• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you think this country was founded upon Christianity?

Do you think the U.S. was intended to be a Christian Nation?

  • Yes

    Votes: 28 19.4%
  • No

    Votes: 99 68.8%
  • other

    Votes: 17 11.8%

  • Total voters
    144
Seems to me that our rights are hinged on how much we are willing to fight for them, regardless of source. And if we fight for an individual right that offends nearly all others, we are likely to lose that "right"....
 
C.S. Lewis is the example I always go with here, of a man who believed in the reality of both. frankly i think the scientific account reinforces the biblical one rather than detracting from it.

I don't agree, unless a lot in there is taken figuratively or presumed to have been translated wrong, then science clashes with the Bible. Now, there are certainly plenty of Christian denominations that do believe that not everything in the Bible is accurate or literal, many in fact, but then I have to ask how they know which parts are real and which aren't? What part of the Bible (or is it other papers/writings related to the Bible) specifically tells a person that those parts that obviously clash with science are figurative, while everything else is to be held true?
 
I think this country was founded for many reasons and freedom of religion was a biggee. That means any religion that blows your skirt up.
 
I think this country was founded for many reasons and freedom of religion was a biggee. That means any religion that blows your skirt up.


What about the skirt less people?:2razz:
 
I think this country was founded for many reasons and freedom of religion was a biggee. That means any religion that blows your skirt up.

pervert.......I suppose you like to see Kilts blown up as well...
 
I don't agree, unless a lot in there is taken figuratively or presumed to have been translated wrong, then science clashes with the Bible. Now, there are certainly plenty of Christian denominations that do believe that not everything in the Bible is accurate or literal, many in fact, but then I have to ask how they know which parts are real and which aren't? What part of the Bible (or is it other papers/writings related to the Bible) specifically tells a person that those parts that obviously clash with science are figurative, while everything else is to be held true?

I don't understand the obsession so many have with proving the bible true, or untrue. Take the good parts, apply them to your daily life, ignore the bad parts.
Yes, there are bad parts....and the fact that we can ignore those parts means that christian beliefs have evolved, even if the christians have not...
 
I don't understand the obsession so many have with proving the bible true, or untrue. Take the good parts, apply them to your daily life, ignore the bad parts.
Yes, there are bad parts....and the fact that we can ignore those parts means that christian beliefs have evolved, even if the christians have not...

I agree. The only problem I have is when some of those parts of the Bible are used to condemn others for harmless behavior that is viewed as sinful. Other than those types things (which definitely, thankfully change with time), I consider the Bible and Christianity to be pretty positive things for people and society, just like most religions, in general. Of course there are fanatics who contort information, but those are small sects of people in any major religion.
 
I agree. The only problem I have is when some of those parts of the Bible are used to condemn others for harmless behavior that is viewed as sinful. Other than those types things (which definitely, thankfully change with time), I consider the Bible and Christianity to be pretty positive things for people and society, just like most religions, in general. Of course there are fanatics who contort information, but those are small sects of people in any major religion.

Fanatics and con artists....a bad combination...
 
For about 2 weeks. Then they got cold and hungry. Rather than ask, they began robbing the native stores and killing the natives. Finally these fine Christians declared them agents of the devil, apparently giving them clear consciences to slaughter the devil in the form of men, women and children over the course of the next few centuries. Nice.

Personally, I think it's why fundamentalists worry so damn much about Islam. They know they have done the same thing (not all that long ago), and would do it again. Projection can be an ugly thing.
 
I hear all the time that "this is a Christian Nation". Do you think this is so.

I am going to go ahead and say anyone who truly thinks this country was meant to be a Christian nation is a complete moron. The founding fathers were secularist, there is some evidence indicating Thomas Jefferson was at least agnostic.

" The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes; fools and hypocrites. To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." -Thomas Jefferson

The major religious philosophy of most of the Founding Fathers was "deism," which is one degree towards theism than agnosticism is.
 
The major religious philosophy of most of the Founding Fathers was "deism," which is one degree towards theism than agnosticism is.

Also, most deist turned into atheist once evolution was theorized, since it cut into the core of their beliefs that God was like a clock maker, and didn't change anything once he created the Earth.
 
Yes, the U.S. was founded as a Christian country, proofs:

51oo2kTXp8L.jpg
 
I think it's why fundamentalists worry so damn much about Islam. They know they have done the same thing (not all that long ago), and would do it again. Projection can be an ugly thing.

