This is a very interesting video, and an interesting debate in the comments. I dm on the side of separation of state and government - There is no place for any religion or beliefs pertaining to a single person in government. I live in Australia, and we too have no official religion, being a very multicultural society. Obama has his head screwed on straight - unlike a certain Ms Gillard over here. I think that everyone has a right to practise religion, but it should never be forced upon others.
@MissArtastic The idea that Obama has 'his head screwed on straight' is at odds with our experience since his inauguration.
The US is a Christian nation because of the character of our people, customs, and traditions. The right to freely exercise one's religion is guaranteed by our Constitution and is unaffected by acknowledging the Christian nature of the country.
Traditionally and demographically the USA is a MOSTLY Christian nation. People just need to get over that. But in definition is it a Christian nation? Of course not.
Obama is a horrible president. But it is true the nation is not a christian nation. The nation is a free for all to practice whatever they want. You cant have a first amendment and be a christian nation
No; America gives $15 million per day of our tax money to the Zionazis so they can "ethnically cleanse" the Palestinian natives off the neighboring land, then build new Jewish settlements on top of the blood of their victims.
@WFSW32 I find generalizing to be very useful. Yes, I'm racist. palestinians on average are dumber than black americans ~ IQ 85. Why do you think we are so careful about the african immigrants we let in? because most black africans are stupid (and aids has something to do with it). the smart african countries - south africa and kenya - do the same thing. bring in all the smart africans and leave the dumb ones outside.
@jungleman68 AIDS has nothing to do with IQ. Having a low IQ has to do with getting AIDS, as they don't understand they'll catch AIDS unless they're careful.
Don't be racist. Generalizing is awful. I could generalize and say all Christians are retarded racists who don't believe in evolution based soley on the fact that the KKK exists.
@WFSW32 I don't think you understood. Our immigration policy regarding africans is based on IQ or the prevalance of AIDS as in we don't want infected people coming in and a lot are turned down. Generalizing is very useful. it prevents us from wasting money on people who can't improve anymore (including our own low IQ kids). Get rid of that time wasting liberal thinking. Racism was favored by evolution for a reason. Stereotypes exist based on facts.
@WFSW32 which jews are you talking about? Never met a jew who actually believed that crap. Black people, arabs, aryan/indo-iranian people, southeast-asian people, and indiginous mexicans/ all native american tribes are stupid. aboriginals are the dumbest by far. only white people and north-east asians are smart. You're an ostrich or one of these dumb groups. so am I and I admit that they are stupid.
@jungleman68 Jews believe in the Garden of Eden and don't believe in evolution. I'm a Native American and I have abouve aerage intelligence for anybody, actually. Intelligence has to do with environment and not biology. Stop being racist.
@WFSW32 "Jews" today are agnostic/atheist and are only culturally Jewish. stop being dumb. oh wait, you can't - Native American IQ - 84. lower than blacks. Yet you still blame your poverty and inability to find jobs on the white man. so you live in the US, go through the same education, and still don't have a high IQ. Biology is responsible for about 2/3 of a person's IQ including in the womb. you're just an ostrich.
@jungleman68 Jews are Jewish. Herp de derp. And if you are going by the fact that they're Semitic then you must support Arabs too. theyre both Semitic. The only reason alot of Jews are white is due to the diaspora. They immigrated to Europe and had children relatively early leading to them lowering their pigmentation rather quickly.
I have an IQ of 130+ actually. And it's environment. Not biology. I grew up in a healthy non-alcoholic environment.
@WFSW32 again you're not listening. Education does not affect IQ but nutrition does. And people here have plenty. First, look up IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Then look up "What Constitute's a Person's IQ?" on howstuffworks. It clearly shows that heavy studying only increases IQ temporarily by a small amount. Thirdly, look up any statistics on african immigrants. They are the highest IQ group in America.
@jungleman68 So races aren't born stupid. They don't have the necessary nutrtional intake. That's more of a nationality trait and not a racial one. The smart Africans are the only one's who can afford to come here. That's why they have the highest IQs. And they teach their children to work hard like they had to.
@WFSW32 no, the wealthy africans are the smart ones. I don't believe you have and IQ of 130+. "Nationality" trait? Why are the normal poor white people in South Africa smarter than the normal poor black people? your arguments are becoming weaker and weaker. They do have the necessary nutritional intake. African diets are some of the most nutritional in the world. Just look at Ethiopian food. With enough food, they'd only be a 75 or so. Stop mixing political correctness with science.
@jungleman68 The wealthy Africans are the ones who can afford an education and a nutritional diet. What white people? The ones in South Africa? How ols are they? Did they get an eeducation before the apartheid ended? Then yeah, they'll have a higher education because the natives were discriminated against.
Read Guns, Germs, and Steel. Good book. You might understand this simple matter by doing so.
@WFSW32 read studies of Ashkenazi intelligence. then maybe YOU will understand. Biology is not politically correct and does not follow the saying that "All men are created equal."
@jungleman68 It has to do with environment. Certain cognitive traits can be inherited, yes, but that doesn't automatically make someone intelligent. Read Guns, Germs, and Steel. It's not that difficult of a read.
And the reason they are more intelligent is because unlike the the Oriental Jews and most Arabs they believe in science and teach their children about it earlier. Most aren't that religious.
@WFSW32 it doesn't take human evolution into account. human intelligence is also an effect of necessity just like ashkenazi evolution. no, that is not the reason. I already gave the source in IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Look up Botswana, Namibia, and Zimbabwe on a map, then their GDP, then IQ. Do the same with Vietnam, Thailand, and Cambodia. Vietnamese have a highly mixed background with the Chinese. Then do Haiti and Jamaica. Then israel and the west bank which are really similar culturally
@jungleman68 The Palestinians suffer discrimination in Israel, especially with the mini-Apartheid. The Thai people's collective IQ can be blamed on an iodine deficiency. Botswana, Nambia, Zimbabwe, Veitnam, and Cambodia, along with Haiti and Jamaica are poor countries. Poor people can't afford a good education which is what the Ashkenazi Jew bankers could afford, because they were rich.
@WFSW32 you did not even look at it did you? Well, since you won't actually look at these things, I'll just list a few more examples and leave it at that. North Korea (starving) and South Korea, Hong Kong PRC and Taiwan, fragile X syndrome. Any argument you make after this is invalid because you did not look at the evidence. Small example - Serbia's IQ is 89 and so is Indonesia's. lower GDPs than botswana. Like I said, until you read it, any argument is invalid. west bank had plenty of oppurtuni
"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel." - Thomas Paine - Age Of Reason
“Question with boldness even the existence of god because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear” Thomas Jefferson.
- "The United States is not a Christian nation any more than it is a Jewish or a Mohammadan nation" John Adams
"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life, I absenteed myself from Christian assemblies." Ben Franklin
@max2right Jefferson was not advocating a disbelief in God but a belief based on reason and observation. His belief in God is unquestionable and formed the foundation of his political beliefs.
The Adams quote is a fake, as is the one attributed to Franklin.
@nnjhansen You are probably right about that Adams quote here is the correct version. The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.Treaty of Tripoli, article 11 signed by John Adams and ratified by congress. Here's another Jefferson quote Jefferson. –“But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.?
@max2right Here are a few others, "The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite . . . . And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity..." _ John Adams letter to Jefferson, 28 June 1813.
@max2right “(C)an 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?" - Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia
@nnjhansen I do not accept your judbment on Franklin's quote. “Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. I had hoped that liberal and enlightened thought would have reconciled the Christians so that their [not our?] religious fights would not endanger the peace of Society.? Letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792 G. Washington
@max2right Then find a citation for the Franklin quote.
"it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes" Washington, 1st Inaugural
@nnjhansen Many of the founding fathers were deists. In the above quote Christianity isn’t mentioned nor is it in the Constitution. Be as dismissive as you chose but, this is a christian nation by population not by government and we all can take comfort in that. The moral values demonstrated in the bible are reprehensible.
@max2right Of the men who founded this nation, only Franklin ever referred to himself as a deist (and his deism was one which reflected the nature of his belief in God not the nature of God). The others generally considered themselves Christians of one sort or another.
This is a Christian nation in people, custom, and tradition.
@max2right "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.... And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion."
Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel. - Thomas Paine - Age Of Reason
@max2right Paine's views on religion are well known but irrelevant. he played no role in founding this nation apart from authoring "Common Sense." That pamphlet does not speak of religion at all.
@max2right Paine's views are not as relevant as those of the men who founded the country. He was not a member of the Continental Congress, the Constitutional Convention, the 1st Congress, or a leader of the Continental Army. He was the author of an influential pamphlet, his relevance is limited to the ideas contained in that pamphlet.
@tontsa911 Because in the 1950s, the retarded republicans had Socalismaphobia , which is a associated with secularism...So they decided to stand behind Jebus and the fairy tales of the bible.
@nnjhansen It wasn't always so. It was E Pluribus Unum until it was changed to In God We Trust. Check out the Treaty of Tripoli. Straight from John Adams.
@gregakinman Whether it was always so is of no consequence, it is now.
The Treaty of Tripoli is no more relevant to this discussion than is the fact that the Treaty of Paris (also signed by Adams) was made "in the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity."
@nnjhansen Just because Adams signed the treaty that said that phrase somewhere does not mean that Adams believed that the USA was a Christian nation. I actually just looked at a scan of the signature page on wikimedia and nowhere on the page does it mention God. Adams (and Hartley, Franklin, and Jay) simply affixed their signatures and stamped their wax seals.
@gregakinman Adams had more to do with the drafting of the Paris treaty than he did with Tripoli. He was a member of the negotiators in Paris, he took no part in drafting Tripoli.
"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite . . . . And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity..." letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813
@nnjhansen Saying that we were founded on the "general" (GENERAL!) principles of Christianity does not, in any way, make us a Christian nation. That doesn't concerning only the morality of Christianity, and not any other of the numerous aspects of Christianity (the dogma, the supernatural beliefs, etc.).
@nnjhansen It makes us a Christian nation in the sense that Christians are our majority. But there is nothing that officially makes our nation a Christian nation. We do not have an official religion.
@gregakinman No, we don't have an official religion but that is an awfully narrow definition. We are clearly an English speaking nation but that is not codified in law either.
@nnjhansen I don't care how narrow the definition is. The pragmatic implication of that definition is that we still cannot create laws based on exclusively Christian values (or those of any other religion, for that matter). And we cannot deport ourselves in our diplomatic efforts as a Christian country, because our country is not officially Christian. I don't live in a theocracy; I live in a secular republic.
And to the matter about speaking English: continued in my next reply (character count)
@gregakinman We can base laws on what ever we want. Our freedom to exercise our religion does not stop at the ballot box or even the statehouse. There is no prohibition on basing laws on a moral code and no prohibition on basing that moral code on religious values.
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." - George Washington
@nnjhansen We should by no means base laws on whatever (it's one word, not two) we want. Legislators cannot carry their own personal prejudices to the assembly room, for they represent the entire country. That's why our method of government is called "representative government."
Also — a good tenet to live by is this: people can do whatever they want, as long as they do not interfere with the well-being or freedom of other people to also do whatever they want.
Legislators are not elected to represent the entire country, they are elected to represent their district or state. What you classify as their 'prejudices,' those who elect them may well consider shared values and be precisely the reason they sent that person to represent them.
Your tenet, good or ill, is not to be confused with a constitutional imperative.
@nnjhansen I was speaking generally and in the plural: legislators, as a group, do represent the entire country.
A legislator may not act in solely his own interest. He must take into account the general wishes of the district or state he represents. Example: Senator thinks gays are an abomination. But state wants gay marriage. He must vote for gay marriage. It's just like the Electoral College — they are (mostly) bound to the wishes of those whom they represent, and not just their own wishes.
@gregakinman Actually you are wrong. Representatives are not bound to act in accordance with the wishes of their constituents at all. They are supposed to vote according to their own conscience and then present themselves to the voters at the end of their term. That is why many voters find a candidate's values and beliefs so important, as they guide their votes on issues that were unanticipated.
@nnjhansen I disagree. For a representative to selfishly go against the wishes of those whom he represents is irresponsible and very un-conscientious. It is his paid job to convey the wishes of the community, for his goals and the goals of his community are one and the same.
@gregakinman You are confusing our system of government with a democracy. We elect representatives to office, the act in accordance with their conscience, if we are dissatisfied we elect someone else the next time.
In your system, why have representatives at all? Why not just have plebiscites?
@gregakinman Im sorry but its constitution 1st then your own selfish ideas on how the world should be 2nd.You have elected this man to represent you,not to be your puppet. Theres a subtle difference and also why you elect a president yet he does not put all of the policys you wish into place as most are stupid for the country as a whole.Such as prayer in schools,which prayer?who says a muslim school cant force a christian to pray to allah or he dont graduate.See why god has no bussiness in gov?
@gregakinman The constitution is there so you dont get majority rule and you keep the rights of the individual from persecution by majority.Jesus was killed by the popular majority who were pagans,always remember this.Your community may have problems an your representative is there to adress them.Just because you believe your point is the best doesnt mean it is for your entire state.Otherwise slavery would be back,no poor man gets welfare an no interacial marriage.Grow up.
@Thelondonbadger When did I ever argue that God has a place in government? Oh, that's right; I never did. Because he doesn't. Theocracies only cause problems. The separation between church and state should be very, very well defined.
@nnjhansen About English not being the official language: our country conducts business in English because that is the only way that we can actually conduct business. If we all spoke a multitude of languages, we wouldn't be able to communicate. But our religious pluralism isn't keeping us from communicating. We must connect to each other based on our shared humanity and not our shared religion.
I have to point this out. WHERE GOD IS MENTIONED does not emply Jesus. Many of these men were Masons and in order to be a mason you have to put your faith in a higher power. On that note, Beleiving in god does not mean you beleive in Jesus Christ. If you believe in Jesus you are a christian by definition.
if republican conservative call themselves christian why do they go to war to kill Gods children in another part of the world. why are republicans racist towards african americans...the kkk on their webpage call themselfs a christian...true christians dont call themselves christian they let God do the judgement...not themselves they noe its not their role in society to decide who is christian that includes themselves. I believe in God but the level of hypocracy in republicans saddens me.
America is no longer a Christian nation, thank God. We are a healthy, diverse crowd who learn from each other so together, we can make wise decisions.
Nature thrives in diversity. So does mankind.
Judaism must never become an independent state. They would be committing suicide. The Islamic extremists and Israel will continue to bankrupt America until America is too weak to help Israel.
Three giants named Justice, Martyr, and Supremacy were neighbors.
Justice and Supremacy clashed, of course. Supremacy, anxious to earn his name, attacked Justice in secret one night. When Martyr awoke, Justice, though wounded, retaliated, wounding Supremacy in front of Martyr.
"Rescue me, Martyr!" Supremacy cried.
Martyr paused and studied both. From Justice he learned mercy, and from Supremacy he learned humility. He helped them make peace.
The answer to the big question is a Cheshire Cat done-diddly done done did-it...
From a cave in Afghanistan with a small group of radical scriptwriters who broke out of "THE SIMPSON'S" Hollywood compound & were dumb enough to ask the obvious...?
Check with "HOMELAND SECURITY" because the threat level changes more often than M-Jackson's changed underpants while officially living & supposedly messing with underage kids (He hated scum who do that) so if you don't understand yet are you slow?
If you let religion lead you wind up with crusades and witch trials. There is a reason for seperation of church and state wether the church or its zealots like it or not.
First off, the founding fathers were athiests, deists, anarchists and a few christians. Second off, who gives a flying fuck what religion obama is? Bush was a christian and it didn't make him a good president... He used it to justify some really bad decisions if I recall correctly.. and I do.
@CloudsWolf None of the men who founded this nation were atheists, not a single one. None were anarchists. One, Franklin referred to himself as a Deist. The rest generally considered themselves to be Christians of one kind or another.
@judoyodan Washington, Adams, and Jefferson all considered themselves Christians. Franklin, as I stated considered himself a deist but his deism was one which concerned the nature of his belief in God (based on observation and reason) rather than the nature of the God he believed in.
@nnjhansen,lol...you are either delusional or ignorant.
Religion has a tendancy to inflict either and often both. You are obviously afflicted. I suggest you get out now, while you still have enough brains to blink your eyes.
