Under God is not acceptable

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 5:40 pm

callmeslick wrote:

I suppose you're right, and if so, that is a testimonial to how thin-skinned and not-used-to not getting their way some Christians have become. It wasn't always so.

It is also a testimonial to how thin skinned the god haters are that they feel a over whelming urge to remove "God" from where ever they think they should. And this too was not always so.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 5:49 pm

CUDA wrote:well if that's the case explain the Democrats and Republicans. just a little division there.

while, in recent years, divergent from the premise, for quite some time both parties worked together for the common good in times of true need.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 5:52 pm

Will Robinson wrote:Any bright student of history would know that the perception, both then and now, is that America was founded largely by Christians and still considered a predominantly Christian nation. So although you had lots to say from your lofty educated perch it doesn't really add up to a correction of my asserting the perception is such which is what the point was.

how does one get to that perception? Is there one reference to Christ in any of the central documents upon which the nation was founded(Declaration, Constitution or even Federalist Papers)?

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 5:58 pm

No, I don't think our system or any other system requires a belief in God, but who wants to be a dog in a dog eat dog world? Yet I fear the powerful and wealthy that have no belief in God, because if you keep going up, there is a small, worldwide group of very smart and wealthy people who think it goes no higher than them, and in a world filled with superstitious people, kinda think of themselves as God. That's the kind of Godliness that scares me.

Heretic · Post by **Heretic** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:06 pm

You got there didn't ya Slick.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:12 pm

Heretic wrote:You got there didn't ya Slick.

um, no, if you're referring to the idea that the US is a Christian nation. The founders were generally theistic, but at that point in time almost everyone was(atheism was very uncommon). Further, as I pointed out, exactly ZERO reference to Christianity was made in the founding documents.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:19 pm

callmeslick wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:Any bright student of history would know that the perception, both then and now, is that America was founded largely by Christians and still considered a predominantly Christian nation. So although you had lots to say from your lofty educated perch it doesn't really add up to a correction of my asserting the perception is such which is what the point was.
how does one get to that perception? Is there one reference to Christ in any of the central documents upon which the nation was founded(Declaration, Constitution or even Federalist Papers)?

A quick google search pops up lots of references:

1777
"With one heart and one voice the good people may…join the penitent confession of their manifold sins…that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of remembrance...that it may please Him...to prosper the means of religion for the promotion and enlargement of that kingdom which consisteth in righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost."
[Continental Congress, Proclamation for a Day of Solemn Thanksgiving and Praise, November 1, 1777]

1853
"We are a Christian people...not because the law demands it, not to gain exclusive benefits or to avoid legal disabilities, but from choice and education; and in a land thus universally Christian, what is to be expected, what desired, but that we shall pay due regard to Christianity?"
[Senate Judiciary Committee Report, January 19, 1853]

1854
"At the time of the adoption of the Constitution and the amendments, the universal sentiment was that Christianity should be encouraged…In this age there can be no substitute for Christianity…That was the religion of the founders of the republic and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants."
[House Judiciary Committee Report, March 27, 1854]

GEORGE WASHINGTON
Commander-in-Chief in the American Revolution; Signer of the Constitution; First President of the United States

"While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian."
[Washington, Writings (1932), Vol. XI, pp. 342-343, General Orders of May 2, 1778.]

"You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life and, above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise intention."
[George Washington, The Writings of Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1932), Vol. XV, p. 55, from his speech to the Delaware Indian Chiefs on May 12, 1779.]

You want it from the Federalist Papers?
John Adams...he was kind of a big player (to put it lightly) in the foundation of this country and he wrote:

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence, were … the general principles of Christianity, in which all those sects were united, and the general principles of English and American liberty, in which all those young men united, and which had united all parties in America, in majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her independence. Now I will avow, that I then believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature and our terrestrial, mundane system. - Letter to Thomas Jefferson, 28 June 1813.

Personally I think you embarrass yourself to claim there is no perception that America is a predominantly Christian nation and that perception has been the same since the Country's inception. But how you see yourself is your burden.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:08 pm

Nobody here is argueing that Christanity didn’t have a huge influence on the foundation of this country, the argument goes to the point…was it “founded” on Christianity.

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html

Subtle technical difference…some people don’t seem to understand…along with other technical points, on other issues.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:30 pm

I think your missing the point on the basis of what this country was "Founded" on. this country was not "Founded" by quote Christians in such words. even though Many of our Founding fathers were indeed Christian. but the Foundation of this country or at least its basic principles that are without a doubt Christian in its making. you need merely to go back to the Plymouth bay colony to see that.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:47 pm

I don't know how it became a debate as to what the country was founded on, Christianity or not, etc.

Slick took issue with my comment that said removing the words "under God" from the pledge is an affront to Christians.
I think most of the people who would edit those words out would expect Christians to take offense for the reasons I stated.

