Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Radorth · 12-14-2002, 05:14 PM

Time to do "No God, No Navy, No America."

You guys up to it? Let's put up the tree and lights an have at it... er, sorry, I guess you just put up a new Gregorian calender. Lucky!

Rad

Daggah · 12-14-2002, 05:25 PM

Stupid ISP dying on me caused a double-post.

[ December 14, 2002: Message edited by: Daggah ]</p>

Daggah · 12-14-2002, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth:
<strong>Time to do "No God, No Navy, No America."

You guys up to it? Let's put up the tree and lights an have at it... er, sorry, I guess you just put up a new Gregorian calender. Lucky!

Rad</strong>

Well there's no god, and there's America. There goes that premise.

Now, how about you stop dodging the issues? Or are you afraid to face them? Perhaps you're not honest enough?

So far, it seems Radorth's posts can be classified according to the following system:

Class A: Radorth posts ad hom attacks.
Class B: Radorth posts assertions without bothering to support them.
Class C: Radorth responds to a point raised with rambling and red herrings.
Class D: Radorth posts non-sequiturs and correlation-causation fallacies.
Class E: Radorth misquotes others.
Class F: Radorth attacks straw men.
Class G: Radorth simply lies.

This post of Radorth's is a C-class post.

Daggah · 12-14-2002, 05:59 PM

Oh, and Radorth, I believe earlier in this "discussion," you posted about how atheists want to get rid of all Christianity from government. I don't know about others but here are my feelings, from a discussion in October:

Quote:

I don't think you can (or even SHOULD) claim that these laws are unconstitutional. Sure, they're religiously motivated, but do we dare step that close to such a slippery slope? If we claim that religiously motivated laws are unconstitutional too...how does one decide whether other laws are religiously motivated? Does one have to have a secular reason for holding an opinion for that opinion to be valid?
The quality and worth of an idea should be judged good or bad by the actual idea, not the motivation behind it.

This was RE: blue laws.

Buffman · 12-14-2002, 07:36 PM

Rad

Here is an extract from "Pilgrams' Progress" that you may not have read:

"I shall, a little, return back and begin with a combination made by them before they came ashore, being the first foundation of their government in this place, occasioned partly by the discontented and mutinous speeches that some of the strangers amongst them had let fall from them in the ship: that when they came ashore they would use their own liberty, for none had power to command them, the patent they had being for Virginia, and not for New England, which belonged to another government, with which the Virginia Company had nothing to do. And partly that such an act by them done (this their condition considered) might be as firm as any patent, and in some more sure. The form was as follows:..." (The Mayflower Compact follows)

(From William Bradford, "Bradford's History of Plimouth Plantation", Boston: Wright & Potter Printing Co., State Printers, 1901.)

The Leyden Pilgrims didn't leave Holland because they were religiously persecuted. They left because they were seeing their membership being integrated and disappearing into the Dutch culture. They picked up approximately half the number of people on the Mayflower in England in order to help pay for the trip. They were certainly not the first Europeans to settle in America. Jamestown was established in 1607. Understanding the differences between the Puritans and the Separationists can help to place the voyage to the Americas in better perspective.

If you were to read the rest of Bradford's history, you would come to understand that the Compact was written, not to declare religious liberty, but to prevent a mutiny by half of the ship's passengers. Within the first 2-3 months ashore, nearly half of the ships company had died. Perhaps they all would have had not the heathen Indians given them food. The U.S.Constitution has only one thing in common with the Mayflower Compact...it was a written and signed document some 167 years later. (I can only hope that you weren't inferring that the Compact founded our current government.)

Radorth · 12-14-2002, 10:02 PM

Interpret it how you choose Buffman, however your bias and cynicism about Christian motives so cripple your judgement, you quote them saying saying almost the opposite of what they said. I believe they stated their ideals and practical reasons for the most part, and lived by them.

Rad

ybnormal · 12-14-2002, 11:00 PM

In other words, by your arguments, are you not making the claim that the actual words of the Constitution itself are of equal, if not of lesser importance, than the beliefs of the men who constructed it?

Close but not quite. I think they understood (and many said) that the Constitution could say anything and it would not matter...

Yes, that's what I thought you thought. Kinda makes the remainder of your sentence irrelevant. But thank you for your candor.

The only real danger I see for America is is leaving God out of government.

Since you believe that America was founded as a "Christian Nation", and your God and your fellow xians have been in control from its inception, what went wrong?

And if this is accurate, and contrary to your many personal statements regarding governance, are you not by default, aligning yourself with those who would willingly replace man's law with God's law?

Good question. My answer is that if God does not rule us, we will be ruled by tyrants, Constitution or no.

Well, there is that Constitution, so you are indeed, aligning yourself with those who would willingly replace man's law with God's law?

So please stop pleading, here of all places, for less hostility towards you, your words and your agenda. You have sworn allegiance to something foreign to your Country and your Constitution. You would be considered a traitor to this Country, in any other arena. You have identified yourself as my political enemy. To use your words, YOU are The only real danger I see for America.

We disagree on what God's law is obviously...

Oh, no, not at all. We both know exactly what it is... our disagreement would be regarding the consequences of your extremist, supremacist and fundamentalist leaders actually being in control, rather than just in your past and future dreams. The only thing obvious here is that you have not seen enough history. You haven't a clue my friend.

...yet if God's "law of the Spirit of life" to truly ruled our hearts, we should need no Constitution or courts, or anything else to make us treat each other justly.

Rad, you must be smart enough to see that your beliefs are wholly circular and contradictory.

You want to make a case that Christian men, under the hand of God, created a Constitution and court system, that they would not need, IF their hearts were truly ruled by this same God's hand.

