Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Founders’ faith

July 16, 2011

Advertisement

To the editor:

Once again, our government is trying to deal with the debt ceiling crisis. Parties on both sides have their agendas to resolve this problem. To complicate matters, we are also dealing with foreign wars, international indebtedness, moral decadence and, worst of all, the polarization of the American people over what is best for the country.

Unfortunately, many Americans have forgotten the faith of our founding fathers which was based on the recognition of the Sovereign God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; and His only begotten Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. If one isn’t concerned about the future of this country, you would have to think they have their heads in the sand, they have a false confidence in themselves or that our government leaders will work things out.

The only solution is to return to the concept of “One nation under God.” This must begin with a “fear of God” since the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom as contrasted to the worldly wisdom which continues to lead us to the wrong solutions. I challenge you to examine your lives to see if you can honestly say that you are pleased with your relationships without the wisdom of God. Proverbs 2:9-12 says to the one who receives the Lord’s wisdom: “Then you will understand righteousness and justice and equity, every good path; for wisdom will come into your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul; discretion will watch over you, understanding will guard you, delivering you from the way of evil, from men of perverted speech.”

Comments

mom_of_three 3 years, 5 months ago

hate to tell you Carl, but several of the founding fathers were Deists. There were some religious men to be sure, but not the religious fanatics that you hoped there were. It was either Jefferson or Franklin (or maybe both) that did not believe there was one being guiding lives or that their lives were pre-destined.
"one nation under god" wasn't added to the pledge until 1950's. "in god we trust" is believed to come from francis scott key's star spangled banner in 1814 and not added to coins until around the civil war. The founding fathers had nothing to do with it.

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

Lalala! He can't heeeeearrr you!1!!11

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

A deist is one who believes in God - from the word "deity. So using the term doesn't imply non-religiosity. However, there's a large difference between deism and Christianity.

It is in fact the right which is attempting to paint the founding fathers as modern day right-wing Christians, which is patently false.

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

Unanimously approved by the senate and signed into law by President John Adams in 1797, I present to you the Treaty of Tripoli which in part said:

"Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Note that "Mussulmen" means Muslims.

But alas, you're talking about the actual religion of the founders, not their desire for this country, no? Well, a minister complained in a sermon reported in papers at the time that, "Among all our presidents from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism."

Where would they get that impression? From quotes of Jefferson saying things like this maybe? "The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs." or "And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

Sounds super religious, doesn't he? What with all his belief in the Trinity and virgin birth. To be fair, he was a Christian. He just didn't believe Jesus was God. He didn't believe in the trinity. He didn't believe Mary was a virgin. So by many contemporary Christian standards, he wasn't a Christian at all.

John Adams: "The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole cartloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity."

But hey, Franklin states it outright, ". . . Some books against Deism fell into my hands. . . It happened that they wrought an effect on my quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist."

I could go on, but what's the point. I'm clearly discounting the Founding Fathers, right? Oh, except that I rather admire them for thinking outside the box and founding a country on something other than religion. When I want to discount them, I'll point out that they were slave owners.

true_patriot 3 years, 5 months ago

I've read George Washington extensively and was shocked to discover that his take on God is quite similar to my own - a belief in something greater than ourselves but stripped of most of the human baggage and theo-political doctrine that has been tacked-on over the past couple thousand years.

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

That's exactly it. I'm not going to say they were atheists, because I doubt they were, but they were also not literal-interpreting evangelical fundamentalists like some on the right would like to believe.

true_patriot 3 years, 5 months ago

Try reading what the founding fathers actually had to say in context, not just an isolated quote on an evangelist calendar now and then.

Of the founding fathers that were specifically Christian, their concept of it was far different than what exists in modern America today - it has been radically transformed in the past two or three centuries, much less over the past couple millenia. Most of the founding fathers would be horrified at the kind of image you paint of them today.

You obviously also don't have any real grasp of the principle of separation of church and state - at least not in the way the founding fathers grappled with it. It is a masterstroke, a double-edged sword that cuts both ways to protect this great experiment in religious and social freedom: It keeps religion as far from the cogs of government and state power as possible to avoid the tragedies of the past, while simultaneously guaranteeing the freedom to worship the god of one's choice in the form of one's choice, or the choice not to worship any god at all.

mom_of_three 3 years, 5 months ago

funny, its what I was taught in school by several teachers. Not looney leftists stuff. Deism isn't christianity. They do believe in religion, but not necessarily that one god controls their lives or that their lives were preordained.