He seemed to be implying that since there is no specific mention of Christianity, either in the Bill of Rights or Declaration of Independence, and wrongly assumed there was no mention in the Federalist Papers, that there is no perception that america is for the most part a christian country and so there is no reason to believe removing the words "under god" could have been done from a desire to agitate Christians or the rightwing as I originally suggested.

I think there is a long standing and well established perception...regardless of the volume of Christian content in the founding documents.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:04 pm

Will Robinson wrote:Slick took issue with my comment that said removing the words "under God" from the pledge is an affront to Christians.
I think most of the people who would edit those words out would expect Christians to take offense for the reasons I stated.

Oh without a doubt. who ever chose to edit those specific words KNEW they would be upsetting Christians. Atheists have been challenging the use of those words in the pledge in court for years, so naturally Christians would take it as an attack on their faith.

He seemed to be implying that since there is no specific mention of Christianity, either in the Bill of Rights or Declaration of Independence, and wrongly assumed there was no mention in the Federalist Papers, that there is no perception that america is for the most part a christian country and so there is no reason to believe removing the words "under god" could have been done from a desire to agitate Christians or the rightwing as I originally suggested

Well I believe at last survey some 80% of Americans consider themselves as Christian so I believe that would qualify this as a Christian nation

I think there is a long standing and well established perception...regardless of the volume of Christian content in the founding documents.

Agreed

The Declaration of Independence states, "Men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It also states that these rights are "self evident" and that they constitute the "Laws of Nature." These principles are taken directly from the Bible.

The Law of Nature can be viewed in Romans 2:14-16. That our Creator is the Author of life is seen in Genesis 2:7. That God, not government, grants liberty is seen in Galatians 5:1. The "pursuit of happiness" is found in Ecclesiastes 3:13.

Beyond that, virtually every one of the ten articles contained in the Bill of Rights has Biblical foundation. The First Amendment recognizes the natural right of freedom of speech, religion and assembly. Christians are clearly given divine instruction regarding each of these responsibilities. Our founding documents properly established a government designed to "secure these rights." Therefore, under the First Amendment, Christians are free to preach the Gospel and to assemble for worship.

Likewise, the Second Amendment has Biblical foundation. Our Lord said in Luke 11:21, "When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace." In Luke 22:35, 36 He said, "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."

Other articles contained in the Bill of Rights also have Biblical basis. For example, the Fourth Amendment comes from Deuteronomy 24:10, 11. The Eighth Amendment originates in Deuteronomy 15: 2, 3. Again, these principles are "self evident" truths which come from "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God."

Even America's constitutional form of government consisting of three co-equal branches, legislative, executive and judicial is taken directly from Isaiah 33:22.

you can take this to the point that even the inscription on the Liberty Bell is a paraphrase of Leviticus 25:10

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:31 pm

Trying to find the Bill of Rights in the Bible is a fishing expedition and poor exegesis.

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:05 am

This countries foundations were laid upon freedom of religion and politics. Just the fact that Christianity is still the dominant religion here shows that it was pushed as a collective belief, but the whole integrity of the Constitution would have been destroyed had Christianity been officially sanctioned. I believe the thought was that it would just be the most logical choice, but considering how dissenters and heretics were treated in England , they made provision for any and all belief systems. As it should be.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:44 am

CUDA wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:Slick took issue with my comment that said removing the words "under God" from the pledge is an affront to Christians.
I think most of the people who would edit those words out would expect Christians to take offense for the reasons I stated.
Oh without a doubt. who ever chose to edit those specific words KNEW they would be upsetting Christians. Atheists have been challenging the use of those words in the pledge in court for years, so naturally Christians would take it as an attack on their faith.

and, CUDA, that gets to my point: why? Is that the trivial level that you, as a Christian, find threatening?
Come on, does your God not give you more strength than that? Where is the belief system flowing from a man whose near-final words were, "Forgive them, they know not what they've done"?
I sit here, 12 generations removed from a 13 year old boy who was sent over here in a wooden boat to make a better life due to REAL persecution of his family(they were Baptists in 17th century England). To see such a private matter, and source of real personal strength to some become trivialized to the point of ire over TV footage and street signs, I dare say, might cause our forbearers to laugh at the irony of it all.

