The question is real dumb... Did they want...(dykes or whatever)? What they did want is EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL. It's bigoted morons who make videos of personal opinions, use historical figures and events - with no substantiating facts - and draw his own twisted conclusions from what is not said. Oh, as for equal rights, the debate at the time was not gay vs. straight - that wasn't even an issue. It was whether or not blacks could be considered real people. Sad, but true (research: 3/5 compromise)
I liked your video but your analogy of the driving laws shows you've missed John Adams' point. The point is not whether we would feel more free with or without driving laws. A closer analogy would be that if suddenly no traffic laws existed, an intrinsic morality would still exist in "law abiding" citizens to continue to drive safely and properly. Those who lacked that inner moral fortitude would drive erratically and dangerously. It is because of this type people that law is required.
@m904begley Flawed argument.If streets are privatley owned you can tell dangerous drivers to drive on your terms or they cant use your street.If you make unjust laws for your street people in your community can deny you business with them.The free market that the founders intendet will regulate itself without stupid laws.
@affilinet PART1 - Private ownership and free market regulation are irrelevant. It is nearly impossible to expound on ideas in 500 characters or less, so I will do it in multiple posts. At 2:00 tshoebat misinterprets a quote by John Adams as meaning, "Without morals there is no freedom," and then he essentially asks, "Would you feel more free or less free without laws?" That entirely misses Adams' point. A more accurate interpretation would be, "Freedom cannot stand without morality."
@affilinet PART2 - John Adams also said, "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." In other words, he was saying that the freedoms provided by our Constitution cannot work for an immoral society. Morality is simply defined as having the character to do what you SHOULD do instead of what you have the FREEDOM to do. According to John Adams, a free society will self destruct without morality.
@affilinet PART3 - So, using traffic laws as an example (albeit a poor one), Adams was saying that if society had an inner moral fortitude to obey traffic signals, speed limits, etc., we wouldn't need traffic laws; but, because many lack that 'morality', laws are established, eroding our freedom. Less morality = more laws = less freedom. A better example is freedom of speech which was abridged after 73 lost their lives due to someone falsly yelling "fire" at a crowded Christmas party in 1913.
@affilinet PART4 - For over a century, no restriction of speech was needed, but when someone who lacked the fortitude to do what was morally right yelled "fire" a mandate had to be issued. This process continues today. Our freedom of speech is eroded in direct proportion to society's waning morals, eg. hate speech laws. I hope this has helped both you and tshoebat to grasp what Adams meant. An online search of Adams' works will provide much better context than quotations alone.
Recommended Films: "Freedom to Fascism", "The Obama Deception", "The Secret of Oz", and "Don't Tread On Me".
Please don't forget to share them. It will help everyone get up to speed as to what is at stake, what's behind it, and most importantly, how to fix it for good. Peace!
RON PAUL 2012! Please Cut and Paste this EVERYWHERE!
The founding fathers wanted equality . Religion has no use in popular vote or popular cancern... Separation of church and state means keep you rediculous beliefs out of everyones hair.
@hiawatha444 If you knew your history, you would know that the Separation of Church and state means YOU CANT be forced to go to church or be charged with a crime as it was in ENGLAND. It means you can be atheist, Baptist, Catholic. Learn history before you speak otherwise you show your intelligence to all. Keep your evelution delusions to yourself can also be said
mr. chase violated the first amendment when he said that christianity was the ESTABLISHED religion. You have contradicted your point several times and I find your video a waste of time. You are misled and my only hope is that you will be led out of your ignorance the more you study.
I find it hard to believe that 200 years after a group of wealthy Racist Mysoginists hold so much sway over modern America. Who cares what they thought? Are we there slaves? Are we compelled to think as they thought? Should we worship as they worshipped? Should we return slavery as an option? Why can't we remake America in the image of the highest and best Free society that we can imagine?
excluding the terrible theme, learn to use a mic brother, i know it involves science and goes against your dated beliefs (you should look into becoming Amish)
I can go on + on + on,bottom line is this:there are literally hundreds of thousands of examples of keeping religion out of American politics. Whereas,at best,scouring through ALL of the historical records,there are examples of some religious zealots that supported injecting religion into it. However,it was the majority, as noted by Jefferson(previous post) that it would not be the case,as the danger to democracy from such a coupling far outweighed any benefit. Indeed,history shows it dangerous.
Madison: "The settled opinion here is, that religion is essentially distinct from civil Government, and exempt from its cognizance; that a connection between them is injurious to both...
...some sort of alliance or coalition between Gov' & Religion neither can be duly supported: Such indeed is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against".
Madison,Founding Father,key player/Constitution/Bill of Rights,as president, rejected attempts to furnish the church w/ authority of schools,Feb '11,next month,rejected giving them land. Also,"Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history."
Also,Jefferson:"Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion,an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ,"so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ,the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority,in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection,the Jew and the Gentile,the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
T. Jefferson,1817,Draft of an Act to Esablish Elementary Schools,Article 1,referring to those in charge, "not being of the gospel of any denomination." Article X, ""no religious reading, instruction or exercise.." Letter/Pres. Monroe, ""continued by the lawless Alliance, calling itself Holy." Lettr,Weightman,1826,(incomplete due to space), "the light/science /laid open to/every view/palpable truth/mankind not born w/ saddles/ few booted + spurred/by the grace/God" Using God 4 tyranny
As for polygamy, I would agree, but not for the same reason that you give. Marriage provides joint taxes and allows people to make more money and remain in lower tax brackets. Lawfully, allowing marriages of more than two people to each other is potentially just cheating taxes. Cheating taxes is cheating the government. And when the government is cheated, the taxpayers are cheated.
You're comments on gays is completely uncalled for. Marriage as a religious institution is more than welcome to deny gays marriage, but Lawful Marriages should be availible to all citizens, regardless of race, sex, color, or sexual orientation. Lawful Marriages provide the benefit of joint taxes and the Founding fathers said that America should be Fair, free from bias of any nature.
Jefferson was, by most of today's standards, an atheist. Certainly he accepted the idea of "Nature's God", but more in the sense of an agnostic, not a christian. Jefferson believed all the miraculous parts of the gospel to be outright lies. Religion is not necessary for government. Virtue is doing good for goodness sake, no god required.
It's really easy to say that what the founding fathers believed is how we should live, but they believed many things that today are considered archaic. The Fathers from the southern states advocated strongly for slavery. Does that mean that we should have kept slaves? The Founding fathers believed in the equality of White, male land-owners, does that mean that we should keep true to that?
They also knew from an economic standpoint that the more limitations that a government places on it's people, the less an economy can grow. If you try and favor Christianity, other religions simply won't want to come into the country. Slowing immigration. It should also be noted that the founding fathers that pushed for Christianity were shunned by Jefferson and Madison until they could agree with neutrality.
The founding fathers were very fearful of the "power" of the church and many of them rejected the Christian bible entirely. Jefferson notably took all of the ridiculous miracles out of the new testament and redesigned a more logical bible. John Adams was not referring to religion as the practice of belief in god, but the teaching of virtues through a family. Atheism can qualify as a religion in that context. Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, and others were notably secular and fearing of theocracy.
PRT 5 Furthermore, the majority of Founding Fathers feltthatreligion should be taught as a private sector, at best w/in a school so suited. As the majority of Schools @ the time were private/religous, u can not takie reference to that situation as public school matter. I find much of the supposed information contained here as being out of context, incomplete and certainly misleading. Have a nice day.
PRT 4,quoted Jefferson, here's another 1:"II do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth."
PRT 3 u can not equate driving laws w/ religious teachings. That is a leap that defies all logic. If u believe that those that support keeping religion in the private sector lack morality,then the greatest minds ever known must be immoral (including Founding/Fathers.) The Northwest Ordinance was required for other reasons than the single one u bring up. In fact it was sucha footnote,it's doubtful Jefferson even noticed it. There are statues and quotes from Greece, we worship Zues, by your logic.
PRT 2; James Madison,Father of the Constitution,Bill of Rights,Founding Father;"The number, the industry and the morality of the priesthood& the devotion of the people have been manifesrtly increased by THE TOTAL SEPARTATION OF THE CHURCH FROM THE STATE."
Feb,1811,vetoed a bill to give Church funding for schools,etc b/c it violated the 1st amendment,Congress agreed. Therefore, while some of the Founding Fathers thought religion wasit was hardly encouraged by all to have it taught in schools.
PRT 1 In answer to your question that u say no one has been able to answer; U phrase the question w/ an undercurrent of hostilety and but w/in a hard-line religous view. Therefore, in answer to your question; the Founding Fathers did not want laws passed based SOLEY upon religious view. U also lump unrelated matters (religion in school/homosexuality, also refer prt 2). People are not prohibited from praying in school, btw, only that schools are not to LEAD prayer.
The ruling in Runkel v Winemiller was not a decision in the Supreme Court, which the case was abolished. The Northwest Ordinance is a completely different document than the Constitution, passed even before the fist amendment and reenacted, but considerably unconstitutional. I'd suggest you review material surrounding this subject before blindly hurling around "facts".
If American law is meant to support "religious morals", just where is the separation of church and state? Just where do we draw the line and say, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion." Religious "morals" support tyranny- Where would our free speech be? Our freedom of religion and freedom from religion? Our right to petition? and so on. If you base law on "religious morals", there is no separation of church and state. How lunatic do you have to be not see that?
if christian veiws the bible and the ten comandments were enforced as laws since the start of this nation then guess what we wouldnt have to worry about gay marriage multiple wifes and lesbians trying to teach our children to tolerate homosexuality tv and other forms of media make all of this sick shit out to be ok more and more kids see this everyday witness homos and lesbians making out and holding hands i dont see how anyone could look at another man and say damn i think i want to sleep withu
The first four are a waste of time and irrelevant to happiness, which is the main human purpose.
