? TWO ARMS?
> Have another and another
> Our God says:
> "There ain't no other!"
> Our God says
> "It's all okay!"
> Our God says
> "This is the way!"
>
> It says in the book:
> "Burn 'n destroy . . .
> 'N repent, 'n redeem
> 'N revenge, 'n deploy
> 'N rumble thee forth
> To the land of the unbelieving scum on the other side
> 'Cause they don't go for what's in the book
> 'N that makes 'em BAD
> So verily we must choppeth them up
> And stompeth them down
> Or rent a nice French bomb
> To poof them out of existance
> While leaving their real estate just where we need it
> To use again
> For temples in which to praise
> OUR GOD
> ("Cause he can really take care of business!")
>
> And when his humble TV servant
> With humble white hair
> And humble glasses
> And a nice brown suit
> And maybe a blonde wife who takes phone calls
> Tells us our God says
> It's okay to do this stuff
> Then we gotta do it,
> 'Cause if we don't do it,
> We ain't gwine up to hebbin!
> (Depending on which book you're using at the time . . . Can't use
> theirs . . . it don't work . . . it's all lies . . . Gotta use mine .
> . . )
> Ain't that right?
> That's what they say
> Every night . . .
> Every day . . .
> Hey, we can't really be dumb
> If we're just following God's Orders
> Hey
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
>
>Did George Bush Lie About America Being Founded on Christian Principles?
>By Gary DeMar
>
Its interesting to note that this article makes the very foolish
leap from god to jesus. God is referenced several times but jesus
is only refernced 3 times and the author claims that the words lord
and god really mean jesus.
Further, the bulk of christian principles are also reflected in
every other major (and minor) religon. So, while the country was
founded by primarily christians, and such principles were present, I
read the message authors like DeMar are sending as, "We should
emulate the Bible and as such persecute those who don't endorse it."
Last I checked, my country (USA) was founded on principles that
stood in defiance of just such persecutions.
Aarghhh! I can't stand it! I just got to do this...
From previous:
I don't think we can casually dismiss
these folks as a minor fruitcake fringe anymore.
Only now???
Let's go back 23.5 years, to...
Frank Zappa, September 1981
Dumb All Over
http://globalia.net/donlope/fz/lyrics/You_Are_What_You_Is.html#Dumb
Whoever we are
Wherever we're from
We shoulda noticed by now
Our behavior is dumb
And if our chances
Expect to improve
It's gonna take a lot more
Than tryin' to remove
The other race
Or the other whatever
From the face
Of the planet altogether
They call it THE EARTH
Which is a dumb kinda name
But they named it right
'Cause we behave the same . . .
We are dumb all over
Dumb all over,
Yes we are
Dumb all over,
Near 'n far
Dumb all over,
Black 'n white
People, we is not wrapped tight
Nurds on the left
Nurds on the right
Religious fanatics
On the air every night
Sayin' the Bible
Tells the story
'N makes the details
Sound real gory
'Bout what to do
If the geeks over there
Don't believe in the book
We got over here
You can't run a race
Without no feet
'N pretty soon
There won't be no street
For dummies to jog on
Or doggies to dog on
Religious fanatics
Can make it be all gone
(I mean it won't blow up
'N disappear
It'll just look ugly
For a thousand years . . . )
You can't run a country
By a book of religion
Not by a heap
Or a lump or a smidgeon
Of foolish rules
Of ancient date
Designed to make
You all feel great
While you fold, spindle
And mutilate
Those unbelievers
From a neighboring state
TO ARMS! TO ARMS!
Hooray! That's great
Two legs ain't bad
Unless there's a crate
They ship the parts
To mama in
For souvenirs: two ears (Get Down!)
Not his, not hers (but what the hey?)
The Good Book says:
"It gotta be that way!"
But their book says:
"REVENGE THE CRUSADES . . .
With whips 'n chains
'N hand grenades . . . "
TWO ARMS? TWO ARMS?
Have another and another
Our God says:
"There ain't no other!"
Our God says
"It's all okay!"
Our God says
"This is the way!"
It says in the book:
"Burn 'n destroy . . .
'N repent, 'n redeem
'N revenge, 'n deploy
'N rumble thee forth
To the land of the unbelieving scum on the other side
'Cause they don't go for what's in the book
'N that makes 'em BAD
So verily we must choppeth them up
And stompeth them down
Or rent a nice French bomb
To poof them out of existance
While leaving their real estate just where we need it
To use again
For temples in which to praise
OUR GOD
("Cause he can really take care of business!")
And when his humble TV servant
With humble white hair
And humble glasses
And a nice brown suit
And maybe a blonde wife who takes phone calls
Tells us our God says
It's okay to do this stuff
Then we gotta do it,
'Cause if we don't do it,
We ain't gwine up to hebbin!