@judoyodan Jefferson repeatedly declared himself to be a follower of Jesus, a Christian. Washington was a vestryman in his Episcopal church. Adams was a devout Congregationalist who turned toward unitarianism.
@nnjhansen Jefferson took out the miracles in the gospel and "created" his own version of the gospel. Oh and if they were all christian we wouldn't have freedom of religion and "One nation under god" in the pledge was added after WW2 and "In god we trust" on coins was added after the Civil War.
@nnjhansen Yes it is. What I said tells you that america probably wasn't found by Christians. And if it was the founders would have been low to moderate Christians.
@SNAKESOAP117 Nothing you said remotely suggests that "(A)merica probably wasn't found by Christians."
That this nation was founded by Christians is not even debatable.
As John Adams put it, "The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite . . . . And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity..."
@nnjhansen Yes low to moderate. If they were highly religious then there would be less religious freedom, and possibly no seperation from church and state.
@SNAKESOAP117 There is no correlation between the devoutness of a person's Christian beliefs and their belief in religious freedom. In fact, many people at the time believed that a lack of religious freedom harmed religion.
@nnjhansen "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it." -John Adams
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law." -Thomas Jefferson
"What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith." -Thomas Paine
@SNAKESOAP117 You really should read what you quote in context;
"Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, 'This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!!!' But in this exclamation I would have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean Hell.'
Do you know what the Common Law is? How is it relevant to this discussion?
@nnjhansen Well you seemed to talk about Mr.Adams and Mr.Jeffersons quotes but what do you think of Mr.Paines quote? And I think it is weird that modern Christians believe Thomas to be Christian but in his time priests and ministers called him an atheist! And did you know the words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, Creator, Divine, and God" aren't in the constitution except in exclusionary terms? They wan't to make it clear that no religion could claim to be the official, national religion.
@SNAKESOAP117 Two points about Paine and his (alleged) quote
1. You need to stretch the definition of founder to the extreme in order to classify Paine as one. He was not a member of the Continental Congress, the Constitutional Convention, the 1st Congress, or the leadership of the Continental Army. He help found nothing. He wrote an important pamphlet. His influence beyond that pamphlet is non-existent.
@SNAKESOAP117 I'm afraid I do not necessarily agree with either statement.
I am honestly not sure what you mean by too much religion and there are numerous examples where the existence of an official religion is not harmful at all.
@nnjhansen To much religion is a bad thing. That's why it isn't in the constitution. The founding fathers realized this and kept it out. We came to America because of religious persicution why would they base it on the religion that forced them to move?
@SNAKESOAP117 There is no evidence to support your assertion. The impetus for what you see as keeping religion out of the Constitution was not anti-religious but anti-federalist. The overriding concern of those who drafted the Constitution was keeping the states unified and the role of religion in the states varied widely. The religious test clause and the establishment clause both served to keep the new central government from infringing on what was seen as a state prerogative.
@SNAKESOAP117 "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens... And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion." - George Washington, Farewell Address
@SNAKESOAP117 "Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand." J. Adams, letter to Z. Adams, 21 June 1776
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." J. Adams, Letter to militia officers, 11 October 1798
@nnjhansen Then how come Christianity isn't in the constitution? The constitution is what we base our country on so if we are a christian nation that was based on christianity then how come it isn't in the constitution? And religion is powerful in politics hence George Bush Jr. And John Adams does not represent the entire founding fathers. How about some quote of Benjamin Franklin? James Madison or Thomas Jefferson on the Trinity?
@SNAKESOAP117 Because religion was a state issue and federal involvement would have created discord among the states. Are you aware that a number of states had established religions? That they maintained for decades after they ratified the Constitution?
“(C)an 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?" T. Jefferson
@SNAKESOAP117 "I've lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing Proofs I see of this Truth — That God governs in the Affairs of Men. ... We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that except the Lord build the House they labor in vain who build it. I firmly believe this, — and I also believe that without his concurring Aid, we shall succeed in this political Building no better than the Builders of Babel" - B. Franklin
@nnjhansen Why would god be in the affairs of man? That would mess with our free will. Right? Thomas Jeffersons quote is saying if we removed their only firm basis(Religion) "a CONVICTION IN THE MINDS OF THE PEOPLE that these liberties are a gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" He was respecting peoples belief but that doesn't prove this nation was built on Christianity. It was built on the Constitution.
@SNAKESOAP117 God's involvement in the affairs of men, what many of the founder's referred to as Providence does not interfere at all with any individual's free will. I do not understand why you believe it would.
Jefferson understood that maintaining the conviction that we get our rights from God was essential to the success of the system the Constitution created
Our nation was not built on the Constitution (it followed the founding of the nation by more than a decade) but on a set of principles
@SNAKESOAP117 The Declaration refers to the principles as 'self evident truths,' all men are created equal, they get rights from God, they institute governments to defend those rights.
Adams said they were the general principles of Christianity and British and American liberty.
@nnjhansen You keep using Adams switch it up. It says endowed by their creator. CREATOR it doesn't specifically say the Christian god because many of the founders were deist.
@SNAKESOAP117 To date, I have used Adams, Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin.
'Creator' is a synonym for God. The men who wrote and signed the document expressed the same thought using the word 'God' or used "Creator' to explicitly refer to God.
Of the men who founded this country, only Franklin referred to himself as a deist. His deism reflected the nature of his belief in God, not the nature of God. His God, like all the others, was the western, Judeo-Christian God.
@TheYDOICARE Jefferson was a prolific writer and yet in all those writings, never once did he declare himself to be a deist. He repeatedly stated he was a follower of Jesus, a Christian.
"He repeatedly stated he was a follower of Jesus, a Christian"
Not quite. For starters, Jesus was not a Christian (obviously).
And while Jefferson offered many contradictions, on this he was crystal clear - he believed in the teachings of Jesus MINUS the miracles and claims of supernaturalism.
But if you think a person can deny the resurection & divinity of Jesus but still be "Christian", the sure, Jefferson was a Christian. By that measure Richard Dawkins is a Christian.
@hazydavey Jefferson was a unitarian Christian. He believed in the central teaching of Jesus but rejected His divine nature. Such beliefs are as old as Christianity.
Dawkins is not a Christian as he rejects what Jesus said was His most important commandment.
Who never belonged to a Unitarian church and who happened to reject the divinity of Jesus? Ok, suit yourself. I've heard some generous definitions of what constitutes a "Christian" but that's a new one.
"He believed in the central teaching of Jesus but rejected His divine nature."
Which is just as true of many deists as well as nonbelievers. Heck, at one point Richard Dawkins even championed an "Atheists for Jesus" movement.
@SNAKESOAP117 To date, I have used Adams, Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin.
'Creator' is a synonym for God. The men who wrote and signed the document expressed the same thought using the word 'God' or used "Creator' to explicitly refer to God.
Of the men who founded this country, only Franklin referred to himself as a deist. His deism reflected the nature of his belief in God, not the nature of God. His God, like all the others, was the western, Judeo-Christian God.
I see you're still quote mining Adams yet leaving out the inconvenient parts.
Putting aside the treaty where Adams affirms the exact opposite of what you suggest here (the US was not, IN ANY SENSE founded on the Christian religion) and putting aside Adams own rejection of Christian doctrine.
Do you have any explanation for why Adams thought that the principles of English and American Liberty upon which the nation was founded were DISTINCT from the principles of Christianity?
@hazydavey The treaty you refer to does not say what you claim. It, unlike you distinguishes the government from the country.
I left nothing out of the quote that would serve to alter its meaning. Adams stated explicitly that the nation was founded on Christian principles , as well as those of American and English liberty. He saw no contradiction in these principles. You may as well ask why he distinguished English and American liberty.
@hazydavey The treaty states, "As the GOVERNMENT of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" (emphasis mine)
You stated, "the US was not, IN ANY SENSE founded on the Christian religion."
You failed to make the distinction the treaty makes.
"An accurate accout of Adams view. Yes?"
Yes and if we were discussing the role of those principles in the founding and I was faced with a character limit, I would use that quote, although properly ellipsed.
I realize the Treaty refers to the government (What other authority would a treaty have?)