5 is saying always obey authority, fuck that, always question authority is more respectable.
6 and 8 are decent morals but instead of phrasing them in that way, I would of phrased them, "thou shall not create an environment where murder or theft is possible" or something like that.
The rest are impossible to control, but are respectable.
The Founders didn't 'want' a great number of things, foremost among these being the tyranny of one religion over another, hence the 1st amendment. And, since most of them read, and agreed with scripture, it's reasonable to assume that they were not in disagreement with the polygamy throughout the scriptures. So, where do the scripturally ignorant like you find support in our founders' presumed or expressed beliefs to support your own demonstrably distorted interpretation of scripture?
I hate to break it to you, but MORE LAWS banning this or that thing you don't like or think is "immoral" won't make us any more moral as a people. It has to do with PERSONAL PRINCIPLES and convictions, not laws. The law bullshit just feels like tyranny, really. It's like, "Why doesn't our gov't trust us to be responsible and make the right decision?"
The same America which defeated the Axis Powers and Communists not too long ago can't be trusted to allow gay marriage or polygamy? We'll "fall" if we let gays marry? REALLY?
we need lots of laws banning certain "immoral" things because the people themselves "can't be trusted"... right? The SAME democracy that you claim is great cuz it empowers the people to elect and choose their leaders.
REAL freedom means letting grown men and women take those risks you don't like and doing those behaviors you may find 'immoral', so long as they are not harming anyone in the process, and all parties consent, for the most part. The First Amendment was designed to protect unpopular speech, right?
How come we can't apply THAT SAME PRINCIPLE of accepting the legality of UNPOPULAR BEHAVIOR and leave people alone? I find it funny how so many right-wingers feel that society is so weak that
If that's not irony and hypocrisy, I don't know what is.
I'm sorry, but when was "freedom" supposed to be taken for granted so much, that the ONLY freedom people are allowed is the kind YOU LIKE when it comes to certain 'moral' behaviors?? When did the Founders say legislating morality was cool or OK? Why didn't they put a single word about THAT in the Constitution?
That's not true freedom; it's moralist BS with limited 'freedom.'
"Why?" "Because it's immoral!" As if THE STATE should somehow be the 'moral guardian' of America... Which is IRONIC considering how much those same conservatives LOVE to talk about "individual liberty" or "freedom" and how "pro-freedom" they are.... except for when it comes to YOUR liberty to do things they don't like.
These SAME conservatives who complain about how "pro-state" the Left is USE THE STATE TO THEIR OWN ENDS TO LEGISLATE MORALITY! They look to the state to 'guard morality.'
I mean, how does anyone else being gay AFFECT YOU PERSONALLY? That's the big question. Unless you can cite a valid example of how it affects you in some big, negative way, it seems like you're merely judging people based on their own personal lives or private behavior that you could easily ignore or stay away from.
I just don't understand this impetus to legislate morality that's in so many conservatives. It's almost like it's in their DNA. "We have to ban this and this and that."
I do not care if a person is a homosexual. I feel sorry for them but I cant change them. They have to do it. Dont tell me that I have to endorse it. No it is not a civil right. Black people cant decide to be white, and to discriminate against them is immoral. Behavior is completely different. Everyone alive discriminates against behaviors. I dont hang out with morons, and certainly wouldnt hire them. All of you that fear their name calling are homophobes, not me. I dont fear them.
@thequantumvacuum But WHY do you think being gay is wrong in the first place? I'm j/w. Is it because of phony religious doctrine? Parental upbringing? It seems to me that ALMOST NO ONE who holds any kind of anti-gay view has critical thinking behind that decision. They usually cite religious doctrine or background, their parents raising them as anti-gay or some version of that story in the middle. But what THINKING reason is there to dislike gay people or homosexuality more than hetero?
@thequantumvacuum They're merely 2 sides of the same coin of sexuality. Yes, being gay is less frequent, but it's no less 'natural' simply b/c of that. Is poison ivy "unnatural" because it's less common in the woods than say, trees? Yes, gays can't reproduce WITH EACH OTHER, but they can still with the opposite sex.
But you don't have to endorse it; no one is forcing you to. We're just saying that you should at least respect them as HUMAN BEINGS,and not discriminate against them
@thequantumvacuum Not treat them as subhuman simply because of who they fall in love with or have sexual relations with. I mean, is it really any of YOUR business?? If you don't wanna hang out with gays, that's fine, but you shouldn't try to make THEIR private lives hell by enacting things like gay marriage bans which prevent them from having the same rights you have as a straight man. You say you don't care if someone's gay, but then you seem to argue that it's ok to discriminate against them
@thequantumvacuum Yes, people 'discriminate' personally against certain behaviors, although that doesn't really fit the def. of "discrimination" so much as "choose not to associate with them." But PRIVATE, consensual behavior is not a valid criteria for preventing someone IN PUBLIC from having all the same rights as you and I. Otherwise, you're simply judging them and pretending like their gayness defines who they are, rather than their humanity or personality.
Why conservatives so obsessed with gays anyhow? For MILLENNIA, in almost every civilization, the elites have been OBSESSED with gays. And other sexual minorities. They keep them down and spread all kinds of nonsensical falsehoods about how 'sinful' or 'evil' they are. How can loving someone, even IF it's in a nontraditional way but is consensual between the two parties, POSSIBLY be "sinful" or wrong??
POLYGAMY??? LOl! First of all, WHO GIVES A FUCK. What business is it of yours if someone has multiple wives? If he loves them all, that's his business. Yes, it is possible for a man (or woman) to be in love with multiple people, and forcing him or her to CHOOSE is kind of cruel. If all parties involve consent to a multiple marriage, who am I to judge? How is it ANY LESS MORAL than a two-person marriage? This fake morality bullshit has gotta go.
REAL morality involves things like not stealing, cheating, killing, etc. It's not about "promoting family values", which is such an archaic and silly term. It's not about sexual prudishness. That's just being a pansy on the issue of sex and relationships but hiding behind the word "values."
And anyhow, exactly HOW MANY Americans are actually polygamous on a regular basis? 2%? 5%? It's hardly worth getting worked up over.
Christian prayer NEVER LEFT SCHOOLS! It was only BANNED IN PUBLIC SCHOOL LED BY A TEACHER, who is, to an extent, a 'representative' of that state or local government which RUNS the school! DUH. If the kids themselves wanna do their own private prayer, that's fine. have at it. But it's not gonna be school-endorsed. That's all.
Why do you think PUBLIC, gov't-led schools should force YOUR version of 'morality' and religion down all students' throats?? THAT is the height of arrogance and pretentiousness. I HATE conservatives like you! You don't believe in the right to privacy or minding your own business. You wanna control people but claim it's "freedom" and how much you LOVE individual liberty.
Gimme a break with your Orwellian doublespeak. Conservatives like you have at least a mild form of mental illness.
WHY do you guys feel the need to control everyone else and care what they do in private?? Are you afraid of how your OWN LIFE is spinning out of control, so in order to feel "in control", you have to at least control OTHERS'? I have NO IMPULSE to control other people, and I would be a monster if I tried. But right-wingers can be such control freaks. I just DON'T GET IT! Just leave people alone. This is none of your business. "Traditional" lifestyles are NOT THE ONLY WAY TO GO.
And what evidence do YOU have that the Founders "didn't want gay marriage"?? WHERE did they say a word about gay marriage? IT WASN'T EVEN AN ISSUE BACK THEN! There was no gay rights movement.
Fucking dumbasses, I swear... Why do right-wingers have such a fetish and hard-on for the Founders?? I respect the Founders as much as the average man on the street, but YOU GUYS on the Right take this admiration to a whole new level. It's sickening. STOP IT
Yes, they were smart, but in the end, they were MEN like everyone else. Ergo, they were FALLIBLE, and they were nowhere near perfect or all-knowing. Pretending like they had ALL THE ANSWERS, esp. for 2011, is insanity. Get over the Founders. They LIVED IN A MUCH DIFFERENT TIME! IF they came to 2011, I highly doubt they'd have written the Constitution exactly the same way as in 1789. Yet you guys pretend like the Founders wanted it all written in stone and unchanging forever.
Frankly, I DON'T GIVE A FUCK what the Founders thought about social issues! It's IRRELEVANT. What matters is the here and now. Why should I care what the Founders thought about issues that weren't even issues back then, shit they could probably never understand?
@whoo689 this is an interpretative statement of whoo689s post. "I dont care about stuff that happened before me. Why should I try to understand stuff thats not on tv. who cares about how we got here or what might have been learned before. All those guys who graduated college at 14 and wrote treaties at 21 wouldnt understand stuff like text messaging and American idol."
@thequantumvacuum WTF? O.o What kind of lowlife narrow-minded misinterpretation of what I just said is this?? DID I SAY ANYTHING ABOUT STUPID AMERICAN IDOL AND TEXT MESSAGING? I was talking about the COMPLEXITIES of modern life, like massive pollution, issues with multinational corporations, and so on. MUCH LARGER populations than the America during the time of the Founders. Stuff like that. Don't twist my words.
What I'm saying is that we can't just rely completely on what people said or
@thequantumvacuum did in the past, no matter how 'smart' they may have been. You guys on the Right act like the Founders were totally infallible, and therefore, the Constitution they wrote NEVER has to adapt to changing times, no matter how different those times are from 1789 or the fact that the Founders COULD NEVER HAVE IMAGINED what these times would be like, so I can understand why they wouldn't put words regarding those issues in the Constitution.
