• 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!

"We do not consider ourselves a christian nation", says Obama

"We" is relative. I could gather 3 or 4 of my friends and boldly state that "We" like beer. And I would be telling the truth (even though we prefer Jack and Coke.)

Now, maybe President Obama, in his circle of friends may speak truthfully when he says that "We" do not consider ourselves a christian nation.


Except that isn't what Obama said. This is what he said:

President Obama told reporters in Turkey that America is not defined by any one religion. "I've said before that one of the great strengths of the United States is, although as I mentioned we have a very large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values," said the president.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Obama_to_Turkey_We_are_not_0406.html

Hell, he even explicitly acknowledged many Americans identify as Christian and that still isn't good enough? How is it in this technological age with tens of millions of sources available and an information highway open 24/7/365.25 that even a simple quote gets diced like scallions? (Nothing personal against CC.)

I've notice a LOT of posts that have misquoted Obama and the worst part is someone already corrected the OP on the first page! What the hell people?


But he isn't speaking for my "we." The people I know, in my US of A, most certainly, by a landslide, consider us to be, in fact, a christian nation.

That speaks volumns about the people in my world and also about the people in Obama's.

Slave owners who raped their slaves considered themselves Christians too. So much for self-identification.

Sure, you got your freedom of religion. And long may she live. But, with numbers too big to ignore, this is a christian nation.

But don't shoot me. I ain't even religious. I'm just calling it like I see it. We can *****-foot around it and re-phrase it to sound more politically correct if it would make anyone feel better. I dont mind.

But it is what it is and I ain't one to believe it's raining outside when I can clearly see that someone is peeing on my head.

Maybe I need to get out more. I dunno.


We are not a Christian nation by government, action, or in any Christian principle worth living by that iam aware of. If anything, by government, action, and lack of principles we are arguably one of the most anti-Christian nations on earth. (I'm not the *****-footing around kind of person.)

I make that proclamation because by numbers we claim to be "Christian" and love to throw that fish symbol around and even throw some money in a plate on some Sunday mornings (when there isn't a big game on.) But we practice almost the opposite of everything Christ taught.

Let's take the hypocrisy one step further. What would happen if Muslims demanded the Federal government recognize one of their religious celebrations as a Nationally paid Holiday vacation? How many morons would be screaming that's proof Muslims are trying to take over the world? Yet there's no problem with the government taking tax dollars and using that to underwrite Christian holidays?
 
What principles that are so exclusive to Christianity was this country founded upon that they can be deemed "Christian principles"? If they aren't exclusive to Christianity then why are they "Christian principles" as opposed to enlightenment principles or principles valued at the time?

---

This country was founded BY Christians. However, our government is secular. The idea of secularism is NOT a Christian concept or espoused by any Christian teachings predating the US that I'm aware of. One could argue that because the idea of a secular state was implemented by Christians that it is therefore a Christian idea and thus Christianity must be the foundation for this country. It would be foolish to discredit the role Christianity has played, for better or for worse, in the formation of this government but its also quite silly to claim anything about this country is Christian apart from the people within it.

Christian people (majority)? Definitely.

Christian government? Definitely NOT.

Christian nation? Depends on your definition of nation.
 
President Obama is right. America is a melting pot and he is making this point clear. Actually the point does need to be made outside the US because many foreigners have this misperception. Besides, look at a good deal of the blogs in discussion even here...gay sex education in schools, gay marriage, etc. We are about as far away from being Christian as you can get.


What foreigners have what misperceptions?

Why talk about gays? Jesus never did.
 
That's self contradicting. Any nation based on principles of religion is a Theocracy. Also, what are the Judeo-Christian principles being claimed?

No it's not. Judeo-Christian principles formulated many of the laws and morals that created this country. They did NOT create a theocracy. There is a difference belief and principle, and religion.

And some of those Judeo-Christian principles are laws against killing and stealing. Many of our founding fathers were some sort of theist, and they based some of the tenets of the laws they created on some of these beliefs...as did many others societies.
 