One CAN distinguish between a government and a country (though the treaty does not) but here, it's meaningless. To speak of "foundational principles" refers to the foundation of the Republic - a form of government.
There's a reason the "Founders" have THAT title while earlier leaders like Roger Williams and William Bradford - though instrumental in the formation of "country" - do not.
@hazydavey Adams was not, in his letter to Jefferson, referring to the formation of a government but to the founding of the nation. These are distinct events in American history.
Neither Williams nor Bradford had anything to do with founding this country.
By your definition, neither Adams nor Jefferson are founders as they had nothing to do with founding our system of government.
"Neither Williams nor Bradford had anything to do with founding this country"
Sure they did. If they didn't, you'll have to tell us what you mean by "country."
And Adams and Jefferson were instrumental in founding our system of government. The Massachusetts Constitution drafted by Adams was extremely influential. And our First Amendment was based very directly on Jefferson's Statute of Religious Freedom.
@hazydavey Country, an independent sovereign entity. In this case the United States of America.
Neither Adams nor Jefferson had anything to do with founding our system of government. Neither was in the country during the Constitutional Convention.
You mean the MA Constitution which states, "It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe."?
Yup, THAT MA Constitution. Just because the framers of the US version made some very different choices hardly means that the MA Constitution - the 1st and in ways, a model - wasn't hugely influential.
To say that just because Adams and Jefferson weren't Framers or signatories of the Constitution means that they didn't have anything to do with our system of government is ludicrious.
Their input both prior to and during the ratification (& amendment) process was vital.
@hazydavey Neither Adams nor Jefferson is acknowledged as a founder because of their extremely limited (at best and I argue substantively non-existent) contribution to the drafting, ratification, or amending of the Constitution.
Their contributions were in the founding of the country. Their actions as members of the 2d Continental Congress and the creation of the Declaration of Independence.
Well you're dead wrong about the Constitution. For starters, there would be no First Amendment without Jefferson.
But since you imagine there is some vital distinction between the founding of the "country" and the founding of the Republic why not explain the difference?
And while you're at it, please tell us what these Christian principles ARE upon which the country was founded.
You repeat this mantra and quote-mine often, but you never identify the principles.
Well you're dead wrong about the Constitution. For starters, there would be no First Amendment without Jefferson.
But since you imagine there is some vital distinction between the founding of the "country" and the founding of the Republic why not explain the difference?
And while you're at it, please tell us what these Christian principles ARE upon which the country was founded.
You repeat this mantra and quote-mine often, but you never identify the principles.
"Yes and if we were discussing the role of those principles in the founding and I was faced with a character limit, I would use that quote, although properly ellipsed."
Then that would be equally disingenuous.
Imagine if I posted that quote as proof that Adams held the view that the principles upon which the Founders achieved independence were the secular principles of liberty. (Secular because in Adams view they are not Christian principles)
"I reject your premise that Adams believed the English and American principles of liberty were necessarily secular"
Fine, but on what basis?
That's certainly what was believed by the folks he mentions in that very same letter - Hume, Gibbon, Voltaire, Locke etc. (those who actually wrote about liberty)
...and that's why are they identified by Adams separately from "Christian Principles"
....and that's why it's misleading to piecemeal the quote as you did.
I don't understand why anyone would see him saying "America is not a Christian nation..." as a bad thing. Is there something wrong with wishing for equality for people of all views? Isn't that what our country was founded upon?
It's refreshing to hear a politician say we are not just a Christian nation. History has shown that most religious nations (Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc) are more often than not oppressive and imperialistic
"Everything you know is wrong Lloyd Pye" Youtube it. and watch it now or later..
When will everyone realize that the more you look at it.. the Government is corrupt, science is invalid, and religion is irrational? Please before you people call me an atheist pig, know that I fight for truth, so peace may venture, and love may follow..
@FaganRoberts It's not as obvious as you'd like to pretend it is. If I had a nickel for every time a religious Conservative described America as a "Christian nation" or as a "nation built on Christian values" I'd be rich enough to wipe my ass with singles from now until the day I died.
This is 2011, we are not a Christian theocracy.. we are a nation of individuals free to practice or not practice any faith we choose. We were meant to be that way, it is in the constitution in fact. This is why we can't have these obnoxious religious biased leaders. It sets the stage for persecution in the name of faith for both science and entire portions of society.
This is a very interesting video, and an interesting debate in the comments. I dm on the side of separation of state and government - There is no place for any religion or beliefs pertaining to a single person in government. I live in Australia, and we too have no official religion, being a very multicultural society. Obama has his head screwed on straight - unlike a certain Ms Gillard over here. I think that everyone has a right to practise religion, but it should never be forced upon others.
MissArtastic 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MissArtastic The idea that Obama has 'his head screwed on straight' is at odds with our experience since his inauguration.
The US is a Christian nation because of the character of our people, customs, and traditions. The right to freely exercise one's religion is guaranteed by our Constitution and is unaffected by acknowledging the Christian nature of the country.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
gorge bush did believe in god as well?
MrEngineerNasa 1 month ago
I'm GLAD Obama said that. Also, I absolutely LOVE Turkey. I've been there twice already! Go MERSIN:)
slesperado 1 month ago
Obama is correct, nailed it, I'm very glad he includes us non- believers as well!
makarr01 1 month ago
Traditionally and demographically the USA is a MOSTLY Christian nation. People just need to get over that. But in definition is it a Christian nation? Of course not.
Dr4usm 2 months ago
@Dr4usm How else would you define a Christian nation other than in its people and traditions?
nnjhansen 2 months ago
@nnjhansen A Christian nation could also be defined as a nation with a state religion or theocracy. That's actually the only thing.
Dr4usm 1 month ago
Obama is a horrible president. But it is true the nation is not a christian nation. The nation is a free for all to practice whatever they want. You cant have a first amendment and be a christian nation
ltajambi 2 months ago
Cherish your new president. He's about the only one who's ever had his head screwed on straight.
Jaacobbbbb 2 months ago
@Jaacobbbbb Wooow. Dude. You are so effin' wrong.
Dr4usm 2 months ago
thats right! we are NOT a christain/buddhist/muslim nation! we are a nation of PEACE AND GOOD WILL!
whatsgoingon07 2 months ago
@whatsgoingon07 If only @jungleman68 agreed. :/
WFSW32 2 months ago
Turkey is secular as well.
WFSW32 2 months ago
Christians are stupid
dickhead2905 3 months ago
America is obviously not a Christian nation.
"Love thy neighbor." ~ Jesus Christ
No; America gives $15 million per day of our tax money to the Zionazis so they can "ethnically cleanse" the Palestinian natives off the neighboring land, then build new Jewish settlements on top of the blood of their victims.
eastariel 3 months ago
@eastariel so what? that's a good thing.
jungleman68 3 months ago
@jungleman68 Go back to Jurassic Park, T-Rex, where you belong. And quit biting the neighbors.
eastariel 3 months ago
@eastariel no. I'll help israel. or help the us annex it.
jungleman68 3 months ago
@jungleman68 Oh ... so you're going to Israel instead of Jurassic Park? Do you think you'll feel right at home there with the zionazis?
eastariel 3 months ago
@eastariel I probably would but i'm not going there. I'll send money for a couple more bullets.
jungleman68 3 months ago
@jungleman68 That's genocide. You're no different from Hitler, nazi.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 go fuck yourself. I'm smarter than hitler. hitler killed smart people - dumb move for germany.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 No, you're just like Hitler. No different. You both hate a race and believe in killing them. No different.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 ok fine. hitler kills smart people, and like him, I want to kill dumb people.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 So... all Jews are smart? And all Palestinians are dumb?
Nope. That's quite prejudiced.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 I find generalizing to be very useful. Yes, I'm racist. palestinians on average are dumber than black americans ~ IQ 85. Why do you think we are so careful about the african immigrants we let in? because most black africans are stupid (and aids has something to do with it). the smart african countries - south africa and kenya - do the same thing. bring in all the smart africans and leave the dumb ones outside.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 AIDS has nothing to do with IQ. Having a low IQ has to do with getting AIDS, as they don't understand they'll catch AIDS unless they're careful.