@thequantumvacuum Show me where in the Federalist Papers the Founders said COMPLETELY, 100%, without a doubt, "Whatever isn't in the Constitution is, by default, unconstitutional." Esp. regarding PERSONAL RIGHTS, like the right to privacy. I'm not so sure the Founders would've thought, "You have no right to privacy, including in your own home, to be free from really nosy people and government that wants to restrict liberty because the Constitution doesn't mention it."
@thequantumvacuum The amendment process was designed to adapt the Constitution for MORE SPECIFIC and larger goals, like the 14th, 15th and 16th Amendments ending slavery and ensuring black freedom. Unlike the welfare state, this could not just be left up to mere laws that could be easily repealed. Amendments were required. This idea that the Founders wanted us to go through a long, difficult and arduous amendment process every time we wanted to enact a new program is absurd.
@thequantumvacuum In fact, there actually WAS a draft version of some part of the Constitution (I think it was the 9th or 10th Amendment or maybe Elastic Clause) that included the word "expressly" or "expressly written" in terms of powers granted. The actual Constitution did not have that terminology, which I think implies to anyone with a brain that the Founders DID NOT THINK that the Constitution was set in stone, even though it was a starting point for American gov't. A template, if you will
@thequantumvacuum I think the Founders would've gotten up in arms much more over things like the Patriot Act than silly shit like gays getting married or social programs.
@whoo689 Uh, they didnt. Thats why they created the ability to amend the Constitution. That means change it. The principles set forth in the declaration will never change. The Constitution was created to protect the citizens from the government. If the day ever comes that the government doesnt need restrictions, it means that a perfect king is sitting on a throne over the whole earth. Let us know when that happens. Until then, enjoy your freedom from government, because thats what it is.
@thequantumvacuum Right... Do you even realize how arduous and difficult it is to amend the Constitution?? So we're supposed to AMEND THE CONSTITUTION every time we wanna update it to adapt to changing times and put in place a certain necessary program or institution like the federal highway system, which could take years, if it even passes Congress? The American people can't wait for shit like that.
The amendment process was designed for a more limited and specific set of goals.
@thequantumvacuum The idea that the Constitution itself is supposed to be unchanging and that the ONLY WAY to get anything done to adapt to changing times to "stay in fidelity to the Constitution" is to AMEND it with such a long and arduous process is, I think, a right-wing and libertarian copout, really. You don't wanna admit that the Constitution was DESIGNED, to some extent, to evolve for changing circumstances. This doesn't mean government should have UNLIMITED power, though.
The founding fathers didn't want women. blacks and native Americans voting either, but we have become a more open and inclusive society since then. Voting was originally restricted to property owners. So we are not confined by the narrow mindedness of the 18th century. We are pluralistic society, if you want to pray in school, do it silently and if you want to do it out loud, do it in your church. Get a grip.
@visigothsatthegates If women and blacks had been allowed to vote back then, we wouldn't have ever had the United States. Women would have wanted to have latte with the savages, and everybody would have gotten scalped. Blacks would have elected Kunta Kinte and we'd all be running around with spears and rings in our noses- wait, isn't that already happening? Shows you the results of the lack of mentality.
People who want prayer in school are pigs who are too lazy to ensure they get their kids get their prayers in before they are off to school, Your moronic pleadings to the mythical being of your choice does not have any place in any institution where we expect logic without compromise to be the guide. Obviously - you are also ignorant of the Philadelphia Bilbe Riots which resulted in Catholics and Protestants killing each other over 'which prayers' to pray in which schools. You vile pig.
As a veteran, I am disconcerted that pigs like you can't even bother to read the founder's papers before bloviating your obvious bigoted hatred all over the Internet. Many men and women of far greater character (do you have any?) have born huge sacrifices to defend the Constitution - a document that appears to be lacking in your library of reference. You vile, gutless pig. People take bullets in your name and you can't even be inconvenienced to understand our history. You vile pig.
What people personally believed has no bearing on what the laws should be. Many people believe differently, and prayer has no place in schools. You have no right to indoctrinate my children into your faith, end of discussion.
Big assumption on the part of tshoebat on the law ... Schools refer to KNOWLEDGE not the rest. The rest is covered with the fact you can believe what you want.
The founding fathers did not want America to be a Christian theocracy. And he is right on that. Everything else should be left to the individual and at most the individual states themselves. I myself believe in the moral Christian values, but do not belief that I should force that onto others, nor should others force it on to me. Let the states decide, that's what the founding fathers believed! Ron Paul 2012.
By what authority do you speak for the founders of this country. There is an abundance of information available to inform us of what their vision was for this country. Morals are not exclusive to religion. In fact in most cases the most immoral acts in the history of western civilization have been perpetrated in the name of religion. You are ignorant
@peterb37 the author of this video is not claiming to speak for the founding fathers, he is claiming that they are clear enough to speak for themselves and uses quotes to do so. As ignorant as you claim the author of this video to be, you are just as ignorant of the fact that the author of this video is bringing up what the founding father's themselves said
If you're trying to argue that Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Thomas Paine, and Ben Franklin were conservative Christians you are beyond delusional. They had a wide, diverse set of viewpoints, but they were all essentially atheists by 18th Century standards, and ones who believed it was time for a new type of society.
@trilobright - If you're going to construct an argument construct it around facts instead of falsehoods. Washington was a protestant, as was Adams. Jefferson proclaimed, in his OWN words, 'I am a real Christian.' What did he mean? HE believed in God but not in the 'godhead' or holy trinity. This was, in fact, a major bone of contention with many christians at the time who felt God and Jesus were not one in the same, and it shows up in Jeffersons writings to Adams on several occasions.
@veradinx - Additionally, the founders did, in fact, believe America should be a moral society and that christianity set a good example for morality. However, the founders did NOT as he claims portend to mandate behavior. As our rights come from our creator, so does our free will to live as we choose. The separation of church and state was done to avoid the manipulation of government by a strong and influential organized religion like the Vatican, not for any so-called anti-religious reasons.
Washington was an Anglican who mostly attended church to make his wife happy, but often sat outside during the service. Anglicans then, as now, were thought of as some abominable mix of Catholic, atheist, and Protestant by their conservative evangelical peers. Jefferson, Franklin and Paine indeed espoused moral beliefs that overlapped with certain types of Christianity, as does Richard Dawkins today, but they simply did not believe in a personal God, Jesus or otherwise.
john adams also put ben franklins grandson in prison for insult the way he looked. as a matter of fact thomas jefferson the 3rd pres HATED john adams. you idiots actually believe the majority of the founding fathers were fundamentalist christians which is quite simply asinine and ignorant. go learn some real history rather than listening to what your idiot preacher babbles.
You dumbass George Washington,Benjamin Franklin,Thomas Jefferson and every other founding father were very good or great people you disrespectful cunt
Despite what the founders PERSONALLY believed in, they honored the concept of FREEDOM. That means, they didn't expect the country to revolve around their personal beliefs. The creator of this video has an agenda.... And it ain't freedom. "Freedom" means: Adults in a free society do what they want as long as it doesn't harm another individual. Period. That's why we MUST vote for Ron Paul in 2012.
I believe in God. Why does equal rights for all so scare you? Listen, Marriage is a religious act. It should not be granted by any government, but only by clergy. Our state government should only be granting civil unions for states have an interest in preventing marriages that include underage persons, persons too closely related and persons currently married. Every state should grant civil unions to any two unmarried people who are not by blood related as siblings or first cousins.
wow you people are so smart that you could sit on icecream and tell what flavor it is if you think the founding fathers would support gay marage try pulling your head out of your ass so you can see whats really going on!
Where is your sense of freedom? How can you think that it is right to deny people a simple thing like the right to be married? It makes no sense to me. Why is it so important to you weather or not someone you don't even know is married? Why should they not have the right? I don't know if you knew this, but marriage has been around a lot longer than Christianity. Can you not see the oppression in saying that two people can't be married? If you ask me "God" is the death of liberty.
@Humbucker121 ...so where does the line get drawn as far as marriage? Are you in favor of polygamy? A certain sect of Mormons do, along with Muslims. Also, if a mother gives an adult man to marry her 12 y.o daughter, should the laws be changed to allow this marriage to happen? I saw a documentary about a young man who loved his dog and even french kissed it on t.v! What if he wants to marry his dog? His words were, that dogs were the best and could be trusted more than any female! So...?
@1Sweetsexyflava A 12 y.o, a dog. Really? It's common sense. As for polygamy, who cares. If all involved are consenting adults. Other peoples marriages shouldn't affect you. You don't have to do it. That's what we call freedom of choice. Even God allows that.The freedom to choose. Comparing gay marriage to beastiality and pedophilia is insulting and down right ignorant. Where do you draw the line? Your argument is not one of logic, but rather of hatred.
REALLY! Some cultures practice pedophilia & it's the norm for them! Some cultures embrace bestiality as well! Some cultures kill their children "honor killings"..So since the US welcomes all cultures, should we allow them to practice their culture? God gave freedom of choice, doesn't make everything right. U obviously don't know the definition of compare. So, since any particular marriage doesn't affect me i shouldn't care if a father marries his daughter? This has been known to happen.
Excellent video my man. Proponents of gay marriage who state that it's unconstitutional not to grant marriage licences to homosexual couples are completely in error. 2 understand the constitution u must understand the original intent of the founders. Except for two, they were all clearly Christian in the biblical sense & would never have imagined that such a level of perversion could ever be justified by the constitution that they so prayerfully forged.
@oooowwwwdddd That's why they drafted separation of church and state right.You clearly don't understand the founding fathers at all.They came from a time of extreme tyranny and oppression.Any denial of the rights of man was detested by them."Lighthouses are more useful than churches."Ben Franklin."This would be the best of all possible worlds,if there were no religion in it."John Adams."All tales and miracles in the Bible,are fit only for imposters to preach,and fools to believe."Thomas Paine.
