Vibr8gKiwi

I think the wall needs to break down a little for the blind Christians to appreciate that there is a wall. Bush has now allowed religious charities to get federal funding (well, religious charities always could get federal funding, but they had to fulfill certain requirements like not discriminating). Some Satanist group should now open a soup kitchen. Homeless can get free food from them, but would have to pray to Satan first (this is exactly what many Christian charity groups will now be doing with our tax money). Let the Christians realize they are funding Satanic prayers with their own tax money and that wall will be back up in nothing flat. Similar thing can be done with school led prayer, religious ethical teachings, classes and such. It's always ok with Christians when they are the ones doing the preaching, but not the other way around. I dunno why most Christians are so blind they cannot see the wall protects them as well as us.

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: Vibr8gKiwi ]</p>

atheist_in_foxhole

Radorth, it doesn't really matter what the founders wanted with regards to religion. Most of these men (and they were ALL men) supported slavery, some supported the death penalty for homosexuals, and unless I'm mistaken they all opposed allowing women to vote. They were far from perfect.

And even if they had included numerous references to Jebus and the babble in the Constitution (which they didn't), strict church/state separation would still be the best policy for both believers and non-believers alike. Read the bloody history of Europe and you'll understand why. And look at how fast Islam is growing. If you xians succeed in tearing down Jefferson's wall, what are you going to do when the Muslims (or some other religion) become the majority?

I know that you're convinced beyond all doubt that your myth is True, and I know that you think that our nation would be a better place if the rest of us would just shut up and embrace your delusions and fantasies, but you need to understand that this is not, never has been, and never will be a xian nation. Period.

If you tear the wall down you will regret it later on.

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: atheist_in_foxhole ]</p>

Jamie_L

Well, I left high school having heard pretty much nothing about what the founders thought about Jesus - bad or good.

Well, since the founders made their documents without reference to Jesus, it seems like their thoughts on Jesus have no place in high school. Any more than Lincoln's or Hitler's views on Jesus are particularly important to learning about their impacts on history.

Jamie

ybnormal

I dunno why most Christians are so blind they cannot see the wall protects them as well as us.

Everything I have seen from xians points to arrogance as the reason... they are convinced that they are right and they are convinced that ?God is on their side, which has convinced them that they will prevail... couple this with their complete misunderstanding of "government by the majority" and you have the makings of your question. Which is where the arrogance comes in... these folks fully intend to force their majority will on us, one way or another. From which direction, and from what area, are they not consolidating their agenda?

Just like the cloning of Federalist Society judges, these history rewrites by folks such as Barton have been in the pipeline for decades, and we are just now seeing the fruits of their labor in the likes of millions of Radorths. When Buffman mentioned that he couldn't find a couple of Radorth's quotes, I Googled several of the Rad's word strings and repeatedly found that 4 out of 5 hits were on xian sites, which are spreading Barton's inventions faster than the gospel. This has become an industry in itself.

It is no coincidence that Barton is working with several states to rewrite their history text books and learning tools for the youngest of children. No one understands the use of early indoctrination better than these xian folks. Do folks here really think it's just some coincidence that in addition to converting the Founders to xians, Barton-clone Radorth is also saying, I left high school thinking the founders almost all had a low opinion of Jesus.

These folks will not be bothered with arguments of "the wall protects xians" because that wall is their ONLY obstacle... an obstacle that an 80% majority of xians believe they can easily sweep aside... they only need a few more judges elected who were raised to believe exactly what these millions of Radorth's are teaching the gullible. Radorth went on record in the other thread to support that, the Constitution could say anything and it would not matter....

This is just another form of Falwell's favorite threat, that "Every knee shall bow!" A Barton/Falwell/Radorth team is a "fundy" microcosm of a real Biblical America Movement, of which seemingly detached parts are scattered throughout the many threads on these forums. Not that I have the answers, but unless one sees this bigger picture, one can't possibly understand the multi-directional forces being applied to this precious wall.

Butters

It would almost be worth it to see the wall come down. I would like to see how "Christians" like their children being taught how to pray and what to believe by Catholics, SDA's, and JW's!

atheist_in_foxhole

And don't forget the Mormons! Fundies think that the LDS church (the fastest growing religion) is a "cult." I can't wait to see the day when the whole country is like Utah.

Buffman

And don't forget the Rev. Moon, who is financing and advertising much of this propaganda.

hezekiah jones

No it isn't all that counts when secular activists and secular "humanists" warp the wisdom of the Founders ...

Most people here seem to at least make an effort to present it completely and in its proper context. That goes for you too, by the way.

... fail to communicate their fears and their remedies ...

Those are contained, explicitly or implicitly, in the constitutions, statutes, and judicial decisions collectively known, and with good reason, as "primary authority," none of which tends to get much play in your threads for some strange reason (actually it's not that strange at all).

... denigrate our Christian heritage and the contributions of Christians ...

The martyr card isn't particularly convincing around here. Nor the strawmen. And your use of the expression "Christian heritage" only serves to support ybnormal's point above.

... and effectively estop any remedies but their own for bad and intolerant behavior.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. If you're referring to "secular activists" and "humanists" at this website, you might want to check out the mastheads here. This is where they hang.

But since you're using the legal term "estop," if you're referring to "secular activists" and "humanists" in the political arena, you should know that we are a very small minority. So if you think we control the penal system, I would say you're seriously mistaken.

I have to assume by remedies you're referring to criminal or tortious acts, since "bad and intolerant behavior" isn't necessarily either. Often it's protected by ... the Constitution, of all things.

How about we have ethics classes for middle-schoolers, using the "most sublime" system of morals in history? Would that be OK?

That's a good question. As I said before, it depends on the facts of the case. Your question can't be addressed without some specifics.

No? Why not? Does it violate Jefferson's "wall" or not?

It might, and it might not. If you agree with most of the Supreme Court's establishment clause decisions, then surely you have some idea where your suggested ethics class might run afoul.

So basically your project is to rant and rave against "secular activists" and "humanists" for what you perceive as some kind of general decline in America's morals?

Since you claim not to object to many Supreme Court interpretations of the Constitution, it's hard to see what it is exactly to what it is you're objecting, aside from a handful of folks trying to draw some reasonable inferences from the founders' private letters and whatnot, which is exactly the same thing you're doing, albeit from an a priori supernaturalism which few people around here take very seriously, as should be plainly evident by now.

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: hezekiah jones ]</p>

Radorth

I made specific points and asked very specific questions and all I get is this rant that begins by throwing all Christians in the same box.

Blah blah blah. This is bull. Our only hope is that a majority become Christians so our kids won't have to grow up in a world that resembles the L.A public school system.

Paranoid generalizing IMO. You should take up preaching.

Are you seriously arguing that 4 of 5 of these are made up? If so, you are full of it. I don't suppose it's possible for an atheist site to trim or ignore a quote, eh? Oh wait, you're the guy who thinks atheists automatically have more integrity.

Well that would certainly explain this complete waste of bandwidth.

I'm about tired of hearing what I think and these mindless comparisons with Barton from Automatons on the other side. For a minute there I thought we were getting close to agreeing on something.

Rad

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>

Toto

I have a suspicion that most of the kids in the LA public school system are already Christians. (Unless you think that Catholics don't count as Christians. . .)

Rad - you made some claims about the Christian sympathies of the founders. You were challenged on the meaning of what you posted and your understanding of it. You were asked some specific questions. But it looks like you searched through the thread to find what you call an "anti-Christian" rant, although you fail to identify the poster who made that claim.

And what exactly did you think we were about to agree on?