Don't be racist. Generalizing is awful. I could generalize and say all Christians are retarded racists who don't believe in evolution based soley on the fact that the KKK exists.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 I don't think you understood. Our immigration policy regarding africans is based on IQ or the prevalance of AIDS as in we don't want infected people coming in and a lot are turned down. Generalizing is very useful. it prevents us from wasting money on people who can't improve anymore (including our own low IQ kids). Get rid of that time wasting liberal thinking. Racism was favored by evolution for a reason. Stereotypes exist based on facts.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 There are no intellectual differences between races.
If you are so racist, why aren't you racist to Jews? They don't believe in evolution so they must have low IQs.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 which jews are you talking about? Never met a jew who actually believed that crap. Black people, arabs, aryan/indo-iranian people, southeast-asian people, and indiginous mexicans/ all native american tribes are stupid. aboriginals are the dumbest by far. only white people and north-east asians are smart. You're an ostrich or one of these dumb groups. so am I and I admit that they are stupid.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 Jews believe in the Garden of Eden and don't believe in evolution. I'm a Native American and I have abouve aerage intelligence for anybody, actually. Intelligence has to do with environment and not biology. Stop being racist.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 "Jews" today are agnostic/atheist and are only culturally Jewish. stop being dumb. oh wait, you can't - Native American IQ - 84. lower than blacks. Yet you still blame your poverty and inability to find jobs on the white man. so you live in the US, go through the same education, and still don't have a high IQ. Biology is responsible for about 2/3 of a person's IQ including in the womb. you're just an ostrich.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 Jews are Jewish. Herp de derp. And if you are going by the fact that they're Semitic then you must support Arabs too. theyre both Semitic. The only reason alot of Jews are white is due to the diaspora. They immigrated to Europe and had children relatively early leading to them lowering their pigmentation rather quickly.
I have an IQ of 130+ actually. And it's environment. Not biology. I grew up in a healthy non-alcoholic environment.
And prove African immigration is not based on IQ.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 if you had a 130+ IQ, you wouldn't make such an irrelevant statement. you're still an ostrich for denying facts.
"And prove that African immigration is not based on IQ."
I am clearly showing that it IS.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 It's not true. Prove that IQ ISN'T based on environment.
Ang give me proof of our "African immigration policy."
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 again you're not listening. Education does not affect IQ but nutrition does. And people here have plenty. First, look up IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Then look up "What Constitute's a Person's IQ?" on howstuffworks. It clearly shows that heavy studying only increases IQ temporarily by a small amount. Thirdly, look up any statistics on african immigrants. They are the highest IQ group in America.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 So races aren't born stupid. They don't have the necessary nutrtional intake. That's more of a nationality trait and not a racial one. The smart Africans are the only one's who can afford to come here. That's why they have the highest IQs. And they teach their children to work hard like they had to.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 no, the wealthy africans are the smart ones. I don't believe you have and IQ of 130+. "Nationality" trait? Why are the normal poor white people in South Africa smarter than the normal poor black people? your arguments are becoming weaker and weaker. They do have the necessary nutritional intake. African diets are some of the most nutritional in the world. Just look at Ethiopian food. With enough food, they'd only be a 75 or so. Stop mixing political correctness with science.
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 The wealthy Africans are the ones who can afford an education and a nutritional diet. What white people? The ones in South Africa? How ols are they? Did they get an eeducation before the apartheid ended? Then yeah, they'll have a higher education because the natives were discriminated against.
Read Guns, Germs, and Steel. Good book. You might understand this simple matter by doing so.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 read studies of Ashkenazi intelligence. then maybe YOU will understand. Biology is not politically correct and does not follow the saying that "All men are created equal."
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 It has to do with environment. Certain cognitive traits can be inherited, yes, but that doesn't automatically make someone intelligent. Read Guns, Germs, and Steel. It's not that difficult of a read.
And the reason they are more intelligent is because unlike the the Oriental Jews and most Arabs they believe in science and teach their children about it earlier. Most aren't that religious.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 it doesn't take human evolution into account. human intelligence is also an effect of necessity just like ashkenazi evolution. no, that is not the reason. I already gave the source in IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Look up Botswana, Namibia, and Zimbabwe on a map, then their GDP, then IQ. Do the same with Vietnam, Thailand, and Cambodia. Vietnamese have a highly mixed background with the Chinese. Then do Haiti and Jamaica. Then israel and the west bank which are really similar culturally
jungleman68 2 months ago
@jungleman68 The Palestinians suffer discrimination in Israel, especially with the mini-Apartheid. The Thai people's collective IQ can be blamed on an iodine deficiency. Botswana, Nambia, Zimbabwe, Veitnam, and Cambodia, along with Haiti and Jamaica are poor countries. Poor people can't afford a good education which is what the Ashkenazi Jew bankers could afford, because they were rich.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 you did not even look at it did you? Well, since you won't actually look at these things, I'll just list a few more examples and leave it at that. North Korea (starving) and South Korea, Hong Kong PRC and Taiwan, fragile X syndrome. Any argument you make after this is invalid because you did not look at the evidence. Small example - Serbia's IQ is 89 and so is Indonesia's. lower GDPs than botswana. Like I said, until you read it, any argument is invalid. west bank had plenty of oppurtuni
jungleman68 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jungleman68 You are the one who does not understand. You don't realize that economics has to do with education.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@eastariel "Palestinians" "native land" whhat were you smoking when you came up with that?
AbuAvital 2 months ago
@AbuAvital They have just as much of a right to be there as whites do in America.
WFSW32 2 months ago
@WFSW32 true and no one disputes that
AbuAvital 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Of course America doesn't consider itself to be a Christian nation!
"Love thy neighbor." ~ Jesus Christ
eastariel 3 months ago
umm hes right. so whats the big deal
MegaLink117 3 months ago
"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel." - Thomas Paine - Age Of Reason
max2right 3 months ago
“Question with boldness even the existence of god because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear” Thomas Jefferson.
- "The United States is not a Christian nation any more than it is a Jewish or a Mohammadan nation" John Adams
"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life, I absenteed myself from Christian assemblies." Ben Franklin
max2right 3 months ago
@max2right Jefferson was not advocating a disbelief in God but a belief based on reason and observation. His belief in God is unquestionable and formed the foundation of his political beliefs.
The Adams quote is a fake, as is the one attributed to Franklin.
nnjhansen 3 months ago
@nnjhansen You are probably right about that Adams quote here is the correct version. The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.Treaty of Tripoli, article 11 signed by John Adams and ratified by congress. Here's another Jefferson quote Jefferson. –“But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.?
max2right 3 months ago
@max2right Here are a few others, "The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite . . . . And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity..." _ John Adams letter to Jefferson, 28 June 1813.
nnjhansen 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@max2right “(C)an 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?" - Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia
nnjhansen 3 months ago
@nnjhansen I do not accept your judbment on Franklin's quote. “Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. I had hoped that liberal and enlightened thought would have reconciled the Christians so that their [not our?] religious fights would not endanger the peace of Society.? Letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792 G. Washington
max2right 3 months ago
@max2right Then find a citation for the Franklin quote.
"it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes" Washington, 1st Inaugural
nnjhansen 3 months ago
@nnjhansen Many of the founding fathers were deists. In the above quote Christianity isn’t mentioned nor is it in the Constitution. Be as dismissive as you chose but, this is a christian nation by population not by government and we all can take comfort in that. The moral values demonstrated in the bible are reprehensible.
max2right 3 months ago
@max2right Of the men who founded this nation, only Franklin ever referred to himself as a deist (and his deism was one which reflected the nature of his belief in God not the nature of God). The others generally considered themselves Christians of one sort or another.
This is a Christian nation in people, custom, and tradition.
nnjhansen 3 months ago
@nnjhansen But, not by government. This is a secular nation by government. Forever the two are seperated.
James Madison -“Separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe.”