@oooowwwwdddd "It behooves every man who values liberty for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others. Or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own." Thomas Jefferson. "Strongly guarded, is the separation of religion and government in the constitution of the United States." James Madison. There is a million more quotes, by several of the founding fathers. Perhaps you should read them.
@Humbucker121 You're entire argument of so called "separation" has no foundation because without the Christian religion, there would be no America. I suggest that you read quotes of the founders, & if ur honest you'll agree. Christianity played a foundational role in our government & in the lives of the men who forged it. 24 of 56 of the signers of The Declaration attended seminary & 54 were practicing evangelical Christians. Our moral laws r based on the 10 commandments & biblical morality.
@Humbucker121 "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams - Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Second President of the United States
They didn't want air planes! They didn't want men on the moon! They didn't want the interweb! They didn't want progress of any kind! Wake up, in the 234 years since a group of free thinking, independent men broke away from their parent nation; the world has changed in ways they could not imagine. But i will tell you one thing they wanted that hasn't changed: Your right to say these things, and our right to disagree with you.
The founding fathers probably didn't regard homosexuality as an issue back then. They didn't see the issues of today so obviously wouldn't have an opinion on them, in the same way we don't have an opinion on the issues Americans will talk about 235 years from now. There are some issues today that we can correctly assume their opinions on but gay marriage isn't one of them.
The founding fathers didn't want clueless backwards douchebags like you imposing their narrow ill-formed views on everyone else. That's why people like Patrick Henry ( a devout christian ) didn't want a constitution without a bill of rights. I know that since you probably ate paint chips as a child this will be hard to understand, but the founding fathers wanted everyone to be free to live their lives as they saw fit. And that government would have no say in personal matters or relationships.
All his credibility is flushed down the drain when he uses negative slurs. I learned that in high school, if you are writing a persuasive paper, do not use degrading terms, if you do the reader (in this case listeners) will disregard your opinion no matter how true it may be.
All of you people that are posting hateful comments need to stop it because everything that you do will come back to you in consequences or did you forget that nothing comes without a price to pay? Everything we do in life has trial and error to it. Please realize that by showing hate that you are promoting yourself in a bad image. How do you want people to percieve you as?
Straw man. Since they didn't address sexual orientation & it was unlikely a hot topic then, there's no way of knowing. But since he also didn't *publicly* express ideas like the one below they may have been ok with things that burn you alive.
"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. ..
@puckf17 Well said and done on that comment. I did my own comment to try to knock some sense into ignorant and hateful people myself. You can look at my channel if you want because I have videos that I have favorited that will blow you away.
It's EASILY PROVEN that America is not, and never was, a "Christian nation". Simply click on my name and take 10 minutes to watch my 'Is America a Christian Nation' video.
If you believe you can refute it, please make the attempt.
I suggest u learn what freedom is really about. And learn about property rights. The govt has got absolutely no buisiness in marriage- only a tyrant would claim such power over one's fellow man.
religion is theroot of communism.the fonding fathers might have been religiouse but they did not belieive that bigotry through christain beleifs to prevail over the country and no matter how you christains twist it it will never make this country into racist bigot even if you try to shame you fellow christain into it .this country has never been america because of bigtoues asses yes i do not need to be protcted .go fuck your self commie
what I dont understand is his blanket statement that people who lived over 200 years ago believe in a certain thing, or in this case did not believe in it, but this statement is NOT supported by ANY of these mens writings. I have read them all and there is not ONE mention of an adversion to gay marriage or even homosexuality in general.
Now lacking anything the men themselves wrote how does the maker of this video make this statement. This is typical christian revisionism
This guy is such an idiot, to distort history like that is just another example of how jebus freaks will go to any length to try and regain lost ground. John Adams said: "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" Now tell me ole Johnny wanted this to be a country based on Christian belief. What a douche bag.
Perhaps it would be better to stay out of the interpersonal relationships of all free peoples! Perhaps it would be better to now teach conduct such as honestly, integrity and honor! As for what people choose to do in they're private lives, I have no care to know, but as their conduct outside of their own private life that would impact all society, I belive in The Rule of Law and not Man. Morals standards and values is something I was taught well, so I need no Org of any kind to teach me these.
This is the funniest thing I have ever heard. It is a shame that this guy is walking amongst us. Not only has he destroyed "Jesus'" teachings he has completely misconstrued what every good man intended for our country. Instead of being told your history from god knows who read your history from people that have educations in History not religious studies. tshoebat is a sorry excuse for an American.
Do you think Jesus would be this decisive? It is a shame because some idiot is teaching the author of this video how to speak. I would venture to guess that it is Beck and David Barton, who know nothing of this country's founding. This guy has to be a POE, or he is completely a complete idiot.
@badtrunk456 Stupid people don't know their stupid because.. They're stupid. Like you. I see NO facts you've "expressed." You're just puking from your pie hole. Just another product of "no child left behind." (No child gets ahead either.. Obviously... You can barely write, let alone express any facts...
Comment removed
m904begley 1 day ago
Comment removed
m904begley 1 day ago
you lost me at "clipped dykes"
Jemmer1000 2 days ago
Our founding fathers were men of the Enlightenment, not the Great Awakening.
USMCmazac 3 days ago
The question is real dumb... Did they want...(dykes or whatever)? What they did want is EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL. It's bigoted morons who make videos of personal opinions, use historical figures and events - with no substantiating facts - and draw his own twisted conclusions from what is not said. Oh, as for equal rights, the debate at the time was not gay vs. straight - that wasn't even an issue. It was whether or not blacks could be considered real people. Sad, but true (research: 3/5 compromise)
Firecat719 1 week ago
I liked your video but your analogy of the driving laws shows you've missed John Adams' point. The point is not whether we would feel more free with or without driving laws. A closer analogy would be that if suddenly no traffic laws existed, an intrinsic morality would still exist in "law abiding" citizens to continue to drive safely and properly. Those who lacked that inner moral fortitude would drive erratically and dangerously. It is because of this type people that law is required.
m904begley 1 week ago
@m904begley Flawed argument.If streets are privatley owned you can tell dangerous drivers to drive on your terms or they cant use your street.If you make unjust laws for your street people in your community can deny you business with them.The free market that the founders intendet will regulate itself without stupid laws.
affilinet 1 day ago
Comment removed
m904begley 1 day ago
Comment removed
m904begley 1 day ago
Comment removed
m904begley 1 day ago
Comment removed
m904begley 1 day ago
@affilinet PART1 - Private ownership and free market regulation are irrelevant. It is nearly impossible to expound on ideas in 500 characters or less, so I will do it in multiple posts. At 2:00 tshoebat misinterprets a quote by John Adams as meaning, "Without morals there is no freedom," and then he essentially asks, "Would you feel more free or less free without laws?" That entirely misses Adams' point. A more accurate interpretation would be, "Freedom cannot stand without morality."
m904begley 1 day ago
@affilinet PART2 - John Adams also said, "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." In other words, he was saying that the freedoms provided by our Constitution cannot work for an immoral society. Morality is simply defined as having the character to do what you SHOULD do instead of what you have the FREEDOM to do. According to John Adams, a free society will self destruct without morality.
m904begley 1 day ago
@affilinet PART3 - So, using traffic laws as an example (albeit a poor one), Adams was saying that if society had an inner moral fortitude to obey traffic signals, speed limits, etc., we wouldn't need traffic laws; but, because many lack that 'morality', laws are established, eroding our freedom. Less morality = more laws = less freedom. A better example is freedom of speech which was abridged after 73 lost their lives due to someone falsly yelling "fire" at a crowded Christmas party in 1913.
m904begley 1 day ago
Comment removed
m904begley 1 day ago
@affilinet PART4 - For over a century, no restriction of speech was needed, but when someone who lacked the fortitude to do what was morally right yelled "fire" a mandate had to be issued. This process continues today. Our freedom of speech is eroded in direct proportion to society's waning morals, eg. hate speech laws. I hope this has helped both you and tshoebat to grasp what Adams meant. An online search of Adams' works will provide much better context than quotations alone.
m904begley 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Recommended Films: "Freedom to Fascism", "The Obama Deception", "The Secret of Oz", and "Don't Tread On Me".
Please don't forget to share them. It will help everyone get up to speed as to what is at stake, what's behind it, and most importantly, how to fix it for good. Peace!
RON PAUL 2012! Please Cut and Paste this EVERYWHERE!
1tonykirk 3 weeks ago
The founding fathers wanted equality . Religion has no use in popular vote or popular cancern... Separation of church and state means keep you rediculous beliefs out of everyones hair.
hiawatha444 3 weeks ago
@hiawatha444 If you knew your history, you would know that the Separation of Church and state means YOU CANT be forced to go to church or be charged with a crime as it was in ENGLAND. It means you can be atheist, Baptist, Catholic. Learn history before you speak otherwise you show your intelligence to all. Keep your evelution delusions to yourself can also be said
VelociRaptor93 1 week ago
mr. chase violated the first amendment when he said that christianity was the ESTABLISHED religion. You have contradicted your point several times and I find your video a waste of time. You are misled and my only hope is that you will be led out of your ignorance the more you study.
iculus1972 3 weeks ago
I find it hard to believe that 200 years after a group of wealthy Racist Mysoginists hold so much sway over modern America. Who cares what they thought? Are we there slaves? Are we compelled to think as they thought? Should we worship as they worshipped? Should we return slavery as an option? Why can't we remake America in the image of the highest and best Free society that we can imagine?
easmachine 3 weeks ago
lmao 0:52
So true!