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

Did you ever read Age of Reason? Thomas Paine states his deism outright. Ethan Allen was probably the most outspoken anti-Christian of the bunch. He said the Bible was "....offensive to reason and common sense, and subversive of moral rectitude in general."

I could go on, but that's me being a "loony leftist" and sticking with historical document instead of writing revisionist history the way they do in Texas.

camper 3 years, 5 months ago

"Looney left propaganda deist crap?" Quite a statement. This sounds more like someone is feeding you revisionist propoganda and conspiracy theories.

weeslicket 3 years, 5 months ago

don't you just love it when an lte writer can just make CRAP up and spew it as TRUTH

kantubek 3 years, 5 months ago

All this fuss about something that cannot be proven either way.

Deal with it.

tomatogrower 3 years, 5 months ago

Can't be proven? Have you read the writings of our founding fathers? That's the problem; we have too many people who don't read anymore.

Carol Bowen 3 years, 5 months ago

I would probably be classified as a liberal, but i do not have a problem with Carl's letter. I do have problems with your response. Liberals, conservatives, libertarians, whatever. They are just groups of people with approximately the same opinions. Do not try to demonize or stereotype. Contribute rather than detract from the discussion.

camper 3 years, 5 months ago

What does Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn have to do with this? Is he the Russian who was falsely imprisoned and deported to central Russia? Long ago I tried to read his memoir, but found it to be very boring and it did not say much. Felt guilty about not being able to finish the task. I recall he was somewhat controversial in later life and even supported the communist regime more than one would think.

Gene Wallace 3 years, 5 months ago

I do Not desire to live in a Progressive Socialist Worker's Utopia were we work for the Global State, which provides for all of our needs, as directed by the governing "Elites". - Obama and the Liberal's Dream. ... NOR do I wish to live in a Christian Theocracy governed by Theocrat interpretations of the Christian Bible.- The Dream of the Christian Right Theocrats ... Both concepts are SCARY and abhorrent. ... I prefer Our Constitutional Representative Republic based on: the United States Constitution as it exists "Right Now". - Arawyn Walays, a Patriotic American Pagan - http://www.squidoo.com/ameripagan

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

I, for one, look forward to returning to the original vision for this country. One where only landed gentry get the vote and it's ok to own another human.

Corey Williams 3 years, 5 months ago

And since no one can prove that a god does exist, there is no argument except those who find that there is nothing else to argue about.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

I do not condemn Christians as a group.

The idea, though, that our founding fathers were akin to modern day right-wing Christians is demonstrably incorrect.

geekin_topekan 3 years, 5 months ago

The founding father's did not intend to create a Christian nation, in fact they wanted just the opposite. We condition children at a very young age to accept the myth that this country was founded in part for its freedom of religion. The truth, the exclusionary language concerning religion in the Constitution indicates that the founders wanted to protect citizens FROM religion, not grant freedom OF religion. Perhaps the Treaty of Tripoli, a trade agreement made with Muslims in 1797 is a little more clear on the founders feelings on Christianity: "The government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion." This was passed by Congress in 1797 during Geo Washington's watch.

Deists believe in a God of reason and of Nature's God, just as it can be found in the Declaration of Independence:"dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them" "powers if the Earth", "Laws of Nature" and "Nature's God" are Deist' language, definitely NOT Christian. No where in the DOI does it mention Christ.

The Founders were fanatical about Romans. They loved them, so much so that they designed every building in the new nation to resemble ancient Rome. Nowhere on any of the founders buildings can be found a depiction of Christ, angels or any reference to Christianity at all.

Chootspa is close to reality concerning white america. The Tea Party needs to acknowledge that the days of blacks knowing their place, women knowing their place and white being the presumed face of America are over. The time to decide those ideal passed may years ago. Time to grow up and move on. Or stay stuck in the past, it is a free country.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

Belief in God and Christianity are not synonymous.

Many people believe in God without being Christians.

Our founding fathers were likely in that group as well.

geekin_topekan 3 years, 5 months ago

You looked at the Washington monument? Jefferson memorial, Lincoln memorial? How bout the tombs of Washington, Jefferson, Adams or Madison? Show me a single reference to a Christian god on any of the Founding Father's memorials.

Deists they were. Their addiction to ancient Roman culture, pagans mind you, is undeniable.

Moses is on the Supreme court building sure, and so is Confucius, and Tortoise and the Hare.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

No mention of Christ in any of those examples.

There is mention of God, and Moses, as geekin said.

Moses and the ten commandments are from the Old Testament, which is also the Jewish Torah. Jews believe in the commandments.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

"Christian symbols", from your first post.