Religion is dangerous.
max2right 3 months ago
@max2right "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.... And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion."
nnjhansen 3 months ago
Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel. - Thomas Paine - Age Of Reason
max2right 3 months ago
@max2right Paine's views on religion are well known but irrelevant. he played no role in founding this nation apart from authoring "Common Sense." That pamphlet does not speak of religion at all.
nnjhansen 3 months ago
@nnjhansen Paine's views are just as relevent as anyone's. The fact that you don't like them or want to admit them doesn't make them irrelevent.
max2right 3 months ago
@max2right Paine's views are not as relevant as those of the men who founded the country. He was not a member of the Continental Congress, the Constitutional Convention, the 1st Congress, or a leader of the Continental Army. He was the author of an influential pamphlet, his relevance is limited to the ideas contained in that pamphlet.
nnjhansen 3 months ago
check au.org/resources/history/old-docs/joel-barlow-and-the-treaty.pdf
hgeny 3 months ago
Then why is your motto "In God we trust"?
tontsa911 3 months ago
@tontsa911 Because in the 1950s, the retarded republicans had Socalismaphobia , which is a associated with secularism...So they decided to stand behind Jebus and the fairy tales of the bible.
KingofTheMafia 3 months ago 11
@tontsa911 Actually our official motto is "E Pluribus Unum" ... Out of many, one.
"In God We Trust" was a part of the Red Scare and I wish we could get over it.
PleaseThinkHarder 3 months ago
@PleaseThinkHarder Actually, "In God We Trust" is our official, legal national motto. See 36 U.S.C. § 302
nnjhansen 2 months ago
@nnjhansen It wasn't always so. It was E Pluribus Unum until it was changed to In God We Trust. Check out the Treaty of Tripoli. Straight from John Adams.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman Whether it was always so is of no consequence, it is now.
The Treaty of Tripoli is no more relevant to this discussion than is the fact that the Treaty of Paris (also signed by Adams) was made "in the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity."
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen Just because Adams signed the treaty that said that phrase somewhere does not mean that Adams believed that the USA was a Christian nation. I actually just looked at a scan of the signature page on wikimedia and nowhere on the page does it mention God. Adams (and Hartley, Franklin, and Jay) simply affixed their signatures and stamped their wax seals.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman Adams had more to do with the drafting of the Paris treaty than he did with Tripoli. He was a member of the negotiators in Paris, he took no part in drafting Tripoli.
"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite . . . . And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity..." letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen Saying that we were founded on the "general" (GENERAL!) principles of Christianity does not, in any way, make us a Christian nation. That doesn't concerning only the morality of Christianity, and not any other of the numerous aspects of Christianity (the dogma, the supernatural beliefs, etc.).
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman The fact that our people, customs, and traditions are, and always have been, overwhelmingly Christian makes us a Christian nation.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen It makes us a Christian nation in the sense that Christians are our majority. But there is nothing that officially makes our nation a Christian nation. We do not have an official religion.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman No, we don't have an official religion but that is an awfully narrow definition. We are clearly an English speaking nation but that is not codified in law either.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen I don't care how narrow the definition is. The pragmatic implication of that definition is that we still cannot create laws based on exclusively Christian values (or those of any other religion, for that matter). And we cannot deport ourselves in our diplomatic efforts as a Christian country, because our country is not officially Christian. I don't live in a theocracy; I live in a secular republic.
And to the matter about speaking English: continued in my next reply (character count)
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman We can base laws on what ever we want. Our freedom to exercise our religion does not stop at the ballot box or even the statehouse. There is no prohibition on basing laws on a moral code and no prohibition on basing that moral code on religious values.
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." - George Washington
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen We should by no means base laws on whatever (it's one word, not two) we want. Legislators cannot carry their own personal prejudices to the assembly room, for they represent the entire country. That's why our method of government is called "representative government."
Also — a good tenet to live by is this: people can do whatever they want, as long as they do not interfere with the well-being or freedom of other people to also do whatever they want.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman Thank YT typo police.
Legislators are not elected to represent the entire country, they are elected to represent their district or state. What you classify as their 'prejudices,' those who elect them may well consider shared values and be precisely the reason they sent that person to represent them.
Your tenet, good or ill, is not to be confused with a constitutional imperative.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen I was speaking generally and in the plural: legislators, as a group, do represent the entire country.
A legislator may not act in solely his own interest. He must take into account the general wishes of the district or state he represents. Example: Senator thinks gays are an abomination. But state wants gay marriage. He must vote for gay marriage. It's just like the Electoral College — they are (mostly) bound to the wishes of those whom they represent, and not just their own wishes.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman Actually you are wrong. Representatives are not bound to act in accordance with the wishes of their constituents at all. They are supposed to vote according to their own conscience and then present themselves to the voters at the end of their term. That is why many voters find a candidate's values and beliefs so important, as they guide their votes on issues that were unanticipated.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen I disagree. For a representative to selfishly go against the wishes of those whom he represents is irresponsible and very un-conscientious. It is his paid job to convey the wishes of the community, for his goals and the goals of his community are one and the same.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman You are confusing our system of government with a democracy. We elect representatives to office, the act in accordance with their conscience, if we are dissatisfied we elect someone else the next time.
In your system, why have representatives at all? Why not just have plebiscites?
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@gregakinman Im sorry but its constitution 1st then your own selfish ideas on how the world should be 2nd.You have elected this man to represent you,not to be your puppet. Theres a subtle difference and also why you elect a president yet he does not put all of the policys you wish into place as most are stupid for the country as a whole.Such as prayer in schools,which prayer?who says a muslim school cant force a christian to pray to allah or he dont graduate.See why god has no bussiness in gov?
Thelondonbadger 1 month ago
@gregakinman The constitution is there so you dont get majority rule and you keep the rights of the individual from persecution by majority.Jesus was killed by the popular majority who were pagans,always remember this.Your community may have problems an your representative is there to adress them.Just because you believe your point is the best doesnt mean it is for your entire state.Otherwise slavery would be back,no poor man gets welfare an no interacial marriage.Grow up.
Thelondonbadger 1 month ago
@Thelondonbadger When did I ever argue that God has a place in government? Oh, that's right; I never did. Because he doesn't. Theocracies only cause problems. The separation between church and state should be very, very well defined.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@nnjhansen And about my tenet; I believe that all law should be shaped around it. I'm not the only one who thinks this way. Not by a long shot.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@gregakinman Whether you or others believe it is irrelevant to whether the Constitution requires it.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen But do you not agree that it makes sense? It makes so much sense that the Constitution SHOULD require it!
gregakinman 1 month ago
@nnjhansen About English not being the official language: our country conducts business in English because that is the only way that we can actually conduct business. If we all spoke a multitude of languages, we wouldn't be able to communicate. But our religious pluralism isn't keeping us from communicating. We must connect to each other based on our shared humanity and not our shared religion.
gregakinman 1 month ago
@Nnjah or whatever your name is.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it always to be kept alive. -Thomas Jefferson (1743 - 1826)
That in itself is a symbol of anarchy.
CloudsWolf 4 months ago
I have to point this out. WHERE GOD IS MENTIONED does not emply Jesus. Many of these men were Masons and in order to be a mason you have to put your faith in a higher power. On that note, Beleiving in god does not mean you beleive in Jesus Christ. If you believe in Jesus you are a christian by definition.
CloudsWolf 4 months ago
if republican conservative call themselves christian why do they go to war to kill Gods children in another part of the world. why are republicans racist towards african americans...the kkk on their webpage call themselfs a christian...true christians dont call themselves christian they let God do the judgement...not themselves they noe its not their role in society to decide who is christian that includes themselves. I believe in God but the level of hypocracy in republicans saddens me.
Flash02021990 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hint about the dominant traits in each religion:
Justice = Islam
Supremacy = Judaism
Martyr = Christianity
America is no longer a Christian nation, thank God. We are a healthy, diverse crowd who learn from each other so together, we can make wise decisions.
Nature thrives in diversity. So does mankind.
Judaism must never become an independent state. They would be committing suicide. The Islamic extremists and Israel will continue to bankrupt America until America is too weak to help Israel.
eastariel 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THREE GIANTS
Three giants named Justice, Martyr, and Supremacy were neighbors.
Justice and Supremacy clashed, of course. Supremacy, anxious to earn his name, attacked Justice in secret one night. When Martyr awoke, Justice, though wounded, retaliated, wounding Supremacy in front of Martyr.
"Rescue me, Martyr!" Supremacy cried.
Martyr paused and studied both. From Justice he learned mercy, and from Supremacy he learned humility. He helped them make peace.
