Right wing Christian dogma

[Meg]

Just curious about what portion of the community subscribes to the belief that public policy should be governed in accordance with Fundamentalist Christian religious beliefs?

[Standard]

What sort of standard would you suggest they use?

I mean do you think it is wrong to murder?

Do you think it is wrong to steal?

Those are commands right from scripture. If one uses a Biblical standard then they are using a TRUE standard. If one uses their OWN standard, then that standard can be seriously flawed.

For example, someone who does not like to consider themselves a thief, may claim that they are only ownership challenged.

If you don't like the standard that is set, then you should not be one who complains when you are wronged. If you think the Biblical standard is somehow now a TRUE standard, then please post your address on here so that all the ownership challenged people can come and help themselves to your stuff.

[Survivalofthefit test]

Meg wrote:

Just curious about what portion of the community subscribes to the belief that public policy should be governed in accordance with Fundamentalist Christian religious beliefs?

The Constitution of the United States of America is based on no less than 26 Biblical tenants. I do believe the basis of law is outlined the same way. Most citizens have no problems abiding by the law. What if we used the Herbert Spencer method of Survival of the fittest only the best prepared would survive. Where would that leave you. You probably are high maintenance, weak, out of shape and ill prepared. And I bet probably closer to retirement age than you are to 30. You need a reality check....test one, two test. Yeah your old.

[Meg]

For the record I'm not near retirement age and I'm not suggesting any standard. I'm asking a question to stimulate discussion.

[Meg]

Additionally Talmudic law predates Christianity but much of our law is in alignment to it...

[Standard]

Where do you think God was when man was created?

Just because the Jewish people don't recognize Jesus as the Messiah, does not mean that God's law ever changed.

If you read the Old Testament and then the New Testament you will find that Jesus did not come to do away with the law.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

So the LAW is still there and it HASN'T CHANGED.

[Meg]

I hear what you're saying Standard, but don't you think that the founders of the country requested separation of church and state because of all that they had seen in the way of religious conflict in the "old country". Understanding that we are self governing, would you do away with such a separation?

What would then be the difference in a country ruled by Christian fundamentalism (rather than the secular rule of law as is today) and a country that bases its laws on Shiria?

[Standard]

Meg wrote:

I hear what you're saying Standard, but don't you think that the founders of the country requested separation of church and state because of all that they had seen in the way of religious conflict in the "old country". Understanding that we are self governing, would you do away with such a separation?
What would then be the difference in a country ruled by Christian fundamentalism (rather than the secular rule of law as is today) and a country that bases its laws on Shiria?

Where are you getting separation of church and state from? Surely you are not naive enough to think that it is in the US Constitution?

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html

If you really want to know what the founding fathers thought of our country you should read some of their writings. It is not what you have heard in the public school system.

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles...

Here are just a few of the things that our founding fathers wrote.

You might especially check out the link that is titled Importance of Morality and Religion in Government.

[ilovetheconstitu tion]

Nowhere in the US Constitution are the words "separation of church and state" used. They didn't want the state to have control in their church business or religious faith and practices, BUT their religious faith and practices guided everything they did in their lives and wrote in the Constitution.

Our founding fathers would roll over in their graves if they would have known that the political, moral, and ethical issues we have today would even BE an issue in the country they worked so hard to create that was founded on God and His principles.

[Meg]

ilovetheconstitution wrote:

Nowhere in the US Constitution are the words "separation of church and state" used. They didn't want the state to have control in their church business or religious faith and practices, BUT their religious faith and practices guided everything they did in their lives and wrote in the Constitution.
Our founding fathers would roll over in their graves if they would have known that the political, moral, and ethical issues we have today would even BE an issue in the country they worked so hard to create that was founded on God and His principles.

I respectfully disagree. It is true that the founding fathrs cared a lot about G-d each in his own way. That said they did not agree-- some were Quakers some Anglican some were not Christian Jefferson was a diest for example while Franklin was a Unitarian. Because they individually cared about their respective religions but did not agree they agreed there would be no religion in government. For this reason the first part of the first amendment states that "congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion". From this we see that Government should not be in the G-d business--it is left to the individual.

Religious freedom is an individual right guaranteed by the framers forbidding government involvement in religion. This also guarentees freedom from religion. Example Epperson v Arkansas in this case the first amendment was used to strike down a state statute forbidding the teaching of evolution in public school.

[ilovetheconstitu tion]

I don't recall saying they all worshiped God, I said that our country was founded on God's principles. God's principles may be present in the religious practices of others...even atheists adhere to what they believe, and what they (America) believed in "then" was morality, ethics, and personal freedom. All the things we've lost now as a country.

Yes, our constitution does say "congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion", meaning they could not establish a "country wide" religion, such as was instilled in England, but where does it say religion should not play a part on politics? Where does it say we should turn our back on God as we have?

[ilovetheconstitu tion]

OH and since you specifically mentioned Jefferson and Franklin...have you read any of the Jefferson Bible that he put together?

". Thomas Jefferson believed that the ethical system of Jesus was the finest the world has ever seen. In compiling what has come to be called "The Jefferson Bible," he sought to separate those ethical teachings from the religious dogma and other supernatural elements that are intermixed in the account provided by the four Gospels. He presented these teachings, along with the essential events of the life of Jesus, in one continuous narrative."