People, including fundies, fear situations they don't understand, can't relate with, and often react irrationally.

ricksfolly
 
Yes, the U.S. was founded as a Christian country, proofs:

51oo2kTXp8L.jpg

ROFLMFAO... Okay. But here is what I want to know: This changes the average American's life in what way, again? In other words, who effing cares what it was founded on? The only thing that matters is the system of government put in place, and that had nothing to do with Christianity. Christian leaders hated the democracy idea. It inspired Vatican I, actually, in 1898, I believe.

Here's the truth, as you like to say: This country was founded on the principles of the Magna Carta, a secular document. You can try to change that history if you like, but Americans have a long tradition of mistrust where religious charlatans are concerned. This nation is not now, nor will it ever be, beholden to the whims of the uneducated fundamentalist. We need no more inquisitions in search of the infidel (yup, the church used the word infidel quite a bit in it's Papal Bulls). You know, giving you people the license to kill Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, and the wrong kind of Christians.

Ain't gonna happen. Hell, you guys can't even get, "Love those that hate you," right. That is a basic. How can you be trusted with the complex stuff?
 
I am going to go ahead and say anyone who truly thinks this country was meant to be a Christian nation is a complete moron. The founding fathers were secularist, there is some evidence indicating Thomas Jefferson was at least agnostic.

This is a double sided question. Yes, I believe the founding fathers inteded these 13 colonies to be merely governed groups of free men. However, It can easily be debated that the wording of your question leaves interpretation of any group who has governed this country at any given time intending to establish this country as a "Christan Nation". And if that is the case, I would say definatly so. As many differant presidential administrations have guided this country to a more christan based union. Next time you poll, I would ask that you present yourself more clearly before insinuating peoples intellect is inferior. (And yes i'm an admitted idiot and fool, however congress has made no law outlawing such behavior that I am aware of)
 
Last edited:
an interesting claim. the only self-proclaimed Deist i'm aware of among the Founding Fathers was Benjamin Franklin. Jefferson probably was as well intellectually, but he worshipped at Christian services, and certainly had no problem with public expressions of faith in the Divine.

perhaps you could cite for us the numbers of this "majority" of Founding Fathers who were deists?

as for this notion:

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
-John Adams

Wow you found a quote, I can do that too.
Our Founding Fathers Were NOT Christians a website full of them with information and sources. Long and short, I don't want to know the religion of someone running for public office and religion has no place in politics, this was the view of the founders, this is the view of people who think freely.
 
Wow you found a quote, I can do that too.
Our Founding Fathers Were NOT Christians a website full of them with information and sources. Long and short, I don't want to know the religion of someone running for public office and religion has no place in politics, this was the view of the founders, this is the view of people who think freely.

:lol: all your site does is reinforce what i have already written here; the Founding Fathers were generally Christian themselves, but of multiple sects, and some were Deists. the states themselves were generally beholden to various sects, and several actually had state churches or professions of Faith written into their Constitutions. the Founding Fathers had a nonaggression pact at the National Level; and States were free to choose as they preferred. they also generally assumed that the character of the nation would continue to be a Christian one, and assumed that this would form the basis for the protection of the hard-won freedoms of the American citizenry.

your site seems mainly to argue that since they had a non-agression pact at the national level, that they obviously couldnt' have been Christian.

i find it too difficult to construct a reply as ludicrous as that which you have offered, and so i give up the attempt.
 
I don't agree, unless a lot in there is taken figuratively or presumed to have been translated wrong, then science clashes with the Bible. Now, there are certainly plenty of Christian denominations that do believe that not everything in the Bible is accurate or literal, many in fact, but then I have to ask how they know which parts are real and which aren't? What part of the Bible (or is it other papers/writings related to the Bible) specifically tells a person that those parts that obviously clash with science are figurative, while everything else is to be held true?

