Autonemesis

It seems to me that by endorsing a pledge "under God", Congress has explicitly refuted certain religious beliefs that say God forbids swearing oaths. The pledge is an expression of religious doctrine saying that God approves of oaths, and therefore cannot be claimed to be generic or uncontroversial among religious adherents. Only by further marginalizing minority sects such as 7th Day Adventist and Jehovah's Witnesses can the pretense of non-controversiality be sustained.

Starspun

Hey Zippy, I can't agree that britain would be better than america. Why? It seems to me that Britain follows suit in whatever foreign policy the US decrees. Like a tea drinking lemming.
j/k

At least about the tea drinking part.
I question why Britain hasn't joined the EU. It seems if the Europeans play their cards right, America can be usurped from it's 'leadership' role in world politics. What a great wake up call that would be.
Anyway, that was off topic so I will add I hope to see a measure of reason come from the simple-minded policies instituted by this governement. Perhaps Pat Robertsons view of a xtian government are coming to pass. Perhaps we should starting looking towards armaggedon.
I suppose that would be unreasonable though...or would it.

[ July 06, 2002: Message edited by: Starspun ]</p>

BigBlue2

The UK is in fact a member of the European Union and has been for some decades. However, they haven't adopted the EU's common currency.

Seth K

Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration of Independence shows the naturalistic heritage of this document more clearly, before the Congress got hold of it. The "endowed by their Creator" bit isn't in there. Instead it says:

emphasis added

That's a pretty clear statement of the concept that rights are the natural consequence of what we are, and not a grant by the mere whim of some celestial monarch.

There is also no appeal to "the Supreme Judge of the universe" near the end either. There is also this curious passage that didn't make the final document:

Starspun

BigBlue, thanks for clearing that up.
I do know that the currency wasn't adopted by Britain. It also seems that Britain disagrees with the EU's stance on a number of issues such as the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. that's why i assumed they were not a member. Assumed being the operative word here.
Once again, thanks. that info puts a new perspective on things.

Buffman

Some additional, preliminary, observations and personal comments.

1) On November 11, 1620, prior to embarking for the shores of America, the Pilgrims signed the Mayflower Compact that declared: `Having undertaken, for the Glory of God and the advancement of the Christian Faith and honor of our King and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia,'.

http://www.plimoth.org/Library/whowere.htm

(Extract)
The Pilgrim story begins in England. A congregation of religious dissidents in Nottinghamshire separated from the king's church and established a church of their own in 1606. Persecuted by government authorities, the congregation fled to the city of Leiden in Holland. There they found toleration to worship as they chose, but poor economic conditions and cultural competition caused them much hardship. They decided to emigrate to the English colonies in North America, then known collectively as "Virginia." After receiving financial backing from a consortium of London merchants, almost 50 members of the Leiden group, accompanied by a similar number of other English emigrants, started across the Atlantic on September 6, 1620, aboard a ship called the Mayflower.
The Mayflower arrived at Cape Cod in southeastern Massachusetts on November 9, 1620, after a 66-day voyage. The Pilgrims chose to remain in New England as it was too late in the season to go on to the northern part of Virginia where they had permission to settle. They signed an agreement on November 11 (now known as the "Mayflower Compact") to guarantee cooperation within their unchartered community. On December 11, 1620 (O.S.), an exploring party found the site of the future town of Plymouth. This is celebrated in legend as the landing on Plymouth Rock, a solitary boulder at the foot of the hill on which Plymouth is built. Construction of the new settlement began on Christmas Day, 1620.
(End extract)

[Were these the first Europeans to set foot on North American soil? Not hardly, though certain radical Christian elements of today would love to make everyone believe that they were. Why would they? Because these cleverly named "Pilgrams" were considered Protestant heretics within their own Christian community in England. Thus, by coming here, they brought their own narrow religious and intolerant views with them. Now, the Senate of the United States has just gone on official record as supporting and promoting this virulent and divisive form Christianity. Let there be no historical mistake about it. These Christians were the ultimate in religious bigotry as they proved themselves to be not too many years later. (Please note that this agreement was signed after arriving, not "prior to embarking," in order to get cooperation from the other half of the original Mayflower passengers who were not members of this Christian cult.)]