A "Christian" God is a bit different from a "Jewish" God or a "Muslim" God, etc.

Those who think that the founding fathers were like modern right wing Christians are simply wrong.

If you want to talk about God, that's one thing. But to insert the adjective "Christian" in front of it changes the meaning.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

I never said they were.

We're talking about religion - I have always understood that our founding fathers had religious beliefs - it's right there in the documents.

"All men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator,...;"

That doesn't make them modern right wing Christians, by any stretch of the imagination.

Many people believe in God without being Christian - the word for a belief in a deity is deist.

I'll ignore the personal jabs for a little while, but not forever.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

I say again that their religious symbology was not Christian.

Belief in God doesn't imply Christianity - use of the ten commandments doesn't either.

And, actually, the lte is entitled founders' faith - I'd say my comments are quite pertinent to that issue.

Jimo 3 years, 5 months ago

It's pretty sad when Dan Brown's fictitious views of Masonic symbology in Washington DC contain more truth than your bizarre attempt to turn our wholly secular republic into a theocracy.

Why do liars keep providing links and then misstating what those links will reveal? For example, the Supreme Court building, erected in that ancient year of 1935!, contains several depictions of the Ten Commandments. "See! The Bible is acknowledged as the source of our law's authority."

Except the SC building also contains depictions of Muhammed. Are we all Muhammedians now? Ditto Confucius. And more Roman pagans that you can shake a stick at. Pagans! Do you understand the term?

So thanks for your Probe.org link. It's good to know where you get your crap at. Personally I find the site theologically offensive and personally laughable. But that's the beauty of America - you keep your silliness to yourself and the rest of us do likewise. None of us have a problem with your beliefs serving to guide your reason in public decisionmaking. Almost all of us have a problem with your beliefs displacing reason in substituting religion for decisionmaking.

Our is a secular government. It has always been a secular government. It isn't any more anti-Christian than pro-Christian. That our Constitution contains not one word about God isn't some oversight! And the Founders would have shrieked in horror to know that the likes of you would be trying to paint them as some Bible-thumping Know-Nothings. They incorporated their cultural inheritance of Christianity right alongside their inheritance of slavery into the then trendy neo-Classical worship of all things Roman (and Greek). The Founders weren't demi-gods. The Constitution is a work of mostly unhappy political compromise (not a divine document whatsoever!). And our forefathers expected us to follow their path of respect for learning and reason to adapt their creation to the needs of the 21st century, not be chained to their own inherently flawed creation, let alone your perversion of it.

Good Day, Sir.

Jimo 3 years, 5 months ago

The site desperately tried to point to any Christian symbology in an attempt to make us believe what is objectively false: that the nation was founded on Christianity rather than as a secular nation. (Poking around the site elsewhere reveals a revolting perversion of Christian theology akin to some cheap tele-evangelist trolling for a dollar in a trailerpark.)

Cherry picking isolated Christian symbology while ignoring the non-Christian symbology adjacent fools no one but he who wishes to be fooled (apparently you - and the excretable Pat Robertson).

Quit your lying? What lie? You never get around in your blather to revealing that point. Is Mohammad depicted in our SC or not? Yes. Is Confucius? Yes. Are endless pagans? Yes. If you have contrary evidence, produce it, or kindly shut your pie hole. I remind you: lying is a sin. Think carefully of your soul before replying.

Jimo 3 years, 5 months ago

Dear Sir,

Again, you spend your time in flatulence rather than paying attention.

The article you link to does not demonstrate your counterpoint to "Nowhere on any of the founders buildings can be found a depiction of Christ, angels or any reference to Christianity at all." That statement remains undisputed by you or your article. What building of the Founders demonstrates an adherence to Christianity?

Space doesn't allow a point by point refutation of your article. But despite the verbal diarrhea of your replies, you've yet to cite any specific point in which the original post was in error.

verity 3 years, 5 months ago

From what I have read, Christian Fundamentalism (the belief that everything in the Bible is to be taken literally) didn't really begin until the late 1800s.

hwarangdo 3 years, 5 months ago

The founding fathers are dead. What they "believed" is buried with them.

Although I agree that God needs to be at the heart of decisions, religion should not. Religion is what mankind manipulated to suit their own needs, culturally and politically. Mankind has been killing each other over "my religion your religion" since day one.

God's qualities of compassion, tolerance, love, peacefulness, and treating ALL lives as one's own have been pushed aside for the darkness of hate, revenge, greed and condemning those who do not believe the same things. Do we allow ourselves to become God's qualities? Or do we fall for the enticements of differences, of separation from our fellow human beings?

