Rev. Billy Graham’s Daughter: ‘I Would Not Vote for…an Atheist’ (POLL)
- Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:28am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
Anne Graham Lotz, daughter of revered televangelist the Rev. Billy Graham, appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, where she joined other faith leaders in discussing religious freedom and politics. Among the topics debated and the statements made, Lotz said that she would not vote for an atheist — a statement that will certainly ruffle non-believers’ feathers.
Anne Graham Lotz
In making the bold claim, Lotz told host David Gregory that she prefers candidates who believe in the existence of a higher power and who conduct themselves under consideration that God has a presence in the world.
“I would not vote for a man who was an atheist because I believe you need to have an acknowledgement or a reverence or a fear for almighty God,” Lotz said. ”I believe that’s where wisdom comes from.”
Watch her make these comments, below (around 20:00):
This distrust of atheists is widespread in society, as the vast majority of Americans claim that a belief in God is something they value in presidential candidates. In fact, a poll that Gregory showed from Dec. 2011 found that 86 percent of Americans said that it is at least somewhat important that presidential candidates believe in God.
Some may contend that the discrimination that is purported to exist against atheists is overblown, but a Gallup poll from 2011 seems to show an inherent bias — at least when it comes to electoral politics. People, as you will see below, are less likely to vote for atheists than they are for women, blacks, Baptists, Jews, Mormons and gays:
Atheists, though, are working diligently to change their image in the public eye. As The Blaze has reported, non-believers have launched a progressive National Atheist Party.
What do you think? Would you vote for an atheist in a presidential election?
(H/T: Urban Christian News)
Carousel image courtesy Shutterstock.com
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 582 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 411 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 408 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 374 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 363 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 408 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 411 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 363 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 408 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (545)
YoshiFD3S
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:10pmI would rather appoint someone who is at least a self-proclaimed member of a faith that promotes HONESTY, INTEGRITY, ACCOUNTABILITY, respect, peace, and overall good moral ethics.
Galations 5:22 for reference…the “fruits of the spirit” as they are called. Look it up.
Although I understand and believe full-well that all men and women are fallible, I would still rather place my trust in a man who at least TRIES to live their lives according to biblical moral standards.
I can also understand and respect the idea of “separation” of faith VS. politics, and that’s it own issue…However, I think people aren’t recognizing that if you are voting or appointing a person to a position of power, and that person doesn’t even live their life according to any kind of moral standards above their own….then you are trusting that person and their judgment to do the right thing all on their own…accountable to NO one. And you wonder where corrupt politicians come from?
Obviously, there are those are most certainly “Christians In Name Only” (RINO punn) as well. Those would claim to be Christians, etc…yet are obvious hypocrites of their own faith….President Obama is a perfect example, quite frankly….the most anti-Israeli American president to date.
It comes down to this. Who/what sets the moral standards and foundations within a person’s life? To ME….I would rather place my trust in a man who at least is known for TRYING to live his life according to biblical
Report Post »mwchase
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:18pm“And you wonder where corrupt politicians come from?”
The belief that restitution for earthly crimes is offered unconditionally if one has faith in a higher power?
Report Post »TerranRich
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:14pmOh, you mean the biblical moral standards that say that a woman who was raped must marry her rapist? Or the biblical moral standards that say that a slave owner an beat his slave to within an inch of his life, as long as he doesn’t die within a few days? Or maybe the biblical moral standards that demand gays, unruly children, and witches be murdered?
Yeah, I’m sorry, but I’m more concerned with their ability to follow the Constitution and operate within their limitation of powers, than I am some attempt to appear pious.
Report Post »Ballot_Box_Revolution
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:32pmif you mean simply someone who doesn’t believe in god yes…..If you mean these modern day agenda driven hater atheist…..no
Report Post »@leftfighter
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:33pm@mwchase
That’s a bastardization of Christian beliefs.
Osama bin Laden himself could have converted to Christianity, but that wouldn’t absolve him of his earthly crimes. There are thousands of people who find Jesus in prison, but that doesn’t absolve them of their crimes. There are a billion people in the world who know Jesus, but none of their crimes here on earth are absolved.
As to sin, well, that’s not for either you or I to judge, is it? You have no more say in it than you do a courtroom in which you aren’t in the jury. Almighty God is the Judge and jury, Satan is the prosecutor, and Jesus is pro bono Defense- but only if you hire Him.
Nobody‘s making the case that someone who is guilty of a crime here on earth shouldn’t be punished for the crime here on earth. That’s a Straw Man.
As for me? Yes, I’m a libertarian-leaning Conservative, but I‘m a citizen of God’s Kingdom before that. I believe Faith in God is imperative to having a solid and trustworthy basis in morality that’s required to be a strong leader. Can Atheists not be good leaders? Not necessarily, but I can’t trust an Atheist to lead America to being the New Israel that the Founders invisioned.
Bad morals tend to precede bad policy. Hello, Bill Clinton.
Report Post »Rational1
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:34pm@YoshiFD3S
Report Post »“I would rather appoint someone who is at least a self-proclaimed member of a faith that promotes HONESTY, INTEGRITY, ACCOUNTABILITY, respect, peace, and overall good moral ethics.”
So you believe someone needs a faith to be a good person? If anything, faith brings more chaos, the belief that some young man died just so YOU could live free of sin and get to heaven as long as you go to church regularly, no matter what, allows people to do unspeakable things because they believe it is “what god wants.” I as a person am a very honest, accountable, respectful, moral ATHEIST with a high amount of integrity, these adjectives have all been used by friends, colleagues, and professors. You would base your entire judgement of me off of my religious non-affiliation? That seems somewhat conceited… Frankly, Catholicism and Christianity, are flawed. The entire bible is riddled with contradictions and ridiculous sins, if one part of the source is flawed, the ENTIRE source is flawed. Catholicism and Christianity for the most part teach acceptable morals, besides continuous anti-gay sentiment and excessively baroque stories from an obvious book of fiction. However, even in light of the obvious fiction, and it is fiction, it is all taken seriously by a group of fanatics. When this fiction is OBVIOUSLY proven wrong, the story in question automatically becomes a parable, mildly ironic is it not?
jzs
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:36pm“I would not vote for a man who was an atheist because I believe you need to have an acknowledgement or a reverence or a fear for almighty God,” Lotz said. ”I believe that’s where wisdom comes from.”
I don’t. Wisdom comes from fear of punishment? I’d rather of someone in office, religious or atheist, who has an internal moral compass and is motivated to do the “right thing,” not because they are afraid of going to hell or hoping to go to Heaven. But simply because they are motivated to do the right thing.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:39pmLotz said that she would not vote for an atheist — a statement that will certainly ruffle non-believers’ feathers. LOL it ruffles no ones feathers as even the completely ignorant would not expect her to say or do any different. The only story here is how pseudo believers express the same position and vote accordingly. There are many issues facing the US that are a tad bit more pressing, many equally as troubling in terms of being an assault on our freedoms, than the belief in God.
Report Post »AOL_REFUGEE
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:49pmThis will ‘ruffle feathers’? Ridiculous. She’s entitled to vote – or not vote – for anyone she pleases, just like anyone else, and not have it be anyone else’s business.
Report Post »Frunobulax
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:55pmThe United States Constitution, Article 6, Section3: “…but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
Ever. As in forever.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:57pm“The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.” – Washington’s Farewell Address 1796
“And may that Being who is supreme over all, the Patron of Order, the Fountain of Justice, and the Protector in all ages of the world of virtuous liberty, continue His blessing upon this nation and its Government and give it all possible success and duration consistent with the ends of His providence.” – John Adams, Inaugural Address, Philadelphia, PA: Saturday, March 4, 1797
“enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter—with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people?” – Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, Washington, DC: Wednesday, March 4, 1801
Report Post »Frunobulax
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:04pm@Colt1860: where’s Jesus in all that? What, were the Founding Fathers Scientologists or something?
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:12pm@Frunobulax http://www.pilgrimhall.org/GivingThanks3c.htm
Thanksgiving Proclamation 1777 by the Continental Congress: the first national Thanksgiving proclamation.
IN CONGRESS
November 1, 1777
FORASMUCH as it is the indispensable Duty of all Men to adore the superintending Providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with Gratitude their Obligation to him for Benefits received, and to implore such farther Blessings as they stand in Need of: And it having pleased him in his abundant Mercy, not only to continue to us the innumerable Bounties of his common Providence; but also to smile upon us in the Prosecution of a just and necessary War, for the Defense and Establishment of our unalienable Rights and Liberties; particularly in that he hath been pleased, in so great a Measure, to prosper the Means used for the Support of our Troops, and to crown our Arms with most signal success:
It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive Powers of these UNITED STATES to set apart THURSDAY, the eighteenth Day of December next, for SOLEMN THANKSGIVING and PRAISE: That at one Time and with one Voice, the good People may express the grateful Feelings of their Hearts, and consecrate themselves to the Service of their Divine Benefactor; and that, together with their sincere Acknowledgments and Offerings,…
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:12pm…they may join the penitent Confession of their manifold Sins, whereby they had forfeited every Favor; and their humble and earnest Supplication 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 graciously to afford his Blessing on the Governments of these States respectively, and prosper the public Council of the whole: To inspire our Commanders, both by Land and Sea, and all under them, with that Wisdom and Fortitude which may render them fit Instruments, under the Providence of Almighty GOD, to secure for these United States, the greatest of all human Blessings, INDEPENDENCE and PEACE: That it may please him, to prosper the Trade and Manufactures of the People, and the Labor of the Husbandman, that our Land may yield its Increase: To take Schools and Seminaries of Education, so necessary for cultivating the Principles of true Liberty, Virtue and Piety, under his nurturing Hand; and 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.”
Report Post »And it is further recommended, That servile Labor, and such Recreation, as, though at other Times innocent, may be unbecoming the Purpose of this Appointment, be omitted on so solemn an Occasion.
SgtB
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:14pmYou’ve got a pretty limited view of theism Yoshi. I am not an atheist, but neither am I a Christian. When I look at the world and see teaming life all around me and try to explain away my higher brain functions and thoughts as a mere byproduct of organic chemistry, I fail every time. I believe that there is a God and there is a true moral right and wrong, but I don‘t believe in Christianity or any other religion I’ve yet seen. In fact, it is my belief that politicians and businessmen are using closed minded people like yourself to gain power.
After all, religion is one of the oldest and most seductive forms of government. All religions attempt to claim ownership of the individual and instill fear of a horrible afterlife for crimes committed in the present in order to have individuals render obedience to the church. If anyone truly knew all of the horrors that the Catholic Church alone has committed over the last thousand years, it would make the most devout of you question your own faith. Just think, the church used to castrate boys just so their voices wouldn’t drop an octave.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:15pm“Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments.” Charles Carroll, signer of the Declaration of Independence
“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.” Patrick Henry
“Finally, let us not forget the religious character of our origin. Our fathers were brought hither by their high veneration for the Christian religion. They journeyed by its light, and labored in its hope. They sought to incorporate its principles with the elements of their society, and to diffuse its influence through all their institutions, civil, political, or literary.” Daniel Webster
“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed….No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.” Noah Webster
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:18pm“If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws.”
Noah Webster
“And as it is our duty to extend our wishes to the happiness of the great family of man, I conceive that we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world that the rod of tyrants may be broken to pieces, and the oppressed made free again; that wars may cease in all the earth, and that the confusions that are and have been among nations may be overruled by promoting and speedily bringing on that holy and happy period when the kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and all people everywhere willingly bow to the sceptre of Him who is Prince of Peace.” Sam Adams
“Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ.” James Madison
“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
“Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual. … Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us.” Hancck
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:21pm“The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. 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.” J Adams
“The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made ‘bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God’.” JAdams
The gospel of Jesus Christ prescribes the wisest rules for just conduct in every situation of life. Happy they who are enabled to obey them in all situations!” Benjamin Rush
“Christianity is the only true and perfect religion, and that in proportion as mankind adopts its principles and obeys its precepts, they will be wise and happy.” B Rush
“I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man.” Hamilton
Report Post »Hollywood
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:42pmBetter to vote for an atheist than an anti-Christ[who happens to be in office now]
Report Post »Locked
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:01pmIt’s interesting to see how the poll has changed. In the first hour it came out, it was about 90% “No, I would not vote for an atheist.” Now it’s about 85% “Yes, I would.”