Heretic · Post by **Heretic** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 7:08 am

Maybe it's just the little things that keep piling up to one big thing.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 7:17 am

The Greeks & Freemasons also influenced the founding of this country…among others.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:41 am

callmeslick wrote:
CUDA wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:Slick took issue with my comment that said removing the words "under God" from the pledge is an affront to Christians.
I think most of the people who would edit those words out would expect Christians to take offense for the reasons I stated.
Oh without a doubt. who ever chose to edit those specific words KNEW they would be upsetting Christians. Atheists have been challenging the use of those words in the pledge in court for years, so naturally Christians would take it as an attack on their faith.
and, CUDA, that gets to my point: why? Is that the trivial level that you, as a Christian, find threatening?
Come on, does your God not give you more strength than that? Where is the belief system flowing from a man whose near-final words were, "Forgive them, they know not what they've done"?
I sit here, 12 generations removed from a 13 year old boy who was sent over here in a wooden boat to make a better life due to REAL persecution of his family(they were Baptists in 17th century England). To see such a private matter, and source of real personal strength to some become trivialized to the point of ire over TV footage and street signs, I dare say, might cause our forbearers to laugh at the irony of it all.

YES we all have our history. I'm a Direct decedent of the Mayflower passengers and the Plymouth Bay Colony. and Dr Samuel Fuller. and by Marriage to William Bradford and I carry the same surname Fuller.

You miss the point slick either that or you chose to ignore the point. since 1954 for 57 years now the OFFICIAL pledge has said "under God" so I'll throw it back at you. if this is so trivial an issue then why did it get removed from from the commercial by NBC with them knowing FULL WELL this would cause an issue. when the PROPER thing to do was say it in its entirety, and why are the Atheists trying to get it permanently removed from the pledge. if it's so trivial. Do I care if its in the pledge?? to a point, but that point is Irrelevant it IS in the pledge, and as long as it is it should not be omitted by choice from any broadcast company that chooses to use it.

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:23 am

Is mishandling the pledge the same as burning our flag? At what point does the decimation stop.
And what about our presidents speech last night? I hear no outrage from the left or the media when their golden boy asks God's blessing for our troops and this country. Is it equitable that NBC edits out words that are officially sanctioned by our government and then gives Obama a pass for using the same words? Isn't asking for God's blessing making one's self "under God"?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:26 am

Heretic wrote:Maybe it's just the little things that keep piling up to one big thing.

and, what is that 'big thing', in terms of actual damage done?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:27 am

Spidey wrote:The Greeks & Freemasons also influenced the founding of this country…among others.

definitely

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:32 am

flip wrote:Is mishandling the pledge the same as burning our flag? At what point does the decimation stop.
And what about our presidents speech last night? I hear no outrage from the left or the media when their golden boy asks God's blessing for our troops and this country. Is it equitable that NBC edits out words that are officially sanctioned by our government and then gives Obama a pass for using the same words? Isn't asking for God's blessing making one's self "under God"?

I am very uneasy with any invokation of God(as in Obama's rhetoric), as I start to wonder if one is relying on faith instead of brains to solve the problem......sort of like the same unease I feel when near a car with a bumper sticker citing God as the co-pilot

At any rate, the NBC action was uncalled-for, sort of dumb and to me, pointless and trivial. But, I do find it amusing that Christians get their panties in such a bunch. It really doesn't speak well at all of the power of one's faith that such absolute drivel causes you to tremble at some supposed threat.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:44 am

I'll agree sometimes we Christians waste our breath on some stupid issues. but there is the other side of the coin to both issues. and that's what my earlier post was trying to say. why is it OK for an Atheist to get all riled up about the use or reference of the word God, but a Christian cannot get upset when it's omitted. it seems like a double standard to me.

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:53 am

Lol, anyone with brains has had to rely on faith at times. You don't think that 13 year old boy you speak of wasn't scared to damn death at times and maybe said a couple of prayers in faith? Having brains means you realize you are not and cannot be totally in control of everything. Apparently, even Obama realizes this.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:21 am

Some religious groups (notably JW's) have objected to the pledge of allegiance on the grounds that their allegiance is to God alone. IMO, the words "under God" are a distraction from that much more serious issue. Why do we force children to pledge their allegiance to this nation? I understand requiring someone joining our military or government to make some sort of pledge of loyalty, but kids don't have the necessary experience to understand what they're pledging, and for many it's akin to blasphemy.

That said, it's a total jerk move for TV producers to edit a bunch of kids saying the pledge. If you want to protest, *you* say it without Under God; don't tape some kids saying it and then edit their words. Or if you do, get consent from all of their parents first.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:38 pm

CUDA wrote:I'll agree sometimes we Christians waste our breath on some stupid issues. but there is the other side of the coin to both issues. and that's what my earlier post was trying to say. why is it OK for an Atheist to get all riled up about the use or reference of the word God, but a Christian cannot get upset when it's omitted. it seems like a double standard to me.

it is a double standard, and don't take anything I've written here to say that I agree with such attitudes on either side. Both sides are thin-skinned and focusing on tripe. I catch a fair bit of heat in 'liberal' forums that I post to for pointing out a liberal tendency to focus on unrealistic or pointless drivel, so I do walk the walk in that regard.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:40 pm

flip wrote:Lol, anyone with brains has had to rely on faith at times. You don't think that 13 year old boy you speak of wasn't scared to damn death at times and maybe said a couple of prayers in faith? Having brains means you realize you are not and cannot be totally in control of everything. Apparently, even Obama realizes this.

you did catch the

on that part of my post, right? That said, I DO get nervous when I see a God Is My Copilot sticker on a car.