Belief in God and His good Qualities is a good thing. Belief in religious bigotry, exclusiveness and holding power over others "in the name of ... " is not a good thing. Forcing one's religion onto another is not a good thing. The founding fathers knew that; hence separation between "church" (religion) and state (the actual governing by the people, for the people). They knew that belief in God and belief in religion are two different things; they knew the destruction that could come by forgetting the fine line between those. Many, many governments and countries have been utterly destroyed because religion was brought to rule.

Will we learn from the past? Or will we stumble into the future with a sword of religious fanaticism? The fate of our country rests with that.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 5 months ago

"The founding fathers are dead. What they "believed" is buried with them." I suppose the large body of writings and letters they all left, not to mention the legislation they created, means little. There is an enormous body of writings, explaining in pretty minute detail, just exactly what they believed. I will agree that governments grow and change as they grow. This is why the Constitutional amendment process was provided for in the Constitution (a pretty amazing thing, that our founders foresaw the need for it). But to try and outwardly attack the Constitution, the very foundation of our government, by saying , "our founders meant this or that" and then use historical revisionism to justify it, when what they meant is pretty clear in the body of work they left behind is a pretty cheap shot. The amendment process is there. If the majority of the people in the US don't like something or want to change something the process is there. Use it.

tomatogrower 3 years, 5 months ago

Cait, you have to be willing to read something more than the Bible. Many of the evangelical churches screen what their members can or cannot read.

gudpoynt 3 years, 5 months ago

I don't care if it rains or freezes, long as I got my plastic Jesus, riding on the dashboard of my car. Comes in colors pink and pleasant, glows in the dark, he's iridescent, take him with me when I travel far.

verity 3 years, 5 months ago

Did you just call the Bible Troll Tripe?

geekin_topekan 3 years, 5 months ago

John Wesley (founder of the Methodist Church) had a remarkable solution to God and Government-->Socialism.

If the Methodist Church had taken the reigns of the US government, they would have more than likely followed John Wesley's prescription for a reverent nation.

"Wherever riches have increased, religion has decreased in the same proportion[...]religion must produce both industry and frugality, and these can do nothing but produce wealth. But while wealth increases, so do pride, anger, love of the world in all of its branches.[...]increase in goods, proportionately increase pride, anger, desire of the flesh, desire of the eyes, and pride in life. So although the form of religion remains, the spirit swiftly vanishes. Is there no way to prevent this decay?"

The Methodist's answer: "If those who gain all they can, and save all they can, will likewise GIVE all they can, then the more they gain, the more they will grow in grace and lay up in heaven"

Imagine if religion ruled the US. Under the Methodist church, we would work our arses off and save, only to give it to those who have less. Only then would we reach heaven.

For those who gripe about Obama care, welfare and such--understand that that is what life would be like if religion ruled the US government. Basically, everytime a welfare check is sent, and someone receives free healthcare, the Repubs/TP are livin' the dream!

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 5 months ago

Hmm. Sam Brownback was raised a Methodist. No wonder he abandoned it.

Jimo 3 years, 5 months ago

Supposedly he converted to Catholicism. Unfortunately the Catholic Church gives the same basic answer as the Methodists.

These differences [of age, physical abilities, intellectual or moral aptitudes, the benefits derived from social commerce, and the distribution of wealth] belong to God's plan, who wills that each receive what he needs from others, and that those endowed with particular "talents" share the benefits with those who need them. These differences encourage and often oblige persons to practice generosity, kindness, and sharing of goods; they foster the mutual enrichment of cultures --

I distribute the virtues quite diversely; I do not give all of them to each person, but some to one, some to others....I shall give principally charity to one; justice to another; humility to this one, a living faith to that one....And so I have given many gifts and graces, both spiritual and temporal, with such diversity that I have not given everything to one single person, so that you may be constrained to practice charity towards one another....I have willed that one should need another and that all should be my ministers in distributing the graces and figrs they have received from me. ---

There exist also sinful inequalities that affect millions of men and women. These are in open contradiction of the Gospel --

Their equal dignity as persons demands that we strive for fairer and more humane conditions. Excessive economic and social disparity between individuals and peoples of the one human race is a source of scandal and militates against social justice, equity, human dignity, as well as social and international peace.

It is incumbent on those who exercise authority to strengthen the values that inspire the confidence of the members of the group and encourage them to put themselves at the service of others.

