Commandments Draw Crowd of 300 in Oklahoma

12 Responses to “Commandments Draw Crowd of 300 in Oklahoma”

1. Gribbit on November 21st, 2005 7:51 am

   Has anyone actually read the Mayflower Compact? There are a lot of references to God there.

   “In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord, King James, by the Grace of God, of England, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, e&. Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord, King James of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620.”

2. Jay on November 21st, 2005 7:59 am

   Holy Jesus! Surely you are not suggesting that government officials at the founding of our nation established principles based upon the Christian faith, that were actually used in the creation of our Nation! Why, that would be establishing a religion! The last time I read the imaginary liberal living document it said in the first rewritten amendment, that there must be a wall seperating Christianity from government. How could this be?

3. Alfred Murrah on November 21st, 2005 11:54 am

   You guys are a hoot! I could produce all sorts of evidence that Thomas Jefferson and pals had a particularly low personal regard for Christianity, and that the god of their understanding was decidedly not the god of your own (not that it matters — can King Kong beat up Godzilla? Could Greedo take Boba Fett?), but there’s no point in dealing in facts with you folks. You’ll just go on squawking about how the founders of America were Christians through and through, and that every legal move made toward keeping the screaming 21st-century lunacy of God-fearing wingnut America to a dull roar translates into an effort to rewrite or erase history and nail Christians to the wall by their hands.

   If you’re going to go through life cross-eyed and deluded, you ought to at least look into happy fantasies rather than persecutory ones. They’re much more gratifying.

   Personally I couldn’t care less whether the Ten Commandments are displayed on a courthouse lawn. I don’t break laws and I’m not an attorney, so I don’t have to look at such monuments. But let’s not pretend American jurisprudence has a special basis in these dicta. Maybe they should put Yahweh’s laws and the legal decrees of every major deity in the world on the same lawn. Then there’s be no room for grass and they wouldn’t need to hire a groundskeeping crew.

   Here’s the facts, gang: Regardless of your take on history, judges throughout the 20th and 21st centuries — both liberal and conservative — have upheld the separation-of-church-and-state interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. It’s not going away and neither is the ACLU. I’m not cruel, so I’m not asking you to like this or even to fully understand it. But believe me, it’s not going away. Your only recourse is to watch and gnash your teeth as America slowly but inexorably lurches toward genuine enlightenment (albeit probably not until Turd Blossom is out of the White House), and complain about it on this blog, much to the mirth of many.

   You all would have fit in well in 14th-century Europe. Unfortunately you won’t get that chance.

   Tom Coburn, by the way, is basically a Nazi, and only in a worthless dustbowl like Oklahoma or a 19th-century empire of ignorance like South Carolina could such a backward-ass Bible-slapper be elected to head custodian of Retardville, much less the U.S. Senate. Sheesh.

4. Kevin Mark Smith on November 21st, 2005 12:26 pm

   I’d be more impressed if the rally took place somewhere in the Ninth Circuit or Massachusetts. It’s not the heartland that’s the problem.

5. loboinok on November 21st, 2005 5:30 pm

   “I could produce all sorts of evidence that Thomas Jefferson and pals had a particularly low personal regard for Christianity, and that the god of their understanding was decidedly not the god of your own”

   Then do it!!

   Lets see your “evidence”!

   But before you do… I would prefer that you ‘present’ it. Libs are well known to ‘produce’ their own facts.

6. Dethanial on November 21st, 2005 9:04 pm

   My oldest son works in the hunting department of a sportsman store. Looks like I will be buying lots of ammo and moving back to Oklahoma. There must be more than one Alfred Murrah, the one who wrote the above post is stupid but it looks more like phil is posting with more than one name.

7. Alfred Murrah on November 22nd, 2005 12:59 am

   “Apparently even here in the heart of the Bible Belt there are idiots.”