(Depending on which book you're using at the time . . . Can't use
theirs . . . it don't work . . . it's all lies . . . Gotta use mine .
. . )
Ain't that right?
That's what they say
Every night . . .
Every day . . .
Hey, we can't really be dumb
If we're just following God's Orders
Hey, Let's get serious . . .
God knows what he's doin' . . .
He wrote this book here
An' the book says:
"He made us all to be just like Him," so . . .
If we're dumb . . .
Then God is dumb . . .
(An' maybe even a little ugly on the side)
DUMB ALL OVER
A LITTLE UGLY ON THE SIDE
More...
http://www.getlyrical.com/lyrics.html?Type=Song&Id=44016
Lyrics for ZAPPA FRANK
THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT NOTHING
http://www.getlyrical.com/lyrics.html?Type=Song&Id=44019
Lyrics for ZAPPA FRANK
HEAVENLY BANK ACCOUNT
___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
with your truly excellent discourse on the American heritage. I am a naturalized citizen, from Austria, and I studied things American in great quantity at our University in Vienna before I finally came over here in the hand luggage of a liberal school teacher from California. I became a US citizen as one of those who are willing to pick up the luggage and carry it, too. Funny, how this discourse on the authors of the constitution and their religious angles and beliefs just couldn't be happening in Europe (well Austria, anyway) because we know they were all practicing Catholics. But for Europeans of today to try to write ones' religious beliefs and Dogma into the constitution, no way, or to argue whether the constitution is following Christian principles, or for a presidential candidate to announce that he is or is not a practicing whatever, so who would listen to that? And who would vote for someone who puts so much emphasis on this issue? After a recent visit I vividly remember a bunch of kids sitting in the subway in Vienna discussing robotics projects and micro controllers and the girl, maybe 12 ys old saying that she hoped her parents wouldn't make her go to the Mosque again next weekend, speaking without any accent. I don't know my friends, it just drives home to me the need to set aside this self righteousness that plagues America and to concentrate on furthering the peace (now that sounds like a Christian principle, doesn't it) and to talk of some REAL ISSUES, and I believe this is exactly what we are doing most of the time. . So, I have no intention to move back to Europe, but I do want to make BD and I discussed with my son (14) your article on the constitution just to instill some healthy scepticism in the boy. Thank you immensly for your work, Gentlemen.! Regards, Stephan Ken Provost wrote: A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- ence for decades now.. While I agree in substance with much of the article Brooke Allen composed, here is a rebuttal that my eldest sister (the one who is happy to stay in Oakland, where she lives) sent for my perusal: http://www.americanvision.org/articlearchive/02-09-05.asp Did George Bush Lie About America Being Founded on Christian Principles? By Gary DeMar “The lesson the President has learned best—and certainly the one that has been the most useful to him—is the axiom that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administration’s current favorites is the whopper about America having been founded on Christian principles. Our nation was founded not on Christian principles but on Enlightenment ones. God only entered the picture as a very minor player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent.” Thus begins an article by Brooke Allen that was posted on the website of “The Nation” on February 3, 2005.1 It’s obvious that Allen has not done a thorough study of American history as it relates to its founding documents. There is much more to America’s founding than the Constitution. America was not born in 1877 or even in 1776. The Constitution did not create America, America created the Constitution. More specifically, the states created the national government. The states (colonial governments) were a reality long before the Constitution was conceived, and there is no question about their being founded on Christian principles. Allen’s article is filled with so many half truths that it would take a book to deal with them adequately. For those of you who are new to the work of American Vision, there are numerous books on the subject that easily refute Allen’s assertions. * America’s Christian History: The Untold Story by Gary DeMar (1995). * America’s Christian Heritage by Gary DeMar (2003). * The United States: A Christian Nation by Supreme Court Justice David J. Brewer (1905). * The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States Developed in the Official and Historical Annals of the Republic by B. F. Morris (1864). * Christianity and the American Commonwealth by Charles B. Galloway (1898).2 Here is Allen’s first assertion: “Our Constitution makes no mention whatever of God.” “No mention whatever” is pretty absolute. Given this bold claim, then how does she explain that the Constitution ends with “DONE in the year of our Lord”? “Our Lord” is a reference to Jesus Christ. This phrase appears just above the signature of George Washington, the same George Washington who took the presidential oath of office with his hand on an open Bible, the same George Washington w