Great video.
YoBravaFrumAnuvaMuva 3 weeks ago
excluding the terrible theme, learn to use a mic brother, i know it involves science and goes against your dated beliefs (you should look into becoming Amish)
EdwardMurrayIV 1 month ago
I can go on + on + on,bottom line is this:there are literally hundreds of thousands of examples of keeping religion out of American politics. Whereas,at best,scouring through ALL of the historical records,there are examples of some religious zealots that supported injecting religion into it. However,it was the majority, as noted by Jefferson(previous post) that it would not be the case,as the danger to democracy from such a coupling far outweighed any benefit. Indeed,history shows it dangerous.
seekertrth 1 month ago 3
Madison: "The settled opinion here is, that religion is essentially distinct from civil Government, and exempt from its cognizance; that a connection between them is injurious to both...
...some sort of alliance or coalition between Gov' & Religion neither can be duly supported: Such indeed is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against".
seekertrth 1 month ago 2
Madison,Founding Father,key player/Constitution/Bill of Rights,as president, rejected attempts to furnish the church w/ authority of schools,Feb '11,next month,rejected giving them land. Also,"Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history."
Strongly/repeatedly supported COMPLETE separation/church/state.
seekertrth 1 month ago
Also,Jefferson:"Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion,an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ,"so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ,the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority,in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection,the Jew and the Gentile,the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
seekertrth 1 month ago
T. Jefferson,1817,Draft of an Act to Esablish Elementary Schools,Article 1,referring to those in charge, "not being of the gospel of any denomination." Article X, ""no religious reading, instruction or exercise.." Letter/Pres. Monroe, ""continued by the lawless Alliance, calling itself Holy." Lettr,Weightman,1826,(incomplete due to space), "the light/science /laid open to/every view/palpable truth/mankind not born w/ saddles/ few booted + spurred/by the grace/God" Using God 4 tyranny
seekertrth 1 month ago
read Thomas Jefferson's Bible you dumb bitch! Jefferson was an atheist!
Mileslogancooper 1 month ago
@Mileslogancooper Damn, no need to be that aggressive when you're wrong. Jefferson was a Deist.
zackersquackers 1 month ago
As for polygamy, I would agree, but not for the same reason that you give. Marriage provides joint taxes and allows people to make more money and remain in lower tax brackets. Lawfully, allowing marriages of more than two people to each other is potentially just cheating taxes. Cheating taxes is cheating the government. And when the government is cheated, the taxpayers are cheated.
rufuguru 1 month ago
You're comments on gays is completely uncalled for. Marriage as a religious institution is more than welcome to deny gays marriage, but Lawful Marriages should be availible to all citizens, regardless of race, sex, color, or sexual orientation. Lawful Marriages provide the benefit of joint taxes and the Founding fathers said that America should be Fair, free from bias of any nature.
rufuguru 1 month ago
Jefferson was, by most of today's standards, an atheist. Certainly he accepted the idea of "Nature's God", but more in the sense of an agnostic, not a christian. Jefferson believed all the miraculous parts of the gospel to be outright lies. Religion is not necessary for government. Virtue is doing good for goodness sake, no god required.
rufuguru 1 month ago
It's really easy to say that what the founding fathers believed is how we should live, but they believed many things that today are considered archaic. The Fathers from the southern states advocated strongly for slavery. Does that mean that we should have kept slaves? The Founding fathers believed in the equality of White, male land-owners, does that mean that we should keep true to that?
rufuguru 1 month ago
They also knew from an economic standpoint that the more limitations that a government places on it's people, the less an economy can grow. If you try and favor Christianity, other religions simply won't want to come into the country. Slowing immigration. It should also be noted that the founding fathers that pushed for Christianity were shunned by Jefferson and Madison until they could agree with neutrality.
rufuguru 1 month ago
The founding fathers were very fearful of the "power" of the church and many of them rejected the Christian bible entirely. Jefferson notably took all of the ridiculous miracles out of the new testament and redesigned a more logical bible. John Adams was not referring to religion as the practice of belief in god, but the teaching of virtues through a family. Atheism can qualify as a religion in that context. Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, and others were notably secular and fearing of theocracy.
rufuguru 1 month ago
PRT 5 Furthermore, the majority of Founding Fathers feltthatreligion should be taught as a private sector, at best w/in a school so suited. As the majority of Schools @ the time were private/religous, u can not takie reference to that situation as public school matter. I find much of the supposed information contained here as being out of context, incomplete and certainly misleading. Have a nice day.
seekertrth 1 month ago
PRT 4,quoted Jefferson, here's another 1:"II do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth."
seekertrth 1 month ago
PRT 3 u can not equate driving laws w/ religious teachings. That is a leap that defies all logic. If u believe that those that support keeping religion in the private sector lack morality,then the greatest minds ever known must be immoral (including Founding/Fathers.) The Northwest Ordinance was required for other reasons than the single one u bring up. In fact it was sucha footnote,it's doubtful Jefferson even noticed it. There are statues and quotes from Greece, we worship Zues, by your logic.
seekertrth 1 month ago
PRT 2; James Madison,Father of the Constitution,Bill of Rights,Founding Father;"The number, the industry and the morality of the priesthood& the devotion of the people have been manifesrtly increased by THE TOTAL SEPARTATION OF THE CHURCH FROM THE STATE."
Feb,1811,vetoed a bill to give Church funding for schools,etc b/c it violated the 1st amendment,Congress agreed. Therefore, while some of the Founding Fathers thought religion wasit was hardly encouraged by all to have it taught in schools.
seekertrth 1 month ago
PRT 1 In answer to your question that u say no one has been able to answer; U phrase the question w/ an undercurrent of hostilety and but w/in a hard-line religous view. Therefore, in answer to your question; the Founding Fathers did not want laws passed based SOLEY upon religious view. U also lump unrelated matters (religion in school/homosexuality, also refer prt 2). People are not prohibited from praying in school, btw, only that schools are not to LEAD prayer.
seekertrth 1 month ago
Belief in a cruel God makes a cruel man.
Thomas Paine
That God cannot lie, is no advantage to your argument, because it is no proof that priests can not, or that the Bible does not.
put that in your pipe and smoke it
i can cherry pick founding father quotes as well
dylanbirkholz 1 month ago
The ruling in Runkel v Winemiller was not a decision in the Supreme Court, which the case was abolished. The Northwest Ordinance is a completely different document than the Constitution, passed even before the fist amendment and reenacted, but considerably unconstitutional. I'd suggest you review material surrounding this subject before blindly hurling around "facts".
Bourtini 2 months ago
If American law is meant to support "religious morals", just where is the separation of church and state? Just where do we draw the line and say, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion." Religious "morals" support tyranny- Where would our free speech be? Our freedom of religion and freedom from religion? Our right to petition? and so on. If you base law on "religious morals", there is no separation of church and state. How lunatic do you have to be not see that?
Bourtini 2 months ago
if christian veiws the bible and the ten comandments were enforced as laws since the start of this nation then guess what we wouldnt have to worry about gay marriage multiple wifes and lesbians trying to teach our children to tolerate homosexuality tv and other forms of media make all of this sick shit out to be ok more and more kids see this everyday witness homos and lesbians making out and holding hands i dont see how anyone could look at another man and say damn i think i want to sleep withu
nine8transam 2 months ago
Check out the Barbary wars to see why Thomas Jefferson owned a Koran.
THX1146 2 months ago
You want to talk about the ten commandments?
The first four are a waste of time and irrelevant to happiness, which is the main human purpose.
5 is saying always obey authority, fuck that, always question authority is more respectable.
6 and 8 are decent morals but instead of phrasing them in that way, I would of phrased them, "thou shall not create an environment where murder or theft is possible" or something like that.
The rest are impossible to control, but are respectable.
CntthnkO15 2 months ago
The Founders didn't 'want' a great number of things, foremost among these being the tyranny of one religion over another, hence the 1st amendment. And, since most of them read, and agreed with scripture, it's reasonable to assume that they were not in disagreement with the polygamy throughout the scriptures. So, where do the scripturally ignorant like you find support in our founders' presumed or expressed beliefs to support your own demonstrably distorted interpretation of scripture?
Thinqingman 2 months ago
Yea' let's get that "dyke" thing out of the way.. - *shakes head*
im4wur 2 months ago
lol
im4wur 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
haha your fucking hilarious, because you have no idea wtf youre talking about haha
Karzaveer 2 months ago
I hate to break it to you, but MORE LAWS banning this or that thing you don't like or think is "immoral" won't make us any more moral as a people. It has to do with PERSONAL PRINCIPLES and convictions, not laws. The law bullshit just feels like tyranny, really. It's like, "Why doesn't our gov't trust us to be responsible and make the right decision?"
whoo689 2 months ago
The same America which defeated the Axis Powers and Communists not too long ago can't be trusted to allow gay marriage or polygamy? We'll "fall" if we let gays marry? REALLY?
whoo689 2 months ago
we need lots of laws banning certain "immoral" things because the people themselves "can't be trusted"... right? The SAME democracy that you claim is great cuz it empowers the people to elect and choose their leaders.
Hypocrisy? Who knows
whoo689 2 months ago
REAL freedom means letting grown men and women take those risks you don't like and doing those behaviors you may find 'immoral', so long as they are not harming anyone in the process, and all parties consent, for the most part. The First Amendment was designed to protect unpopular speech, right?
How come we can't apply THAT SAME PRINCIPLE of accepting the legality of UNPOPULAR BEHAVIOR and leave people alone? I find it funny how so many right-wingers feel that society is so weak that
whoo689 2 months ago
If that's not irony and hypocrisy, I don't know what is.