Last edited:
All of Christianity is based on the principles of accepting Christ and worshiping God. So how can a secular nation be based on worshiping God?

You are missing the point and thinking in only black and white. This is also a non-sequitur. There are far more Judeo-Christian principles than the one that you mention, and using these principles does not lead to the conclusion you are presenting.
 
No this is not a Christian nation. This is a nation in which the majority of the populace claims Christianity as a religion. There is a difference.

As Laila has already stated, do not get confused between a Christian minority state and a christian country. They are two completely different things. For example, Saudi Arabia is a muslim country, because it does not practice secularism and enforces Sharia law. Albania, or Bosnia, or in this case Turkey as an example does not, and practices secularism, and therefore cannot be pinned a muslim state, but one with a muslim majority populace, like the UK, US, France etc cannot be, and should not be pinned as a christian country.
 
You are missing the point and thinking in only black and white. This is also a non-sequitur. There are far more Judeo-Christian principles than the one that you mention, and using these principles does not lead to the conclusion you are presenting.


Iam not missing the point but explaining the claim by showing one cannot reference Christian principles exclusive from theology. A theocracy is formed by referencing a divine being as a basis for it's laws. That is why iraq is a self-defined theocracy because it states point blank in their Constitution islam is the main source of legislation. There is nothing in our Constitution suggesting the same about Christianity.

However, applications of the concepts of theocracies needs no examination to prove the claim wrong. We merely need to look at what gets labeled as a Christian principle.

Illegal to:

Murder: pre-dates Christianity

Theft: pre-dates Christianity


If a principle within Christianity is found in any other system, secular or religious, it cannot be claimed as a "Christian" principle in regards to this discussion. The onus is on you to demonstrate Christian principals that cannot be sourced from other systems.
 
Iam not missing the point but explaining the claim by showing one cannot reference Christian principles exclusive from theology. A theocracy is formed by referencing a divine being as a basis for it's laws. That is why iraq is a self-defined theocracy because it states point blank in their Constitution islam is the main source of legislation. There is nothing in our Constitution suggesting the same about Christianity.

However, applications of the concepts of theocracies needs no examination to prove the claim wrong. We merely need to look at what gets labeled as a Christian principle.

Illegal to:

Murder: pre-dates Christianity

Theft: pre-dates Christianity


If a principle within Christianity is found in any other system, secular or religious, it cannot be claimed as a "Christian" principle in regards to this discussion. The onus is on you to demonstrate Christian principals that cannot be sourced from other systems.

No, you are still missing the point. It is irrelevant to whether any of these issues pre-dated Christianity. The mindset of the founding fathers is what is relevant, and these principles were used based on their belief system, which was Judeo-Christian.

And your definition of a theocracy is faulty. Pay attention to the things I place in bold:

Theocracy is a form of government in which a god or deity is recognized as the state's supreme civil ruler, or in a broader sense, a form of government in which a state is governed by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided. For believers, theocracy is a form of government in which divine power governs an earthly human state, either in a personal incarnation or, more often, via religious institutional representatives (i.e., a church), replacing or dominating civil government.Theocratic governments enact theonomic laws.
Theocracy should be distinguished from other secular forms of government that have a state religion, or are merely influenced by theological or moral concepts, and monarchies held "By the Grace of God".


Theocracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here is the statement that you must refute, taken from the above definition: The US is not a theocracy, but is meerly influenced by theological (Judeo-Christian) concepts.

Good luck. Since your definition is faulty and been proven inaccurate, therefore, making your premise a non-sequitur, your position has now been thoroughly debunked.
 
No, you are still missing the point. It is irrelevant to whether any of these issues pre-dated Christianity. The mindset of the founding fathers is what is relevant, and these principles were used based on their belief system, which was Judeo-Christian.

