# Feeble Founding Fathers



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Feeble Founding Fathers: Perhaps Thoreau would have thought so. After all we seen through a quote on this site that he thought anyone over 30 years old didn't have anything useful that they could teach him. As all Christian icons have been under attack for some time now I thought you might find some of these quotes food for thought. After all there are many on this site that pit out faith against the U.S. constitution. The irony in this is that our constitution was formed based on the Bible.

Did you Know:

As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U.S. Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view ... it is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments!

As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door.

As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court judges sit,
a display of the Ten Commandments!

There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington, D.C.

James Madison, the fourth president, known as "The Father of Our Constitution" made the following statement: "We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."

Patrick Henry, that patriot and Founding Father of our country said: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ".

Every session of Congress begins with a prayer by a paid preacher, whose salary has been paid by the taxpayer since 1777.

Fifty-two of the 55 founders of the Constitution were members of the established orthodox churches in the colonies.

Thomas Jefferson worried that the Courts would overstep their authority and instead of interpreting the law would begin making law . an oligarchy ...

The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said:"Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers."

How, then, have we gotten to the point that everything we have done for 220 years in this country is now suddenly wrong and unconstitutional? 
.
It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God. Therefore, it is very hard to understand why there is such a mess about having the Ten Commandments on display or "In God We Trust" on our money and having God in the Pledge of Allegiance. Why don't we just tell the other 14% to Sit Down and SHUT UP!!!


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

So you have shown evidence of exactly how close church and state are tied these days, and how much they need to be untied. This is not a theocracy.



> It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God. Therefore, it is very hard to understand why there is such a mess about having the Ten Commandments on display or "In God We Trust" on our money and having God in the Pledge of Allegiance. Why don't we just tell the other 14% to Sit Down and SHUT UP!!!


Because this is America. In America you don't tell the minority to sit down and shut up, because they have the same rights to freedom of religon as the majority.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

That sure took you a long time MT, I was worried you kicked off. I should explain that everything below "Did You Know" is a quote. Sorry, I don't want to take credit when I haven't earned it.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Not to mention that when you appear in court as a witness you swear on the Bible, in the name of God that you will tell the truth.

M_T, the more I read your posts on this, the more I am coming to believe that you are an atheist. Are you?

huntin1


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

huntin1 said:


> Not to mention that when you appear in court as a witness you swear on the Bible, in the name of God that you will tell the truth.
> 
> M_T, the more I read your posts on this, the more I am coming to believe that you are an atheist. Are you?
> 
> huntin1


Why am I thought to be an athiest because I support freedom of religon as dictated in the constitution? I'm sure that if this was the 1800's and I was supporting the statement "All men are created equal" someone just like you would ask if I was black.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

> and how much they need to be untied.


Why fix what isn't broken???????? :eyeroll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Militant_Tiger
Why am I thought to be an athiest because I support freedom of religon as dictated in the constitution? [b:3ioex5b1 said:


> I'm sure [/b]that if this was the 1800's and I was supporting the statement "All men are created equal" someone just like you would ask if I was black.


MT, because it looks like you support freedom from religion, not freedom of religion.

In the words of Ronald Reagan "well, here we go again".
I wish you had a bet with hunt1 on your stereotype statement that you are sure of. I would like to see you loose some money. Maybe that would help you learn, maybe.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

huntin1 said:


> M_T, the more I read your posts on this, the more I am coming to believe that you are an atheist. Are you?
> 
> huntin1


FFS M_T do you EVER answer a direct question. I did not say you were an atheist, I said that from your posts that is what it is starting to look like. I then ASKED, "ARE YOU"

As usual you skated around the question and went off on some bull**** again. You are getting real tiresome.

I would not even think of asking if you are black, and all men are created equal under the eyes of God. In addition, I try to treat everyone with respect, right up to the time that they show me that they deserve no respect. You, my friend are already there.

huntin1


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

> FFS M_T do you EVER answer a direct question. I did not say you were an atheist, I said that from your posts that is what it is starting to look like. I then ASKED, "ARE YOU"
> 
> As usual you skated around the question and went off on some b#llsh*t again. You are getting real tiresome.


I have answered this question multiple times. I will not answer it again. If it concerns you so much I propose that you search for it.