Not sure if that just means more hardliners are on in the morning, or if someone’s hijacked the poll (as happened every so often).
Report Post »AugustusCarp
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:03pmWhich set of “biblical moral standards” would you want a leader to try to live up to? I hope that very few would attempt to live up to the guidance laid down in Leviticus and Deuteronomy
You say that a politician who is an atheist is accountable to no one? REALLY??? what about the electorate? Even those who claim to be accountable to someone else will still be accountable to the people who put them in office
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:17pmI will go one better, I will not vote for an atheist, a mormon, and would have to be a real tough situation before I pull the lever for a catholic.
They call it my vote for a reason, and that is because it is mine.
Poison or poison light – I aint drinking either one.
If Obama wins, and we pick up a majority in the senate, and get stronger republicans in the house, then they can contain him for four more years (regardless of what the Russians were told).
If Romney wins, then you know in 2014 the libs will clean up in the house and senate. A mormon progressive with a jelly fish backbone with the liberals MSM and the senate and house pulling him, he will fold like a cheap lawn chair from K Mart. No thanks, I will keep the enemy I already have over the sheep in jelly fish clothing
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:24pmJohn Adams
2nd U.S. President and Signer of the Declaration of Independence
“Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God … What a Eutopia, what a Paradise
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:26pmPatrick Henry
Ratifier of the U.S. Constitution
“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.”
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:32pm“[T]hanks be given unto Almighty God therefore, and knowing that it is appointed for all men once to die and after that the judgment… principally, I give and recommend my soul into the hands of Almighty God who gave it and my body to the earth to be buried in a decent and Christian like manner… to receive the same again at the general resurrection by the mighty power of God.” John Hart, JUDGE; LEGISLATOR; SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION
“The great pillars of all government and of social life [are] virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone, that renders us invincible.” Patrick Henry, REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; LEGISLATOR; “THE VOICE OF LIBERTY”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA
“It becomes a people publicly to acknowledge the over-ruling hand of Divine Providence and their dependence upon the Supreme Being as their Creator and Merciful Preserver… and with becoming humility and sincere repentance to supplicate the pardon that we may obtain forgiveness through the merits and mediation of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” Samuel Huntington, SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; JUDGE; GOVERNOR OF CONNECTICUT
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:35pm“For my part, I am free and ready enough to declare that I think the Christian religion is a Divine institution; and I pray to God that I may never forget the precepts of His religion or suffer the appearance of an inconsistency in my principles and practice.” James Iredell, RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA; U. S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT GEORGE WASHINGTON
Thomas Jefferson, SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; DIPLOMAT; GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA; SECRETARY OF STATE; THIRD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:
“The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.”
“The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.”
“I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.”
“I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.”
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:37pm“[I] . . . am endeavoring . . . to attend to my own duty only as a Christian. . . . let us take care that our Christianity, though put to the test . . . be not shaken, and that our love for things really good wax not cold.” William Samuel Johnson, JUDGE; MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; PRESIDENT OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE; U. S. SENATOR
“I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare their unsatisfactoriness by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your evidence in this way.” James Madison, SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; AUTHOR OF THE FEDERALIST PAPERS; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; SECRETARY OF STATE; FOURTH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
“I give and bequeath my soul to Almighty God that gave it me, hoping that through the meritorious death and passion of our Savior and Redeemer Jesus Christ to receive absolution and remission for all my sins.” George Mason, DELEGATE AT THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; “FATHER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS”
Report Post »db321
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:46pmLET’s GET SOMETHING STRAIGHT!
What is your WORD?
What is your DEED?
Your support of a Candidate is your Deed?
Your Vote for Candidate is your Deed?
God says that ALL – even Obama, Atheist, Jews and Muslims will be judge for every Word and Deed they have done in their life – no mater who they believe in.
Even if you close the curtains in the voting booth behind you and never told anyone who you voted for – YOU STILL BE JUDGED FOR YOUR WORD AND DEED (VOTE).
Atheist may have kicked God out of Schools and are trying to kick God out of this Country – God does not take orders from Obama, the Atheist or even the ACLU and he is going to Judge everyone for the Word and Deed in their life.
Beside God told us who we should vote for in the Bible – he was very clear – God does not want anyone running this Country who is going to turn their back on Israel like Obama, and Ron Paul have done.
Don’t get mad at me – I’m in sales – Gods in Management.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:47pm@jzs The word fear is used in a different context within Scripture. It does not mean, therein: pain, impending evil, being afraid, alarmed, anxiety, or to be terrified.
“In scripture, fear is used to EXPRESS a filial [relationship] or a slavish [servile] PASSION [not actual condition or personal status]. In good men, the fear of God is a holy awe or reverence of God and his laws, which springs from a just view and real love of the divine character, leading the subjects of it to hate and shun every thing that can offend such a holy being, and inclining them to aim at perfect obedience [to all that is just, holy and good]. This is filial fear [a natural need and want of guidance, blessings and justice.” Webster
Report Post »SoNick
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:56pmColt 1860 is once again guilty of argumentum verbosum, flooding us with quotes of important people that have no impact whatsoever on what the Constitution says. repeat after me, Colt: no religious test.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 5:06pm@SoNick The signers of the declaration and Constitution were Christian. Repeat after me, since the founding of our Nation, we’ve been a CHRISTIAN people. I’ll POST 100 hundred more quotes. As I’m pretty sure Liberals only have about twenty out of context quotes to somehow prove the signers were not Christian. LOL. The gig is up.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 5:13pm@SoNick I never mentioned a requirement of a religious test. The quotes are for those stating that the founders, signers, and early Americans were Deists, not Christians. On that note, Why is it anytime someone pints out a quote that proves a significant signer was Christian, some out of context defense is brought up? No religious test was required by Congress, ever. And no church has ever been established by congress, ever. YET, that clause DID NOT MEAN Washington could not take his constitutional Oath on the Holy Bible, and say thereafter “So help me God”. The quotes are to show that America during our founding was overwhelmingly Christian, and religious. The liberals, MSM, and public schools don’t like to point that out, and in fact, go out of their way to distort or lie.
Report Post »BuzzardSays
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 5:43pmCan you know the evil mind of an atheist. God knows their minds and it is all evil, all the time. He calls them fools.
Report Post »basmith7
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:27pmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_111th_United_States_Congress#Religious_demographics
And you wonder where corrupt politicians come from?
None of them are atheist.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:38pm@Buzzardsays, I don’t believe that for one second. There’s a group of atheists that are a pain in the butt, but nothing more. They don’t represent all or even most atheists either. I don’t equate your intolerance to all Christians.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:51pm@basmith7 I’m pretty sure many went to public schools, and very liberal colleges. Don’t forget that most churches are corporations, wherefore their speech is limited, e.g. can’t talk about certain politics or other governmental things. Granted, many of our churches today are corrupt, Congress only reflects that. I’d say we need an awakening, or revival.
Here you go, you sleepy Christians: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ec5dJHtMTSg
Report Post »Clixx13
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:54pmMost anti-Israeli president to date? REALLY?
Report Post »iharbison
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:31pmI would rather place my trust in a man who does the right thing because it’s the right thing to do, not because he fears a higher power and possible punishment from that power. What makes you think it isn’t possible for a non-God-fearing man to make wise, good decisions?
Report Post »evodevo
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:39pm@ Colt1860 – Are you aware that most of your “quotes” are fakes?
Report Post »msbav8r
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:55pmWhich part of the bible do you consider ‘moral’?
The rapes, genocides, slavery or incest?
When 75% of the US population is Christian and .2% is atheist, you cannot claim any ‘moral’ superiority by following a 2000+ year-old book written by primitive goat herders.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 8:58pm@evodevo LOL. Nice try. Show me proof that at least four of them are fake.
Report Post »CajunReb
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:00pmI’d rather the candidate I vote for be a Christian first. I have a problem voting for a member of a Christian cult but would vote for the Mormon Christian cult candidate over a Moozlum Communist in a heart beat. I wish there was a true conservative to represent the Republican pat this election but obviously the Republican electorate believes the propaganda put out by the Romneyites that only a moderately Liberal Republican can beat the Communist that presently resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington City. Our Republic was lost at Appomattox during the administration of the first USSA dictatorial Communist President. .
Report Post »jzs
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:01pmcolt1860, I haven’t read all the posts but I appreciate that you are standing your ground.
Here’s my slant. Yes, you’re right, many of the Founding Fathers called themselves Christians, and many also believed that there is a God whose moral precepts can be found in the the words of Christ, precepts that can be verified with reason and logic. I agree with that view for what that is worth.
But most of the Founders, as I understand it, were Deists not Theists (sorry if this ground is already tread). Being a Deist is different than being a current day Evangelical “Christian.” In common is a belief in a God and a belief that Christ had acute insight into the morality that God gave to the world. But Jefferson, for one, did not think Christ divine, but only a profound philosopher. He said: 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. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors.
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
http://www.nobeliefs.com/jefferson.htm
That’s a little different from your idea of a “Christian.”
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:20pm@JZS
if you research, you will find that the majority of the founding fathers professed to be christian, and only two of the signers were diests (ben franklin being one of them)
Report Post »thankful
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:35pmOne would be foolish to vote for an Athiest…for they have no sense or right and wrong, only what they like or don’t like. They are their own God therefore have no basis for ethical decisions. Ha, but don’t tell them that because since they ARE their own God they believe they know everything. Faith is a decision we all must make…I choose to follow my savior. Athiests choose themselves, it’s really quite sad, but it is their decision.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:44pm@JZS What RangerP said.
As regards to the Jefferson quote, a few posts above are quotes of Jefferson professing himself to be Christian, though, according to what he believes a Christian is. I appreciate that you at least understand my intent here, as pointed out in your first paragraph. My main concern is the LOSS, distortion, and manipulation of our history and heritage, mostly perpetuated by the Left, in order to advance or implement a Marxist (Godless) agenda, though our history is rich in the belief in a higher power. It’s one thing for leftists to want their positions to be accepted and executed within our Governments and societies, it’s another to, by deception, indoctrination and infiltration, force that upon a populace whose history is one against such change. We escaped Europe in order to be able to freely practice religion, not to be free from religion. Jefferson wrote in a 1802 letter that he did not want his administration to be a “government without religion,” but one that would “strengthen… religious freedom.”
Report Post »jzs
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:52pmcolt1860, I rarely extend comments over two posts but I’ll do that here because this is a facinating subject in my view. You say: “SoNick The signers of the declaration and Constitution were Christian. Repeat after me, since the founding of our Nation, we’ve been a CHRISTIAN people.”
I’ve heard that before plenty of times, that we are a “CHRISTIAN people” and that the United States is a “Christian country.” Maybe you’ve noticed but nowhere in the Constitution of the United States do the words “Christian,“ ”Christ,“ ”Jesus“ or ”God” ever appear. Nowhere are any words in the Constitution justified by reference to religion.
In fact beyond Jefferson’s famous statement in a letter about the “separation of church and state” he said, “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 Hindi and Infidel of every denomination.
-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
That’s pretty inclusive, and hardly an affirmation that Jefferson believed ours is a “Christian nation.”
What does that mean anyway, “C
Report Post »child of God
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:21pm@Rational1
“ the belief that some young man died just so YOU could live free of sin and get to heaven as long as you go to church regularly, no matter what, allows people to do unspeakable things because they believe it is ‘what god wants.’ ”
You like so many, including Christians, believe that just because they go to church means they’re true believers. Jesus said “Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord!, Lord!’ on the day of judgement will enter the kingdom of God.“ They are also people people that he referred to as ”Christian in name only.” Jesus specifically preached non-violence.
Report Post »StormFox
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:25pmIronic that you would rather vote for a dishonest hypocrite because they claim they believe in God. Sure they may believe in God, but they are still liars and hypocrites.