   Yes, in even in the ocean there is saline water and marine life.

   loboinok wants to see evidence of the Founding Fathers’ views on Christianity. He is apparently among those who refuses to distinguish between deism and sectarianism.

   You can start here:

   http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/12/great_debate.html

   But that’s more of an editorial take, which you may not swallow since you can dismiss it surely being the work of the leftist media aiming to abolish Christianity. So for a scholarly treatment of the subject, go here:

   http://www.postfun.com/pfp/worbois.html

   This essay includes an extensive bibliography, and given the straightforward issuances from the main players it’s hard to argue even for somone wearing arc welder’s lenses that anything was taken out of content. The text:

   No one disputes the faith of our Founding Fathers. To speak of unalienable Rights being endowed by a Creator certainly shows a sensitivity to our spiritual selves. What is surprising is when fundamentalist Christians think the Founding Fathers’ faith had anything to do with the Bible. Without exception, the faith of our Founding Fathers was deist, not theist. It was best expressed earlier in the Declaration of Independence, when they spoke of “the Laws of Nature” and of “Nature’s God.”

   In a sermon of October 1831, Episcopalian minister Bird Wilson said,

   Among all of our Presidents, from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism.

   The Bible? Here is what our Founding Fathers wrote about Bible-based Christianity:

   Thomas Jefferson:

   I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth.
   SIX HISTORIC AMERICANS,
   by John E. Remsburg, letter to William Short
   Jefferson again:
   Christianity…(has become) the most perverted system that ever shone on man. …Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and importers led by Paul, the first great corrupter of the teaching of Jesus.
   More Jefferson:
   The clergy converted the simple teachings of Jesus into an engine for enslaving mankind and adulterated by artificial constructions into a contrivance to filch wealth and power to themselves…these clergy, in fact, constitute the real Anti-Christ.
   Jefferson’s word for the Bible?
   Dunghill.
   John Adams:
   Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of other trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days?
   Also Adams:
   The doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity.
   Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 states:
   The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.
   Here’s Thomas Paine:
   I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the Bible).

   Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to ‘God’ to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and to debauch and rape the daughters. I would not dare so dishonor my Creator’s name by (attaching) it to this filthy book (the Bible).

   It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God against the evils of the Bible.

   Accustom a people to believe that priests and clergy can forgive sins…and you will have sins in abundance.

   The Christian church has set up a religion of pomp and revenue in pretended imitation of a person (Jesus) who lived a life of poverty.

   Finally let’s hear from James Madison:

   What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy.

   Madison objected to state-supported chaplains in Congress and to the exemption of churches from taxation. He wrote:

   Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.

   These founding fathers were a reflection of the American population. Having escaped from the state-established religions of Europe, only 7% of the people in the 13 colonies belonged to a church when the Declaration of Independence was signed.

   Among those who confuse Christianity with the founding of America, the rise of conservative Baptists is one of the more interesting developments. The Baptists believed God’s authority came from the people, not the priesthood, and they had been persecuted for this belief. It was they—the Baptists—who were instrumental in securing the separation of church and state. They knew you can not have a “one-way wall” that lets religion into government but that does not let it out. They knew no religion is capable of handling political power without becoming corrupted by it. And, perhaps, they knew it was Christ himself who first proposed the separation of church and state: Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto the Lord that which is the Lord’s.

   In the last five years the Baptists have been taken over by a fundamentalist faction that insists authority comes from the Bible and that the individual must accept the interpretation of the Bible from a higher authority. These usurpers of the Baptist faith are those who insist they should meddle in the affairs of the government and it is they who insist the government should meddle in the beliefs of individuals.

   The price of Liberty is constant vigilance. Religious fundamentalism and zealous patriotism have always been the forces which require the greatest attention.

   Editor’s Note: This page was first posted in 1995. Since then we’ve received volumes of mail from politically conservative Christians supplying us with quotes from public speeches made by the authors above. While most of these author politicians were diplomatic in their public expressions concerning religion, in their private conversations, voluminous writings and correspondences they expressed contrary beliefs.

