- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:37 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
quote: You talk about "preventing religion..." *Preventing religious influence in government.
Which is clearly not its purpose or its use for 200+ years. Religious groups openly influence govt policy making and always have.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:39 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Why do you think it matters?
Why won't you answer it? You're the one that keeps bringing up Thomas Jefferson. If he had wanted what you declare he did, why didn't he write it in to begin with? Could have started it out with, this Republic is in no way a Christian Republic. Pretty simple.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:42 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
Which is clearly not its purpose or its use for 200+ years.
That's your opinion. I prefer that of the men who wrote it.
quote:
Religious groups openly influence govt policy making and always have.
Of course. We take plenty of action that runs counter to our Constitution.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:44 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
I prefer that of the men who wrote it.
Why didn't they write it in?
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:45 pm to Lg
quote:
Why won't you answer it?
You clearly know the answer. It's not relevant to any point I've made. Feel free to throw it out there, though.
quote:
Could have started it out with, this Republic is in no way a Christian Republic.
No. You have a deep lack of understanding on this. The point wasn't to ensure we weren't a "Christian Republic." The point was to ensure we were secular.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:49 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
No. You have a deep lack of understanding on this. The point wasn't to ensure we weren't a "Christian Republic." The point was to ensure we were secular.
The point was to ensure that the govt didn't step in and tell people how and who to worship, not to ensure that the people didn't worship. The people include govt officials. Trump is free to use God as his reasoning for making decisions. Religous groups are free to lobby the govt to make decisions they desire.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:55 pm to Covingtontiger77
quote:
No matter how much you fight it or deny it, this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. This whole inauguration has had GOD and JESUS all throughout it!
Judeo-Christian was not a term used in this country until the 1950s as wealthy, academic, protestant wasps wanted to end anti-Semitism and began to use the term.
George Washington would have been baffled by the term Judeo-Christian as would all the Founding Fathers since it wasn't a term that existed.
This post was edited on 1/20/17 at 6:01 pm
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:57 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
not to ensure that the people didn't worship
I don't know how many times I need to say it before it sticks, but I'll say it once more. I've never said or indicated that it was.
quote:
Trump is free to use God as his reasoning for making decisions.
"God" and religion are not requirements for the other.
quote:
Religous groups are free to lobby the govt to make decisions they desire.
This was irrelevant the first time you said it, and it's still irrelevant.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 5:59 pm to Covingtontiger77
Religion has no place in government. Just like It has no place in schools. You as a parent are the only authority figure that has the right to impress beliefs on your child. Keep your crack pot views and bastardized faith in your own home. Not in public schools and not in government.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 6:02 pm to Covingtontiger77
It was so important to our founding fathers that they didn't want it.
I guess they just couldn't see the profit that the modern day Televangelist could make as the Presidential Spiritual Advisor.
I guess they just couldn't see the profit that the modern day Televangelist could make as the Presidential Spiritual Advisor.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 6:05 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
The founders and the Constitution both commented within the context of protecting the freedom of religious belief of the citizen from being trampled by the state. As stated by others, the BOR was a protection of rights of the people, not the government.
BTW, the context the founders had was a state government in England forcing their beliefs on the people of the colonies. That was the same context the pilgrims had of leaving England and going to America. Religious freedom was important because religion was everywhere (even the founders were religious) and they wanted to make sure everyone had the right to worship as they pleased. Therefore, the 1A was included to state that the government could not force a citizen to believe one way or the other by creating and enforcing a state-sponsored religion.
That, again, is a far cry from acknowledging religion exists, or even making statements about God.
Even Thomas Jefferson, who was probably one of the most liberal of the founders when it came to religion (his "edited" Bible is legendary) even mentioned religious doctrines in his inaugural address:
BTW, the context the founders had was a state government in England forcing their beliefs on the people of the colonies. That was the same context the pilgrims had of leaving England and going to America. Religious freedom was important because religion was everywhere (even the founders were religious) and they wanted to make sure everyone had the right to worship as they pleased. Therefore, the 1A was included to state that the government could not force a citizen to believe one way or the other by creating and enforcing a state-sponsored religion.
