Originally posted by xaos
MT er Halo, how do you find all this time on the net when you're a soldier?
XAOS

Um...I never said I was a "soldier."

Anyway, I put in my hours at work...otherwise I'd be hunted down for illegally taking a paycheck every the 1st and 15th of each month. I work any hour of the day and any day of the week when needed.

[Edited on 11-2-2003 by Halo]

Originally posted by William
I'm not going to comment on the general subject (yet), but I do have a question for the Christians in this thread.

GWB honestly believes his actions in Iraq are hastening the eventual end-timers Armageddon in which he and his fundamentalist buddies (Falwell) believe. During a 60 Minutes interview, Falwell was proud of the fact that he advises the president weekly on this very subject (later confirmed in a Washington Post question of Bush). Do you believe it is a good thing that our president is working to duplicate the end-time events of one religion?

First, may I say that Particle is as ignorant about this nation as any literate human being can be. Seperation of church and state. What, did you pencil that into your copy of the constitution? You do have a copy within arm's reach at this moment, don't you? Didn't think so.

William. The idea that Geaorge would have any idea of hastening the end time is utterly ridiculous. Not even a Texan would have such a cock-eyed notion. Farwell may talk to Georgy on a weekly basis, but that doesn't mean that he is being steered toward such a direction. Sounds like maybe you a5re buying into a conspiracy theory, and buying it because you have a certain disdain for the religion.
Seriously, not even a politician from Texas is that stupid.

Hi Thomas...

I'll have to look for the Washington Post interview... it's a few months old now. But Bush did confirm he believes he is playing an important role in helping to bring about Biblical prophecies.

Now... this doesn't mean that I don't think Saddam needs to feel real pain, and quickly. But I'm concerned about Bush's motives, which may influence his methods and rhetoric. Has anyone noticed that recently, his public speaking style has evolved into one of a Baptist minister?

And Thomas... you should know me better by now, I don't hate religion... I just dislike it.

I dont mean to change the subject... but what the hell is this "take back ats" stuff about?


thanx

Here's a story one of my friends recieved over e-mail:

In a mystery fire George Walker Bush's personal library was destroyed. Sadly, both of his books were destroyed, and he hadn't even finished coloring the second one.

ENJOY!

XAOS

P.S. in response to the take back ATS, its some arcane conspiracy devised by the mods

[Edited on 11-2-2003 by xaos]

Time and time again I have heard the "Freedom from Religion" argument. It is important to remember that the majority of the founding fathers of this country were
Deists, not Christians. And that they fled to this land to escape religious persecution.

Be that as it may, am I to assume that because I live in the so called "Land of the Free" that I am not free to live my life free FROM religion? Must I choose one?

If this is so, all hail the American Taliban!

We do not drag you from your house to church, You are not forced to pray 5 times a day, nor are you restricted in whatever sordid pasttimes you want to entertain yourself in.

You can choose all, one, or no religion without fear of being executed as an infidel, nor are you forced to participate in the religion section of the board or partake in indorctination lessons on your beliefs...

If you want freedom FROM religion then you have it ... go away ... problem solved...

Unbelievable. The president is receiving advise from his spiritual leader you say, and you have a problem with that. Numerous advisors, from different religions should be then utilized, you say. Separation of church and state you demand? He's destroying what freedom we have left, you assert??

Well, let's consider a few things for a moment.

There is no such creature as the "Separation of church and state", there is no clause in the constitution or any of its amendments and what anti-Christians try to teach as truth was nowhere in the minds of the founding fathers. As a matter of fact, if one were to go back and read a few speeches by earlier presidents, you'd find that God being left out of this nation is a relatively new idea and is a plot to dilute our spirit, our backbone and our character as a nation. So,I believe, is T.V. but that is another topic for another thread.