Then they changed their names.
eastariel 4 months ago
The answer to the big question is a Cheshire Cat done-diddly done done did-it...
From a cave in Afghanistan with a small group of radical scriptwriters who broke out of "THE SIMPSON'S" Hollywood compound & were dumb enough to ask the obvious...?
Check with "HOMELAND SECURITY" because the threat level changes more often than M-Jackson's changed underpants while officially living & supposedly messing with underage kids (He hated scum who do that) so if you don't understand yet are you slow?
spacelizardlaw 4 months ago
Religions are entirely manifestations of human ignorance.
Education is the key to eradication.
judoyodan 4 months ago
Finally, I agree with Obama.
SteinUndStahl666 4 months ago
If you let religion lead you wind up with crusades and witch trials. There is a reason for seperation of church and state wether the church or its zealots like it or not.
CloudsWolf 4 months ago
First off, the founding fathers were athiests, deists, anarchists and a few christians. Second off, who gives a flying fuck what religion obama is? Bush was a christian and it didn't make him a good president... He used it to justify some really bad decisions if I recall correctly.. and I do.
CloudsWolf 4 months ago
@CloudsWolf None of the men who founded this nation were atheists, not a single one. None were anarchists. One, Franklin referred to himself as a Deist. The rest generally considered themselves to be Christians of one kind or another.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen, you obviously know nothing about ANY of the group of men referred to as the "founding fathers."
Amoung others, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine were not Christian.
Even John Adams did not accept the "divinity" of the Jesus Christ character.
judoyodan 4 months ago
@judoyodan Washington, Adams, and Jefferson all considered themselves Christians. Franklin, as I stated considered himself a deist but his deism was one which concerned the nature of his belief in God (based on observation and reason) rather than the nature of the God he believed in.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen,lol...you are either delusional or ignorant.
Religion has a tendancy to inflict either and often both. You are obviously afflicted. I suggest you get out now, while you still have enough brains to blink your eyes.
judoyodan 4 months ago
@judoyodan Jefferson repeatedly declared himself to be a follower of Jesus, a Christian. Washington was a vestryman in his Episcopal church. Adams was a devout Congregationalist who turned toward unitarianism.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen Jefferson took out the miracles in the gospel and "created" his own version of the gospel. Oh and if they were all christian we wouldn't have freedom of religion and "One nation under god" in the pledge was added after WW2 and "In god we trust" on coins was added after the Civil War.
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago in playlist More videos from FFreeThinker
@SNAKESOAP117 Are you familiar with the concept of a non-sequitur?
None of what you cite is remotely relevant to the conclusion you are drawing.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen Yes it is. What I said tells you that america probably wasn't found by Christians. And if it was the founders would have been low to moderate Christians.
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 Nothing you said remotely suggests that "(A)merica probably wasn't found by Christians."
That this nation was founded by Christians is not even debatable.
As John Adams put it, "The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite . . . . And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity..."
Low to moderate Christians??
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen Yes low to moderate. If they were highly religious then there would be less religious freedom, and possibly no seperation from church and state.
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 There is no correlation between the devoutness of a person's Christian beliefs and their belief in religious freedom. In fact, many people at the time believed that a lack of religious freedom harmed religion.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it." -John Adams
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law." -Thomas Jefferson
"What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith." -Thomas Paine
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 You really should read what you quote in context;
"Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, 'This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!!!' But in this exclamation I would have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean Hell.'
Do you know what the Common Law is? How is it relevant to this discussion?
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen Well you seemed to talk about Mr.Adams and Mr.Jeffersons quotes but what do you think of Mr.Paines quote? And I think it is weird that modern Christians believe Thomas to be Christian but in his time priests and ministers called him an atheist! And did you know the words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, Creator, Divine, and God" aren't in the constitution except in exclusionary terms? They wan't to make it clear that no religion could claim to be the official, national religion.
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 Two points about Paine and his (alleged) quote
1. You need to stretch the definition of founder to the extreme in order to classify Paine as one. He was not a member of the Continental Congress, the Constitutional Convention, the 1st Congress, or the leadership of the Continental Army. He help found nothing. He wrote an important pamphlet. His influence beyond that pamphlet is non-existent.
2. I cannot find where that quote came from.
The issue of religion was left to the states
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen O.k. But I think we both can agree to much religion is bad and a country that has an official religion can be bad.
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 I'm afraid I do not necessarily agree with either statement.
I am honestly not sure what you mean by too much religion and there are numerous examples where the existence of an official religion is not harmful at all.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen To much religion is a bad thing. That's why it isn't in the constitution. The founding fathers realized this and kept it out. We came to America because of religious persicution why would they base it on the religion that forced them to move?
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 There is no evidence to support your assertion. The impetus for what you see as keeping religion out of the Constitution was not anti-religious but anti-federalist. The overriding concern of those who drafted the Constitution was keeping the states unified and the role of religion in the states varied widely. The religious test clause and the establishment clause both served to keep the new central government from infringing on what was seen as a state prerogative.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens... And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion." - George Washington, Farewell Address
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 "Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand." J. Adams, letter to Z. Adams, 21 June 1776
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." J. Adams, Letter to militia officers, 11 October 1798
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen Then how come Christianity isn't in the constitution? The constitution is what we base our country on so if we are a christian nation that was based on christianity then how come it isn't in the constitution? And religion is powerful in politics hence George Bush Jr. And John Adams does not represent the entire founding fathers. How about some quote of Benjamin Franklin? James Madison or Thomas Jefferson on the Trinity?
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 Because religion was a state issue and federal involvement would have created discord among the states. Are you aware that a number of states had established religions? That they maintained for decades after they ratified the Constitution?
“(C)an 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?" T. Jefferson
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 "I've lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing Proofs I see of this Truth — That God governs in the Affairs of Men. ... We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that except the Lord build the House they labor in vain who build it. I firmly believe this, — and I also believe that without his concurring Aid, we shall succeed in this political Building no better than the Builders of Babel" - B. Franklin
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen Why would god be in the affairs of man? That would mess with our free will. Right? Thomas Jeffersons quote is saying if we removed their only firm basis(Religion) "a CONVICTION IN THE MINDS OF THE PEOPLE that these liberties are a gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" He was respecting peoples belief but that doesn't prove this nation was built on Christianity. It was built on the Constitution.
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 God's involvement in the affairs of men, what many of the founder's referred to as Providence does not interfere at all with any individual's free will. I do not understand why you believe it would.
Jefferson understood that maintaining the conviction that we get our rights from God was essential to the success of the system the Constitution created
Our nation was not built on the Constitution (it followed the founding of the nation by more than a decade) but on a set of principles
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen What were the principles?
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 The Declaration refers to the principles as 'self evident truths,' all men are created equal, they get rights from God, they institute governments to defend those rights.
Adams said they were the general principles of Christianity and British and American liberty.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen You keep using Adams switch it up. It says endowed by their creator. CREATOR it doesn't specifically say the Christian god because many of the founders were deist.
SNAKESOAP117 4 months ago
@SNAKESOAP117 To date, I have used Adams, Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin.
'Creator' is a synonym for God. The men who wrote and signed the document expressed the same thought using the word 'God' or used "Creator' to explicitly refer to God.
Of the men who founded this country, only Franklin referred to himself as a deist. His deism reflected the nature of his belief in God, not the nature of God. His God, like all the others, was the western, Judeo-Christian God.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen There are so many inaccuracies in this short comment I don't even know where to start
kamand05 4 months ago
@kamand05 The reason you are at a loss is because there are no inaccuracies.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
Thomas Jefferson was a deist.
TheYDOICARE 4 months ago
@TheYDOICARE Jefferson was a prolific writer and yet in all those writings, never once did he declare himself to be a deist. He repeatedly stated he was a follower of Jesus, a Christian.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
"He repeatedly stated he was a follower of Jesus, a Christian"
Not quite. For starters, Jesus was not a Christian (obviously).
And while Jefferson offered many contradictions, on this he was crystal clear - he believed in the teachings of Jesus MINUS the miracles and claims of supernaturalism.
But if you think a person can deny the resurection & divinity of Jesus but still be "Christian", the sure, Jefferson was a Christian. By that measure Richard Dawkins is a Christian.
hazydavey 4 months ago
@hazydavey Jefferson was a unitarian Christian. He believed in the central teaching of Jesus but rejected His divine nature. Such beliefs are as old as Christianity.