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Its interesting to note that this article makes the very foolish leap from god to jesus. There are problems with the article my sister sent to me, as there were with Brooke Allen's essay, but from the perspective of a mainstream Christian, equating Jesus with God would not be among them. There seems to be a great concern in the United States that we have somehow "departed" from the deeply religious beliefs of our founding fathers. Brooke Adams was right to point out, however, that the religious views of early American leadership were profoundly influenced by Enlightenment ideals; much more so than many of us understand or care to admit. Many of these men were Masons, a perspective which has left an indelible mark on the symbols used to represent America. They were NOT Christians in the same sense that my evangelical brethren like to make them. Equating "fundamentalist" Christianity (as it is now practiced in the United States) with men like Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington removes their clearly articulated thinking from the context in which it should be placed. This historical sublimation (I can't think of another way to express this, and I hope I'll not be misunderstood!) of modern ideas represents a dangerous trend: one that equates "righteousness" with assent and "evil" with dissent. From what I have read of early American political and religious thought, our leadership remained consistently opposed to the idea that the government should become involved in the realm of religion. The Constitution gives clear counsel on this matter. Further, the bulk of christian principles are also reflected in every other major (and minor) religon. So, while the country was founded by primarily christians, and such principles were present, I read the message authors like DeMar are sending as, "We should emulate the Bible and as such persecute those who don't endorse it." The people who founded the United States were Christians, but let me pose some questions: Do national policies reflect Christian principles? (Indeed, have they ever?) Do our courts interpret law in light of Jesus' gospel teaching? Does our leadership espouse the servitude and humility of Jesus Christ? Silly questions? Indeed! I can argue, from a completely secular perspective, that my nation does not, has not, and has NEVER espoused Christianity. Last I checked, my country (USA) was founded on principles that stood in defiance of just such persecutions. Can I say "Amen" to that? robert luis rabello "The Edge of Justice" Adventure for Your Mind http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782> Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
>http://www.americanvision.org/articlearchive/02-09-05.asp > >Did George Bush Lie About America Being Founded on Christian Principles? >By Gary DeMar > Its interesting to note that this article makes the very foolish leap from god to jesus. God is referenced several times but jesus is only refernced 3 times and the author claims that the words lord and god really mean jesus. Further, the bulk of christian principles are also reflected in every other major (and minor) religon. So, while the country was founded by primarily christians, and such principles were present, I read the message authors like DeMar are sending as, "We should emulate the Bible and as such persecute those who don't endorse it." Last I checked, my country (USA) was founded on principles that stood in defiance of just such persecutions. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
on 2/15/05 11:04 PM, Keith Addison at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I think I'd not be alone in that, when someone says they're a > Christian, I'd want to know what kind of Christian - an unknown, > variable factor indeed. If I didn't know that, "X-tian" might be > rather apt. "He's religious, he says he's a Christian." > > > Rightwing so-called "fundamentalist" allegedly Christian > dispensationalists who are utterly intolerant and seem to know > nothing of "God is love" or the Sermon on the Mount but rather crave > the destruction of all life and make it soon? Have these people even > read the Gospels? There's not much evidence of it. I've called them > an "evil cult" before this. Christians? I don't think so. Here's an idea -- if you believe that Jesus is gonna come back on a cloud and pull all the true believers (you and your friends) out of their clothes, that God talks to Bush, that gays and socialists are gonna burn in hell for all eternity, etc, etc, you should continue to use the word Christian to describe yourself. If OTOH, you believe that your personal calling in life is to attempt to live according to the teachings of one Yeshua bin Pantera (or possibly Yeshua bin Yusef) as (hopefully) recorded in a particular body of writings called the "Gospel of Jesus Christ", then you call yourself a Yeshuite. In other words, when a word gets co-opted by the opposition, you pick a different word, to avoid being confused with them. Easy. -K ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
G'day Hakan; - Original Message - From: "Hakan Falk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 6:10 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution Luc, Sorry but my earlier reply was sent by itself and without following comment. You are right, but I think that many Christians also should learn "respect or please keep their crap for them self". It is numerous times that I met representatives for the Christian religion, that in an abusive way promote their religion and demand respect for it, without them self having any respect for what others belive in. This I say, even because my denomination would officially and by birth be Christian protestant. I am sorry, but I fail to see in what way Ken did not show respect, he declared what be belive and did a general comment about religious variant in general. In mathematics X stand for unknown denomination And were we speaking of mathematics I would agree. and I think that in this case it was meant as such. You can believe that if you want to,however anyone who has been around confirmed atheists for any amount of time knows more than well that the "X" is a lot more than a generic symbol. It is meant the way it was used. Like "X"mas is. There's some kind of denigration implicit in Xmas? It's just "informal, short for Christmas". Hakan's meaning for X is the second one listed, a symbol for an unknown or variable factor; 6th is the symbol for Christ, Christian, from the form of the Greek letter khi, X, first letter of Khristos, Christ. I read "X-tian" in this case as a mix of #6 and #2. I didn't see any lack of respect in it. I think I'd not be alone in that, when someone says they're a Christian, I'd want to know what kind of Christian - an unknown, variable factor indeed. If I didn't know that, "X-tian" might be rather apt. "He's religious, he says he's a Christian." Ken said: "... much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe". What those particular rulers would definitely have you believe is that that would be *their* version of a Christian. Many Christians here, and many others too, don't accept that that is a genuine Christian at all. I don't think you accept it either, do you? Rightwing so-called "fundamentalist" allegedly Christian dispensationalists who are utterly intolerant and seem to know nothing of "God is love" or the Sermon on the Mount but rather crave the destruction of all life and make it soon? Have these people even read the Gospels? There's not much evidence of it. I've called them an "evil cult" before this. Christians? I don't think so. I was brought up as Hakan was but I'm neither a Christian nor an atheist. I've had much experience of both, and though there've been many exceptions on both sides, in general I've seen more intolerance in Christians than in atheists. Whatever they might have believed, as far as the way they behaved was concerned, some of the atheists were better Christians than some of the Christians were. Christians even joke about their intolerance, like this one: "A man was walking across a bridge one day, and he saw a man standing on the edge about to jump off. He said, I ran over to him and, said Stop; don't do it'. "Why shouldn't I?" the man said. I said, "Well there is so much to live for." He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too. Are you Christian or Buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "You are?!? Wow," I said, "so am I! Are you Protestant Church of God, or Protestant Church of God the Lord?" He said, "Protestant Church of God." I said in my excitement, "My brother, me too! Are you original Protestant Church of God, or Reformed Church of God?" He said, "Reformed Church of God." I could hardly contain myself. "My brother, me too! Are you Reformed Protestant Church of God of 1879, or are you Reformed Protestant Church of God Reformed 1915?" He said, "Reformed Protestant Church of God Reformation of 1915." I shouted, "Die heretic," and pushed him off the bridge." You can find that story in several different church sermons on the web, with quite a wide variety of lessons drawn from it, according to the type of church. I don't think the "sacred cow" case is a good comparison, or any comparison. That was a case of a disparaging colonial-era usage surviving in common parlance well past its use-by date, ev
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
i suppose you have a problem with christmas being spelled with an X as well. you know XMAS! i never thought it was intended as any form of denegration. seems we're awfully sensitive here...rbury - Original Message - From: "Legal Eagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution > G'day Ken; > Nice of you to denigrate CHRISTians like that . We are not "X" anything > thank you very much. Either learn some respect or please keep your crap to > yourself. You don't have to agree, but you don't get to denigrate either. > Someone had a whack at "sacred cows" a while back, you should have learned > from that. > Luc > - Original Message - > From: "Ken Provost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 11:34 PM > Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution > > > > on 2/14/05 6:38 PM, knoton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> Our Godless Constitution > >> by BROOKE ALLEN > >> [from the February 21, 2005 issue] > > > > > >> > >> http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&s=allen > >> > > > > > > > > A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an > > unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's > > great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't > > even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), > > much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you > > believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out > > of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our > > Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- > > ence for decades now.. > > > > -K > > > > ___ > > Biofuel mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel > > > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > > > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): > > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ > > > > > ___ > Biofuel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
It is worse than that
See
http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/7laws.html
The U.S. Congress officially recognized the Noahide
Laws in legislation which was passed by both houses.
Congress and the President of the United States,
George Bush, indicated in Public Law 102-14, 102nd
Congress, that the United States of America was
founded upon the Seven Universal Laws of Noah, and
that these Laws have been the bedrock of society from
the dawn of civilization. They also acknowledged that
the Seven Laws of Noah are the foundation upon which
civilization stands and that recent weakening of these
principles threaten the fabric of civilized society,
and that justified preoccupation in educating the
Citizens of the United States of America and future
generations is needed. For this purpose, this Public
Law designated March 26, 1991 as Education Day, U.S.A.
Noahide or Noachide law is actually Jewish although
some "Christians" apparently want to practice Judaism.
I'm afraid it will only get worse at least for a time.
Kirk
--- knoton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave,
>
> Bingo! That's my read on it. To be more specific,
> they want "THEIR
> god's law" (that god of Judaism and Christianity) to
> be the law of the
> land.
>
> You can google the same same criteria {dominionism
> and "christian
> reconstructionism"} as mentioned earlier, but
> specify "death penalty"
> and see what they intend to do with that ~both by
> expanding the list of
> crimes eligible, and the METHODs of execution to be
> employed. The
> Constitution Restoration Act will PROHIBIT judicial
> review of these
> extremist goals. Not even the U.S. Supreme Court
> will have
> jurisdiction.
>
> Try googling by specifying "Pat Robertson" to the
> before mentioned
> search criteria and see what you learn.
> "Presbyterian" yields some
> interesting background, too. Poke around enough and
> you'll find several
> people and orgs that you recognize.