   Which beliefs are true? If a politician appears one way in public and another in private, which do you think better represents their true beliefs? How do you reconcile the inflamatory writings above with various pro-Christian statements that the same men made in public over the course of their careers? Could it be called “politics,” an attempt to appease Christians while ensuring a more rational government based on the separation of church and state? It certainly seems that way.

   In addition, the Editor does not recognize any religious intentions of the so-called “Founding Fathers” as relevant to discussions of political process today. As a descendent of Native Americans the editor understands that America had already been “found.” The “Christian” beliefs of a handful of landed, white, male aristocracy enslaving blacks and murdering Native Americans hold little credibility and should be dumped along with the notions of slavery we so wisely dispensed with on January 1, 1863.

   References: The writings of Thomas Jefferson exist in 25 volumes. The references for this article were found in the book, SIX HISTORIC AMERICANS, by John E. Remsburg (who interviewed many of Lincoln’s associates). Much of his work on Jefferson came from THE MEMOIRS, CORRESPONDENCE AND MISCELLANIES FROM THE PAPERS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON, 4 volumes ed. by Thomas Jefferson Randolph (the grandson of Thomas Jefferson).

   Other Links:

   Thomas Paine
   http://atheist.tamu.edu/freethought/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/chapter_1.html

   Thomas Jefferson
   http://atheist.tamu.edu/freethought/john_remsburg

   Benjamin Franklin
   http://atheist.tamu.edu/freethought/franklin_steiner/presidents.html

   General Information
   http://www.dimensional.com/~randl/founders.htm

8. loboinok on November 22nd, 2005 3:59 am

   The following is”Best Evidence” documentation… can be used as evidence in a court of law. The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of mankind.

   (Source: Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XV, p. 383.)

   I concur with the author in considering the moral precepts of Jesus as more pure, correct, and sublime than those of ancient philosophers.

   (Source: Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. X, pp. 376-377. In a letter to Edward Dowse on April 19, 1803.)

   An eloquent preacher of your religious society, Richard Motte, in a discourse of much emotion and pathos, is said to have exclaimed aloud to his congregation, that he did not believe there was a Quaker, Presbyterian, Methodist or Baptist in heaven, having paused to give his hearers time to stare and to wonder. He added, that in heaven, God knew no distinctions, but considered all good men as his children, and as brethren of the same family. I believe, with the Quaker preacher, that he who steadily observes those moral precepts in which all religions concur, will never be questioned at the gates of heaven, as to the dogmas in which they all differ. That on entering there, all these are left behind us, and the Aristides and Catos, the Penns and Tillotsons, Presbyterians and Baptists, will find themselves united in all principles which are in concert with the reason of the supreme mind. Of all the systems of morality, ancient and modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus.26

   To the corruptions of Christianity I am, indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others. 27

   Jefferson also put together his own version of the Bible, less the references to the supernatural (virgin birth, miracles, etc.). He called it The Life and Morals of Jesus, and it reveals his reverence for that part of the Bible that he found “reasonable.” The Fifty-seventh Congress ordered a reprint of his work. 29 Many people have questioned his mutilation of the canon, but one is forced to agree that it would be very much in character for him to recommend studying the Bible. To deny this is to deny that he swore “upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”
   George Washington

   “Father of Our Country”

   While just government protects all in their religious rights, true religion affords to government its surest support.

   (Source: George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1932), Vol. XXX, p. 432 n., from his address to the Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church in North America, October 9, 1789.)

   Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?

   And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

   (Source: George Washington, Address of George Washington, President of the United States . . . Preparatory to His Declination (Baltimore: George and Henry S. Keatinge), pp. 22-23. In his Farewell Address to the United States in 1796.)

   Benjamin Rush

   Signer of the Declaration of Independence

   The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.

   (Source: Benjamin Rush, Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical (Philadelphia: Thomas and William Bradford, 1806), p. 8.)