Dawkins is not a Christian as he rejects what Jesus said was His most important commandment.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
"Jefferson was a unitarian Christian".
Who never belonged to a Unitarian church and who happened to reject the divinity of Jesus? Ok, suit yourself. I've heard some generous definitions of what constitutes a "Christian" but that's a new one.
"He believed in the central teaching of Jesus but rejected His divine nature."
Which is just as true of many deists as well as nonbelievers. Heck, at one point Richard Dawkins even championed an "Atheists for Jesus" movement.
hazydavey 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hazydavey "Who never belonged to a Unitarian church and who happened to reject the divinity of Jesus?"
That is why I used "u" instead of "U" to describe his beliefs. Unitarian belief is one that rejects the divinity of Christ.
A nonbeliever or a deist believer in an impersonal and uninvolved God would not meet Jefferson's definition of a follower of Jesus.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SNAKESOAP117 To date, I have used Adams, Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin.
'Creator' is a synonym for God. The men who wrote and signed the document expressed the same thought using the word 'God' or used "Creator' to explicitly refer to God.
Of the men who founded this country, only Franklin referred to himself as a deist. His deism reflected the nature of his belief in God, not the nature of God. His God, like all the others, was the western, Judeo-Christian God.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
I see you're still quote mining Adams yet leaving out the inconvenient parts.
Putting aside the treaty where Adams affirms the exact opposite of what you suggest here (the US was not, IN ANY SENSE founded on the Christian religion) and putting aside Adams own rejection of Christian doctrine.
Do you have any explanation for why Adams thought that the principles of English and American Liberty upon which the nation was founded were DISTINCT from the principles of Christianity?
hazydavey 4 months ago
@hazydavey The treaty you refer to does not say what you claim. It, unlike you distinguishes the government from the country.
I left nothing out of the quote that would serve to alter its meaning. Adams stated explicitly that the nation was founded on Christian principles , as well as those of American and English liberty. He saw no contradiction in these principles. You may as well ask why he distinguished English and American liberty.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
"The treaty ...distinguishes the government from the country."
No, it doesn't. The distinction is your own. The Treaty says exactly what it says.
"I left nothing out of the quote that would serve to alter its meaning."
Sure you did. I can play game too and present the following "quote" from Adams:
"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence, were … the general principles of English and American liberty"
An accurate accout of Adams view. Yes?
hazydavey 4 months ago
@hazydavey The treaty states, "As the GOVERNMENT of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" (emphasis mine)
You stated, "the US was not, IN ANY SENSE founded on the Christian religion."
You failed to make the distinction the treaty makes.
"An accurate accout of Adams view. Yes?"
Yes and if we were discussing the role of those principles in the founding and I was faced with a character limit, I would use that quote, although properly ellipsed.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
I realize the Treaty refers to the government (What other authority would a treaty have?)
One CAN distinguish between a government and a country (though the treaty does not) but here, it's meaningless. To speak of "foundational principles" refers to the foundation of the Republic - a form of government.
There's a reason the "Founders" have THAT title while earlier leaders like Roger Williams and William Bradford - though instrumental in the formation of "country" - do not.
hazydavey 4 months ago
@hazydavey Adams was not, in his letter to Jefferson, referring to the formation of a government but to the founding of the nation. These are distinct events in American history.
Neither Williams nor Bradford had anything to do with founding this country.
By your definition, neither Adams nor Jefferson are founders as they had nothing to do with founding our system of government.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
"Neither Williams nor Bradford had anything to do with founding this country"
Sure they did. If they didn't, you'll have to tell us what you mean by "country."
And Adams and Jefferson were instrumental in founding our system of government. The Massachusetts Constitution drafted by Adams was extremely influential. And our First Amendment was based very directly on Jefferson's Statute of Religious Freedom.
hazydavey 4 months ago
@hazydavey Country, an independent sovereign entity. In this case the United States of America.
Neither Adams nor Jefferson had anything to do with founding our system of government. Neither was in the country during the Constitutional Convention.
You mean the MA Constitution which states, "It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe."?
That MA Constitution?
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
Yup, THAT MA Constitution. Just because the framers of the US version made some very different choices hardly means that the MA Constitution - the 1st and in ways, a model - wasn't hugely influential.
To say that just because Adams and Jefferson weren't Framers or signatories of the Constitution means that they didn't have anything to do with our system of government is ludicrious.
Their input both prior to and during the ratification (& amendment) process was vital.
hazydavey 4 months ago
@hazydavey Neither Adams nor Jefferson is acknowledged as a founder because of their extremely limited (at best and I argue substantively non-existent) contribution to the drafting, ratification, or amending of the Constitution.
Their contributions were in the founding of the country. Their actions as members of the 2d Continental Congress and the creation of the Declaration of Independence.
To argue otherwise is absurd.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
Well you're dead wrong about the Constitution. For starters, there would be no First Amendment without Jefferson.
But since you imagine there is some vital distinction between the founding of the "country" and the founding of the Republic why not explain the difference?
And while you're at it, please tell us what these Christian principles ARE upon which the country was founded.
You repeat this mantra and quote-mine often, but you never identify the principles.
hazydavey 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nnjhansen
Well you're dead wrong about the Constitution. For starters, there would be no First Amendment without Jefferson.
But since you imagine there is some vital distinction between the founding of the "country" and the founding of the Republic why not explain the difference?
And while you're at it, please tell us what these Christian principles ARE upon which the country was founded.
You repeat this mantra and quote-mine often, but you never identify the principles.
hazydavey 4 months ago
@nnjhansen
"Yes and if we were discussing the role of those principles in the founding and I was faced with a character limit, I would use that quote, although properly ellipsed."
Then that would be equally disingenuous.
Imagine if I posted that quote as proof that Adams held the view that the principles upon which the Founders achieved independence were the secular principles of liberty. (Secular because in Adams view they are not Christian principles)
You would be howling.
hazydavey 4 months ago
@hazydavey I reject your premise that Adams believed the English and American principles of liberty were necessarily secular.
nnjhansen 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nnjhansen
"I reject your premise that Adams believed the English and American principles of liberty were necessarily secular"
Fine, but on what basis?
That's certainly what was believed by the folks he mentions in that very same letter - Hume, Gibbon, Voltaire, Locke etc. (those who actually wrote about liberty)
...and that's why are they identified by Adams separately from "Christian Principles"
....and that's why it's misleading to piecemeal the quote as you did.
hazydavey 4 months ago
Obama is a closet atheist.
Yallniggasbetrollin 5 months ago
I don't understand why anyone would see him saying "America is not a Christian nation..." as a bad thing. Is there something wrong with wishing for equality for people of all views? Isn't that what our country was founded upon?
TrEvADiZasTA 5 months ago
It's refreshing to hear a politician say we are not just a Christian nation. History has shown that most religious nations (Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc) are more often than not oppressive and imperialistic
zombiefan011 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Everything you know is wrong Lloyd Pye" Youtube it. and watch it now or later..
When will everyone realize that the more you look at it.. the Government is corrupt, science is invalid, and religion is irrational? Please before you people call me an atheist pig, know that I fight for truth, so peace may venture, and love may follow..
Light and Love..
TheHeretic333 5 months ago
Barky is an idiot, but he's spot on with regard to America NOT being a Christian nation. Never was, never will be. Barky is just stating the obvious.
FaganRoberts 5 months ago
@FaganRoberts It's not as obvious as you'd like to pretend it is. If I had a nickel for every time a religious Conservative described America as a "Christian nation" or as a "nation built on Christian values" I'd be rich enough to wipe my ass with singles from now until the day I died.
PhobicOne 5 months ago
@PhobicOne LOL! Good point.
FaganRoberts 4 months ago
This is 2011, we are not a Christian theocracy.. we are a nation of individuals free to practice or not practice any faith we choose. We were meant to be that way, it is in the constitution in fact. This is why we can't have these obnoxious religious biased leaders. It sets the stage for persecution in the name of faith for both science and entire portions of society.
leonheart00 5 months ago
It is absurd that despite Barack Obama points out Modern Turkey is likewise founded on similar secular prin