This nation was clearly founded as a nation with a Judeo-Christian society. There is enough evidence of that to make this discussion absurd. I've already written volumes on this topic giving examples from government documents, quotes by the evil white founding men, etc. Bush does not need to get a multitude of advisors, as a matter of fact, that'd be a stupid idea as there'd be a Holy War breaking out in the oval office! Anyway, there are nations all over the world that has predominant religions. Hindus, for example, may go to India. We see what a thriving, prosperous nation that is. Muslims, there are many nations that are not only based on Muslim value and ethics, but they will help you remain Muslim by torturing you and your family if you decided to convert to another belief. Taoism, head east, young man. See, this is the nation Christians built, with all our flaws and shortcomings.
DARN! Get so caught up in the board I ignore the time. Gotta go to work. Talk later.

I agree with TC that Bush may be getting advice from Fallwell but is not necessarily in an "end times" scenario.

Okay... for those of you unfamiliar with Texas culture (not being sarcastic, here, BTW) lemme give you some of the basics: This part of the South buys heavily into the religion aspect. For instant credibility, all you have to do is pray and mention Jehovah 10 or 12 times (bonus points for mentioning any religious retreat or trip to Israel.) Praying in public adds to your credibility. When challenged, the first thing you do is bring up Jehovah and your little church that you attended since Jesus was a corporal.

Down here, scoundrels win over the good guys with that tactic. We had a preacher (Walker Railey) who strangled his wife. She was left in a permanent vegitative state and he (with all the evidence against him), got up in the defense phase, cried at the jury (yes, really) and mentioned God and Jesus. The prosecution hammered home the smoking gun points, and Railey sobbed and kept on with religion.

The jury ACQUITTED the monster, and patted him on his back. Mrs. Railey lived for 20 years or so in a perpetual coma. Railey went on to marry the psychologist he was having an affair with at the time of his wife's attempted murder.

Bush is falling back on cultural patterns: If you want to make an impression on the people, preach and mention God. It does NOT mean that away from your little pulpit you won't do things like have affairs, break laws, or attempt to murder your wife.

And that's the full significance of the matter. It's a plastic overlay so he can do a smoke-and-mirrors/don't-question-me-and-do-as-I-say to the public because he's not good on his verbal feet in answering questions.

Okay, I agree that there should not be a multitude of spiritual advisors in the white house, as you said, it would be mayhem. But if there is not representation from all religions, then there should not be representation from one that will make the presidents view biased toward one faith. There should be a spiritual advisor, to be the liason between the president and religion. But this advisor should be a member of the cabinet and a government employee. Jerry Falwell is neither of these and most of all, he is despised by many Americans.

As for the seperation of church and state:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting free exercise thereof.

Right there, first amendment, any questions?

And the fact that America was fonded as a Judeo-Chrisitan state? Well thats how it may have been founded, but its not that way anymore, we welcomed asisan immigrants, we forced africans to "immigrate" we allowed the arabs to come and in doing so established a wide religous diversity. This was part of the "great mixing pot" that was America. This is a country founded for the people by the people, amd in making these followers of different faiths citizens we accepted that these religions would be represented too. We cannot give one religion bias over another just like we cannot bias for race (but now we can discriminate against arabs, yay ).

OXAS

[Edited on 12-2-2003 by xaos]

Several good points brought up about religious advisors in D.C. so far...
However, there are a few problems with the idea of either having "duly appointed religious advisors" or having none at all; The biggest problem is that the government is already too big & trying to control too much of the lives of American citizens...If we add "official" religious advisors to the mix, then that opens up the road for the White House to start exerting its control over the religious communities in this nation. Religions would have to contend with the possibility that they will get taxed (as well as other regulations imposed) if the government sticks its hand in that area...Once religion has been "officially" included in the workings of D.C., they're going to wind up getting "regulated to death" just like everything else the government has put its hand into. Basically, my opinion is that the only regulation that should be implied for religion is that their practice of worship doesn't cause harm to anyone else.

"Your freedom ends where my nose begins"--Spider Robinson

The government is in need of serious downsizing as it is. It's already taken over far more control than our Founding Fathers *ever* intended & laid out in the Constitution...Most of the power that's already been subborned by the feds should have stayed in the hands of the State/Local Governments.