> MT, because it looks like you support freedom from religion, not freedom of religion.


How exactly does allowing freedom from laws based on a religous document mean that I am anti-religon? You simply wish to have your religon elevated above the rest, and I will not stand for it.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Not going to enter this debate but have one quick comment. Federal and state judiciary rules were changed quite some time ago to accomodate other religions and you do NOT have to swear on a Bible if it is against your religion.


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

I thought you were a Jehovahs Witness MT?


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

racer66 said:


> I thought you were a Jehovahs Witness MT?


Where did you get that?


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

If I remember correctly, you confirmed that awhile back this fall.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

"freedom from laws based on a religous document "

As long as said laws dont violatate anything granted in he constitution, then there is nothing to need freedom from...But the Constitution is a religions document, so i suppose that is one of the "documents" whos laws we need freedom from? :roll:

Also, a theocracy is where GOD rules a country and makes the desicions. Congress and the President make desicions. this CANOT become a thecracy if the constititon is still in effect.

in other words, minoritys are in no way threatened. you just dont like the idea of God (democratic indoctrination) and want his GONE because you dont want to live the way your maker tells you to.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

racer66 said:


> If I remember correctly, you confirmed that awhile back this fall.


If so it was done in jest, I however have no recollection of saying such a thing.



> As long as said laws dont violatate anything granted in he constitution, then there is nothing to need freedom from...But the Constitution is a religions document, so i suppose that is one of the "documents" whos laws we need freedom from?


Oh but it does violate rights granted in the constitution. It goes directly against the pursuit of happiness, as gay marriage does not infringe upon the rights of others. It also infringes upon the right of liberty, and touches on diversity.

For some further reading take a look at this http://www.sunnetworks.net/~ggarman/MSun-10-26-03.html



> Also, a theocracy is where GOD rules a country and makes the desicions. Congress and the President make desicions. this CANOT become a thecracy if the constititon is still in effect.


Actually according to dictionary.com a theocracy is "A government ruled by or subject to religious authority". I would think it rather obvious that a god could not run a country.



> in other words, minoritys are in no way threatened. you just dont like the idea of God (democratic indoctrination) and want his GONE because you dont want to live the way your maker tells you to.


You can say that the minorities are not threatened, though it is blaringly obvious that they are. Their inalienable rights have been removed. Who are you to tell me that I don't like the idea of God? I do not want to live apart from as the Bible says, I just don't want people who don't believe in it to be forced to live by it too.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

"religious authority"

--Which is ,in the Christian Religion, GOD. You also claim that God ( whos name is NOT capitalised in your post...) is incapable of runing a nation. yet you CLAIM to be a devout christian who has read the Bible many times, ect.

God governed Isreal for a thoulsand years, and isreal was ONY safe when they followed him.

So, with all respect due to a hypocritical imposter ( NONE ), please remove your sorry posterior from our forums. You can now officialy say that i am "INTOLLERANT".

GO HOME.

oke:


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

> --Which is ,in the Christian Religion, GOD. You also claim that God ( whos name is NOT capitalised in your post...) is incapable of runing a nation. yet you CLAIM to be a devout christian who has read the Bible many times, ect.


I thought you would comment on that, I said god without capitols because it was in reference to any god, and I only believe in one true God. If you read farther down, it is capitalized. I doubt you read that far, though. I have never claimed to have read the Bible many times, I have read portions of it when I was younger.



> So, with all respect due to a hypocritical imposter ( NONE ), please remove your sorry posterior from our forums. You can now officialy say that i am "INTOLLERANT".
> 
> GO HOME.


If you grow weary of my logical arguments, you could just ignore my posts.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

MT
Show me a logical post, and I'll tell you if I am tired of it. I simply see you rationalizing. People want to put religion on the back burner so they can lead their life any way they wish without anything reminding them that they are doing something wrong. In other words don't arouse my conscience.

We are charged with telling others about God, but you want to stifle it in the name of the United States constitution. You simply want people to feel that they are not patriotic if they choose God over the constitution. The conflict between the two only occurs in the mind of those who want an excuse to stray from the teachings of the Bible.