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 3:08 pm

Lol, yeah point taken.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:43 pm

callmeslick wrote:you did catch the on that part of my post, right? That said, I DO get nervous when I see a God Is My Copilot sticker on a car.

To be fair, I'd be much less nervous around certain drivers if they left all of the driving in God's hands.

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:31 pm

Lol yeah, I think Slick was referring to the ones who think God is gonna do any and every little thing they ask.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:34 am

Well here's one problem with the Godless society that some seem to strive for. Do any of you see the state becoming the source of worship in a govt. eschewing any reference to God? Is there a chance we could become like the old USSR where the only religion allowed is the state itself? Food for thought at any rate.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:56 am

flip wrote:This countries foundations were laid upon freedom of religion and politics. Just the fact that Christianity is still the dominant religion here shows that it was pushed as a collective belief, but the whole integrity of the Constitution would have been destroyed had Christianity been officially sanctioned. I believe the thought was that it would just be the most logical choice, but considering how dissenters and heretics were treated in England , they made provision for any and all belief systems. As it should be.

"Freedom of religion" is different from "Freedom from religion". See the difference? Christians are free to practice their religion in the U.S., but they shouldn't force it on others. They're doing that with the mention of God in our pledge. Christians forget that religion can be just as repressive as any government if it becomes the dominant presence in any society. Keeping God out of a national pledge is not a slam against Christians. It's a sign of respect for those who hold different beliefs. We may be a Christian-founded country, but we are a free country first and foremost. If Christians can't see that subtle difference, then they're just ignorant and intolerant of those who hold different beliefs from them.

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:27 pm

TC, that is exactly what I just said .

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:17 pm

tunnelcat wrote:we are a free country first and foremost

So why do we require kids to pledge their allegiance to anything?

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:57 pm

then they're just ignorant and intolerant of those who hold different beliefs from them.

you mean just like the Atheists and hard core lefties that don't like what Christians believe?? you included

edit: Oh and please show me in the Constitution where there is "freedom from religion". not to mention that your attempting to take this thread off topic again. this is about what NBC did, not what our Government allows. See the Difference

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:13 pm

Lothar wrote:
tunnelcat wrote:we are a free country first and foremost
So why do we require kids to pledge their allegiance to anything?

Actually, we don't, since a Supreme Court decision stated that schoolchildren could not be compelled to say the Pledge.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:38 pm

woodchip wrote:Well here's one problem with the Godless society that some seem to strive for. Do any of you see the state becoming the source of worship in a govt. eschewing any reference to God? Is there a chance we could become like the old USSR where the only religion allowed is the state itself? Food for thought at any rate.

I guess we’ll have to change “rights from our creator” to “rights from our government“. (paraphrased)

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:00 pm

tunnelcat wrote:... Christians are free to practice their religion in the U.S., but they shouldn't force it on others. ..

And liberals are free to petition their representatives to change things. A President put those words in the pledge, let them get a President to remove them. But when a network liberal edits out reality to cleanse religion from actual events that liberal, and by virtue of their responsibility, that network, is forcing their beliefs on others.
No different except as I note before, an evangelical will at least ask you to think like he does a liberal will just take over institutions of learning and other avenues of influence and impose his ideology upon us.
Liberalism may not identify some omnipotent entity as the source of what is to be considered correct in the world, but they take their self appointed authority just as serious as the Pope takes his only they don't wear funny hats.
It's like the popular kids in high school, a liberal clique, is now assuming the role of authority over everyone and they are just as shallow, clueless and drunk on their own power as they ever were.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:30 am

I can't help but wonder where people who are Christians and liberals would fit into Will's dichotomy.

flip · Post by **flip** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:40 am

I don't understand the hardon people have against God. I mean, if you look around, it's not an unreasonable belief. When people get out of hand , then yes, squash them, but the thought that there might be a God is not unreasonable at all. To try and remove that thought from people's minds is gonna be a feat.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:52 am

woodchip wrote:Well here's one problem with the Godless society that some seem to strive for. Do any of you see the state becoming the source of worship in a govt. eschewing any reference to God? Is there a chance we could become like the old USSR where the only religion allowed is the state itself? Food for thought at any rate.

fake food, if anything. Do you see anything in the American psyche that would lead you to expect 'worship' of the government?? If by worship of state you refer to some sort of hyper-nationalism or overly patriotic sentiment, we get a bit of that here, but overall, we are a pretty cynical and independent lot.