That, again, is a far cry from acknowledging religion exists, or even making statements about God.
Even Thomas Jefferson, who was probably one of the most liberal of the founders when it came to religion (his "edited" Bible is legendary) even mentioned religious doctrines in his inaugural address:
quote:While not outright acknowledging the Christian God, Jefferson mentions qualities of God and uses somewhat generic terms for what most of the country believed regarding the notion of providence (God ordaining all things). And then there was Washington's inaugural address, which attributes every public good we have to the providence of God (again, not specifically mentioned as "God" but understood given historical context):
Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government. Kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from the exterminating havoc of one quarter of the globe; too high-minded to endure the degradations of the others; possessing a chosen country, with room enough for our descendants to the thousandth and thousandth generation; entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow-citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them; enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter—with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.
...
Relying, then, on the patronage of your good will, I advance with obedience to the work, ready to retire from it whenever you become sensible how much better choice it is in your power to make. And may that Infinite Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our councils to what is best, and give them a favorable issue for your peace and prosperity.
quote:
Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public summons, repaired to the present station; it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official Act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the Universe, who presides in the Councils of Nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that his benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the People of the United States, a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes: and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success, the functions allotted to his charge. In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own; nor those of my fellow-citizens at large, less than either. No People can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency. And in the important revolution just accomplished in the system of their United Government, the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities, from which the event has resulted, cannot be compared with the means by which most Governments have been established, without some return of pious gratitude along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage. These reflections, arising out of the present crisis, have forced themselves too strongly on my mind to be suppressed. You will join with me I trust in thinking, that there are none under the influence of which, the proceedings of a new and free Government can more auspiciously commence.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 6:20 pm to FooManChoo
You're conflating the presence of religion and the influence of religion.
Keeping religion out of the government does, in fact, protect the rights of the people.
Correct, and allowing religion to directly influence the government was a huge part of that problem. This was recognized by men like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and John Adams.
This has no relevance.
Indeed. A far cry from "founding a nation on Judeo-Christian principles."
quote:
protection of rights of the people, not the government
Keeping religion out of the government does, in fact, protect the rights of the people.
quote:
BTW, the context the founders had was a state government in England forcing their beliefs on the people of the colonies.
Correct, and allowing religion to directly influence the government was a huge part of that problem. This was recognized by men like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and John Adams.
quote:
That, again, is a far cry from acknowledging religion exists, or even making statements about God.
This has no relevance.
quote:
mentioned
quote:
mentioned
quote:
somewhat generic terms
Indeed. A far cry from "founding a nation on Judeo-Christian principles."
quote:
"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses. ". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."
-John Adams
quote:
“During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.”
– James Madison
Posted on 1/20/17 at 6:49 pm to Covingtontiger77
Atheist, couldn't care less about the prayers and religious overtones. I'm sorry that my not caring upsets many of you who want me to be angry about it.
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:29 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:I'm not at all. I think you are conflating influence of religion with governance through religion, or rather through an official religious organization (like the Church of England).
You're conflating the presence of religion and the influence of religion.
Influence is simply the ability to have an affect on someone or something else. Religion can influence a person's ideas and actions but so can lack of religion, as can a family situation, or neighborhood grown up in, or schooling, or any number of things.
My religious beliefs influence my decisions in every-day life, including how I interact with my family, friends, coworkers, or strangers, as well as how I act in my home and at work and anywhere else I am. My religion is ingrained within me. If I were President or other government representative, I would have to act within the law, but how I act would be in accordance to my beliefs. In that sense, even if I'm not instituting a particular religion or forcing anyone to believe as me, my religion would be influencing policy, law-making, enforcement, etc.
quote:Not necessarily, just like religious influence in government doesn't necessarily lead to removal of rights of the people. There is a lot of latitude of action within the law and choices can be made one way or the other depending on what influences the deciders have in their lives. Religion can be one of those influences, and that doesn't necessarily lead to lost rights, but we can talk specifics if you'd like.
Keeping religion out of the government does, in fact, protect the rights of the people
quote:Not at all. Influence wasn't the problem; the government being run by the Church was. The King was the head of the Church so he was not just a political ruler but a religious one, with the authority to force his subjects to bend the knee not only to himself but to the specific teachings of the COE. That's why the pilgrims left; they were persecuted by the government for not submitting to the doctrines of the King (which again was head of the church).
