The Godless Constitution  | | | 
November 6th, 2007, 12:22 AM
|
#41 (permalink)
| | Fact Checker
Join Date: Feb 2000 Location: MSU- E. Lansing, MI
Posts: 6,271
| Quote:
Originally Posted by sharder8  So was the declaration of war against Iraq . . . . which was based on intelligence from several countries . . . . and after congress was briefed on that intelligence . . . which a number of the Democrats still signed . . . . but now deny . . . .
What was your argument again???? 
Harder | There was a "Declaration of War against Iraq" that was unanimously approved by the Senate.
It is no wonder you have such a distorted view of things when your memory revises history to suit your opinion. Much in the same fashion that the Constitution is not in the least bit replete with mentions of God, there was never a "Declaration of War" nor anything remotely close that was "unanimously" approved.
That goofy smile fits you perfectly. | 
|  | |
November 6th, 2007, 12:38 AM
|
#42 (permalink)
| | I do Ouchy-Bleedy.
Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Albany, Ga.
Posts: 10,660
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Flash Huh? What did the founders not put into our founding document?
Is religious truth a matter of numbers?
Is separation of church and state a Christian value? | Since there is nothing in any of our founding documents stating that there MUST be separation of church and state, your comment doesnt change anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Flash You are forgiven.
What does the Bible prescribe as the punishment for murder? Now, show me that our laws are the same.
Murder was a crime long before Christianity came on the scene, dude.
Our laws allow porn. Is that a Christian value? |
Punishment changes with the times. Back when a murder was a crippling crime to a community/tribe, The punishment was, and NEEDED to be much harsher than it is today. Back then, a murder virtually guaranteed the death of the family or several families. Today, the murder of a man will not cause significant hardship on the family, much less others around them. In general, today, anyone who needed to be supported by the murdered person is easily taken care of by the family, if not the family, the community/state/government.
The actuality of murder being a CRIME is what matters. The Bible considers it a crime, our founding fathers considered it a crime, it is a crime under our laws. The punishment is the thing that has changed. We no longer demand an eye for an eye. Murder was a crime from the beginning of written history. Written in the Bible, that is(supposedly roughly 4000 BC). While it has been claimed that the first written laws were the Hammurabi code, MOST SCHOLARS discount the idea.
AS for Porn, it is clash with free speech. Our laws represent the best compromise possible. No child porn, no "snuff" film, No rape scenes, etc. . . However "normal" sexual porn is considered acceptable as long as no one is harmed. In researching this answer I found this site which would be hilarious if they werent deadly serious about it. So FAR, our laws have come down FOR free speech, and I hope they continue to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer Vern
What do you know about the Code of Hammurabi? Roman law? Mosaic law? All predate Christianity by a thousand or more years. You forget that Christianity is a composite of ideas. Very little is original in the religion. |
The Code of Hammurabi was set out around 1750 BC. While there are significant differences between the two, there are many striking similarities. Again most scholars discount the idea:Quote:
Most scholars, however, have abandoned this theory, since further research has shown that, in ancient times, there were codes of law in various countries. Some of these were much older than Hammurabis' stele.
Technically Christianity IS a subset of Judaism - the Abrahamic GOD is THE God I speak of. Christian, Jews, and the Muslim are the Major religions who worship God(Gnosticism, and Manichaean while not religious use the Old Testament as guiding traditions). Pretty much The Bible, along with the Torah and the Quran use the same set of texts. Almost all of which form the basis for our laws.
Furthermore, Mosaic law moved beyond the Code of Hammurabi, or any of the ancient law codes, because it is grounded in the worship of one God. The ethical principles in the law of Moses spring from love toward the one true God. Such love demands that one also love fellow human beings, whom God made in his image. Moses thus talks about human sin and our responsibility to God in resisting sin. Hammurabi and other ancient law-givers, however, do not address this issue.
Hammurabi's law code is exclusively civil and criminal. Moses' law code, on the other hand, begins with spiritual principles — love toward God and humans — from which the civil and criminal laws are derived. From its stress on the motive of love, the law of Moses demanded more humane treatment for slaves, gave higher regard for womanhood, and placed greater value upon human life in general. The priority given to such spiritual values made the Mosaic law unique among all the ancient law codes.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Flash Why is it that you only credit Christianity with the good things that America has produced? |
Because I think that is the way it is.
At least your questions are better than Gomers incessant spamming with the trivialQuote:
Originally Posted by Gomer YADA, YADA, Treaty of Tripoli, YADA, YADA |
I explained to Gomer in this thread, but apparently he isnt listening.
__________________
They say technology slows down for no one. I know it outruns my wallet. I figure its because my wallet isn't light enough yet.
| 
| | |
November 6th, 2007, 12:39 AM
|
#43 (permalink)
| | Fact Checker
Join Date: Feb 2000 Location: MSU- E. Lansing, MI
Posts: 6,271
| Quote:
Originally Posted by no1_vern | Show me the specific post vern. | |
| | |
November 6th, 2007, 12:42 AM
|
#44 (permalink)
| | I do Ouchy-Bleedy.
Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Albany, Ga.
Posts: 10,660
|
Beemer - Im Sorry.
I apologize for not only thinking but claiming that I thought you were dishonest.
Vern | |
| | |
November 6th, 2007, 12:48 AM
|
#45 (permalink)
| | Not an OWO yet, just OLD!
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Uh, Central Oregon
Posts: 5,718
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomer There was a "Declaration of War against Iraq" that was unanimously approved by the Senate.
It is no wonder you have such a distorted view of things when your memory revises history to suit your opinion. Much in the same fashion that the Constitution is not in the least bit replete with mentions of God, there was never a "Declaration of War" nor anything remotely close that was "unanimously" approved.
That goofy smile fits you perfectly. | Hey Dumb arse, ya' missed my point entirely . . .
Our Government has lied many times in the past, to suit the situation . . . as pointed out by wiggerbeater. Yet, you still cling to the quote from a Treaty that was re-negotiatied 8 years later and no longer contained the quote you're hanging on to for dear life.
Do you know what a metaphor is??? If you don't, let me give you one . . .
Jesus never stated that he was the son of God, or that he was God. What he did say was, "My Father and I are one". So, are you ready for a second metaphor . . . "endowed by their creator"
Quote: |
Originally Posted by EX So having the word "Creator" in it means they all believed in a god? |
Not necessarily . . . what it does mean, is that those who didn't, didn't have a problem with the wording that was finally agreed upon.
Quote: |
Originally Posted by EX You mean that the "creator" they are talking about couldn't be your parents (who were the ones who did *create* you with the mixing of their DNA). |
When taken in context with the time as which it was written, highly unlikely. (Read my above response.)
Harder
__________________
* NOSCE TE IPSUM *
* NOLI ME TANGERE * | |
| | |
November 6th, 2007, 12:55 AM
|
#46 (permalink)
| | Fact Checker
Join Date: Feb 2000 Location: MSU- E. Lansing, MI
Posts: 6,271
| Quote:
Originally Posted by sharder8 Hey Dumb arse, ya' missed my point entirely . . .
Our Government has lied many times in the past, to suit the situation . . . as pointed out by wiggerbeater. Yet, you still cling to the quote from a Treaty that was re-negotiatied 8 years later and no longer contained the quote you're hanging on to for dear life. | I did not miss your point, you did not make one. The "government lie" as you put it was unanimously approve. Not a single objection. The people of the same generation of our founding fathers approved it with nary a bat of the eye.
You missed my point. There was a vote on the Iraq situation. And regardless of the lies, 25% of the vote was against it. There was not a unanimous vote as in the case of the treaty.
Both you and vern are ignoring the fact that the Constitution makes no mention whatsoever to God, Christ, or Creator. The only mention of religion is a specific exemption from a religious test for entering into office.
Wigger on the otherhand is actively spreading the misconception that the Constitution is "replete" with mentions of God. And that is not the first time a member in these forums have made that claim. A claim which has absolutely ZERO basis in fact. | |
| | |
November 6th, 2007, 01:13 AM
|
#47 (permalink)
| | Rather Large Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Vernon, BC, Canada
Posts: 9,245
|
How many quotes do you need to read from the Father of the Constitution, James Madison before you get the idea of what his intensions were in regards to Separation of Church and State? http://atheism.about.com/library/quo...q_JMadison.htm
I'm getting dizzy with all the spin.
__________________
Beware of promises of life where death is prerequisite.
| |
| | |
November 6th, 2007, 01:22 AM
|
#48 (permalink)
| | Not an OWO yet, just OLD!
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Uh, Central Oregon
Posts: 5,718
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer How many quotes do you need to read from the Father of the Constitution, James Madison before you get the idea of what his intensions were in regards to Separation of Church and State? http://atheism.about.com/library/quo...q_JMadison.htm
I'm getting dizzy with all the spin. | How many interpretations of something written over 200 years ago, did it take you to get to the point that you agree with what you believe he meant??? Did you personally ask him???? Talk about putting a spin on things . . . You and your ilk swear your interpretation is the only correct one. Yet, you leave out the context in which it was said. Context in this case should also include what was happening in the world/country/time when they wrote/said what they did.
Harder | |
| | |
November 6th, 2007, 09:09 AM
|
#49 (permalink)
| | Rather Large Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Vernon, BC, Canada
Posts: 9,245
|
It doesn't take much of an interpretation considering Madison spelled it out clear and simple many times by his own words. You would have us interpret his words similar to:
I want a hotdog
to
I may want a hot dog
to
It could have been a hamburger and not a hotdog that he requested. Were you there?
Ilk? Get a grip sharder. | |
| | |
November 6th, 2007, 10:04 AM
|
#50 (permalink)
| | I do Ouchy-Bleedy.
Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Albany, Ga.
Posts: 10,660
|
Everyone can speculate what he actually wanted(even I can) But WHAT WAS WRITTEN is what we must go by. | |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Most Active Discussions  | | | | |   Recent Discussions  | | | | |
 |
hardware
prices 
