The Great Seal of the USA designed by Jefferson, Franklin and, I believe, Adams. The motto "annuit coeptis" means "He hath smiled upon our undertakings". Guess who "He" is?:-}
Posted on 11/30/2004 9:14:15 AM PST by cainin04
No need. I'm very much aware of it. And quite contented with it.
My only reason for engaging you was over the statement you made about the Constitution's having scriptural roots (back in post 481 you said: "In fact, the bible was a major contributor to the development of our constitution."). If we're straight on that point -- and I truly hope we are -- then that's all I wanted to accomplish; and our dialogue is done.
An old trick question. It's in the date at the end:
... 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 ...Technically, although it's clearly not in an operative clause, one can argue that's a reference to God.
But you have not answered about the Bible's position on slavery. If the Bible is infallible, and is absolutely never wrong on anything, does that mean you approve of slavery in certain instances?
Actually, James Madison was a federalist, and he wrote the Bill of Rights. Alexander Hamilton though, did not feel the need for a Bill of Rights because the Constitution is a restraint on government, not the rights of the people. He apparently could not fathom a scenario where government would even be in a position to question individual rights, or infer that the people aren't entitled to them. So, in that respect, to say that the Federalists didn't want a Bill of Rights is disingenuous -- it wasn't that they didn't believe in individual rights. They simply did not recognize the need to specify them in the Constitution.
I also believe that rights do not come from the state. I believe individual rights are inherent among all of us, regardless of how we perceive their spiritual or nonspiritual origins.
By the way, Thomas Jefferson was also an anti-federalist, among many other things. But you will get strong disagreements, even from evangelicals, that he was far from a Christian. We need to be careful not to lump all industrialist's into one specific set of religious beliefs.
Its certainly disputed in the way that you present it. Our nation has never embraced a theocracy.
PatrickHenry and others have repeated refuted (with evidence) your claims of the constitution being based on scripture yet you continue make unfounded assertions. You stated that the founders showed their intent of Christian state by putting it on our money and the pledge - yet it was pointed out that both of those phrases were added in the 20th century.
Others have pointed out how scripture has been wrongly interpreted as literal by the church in the past, yet you respond with "I don't know anything about that so I can't comment." You have been presented a lot of good information in these threads that you just choose to ignore.
I beg your pardon? That was my statement. If you agree that the Constitution does not allow mixing of church and state by virtue of its omission, then I rest MY case. The Tenth Amendment clearly states that any power not specifically granted to Congress is retained by the States, or the People. That's not my interpretation. That's exactly what it says. I can't believe I'm having this conversation with a conservative. Usually this is one of the amendments you guys are correct about.
There is no conflict with 1st commandment. . .People are free to choose whatever religion they want, they can choose not be Christians and be just as much a citizen.
The first commandment does not allow anyone to worship anyone or anything but God himself. The First Amendment does allow it. You don't see a conflict there?
The Great Seal of the USA designed by Jefferson, Franklin and, I believe, Adams. The motto "annuit coeptis" means "He hath smiled upon our undertakings". Guess who "He" is?:-}
Oh, and one other thing, George Mason was a devout Christian.
WHile technically correct, your statement is, at the least, misleading, since more than a few of the states had established religions. In fact Ct did not disestablish until well into the 19th century.
Only if you see a conflict between football not allowing gouging and the WWF allowing it.
What took you so long. It's one of the most common whines of those trying to abuse language and not being allowed to get by with it. It wouldn't matter if it were me alone or half the world. You are trying to lie about it's contents and were busted. And no, not me alone, btw. That's yet another dishonest approach used to try and alienate opposition in debate and belittle them hoping the belittling will win your argument for you in absence of any support otherwise. Typical liberal approach - beg feelings when busted. And no, I'm not misunderstanding the language any more than Israel did for thousands of years. Somehow, because it suits your purposes in modern times, you think it divine right to march in and lie about what the text says or doesn't say - trying to hijack what you can't disprove.. Sounds amazingly Islamic fundamentalist in nature.
Well, not to put to fine a point on it but you're wrong. Rockefeller Republicans are no longer the majority in the GOP. Nor will they be any time in the forseeable future. I know you don't like those facts but facts they are nonetheless.
But there's hope, if you are pro gun, pro abortion, pro drugs, pro special rights for homosexuals and pro open borders the LP is looking for a few good men.
Wrong. While Madison did agree with Mason and Jefferson who warned against the exclusion of such enumerated rights, it was James Madison who actually wrote them.
Hey look friend, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
I do not see the Constitution and the Bible as synonymous, as this statement seems to imply. The charge was made that the Bible was the foundation upon which the Constitution was created. I disputed this notion because they run in direct conflict with each other on the issue of religious freedom. The Ten Commandments does not allow freedom of worship -- the Constitution does. Therefore, the connection between the two is specious at best.
The point I was making is that the Decalog and the Bill of Rights are horses of a different color. Render unto God what is God's and unto Caesar what is Caesar's.
http://www.jmu.edu/madison/gpos225-madison2/madprobll.htm
In this text you will find that Madison proposed and drafted -- at the urging of Thomas Jefferson -- 12 amendments later trimmed to 10, that became known as the original "Bill of Rights."
Drink up, horsey.
"At the Constitutional Convention, James Madison had not believed that a bill of rights was required for the new government."
George Mason and the anti federalists set him straight. The reason you are unfamiliar with George Mason is because, unlike Jefferson and Madison, Mason was a devout Christian which doesn't obtain with lefty historical revisionism.
Search Google for "The Father of the Bill of Rights" and then stick your head in the trough and stay under until you can recite the Virginia Bill of Rights which preceded and was precedent for the US Bill of Rights.
This discussion has already been had in this forum = see previous posts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.