Vote for them over someone who is honest and doesn’t believe in God, but DOES believe logic and reason should be the guiding principals when making decisions and is honest with the people about what he believes.
As much as all the Christians keep complaining about “Oh noes! Atheist are destroying the country!” when is the last time the Atheist actually had a chance to run the country?
The problem is people vote because they believe the person they are voting for is a man of God..
Also, you can say “well I won‘t vote for them because they don’t fear a higher power!” and I think it is novel that you believe humans are all child like and need daddy to straighten them out sometimes. However some of us are adults who can do good because we want to, not because we fear our daddy will punish us if we don’t play nice.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:44pm@JZS Unfortunately, among Conservatives and Liberals, there’s a HUGE misunderstanding as to what words mean. People does not mean Government. Nation means People and their Government, not just Government. When I say a Christian people, I do NOT mean a Christian Government, as in some political and religious institution united as one.
Some of your points I’ve already discussed on this page. Practically all the signers of the Constitution were Christian, and KNEW where LIFE came from, from whom our LIBERTY originated, from where our BLESSINGS come, ETC. I could post the quotes, but I’ll just unnecessarily repeat myself.
They did not dismiss that amendment, to dismiss Christ, or his religion. They did so because they understood that such an amendment was contrary to our federal union of republican states, and contrary to the teachings of Christ e.g. love, justice, peace, equality, etc. This was, after all, a Constitution intended to limit the general Government.
We are, since the founding of our Nation, a Christian people. People, nation, and Government, are not the same. And within context, may mean totally different things. I don’t want to repeat myself, so, if you don’t mind, look at my other posts on here. I’ll conclude with this. Christianity was a huge influence on our forefathers. The principles, humanity, respect, tolerance, justice, peace, laws, precepts, etc. they learned within there, is what helped our nation to be free and just.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:49pmMD’s Declaration of Rights from 1776:
XXV. That no other test or qualification ought to be required, on admission to any office of trust or profit, than such oath of support and fidelity to this State, and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this Convention, or the Legislature of this State, and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion.
XXXVI. That the manner of administering an oath to any person, ought to be such, as those of the religious persuasion, profession, or denomination, of which such person is one, generally esteem the most effectual confirmation, by the attestation of the Divine Being.
DE, 1776:
“Art. 22. Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust . . . shall . . . make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit: “I ___, do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, Blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scripture of the Old and New Testaments to be given by divine inspiration.”
VA, 1776:
Report Post »“That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.”
COFemale
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:07pmCorrupt politicians come about when they give their soul to the devil for power. All men and women are fallible regardless of religious beliefs. However, the pot is more savory for the devil when a Christian falls.
I would not knowingly vote for an atheist as I do not know where their moral basis comes from.
Report Post »youshouldnotpostthatanywhere
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:50pmTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTrollTroll
Report Post »Fordiman
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:52pmDivine command theory has the fatal flaw that if you _do_ turn out to be insane, you will, like Abraham, follow the orders of the voices in your head, regardless of the implications. I don’t care what your religion is – but if you don’t have an understanding of the secular theories for moral action and basic ethics, I‘d rather you weren’t running anything more dangerous than a fryolator.
Report Post »milez5
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 3:45amOne big reason not to vote for an atheist would be the arrogance of that position. To state that you are sure that there is no God— unlike an agnostic who just admits that he doesn’t know— would almost certainly mean that a person is an ideologue.
Report Post »we just had eight years of Bush a progressive/neoconservative ideologue and now of course we have a straight up Marxist.
I hope for the sake of our nation and indeed the world that Romney is the true moderate that he’s been cracked up to be.
milez5
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 3:54amDiscrimination? Really? Is it discrimination to admit that you would not vote for a man who’s values and beliefs differ entirely from your own? We use the term discrimination far too often and always place it in a negative context. Of course voters seek a candidate who shares their values and beliefs—or at least professes to do so–and their doing so is hardly discrimination.
Report Post »GodlessLiberal1990
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 4:55amyou are trusting that person and their judgment to do the right thing all on their own…accountable to NO one…… if i were elected to office i would be accountable to the American people NOT GOD
Report Post »lemonfemale
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 4:59am“Living by Biblical principles”. Since you call some people CINOs, there is a certain set of principles you want your politiciabs to live by, which is fine. I feel the same. Only I don’t just ask if the Bible guides their life and leave it at that. I want to know which morals they feel the Bible calls on them to follow. The Berrigan brothers leap to mind: anti-Vietnam war, draft resisters, devoted enough that they went to jail for this. And, well maybe not Fred Phelps because I don’t know if he just wants publicity, but his kids feel religiously bound to picket funerals of fallen soldiers. On the other hand, if a person believes as I do and will stand up for those beliefs they have my vote.
Report Post »Ran60
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 7:56amWhich God? Odin??
Who’s morality? Sounds like an open invitation to redefine “is”.
It is unfortunate that most people accept the stereotype (read this as: the ones the press all seem to give attention to) of atheists, when in fact their vulgar and disrespectful words and acts should brand them as ANTI-RELIGIONISTS. Many of these seem to forget that pesky “free exercise” clause.
But to discount any candidate by any reason other than their policies would be bigotted and irrational.
Report Post »Wolf
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 8:21amSo Gallup’s poll has 49% would vote for and 49% who wouldn’t vote for and 3% who are undecided… 101%. Interesting how those statistics prove the axiom there is truth, lies and statistics lie…
Report Post »Thors Hammer
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 10:21amI voted that I wouldn’t vote for an atheist because I want someone in office who knows that he/she is not the ultimate authority on anything – God is. Too many of our ‘representatives’ forget that when they assume power. On a personal level, I feel badly for those who don’t know, love and appreciate a higher being, but I would not ostracize them
Report Post »inblack
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 10:47amNo, I don’t care about founders, I don’t care for people who force religion on people, but I would not vote for an atheist.
I think to be an atheist you have to deny the part of you that knows that God is present. That is mentally dishonest.
I do pray that those people find God though.
Report Post »governmentCorruptionDestroysAmerica
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 11:29amIf you truly believe that God exists then you could not logically vote for an aetheist because he/she would be living in a fantasy world! At its core, America exists by Divine Providence. In my opinion, a belief in God should be required to be the president of America. I am stunned at the initial poll results.
Report Post »Not your average Joe
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 1:17pmBiblical standards allows for incest–Abraham and his half-sister, Sarah; Lot and his daughters (could father get so drunk and not know he was having sex with his daughter?…without passing out first); Noah’s children–who did their children have sex with after the flood? Biblical standards allow for warfare on peaceful people and the murder of innocents women and children (Thou shalt not kill really only applied to the Hebrews, and their tribal members. The forced marriage (rape) of women (girls, really) captured in war. Also, in Jesus’ time, a Hebrew man could have as many wives as he wanted and could afford. Are those the Biblical standards you are looking for? If a person is raised with love, repect, kindness, and dignity then, generally, that is how they will treat others. And one can be raised that way by atheists as well as Christians.
Report Post »jzs
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 2:09pmcolt1860, I’ve enjoyed reading your post. One recurring theme however is that, “We are a Christian people.” That’s got a nice ring to it, but what does it mean and what follows from that idea? Certainly you don’t mean that Muslims or Buddhists living in the US are Christian. Does it mean they are not included in the “we” when you say, “We are a Christian people.” Are they less American? Where do all the people without religion or of a different religion fit into the context of this country being Christian?
Report Post »irishbum04
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 2:41pm“if you mean simply someone who doesn’t believe in god yes…..If you mean these modern day agenda driven hater atheist…..no”
Gotta love it – integrity at its best. No agendas allowed… unless you agree with it. Jesus would be proud.
Report Post »USA-Ron
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 3:36pmI would not vote for an Atheist, only a Jew or a Christian
Report Post »DeltaCharlieCain
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:09pmI am a devout Christian, but as a libertarian/conservative I would rather vote for an atheist who believes in the Constitution (and therefore, respects religious freedom) than a fake Christian/fake Constitutional professor (such as Obama). I will admit that atheism is obviously not something I would be looking for in a president and would rather have someone religious, but it‘s more about respect for other people’s rights than his own personal views. Even though he has a reputation for making fun of Christianity, as well as other religions, if Penn Jillette were to run for the GOP nomination (please note that I’m being hypothetical), I would vote for him over Obama any day. If it was between Jillette and Ron Paul, then I would vote for Paul (although it wouldn’t just be the issue of religion there).
Report Post »SgtB
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:17pmPenn would be a trillion times better than Obama. I think we all know by now how much a trillion is and I mean it.
Report Post »shadokishi
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:03pmI don’t agree with everything you said, but I applaud you in your ability to think for yourself. Please teach others to be rational minded like you.
Report Post »inblack
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 10:51amWhere is the question about: Would you vote for a “White man”?
I bet the negatives are higher than for a woman.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 3:01pmDelta– The fundamental law passed by Congress while the US Constitution was being formed–the Northwest Ordinance -was again passed by the First Federal Congress in 1789 while the Bill of Rights
Report Post »was being formed. Article III Religion Morality and Knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind appears to have been motivated by a sermon preached by Elizur Goodrich May10,1787 pp 909-940 Political Sermons of the American Founding Era 1730–1805 Second Edition Liberty Fund Ellis Sandoz Editor (Vol.1) Title The Principles of Civil Union and Happiness considered and Recommended, Hartford Conn. I cannot believe that the Founders leveled all religions and made it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference– which Joseph Story in
his Commentaries on the Constitution ,1833 declared would have caused universal disapprobation and indignation. The Religion was Christianity the Morality that sprang from and rested upon that common faith was inseparable from our founding religion.I could not vote for an infidel,nor an atheist.
But must stand with John Jay , Noah Webster, and Joseph Story And can only vote for a Christian.
tiredofprogressives
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:49pmThis ignorant woman does not even know she is a heretic let alone call someone an atheist. People in the USA are totally ignorant about Christianity. They have no clue about the Old Testament and the New Testament other than they were “saved” which is a heresy and also why the jews love the ignorant protestants.
Report Post »jingo455
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:12pmHow dare you, call us “ignorant” Protestants.
If you READ the Bible (Revelations 17) you’d know the Catholic Church is the “beast on seven hills” as well as seven kings. The woman riding on a beast, is also interpreted to be a church-nation (women symbolize the church; the bride of Christ), and right now the only church-nation is the Vatican.
The Catholic church genocided the Waldensian Christians, massacred the Cathar Christians and forced them to wear a Yellow Cross (which Catholic Hitler copied for his Yellow Star), and in the Reichskonkordat, the Vatican was the first government to recognize the Nazi government and dissolved the Catholic Centre Party, the last remaining major electoral opposition in the German government. The Italian government, which worked closely with the Vatican were the ONLY allies of Hitler at the onset of the second world war.
Don’t get me wrong, back when I thought the antichrist was muslim I thought the Crusades were great and loved the Pope, I even thought of joining the church. I set about reading revelations to prove to myself that muslims were the antichrist and my jaw dropped open because I realized it was my beloved Vatican that was the antichrist.
Our world has a brilliant twist ending. Who’d of thought the biggest church on Earth would be the antichrist. That a man who claims to be God‘s representative on Earth is in fact the Devil’s.
Then again, anyone who claims that is blaspheming so it’s all the more proof
Report Post »Snuffy3
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:32pmIngorant Protestants, ignorant Protestants, ignorant Protestants. There, I dared do it thrice. It was easy.
Report Post »ezekiel22
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:05pmPlease explain your position. On what basis do you make those claims? Personally what you appear to be doing is sniping and anyone can do that.
Report Post »edmundburk
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:54pmthe bible was WRITTEN by catholics, and as far as massacures go, the protestants were guilty of their own massacures.
Report Post »jingo455
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 11:29amEdmund Burk, what massacres?
There is no “Protestant Church” nation-state, so it’s not possible for the Protestant Church itself to be guilty of any massacres. Whereas the Catholic Church, in contradiction to Biblical teaching, is all concerned with THIS world and attaining an EARTHLY kingdom, so they have a church riding a nation (the Vatican nation state), which itself it GUILTY of killing thousands of “heretic” christians.