You in a previous post said if I had talked to a pastor who did not condone gay marriage that the pastor was not a man of God. Just the opposite is true. The Bible is very much against the gay lifestyle. I remember and old black hymn that says something like "you gota serve somebody, now it may be the devil, or it may be the Lord, but you got to serve somebody". The gist of this is everything you do serves either satan or God. I think the Bible says you can not serve God and (I can't remember the word used for satan) . The pastor who does condone gay marriage is not only not a man of God, but serves satan.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

> Show me a logical post, and I'll tell you if I am tired of it. I simply see you rationalizing. People want to put religion on the back burner so they can lead their life any way they wish without anything reminding them that they are doing something wrong. In other words don't arouse my conscience.


YOUR conscience. Who are you to dictate what someone else believes and thus what their conscience tells them?



> We are charged with telling others about God, but you want to stifle it in the name of the United States constitution. You simply want people to feel that they are not patriotic if they choose God over the constitution. The conflict between the two only occurs in the mind of those who want an excuse to stray from the teachings of the Bible.


If you choose to force God upon people instead of following the constitution, you are not patriotic. If you believe as such you go directly against what America stands for. You are welcome to tell others about God, but you are given no right to enforce laws upon them which are applicable only if you believe in such religon. This conflict occurs only in the minds of those who feel that it is more important to maintain what America stands for, and what made it great instead of trying to make America all Christian.



> You in a previous post said if I had talked to a pastor who did not condone gay marriage that the pastor was not a man of God. Just the opposite is true. The Bible is very much against the gay lifestyle. I remember and old black hymn that says something like "you gota serve somebody, now it may be the devil, or it may be the Lord, but you got to serve somebody". The gist of this is everything you do serves either satan or God. I think the Bible says you can not serve God and (I can't remember the word used for satan) . The pastor who does condone gay marriage is not only not a man of God, but a servant of satan.


I am in complete shock that someone with all of your "worldly experience" and supposed wisdom cannot understand that not all people believe in the same God. Not all people believe in the same religon, thus not all people follow the same set of moral rules. Now the Bible may say that homosexuality is wrong, but what if someone does not believe in the our God? Who are we to enforce something upon them which they do not believe in? A preist or pastor who does not understand that you cannot force religon upon someone may be a man of God, but he is also an idiot.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> the Bible may say that homosexuality is wrong, but what if someone does not believe in the our God?


If they believe or not they are still going to roast. Is that not worse than a law that prohibiting same sex marriage. Your very short sighted.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Plainsman said:


> > the Bible may say that homosexuality is wrong, but what if someone does not believe in the our God?
> 
> 
> If they believe or not they are still going to roast. Is that not worse than a law that prohibiting same sex marriage. Your very short sighted.


They do not believe in our God. You cannot force your God on them. You still do not realize that religon is choice, and not everyone has made the choice that you have. Perhaps one day you will realize this.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

"Who are you to dictate what someone else believes and thus what their conscience tells them?"

--you have to accept or deny one thing hopper. you either are a Christian or your NOT. If you are, then you cant believe in any others. wichmeans, that as a christian, you CANT say any other religion is legitimate. Now we must still be kind and generous to them, but that doesnt change the fact that they are toast.

If you realy carred about people like you SAY YOU DO. then you would try to reach these people for the cause of Christ. But, you aperently dont care that eveory time you take a breath, ANOTHER PERSON DIES, AND WILL SPEND ETERNITY BEING BROILED ALIVE, AND EATEN BY UN-DYING WORMS. O-whell. no skin off your back...except when youstand before Christ, and he asks you what you EVER did for him, and WHY he should let YOU into his heaven.

Now, on to my actual POINT. Humans have the same consience. all but deranged lunatics know murder is wrong. All, even habitual theifs, know stealing is wrong. Even barbaric cultures that practice such things as murduring a neiboring villge, and eating their flesh make up some excuse to justify their actions, because withought some justification, it would be wrong. for instance, even in the "marrying" tribes of the amazon, who think nothing of sleeping with anothe mans wife, THE HUSBANDS STILL BECOME ANGRY when they catch them in the act. WHY? You see, all human beings have the same basic moral code. Whats wrong is wrong to eveoryone withought a mental condition.