   We profess to be republicans, and yet we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government, that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by the means of the Bible. For this Divine Book, above all others, favors that equality among mankind, that respect for just laws, and those sober and frugal virtues, which constitute the soul of republicanism.

   Benjamin Franklin

   Signer of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence

   [O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.

   Source: Benjamin Franklin, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, editor (Boston: Tappan, Whittemore and Mason, 1840), Vol. X, p. 297, April 17, 1787.

   I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that “except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.

   I therefore beg leave to move that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service.

   (Source: James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, Max Farrand, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. I, pp. 450-452, June 28, 1787.)

   John Adams
   Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Second President of the United States

   [I]t 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.

   (Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, 1854), Vol. IX, p. 401, to Zabdiel Adams on June 21, 1776.)

   [W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

   (Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. 1854), Vol. IX, p. 229, October 11, 1798.)

   ……………..

   To determine whether the “Founding Fathers” were generally atheists, agnostics, and deists, one must first define those terms. An “atheist” is one who professes to believe that there is no God;1 an “agnostic” is one who professes that nothing can be known beyond what is visible and tangible;2 and a “deist” is one who believes in an impersonal God who is no longer involved with mankind. (In other words, a “deist” embraces the “clockmaker theory” 3 that there was a God who made the universe and wound it up like a clock; however, it now runs of its own volition; the clockmaker is gone and therefore does not respond to man.)

   Today the terms “atheist,” “agnostic,” and “deist” have been used together so often that their meanings have almost become synonymous. In fact, many dictionaries list these words as synonym.4

   Those who advance the notion that this was the belief system of the Founders often publish information attempting to prove that the Founders were irreligious.5 One of the quotes they set forth is the following:

   The government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion.GEORGE WASHINGTON

   The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli is the source of Washington’s supposed statement. Is this statement accurate? Did this prominent Founder truly repudiate religion? An answer will be found by an examination of its source.

   That treaty, one of several with Tripoli, was negotiated during the “Barbary Powers Conflict,” which began shortly after the Revolutionary War and continued through the Presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison.6 The Muslim Barbary Powers (Tunis, Morocco, Algiers, Tripoli, and Turkey) were warring against what they claimed to be the “Christian” nations (England, France, Spain, Denmark, and the United States). In 1801, Tripoli even declared war against the United States,7 thus constituting America’s first official war as an established independent nation.

   Throughout this long conflict, the five Barbary Powers regularly attacked undefended American merchant ships. Not only were their cargoes easy prey but the Barbary Powers were also capturing and enslaving “Christian” seamen8 in retaliation for what had been done to them by the “Christians” of previous centuries (e.g., the Crusades and Ferdinand and Isabella’s expulsion of Muslims from Granada9).

   In an attempt to secure a release of captured seamen and a guarantee of unmolested shipping in the Mediterranean, President Washington dispatched envoys to negotiate treaties with the Barbary nations.10(Concurrently, he encouraged the construction of American naval warships11 to defend the shipping and confront the Barbary “pirates”—a plan not seriously pursued until President John Adams created a separate Department of the Navy in 1798.) The American envoys negotiated numerous treaties of “Peace and Amity” 12 with the Muslim Barbary nations to ensure “protection” of American commercial ships sailing in the Mediterranean.13 However, the terms of the treaty frequently were unfavorable to America, either requiring her to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars of “tribute” (i.e., official extortion) to each country to receive a “guarantee” of safety or to offer other “considerations” (e.g., providing a warship as a “gift” to Tripoli,14 a “gift” frigate to Algiers,15 paying $525,000 to ransom captured American seamen from Algiers,16 etc.).