If you read the transcripts of some of the inquisitions, it’s just shocking. They kill people who PROFESS a belief in Jesus as savior but who refuse to agree that the Pope is infallible and God’s representative.
I don’t dispute that Peter was given power, but he can’t “pass” the power down. Apostolic-succession is derived from Roman Paganism (the College of Priests in Rome was turned into the College of Cardinals, the Vestal Virgins into Nuns, the Patron Gods turned into Patron Saints, etc.). And is it not true that the apostolic succession would be broken if an evil man is in the chain of succession? The Catholic Church itself even admits there were “bad popes” (i.e. Alexander VI).
Nevermind the bible itself condemns ANY man who calls himself holy. One of the very DEFINITIONS of blasphemy is to claim the power to forgive sins and the Catholic church does that. They claim that even their priests have the power to give remission for sins. That is LITERALLY blasphemy, and also enables wicked men to have cover to commit sins and fe
Report Post »VRW Conspirator
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 1:22pmFor Jingo and those of like mind…
First – I just love that you KNOW the mind of God as revealed to John in the Book of Revelation. Even John did not know the meaning of his dream. So glad that you can 1950 years later. You must be the next prophet like Joseph or maybe even the Messiah come again. Which is it?
Report Post »Second – in another reply you mentioned a protestant nation state never having been around. Oh Really?? Ever hear of the Church of England, created by King Henry with him as the supreme authority on the faith. Now that is the Anglican Church and STILL the national church of Great Britain, which if you recall used to have colonies ALL over the world where they oppressed, subjugated, murdered, robbed, stole, destroyed, and raped entire cultures and nations for their resources all in the name of Divine Manifest Destiny.
Third – lets see, who do you accredit and follow the teachings of regarding the Protestant denominations?
Martin Luther maybe – yeah.. Catholic Priest, loved the Church and the Pope, pleaded with them to reform because he DID NOT want to fracture the Body of Christ
John Wesley maybe – yeah…also had NO problem with the Catholic Church or the Pope, saw their differences as minor traditions and practices but not the CORE of the teaching and the Faith. This view actually turned many off to Wesley.
John Calvin – well, he that judges will be judges…hot where you are John??
jingo455
Posted on April 12, 2012 at 4:08amVRW, if your idea of a rebuttal is to basically say “but there were some Protestant nations that did bad things!” then you have serious issues. I am aware of the Church of England’s existence. Most people call them “catholic lite”, but even then to say that England and it’s Church are one is far-fetched. It did not carry out colonial policy based on it’s faith, in fact, England‘s colonies were filled with most of it’s faith’s dissidents.
Whereas in Catholicism’s case, they forced their faith on the natives at swordpoint (see Cortez). But colonialism aside, the real issue is the Vatican STATE itself is guilty for genociding the Cathars, Waldensians, the Hussites, and the list goes on, and there is no separating the Vatican from the Catholic Church. The Vatican state only exists as part of the Catholic Church. This fits the part of Revelations saying all the kings of the Earth drank in her adultery.
The Vatican today sends out diplomats who also happen to be cardinals. No other country on earth is a nation-state AND a church in such a stark way. You can try to spin it how you want, but Revelations is very CLEAR on this one.
Seven hills = Rome. Even the catholic encyclopedia says that. And the beast sits on seven hills.
Report Post »Attila2001
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:28pm@POWER
Thank you for proving my point. So you are saying more people have died under faith based policies (Communism and Maoism included as faiths, along with all the wars caused by Christianity and Islam). Also if you are following Christ didn’t he advocate Communism (give away everything your own and follow me). Or maybe maybe it was cutthroat Capitalism (give the 1 talent to the person who made earner more talents) I guess you have to have faith on which interpretation is correct.
Or we can apply reason: Is communism a workable system? Well, it is a nice idea but seems to fail for 3 hippies trying to share an apartment maybe we shouldn’t force it on a country of millions.
Don‘t try putting communism on humanism’s doorstep.
Report Post »TXGal
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:37pmYou are VERY uninformed.
Report Post »Attila2001
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:01pm@TXGAL
Would you like to give examples and correct me or are you just name calling.
Report Post »Marine25
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:39pmNo, you are quite informed on that one. Of course here at Glenn Beck central, anything objectionable must be socialist, communist, atheist, and yes humanist. Even if the objectionable in question is religious or republican in nature, those are just “false christians” or ‘RINO”s.
Report Post »Leperus
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:25pmDoes Mrs. Graham-Lotz mean “any god” or her “god”? There is a reason we have a policy against religious testing for public office. Its about freedom. Mrs. Graham-Lotz is free to vote how she pleases, but don‘t attempt to force someone’s beliefs into the spotlight when there is not a need to do so.
Report Post »The_Almighty_Creestof
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:31pmI’m surprised with the poll results. In this volatile world (and a nuclear one), I would think you’d want the leader of your country to at least CONSIDER non-earthly elements in regards to war in this day and age when we can actually destroy all life on the planet multiple times.
Report Post »kaydeebeau
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:02pmThere is only one God
Report Post »Attila2001
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:39pm@THE_ALMIGHTY_CREESTOF
Are you serious in this volatile world I would hope people would look at this world not the next. If this is the only world you have you want to take care of it. If you have another non-earthly world and you feel there are too many infidels in this one you might not hesitate in using weapons of mass destruction to destroy them.
Also interesting that in the more secular countries there is less crime, less abortion, and generally happier people. Referring to places like Sweden.
Report Post »The_Almighty_Creestof
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 5:03pm@ Attila2001
Some athiest 70+ year old president nearing his own death may not care about the ramifications of a first strike if he thinks it would wipe out the enemy and have an acceptable fallout (no pun intended) here in the US…might even think he is doing his “only” world a favor.
However, a believer might worry about his own ETERNAL soul being lost for his deed.
I prefer to believe that whether or not the president believes, God would step in and tap him on the shoulder before he pushes that button…stopping him. However, God’s gift of “Free Will” may not allow that.
Report Post »shadokishi
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:10pm@THE_ALMIGHTY_CREESTOF
An atheist President would care MORE about the consequences of his actions. If we only have one life to live, then we must live it as fully as we can. The belief that simply confessing your sins rewards you with a life of eternal happiness is far more likely to dilute a person’s morals.
As for your earlier comment about non-earth elements: I believe the people behind such massive powers are scientists. The people that devoted their lives to discovering more about our world. The people who sacrificed life, love, and personal gain in order to give us precious knowledge that you simply dismiss. I fear man, because man created the bomb. God did not make it, God did not halt its construction, and God did not stop America from killing millions of people with a single button. Therefore, I submit that God had no part to play. Blame scientists for creating massive killing machines, and praise other scientists for figuring out how to treat cancer, polio, small pox, and all the other plagues set upon the Earth.
Report Post »Attila2001
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:09pm@BARBER2
No, Hitler was not an Atheist. More likely he beleived in some weird occult Wagnerian religion, but definitely not Atheist. So I suppose if your choices were someone who professed to believe in God, like Hitler, or and Atheist your vote would be going for Hitler.
Report Post »JoeNavy
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:22pmHitler was a devote Catholic, give Mein Kompf a read… and stop making things up.
Report Post »Grubmeister
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:24pmI would think twice before trying to pidgeonhole Hitler on religion. His book may have given the indication he was a devout catholic.His quotes are all over the map though, sometimes bluntly stating he was using religion as a tool to further his political power and control over the German people. I think at best we can say he was a political weasle, willing to say and do whatever it took to accomplish his goals.
Report Post »Wow, now that I think about it, that’s exactly what I think politicians do in this country too!
dissentnow
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:40pmHitler was a devout occultist with Roman Catholic leanings who wrote of his lord and savior, Jesus Christ. I would hardly call him an atheist.
Report Post »abbygirl1994
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:07pmI was shocked and dismayed with the results… I am guessing that people who voted NO haven’t a clue that right now we have a Godless President! And look at the state of our country.. without God in our President or government this country will fail! Wake up America! Lord help us!
Report Post »gragra
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:31pmA godless president? If only…. no, he invoked his invisible friend more times in the first 6 months of office than Dubya did in the whole miserable 8 years he was in power, but then basing beliefs on evidence is not the strong suite of faith-heads.
Report Post »BritLaughingAtUSGodists
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:06pmOh my poor dear. Be shocked. Be dismayed. The atheists are coming!! And we’ll eat your babies too. Go back to sleep America. The worlds better off if you’re asleep.
Report Post »Frunobulax
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:01pmJefferson, Taft, and Garfield were — if not outright atheists — non-religious and hostile to religion. A number of other POTUSes (including Lincoln) weren’t that far behind them.
POTii?
Report Post »Rational1
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:03pmI’m assuming your going to be able to vote in the next election cycle, seeing as your username elicits the date “1994.” (yes genius, i know) However, if you are what America has to look forward to, I’m moving to Britain. Frankly, your unsupported, religiously motivated claims are a PRIME example of the intolerance expressed all throughout most religions, especially in modern day America. If you really believe Obama is an atheist be my guest, but i bet you also believe that Atheists are inconsiderate baby-eating mongrels that don’t think “logically” when in fact, many of the most intelligent minds EVER were and are atheist. Jamie Hynemen and Adam Savage- both Atheist, Steve Jobs- Atheist, Bill Gates- Atheist, Richard Dawkins- Atheist. These men lead at the forefront of culture, they all contribute insurmountable amounts of information to the public about what ACTUALLY goes on in the universe. All of them are also respectable citizens, who consistently give back to the community, this is more than many people of “faith” can say.
Report Post »Awfy
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:04pmJust to fix @RATIONAL1′s response a little, Steve Jobs was a Buddhist but that still doesn’t fit with the American Republican ideal which seems to be Christianity, so I’ll let it stand.
Report Post »Grubmeister
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:36pmAWFY,
With all due respect, what god do the buddhists worship? Siddhartha Gautama, known as the Buddha, was not a god. He was a teacher.
From wikipedia:
Report Post »“Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.”
HairRazor
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 10:36amGRAGRA.. Obama craftily exhibits deceptions. He strikes a pose and/or attempts to voice the virtues of Christ (phony parroting he picked up from wrong Wright). He makes a claim to Christianity for the simple reason that most Americans lean that way. Don’t buy the lie. He needs to go.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:56amOur forefathers all intended for our Nation to be led by a Christian people. They understood the importance of Religion, morality, knowledge, and the great wisdom of Christ and the Bible.
“Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” John Jay, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
Americans at the founding of our Nation were very religious. Within their political institutions they made sure to preserve our heritage.
Practically all state constitutions contained the following language or sentiment:
“Art. 22. Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust . . . shall . . . make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit: “I ___, do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, Blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scripture of the Old and New Testaments to be given by divine inspiration.” Delaware Constitution 1776
George Washington, the Father of this country, proclaimed, “Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor…”
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:03pm“On Monday last the Circuit Court of the United States was opened in this town. The Hon Judge [Supreme Court Justice] Paterson presided. After the Jury were impaneled, the Judge delivered a most elegant and appropriate charge… Religion and morality were pleasingly inculcated and enforced as being necessary to good government, good order, and good laws, for “when the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice” [Proverbs 29:2]… After the charge was delivered, the Rev. Mr. [Timothy] Alden addressed the Throne of Grace in an excellent, well-adapted prayer.” New Hampshire Newspaper from Portsmouth 1800.
“In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate – look to his character… It is alleged by men of loose principles or defective views of the subject that religion and morality are not necessary or important qualifications for political stations. But the Scriptures teach a different doctrine. They direct that rulers should be men “who rule in the fear of God, able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness” [Exodus 18:21]… [I]t is to the neglect of this rule of conduct in our citizens that we must ascribe the multiplied frauds, breaches of trust, peculations [white-collar larceny] and embezzlements of public property which astonish even ourselves; which tarnish the character of our country; which disgrace a republican government.” Noah Webster 1823
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:06pmSam Adams said, “He who is void of virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all regard of his country. [P]rivate and public vices are in reality… connected… Nothing is more essential.. than that all persons employed in places of power and trust be men of unexceptionable characters. The public cannot be too curious concerning the [private] characters of public men.”