>
> Where the Constitution Restoration Act may be
> specific to the United
> States, you'll soon learn that they do not intend to
> stop with just the
> United States.
>
> Demian
> ==
>
> I found the text of this act and some things about
> it. Am I right in
> thinking that they are trying to make "god's law"
> part of our
> constitutional law?
> -dave
>
> Knoton,
> >Try googling the following:
> >
> >"Constitution Restoration Act"
> >
> >which was introduced in both houses of the U.S.
> Congress >one year ago
> >this month.
>
> > [1]kcom.gif
>
>
>
> References
>
>1. http://www.knoton.com/
> > ___
> Biofuel mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- ence for decades now.. While I agree in substance with much of the article Brooke Allen composed, here is a rebuttal that my eldest sister (the one who is happy to stay in Oakland, where she lives) sent for my perusal: http://www.americanvision.org/articlearchive/02-09-05.asp Did George Bush Lie About America Being Founded on Christian Principles? By Gary DeMar “The lesson the President has learned best—and certainly the one that has been the most useful to him—is the axiom that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administration’s current favorites is the whopper about America having been founded on Christian principles. Our nation was founded not on Christian principles but on Enlightenment ones. God only entered the picture as a very minor player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent.” Thus begins an article by Brooke Allen that was posted on the website of “The Nation” on February 3, 2005.1 It’s obvious that Allen has not done a thorough study of American history as it relates to its founding documents. There is much more to America’s founding than the Constitution. America was not born in 1877 or even in 1776. The Constitution did not create America, America created the Constitution. More specifically, the states created the national government. The states (colonial governments) were a reality long before the Constitution was conceived, and there is no question about their being founded on Christian principles. Allen’s article is filled with so many half truths that it would take a book to deal with them adequately. For those of you who are new to the work of American Vision, there are numerous books on the subject that easily refute Allen’s assertions. * America’s Christian History: The Untold Story by Gary DeMar (1995). * America’s Christian Heritage by Gary DeMar (2003). * The United States: A Christian Nation by Supreme Court Justice David J. Brewer (1905). * The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States Developed in the Official and Historical Annals of the Republic by B. F. Morris (1864). * Christianity and the American Commonwealth by Charles B. Galloway (1898).2 Here is Allen’s first assertion: “Our Constitution makes no mention whatever of God.” “No mention whatever” is pretty absolute. Given this bold claim, then how does she explain that the Constitution ends with “DONE in the year of our Lord”? “Our Lord” is a reference to Jesus Christ. This phrase appears just above the signature of George Washington, the same George Washington who took the presidential oath of office with his hand on an open Bible, the same George Washington who was called upon by Congress, after the drafting of the First Amendment, to proclaim a national day of prayer and thanksgiving. The resolution read as follows: That a joint committee of both Houses be directed to wait upon the President of the United States to request that he would 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 signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a Constitution for their safety and happiness. It seems rather odd that the constitutional framers would thank God for allowing them to draft a Constitution that excluded Him from the Constitution and the civil affairs of government. Allen is correct that there were a number of Enlightenment principles floating around the colonies in the late eighteenth century as well as anti-clericalism. And there is no doubt that some of these principles made their way into the Constitution, although it’s hard to tell where when compared to the obvious Enlightenment principles inherent in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789). But we should be reminded of Allen’s absolutist claim of a complete dissolution of religion from political considerations in the Constitution. She has set the evaluative standard. If she is correct, then why didn’t the framers presage the French revolutionaries by starting the national calendar with a new Year One? Why did the Constitutional framers set aside Sunday—the Fourth Commandment of the Decalogue—as a day of rest for the President (Art. 1, sec. 7) if it was their desire to secularize the nation as Allen suggests? The French revolutionaries reconstructed the seven-day biblical week and turned it into a ten-day metric week in hopes of ridding the nation of
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
on 2/15/05 5:24 PM, knoton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You can google the same same criteria {dominionism and "christian
> reconstructionism"} as mentioned earlier, but specify "death penalty"
> and see what they intend to do with that ~both by expanding the list of
> crimes eligible, and the METHODs of execution to be employed.