I'm sorry, but when was "freedom" supposed to be taken for granted so much, that the ONLY freedom people are allowed is the kind YOU LIKE when it comes to certain 'moral' behaviors?? When did the Founders say legislating morality was cool or OK? Why didn't they put a single word about THAT in the Constitution?
That's not true freedom; it's moralist BS with limited 'freedom.'
whoo689 2 months ago
"Why?" "Because it's immoral!" As if THE STATE should somehow be the 'moral guardian' of America... Which is IRONIC considering how much those same conservatives LOVE to talk about "individual liberty" or "freedom" and how "pro-freedom" they are.... except for when it comes to YOUR liberty to do things they don't like.
These SAME conservatives who complain about how "pro-state" the Left is USE THE STATE TO THEIR OWN ENDS TO LEGISLATE MORALITY! They look to the state to 'guard morality.'
whoo689 2 months ago
I mean, how does anyone else being gay AFFECT YOU PERSONALLY? That's the big question. Unless you can cite a valid example of how it affects you in some big, negative way, it seems like you're merely judging people based on their own personal lives or private behavior that you could easily ignore or stay away from.
I just don't understand this impetus to legislate morality that's in so many conservatives. It's almost like it's in their DNA. "We have to ban this and this and that."
whoo689 2 months ago
I do not care if a person is a homosexual. I feel sorry for them but I cant change them. They have to do it. Dont tell me that I have to endorse it. No it is not a civil right. Black people cant decide to be white, and to discriminate against them is immoral. Behavior is completely different. Everyone alive discriminates against behaviors. I dont hang out with morons, and certainly wouldnt hire them. All of you that fear their name calling are homophobes, not me. I dont fear them.
thequantumvacuum 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum But WHY do you think being gay is wrong in the first place? I'm j/w. Is it because of phony religious doctrine? Parental upbringing? It seems to me that ALMOST NO ONE who holds any kind of anti-gay view has critical thinking behind that decision. They usually cite religious doctrine or background, their parents raising them as anti-gay or some version of that story in the middle. But what THINKING reason is there to dislike gay people or homosexuality more than hetero?
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum They're merely 2 sides of the same coin of sexuality. Yes, being gay is less frequent, but it's no less 'natural' simply b/c of that. Is poison ivy "unnatural" because it's less common in the woods than say, trees? Yes, gays can't reproduce WITH EACH OTHER, but they can still with the opposite sex.
But you don't have to endorse it; no one is forcing you to. We're just saying that you should at least respect them as HUMAN BEINGS,and not discriminate against them
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum Not treat them as subhuman simply because of who they fall in love with or have sexual relations with. I mean, is it really any of YOUR business?? If you don't wanna hang out with gays, that's fine, but you shouldn't try to make THEIR private lives hell by enacting things like gay marriage bans which prevent them from having the same rights you have as a straight man. You say you don't care if someone's gay, but then you seem to argue that it's ok to discriminate against them
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum Yes, people 'discriminate' personally against certain behaviors, although that doesn't really fit the def. of "discrimination" so much as "choose not to associate with them." But PRIVATE, consensual behavior is not a valid criteria for preventing someone IN PUBLIC from having all the same rights as you and I. Otherwise, you're simply judging them and pretending like their gayness defines who they are, rather than their humanity or personality.
whoo689 2 months ago
Why conservatives so obsessed with gays anyhow? For MILLENNIA, in almost every civilization, the elites have been OBSESSED with gays. And other sexual minorities. They keep them down and spread all kinds of nonsensical falsehoods about how 'sinful' or 'evil' they are. How can loving someone, even IF it's in a nontraditional way but is consensual between the two parties, POSSIBLY be "sinful" or wrong??
whoo689 2 months ago
POLYGAMY??? LOl! First of all, WHO GIVES A FUCK. What business is it of yours if someone has multiple wives? If he loves them all, that's his business. Yes, it is possible for a man (or woman) to be in love with multiple people, and forcing him or her to CHOOSE is kind of cruel. If all parties involve consent to a multiple marriage, who am I to judge? How is it ANY LESS MORAL than a two-person marriage? This fake morality bullshit has gotta go.
whoo689 2 months ago
REAL morality involves things like not stealing, cheating, killing, etc. It's not about "promoting family values", which is such an archaic and silly term. It's not about sexual prudishness. That's just being a pansy on the issue of sex and relationships but hiding behind the word "values."
whoo689 2 months ago
And anyhow, exactly HOW MANY Americans are actually polygamous on a regular basis? 2%? 5%? It's hardly worth getting worked up over.
Christian prayer NEVER LEFT SCHOOLS! It was only BANNED IN PUBLIC SCHOOL LED BY A TEACHER, who is, to an extent, a 'representative' of that state or local government which RUNS the school! DUH. If the kids themselves wanna do their own private prayer, that's fine. have at it. But it's not gonna be school-endorsed. That's all.
whoo689 2 months ago
Why do you think PUBLIC, gov't-led schools should force YOUR version of 'morality' and religion down all students' throats?? THAT is the height of arrogance and pretentiousness. I HATE conservatives like you! You don't believe in the right to privacy or minding your own business. You wanna control people but claim it's "freedom" and how much you LOVE individual liberty.
Gimme a break with your Orwellian doublespeak. Conservatives like you have at least a mild form of mental illness.
whoo689 2 months ago
WHY do you guys feel the need to control everyone else and care what they do in private?? Are you afraid of how your OWN LIFE is spinning out of control, so in order to feel "in control", you have to at least control OTHERS'? I have NO IMPULSE to control other people, and I would be a monster if I tried. But right-wingers can be such control freaks. I just DON'T GET IT! Just leave people alone. This is none of your business. "Traditional" lifestyles are NOT THE ONLY WAY TO GO.
whoo689 2 months ago
And what evidence do YOU have that the Founders "didn't want gay marriage"?? WHERE did they say a word about gay marriage? IT WASN'T EVEN AN ISSUE BACK THEN! There was no gay rights movement.
Fucking dumbasses, I swear... Why do right-wingers have such a fetish and hard-on for the Founders?? I respect the Founders as much as the average man on the street, but YOU GUYS on the Right take this admiration to a whole new level. It's sickening. STOP IT
whoo689 2 months ago
Yes, they were smart, but in the end, they were MEN like everyone else. Ergo, they were FALLIBLE, and they were nowhere near perfect or all-knowing. Pretending like they had ALL THE ANSWERS, esp. for 2011, is insanity. Get over the Founders. They LIVED IN A MUCH DIFFERENT TIME! IF they came to 2011, I highly doubt they'd have written the Constitution exactly the same way as in 1789. Yet you guys pretend like the Founders wanted it all written in stone and unchanging forever.
whoo689 2 months ago
Frankly, I DON'T GIVE A FUCK what the Founders thought about social issues! It's IRRELEVANT. What matters is the here and now. Why should I care what the Founders thought about issues that weren't even issues back then, shit they could probably never understand?
whoo689 2 months ago
@whoo689 this is an interpretative statement of whoo689s post. "I dont care about stuff that happened before me. Why should I try to understand stuff thats not on tv. who cares about how we got here or what might have been learned before. All those guys who graduated college at 14 and wrote treaties at 21 wouldnt understand stuff like text messaging and American idol."
thequantumvacuum 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum WTF? O.o What kind of lowlife narrow-minded misinterpretation of what I just said is this?? DID I SAY ANYTHING ABOUT STUPID AMERICAN IDOL AND TEXT MESSAGING? I was talking about the COMPLEXITIES of modern life, like massive pollution, issues with multinational corporations, and so on. MUCH LARGER populations than the America during the time of the Founders. Stuff like that. Don't twist my words.
What I'm saying is that we can't just rely completely on what people said or
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum did in the past, no matter how 'smart' they may have been. You guys on the Right act like the Founders were totally infallible, and therefore, the Constitution they wrote NEVER has to adapt to changing times, no matter how different those times are from 1789 or the fact that the Founders COULD NEVER HAVE IMAGINED what these times would be like, so I can understand why they wouldn't put words regarding those issues in the Constitution.
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum Show me where in the Federalist Papers the Founders said COMPLETELY, 100%, without a doubt, "Whatever isn't in the Constitution is, by default, unconstitutional." Esp. regarding PERSONAL RIGHTS, like the right to privacy. I'm not so sure the Founders would've thought, "You have no right to privacy, including in your own home, to be free from really nosy people and government that wants to restrict liberty because the Constitution doesn't mention it."
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum The amendment process was designed to adapt the Constitution for MORE SPECIFIC and larger goals, like the 14th, 15th and 16th Amendments ending slavery and ensuring black freedom. Unlike the welfare state, this could not just be left up to mere laws that could be easily repealed. Amendments were required. This idea that the Founders wanted us to go through a long, difficult and arduous amendment process every time we wanted to enact a new program is absurd.
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum In fact, there actually WAS a draft version of some part of the Constitution (I think it was the 9th or 10th Amendment or maybe Elastic Clause) that included the word "expressly" or "expressly written" in terms of powers granted. The actual Constitution did not have that terminology, which I think implies to anyone with a brain that the Founders DID NOT THINK that the Constitution was set in stone, even though it was a starting point for American gov't. A template, if you will
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum I think the Founders would've gotten up in arms much more over things like the Patriot Act than silly shit like gays getting married or social programs.
whoo689 2 months ago
@whoo689 Uh, they didnt. Thats why they created the ability to amend the Constitution. That means change it. The principles set forth in the declaration will never change. The Constitution was created to protect the citizens from the government. If the day ever comes that the government doesnt need restrictions, it means that a perfect king is sitting on a throne over the whole earth. Let us know when that happens. Until then, enjoy your freedom from government, because thats what it is.
thequantumvacuum 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum Right... Do you even realize how arduous and difficult it is to amend the Constitution?? So we're supposed to AMEND THE CONSTITUTION every time we wanna update it to adapt to changing times and put in place a certain necessary program or institution like the federal highway system, which could take years, if it even passes Congress? The American people can't wait for shit like that.