Governor Morris, signer of the Constitution, said, “There must be religion. When that ligament is torn, society is disjointed and its members perish. The nation is exposed to foreign violence and domestic convulsion. Vicious rulers, chosen by vicious people, turn back the current of corruption to its source. Placed in a situation where they can exercise authority for their own emolument, they betray their trust. They take bribes. They sell statutes and decrees. They sell honor and office. They sell their conscience. They sell their country… But the most important of all lessons is the denunciation of ruin to every state that rejects the precepts of religion.”
James Madison, declared in 1785, “Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe…”
“Those, therefore, who pay no regard to religion and sobriety in the persons whom they send to the legislature of any State are guilty of the greatest absurdity and will soon pay dear for their folly.” John Witherspoon
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:07pmPublic schools in America taught what Noah Webster wrote in his textbooks. In fact, Noah’s dictionary became the standard, and most widely used, Dictionary among professionals and the common people. Webster said this, in his textbook, History of the United States (1832), which was popular in public schools at that time:
“When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers just men who will rule in the fear of God. The preservation of a republican government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded. If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the Divine commands and elect bad men to make and administer the laws.”
The US Northwest Ordinance, enacted into Law in 1789, declared, “Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.”
Report Post »Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:16pmThomas Jefferson edited his own version of the Bible because it didn’t entirely suit him as it was…and he was a brilliant Renaissance man.
Our founding generation of Americans left the oppression of Europe’s kings and orthodox church leaders to have the freedom to worship as they chose here. And because early Americans came from different parts of Europe, they certainly didn’t agree on everything religious. No one group has a monopoly on religion. If this is “a Christian nation,” it has long been religiously divided into many sects, denominations and splinter groups like the Mormons, The Seventh Day Adventists, The Quakers, The Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc., along with the most dominant groups like the Catholic Church and the pushy evangelicals.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:34pm@Tandem2011 That Jefferson Bible was a personal collection of verses (many in foreign languages) that Jefferson made for himself. It was only publicly publicized after his death. You’re right about the history of those early settlers. Which is why the first amendment states, “ESTABLISHMENT of Religion”. It does not, however, state, solely “Religion”. That would make the founding fathers some of the worst liars and hypocrites in history. They wrote Thanksgiving Proclamations thanking God, and declared National Days of Prayer and Fast.
“Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants.”- Benjamin Franklin
“I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.” – Thomas Jefferson
“We have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us, and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us.” – Abraham Lincoln’s 1863 Thanksgiving Proclamation
The New England Primer, used by our founding fathers, and early public schools:
Report Post »http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/nep/1777/
colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:51pmThe father of the Constitution, James Madison, said, as President, in a Thanksgiving Day Proclamation (1815):
“No people ought to feel greater obligations to celebrate the goodness of the Great Disposer of Events of the Destiny of Nations than the people of the United States. His kind providence originally conducted them to one of the best portions of the dwelling place allotted for the great family of the human race. He protected and cherished them under all the difficulties and trials to which they were exposed in their early days. Under His fostering care their habits, their sentiments, and their pursuits prepared them for a transition in due time to a state of independence and self-government. In the arduous struggle by which it was attained they were distinguished by multiplied tokens of His benign interposition. During the interval which succeeded He reared them into the strength and endowed them with the resources which have enabled them to assert their national rights, and to enhance their national character in another arduous conflict, which is now so happily terminated by a peace and reconciliation with those who have been our enemies. And to the same Divine Author of Every Good and Perfect Gift we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages, religious as well as civil, which are so richly enjoyed in this favored land.”
An interesting read, God and America: http://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/america.html
Report Post »TerranRich
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:19pmIf our forefathers intended our country to run on Christian principles, then why didn’t they say so in the Constitution? Why does it instead erect a wall of separation between church and state by disallowing the government from interfering with religious beliefs, and vice versa? Why is there no mention of a god in the Constitution, other than to specify the current year “in the year of our Lord”? Why does Article VI Paragraph 3 state that there shall be NO religious test for any public office?
You can quote the founding fathers all you want; I can show you just as many quotes where people like Thomas Jefferson agree that a separation of church and state is crucial to preserve both. The quotes mean nothing; it’s what was written in our Constitution that counts.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:42pm@TerranRich You’re taking things out of context. The seperation of church and state IS, for all practical matters regarding Government or its administration, absolute. The Supreme Court with many Progressives and Liberals have falsely interpreted (and expanded, albeit unconstitutionally) Jefferson’s letter as meaning therein, a seperation from RELIGION, or religious content. Jefferson here did not mean Religion, but AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, such as a Church, or, any Ecclessiastical Institutiton or Organization pertaining thereto. Meaning, no ecclesiastical body of men, or clergy, would have any authority or direct influence over State matters, or affairs therein. The founding fathers well knew the evils of external or foreign institutions influencing or guiding Government, or affecting its Form therein. Th US Constitution prohibits Congress from creating, or adopting, any ESTABLISHMENT of Religion; or from making any such Establishment a part of our General Government, or function thereof. They did not intend to prohibit private Citizens from excersizing or declaring their faith or religion in the public square, as that would be contrary or oppressive to the free conscience of every man. At no point did the first Ammendment imply a strict separation of Government and Religion. The frist Ammendment CLEARLY, SPECIFICALLY, and UNEQUIVOCALLY states, declares, and says, AN ESTABLISHMENT of Religion. IT DOES NOT SAY, solely, Religion.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:45pmThe US Northwest Ordinance statess,
July 13, 1787
“…And, for extending the fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty, which form the basis whereon these republics, their laws and constitutions are erected; to fix and establish those principles as the basis of all laws, constitutions, and governments, which forever hereafter shall be formed in the said territory…
Article I. No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments, in the said territory…
Article III. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged…”
“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed….No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.” – Noah Webster
“The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free Constitutions of Government.” – Noah Webster
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:48pmIn 1892 the S. Court stated, “No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, State or national, because this is a religious people … This is a Christian nation. There is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons: they are organic [legal, governmental] utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people. … These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.”
“On every question of construction [of the Constitution] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or intended against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), letter to Judge William Johnson, (from Monticello, June 12, 1823)
“Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.” James Madison
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:53pm“Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure than they have it now, They may change their Rulers and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting Liberty. They will only exchange Tyrants and Tyrannies” John Adams
“We have no government, armed with power, capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams
“IN CONGRESS November 1, 1777
FORASMUCH as it is the indispensable Duty of all Men to adore the superintending Providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with Gratitude their Obligation to him for Benefits received, and to implore such farther Blessings as they stand in Need of: And it having pleased him in his abundant Mercy, not only to continue to us the innumerable Bounties of his common Providence; but also to smile upon us in the Prosecution of a just and necessary War, for the Defense and Establishment of our unalienable Rights and Liberties,” http://www.pilgrimhall.org/GivingThanks3c.htm
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:55pmEDUCA’TION, n. [L. educatio.] The bringing up, as of a child, instruction; formation of manners. Education comprehends all that series of instruction and discipline which is intended to enlighten the understanding, correct the temper, and form the manners and habits of youth, and fit them for usefulness in their future stations. To give children a good education in manners, arts and science, is important; to give them a religious education is indispensable; and an immense responsibility rests on parents and guardians who neglect these duties.
Fisher Ames, known as the primary author of the First Amendment, was a publicist, statesman, judge and congressman from Massachusetts (1791-1797). On September 20, 1789, Fisher Ames was quoted in Paladian Magazine, giving his view of American education:
“We have a dangerous trend beginning to take place in our education. We’re starting to put more and more textbooks into our schools. We’ve become accustomed of late of putting little books into the hands of children, containing fables and moral lessons. We’re spending less time in the classroom on the Bible, which should be the principal text in our schools. The Bible states these great moral lessons better than any other man-made book.”
Report Post »I support God's Israel!
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:56amPART 2:
Report Post ».to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke-out on the reasons for their rate increases.
.to tell a major manufacturing company (Boeing) in which State they are allowed to locate a factory.
.to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
.to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
.to fire an inspector general of Ameri-corps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
.to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office.
.to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 90 to date & counting.
.to hide his medical, educational and travel records.
.to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
.to not know how to properly pronounce Navy ‘corpsman’.
.to go on multiple global ‘apology tours’-including bowing to foreign rulers.
.to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends; paid for by the taxpayer.
.to say that America was not a Christian nation.
.to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) just for his wife.
.to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.
Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:28pmIn other words, you mean…what?
Report Post »Father_Goose
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:53amThe one we have in the White-house now, is at best an atheist and at worst a closet Muslim and you can see what he has done in three short years to religious freedoms in this country. I for one could not vote for someone who does not have a strong relationship with God. That is not to say that I believe that there should be a requirement for such, just that I would not support them. We wonder why this country is going down hill so fast when all we do is poke out finger in the eye of God. Do we really expect Him to bless us when we are acting the way we do now?
Report Post »I support God's Israel!
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:56amPART 1: An impressive list of accomplishments by President Obama, THE FIRST PRESIDENT TO:
.to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
Report Post ».to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.
.to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States .
.to violate the War Powers Act.
.to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
.to defy a Federal Judge’s court order to cease implementing the Health Care Reform Law.
.to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
.to spend a trillion dollars on ‘shovel-ready’ jobs when there was no such thing as ‘shovel-ready’ jobs.
.to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
.to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive Fiat.
.to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S.,including those with criminal convictions.
.to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
.to terminate America ’s ability to put a man in space-defunded NASA.
.to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
.to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.
barber2
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:03pmI think it is the total lack of humility that we are seeing in the White House that is the issue. The union bullying, the disregard for the law all show an arrogance which is dangerous to our freedoms. Atheists think THEY are god. They know all of the answers. They get to make all of the decisions. The people are viewed as ignorant and needing to be ” cared for.” Saul Alinsky, inspite of all of his so-called concern for the little guy, has a deep tone of lack of respect for the very “ little people” he is organizing for . Can see why he would appeal to an arrogant organizer who is smarter than the dummy he is taking care of. Bad.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:40amI‘d vote for an atheist as long as they weren’t the in-your-face pushing their ideology types. I don’t like the in-your-face Christians, Jews or Muslims pushing their agenda either.
Report Post »Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:49amWe want honest representation from our elected leaders — to fairly represent our currently pluralistic democratic society. All legal citizens under our Constitution have the same rights and responsibilities. It’s not just for a particular vocal group — be it the majority or the minority.
Report Post »abbygirl1994
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:13pmIsn’t tjay what we have in the WH now.. someone pushing his agenda on American’s… Think about it. The Godless has already been voted in it time to get a President who has God in his life who has values, principles, character and who isn’t a liar. Nothing I hate more than a president who lies on a regular basis to American’s. Lord help us!
Report Post »justangry
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:13pmI’m an agnostic, are you saying I have no values because of that?
Report Post »momprayn
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:37amNo, wouldn’t vote for an atheist. Agree with those that referred back to our godly Founders and said outright that if the nation didn’t have “mostly” people of morals, (and they thought the Bible gave the best standards), we could not survive as a “Republic”. I agree with what Anne said (and God bless her for stating these things publicly) & yes, she is in good company, if you have a positive opinion of the Founders, Bible since what she said was also biblical — all wisdom comes from God (the biblical one).
Report Post »Problem is too many have rebelled against that & have infiltrated everything & run the country pretty much. Glenn was talking about that this morning – too many of us “dismissed” liberals, radicals, etc. thinking they wouldn’t get anywhere here. Wrong. Now we’re learning they did. It takes much diligent oversight, voting right, vetting, involvement, holding politicians accountable, etc. to keep it going in the right direction. Think we’ve learned our lesson, but the question is – is it too late?
ramaus
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:56amHitler’s Mein Kampf mentions God over fifty(50) times.
Report Post »The U.S. Constitution never mentions God. I think we are on the right path.
colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:02pm@ramaus It mentions Christ:
“The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same. Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,”
Furthermore, George Washington took his Constitutional Oath with his hand on the Bible, and further stated, “So help me God”.
