Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MrDarwin · 12-13-2002, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth:
I don't have 8 hours a day to search the world in support of my personal crusade, that's why. Neither does Emerson or Daggah. We work. Of course they don't have families far as I know.

So magnanimous, coming from the guy who just a couple of days ago posted:

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth:
And where the hell is Daggah now? He has several new "liars" to call out.

MrDarwin · 12-13-2002, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth:
I did supply at least 5 Christian principles which drove the founders, and made the Constitution possible, which nobody can find anywhere because they are too lazy to look.

Radorth, for those of us who are denser than a lump of granite, could you please list those 5 principles? No need to discuss them at length, just a simple enumeration to pull them together in one place.

Radorth · 12-13-2002, 06:28 AM

Quote:

3016
posted December 13, 2002 06:15 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Radorth:
I don't have 8 hours a day to search the world in support of my personal crusade, that's why. Neither does Emerson or Daggah. We work. Of course they don't have families far as I know.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So magnanimous, coming from the guy who just a couple of days ago posted:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Radorth:
And where the hell is Daggah now? He has several new "liars" to call out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

True, he doesn't have time to read any posts but mine, apparently.

Meanwhile we note that the only known misquote (of Washington) in this thread came from an Atheist Automaton while Daggah was laying tile. Unfortunately, a golden opportunity to prove himself a "young man of integrity" was missed by only a few hours.

Rad

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]

gravitybow · 12-13-2002, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill Snedden:
I've been following this thread with no little amount of interest, and after wading through a voluminous 8 pages of irrelevant contentions and off-topic sniping, I'm unable to find much real discussion around the subject of the thread.

It seems to me that in order to support a positive position on the OP, one would have to

A) state the principles upon which one believes the U.S. Constitution to be based.

B) provide argument and evidence to support the contention that those principles are uniquely Christian OR that the reliance by the Founders upon those principles was driven solely by their Christian faith.

Needless to say I believe such a task to be quite impossible, however it would be interesting to see a proponent at least attempt the actual argument instead of digressing into irrelevancies.

It would might also be interesting to see opponents state their disagreements in a civil manner...just a thought...

Regards,

Bill Snedden

Bill's post bears repeating while there's still a chance to get this thread back on topic. I'm sure many others would also like to see the topic question answered in a reasonable, civil fashion. There must be someone out there who is familiar with and willing to state the particulars on which Constitutional principles are Biblically based. Bill's A and B above would be a great way to get back on track, but any discussion of the original topic is preferable to the never-ending tangents.

How is the US Constitution a result of "Christian principles"?

Radorth · 12-13-2002, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Radorth, for those of us who are denser than a lump of granite, could you please list those 5 principles? No need to discuss them at length, just a simple enumeration to pull them together in one place.

Not in your insincere case, no. You have to do all your own homework anyway.

(New rule)

Rad

Radorth · 12-13-2002, 06:35 AM

Quote:

You sure you want to stick with this story? I lurk on several boards, and I might not be to lazy to go and find where you did use "Bartons's" quotes, and even defended him when someone pointed out that the quotes you used were bogus.

Oh I see, so I can't use anything Barton ever used, is that it? Yes I am sticking with my story, and please do quote my "defense" of Barton in context. All I recall saying was that he had plenty of ammo without using "questionable" quotes and that if I saw his name alone attached to them by Federer, I would avoid them.

Rad

Radorth · 12-13-2002, 06:44 AM

Actually I avoid any quotes that do not have an old source attached, such as an early book or a reliable neutral or government source referenced. It's disgusting how each and every quote which weakens the atheist case gets labeled a "Barton quote" and does not get an individual, fair and rightful test.

Rad

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]

Yellum Notnef · 12-13-2002, 06:57 AM

Quote:

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radorth, for those of us who are denser than a lump of granite, could you please list those 5 principles? No need to discuss them at length, just a simple enumeration to pull them together in one place.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not in your insincere case, no. You have to do all your own homework anyway.

(New rule)

Rad
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wil somebody who measures up to this jerks sincerity test please ask the above question again.
This "new rule" baloney is the most ridiculous and childish attempt to ditch resonable questions central to the OP I`ve ever seen here. And thats saying a lot since we`re talking about Radorth.
He acts like he`s 6 years old. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />
He should be ashamed of himself if this is the way he has been "debating" (read hassling) people for 25 years.
I`m sure Jesus is very proud.

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Fenton Mulley ]

gravitybow · 12-13-2002, 06:59 AM

How is the US Constitution a result of "Christian principles"?

MrDarwin · 12-13-2002, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth:


Not in your insincere case, no. You have to do all your own homework anyway.

(New rule)

Rad

No skin off my nose; this just tells us all a lot about your own sincerity, as well as just how much substance there is to your argument in the first place.

12-13-2002, 06:44 AM	#207
Radorth Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,872	Actually I avoid any quotes that do not have an old source attached, such as an early book or a reliable neutral or government source referenced. It's disgusting how each and every quote which weakens the atheist case gets labeled a "Barton quote" and does not get an individual, fair and rightful test. Rad [ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>

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

12-13-2002, 06:59 AM	#209
gravitybow Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Washington, NC Posts: 1,696	How is the US Constitution a result of "Christian principles"?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.