Yup, it's clear that they're CRAZY (i.e., CERTIFIABLE). It's enuf to
make any good Christian disavow the term, 'till the insanity blows
over... Meanwhile, we (poor Amerikan schmucks) have to figger out
how to survive this assault -- more later. -K
___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
- Original Message - From: "Hakan Falk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 6:10 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution Luc, Sorry but my earlier reply was sent by itself and without following comment. You are right, but I think that many Christians also should learn "respect or please keep their crap for them self". It is numerous times that I met representatives for the Christian religion, that in an abusive way promote their religion and demand respect for it, without them self having any respect for what others belive in. This I say, even because my denomination would officially and by birth be Christian protestant. I am sorry, but I fail to see in what way Ken did not show respect, he declared what be belive and did a general comment about religious variant in general. In mathematics X stand for unknown denomination And were we speaking of mathematics I would agree. and I think that in this case it was meant as such. You can believe that if you want to,however anyone who has been around confirmed atheists for any amount of time knows more than well that the "X" is a lot more than a generic symbol. It is meant the way it was used. Like "X"mas is. Why are you so upset by not being especially mentioned, was it the lack of attention to your specific case? I am sorry to disappoint you but I do not suffer from adolescent temper tantrumus (my word). Luc - pinning for attention.ha! Hakan X-tian or whatever. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
I find your response rather amusing but all too much a double standard.. First of all, if the archives are any indicator, you spend a great deal of time bashing your favorite sects du jour. Second of all, Ken Provost didn't bash christians. He did make note of the type of "christians" who choose to misappropriate the power of public office in pursuit of enforcing their theological ideology upon others. From this vantage point it is an apology owed by you for jumping to sweeping conclusions. How you came to them one can only hazard to guess, probably with a fair degree of accuracy. You expect or demand respect but don't exactly reciprocate. Should others presume that this too is a tenant of your religion of choice? What? A person is allowed to have their opinioin but they aren't allowed to express it? What is it about such a double standard that sounds oh so Bushwellian? You can hold your opinion, express it, but others are to be denegrated for their opinion and expected to remain silent? If such truly is the case, then someone should take a moment to point out your extreme form of hypocrisy. Why this should even have to be said is beyond me...almost. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: "Legal Eagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 5:07 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution G'day Ken; Nice of you to denigrate CHRISTians like that . We are not "X" anything thank you very much. Either learn some respect or please keep your crap to yourself. You don't have to agree, but you don't get to denigrate either. Someone had a whack at "sacred cows" a while back, you should have learned from that. Luc - Original Message - From: "Ken Provost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 11:34 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution on 2/14/05 6:38 PM, knoton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our Godless Constitution by BROOKE ALLEN [from the February 21, 2005 issue] http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&s=allen A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- ence for decades now.. -K ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Luc, Sorry but my earlier reply was sent by itself and without following comment. You are right, but I think that many Christians also should learn "respect or please keep their crap for them self". It is numerous times that I met representatives for the Christian religion, that in an abusive way promote their religion and demand respect for it, without them self having any respect for what others belive in. This I say, even because my denomination would officially and by birth be Christian protestant. I am sorry, but I fail to see in what way Ken did not show respect, he declared what be belive and did a general comment about religious variant in general. In mathematics X stand for unknown denomination and I think that in this case it was meant as such. Why are you so upset by not being especially mentioned, was it the lack of attention to your specific case? Hakan X-tian or whatever. At 11:07 PM 2/15/2005, you wrote: G'day Ken; Nice of you to denigrate CHRISTians like that . We are not "X" anything thank you very much. Either learn some respect or please keep your crap to yourself. You don't have to agree, but you don't get to denigrate either. Someone had a whack at "sacred cows" a while back, you should have learned from that. Luc - Original Message - From: "Ken Provost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 11:34 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution on 2/14/05 6:38 PM, knoton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our Godless Constitution by BROOKE ALLEN [from the February 21, 2005 issue] http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&s=allen A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- ence for decades now.. -K ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
G'day Ken; Nice of you to denigrate CHRISTians like that . We are not "X" anything thank you very much. Either learn some respect or please keep your crap to yourself. You don't have to agree, but you don't get to denigrate either. Someone had a whack at "sacred cows" a while back, you should have learned from that. Luc - Original Message - From: "Ken Provost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 11:34 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution on 2/14/05 6:38 PM, knoton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our Godless Constitution by BROOKE ALLEN [from the February 21, 2005 issue] http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&s=allen A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- ence for decades now.. -K ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Nice of you to denigrate CHRISTians like that . We are not "X" anything thank you very much. Either learn some respect or please keep your crap to yourself. You don't have to agree, but you don't get to denigrate either. Someone had a whack at "sacred cows" a while back, you should have learned from that. Luc - Original Message - From: "Ken Provost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 11:34 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution on 2/14/05 6:38 PM, knoton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our Godless Constitution by BROOKE ALLEN [from the February 21, 2005 issue] http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&s=allen