[Edited on 12-2-2003 by MidnightDStroyer]

Xaos, the US founding fathers were not Christians. A number of them were deists, several pronounced religion a necessary evil, and they would have all kicked and screeched (except for Washington) at the inclusion of "so help me God" to oaths or "In God we trust" on currency or "under God" in a pledge.

Read up on 'em.

Whatever sect of religion they followed (which varied from person to person to at least *some* extent), a lot of the document-drafting they wrote had religious principles as *guidance* without actually specifying any particular religion.

Originally posted by Byrd
and they would have all kicked and screeched (except for Washington) at the inclusion of "so help me God" to oaths or "In God we trust" on currency or "under God" in a pledge.

No you're wrong there Byrd.

The founding fathers (Many of which were freemasons, and they were the movers and shakers...not to mention that many other peoples at that time were masons, George Washington and such, Ben Franklin.)

The "In God We Trust" comes exactly from ritual.

"In whom do you put your trust?"

"In God."

And that is why it is all over the money, people try to attribute the Great Seal as a masonic invention, it isn't, but the "In God We Trust" is.

Edit: Furthermore, no founding father, would be able to comprehend why today so many are irreligious and//or athiests, and would directly blame ALL of america's problems on that, they wouldn't even bother to think about the Gold standard.

Morality is out man...welcome to the age of the physical, errect idols and turn our backs on the one god? Nay, let's just turn our backs on ANY god, after all, we're humans, and we smoke pot, hail be to humanity, for it created everything, and rules all!

Athiesm, is approximately 30 years old, maybe 100 if you count Mark Twain, who really wasn't an athiest, he just bashed catholicism, but he COULD have been an athiest we really just don't know.

Anyways...that's what the founding fathers would think...I don't think any of them thought you should just not believe anything (be irreligious) as you claim Byrd, you must have read a funky source or something, because the person to person relationship amongst people of that time, especially amongst the founding fathers, would have prevented anyone from saying "religion sucks, we should just all run around and do our own thing, and if we need more morals, we can just pass laws"......that is what disgusts the founding fathers.

Sincerely,
no signature

[Edited on 13-2-2003 by FreeMason]

I knew about the whole deist thing, but many others were Protestants. And the majority of the United states was also protestant. So the US was founded with a Christian Nation in mind.

XaoS

The Treaty of Tripoli takes nothing away from this as the government is for making traeies with, establishing trade with and interacting with nations around the world. It isn't a Christian government in that capacity anymore than it was to exchange silver internationally, but gold, instead.
Reading the words and understanding are two different thing. Much of that site was that way, or it was allowed to be left in a manner that would allow readers to interpret the info the wrong way on purpose. While it is, of course, a biased site, I prefer to believe the researchers of the site were able to find and read but not understand information they found.

Thomas is an interesting individual to single out as he expected students of his college to attend the worship service of their particular sect (denomination) weekly, and was fully in favor of the government's position of spreading the Gospel to the natives of the continent.

I notice, also, that they omited G. Washington's many speeches. I guess the first elected president's thoughts and expaectations of the new nation were deemed unimportant.

America was not found on Christian principles, America was found in hyprocisy. Today , we're living in a hyprocisy, not a democracy.. Whoever said that the founding fathers must be kicking when God was inserted into everything is right... they were.

When the original pledge was written, the words "Under God" werent even written. francis bellamy said he wrote a pledge for people of all people so diverse and divided by race, color, and especially religion... so when the words Under God were added into law by Eisenhower, he must've turned in his grave...

A true democracy represents ALL PEOPLE... especially in America, we need a pledge that represents a nation of diversity as bellamy said... so adding Under God now represents the christians.

This country was never founded on christian principles, if it was the slave trade would have never had happened.. all men are created equal my ass, we were but not in america.

slaves werent even considered human beings in the slave era!! 3 slaves counted for one person!! yep... i'm sure Jesus liked that one.

[Edited on 2-14-2003 by Illmatic67]