You see, minorities still have their right to practice their religion, EVEN IN A CHRISTIAN STATE, as it was christian values that gave them that right. WHy is it that the only people who care so much about this ARE COMFORTABLE WHITE ATHEISTS??? Their are many famous, and prominent Budistsin America...why arent they saying naything? people would listen. Their are MANY prominent Witches in America...why arnt they saying anything? BECAUSE THEY DONT CARE. They already have complete religious freedom.

YOUR RESTRICTING THE MAJORITY IN ORDER TO SERVE THE MINORITY. Verry interesting, considering the minority already has the service your trying so desperately to give them...

BENDING THE CHRISTIAN MAJORITY TO SERVE THE PAGAN MINORITY IS JUST AS UN-CONSTITUTIONAL AS IS TO TAKE AWAY THEIR FREEDOMS ENTIRELY.

They can practice their religion...WHY CANT I???

Dont worry Weed-Hopper, this is my last post in responce to your illogical dribble. Your request is granted. ill put you right at the top of my "IDIOTS TO IGNORE" list with OSOK.

Good day, and good ridence uke:


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

> --you have to accept or deny one thing hopper. you either are a Christian or your NOT. If you are, then you cant believe in any others. wichmeans, that as a christian, you CANT say any other religion is legitimate. Now we must still be kind and generous to them, but that doesnt change the fact that they are toast.


Are you telling me that anyone who is not a Christian does not deserve the same right to have their beliefs? Do you propose that we start the 9th crusades to make everyone Christian?



> If you realy carred about people like you SAY YOU DO. then you would try to reach these people for the cause of Christ. But, you aperently dont care that eveory time you take a breath, ANOTHER PERSON DIES, AND WILL SPEND ETERNITY BEING BROILED ALIVE, AND EATEN BY UN-DYING WORMS. O-whell. no skin off your back...except when youstand before Christ, and he asks you what you EVER did for him, and WHY he should let YOU into his heaven.


Are you trying to tell me that because I don't prohibit someone from their actions because they do not have the same beliefs that I do? I am afraid that it will be people like yourself who instead of trying to logic someone into believing in the Lord, you feel that it is necissary to impose unjust law upon them. When you finally reach the pearley gates, I have an odd feeling that religous oppression will not go on the "good" list for your accomplishments.



> You see, minorities still have their right to practice their religion, EVEN IN A CHRISTIAN STATE, as it was christian values that gave them that right. WHy is it that the only people who care so much about this ARE COMFORTABLE WHITE ATHEISTS??? Their are many famous, and prominent Budistsin America...why arent they saying naything? people would listen. Their are MANY prominent Witches in America...why arnt they saying anything? BECAUSE THEY DONT CARE. They already have complete religious freedom.


The right to practice, but are still forced to live under Christian law. What kind of freedom is that? I love the generalization that the only ones who care are the athiests. Witches in America? How old are you again?



> YOUR RESTRICTING THE MAJORITY IN ORDER TO SERVE THE MINORITY. Verry interesting, considering the minority already has the service your trying so desperately to give them...


The majority is restricted because they have to live with gays in the world? In what way is the majority restricted?



> BENDING THE CHRISTIAN MAJORITY TO SERVE THE PAGAN MINORITY IS JUST AS UN-CONSTITUTIONAL AS IS TO TAKE AWAY THEIR FREEDOMS ENTIRELY


You are out of your damn mind. Pagan? Forcing people to live in a country with gay people that can be just like others? That is allowing pagan beliefs and goes against the constitution?



> Dont worry Weed-Hopper, this is my last post in responce to your illogical dribble. Your request is granted. ill put you right at the top of my "IDIOTS TO IGNORE" list with OSOK.


You have a very odd way of thinking, some would say illogical, yet others would call you a moron, but I will not.


----------



## pointer99 (Jan 16, 2004)

Militant_Tiger said:


> If you grow weary of my logical arguments, you could just ignore my posts.


weedhopper.....i am still waiting on you to make a logical argument.

pointer


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

pointer99 said:


> Militant_Tiger said:
> 
> 
> > If you grow weary of my logical arguments, you could just ignore my posts.
> ...


So with your logic you can force religon on people?


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

...


----------