The Preamble states, “Blessings of Liberty”. The founding fathers well understood that Blessings came from God, not man.
“When we view the blessings with which our country has been favored, those which we now enjoy, and the means which we possess of handing them down unimpaired to our latest posterity, our attention is irresistibly drawn to the source from whence they flow. Let us then, unite in offering our most grateful acknowledgments for these blessings to the Divine Author of All Good.” James Monroe made this statement in his 2nd Annual Message to Congress, November 16, 1818.
“Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature.” – Benjamin Franklin
Report Post »Frunobulax
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:26pmThat‘s not ’Christ’. If they meant “Jesus Christ’ why not just say “Jesus Christ”?
Also, “Year of our Lord” is a date reference that most writers used back then. The other items you cite — as far as meaning in religious terms go — are non-specific.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:36pm@Frunobulax In the year of our Lord means, in the Year of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. You can’t slice and dice that one.
“I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.” Samuel Adams
“Called on the people of New Hampshire . . . to confess before God their aggravated transgressions and to implore His pardon and forgiveness through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ . . . [t]hat the knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ may be made known to all nations, pure and undefiled religion universally prevail, and the earth be fill with the glory of the Lord” Josiah Bartlett, MILITARY OFFICER; SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; JUDGE; GOVERNOR OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:38pm“Let us enter on this important business under the idea that we are Christians on whom the eyes of the world are now turned… [L]et us earnestly call and beseech Him, for Christ’s sake, to preside in our councils. . . . We can only depend on the all powerful influence of the Spirit of God, Whose Divine aid and assistance it becomes us as a Christian people most devoutly to implore. Therefore I move that some minister of the Gospel be requested to attend this Congress every morning . . . in order to open the meeting with prayer.” Elias Boudinot, PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; SIGNED THE PEACE TREATY TO END THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION; FIRST ATTORNEY ADMITTED TO THE U. S. SUPREME COURT BAR; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; DIRECTOR OF THE U. S. MINT
“Rendering thanks to my Creator for my existence and station among His works, for my birth in a country enlightened by the Gospel and enjoying freedom, and for all His other kindnesses, to Him I resign myself, humbly confiding in His goodness and in His mercy through Jesus Christ for the events of eternity.” John Dickinson, SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA; GOVERNOR OF DELAWARE; GENERAL IN THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
“He called on the entire state to pray “that universal happiness may be established in the world [and] that all may bow to the scepter of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the whole earth be filled with His glory.”” John Hancock
Report Post »Small World
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:30amI would not vote for an atheist and I did not vote for the one we have in the white house now.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:01pmWhat if it was: atheist VS Obama? Or atheist VS Debbie Wasserman-Shultz?
Report Post »burnteye86
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 4:12amThen I would have to write your name in I recon.
Report Post »burnteye86
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 4:14amha, you’d make a better Prez than those two idiots. Seriously.
Report Post »ramaus
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:29amArticle VI, U.S. Constitution – ” . . . but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
Report Post »PoWer
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:44amFaith is not a requirement to run for office. This is just the opinion of weather people will vote for the person. Public opinion is not regulated by the consitution although it might be an influence.
Report Post »Gorp
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:45amThere might not be any religious test to be elected. However, there is a requirement in my mind that the person at least believe in God.
The Founders were religious, regardless of what some might say, and this country was founded with Divine inspiration. God must not be eliminated from our form of government at any cost.
Report Post »Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:54amTo my eyes, the U.S. Constitution is as Divinely-inspired as any religious holy book. In fact, I respect it OVER the traditional holy books that are filled with sexism, prejudice and contradictions (along with the good teachings, of course).
Report Post »justangry
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:41pmI do too Tandem. Natural Law and God’s Law are interchangeable to me.
Report Post »Carol1955
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:27amI could not vote for an athiest. To bring back our nation from the pit we’ve dug, we need leadership who will humble themselves before God and seek the wisdom only He can provide. Being “good” isn’t good enough. Mankind isn’t going to fix anything on its own.
Report Post »I support God's Israel!
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:08pmWow! You said that perfectly.
We are at a crossroads in this country and in our culture. We‘ve carried ’being politically correct’ WAY too far. We’ve allowed anything to be accepted, even when teenagers keep their pants below their wastes and strut around like they are some kind of rock star, we have helped Satan along. And, when a President can tell the Supreme Court that they should be shamed when they vote on something and then turn around and claim (the past 2 weeks) that his administration has no right to tell them what to do, to me, it makes me believe he follows someone other than God, and that only leaves one other thing. OBAMA IS A HYPOCRITE. Whether knowingly or unknowingly, this president is not only WRONG, but he is trying make RIGHT into WRONG. He is an evil leader IN the 10th degree and if Americans do not see it, then they deserve to lose their freedoms.
I have freedom through Jesus Christ and I do not need to look towards this man for those freedoms. However, one of the greatest things an American can do IS TO VOTE. IT IS A PRIVILEGE. I look for someone WITH VALUES: family values, honorable values, American values, based on our Constitution, and a moral compass. THIS PRESIDENT DOES NOT HAVE ANY OF THOSE. And, since MORAL VALUES were given by GOD HIMSELF in the book of Genesis and because Satan does NOT HAVE ANY MORAL VALUES, IT IS VERY CLEAR TO ME AND IT SHOULD BE CLEAR TO ALL AMERICANS, who vote, IT AIN’T OBAMA.
Report Post »BritLaughingAtUSGodists
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:22pmSo come on then. Start praying. Every Christian in the US start praying now. pray for the type of country and world you want… oh… nothing happening? I wonder why. You are so devout, you must pray for stuff all the time, but you still hate the way things are. Something isn’t working is it. I wonder why not.
Two hands digging a well in Africa do more good than a million hands clasped in prayer ever will. get off your knees and actually do something GOOD for a change. Make a difference. Forget god, she doesn’t exist.
Report Post »4truth2all
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 1:49pmYo Brit:
It is many, many times the clasped hands that allow the digging ones the effort …
I hike regularly and have a pretty good knowledge of creation. Many creatures in the forrest are camouflaged, and even those that are not, depending on the distance are not easily spotted. I am sure ( and know this first hand in walking with others) that most people never see them … that does not mean they don’t exist.
Report Post »Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:27amHave you actually listened to this woman’s religious views? She’s clearly on the fringe of Christianity — as irrational ideologically as the Marxist left. All extremes are not good. This is why ultra-conservative (scientifically illiterate) Rick Santorum cannot get elected for president. Fanatics.
Report Post »barber2
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:53amYou can believe in God and still believe in evolution. Just because someone believes in God does NOT mean they are ” scientifically illiterate.“ I think the arrogance of the atheists is ” culturally illiterate.” And dangerous. Anyone who thinks he has ALL of the answers, just isn’t asking the right questions.
Report Post »PoWer
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:55am“Scientifically illiterate” is how I would describe most Atheist. Darwin believed that a cell was an extremely simple construct and that they spontaneously came into existence all the time. We now know how incredibly complex they are. Evolution is like saying you can put some chunks of brass in a box and shake it long enough it will eventually become a Swiss watch. A Cell is infinately more complex than a swiss watch and yet people believe that this can just happen all on its own.
Report Post »Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:25pmBARBER2, I agree. However, in reference to Graham’s daughter and son, Mr. Santorum, and the like, they each reveal what they don’t know of science-fact every time they put their foot in their mouths. No one is saying that believers in God = stupidity. Only the lying Bill Mahers, Michael Moores and Sean Penns of the world say that. But believers have a duty to re-examine their own faiths if they want to keep pace with what’s credible in an ever-advancing information age.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:26pm@PoWer “Scientifically illiterate”, I like that term. I was thinking the same the other day. We ‘creationists’ can prove a Creator, but evolutionists can never prove evolution. One lays down stones, wood, a hammer and nails on the ground, 100 years later, they’re still there. Nothing productive happens, nor does anything evolve into a bridge. Now, someone picks up stones, wood, a hammer and nails, draws a blueprint, and starts building, a house is constructed within two weeks. Throw a seed on the ground, and give it no sunlight, water, or rich soil, and you’ll have a dried, decaying seed in two weeks. Try putting a box over that seed, and you’ll see. Take a seed, plant it in rich soil, water it, or allow rain to fall on it along with sunshine, and you have some pretty leaves growing in five days. Maintain that growing seed, and you’ll have yourself a pretty flower, or some yummy vegetation. Now, set the Sun just one mile closer to us, and we’ll all burn. Set it one mile away from us, and we’ll all freeze. What animal today is evolving? When will we have three arms? None of that can be proven or answered today, it’s all theory, and fantasy.
Report Post »mwchase
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:25pm@Colt1860
>One lays down stones, wood, a hammer and nails on the ground, 100 years later, they’re still there. Nothing productive happens, nor does anything evolve into a bridge. Now, someone picks up stones, wood, a hammer and nails, draws a blueprint, and starts building, a house is constructed within two weeks.
Which indicates that construction requires energy that the tools do not have, and could not use. What is your point?
>Throw a seed on the ground, and give it no sunlight, water, or rich soil, and you’ll have a dried, decaying seed in two weeks. Try putting a box over that seed, and you’ll see. Take a seed, plant it in rich soil, water it, or allow rain to fall on it along with sunshine, and you have some pretty leaves growing in five days. Maintain that growing seed, and you’ll have yourself a pretty flower, or some yummy vegetation.
Life cannot survive in all environments. What is your point?
>Now, set the Sun just one mile closer to us, and we’ll all burn. Set it one mile away from us, and we’ll all freeze.
Please provide a citation, ideally accounting for the eccentricity of Earth’s orbit. (Also, heliocentrism? For shame.)
>What animal today is evolving?
This question is meaningless. Individual animals do not evolve. Populations evolve, and all populations are subject to selective pressures.
>When will we have three arms?
The magnitude of the morphological changes required to even consider this as a possibility is unima
Report Post »FreeThinkingAtheist
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:22pm@colt1860
I’m sorry to say this, but your comment is just blatantly retarded. You can’t have a hammer and some stones evolve into a bridge because they are not living. However, a living cell can evolve, and it’s been demonstrated that cells actually DO come to live somewhat spontaneously. Research aminoacids.
My point is that not only cells can evolve, but even SPECIES. Again, just google about sharks evolving into a stronger specimen. You’re trying to say that a magic man who is his own dad, his own son and made a virgin pregnant, made us from dirt. That’s something a 4 year old would say, but not an adult.
Report Post »Marine25
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:45pm@freethinkingatheist
Report Post »very succinctly put.
colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:09pm@mwchase You said, “Which indicates that construction requires energy that the tools do not have, and could not use. What is your point?”
That the whole universe required some energy for its existence. It did NOT come out of nothing. There must have be some driving force.
You said, “Life cannot survive in all environments. What is your point?”
What are the chances that everything around us was perfectly put in place by coincidence for our own survival?
@FreeThinkingAtheist you said, “You can’t have a hammer and some stones evolve into a bridge because they are not living.”
Right. You CAN’T have something come out of something THAT IS NOT LIVING. Get the point? There must be something ALIVE. Did the big bang spontaneously come out of NOwhere? My point is, you can’t prove that we came from nothing. But nature CAN prove that in order for something to come into existence there must be some active life or force ALREADY present. No evolutionist can prove the contrary.
Yall questions pretty much support my points. Thanks.
Report Post »Frunobulax
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:20pm“We ‘creationists’ can prove a Creator, but evolutionists can never prove evolution.”
I love this. This is why some people shouldn’t be allowed to go near a ballot box.
Along similar lines, we hear that global warming must be a hoax because it wasn’t mentioned in the Bible. [Until we're all roasting in a desert sandbox. By then, it'll be: "This was all predicted in the Bible! We chose not to believe and now we're being punished by God!]
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:24pm@Frunobulax Evolution is still a theory. It cannot be proven.