A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- ence for decades now.. -K ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Knoton, >Try googling the following: > >"Constitution Restoration Act" > >which was introduced in both houses of the U.S. Congress one year ago >this month. I found the text of this act and some things about it. Am I right in thinking that they are trying to make "god's law" part of our constitutional law? -dave ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Has anyone else ever seen a copy of the Six Nations Constitution? There weren't many other democracies at hand in the mid 1700's, and apparently this quite venerable Native document was very useful. It gives a context to the "Godless" document. Jesse > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (knoton) > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:38:52 -0800 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution > > Our Godless Constitution > by BROOKE ALLEN > [from the February 21, 2005 issue] > > http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&s=allen > > It is hard to believe that George Bush has ever read the works of George > Orwell, but he seems, somehow, to have grasped a few Orwellian precepts. > The lesson the President has learned best--and certainly the one that > has been the most useful to him--is the axiom that if you repeat a lie > often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administration's > current favorites is the whopper about America having been founded on > Christian principles. Our nation was founded not on Christian principles > but on Enlightenment ones. God only entered the picture as a very minor > player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent. > > Our Constitution makes no mention whatever of God. The omission was too > obvious to have been anything but deliberate, in spite of Alexander > Hamilton's flippant responses when asked about it: According to one > account, he said that the new nation was not in need of "foreign aid"; > according to another, he simply said "we forgot." But as Hamilton's > biographer Ron Chernow points out, Hamilton never forgot anything > important. > > In the eighty-five essays that make up The Federalist, God is mentioned > only twice (both times by Madison, who uses the word, as Gore Vidal has > remarked, in the "only Heaven knows" sense). In the Declaration of > Independence, He gets two brief nods: a reference to "the Laws of Nature > and Nature's God," and the famous line about men being "endowed by their > Creator with certain inalienable rights." More blatant official > references to a deity date from long after the founding period: "In God > We Trust" did not appear on our coinage until the Civil War, and > "under God" was introduced into the Pledge of Allegiance during the > McCarthy hysteria in 1954 [see Elisabeth Sifton, "The Battle Over the > Pledge," April 5, 2004]. > > In 1797 our government concluded a "Treaty of Peace and Friendship > between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of > Tripoli, or Barbary," now known simply as the Treaty of Tripoli. Article > 11 of the treaty contains these words: > > "As the Government of the United States...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 document was endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and > President John Adams. It was then sent to the Senate for ratification; > the vote was unanimous. It is worth pointing out that although this was > the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it was > only the third unanimous vote in the Senate's history. There is no > record of debate or dissent. The text of the treaty was printed in full > in the Philadelphia Gazette and in two New York papers, but there were > no screams of outrage, as one might expect today. > > The Founding Fathers were not religious men, and they fought hard to > erect, in Thomas Jefferson's words, "a wall of separation between church > and state." John Adams opined that if they were not restrained by legal > measures, Puritans--the fundamentalists of their day--would "whip and > crop, and pillory and roast." The historical epoch had afforded these > men ample opportunity to observe the > corruption to which established priesthoods were liable, as well as "the > impious > presumption of legislators and rulers," as Jefferson wrote, "civil as > well as > ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, > have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own > opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as > such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and > maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and > through all time." > > If we define a Christian as a person who believes in the divinity of > Jesus Christ, then it is safe to say that some of the key Founding > Fathers were not Christians at all. Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson > and Tom Paine were deists--that is, they believed in one Supreme Being > but rejected revelation and all the supernatural eleme
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Hello Gustl, I agree with this, > This bit is absolutely false. > > The Founding Fathers were not religious men, However, I am sure that you know a "hook" when you see one. Reading through this article, one becomes aware that, while it meanders through more "distant", and sometimes obscure historic details, it's focal point, and yours, are basically the same, the absolute necessity for "the separation of church and state". Personally, I see another separation even higher on the nation's priority list at the present time, that of Bush and state. AntiFossil Mike Krafka USA - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 9:17 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution > On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:38:52 -0800 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (knoton) wrote: > > Our Godless Constitution > > by BROOKE ALLEN > > [from the February 21, 2005 issue] > > > > The Founding Fathers were not religious men, > > This bit is absolutely false. What our founding fathers > were were religious men who knew the importance of not > letting sectarian predilicition intefere with the rights > they were espousing and the government they were > establishing. They were giving the people the right to > choose their religion or to choose to not have any > religion, a purely private decision. Unfortunately the > modern state has instituted radical and mindless > "patriotism" as the state religion. A sad situation. > > Happy Happy, > > Gustl > ___ > Biofuel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