The common good requires the social well-being and development of the group itself. Development is the epitome of all social duties. Certainly, it is the proper function of authority to arbitrate, in the name of the common good, between various particular interests; but it should make accessible to each what is need to lead a truly human life: food, clothing, health, work, education and culture, suitable information, the right to establish a family, and so on.

grimpeur 3 years, 5 months ago

Chootspa, I like you. You got that special sumthin, a certain...what is it...panache? Yes, but more toward...salve wafer? No, actually you've got...oh, help me out here...moxie? Flair! Élan. Jenny say craw? No, no, no...esprit de...joie de...man I think it's French. Or Yiddish, maybe?

Oh heck with it.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 5 months ago

What people say and write about what they believe very often has nothing to do with what they actually believe.

I've been around the block enough times to know that.

rockchalker52 3 years, 5 months ago

You're a wise man, RH. Cynical, but wise.

verity 3 years, 5 months ago

I've been around the block a few times too, and I have noticed that very same thing. I might add that most of them seem to really believe that they believe what they think they believe.

Related to that is the fact that what people think their motive is for doing something often isn't their motive at all. Generally we have multiple motives for doing something and often we may not want to admit to ourselves what our true motives are.

notaubermime 3 years, 5 months ago

"That's it...nothing else, nada, zip in reference to religion in our Constitution." And you don't see a message there?

"Party of Atheists" There does not exist any such thing. Do you have something against atheists?

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

Not wanting prayer in public schools and/or "Christian" values taught in them is not trying to "obliterate" your belief systems.

I put Christian in quotes because there are many different interpretations of it, and many different groups.

You are free to believe whatever you like - you are even free to teach your children your values, home school them, or send them to private schools.

Why do you need to impose your values/beliefs on children in public schools?

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

The leap there is clear - those who don't want prayer in public schools want to eliminate religion from your beliefs.

It's simply not true.

People, including myself, who find the idea of prayer in public schools problematic, do so because they feel that there should be a separation of church and state, and that prayers in public school blur that line.

That certainly doesn't mean that I, or others, want to stop you from believing whatever you believe.

It looks from my perspective as though the ones who want to gain control of our system and install their beliefs in it are those on the religious right.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

A public school is a state run institution.

It's the same issue with "faith based" social service initiatives.

I don't recall any "rant" - I simply pointed out that religion is widely available to parents and families in a variety of ways. So any parent that wants their children to get "religious training" can easily do so.

What sort of "religious training" would you install in public schools? I assume it would be Christian, since you identify as one. What about Muslims, Jews, etc.? That's part of the problem - if parents choose their own faith, then they can bring up their children in that faith.

Your interpretation is not at all correct - I have no interest in eliminating religion from our culture. If I did, I'd advocate for closing churches, preventing parents from raising their children in a religious tradition, etc.

Which I don't do, of course.

Again, the ones that want to impose their view are the religious right.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

Why should 76% of the population be allowed to impose their views on the other 24%?

Look at how you want to do that.

In my version, everybody gets to practice their own religion as they see fit, and nobody imposes that on anybody else.

notaubermime 3 years, 5 months ago

"...the laws concerning the display of Christian symbols in public places is unconstitutional."

Could you point to the laws concerning display of Christian symbols in public places?

"Only the ones that attack Christians with insults as so often occurs right here in these award winning LJW opinion forums."

So the Christians who attack Muslims, Jews, and nonbelievers on this site are just fine in your book?

Kirk Larson 3 years, 5 months ago

You just can't seem to grasp the term "public". When religious displays are put up on public spaces, prayers pushed on kids in public schools that is the government establishing religion. Let the private sector do whatever they like, just keep the government out of the religion business.

Jimo 3 years, 5 months ago

"Party of Atheists"?

I assume you're talking about the Ayn Rand wing of the GOP?

beatrice 3 years, 5 months ago

What is with this "we" business? I am not dealing with "moral decadence." My morality is just fine, thank you very much. As this letter makes clear, the hatred and intollerance of some among the Christian faithful is prominent. If we don't believe in their magical sky god then we are the ones to blame for the troubles of our nation. Nonsense.

Iran and Afghanistan have been nations under god. How is that working out?