admittedly copying and pasting from an earlier post:

it is worth noting that there are some simply amazing parts of the Bible that seem downright eerie given the current modern scientific understanding of the universe. most creation myths involve anthromorphic solar bodies (the sun and the moon hook up and have a baby earth), or something similarly creative - as i recall the Sumerians thought we were living on the body of a dead god. peruse the creation myths of various cultures if you like, you'll find either similar items or variations of steady state assumptions. the creation account in Genesis is unique in that it parallels the scientific account. Science teaches us that first there was not simply 'nothing' but 'no-thing'; not even the possibility of a thing because there was no time nor space for it to be in; and then there was a massive explosion of energy-light. that then the energy solidified and became stars, that the earth was formed, that it was covered in water for some time, that the landmasses formed, that photosynthentic life formed, followed by animal life, followed by the development of eyesight, followed by an explosion in the number and diversity in water-based life forms (cambrian, as i recall), followed by the development of land animals, followed by the development of man, who lived in a natural state for a period of time before developing what we call civilization. Genesis tells us that first there was nothing. then there was an explosion of light followed by the development of the stars and earth, which was covered in water for a time, developed land masses, saw the introduction of photosynthetic life, followed by the development of animal life, followed by the development of the ability to discern night from day (gee, sounds like developing eyesight), followed by the explosion of water-based lifeforms some of which (the bible tells us and science confirms) were huge, followed by the development of land animals, followed by the development of man, who lived in a natural state for a while before developing civilization.

and i'm expected to believe that the author of Genesis got lucky?
 
:lol: all your site does is reinforce what i have already written here; the Founding Fathers were generally Christian themselves, but of multiple sects, and some were Deists. the states themselves were generally beholden to various sects, and several actually had state churches or professions of Faith written into their Constitutions. the Founding Fathers had a nonaggression pact at the National Level; and States were free to choose as they preferred. they also generally assumed that the character of the nation would continue to be a Christian one, and assumed that this would form the basis for the protection of the hard-won freedoms of the American citizenry.

your site seems mainly to argue that since they had a non-agression pact at the national level, that they obviously couldnt' have been Christian.

i find it too difficult to construct a reply as ludicrous as that which you have offered, and so i give up the attempt.

The important thing to note is that the founder's religion isn't even important. Our laws are not based on christian values, the only example anyone has given are the commandments and saying that our laws are based on the ten commandments is so stupid it's unreal. I will say again, religion has no place in politics, and I would even go so far as to say that it has no place at all.
 
The US was founded on Judeo-Christian values and morals. However, we are NOT a Christian nation. There is a difference.
 
The US was founded on Judeo-Christian values and morals. However, we are NOT a Christian nation. There is a difference.

May Allah praise you and may your name be blessed among the faithful:mrgreen:
 
admittedly copying and pasting from an earlier post:

it is worth noting that there are some simply amazing parts of the Bible that seem downright eerie given the current modern scientific understanding of the universe. most creation myths involve anthromorphic solar bodies (the sun and the moon hook up and have a baby earth), or something similarly creative - as i recall the Sumerians thought we were living on the body of a dead god. peruse the creation myths of various cultures if you like, you'll find either similar items or variations of steady state assumptions. the creation account in Genesis is unique in that it parallels the scientific account. Science teaches us that first there was not simply 'nothing' but 'no-thing'; not even the possibility of a thing because there was no time nor space for it to be in; and then there was a massive explosion of energy-light. that then the energy solidified and became stars, that the earth was formed, that it was covered in water for some time, that the landmasses formed, that photosynthentic life formed, followed by animal life, followed by the development of eyesight, followed by an explosion in the number and diversity in water-based life forms (cambrian, as i recall), followed by the development of land animals, followed by the development of man, who lived in a natural state for a period of time before developing what we call civilization. Genesis tells us that first there was nothing. then there was an explosion of light followed by the development of the stars and earth, which was covered in water for a time, developed land masses, saw the introduction of photosynthetic life, followed by the development of animal life, followed by the development of the ability to discern night from day (gee, sounds like developing eyesight), followed by the explosion of water-based lifeforms some of which (the bible tells us and science confirms) were huge, followed by the development of land animals, followed by the development of man, who lived in a natural state for a while before developing civilization.

and i'm expected to believe that the author of Genesis got lucky?

Actually, you are vastly overgeneralizing much of Genesis and not correct in other aspects. The first line in Genesis reads that God made the heavens and earth. Then it goes on to say that the world was dark but that there were oceans, yet no sky. I'm pretty sure that the sun was there before there was water on Earth. Also, it describes the moon as a lesser light, yet we know that the moon doesn't actually create light of its own, but rather reflects the light of the sun. The stars, according to the Bible, were placed there for us.

I just read the first page of Genesis, the creation. It doesn't say anything about a big-bang like event. In fact, according to what I just read, the Earth was there with water before the sun shown on the Earth to create the first day. That does not fit in with what you are describing. In fact, it sounds quite egotistic of us to assume that God made everything just for us.
 
Back
Top Bottom