I don't think you'd find it as false a claim as you might think if you apply the generally accepted, contemporary, rough translation of "religion" and "religious" to the matter. Even if you strictly applied the definitions found in Websters, you would quickly see that they don't stick very well to those who don't adhere to the extremes of "worship" and systemized ritual. Their beliefs were by-and-large "all encompassing," incorporating fundamental tenants found in almost all religions, not specifically the tenants and doctrines of any one religion. When you combine their almost unanimous acknowledgements of diety with their discord for "organized religion," its constructs and decripitudes, you would probably come up with a more precise akin to 'The founding fathers were deists, not men of religion,' which the author does go to great lengths to verify. All in all his statement is to a very large degree correct. And, as you may have noticed, it certainly gets the dander up for some, eh? :-) Quite the nicely written and well thought out piece of work - far more accurate than the habitual abuse of historic fact for the purpose of idealogical gain being rendered by the self-appointed "elitists" of the day. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:38:52 -0800 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (knoton) wrote: Our Godless Constitution by BROOKE ALLEN [from the February 21, 2005 issue] The Founding Fathers were not religious men, This bit is absolutely false. What our founding fathers were were religious men who knew the importance of not letting sectarian predilicition intefere with the rights they were espousing and the government they were establishing. They were giving the people the right to choose their religion or to choose to not have any religion, a purely private decision. Unfortunately the modern state has instituted radical and mindless "patriotism" as the state religion. A sad situation. Happy Happy, Gustl ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:38:52 -0800 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (knoton) wrote: > Our Godless Constitution > by BROOKE ALLEN > [from the February 21, 2005 issue] > > The Founding Fathers were not religious men, This bit is absolutely false. What our founding fathers were were religious men who knew the importance of not letting sectarian predilicition intefere with the rights they were espousing and the government they were establishing. They were giving the people the right to choose their religion or to choose to not have any religion, a purely private decision. Unfortunately the modern state has instituted radical and mindless "patriotism" as the state religion. A sad situation. Happy Happy, Gustl ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
Our Godless Constitution by BROOKE ALLEN [from the February 21, 2005 issue] - Original Message - From: "knoton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 9:38 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution Our Godless Constitution by BROOKE ALLEN [from the February 21, 2005 issue] http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&s=allen It is hard to believe that George Bush has ever read the works of George Orwell, but he seems, somehow, to have grasped a few Orwellian precepts. The lesson the President has learned best--and certainly the one that has been the most useful to him--is the axiom that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administration's current favorites is the whopper about America having been founded on Christian principles. Our nation was founded not on Christian principles but on Enlightenment ones. God only entered the picture as a very minor player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent. Our Constitution makes no mention whatever of God. The omission was too obvious to have been anything but deliberate, in spite of Alexander Hamilton's flippant responses when asked about it: According to one account, he said that the new nation was not in need of "foreign aid"; according to another, he simply said "we forgot." But as Hamilton's biographer Ron Chernow points out, Hamilton never forgot anything important. In the eighty-five essays that make up The Federalist, God is mentioned only twice (both times by Madison, who uses the word, as Gore Vidal has remarked, in the "only Heaven knows" sense). In the Declaration of Independence, He gets two brief nods: a reference to "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God," and the famous line about men being "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights." More blatant official references to a deity date from long after the founding period: "In God We Trust" did not appear on our coinage until the Civil War, and "under God" was introduced into the Pledge of Allegiance during the McCarthy hysteria in 1954 [see Elisabeth Sifton, "The Battle Over the Pledge," April 5, 2004]. In 1797 our government concluded a "Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, or Barbary," now known simply as the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 of the treaty contains these words: "As the Government of the United States...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 document was endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and President John Adams. It was then sent to the Senate for ratification; the vote was unanimous. It is worth pointing out that although this was the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it was only the third unanimous vote in the Senate's history. There is no record of debate or dissent. The text of the treaty was printed in full in the Philadelphia Gazette and in two New York papers, but there were no screams of outrage, as one might expect today. The Founding Fathers were not religious men, and they fought hard to erect, in Thomas Jefferson's words, "a wall of separation between church and state." John Adams opined that if they were not restrained by legal measures, Puritans--the fundamentalists of their day--would "whip and crop, and pillory and roast." The historical epoch had afforded these men ample opportunity to observe the corruption to which established priesthoods were liable, as well as "the impious presumption of legislators and rulers," as Jefferson wrote, "civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time." If we define a Christian as a person who believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ, then it is safe to say that some of the key Founding Fathers were not Christians at all. Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine were deists--that is, they believed in one Supreme Being but rejected revelation and all the supernatural elements of the Christian Church; the word of the Creator, they believed, could best be read in Nature. John Adams was a professed liberal Unitarian, but he, too, in his private correspondence seems more deist than Christian. George Washington and James Madison also leaned toward deism, although neither took much interest in religious mat
Re: [Biofuel] Our Godless Constitution
on 2/14/05 6:38 PM, knoton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Our Godless Constitution > by BROOKE ALLEN > [from the February 21, 2005 issue] > > http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&s=allen > A breath of fresh air -- thanks! Having been an unabashed atheist for 90% of my long life, it's great to know that my hero Tom Jefferson wasn't even a real Deist (as I've always been taught), much less an X-tian like our rulers would have you believe. 'Course Tom has almost been drummed out of the Founding Father's Klub already, and our Revolution has been renamed the War of Independ- ence for decades now.. -K ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
