7 of 7
7
McCain: America a “Christian Nation” (Merged)
Posted: 01 November 2007 01:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 91 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  134
Joined  2006-11-01

I suspect Spanky may be promoting some fractured view of history and the Constitution, in which case I truly feel sorry for him.

What fractured view of history and the Constitution?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 November 2007 01:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 92 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4080
Joined  2006-11-28

Doug, PaineMan,

You guys are feeding the troll. It’s been repeatedly demonstrated that FF has no interest in or respect for fact, has an agenda to push that is immune to rational argument, and is in language and tone simply trying to get a rise out of you. FWIW I’d let it go.

 Signature 

The SkeptVet
The SkeptVet Blog
Militant Agnostic: I don’t know, and neither do you!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 November 2007 02:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 93 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15368
Joined  2006-02-14
mckenzievmd - 01 November 2007 01:33 PM

You guys are feeding the troll. It’s been repeatedly demonstrated that FF has no interest in or respect for fact, has an agenda to push that is immune to rational argument, and is in language and tone simply trying to get a rise out of you. FWIW I’d let it go.

Sage advice, Brennen ...

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 November 2007 07:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 94 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  134
Joined  2006-11-01
PaineMan - 01 November 2007 09:25 AM

Perhaps some clarification is in order.  An “Established Religion” specifically refered to “State Churches” such as the Anglican Church in England and the Catholic Church in Spain.

Who use the term to mean that and why is it relevant?

In England, there was a specific “test” that required anyone wishing to hold public office to swear they were a member of the Anglican Church. 

Show me the law that said that.

This was carried over to the colonies in a similar way in several places such as the Congregationalists in Massachusetts and the Episcopalians (Anglicans) in Virginia.

Huh?  Why would the Congregationalists impose a religious test that favored Anglicans? 

I believe, refers to the Massachusetts situation where these Baptist “Dissenters” were being taxed to support the “established” Congregationalist Church.

What time period are you talking about?

Virginia comes into play as a leader of this movement away from an “established church” and a separation of church and state with their Virginia Statute for Religious Liberty.

The leading colony/state in the movement to separate church and state was Rhode Island.  It separated the two in the 1600’s.  The rest of them followed RI.

Patrick Henry argued for taxes (not necessarily “tyranny”) to support the Christian/Episcopal Church .

That was tyranny, dude.  Plain and simple.  At least according to the great Baptist, James Madison.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 November 2007 08:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 95 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7573
Joined  2007-03-02

No Fred, they were not “closet Baptists”.  Jefferson was even accused of being an atheist a few times too.  He was a deist.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 November 2007 12:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 96 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1214
Joined  2007-09-21

Using Fred’s logic we could also assert that he is a closet atheist.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 November 2007 03:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 97 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  134
Joined  2006-11-01
PaineMan - 01 November 2007 09:25 AM

Virginia comes into play as a leader of this movement away from an “established church” and a separation of church and state with their Virginia Statute for Religious Liberty.

Virginia rid itself of its legally established Church and separated church and state ten years before the Virginia Religious Law was passed in 1786. 

There, Patrick Henry argued for taxes (not necessarily “tyranny”) to support the Christian/Episcopal Church but was defeated by Jefferson and Madison in this 1786 law that guaranteed religious freedom to everyone.

That is a false statement.

The views expressed in the Virginia statute were carried forward to the US Constitution

What views?

by Jeffereson and Madison


Jefferson had nothing to do with the Constitution, officially.

the latter being the principle author of the document.

Why do you say that?

Which is not to say that everyone agreed with this separation.  Attempts were periodically made to make the US a “Christian Nation” but they always failed.  The National Reform Association tried in 1864 by pushing for an amendment that said we are “humbly acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all authority and powerin civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ as the Ruler among the nations, [and] His revealed will as the supreme law of the land, in order to constitute a Christian government.”  It didn’t make it.  In the 1950’s it was tried again to insert that the United States “devoutly recognizes the Authority and Law of Jesus Christ, Saviour and Ruler of nations, through whom are bestowed the blessings of liberty.”, it failed, was revived in the 60’s and failed again.

I wish the Counterfeit Christians would try that again.  I might start a “satirical” campaign myself.

Some people continue to hold out that the Constitution applies only to Christians

Who are these people?

Justice John Paul Stevens in his 1985 Wallace v. Jaffree ruling, put this form of the Christian Nation rhetoric to rest saying, “At one time it was thought that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Mohammedism or Judaism. But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all.”

The Supreme Court never thought “that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Mohammedism or Judaism.”  What was Stevens talking about?
 

No, Mr. McCain, America is not a Christian Nation.

That all depends on what he meant, dude.

Profile
 
 
   
7 of 7
7