Report Post »redrover2
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:25pm@colt1860
You‘re talking about how atheists are scientifically illiterate yet state that if the sun were 1 mile closer or farther we wouldn’t survive? The sun is millions of kilometers away (1 mile is about 1.6 km); +-1 mile is very insignificant. In fact, the distance of the earth from the sun varies by millions of kilometers every year (elliptical orbit). Don‘t go on about how the universe works if you can’t remember high school astronomy. That’s not an insult, just a word of advice.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:45pm@redrover2 That was not my point. Granted, in my quick response, I didn’t explain that well, and knew it when writing it. Perhaps I should have explained it as within the meaning of our orbit around the sun. Earth has the needed weather, ETC, ETC. and anything else required to survive. Mars, Mercury, ETC. don’t.
Report Post »FaithinHumanity
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 5:00pm@Colt1860
Report Post »Do you even know what a theory is? A scientific theory is for all practice and purposes, a fact. The same way gravity is a theory, heliocentricity, the orbit of the Earth around the Sun, is a theory. Learn some science. If you have such groundbreaking theories on evolution, submit it to a peer reviewed scientific journal and collect your Nobel Prize
colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 5:48pm@FaithinHumanity The word “theory” has more than one meaning. If you have a research paper having Evolution answer all questions regarding our existence, then please submit it to receive your one million dollars. Evolution does not and cannot provide even half the questions regarding our universe. Evolution is still under investigation and observation. Evolution can not prove anything without a doubt, unlike many other scientific theories, who at least here on earth, are proven to be true without any doubt, or possible alternative viewpoint. Evolution is more of a puzzle right now, wherein scientists are trying to put pieces together to come up with an answer as to how and why we are here. I wouldn’t hold my breath though.
Report Post »SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:11pm@Colt1860 “The word “theory” has more than one meaning.”
In general vernacular, yes, but not in science.
“If you have a research paper having Evolution answer all questions regarding our existence, then please submit it to receive your one million dollars. Evolution does not and cannot provide even half the questions regarding our universe.”
Nor does it aim to. Evolution is merely a statement about the origin of species in the universe, not how early cellular life originated, or how the universe came to be. Those questions are answered via abiogenesis and cosmology. Evolution is true whether a god guided the creation of the universe or not.
“Evolution is still under investigation and observation. Evolution can not prove anything without a doubt, unlike many other scientific theories…”
You are demonstrating that you possess a scientific illiteracy that is crippling your objective analysis. Scientific theories are never “absolutes”; germ theory, atomic theory, cell theory, gravitation, relativity, et al. are simply the best models we have given the current data. Nothing in science remains an absolute without continual investigation. If it did, it wouldn’t be science.
“Evolution is more of a puzzle right now”
It‘s a puzzle which we’ve found roughly 95% of the necessary pieces to see the overall structure and hierarchy. Just like all puzzles, you don’t need every piece to imagine what the whole picture will look like.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:09pm@Superflu
You said “Evolution is merely a statement about the origin of species in the universe, not how early cellular life originated, or how the universe came to be. Those questions are answered via abiogenesis and cosmology. Evolution is true whether a god guided the creation of the universe or not.”
I would tend to agree with you here, but the fact is, that most [liberal] scientists use Evolution as a way to replace, substitute or dismiss the notion of a Divine Creator. The purpose of Evolution has been in a sense corrupted to justify the belief in no God, at least for some folks.
You said “You are demonstrating that you possess a scientific illiteracy that is crippling your objective analysis. Scientific theories are never “absolutes”; germ theory, atomic theory, cell theory, gravitation, relativity, et al. are simply the best models we have given the current data. Nothing in science remains an absolute without continual investigation. If it did, it wouldn’t be science.”
Exactly. Your point is MY point. Evolution can’t prove anything, nor is it absolute. However, if I drop an apple from twenty feet high, without any immediate outer or external interference or influence, I CAN PROVE that some pulling force exists. No such experiment can be done with Evolution. I‘d say it’s an interesting hypotheses and somewhat incredible analysis, but it ascertains nothing that can be stated as fact or truth, especially within those missing gaps and holes.
Report Post »SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:54pm@Colt1860
“I would tend to agree with you here, but the fact is, that most [liberal] scientists use Evolution as a way to replace, substitute or dismiss the notion of a Divine Creator.”
Even many conservative scientists dismiss god. Theism is not a political or social position – it is a position of faith/lack of it. Many like myself simply do not see the need for any sort of deity, nor any evidence to support the existence of said being, so we do not believe in one.
“However, if I drop an apple from twenty feet high, without any immediate outer or external interference or influence, I CAN PROVE that some pulling force exists. No such experiment can be done with Evolution.”
I’m afraid you are incorrect. You are not proving that gravity exists, merely that the model of gravity is most likely true. This is the concept of “falsifiability” in science. If something is not falsifiable, it is by nature not scientific. Furthermore, we CAN perform such experiments with evolution. Genetic analysis in particular has been the most brilliantly helpful tool in showing that evolution is our best explanation for the origin of species. Prior to the advent of genetics, there existed a hierarchal lineage based upon fossil data. Genetics demonstrated that this hierarchy was correct.
“it’s an interesting hypotheses”
It’s not a hypothesis – it’s a theory. Until you understand the immense difference between those terms you will not understand how significant evolution
Report Post »SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:58pm@Colt1860
…You will not understand how significant evolution is to biology and our understanding of life on this planet.
That things evolve is a fact; Natural selection is merely the strongest theory we have for how evolution brings about new species.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:06pm@SuperfluousWankery Evolution is not just being used for what you state. What you propose is actually something else than what is prompted by liberals and some atheists. They use Evolution as a vehicle to dismiss the origin of the universe and the beginning of everything by a Divine Creator. I see your point, but unfortunately these folks are using it to attack Christians or any Deist belief, for political and social reasons, irregardless of what purpose it holds within the field of science. Like you said, Evolution at face value, is great if used to examine life and whatnot here on earth, but a distraction and falsehood if used to define or determine the origin of all life and force, from the very beginning, which it cannot do.
Report Post »Carol1955
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:24amOur nation was founded by Christian leaders and based on Christian values and principles. I belive that an athiest could be a “good” person but I belive that a truely Christian leader would seek the will of God and if he or she honored God, they would benefit from that relationship in a way that a nonChristian never could. Following God‘s will and humbling ourselves before Him is the only way we can deliver ourselves from this mess we’ve gotten in to. We need to see that in our leadership.
Report Post »Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:39amThis is why a religious moderate like Romney would be good for our country. He’s reasonable.
Report Post »gragra
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:35pmPlease look up the Treaty of Tripoli. It says right there in the preamble, “The government of the United States is in no way founded upon the christian religion.”
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:20am..
Report Post »She is in good company, John Locke did not trust atheists either.
..
Macman1138
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:27amIt’s odd though, many still would vote for Muslims, knowing their track record.
Report Post »Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:32amAtheists are arrogant. Agnostics are honest enough to admit they are not as cocksure as religious doctrinaires (who are arrogant too). I respect informed agnostics for admitting what they cannot know with certainty and can say openly without delusion.
Report Post »GodHatesFigs
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:53amOne can be an agnostic atheist. Most are.
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:40pm..
Godhatesfigs
The terms are mutually exclusive.
If you are an agnostic atheist then all the Christians on this board are agnostic theists and we are waiting for the atheists to prove there is no God.
Report Post »..
SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:00pmJJBlazeReader – they are not mutually exclusive. There are gnostic theists, agnostic theists, gnostic atheists, and agnostic atheists. Gnostic theists and atheists proclaim to know with certainty their positions are absolutely true. Agnostic theists and atheists instead, do not know with certainty that their beliefs are true, but rather assume them to be so either based upon faith (theism) or because they do not see evidence to the contrary (atheism).
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:13pm..
Superfluouswankery
That is sophistry and worthy of your user name.
Report Post »..
SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:19pmI apologize for using the terms in their proper context and not the limitations of general speech. If you’d like, I can dumb down statements for you so that they’ll be easier to digest.
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:38pm..
Superfluouswankery.
Ah, did I hit a raw nerve? Sophists always hate when you call them on it.
I guess maybe I am an Islamic Buddhist Shintoist.
Your name fits your comments. No point in discussing superfluous wankery.
..
Report Post »SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:52pmNo nerve to strike – I’m not offended by idiots and their ill fated boasting.
The term “agnostic atheism” is very real, and I‘m afraid for your foregone conclusions that I’ll have to illustrate the history of the term as follows.
Robert Flint, in his Croall Lecture of 1887–1888
“The atheist may however be, and not unfrequently is, an agnostic. There is an agnostic atheism or atheistic agnosticism, and the combination of atheism with agnosticism which may be so named is not an uncommon one.
If a man has failed to find any good reason for believing that there is a God, it is perfectly natural and rational that he should not believe that there is a God; and if so, he is an atheist… if he goes farther, and, after an investigation into the nature and reach of human knowledge, ending in the conclusion that the existence of God is incapable of proof, cease to believe in it on the ground that he cannot know it to be true, he is an agnostic and also an atheist – an agnostic-atheist – an atheist because an agnostic… while, then, it is erroneous to identify agnosticism and atheism, it is equally erroneous so to separate them as if the one were exclusive of the other…”
There are even Christian Agnostics. A/gnosticism isn’t a statement about the existence of god or lack thereof, it’s a position about the level of confidence in knowledge pertaining to that belief.
Report Post »SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:05pmJust in case that was too in depth for you:
A/gnostic originates from the word gnosis, meaning ‘to know’. The word does not refer exclusively to theistic beliefs, as one can say they are “agnostic” to any number of social, political, or philosophical ideas.
In this case, agnostic is an adjective. Atheist and theist are nouns. It’s similar to saying “a black cat”. You wouldn’t say those two terms are mutually exclusive now, would you?
I’m glad we could spend this time reminding you of your high school education.
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:20pm..
Superfluouswankery
A very good example of sophistry. You twist and redefine words so that your original position that cannot be substantiated is “magically” substantiated.
I can use this same method to substantiate Islamic Hinduist.
If you can fall for this you will buy anything.
BTW resorting to name calling is what I expect from atheists no matter how you try to re-define yourself with a new and improved version.
Superfluouswankery just joined today.
Report Post »..
SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 7:40pm“You twist and redefine words so that your original position that cannot be substantiated is ‘magically’ substantiated.”
I haven’t redefined anything, I simply referenced a definition from the 1890s. The term “agnostic” itself was coined in 1869 by Thomas Huxley, so I don’t understand how this is difficult to understand that the phrase “agnostic atheism” was not uncommon at the time.
There is nothing new about the phrase. The use of atheism and agnosticism as separate concepts is a invention of culture that stems largely from the post-McCarthyist era. Don’t fault me for your ignorance of its etymology and purpose.
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 8:25pm..
I wrote:
“A very good example of sophistry. You twist and redefine words so that your original position that cannot be substantiated is “magically” substantiated.
I can use this same method to substantiate Islamic Hinduist.”
You are intentionally quoting text out of content.
You do not refute the argument. You instead deflect, use the shifting sands argument and of course the inevitable use of sophistry and last but not least calumny. You have provided an excellent example of how atheists act.
You just joined today, I need not add anything else.
..
Report Post »SuperfluousWankery
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 9:45pmMy position was already substantiated by providing a definition from the era in which the word was crafted that was in common use, as well as demonstrating how the words were used in syntax. You simply refuse to address these facts because your confirmation bias has your brain in a vice. That is all I have to say.
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:13pm..
So as long as it is said that is all that matters. Doesn’t matter if Robert Flint said 2 plus 2 equals 1,743. If Robert Flint said it – it must be true. I am sure your uncritical devotion to Robert Flint would make any non critical thinker happy.
Sophistry fails again.
You have inspired me. I am contemplating writing a book on Islamic Hinduism.
Bye bye superfluous wankery
..
Report Post »shadokishi
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:15pmJJBLAZEREADER, I ask you to take off your hate glasses and read the argument you had with SUPERFLUOUSWANKERY.
You will find that he answered your questions through investigation. He found the source of the word gnostic and quoted it as well as provided many facts about its use. Because you are misusing the term, you refuse to acknowledge that you were wrong.