It wasn't that he didn't believe in God or Jesus, it was that he was tired of the religious zealots turning those deities into something they weren't. His feelings are akin to a Christians view of legalism. You don't add to or take away from the Bible, which is what many try to do.

Franklin, while a Unitarian, had this to say...

"Whoever shall introduce into public affairs the principles of primitive Christianity will change the face of the world." - Letter to the French ministry, March, 1778"

I'd call public affairs politics wouldn't you, and he said we should introduce the basic principles of Christianity to that. He did NOT say one had to "be" a Christian to do that.
Feel free to practice your faith whatever it is, that is your freedom in this country, WHILE respecting the fact that the country was founded on the principals of Christianity.

[Stanford Paul Meg]

Thomas Jefferson had good bangin' with a belly warmer back in the day!

Washington had wooden teeth, probably didn't feel too good on the slave camel toes when them teeth a splintered!

The good lord gave us wood so i guess it's ok for ole George to go down on the slave women folk!

Now that's a sermon for Sunday mornin' with the Baptistas!

Oh Forgive me Lord, and God bless those pygmies down there in New Guinea. Amen!

[Standard]

Meg wrote:

<quoted text>
I respectfully disagree. It is true that the founding fathrs cared a lot about G-d each in his own way. That said they did not agree-- some were Quakers some Anglican some were not Christian Jefferson was a diest for example while Franklin was a Unitarian. Because they individually cared about their respective religions but did not agree they agreed there would be no religion in government. For this reason the first part of the first amendment states that "congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion". From this we see that Government should not be in the G-d business--it is left to the individual.
Religious freedom is an individual right guaranteed by the framers forbidding government involvement in religion. This also guarentees freedom from religion. Example Epperson v Arkansas in this case the first amendment was used to strike down a state statute forbidding the teaching of evolution in public school.

In a practical sense, classifying Jefferson as a "Deist" with regards to religious affiliation is misleading and meaningless. Jefferson was never affiliated with any organized Deist movement. This is a word that describes a theological position more than an actual religious affiliation, and as such it is of limited use from a sociological perspective. If one defines the term "Deist" broadly enough, then the writing of nearly every U.S. president or prominent historical figure could be used to classify them as a "Deist," so classifying people as such without at least some evidence of nominal self-identification is not very useful.

Although Jefferson's specific denominational and congregational ties were limited in his adulthood and his ever-evolving theological beliefs were distinctively his own, he was without a doubt a Protestant. One should keep in mind that despite his later self-stated non-affiliation with any specific denomination, he was raised as an Episcopalian, attended Episcopalian services many times as an adult and as President, and he expressed a clear affinity for Unitarianism. However these denominations may be classified now, uring Jefferson's lifetime, the Episcopal Church and the Unitarian Church were both considered to be Protestant denominations.

[Imboden]

Standard wrote:

<quoted text>
In a practical sense, classifying Jefferson as a "Deist" with regards to religious affiliation is misleading and meaningless.

Standard, Websters dictionary defines Deist as

"The belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation."

Now we are talking about Thomas Jefferson, a guy who rewrote the entire bible and removed all supernatural miracles attributed to God and Jesus Christ.

There is no question Jefferson rejected the Bible as divine revelation and rejected the divinity of Jesus. In the Declaration of Independence Jefferson's appeal was to the God of the Deist, "Nature's God," not specifically to the God of Christianity (see letter dated Sep. 14, 1813, to Jefferson from John Adams equating "Nature's God" with "the revelation from nature").

You can also take Jefferson's own words for it.

[quote]
Jefferson to Adams
Monticello. May 5. 17.
DEAR SIR
Absences and avocations had prevented my acknoleging your favor of Feb. 2.
when that of Apr. 19. arrived. I had not the pleasure of recieving the
former by the hands of Mr. Lyman. His business probably carried him in
another direction; for I am far inland, and distant from the great line of
communication between the trading cities. Your recommendations are always
welcome, for indeed the subjects of them always merit that welcome, and
some of them in an extraordinary degree. They make us acquainted with what
there is of excellent in our ancient sister state of Massachusets, once
venerated and beloved, and still hanging on our hopes, for what need we
despair of after the resurrection of Connecticut to light and liberality.54
I had believed that, the last retreat of Monkish darkness, bigotry, and
abhorrence of those advances of the mind which had carried the other states
a century ahead of them. They seemed still to be exactly where their
forefathers were when they schismatised from the Covenant of works, and to
consider, as dangerous heresies, all innova-tions good or bad. I join you
therefore in sincere congratulations that this den of the priesthood is at
length broken up, and that a protestant popedom is no longer to disgrace
the American history and character. If, by religion, we are to understand
Sectarian dogmas, in which no two of them agree, then your exclamation on
that hypothesis is just,'that this would be the best of all possible
worlds, if there were no religion in it.' But if the moral precepts, innate
in man, and made a part of his physical constitution, as necessary for a
social being, if the sublime doc-trines of philanthropism, and deism taught
us by Jesus of Nazareth in which all agree, constitute true religion, then,
without it, this would be, as you again say,'something not fit to be
named, even indeed a Hell.'[/quote]

I don't think it's misleading to say Jefferson and the founding fathers did not agree on religion. Unitarians, Deists, Catholics, Calvinists, Anglicans to name a few do not agree on religious dogma.