The amendment process was designed for a more limited and specific set of goals.
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum The idea that the Constitution itself is supposed to be unchanging and that the ONLY WAY to get anything done to adapt to changing times to "stay in fidelity to the Constitution" is to AMEND it with such a long and arduous process is, I think, a right-wing and libertarian copout, really. You don't wanna admit that the Constitution was DESIGNED, to some extent, to evolve for changing circumstances. This doesn't mean government should have UNLIMITED power, though.
whoo689 2 months ago
@thequantumvacuum For instance, why do you think we have a Bill of Rights?
whoo689 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓
procommenter 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Read The Law by Bastiat (free download online--a short essay). Watch The Agenda (Amazon) Then get out there and suport the Restoration of America.
Ron Paul 2012
possumpistol 3 months ago
You're stupid, your video is ignorant, and your microphone is a piece of crap.
jieuxarmeni 3 months ago
religion is not a matter for public policy. it is private insanity
hobot22 3 months ago 10
@hobot22 We don't need a private insanity when we have you.
emaleroland 1 month ago
When the constitution was written we did not have prayer in public schools because public schools had not been established.
mentalphysicalism 3 months ago
Religion is not the best way for morality. Religion promotes division between
groups and it promotes archaic rules. If you are unable to make moral decisions
based upon not harming others and general welfare, you may need a religious
ideology to think for you.
mentalphysicalism 3 months ago
The founding fathers wanted slavery and only male landowners to vote.
mentalphysicalism 3 months ago
The founding fathers didn't want women. blacks and native Americans voting either, but we have become a more open and inclusive society since then. Voting was originally restricted to property owners. So we are not confined by the narrow mindedness of the 18th century. We are pluralistic society, if you want to pray in school, do it silently and if you want to do it out loud, do it in your church. Get a grip.
visigothsatthegates 3 months ago
@visigothsatthegates If women and blacks had been allowed to vote back then, we wouldn't have ever had the United States. Women would have wanted to have latte with the savages, and everybody would have gotten scalped. Blacks would have elected Kunta Kinte and we'd all be running around with spears and rings in our noses- wait, isn't that already happening? Shows you the results of the lack of mentality.
sensibleadult 3 months ago
People who want prayer in school are pigs who are too lazy to ensure they get their kids get their prayers in before they are off to school, Your moronic pleadings to the mythical being of your choice does not have any place in any institution where we expect logic without compromise to be the guide. Obviously - you are also ignorant of the Philadelphia Bilbe Riots which resulted in Catholics and Protestants killing each other over 'which prayers' to pray in which schools. You vile pig.
tpartier 3 months ago
As a veteran, I am disconcerted that pigs like you can't even bother to read the founder's papers before bloviating your obvious bigoted hatred all over the Internet. Many men and women of far greater character (do you have any?) have born huge sacrifices to defend the Constitution - a document that appears to be lacking in your library of reference. You vile, gutless pig. People take bullets in your name and you can't even be inconvenienced to understand our history. You vile pig.
tpartier 3 months ago
lots of Godless people here... the Cross always offends.
420dieter 3 months ago
What people personally believed has no bearing on what the laws should be. Many people believe differently, and prayer has no place in schools. You have no right to indoctrinate my children into your faith, end of discussion.
darththeo 3 months ago
Big assumption on the part of tshoebat on the law ... Schools refer to KNOWLEDGE not the rest. The rest is covered with the fact you can believe what you want.
darththeo 3 months ago
lol - Ok, I've had my quota of jingoistic idiots for the day. Thanks for posting!
im4wur 3 months ago
The founding fathers did not want America to be a Christian theocracy. And he is right on that. Everything else should be left to the individual and at most the individual states themselves. I myself believe in the moral Christian values, but do not belief that I should force that onto others, nor should others force it on to me. Let the states decide, that's what the founding fathers believed! Ron Paul 2012.
AmericanCryer 3 months ago
By what authority do you speak for the founders of this country. There is an abundance of information available to inform us of what their vision was for this country. Morals are not exclusive to religion. In fact in most cases the most immoral acts in the history of western civilization have been perpetrated in the name of religion. You are ignorant
peterb37 4 months ago
@peterb37 the author of this video is not claiming to speak for the founding fathers, he is claiming that they are clear enough to speak for themselves and uses quotes to do so. As ignorant as you claim the author of this video to be, you are just as ignorant of the fact that the author of this video is bringing up what the founding father's themselves said
csoul7811 3 months ago
More antiquated ideas from over 200 years ago. New, modern ideas please!
beatapt5 4 months ago
FALSE HISTORY REPORT 101
treid100182 4 months ago
If you're trying to argue that Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Thomas Paine, and Ben Franklin were conservative Christians you are beyond delusional. They had a wide, diverse set of viewpoints, but they were all essentially atheists by 18th Century standards, and ones who believed it was time for a new type of society.
trilobright 4 months ago
@trilobright - If you're going to construct an argument construct it around facts instead of falsehoods. Washington was a protestant, as was Adams. Jefferson proclaimed, in his OWN words, 'I am a real Christian.' What did he mean? HE believed in God but not in the 'godhead' or holy trinity. This was, in fact, a major bone of contention with many christians at the time who felt God and Jesus were not one in the same, and it shows up in Jeffersons writings to Adams on several occasions.
veradinx 4 months ago
@veradinx - Additionally, the founders did, in fact, believe America should be a moral society and that christianity set a good example for morality. However, the founders did NOT as he claims portend to mandate behavior. As our rights come from our creator, so does our free will to live as we choose. The separation of church and state was done to avoid the manipulation of government by a strong and influential organized religion like the Vatican, not for any so-called anti-religious reasons.
veradinx 4 months ago
@trilobright washington and adams were definitely christians
jefferson , franklin and paine believed in christian principles all u have to do is read what they wrote
blaq7427 3 months ago
@blaq7427
Washington was an Anglican who mostly attended church to make his wife happy, but often sat outside during the service. Anglicans then, as now, were thought of as some abominable mix of Catholic, atheist, and Protestant by their conservative evangelical peers. Jefferson, Franklin and Paine indeed espoused moral beliefs that overlapped with certain types of Christianity, as does Richard Dawkins today, but they simply did not believe in a personal God, Jesus or otherwise.
trilobright 3 months ago
john adams also put ben franklins grandson in prison for insult the way he looked. as a matter of fact thomas jefferson the 3rd pres HATED john adams. you idiots actually believe the majority of the founding fathers were fundamentalist christians which is quite simply asinine and ignorant. go learn some real history rather than listening to what your idiot preacher babbles.
D3viouz1 4 months ago
just another religious bumb ass video....dont watch it...its a waste of time.
moonshineinsummer1 5 months ago
your an ass.....plain and simple........
Arielrxquen 5 months ago
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. -Thomas Jefferson
oliverj79 5 months ago 10
You dumbass George Washington,Benjamin Franklin,Thomas Jefferson and every other founding father were very good or great people you disrespectful cunt
Operation116 5 months ago
If there is a seperation of church than why can't gays get married?
They have civil unions so you really think it matters what the state calls it?
You think a WORD matters, lol
MrPurpose79 6 months ago
You assume that you can't have morals unless you have religion. It is a fact that more Christians are in prison than Atheists
MrPurpose79 6 months ago
Despite what the founders PERSONALLY believed in, they honored the concept of FREEDOM. That means, they didn't expect the country to revolve around their personal beliefs. The creator of this video has an agenda.... And it ain't freedom. "Freedom" means: Adults in a free society do what they want as long as it doesn't harm another individual. Period. That's why we MUST vote for Ron Paul in 2012.
mc1135 6 months ago
"The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." -George Washington, John Adams, Joel Barlow
Look it up.
mc1135 6 months ago
I think people are raging and doing the whole 'thumbs down' thing because they're bummed that the founding fathers really did say and believe that.
So you're all not really attacking the dude narrating this video, all he is doing is laying down the facts.
leafclash 6 months ago
I believe in God. Why does equal rights for all so scare you? Listen, Marriage is a religious act. It should not be granted by any government, but only by clergy. Our state government should only be granting civil unions for states have an interest in preventing marriages that include underage persons, persons too closely related and persons currently married. Every state should grant civil unions to any two unmarried people who are not by blood related as siblings or first cousins.
Steven804 6 months ago in playlist Political
wow you people are so smart that you could sit on icecream and tell what flavor it is if you think the founding fathers would support gay marage try pulling your head out of your ass so you can see whats really going on!
MrTalrah 6 months ago in playlist new yankee workshop
Where is your sense of freedom? How can you think that it is right to deny people a simple thing like the right to be married? It makes no sense to me. Why is it so important to you weather or not someone you don't even know is married? Why should they not have the right? I don't know if you knew this, but marriage has been around a lot longer than Christianity. Can you not see the oppression in saying that two people can't be married? If you ask me "God" is the death of liberty.
Humbucker121 6 months ago
@Humbucker121 ...so where does the line get drawn as far as marriage? Are you in favor of polygamy? A certain sect of Mormons do, along with Muslims. Also, if a mother gives an adult man to marry her 12 y.o daughter, should the laws be changed to allow this marriage to happen? I saw a documentary about a young man who loved his dog and even french kissed it on t.v! What if he wants to marry his dog? His words were, that dogs were the best and could be trusted more than any female! So...?