(2) On July 4, 1776, America's Founding Fathers, after appealing to the `Laws of Nature, and of Nature's God' to justify their separation from Great Britain, then declared: `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'.

[There are 146 years between 1620 and 1776. Slowly the superstitions and myths of the past were being minimized in, or eliminated from, the minds of enlightened men in the "New World;" but it would still be another 83 years before Darwin's "Origin of Species" would shake inerrant Christiandom to its foundations. So when those Founding Fathers physically composed the Declaration of Independence, they did so as Deists more than as Christians, though in debate, more than 50 of the 55 signers were enlightened Christians. They used the language they did to trump the British King's "Defender of the Faith" claim. However, in the King's role as the Crown Head of the colonies, they cited 18 general, and 9 specific, charges in the body of the declaration. Nowhere is Christianity, Jesus Christ, Protestantism or the Judeo-Christian bible mentioned. When a divinity is cited, it is as a "Nature's God," not the God of Nature, or that men are endowed by a "Creator," not manufactured from dirt by one, or a "Supreme Judge," not a supernatural one, or a "Divine Povidence," rather than a divine god.]

(3) In 1781, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence and later the Nation's third President, in his work titled `Notes on the State of Virginia' wrote: `God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God . That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.'.

[Previously discussed. "The Jefferson Memorial juxtaposes phrases to misrepresent what Jefferson said." ]

http://www.uvm.edu/~jloewen/liesacro...ssamerica.html

(4) On May 14, 1787, George Washington, as President of the Constitutional Convention, rose to admonish and exhort the delegates and declared: `If to please the people we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterward defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair; the event is in the hand of God !'.

[I have not researched Washington's words uttered on May 14, 1787. Why? Well, because, "Monday May 14th 1787 was the day fixed for the meeting of the deputies in Convention for revising the federal system of Government. On that day a small number only had assembled. Seven States were not convened till, Friday 25 of May, when the following members appeared to wit:..." ----The name of George Washington is included in the May 25th group from Virginia. Robert Morris nominated GW to be President of the Convention. John Rutledge seconded the motion. Washington was unanimously elected by ballot..."and conducted to the Chair by Mr. R. Morris and Mr. Rutledge; from which in a very emphatic manner he thanked the Convention for the honor they had conferred on him, reminded them of the novelty of the scene of business in which he was to act, lamented his want of better qualifications, and claimed the indulgence of the House towards the involuntary errors which his inexperience might occasion."---Copied from "James Madison-Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787:Volume One", Prometheus Books, Buffalo, New York, 1987, pgs. 17-18.) I do not have the time to read all the entries to locate the specific point at which GW may have risen and made the claimed statement. However, the fact should be clear that the Senate statement is in error.]

That's enough for now...and maybe forever on this specific item. It is patently obvious that 99 U.S. Senators have no accurate knowledge about these first items to which they have agreed. I can only conclude that they weren't interested in accuracy, but rather, haste, votes, position and power...never principle or their sworn duty and honor to uphold our Constitution and defend it from enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC.

[ July 06, 2002: Message edited by: Buffman ]

Buffman

Relative to this string, I invite folks to read my July 6, 2002, 02:40 PM entry at:

http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?u...6&t=000765&p=2

(Obviously, if I can't even write one line without a typo, my eyes and two fingers are shot.)

[ July 07, 2002: Message edited by: Buffman ]

ohwilleke

I'm certainly deeply disgusted by the resolution.

Grumpy

What's super-creepy is that someone must have drafted that resolution within a couple of hours after the 9th Circuit ruling came down. Why would anyone have these quotes handy for quick reference??

Zippy

</strong>

It's better in the sense that we don't have much of a problem with religious sorts. At least nothing like as bad as you guys have.

But yes, the UK does sometimes tend to follow behind the US a little too closely. At the moment.

Paul