Sorry, but there are no such things as magical sky gods. Believe in them if you wish, but once others quit trying to force those beliefs on the rest of us the better we will all be.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 5 months ago

Y'know if people like the Texas State Schoolboard didn't outlaw the teaching of Enlightenment philosophers and what they thought, said and wrote then maybe, just maybe, more people would know what the so called "Founding Fathers" actually said, wrote and thought. They pretty much go hand in hand. But in a slick bit of historical revisionism to bolster their belief that this country was founded on "Christian principles" they had to sweep them (including Thomas Jefferson, the very man who wrote the the Declaration of Independence and framed the Constitution), under the rug.

jonas_opines 3 years, 5 months ago

This is really the solution. Certainly there has never been a society yet that had a heavy focus on the Christian religion yet was doing quite poorly from an economic or productivity standpoint.

notaubermime 3 years, 5 months ago

Sarcasm? Why would you think that he is being sarcastic?

tomatogrower 3 years, 5 months ago

Spain, when they tried to invade the uppity English protestant queen. Things went downhill for Spain after that. Slowly, but everthing happened slower back then. And quite frankly I would never have wanted to live in Spain during the Inquisition, or in England under Oliver Cromwell. Please learn some world history.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 5 months ago

By the way, I had a friend working as a curator at Monticello (she has since left to pursue a PhD) when Texas pulled their do si do with Jefferson. The s**tstorm there was enormous.

Kate Rogge 3 years, 5 months ago

I'm not a Christian, nor do I believe that this country was founded by Christians as a Christian nation. But I agree with Mr. Burkhead that it would be better for us all to understand justice and equity and to be delivered from the way of evil and men of perverted speech. That sounds pretty good to me. We don't have to share a religion, nor a view of our country's founding, to agree that we'd be better off with more understanding, wisdom, and discretion. Now, really, how bad could that be?

mom_of_three 3 years, 5 months ago

yeah, i didn't get that from the lte.
I got that he believes the country was founded on god and "in god we trust" , which did not come about until the 1860's.

You can be good, and do the right thing and it have nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs, but because it is the proper behavior.

notaubermime 3 years, 5 months ago

"to agree that we'd be better off with more... wisdom"

That's what the proverb that Mr. Burkhead said, but what Mr. Burkhead said was "...since the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom as contrasted to the worldly wisdom which continues to lead us to the wrong solutions." In other words, unless the wisdom comes from God (undoubtedly via the Bible), it is wrong. I would assert that you very much do need to share a religion to believe that the only truth that exists comes from the Bible.

Truly, as a nonbeliever, I see little to quarrel with on what Jesus said in the Bible. What gets me is how his followers exploit that to their own means. I find that to be sorrowful.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 5 months ago

The Jefferson Bible, or The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth as it is formally titled, was Thomas Jefferson's effort to extract the doctrine of Jesus by removing sections of the New Testament containing supernatural aspects as well as perceived misinterpretations he believed had been added by the Four Evangelists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferso...

Texas Conservatives Win Curriculum Change http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

(This makes me feel a little like Merrill but at least I don't copy and paste whole articles.)

Mike Ford 3 years, 5 months ago

many of the founding fathers didn't want a state sanctioned religion as they'd left Europe with monarchies in bed with the Catholic and Anglican Churches. They didn't want state sanctioned religion which is exactly what the exalted Bryllocreme and his Parker, Kansas minions want now. This is the history that the coneheads can't get around and they try to failingly with baa and ksrush to osfucate historical reality with the bedtime stories they brainwash people with every day on 98.1 KMBZ. I sure hate what the dumblicans have done with my grandparent's favorite easy listening channel KUDL. Why can't I hear the Commodore's song "Easy" instead of some blowhard that was fired by KC Royals in 1985 who should be using his large caboose to plug a hole in the levee in Missouri? Stop making sense dumblicans please!!!!!

Mike Ford 3 years, 5 months ago

huh is what I expect to hear from dummies. conservatives are always dismissive of anything they don't hear from George Will or Faux or chalkboard cryer who recently was fired from faux for his made up historical rants that made me think of the reverend tilton from dallas who used to do the joker faces in his religious state of rapture like glenn beck's crying. you people sure have some intelligent heroes don't you????

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 5 months ago

Huh? Just where in "This land is Your land" is even God (much less Jesus) mentioned? I think Woody Guthrie is rolling in his grave.

jayhawxrok 3 years, 5 months ago

Hogwash.

Freedom of religion was the founding father's message, the US has never been, is not now and will NEVER be a theocracy.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 5 months ago

Tell that to Sam Brownback and his "Office of Faith Based Initiatives" where people make decisions by pulling a Bible out. This is a taxpayer funded office. In other words, taxes you pay are paying these people's salaries. If that isn't evidence of a theocracy I don't know what is.

BrianR 3 years, 5 months ago

Exactly. These people are a threat and should be removed from office.