   The 1797 treaty with Tripoli was one of the many treaties in which each country officially recognized the religion of the other in an attempt to prevent further escalation of a “Holy War” between Christians and Muslims.17 Consequently, Article XI of that treaty stated:

   As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity [hatred] against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] and as the said States [America] have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.18

   This article may be read in two manners. It may, as its critics do, be concluded after the clause “Christian religion”; or it may be read in its entirety and concluded when the punctuation so indicates. But even if shortened and cut abruptly (”the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion”), this is not an untrue statement since it is referring to the federal government.

   Recall that while the Founders themselves openly described America as a Christian nation (demonstrated in chapter 2 of Original Intent), they did include a constitutional prohibition against a federal establishment; religion was a matter left solely to the individual States. Therefore, if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is not a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation.

   Reading the clause of the treaty in its entirety also fails to weaken this fact. Article XI simply distinguished America from those historical strains of European Christianity which held an inherent hatred of Muslims; it simply assured the Muslims that the United States was not a Christian nation like those of previous centuries (with whose practices the Muslims were very familiar) and thus would not undertake a religious holy war against them.

   This latter reading is, in fact, supported by the attitude prevalent among numerous American leaders. The Christianity practiced in America was described by John Jay as “wise and virtuous,” 19 by John Quincy Adams as “civilized,” 20 and by John Adams as “rational.” 21 A clear distinction was drawn between American Christianity and that of Europe in earlier centuries. As Noah Webster explained:

   The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it.22

   Daniel Webster similarly explained that American Christianity was:

   Christianity to which the sword and the fagot [burning stake or hot branding iron] are unknown—general tolerant Christianity is the law of the land!23

   Those who attribute the Treaty of Tripoli quote to George Washington make two mistakes. The first is that no statement in it can be attributed to Washington (the treaty did not arrive in America until months after he left office); Washington never saw the treaty; it was not his work; no statement in it can be ascribed to him. The second mistake is to divorce a single clause of the treaty from the remainder which provides its context.

   It would also be absurd to suggest that President Adams (under whom the treaty was ratified in 1797) would have endorsed or assented to any provision which repudiated Christianity. In fact, while discussing the Barbary conflict with Jefferson, Adams declared:

   The policy of Christendom has made cowards of all their sailors before the standard of Mahomet. It would be heroical and glorious in us to restore courage to ours. 24

   Furthermore, it was Adams who declared:

   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; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature. 25

   Adams’ own words confirm that he rejected any notion that America was less than a Christian nation.

   What you offer is Anti-Christ poorly disguised as Atheism.

   Atheism recognizes no god. You on the other hand are actively working to counter the God you know exists.

   What you and who you reference here are doing is addressed on my Blog at: http://loboslinks.blogspot.com

9. Alfred Murrah on November 22nd, 2005 11:00 pm

   “Atheism recognizes no god. You on the other hand are actively working to counter the God you know exists.”

   Hee hee. If you’re dumb or desperate enough to believe that, be my guest. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out who really has a stake in the whole religion game — the specimen brainwashed at at early age into believing into heavenly bogeymen or the fellow fortunate enough to grow up with the freedom to evaluate the universe based on what is rather than what a bunch of religious twits say “should” be.

10. loboinok on November 23rd, 2005 12:07 am

    “It doesn’t take a genius to figure out who really has a stake in the whole religion game”

    Christ has already won the ‘game’!

    It doesn’t take a genius to follow a moron to Hell either… have a nice trip.

11. Alfred Murrah on November 23rd, 2005 5:57 am

    “Christ has already won the ‘game’!”

    Sure he has. That’s why he promized his followers he’d return within their lifetimes, only to (surprise, surprise) remain dead as a dildo 2,000 years later.

    Via the usual suspects (wishful thinking, enthusiastic quote-mining, etc.), you’ve done your best to conflate deism with Christianity. Like any proper tool of a far-flung and popular religious movement, you see what you want t see and ignore glaring evidence to the contrary.

    If historical documents can’t convince you that Jefferson et al. quite reasonably held the simultaneous positions of cherishing a higher power and scorning Christianity (then, as now, a font of religious intolerance), nothing will. Then again, you’re all goofy enough to be caught up in “fighting” (read: pissing into the wind) the ACLU, so I suppose anything’s possible in your minds.