The term agnostic has different connotations today than its original creation. However, if used in the proper context it has nothing to do with religious or areligious values.
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:07pm..
Shadokishi member since April 10 2012. Says it all.
Wonder if the Blaze will give me any remuneration for getting more people to sign up?
Report Post »..
shadokishi
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 1:15amAgain, you avoid both the question and the answer. You favor hating on other people over rational thought. All I asked was that you re-read what was posted. Instead, you attacked me.
I hope you live a happy and healthy life, but I would not want anyone like you in a leadership position.
Report Post »JJBlazeReader
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 2:40am..
Shadokishi
Ah, yes I see you start off accusing me of hate in your first post, uncivil as usual for an atheist.
It is apparent that you are too dogmatic to see that sophistry is being used by Robert Flint and subsequent users as a means to avoid defending atheism’s premise. No matter how you parse it or use “see man ticks” it is gobbledygook.
Atheism, or even the contrived agnostic atheism has nothing positive to offer Western Christian Civilization unless you think Darwinism and Nihilism are sound principles to base a society on.
Anyone looking at the nastiness, name calling etc. from the both of you will see why I would not vote for either of you.
Besides I side with John Locke’s opinion of atheists.
Night night rather bye bye.
..
Report Post »Daveed
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:10am“This distrust of atheists is widespread in society” This is an odd statement to put in an article. What did the person who wrote this article mean? Would the article be the same if that odd statement was omitted?
Report Post »If I was in a Fox hole, I would rather have a buddy who believes in God than a guy who thinks, this is all there is and I do not have to answer to anybody, when the weaponry fire is at it’s worse, you want the percentages on your side. The buddy who is a believer, has your back a way higher percentage of the time, than the guy who thinks no one is watching and is scared to death for himself.
Tandem2011
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:45amLet’s not stereotype non-believers. They may surprise themselves as well as others in a crisis. Non-believers in a God may still believe in humanity…which is like believing in God. The same is reversely true about Christians or Muslims who fail to do what’s morally and legally right when tested.
Report Post »I support God's Israel!
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:17pmTandem2011: NO SUBSTITUTE IS LIKE BELIEVING IN GOD. You either believe or you don’t You either BELONG TO GOD or YOU BELONG TO SATAN. Period. There is no in between and Jesus says so himself in the New Testament. If you die without God and Jesus in your heart, you do NOT get a second chance. DEATH IS FINAL. If you BLASPHEME the Holy Spirit, which means that at death you have rejected Jesus as your personal Savior, YOU GET NO 2ND CHANCE. There will be no kumbyyah, no coming back, no more choice in the matter. Therefore, atheists will never base their opinions or decisions on MORALITY, which ONLY comes from God. The devil is a LIAR and he will get you to believe there is no God. The devil will also try to convince you that God is so loving that he would save everyone. THAT IS A LIE OF SATAN and it is clearly in the Bible. So, atheists do NOT have an excuse for why they do not believe. THEY ARE LISTENING TO SATAN and whoever follows Satan WILL BE BANISHED FROM HEAVEN because God CANNOT LOOK UPON SIN and if you have sin, you cannot enter into HIS presence. JESUS IS THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN FORGIVE YOU AND ATHEISTS OF THEIR SINS. FIGURE IT OUT BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE.
Report Post »Satan is a creeper, meaning, he will inch into your life with fibs and half-truths until he’s got you. THEN, HE WILL HANG YOU OUT TO DRY AND LAUGH ALL THE WELL TO HELL.
FaithinHumanity
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 4:57pmHerp Derp, because CAPS makes you right
Report Post »Daveed
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:01amNo, would not vote for an athiest. I am suprised the GOP did not choose one to shove down our throats.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:55amI definitely would. I look for a man of character, skill, and leadership. All of our presidents have been Christians, and their success has had no causality with their faith. Indeed, some of the most vocally religious presidents have been some of the worst (Bush Jr, Obama).
Report Post »Locked
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:56amNote, “man” in this case doesn’t denote only a male candidate. I’d vote for a woman if she had the same characteristics.
Report Post »wifezilla
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:17amLocked: HUman, not specifically male. Gotcha. Yes. Character is the important factor. Anyone can claim to be religious. Even if they truly are, what does their religion teach them? Based on recent history, it teaches them to grow government and squash individual freedom. So the religious litmus test…not as helpful as advertised.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:26am@Wifezilla
“Character is the important factor.”
Indeed, that was my point. Religious background is just part of what makes up a candidate’s values. I‘ve known atheists who are more moral than most of the Christians I’ve met; and I’ve know Christians more logical and well-versed in science than most atheists I know. I would never, ever, make a blanket statement like “I will only vote for Christians” (despite being one myself), because it’s choosing a car based on the tires. Sure, it’s a nice foundation; but if the car has no engine, why would you buy it?
Report Post »sooner12
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:28amRemember Stalin was an athiest and look what he did. Hitler was an athiest and look what he did. Need I go on?
Report Post »Locked
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:40am@Sooner12
People have killed throughout history for all sorts of reasons. Hitler didn’t kill Jews because of unbelief. He did it because he believed them to be inferior (same with gypsies, and Catholics, and gays). He also professed to be Christian (verifiable fact), although his methods and comments suggested a mixture of beliefs and non-belief (also fact).
Way to Godwin’s your own argument though.
Report Post »Attila2001
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:47am@Sooner12
Please stop lying Hitler was in no way an Atheist. He may not have been a Christian, but espoused all sorts Christian platitudes in Mein Kampf . He also lead a country that was predominately Catholic and Lutheran and had Gut Mit Uns (God with us) stamped on all the SS belt buckles.
Now Stalin was an Atheist or believed God’s name was Joseph Stalin. What Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot all have in common is they were Arationalists (without reason). Far more Christians will fit the Arationalist label than Atheists.
Report Post »barber2
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:57amATTILLA: Hitler was an atheist. He just used religion the way the Islamic fanatics use religion: a tool for conquest and control. He slaughtered many Christian priests, nuns and ministers as well as the Jews. He hated the opposition which religious groups gave him. All dictators do that. That is what is concerning about the atheist core of our current Far Lefties in America.
Report Post »PoWer
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:03pm@Attilla
Lots of people claim to be Christian but do not follow the teachings of Christ.
Hitler was an occultist in practice, this has been validated by history.
Also verified, More people have died under the religion of communism, yes it is a religion, than all other conflicts throughout history combined. Communism was spawned from the humaistic belief that people can be theor own gods. This has not proven to be the case. We did not create ourselves and thus we can never be only accountable to ourselves.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:10pm@Power
“Communism was spawned from the humaistic belief that people can be theor own gods. ”
Pssst, that’s Mormonism, not Communism ;-)
I kid, I kid. Well, except about the belief that you can become as a god after death being part of LDS. That part is true.
Report Post »Attila2001
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 12:34pmsorry to re-post this meant to go to this thread
@BARBER2
No, Hitler was not an Atheist. More likely he beleived in some weird occult Wagnerian religion, but definitely not Atheist. So I suppose if your choices were someone who professed to believe in God, like Hitler, or and Atheist your vote would be going for Hitler.
Report Post »Rational1
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 1:55pm@Sooner12
Report Post »you think Hitler was atheist? Please, show me the facts you found backing up this statement…
Hitler was born into a predominantly Jewish family, he attended Catholic school throughout his life at the request of his mother, who was devoutly Catholic. When he moved out he became an avid anti-semite (person who dislikes people of the Jewish faith) because he had a fight with his family, mainly his Jewish grandparents (Father’s side). Adolf Hitler was definitely NOT an atheist, he frequently expressed belief in a (singular) god, and occasionally referred to the Christian god. However, Hitler was predominantly Pagan, specifically German Neo-Paganism. Atheism is a life choice, simply put, the belief that life is simpler than any faith tries to make it. For a church that preaches tolerance and respect, many of the people posting here seem to feel their religious beliefs should reflect the things they are either to afraid or to dumb to understand. Frankly, America has turned into a breeding ground for intolerance and ignorance (insert witty reference to the movie “Ideocracy” here) because of the incessant rambling of religious “scholars,” give evidence instead of making unbridled and flamboyant claims.
evidence that Hitler was NOT ATHEIST: http://www.adherents.com/people/ph/Adolf_Hitler.html
momrules
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:54amI would never knowingly vote for an atheist, or a Muslim for that matter, for any public office.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:39pmHow about an agnostic or a diest?
Report Post »jinnywalz
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:49amOur founding fathers stated in many different ways that our form of government must be led by men of faith. Otherwise the laws of the land will be found impotent. Examples that have crept in already are the abortion issue, the borderless country push, the loss of our first, second and ten amendment rights and I could go on and on. This is yet another way the left is dismantling who we are as a nation, all in preparation for a one-world governance.
Report Post »Rational1
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:14pmActually, they stated the exact opposite, some founding fathers (Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson mainly, were actually agnostic-atheist and Deist respectively). No part of our country held ANY religious affiliation until 1957 under president Eisenhower. Eisenhower signed a bill in 1956 that allowed all money to be coined with the term “E Pluribus Unum” or “In God We Trust,” simultaneously, the bill added “under god” to the pledge of allegiance. This misconception that our nation’s founding was influenced by religion is ridiculous, and most importantly not true. The constitution and Bill of Rights were both expressly written to SEPARATE church and state, it says so in Article ONE. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” in essence they are saying that there is a place for logical and illogical thinking, religion has no place in politics. I would much rather there be a logical atheist president who was productive in office and straightforward, than a religious nutcase that continues to get NOTHING done, all the while trying to pass bills through congress to advance his/her hidden agenda.
Report Post »mcsledge
Posted on April 10, 2012 at 2:03pmRational1 – Maybe you should read some real history instead of godless propoganda.
The Founders were religious individuals.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,……And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
John Adams (2nd President) stated that the Constution was made for a moral and religious people…. and that it was wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
Your interpretation of the First Amendment shows how absolutely clueless you really are. Did you know that each state actually favored a specific religion even after the US Constitution was passed. How could this be? The US Constitution governs the Federal Government. Congress is the Legislative Branch of the Federal Government. They did not say there shall be no God in State matters. Look on the walls of the courthouses throughout this nation.
Go babble your godless gibberish somewhere else.
Report Post »wifezilla
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:39amAnd now we see why the religious right keeps ending up in the same trap. You would rather vote for a socialist who professes a belief in god (like Obama) than an atheist who understands and will fight for your individual freedom.
Report Post »greatgrandma
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 2:51pm@wifezilla………..1st of all, Obama is not a Christian, he is a muslim………….2nd………an Atheist would fight for our individual freedoms. Do you know something I don’t? From where I sit they are fighting diligently to take away all our religious freedoms. Atheist are a hate group. And like all other hate groups they have an agenda. If you think they are going to stop with just religion you have another thought coming. Try Communism.
Report Post »Frunobulax
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 3:33pmGreatGrandma: “Atheist are a hate group. And like all other hate groups they have an agenda. If you think they are going to stop with just religion you have another thought coming.”
What a bigoted fool you are, Grandma!
Report Post »redrover2
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 5:59pm@greatgrandma
Not getting everything you want does not equate to having religious freedom taken away. Stop acting like such a child and accept that there are people who live in this country who aren’t Christian.
Report Post »wifezilla
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 11:06pmObama claims he is a Christian. That was my point. ANYONE can claim to be a Christian whether they are or not. As for atheists in general, some want to protect individual freedom – like me. I am an atheist who believes in individual freedom and fights for freedom for all. Others are simply progressives using atheism as a way to attack and cause dissent. Remember, there are progressive atheists, progressive christians, progressive jews, etc… Progressivism is the enemy. By assuming all people who don’t claim the same belief system as you are the enemy, you fall in to the progressive trap and become one of the “useful idiots”.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:33amIf an atheist was running against Obama, I sure as heck would vote for him.
Report Post »SpeckledPup
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:47amagreed! Anyone but that rabid animal obama in November.
Report Post »Dispman
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 10:47amIf the GOP selected an athiest to be the head of the party in the first place, we would have a host of larger issues with which we would have to deal.
Report Post »