Mike Ford 3 years, 5 months ago

did your christian principals include deciding that indigenous people's land could be stolen and lived upon? do you really think that some ceremony at a church undoes the theft of this country by christians who murdered christianized munsee indians in Ohio in 1782 or molested lakota children at rosebud and pine ridge into the 1970's please defend your defenseless position....I'm waiting??? You name a denomination I'll name an atrocity....I've done this on here before....I love how all of these ranting dinwits scream about intervention from the federal government but you sure didn't look a gift horse away when your government made all of these fraudulent treaties and stole the majority of this country away. i know many of you want a return to the articles of confederation as i've heard on shannon and parks... no centralized government right? you were contained to the colonies and the shawnees, potawatomies, miamis, kickapoos, and others held the colonies in check along with the Mohawks and the Six Nations. an expanded government stole indian lands in the 19th century and uses the us supreme court to sanctify your theft and absolve your sins now. please live in ignorant bliss while we know who you are.

notaubermime 3 years, 5 months ago

Response to BornAgainAmerican's post at 9:37 p.m. on July 16:

"There was a Chief Justice in Alabama removed from office for defying a Federal Judges order to remove a 10 commandments monument from the State Supreme Court Building in 2003. The ACLU has filed many lawsuits across the country to ban religious symbols in public places. Do you have your head in the sand?"

Those are all court cases. You stated that the laws were unconstitutional. Can you point to those laws?

"Haven't noticed that atheists have been attacked by Christians. Please show me an example. Same goes for a Christian assault on those of Jewish faith."

Haven't noticed those posts? What, has your head been buried in the sand? That sort of search is like searching for a needle in a haystack in the first place, but it is made further complicated by the removal of posts and banning of users. If you haven't seen them, then I guess you haven't seen them, but that doesn't mean they weren't there.

"As for Muslims, if you are not at least leery of any and all Muslims after 30 years of attacks on America and Americans by Muslims, you have to be naive or have a death wish."

Any and all Muslims? No. No, I've met many Muslims and didn't fear, nor was I leery of any of them. I judge people by what they do and what they say, not what they believe. I think that you are a horrible person for thinking otherwise. Your path only leads to blood and violence.

jayhawxrok 3 years, 5 months ago

I agree Brownback is one of several abusers, those who have a religious agenda they want to carry out and use their elected office to try and force it on everyone else. Rick Perry is another loon, Bachman queen of the loons of course with Quitter Palin on the sideline praying for a bumpersticker moment.

beatrice 3 years, 5 months ago

Problem is, once "Republican candidate" is identified, the numbers go in favor of Obama. However, keep hope alive BAA.

"President Barack Obama tops all leading GOP White House hopefuls, hitting the all- important 50-percent mark against every candidate but Romney: • 47 - 41 percent over Romney, unchanged from June 8; • 50 - 38 percent over Bachmann, who was not matched against Obama June 8; • 53 - 34 percent over Sarah Palin, compared to 53 - 36 percent June 8; • 50 - 37 percent over Perry, who was not matched against Obama June 8." http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1623

Jimo 3 years, 5 months ago

Problem is: at this point in the election cycle, 'anyone else' routinely polls double-digits above the incumbent President (unless he's incredibly but temporarily popular, such as Papa Bush after the Gulf War). Voters routinely romanticize unknown candidates, making them into their own personal dream candidate. Once the alternative candidate opens his mouth, take a stand on specific issues, and gets criticized with the same fury an incumbent President must face daily, the challenger's numbers drop 10-20%. At present, that would result in a GOP bloodbath of Goldwater proportions.

The fact remains, Obama runs ahead of all GOP challengers in all swing states he won last time. That includes places like Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Colorado, and Florida. Heck, even paired off with Tea Bag dream candidates like Rick Perry of Texas, polling shows Obama carrying Texas! Tea Baggers spend too much time in their Fox Bubble to understand the views of real Americans.

So, yeah you're right -- Presidents Kerry, Dole, Mondale, and McGovern all agree with you!

(Guess that explains why Republicans are working so furiously to suppress voting for the next election.)

beatrice 3 years, 5 months ago

Hard to keep up -- with you? hahahaha

As jafs already explained to you elsewhere the choices, when individually based, show Obama leading actual Republican candidates. Take a look at the poll numbers I just provided.

Personally, I am not holding my breath for an Obama re-election or taking any poll too seriously right now, even those that support my general thoughts on the still distant election. You should hold your breath on it either.