Correct, and allowing religion to directly influence the government was a huge part of that problem. This was recognized by men like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and John Adams.
Religion has and still does influence government and that's fine. You can see it in our laws and our founding documents. People vote based on their consciences and their consciences are often shaped by their religious beliefs. What is wrong is when the government imposes on religion to the point where people become enemies of the state for violating their religious convictions. The 1st amendment was specifically written to prevent the government from barring the free exercise of speech and religion, which is what the COE was doing to those who did not believe as the King did.
quote:It does when people are complaining that using God's name or talking about Him has not place in government, which implies that it should not be done. The basis for such a claim is invariably "the separation of church and state" which was not created to get God (religion) out of government entirely, but to keep government from interfering in the natural right to worship as one chooses.
This has no relevance.
quote:Just take a look at some of those original state charters and constitutions or even some of their specific state laws. They are littered with references to God, Jesus, and Biblical terminology or applications. The Declaration of Independence provides the framework for the rebellion against England and influenced the beginning of our own government, and it states (as everyone knows) "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." It also has several other references to God. Not bad for a document written by the likes of Thomas Jefferson. Even the Continental Congress had explicit calls to prayer, thanksgiving (to God), and fasting (a religious thing).
Indeed. A far cry from "founding a nation on Judeo-Christian principles."
The reason why the Constitution doesn't read as a religious manuscript due to the influences of Christianity is because it was meant to be limited in scope, protecting states and individuals from the federal government's interference and leaving matters of religious discussion to the churches and the states (literally; the states had official churches and acknowledged Jesus and stuff).
If you're interested in Christian influence on the founders or the founding of this nation, I'd suggest giving this a read: Did America Have a Christian Founding?
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:32 pm to jptiger2009
I'll say this - I'm tired of foreigners bringing their religion over here and trying to use govt to force it on others... and we all know ones been waaaaaay more successful than the rest at that for the last couple hundred years
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:40 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
FooManChoo
I don't feel like giving this my full attention right now, but thanks for the discussion.
Posted on 1/21/17 at 11:00 am to FooManChoo
quote:
My religious beliefs influence my decisions in every-day life, including how I interact with my family, friends, coworkers, or strangers, as well as how I act in my home and at work and anywhere else I am. My religion is ingrained within me.
That's fine. Your religion does not influence my decisions, and that wouldn't change if you were an elected official. The Constitution ensures that they do not.
quote:
I would have to act within the law
Indeed.
quote:
Not necessarily
This is simply not true. Legislating to the favor of one religion over another does not protect the rights of the people. John Adams saw this when he said as much.
quote:
Not at all. Influence wasn't the problem; the government being run by the Church was. The King was the head of the Church so he was not just a political ruler but a religious one
The King was the Governor of the Church. He was certainly influenced by leadership within the Church. It's absolutely correct to say that religion influenced the government.
quote:
The 1st amendment was specifically written to prevent the government from barring the free exercise of speech and religion
That's your interpretation of it. Once again, I'll stick to that of the men that wrote it.
quote:
It does when people are complaining that using God's name or talking about Him has not place in government, which implies that it should not be done.
That's such a basic understanding of the issue. I don't care if you use your god's name (this is a fairly recent practice as commonly identified). The problem comes when the government pushes legislation that says I'm legally obligated to behave in a certain manner, and a particular faith is the justification given.
quote:
state laws
Correct, and that's fine.
quote:
They are littered with references to God, Jesus, and Biblical terminology or applications.
Yet all gods were explicitly absent from our core founding documents.
quote:
The reason why the Constitution doesn't read as a religious manuscript due to the influences of Christianity is because it was meant to be limited in scope
No, this is simply not true. It doesn't read as a religious manuscript because the Founders actively avoided doing that. In their own words, they specifically wanted to leave religion out.
quote:
I'd suggest giving this a read: Did America Have a Christian Founding?
Interesting read, but Dr. Hall is a typical Christian apologist. He has his own set of beliefs, and wrote to those.
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News