    You should consider yourself lucky that the Founding Fathers aren’t alive today; if they were, their greatest targets of loathing would be people who rally behind their godthing in an effort to hamstring the scientific advancement of society, plead for special rights, and marginalize non-adherents — in other words, the kind of slack minds who champion the startingly errant garbage posted here every day.

12. Rat Zinger on November 23rd, 2005 8:45 am

    “Christ has already won the ‘game’!”

    Sure he has. That’s why he promized his followers he’d return within their lifetimes, only to (surprise, surprise) remain dead as a dildo 2,000 years later.

    Via the usual suspects (wishful thinking, enthusiastic quote-mining, etc.), you’ve done your best to conflate deism with Christianity. Like any proper tool of a far-flung and popular religious movement, you see what you want t see and ignore glaring evidence to the contrary.

    If historical documents can’t convince you that Jefferson et al. quite reasonably held the simultaneous positions of cherishing a higher power and scorning Christianity (then, as now, a font of religious intolerance), nothing will. Then again, you’re all goofy enough to be caught up in “fighting” (read: pissing into the wind) the ACLU, so I suppose anything’s possible in your minds.

    You should consider yourself lucky that the Founding Fathers aren’t alive today; if they were, their greatest targets of loathing would be people who rally behind their godthing in an effort to hamstring the scientific advancement of society, plead for special rights, and marginalize non-adherents — in other words, the kind of slack minds who champion the startingly errant garbage posted here every day.

• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  loading...
  
  
  
  

• Our Greatest Hits

  • Top Ten Reasons To Stop The ACLU
  • Top Ten Myths About The ACLU
  • Interview With A Former ACLU Lawyer
  • ACLU Vs American Sovereignty
  • ACLU Policy To Legalize Child Porn Distribution
  • ACLU And The Second Amendment
  • ACLU Vs. National Security
  • ACLU Against Tax Exemptions For Churches
  • ACLU Against Free Speech For Pro-Life Protesters
  • American Communist Lawyers Union
  • ACLU Advocates Open Borders
  • Your Tax Money Pays For The ACLU's Agenda
  • ACLU Seeks To Silence Free Speech Of Its Own Board Members
  • ACLU Has Massive Database Of Its Members'Financial Information
• 

• Affiliations

  • 

• Links

  • ACLU In News
  • ACLU News Room
  • ACLU Sux
  • Alliance Alert
  • Bare Naked Islam
  • Drudge
  • Fox News
  • Free Republic
  • FU-ACLU : Fed Up – All Christians Live United
  • Get A CLU
  • Liberty Counsel
  • Memorandum
  • Men’s News Daily
  • Pacific Justice Institute
  • Publius’ Forum
  • WND

• Resources

  • Advocates for Faith and Freedom
  • Alliance Defense Fund
  • American Center for Law & Justice
  • American Family Association
  • Anti-CAIR
  • Boy Scouts of America
  • Boy Scouts of America Legal Issues Website
  • Christian Legal Society
  • Civil Rights Union
  • CourtZero
  • Discover the Networks
  • Islamist Project – Center for Security Policy
  • Landmark Legal Foundation
  • National Alliance Against Christian Discrimination
  • National Legal Foundation
  • See how YOUR Senator or Representative ranks with the ACLU
  • Ten Commandments Defense
  • The American Civil Rights Union
  • The American Legion
  • The Becket Fund
  • The Center For Reclaiming America
  • The Rutherford Institute
  • Thomas More Law Center
  • U.S. House of Representatives Contact List
  • U.S. Senate Contact List
  • WallBuilders

• The Giants

  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
• Click For Blogroll

• Daily Visits

  Click For Blogroll

• The Big Blogroll

  Click For Blogroll

• Humor

  Click For Blogroll
•