On second thought, who am I to recommend anything to you. Feel free to hold your breath until then if you wish.

(hard to keep up ... oh, the roll of the eyes you provided with that one. My eyes might just get stuck this way it was such a big eye roller.)

beatrice 3 years, 5 months ago

No, it is you who doesn't get it. The poll question isn't placing Obama on one side and a string of Republican candidates on the other. It is one on one, head to head. Obama vs Romney? Obama gets the nod. Obama vs Bachmann? Obama gets the nod. Obama vs Pawlenty? ... well, hopefully you are getting it by now.

Maybe you aren't, since jafs already explained the process to you.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

It wasn't me.

I didn't do it, officer, no sir.

jayhawxrok 3 years, 5 months ago

LOL, funny how you right wingers only quote polls that support your views.

How about the Quin poll showing Americans blame Republicans more then Dems and more than Obama if they can't reach a deal? How the majority of Americans blame Bush and Reps before Dems and Obama for the debt situation's ORIGIN.....no, those polls you don't want to talk about, lol.

Jimo 3 years, 5 months ago

The Quinnipiac poll????

I was going to call you a blithering idiot and make a snide remark about turning off Fox.

But then I tried going to the Foxnews.com website and searching for the Quinnipiac poll on the 'blame' for the economy.

I was unable to find any direct mention of this news at all!!! So, yeah Born, maybe you should turn off Fox. But what's more, you just prove the point -- Fox News viewers are grossly more misinformed about current news events than even those who say they don't follow news at all. I guess I'd long ago realized how clueless Fox viewers were about things but I guess if Rupert Murdoch doesn't allow you to actually see (hear?) the news how would you discovered it.

Meanwhile, go back to Google, type in Quinnipiac poll and read the 9,982 !! news articles that Fox has been hiding from you. You can't help but learn something.

http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=Quinnipiac+poll&btnmeta_news_search=Search+News&tbm=nws

Jimo 3 years, 5 months ago

Yeah....far left. About as far left as the Wall Street Journal. ROFL

Apparently in Moronese, "far left" means "anyone who points out how stupid I am."

Mike Ford 3 years, 5 months ago

actually last tuesday I saw a poll where Mr. Obama would beat all of your clowns with Romney being the least BEATEN at 47% TO 41%. You guys always invert numbers to your favor. You don't like facts.

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

I saw one with something like 49-46 for Romney, but it was still within the margin of error. It also ignores any Tea or Green Party spoilers.

beatrice 3 years, 5 months ago

Honestly, who cares if all the founding fathers were devout Christians. The founding fathers also owned slaves, their guns were single shot and at least one of them had wooden teeth. Are we supposed to continue with those traditions as well? I don't think so.

The point is, centuries later, we aren't all Christians now. Americans practice many religions, including no religion at all. We can't base our society on what one of those religions imagines as being the "true" way to live. Believe in whatever you want, just don't try to force that belief on any of the rest of us by law.

beatrice 3 years, 5 months ago

You think "united we stand" means "united in religious practice"? Hardly.

beatrice 3 years, 5 months ago

It is more than just not bothering one another, it is about not passing laws that demand one way of living over another, especially based on religion. That drives us apart, like Shiites and Sunnis, Catholics and Protestants, Christians and Muslims, etc.... However, I don't feel we have too many cultures to survive -- look at all the nations that insist by law that people behave in a single manner. How well are they doing? I believe respecting differences is the key, and since we have so many different cultures it is actually necessary that we get along (more or less), otherwise all of us would constantly be in a battle of some kind with one group or another. I also believe there is plenty of just about everything to go around, especially in this country. We will differ in our opinions on how it should go around and who gets what portion of what pie, but the pie is big and there is plenty. We just aren't helping matters with the non--stop partisan attacks. They kind of division was invented by lobbyists to keep people from actually demanding action from politicians. Instead, it becomes only about a party winning, rather than leaders leading.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

That explains your desire to impose your views on others and create a more homogenous culture.

I strongly disagree with that approach.

In my view, we don't need to do that in order to work together, and we shouldn't do that, if we believe in freedom.

Working together is important, and finding a way to do that would be very good for our country.

But, I think we can/should do that without homogenizing the culture.

uncleandyt 3 years, 5 months ago

...on day 17 an Angel came down and landed on the deck of the ark and said unto Noah " Put not the penguins between the Pandas and Polar Bears ! thank you" And so it was that Noah saved several varieties of penguin. Amen

yourworstnightmare 3 years, 5 months ago

"under god" was added to the "Pledge of Allegiance" in 1954.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.