1Sweetsexyflava 6 months ago
@1Sweetsexyflava A 12 y.o, a dog. Really? It's common sense. As for polygamy, who cares. If all involved are consenting adults. Other peoples marriages shouldn't affect you. You don't have to do it. That's what we call freedom of choice. Even God allows that.The freedom to choose. Comparing gay marriage to beastiality and pedophilia is insulting and down right ignorant. Where do you draw the line? Your argument is not one of logic, but rather of hatred.
Humbucker121 6 months ago
REALLY! Some cultures practice pedophilia & it's the norm for them! Some cultures embrace bestiality as well! Some cultures kill their children "honor killings"..So since the US welcomes all cultures, should we allow them to practice their culture? God gave freedom of choice, doesn't make everything right. U obviously don't know the definition of compare. So, since any particular marriage doesn't affect me i shouldn't care if a father marries his daughter? This has been known to happen.
1Sweetsexyflava 6 months ago
Excellent video my man. Proponents of gay marriage who state that it's unconstitutional not to grant marriage licences to homosexual couples are completely in error. 2 understand the constitution u must understand the original intent of the founders. Except for two, they were all clearly Christian in the biblical sense & would never have imagined that such a level of perversion could ever be justified by the constitution that they so prayerfully forged.
oooowwwwdddd 7 months ago
@oooowwwwdddd That's why they drafted separation of church and state right.You clearly don't understand the founding fathers at all.They came from a time of extreme tyranny and oppression.Any denial of the rights of man was detested by them."Lighthouses are more useful than churches."Ben Franklin."This would be the best of all possible worlds,if there were no religion in it."John Adams."All tales and miracles in the Bible,are fit only for imposters to preach,and fools to believe."Thomas Paine.
Humbucker121 6 months ago
@oooowwwwdddd "It behooves every man who values liberty for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others. Or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own." Thomas Jefferson. "Strongly guarded, is the separation of religion and government in the constitution of the United States." James Madison. There is a million more quotes, by several of the founding fathers. Perhaps you should read them.
Humbucker121 6 months ago
@Humbucker121 You're entire argument of so called "separation" has no foundation because without the Christian religion, there would be no America. I suggest that you read quotes of the founders, & if ur honest you'll agree. Christianity played a foundational role in our government & in the lives of the men who forged it. 24 of 56 of the signers of The Declaration attended seminary & 54 were practicing evangelical Christians. Our moral laws r based on the 10 commandments & biblical morality.
oooowwwwdddd 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Humbucker121 "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams - Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Second President of the United States
oooowwwwdddd 6 months ago
Wow, the founding father didn't think gay marriage should be taught in school? Thanks, what a revelation.
Xelanderthomas 7 months ago
They didn't want air planes! They didn't want men on the moon! They didn't want the interweb! They didn't want progress of any kind! Wake up, in the 234 years since a group of free thinking, independent men broke away from their parent nation; the world has changed in ways they could not imagine. But i will tell you one thing they wanted that hasn't changed: Your right to say these things, and our right to disagree with you.
Bighappykitty 8 months ago
The founding fathers probably didn't regard homosexuality as an issue back then. They didn't see the issues of today so obviously wouldn't have an opinion on them, in the same way we don't have an opinion on the issues Americans will talk about 235 years from now. There are some issues today that we can correctly assume their opinions on but gay marriage isn't one of them.
xtremejohnny69 8 months ago
this guy is probably gay
hmhmhmhm8 8 months ago
The founding fathers didn't want clueless backwards douchebags like you imposing their narrow ill-formed views on everyone else. That's why people like Patrick Henry ( a devout christian ) didn't want a constitution without a bill of rights. I know that since you probably ate paint chips as a child this will be hard to understand, but the founding fathers wanted everyone to be free to live their lives as they saw fit. And that government would have no say in personal matters or relationships.
K20ej88 8 months ago 6
@K20ej88 Based on what documentation do you think this? What physical, historical, primary source?
hendrickx88 2 months ago
Comment removed
K20ej88 8 months ago
All his credibility is flushed down the drain when he uses negative slurs. I learned that in high school, if you are writing a persuasive paper, do not use degrading terms, if you do the reader (in this case listeners) will disregard your opinion no matter how true it may be.
woopsme 8 months ago
@woopsme True, if you want people to listen to you, you should try to sound as intelligent as possible.
xtremejohnny69 8 months ago
What an embarassment to his country.
hausman24 8 months ago in playlist UNITED STATES of AMERICA
dislike X 10000000
davlon0 9 months ago
All of you people that are posting hateful comments need to stop it because everything that you do will come back to you in consequences or did you forget that nothing comes without a price to pay? Everything we do in life has trial and error to it. Please realize that by showing hate that you are promoting yourself in a bad image. How do you want people to percieve you as?
JetSpeed3r 9 months ago
I learned that christians really are nuts from this video,very informative.
Lazybate 9 months ago
faggot made this video
llHyRaXll 9 months ago
boy this is a bunch of crapp..
chiledoug 9 months ago
Straw man. Since they didn't address sexual orientation & it was unlikely a hot topic then, there's no way of knowing. But since he also didn't *publicly* express ideas like the one below they may have been ok with things that burn you alive.
"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. ..
– Jefferson, Letter to Adams, April 11, 1823
puckf17 10 months ago
@puckf17 Well said and done on that comment. I did my own comment to try to knock some sense into ignorant and hateful people myself. You can look at my channel if you want because I have videos that I have favorited that will blow you away.
JetSpeed3r 9 months ago
It's EASILY PROVEN that America is not, and never was, a "Christian nation". Simply click on my name and take 10 minutes to watch my 'Is America a Christian Nation' video.
If you believe you can refute it, please make the attempt.
sgapplebee 11 months ago
idiot. leave usa now
llHyRaXll 11 months ago
Your mouth is too close to the mic and you know nothing of the founding fathers (I take it you're talking about the USA founding fathers).
ABdadaSURD 11 months ago
Rubbish read you own constitution and history
RobskiKD 11 months ago
I suggest u learn what freedom is really about. And learn about property rights. The govt has got absolutely no buisiness in marriage- only a tyrant would claim such power over one's fellow man.
swu880 11 months ago
Gov't following Christian Values only. Theocracy much?
What does that make the Treaty of Tripoli make then as stated by John Adams? Art. 11 =D
kmelfina 11 months ago
religion is theroot of communism.the fonding fathers might have been religiouse but they did not belieive that bigotry through christain beleifs to prevail over the country and no matter how you christains twist it it will never make this country into racist bigot even if you try to shame you fellow christain into it .this country has never been america because of bigtoues asses yes i do not need to be protcted .go fuck your self commie
MrDaleaaaa 11 months ago
The people who discredited this video. It just shows how much they really know about The Founding Fathers.
DearCitizenTv 1 year ago
what I dont understand is his blanket statement that people who lived over 200 years ago believe in a certain thing, or in this case did not believe in it, but this statement is NOT supported by ANY of these mens writings. I have read them all and there is not ONE mention of an adversion to gay marriage or even homosexuality in general.
Now lacking anything the men themselves wrote how does the maker of this video make this statement. This is typical christian revisionism
carlo75x 1 year ago
I have not enjoyed this video, and I learned only that you are not very clever.
steinarrexfaroensis 1 year ago
Danbury baptists btw. was who he sent the letter to.
rokee1979 1 year ago
This is sad. This person needs to do a whole lot more research on the founding fathers. ps this audio is of terrible quality.
jbecksax 1 year ago
yes
johnedwards1968 1 year ago
pathetic...wow..just pathetic...you know nothing of history of religion in this country...god, read a book other than the bible will ya
WordsofHarmony 1 year ago
271 People think you are a Douche
CAG3013 1 year ago
This guy is such an idiot, to distort history like that is just another example of how jebus freaks will go to any length to try and regain lost ground. John Adams said: "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" Now tell me ole Johnny wanted this to be a country based on Christian belief. What a douche bag.
rpmdude 1 year ago
Perhaps it would be better to stay out of the interpersonal relationships of all free peoples! Perhaps it would be better to now teach conduct such as honestly, integrity and honor! As for what people choose to do in they're private lives, I have no care to know, but as their conduct outside of their own private life that would impact all society, I belive in The Rule of Law and not Man. Morals standards and values is something I was taught well, so I need no Org of any kind to teach me these.
clarisd 1 year ago
This is the funniest thing I have ever heard. It is a shame that this guy is walking amongst us. Not only has he destroyed "Jesus'" teachings he has completely misconstrued what every good man intended for our country. Instead of being told your history from god knows who read your history from people that have educations in History not religious studies. tshoebat is a sorry excuse for an American.
TheEuhemerus 1 year ago
Do you think Jesus would be this decisive? It is a shame because some idiot is teaching the author of this video how to speak. I would venture to guess that it is Beck and David Barton, who know nothing of this country's founding. This guy has to be a POE, or he is completely a complete idiot.
cmsalvagio 1 year ago
Did anyone else almost slit their own throats listening to this moron...
Morals don't come from religion, for the 100,000,000,000,000th time...
I don't know a single secularist who thinks Thomas Jefferson thought anything you claim atheists think he said, or thought...
You can barely speak, let alone express facts...
badtrunk456 1 year ago 7
@badtrunk456
Maybe you should read The Jefferson Bible. Until you have read it - you are not qualified to discuss this...
fred19992010 7 months ago
@fred19992010 I have read the Jefferson Bible...
badtrunk456 7 months ago
@badtrunk456 Stupid people don't know their stupid because.. They're stupid. Like you. I see NO facts you've "expressed." You're just puking from your pie hole. Just another product of "no child left behind." (No child gets ahead either.. Obviously... You can barely write, let alone express any facts...
phdequipped 3 months ago