Now, I'll admit, that you're good at what you've been allowed to do here, but the fact remains, nothing you have said has anything to do with the Constitution's words. And no matter how many other threads you visit, to proclaim some thinly veiled victory here, EVERYONE who has followed along will know that you clearly LOST IT, and lost it big time, altho in a grand style. I further suspect that when you go to sleep tonight, you will admit it to yourself, and to your God, while promising faithfully, to do it all over again tomorrow.

Peace!

Toto · 12-15-2002, 01:19 AM

I gave fair warning, and I see no reason not to close this thread. The question in the title - How is the US Constitution a result of "Christian principles" - has be answered, and we have found no such principles.

You are free to start a new thread on any subtopic that you still need to discuss.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-14-2002, 05:14 PM	#281
Radorth Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,872	Time to do "No God, No Navy, No America." You guys up to it? Let's put up the tree and lights an have at it... er, sorry, I guess you just put up a new Gregorian calender. Lucky! Rad

12-14-2002, 05:25 PM	#282
Daggah Banned Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Deployed to Kosovo Posts: 4,314	Stupid ISP dying on me caused a double-post. [ December 14, 2002: Message edited by: Daggah ]</p>

12-14-2002, 07:36 PM	#285
Buffman Beloved Deceased Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: central Florida Posts: 3,546	Rad Here is an extract from "Pilgrams' Progress" that you may not have read: "I shall, a little, return back and begin with a combination made by them before they came ashore, being the first foundation of their government in this place, occasioned partly by the discontented and mutinous speeches that some of the strangers amongst them had let fall from them in the ship: that when they came ashore they would use their own liberty, for none had power to command them, the patent they had being for Virginia, and not for New England, which belonged to another government, with which the Virginia Company had nothing to do. And partly that such an act by them done (this their condition considered) might be as firm as any patent, and in some more sure. The form was as follows:..." (The Mayflower Compact follows) (From William Bradford, "Bradford's History of Plimouth Plantation", Boston: Wright & Potter Printing Co., State Printers, 1901.) The Leyden Pilgrims didn't leave Holland because they were religiously persecuted. They left because they were seeing their membership being integrated and disappearing into the Dutch culture. They picked up approximately half the number of people on the Mayflower in England in order to help pay for the trip. They were certainly not the first Europeans to settle in America. Jamestown was established in 1607. Understanding the differences between the Puritans and the Separationists can help to place the voyage to the Americas in better perspective. If you were to read the rest of Bradford's history, you would come to understand that the Compact was written, not to declare religious liberty, but to prevent a mutiny by half of the ship's passengers. Within the first 2-3 months ashore, nearly half of the ships company had died. Perhaps they all would have had not the heathen Indians given them food. The U.S.Constitution has only one thing in common with the Mayflower Compact...it was a written and signed document some 167 years later. (I can only hope that you weren't inferring that the Compact founded our current government.)

12-14-2002, 10:02 PM	#286
Radorth Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,872	Interpret it how you choose Buffman, however your bias and cynicism about Christian motives so cripple your judgement, you quote them saying saying almost the opposite of what they said. I believe they stated their ideals and practical reasons for the most part, and lived by them. Rad

12-14-2002, 11:00 PM	#287
ybnormal Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 430	In other words, by your arguments, are you not making the claim that the actual words of the Constitution itself are of equal, if not of lesser importance, than the beliefs of the men who constructed it? Close but not quite. I think they understood (and many said) that the Constitution could say anything and it would not matter... Yes, that's what I thought you thought. Kinda makes the remainder of your sentence irrelevant. But thank you for your candor. The only real danger I see for America is is leaving God out of government. Since you believe that America was founded as a "Christian Nation", and your God and your fellow xians have been in control from its inception, what went wrong? And if this is accurate, and contrary to your many personal statements regarding governance, are you not by default, aligning yourself with those who would willingly replace man's law with God's law? Good question. My answer is that if God does not rule us, we will be ruled by tyrants, Constitution or no. Well, there is that Constitution, so you are indeed, aligning yourself with those who would willingly replace man's law with God's law? So please stop pleading, here of all places, for less hostility towards you, your words and your agenda. You have sworn allegiance to something foreign to your Country and your Constitution. You would be considered a traitor to this Country, in any other arena. You have identified yourself as my political enemy. To use your words, YOU are The only real danger I see for America. We disagree on what God's law is obviously... Oh, no, not at all. We both know exactly what it is... our disagreement would be regarding the consequences of your extremist, supremacist and fundamentalist leaders actually being in control, rather than just in your past and future dreams. The only thing obvious here is that you have not seen enough history. You haven't a clue my friend. ...yet if God's "law of the Spirit of life" to truly ruled our hearts, we should need no Constitution or courts, or anything else to make us treat each other justly. Rad, you must be smart enough to see that your beliefs are wholly circular and contradictory. You want to make a case that Christian men, under the hand of God, created a Constitution and court system, that they would not need, IF their hearts were truly ruled by this same God's hand. Now, I'll admit, that you're good at what you've been allowed to do here, but the fact remains, nothing you have said has anything to do with the Constitution's words. And no matter how many other threads you visit, to proclaim some thinly veiled victory here, EVERYONE who has followed along will know that you clearly LOST IT, and lost it big time, altho in a grand style. I further suspect that when you go to sleep tonight, you will admit it to yourself, and to your God, while promising faithfully, to do it all over again tomorrow. Peace!

12-15-2002, 01:19 AM	#288
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	I gave fair warning, and I see no reason not to close this thread. The question in the title - How is the US Constitution a result of "Christian principles" - has be answered, and we have found no such principles. You are free to start a new thread on any subtopic that you still need to discuss.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.