The founders weren't exactly Christian and there's nothing in the Constitution referencing Christianity so your claim about the founding principles lacks evidence. My point about murder/theft laws is they are secular and not religious based, therefore claiming them as being Christian is intellectually dishonest by omitting the fact those laws wholly exist without Christianity.


And your definition of a theocracy is faulty. Pay attention to the things I place in bold:



Here is the statement that you must refute, taken from the above definition: The US is not a theocracy, but is meerly influenced by theological (Judeo-Christian) concepts.

Good luck. Since your definition is faulty and been proven inaccurate, therefore, making your premise a non-sequitur, your position has now been thoroughly debunked.


Wiki is not a reliable source for the issue and the first reason is the root meaning of the term:

theocracy:

1622, "sacerdotal government under divine inspiration" (as that of Israel before the rise of kings), from Gk. theokratia "the rule of God" (Josephus), from theos "god" (of unknown origin, perhaps a non-I.E. word) + kratos "a rule, regime, strength" (see -cracy). Meaning "priestly or religious body wielding political and civil power" is recorded from 1825.

Iraq most certainly fits that criteria because the Koran is their main direct source of legislation as has been shown via Article 2 of their Constitution. But we can go even further and view the evidence from the ground, beginning in 2005:

"But in recent weeks, some civil rights leaders and social conservatives had raised concerns to the White House over language in the proposed constitution calling for Islam to be the official religion of the state. The concern is that a religion is being specifically named. They note that the drafters of the U.S. Constitution did not name Christianity as the official religion of this country, considering religious freedom a basic tenet of democracy."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/26/AR2005082600548.html


And from 2007, a report from our State Department:

September 15, 2007:

"Religious freedom has sharply deteriorated in Iraq over the past year because of the insurgency and violence targeting people of specific faiths, despite the U.S. military buildup intended to improve security, a State Department report said Friday ...."Many individuals from various religious groups were targeted because of their religious identity or their secular leanings," the report said.It found that members of all religions in Iraq are "victims of harassment, intimidation, kidnapping, and killings" and that "frequent sectarian violence included attacks on places of worship."

http://www.google.com/gwt/n?u=http://www.brucegourley.com/iraqtheocracy/&hl=en&safe=off&source=m


So how I don't know how in the world it can be claimed my position has been debunked. People can split hairs about narrow definitions of "Theocracy" but the evidence from the ground leaves their position as bald and bumpy as a golf ball.
 
The founders weren't exactly Christian and there's nothing in the Constitution referencing Christianity so your claim about the founding principles lacks evidence. My point about murder/theft laws is they are secular and not religious based, therefore claiming them as being Christian is intellectually dishonest by omitting the fact those laws wholly exist without Christianity.





Wiki is not a reliable source for the issue and the first reason is the root meaning of the term:

theocracy:

1622, "sacerdotal government under divine inspiration" (as that of Israel before the rise of kings), from Gk. theokratia "the rule of God" (Josephus), from theos "god" (of unknown origin, perhaps a non-I.E. word) + kratos "a rule, regime, strength" (see -cracy). Meaning "priestly or religious body wielding political and civil power" is recorded from 1825.

Iraq most certainly fits that criteria because the Koran is their main direct source of legislation as has been shown via Article 2 of their Constitution. But we can go even further and view the evidence from the ground, beginning in 2005:

"But in recent weeks, some civil rights leaders and social conservatives had raised concerns to the White House over language in the proposed constitution calling for Islam to be the official religion of the state. The concern is that a religion is being specifically named. They note that the drafters of the U.S. Constitution did not name Christianity as the official religion of this country, considering religious freedom a basic tenet of democracy."
War Supporters Concerned That 'Theocracy' Will Be Final Word in Iraq Saga


And from 2007, a report from our State Department:

September 15, 2007:

"Religious freedom has sharply deteriorated in Iraq over the past year because of the insurgency and violence targeting people of specific faiths, despite the U.S. military buildup intended to improve security, a State Department report said Friday ...."Many individuals from various religious groups were targeted because of their religious identity or their secular leanings," the report said.It found that members of all religions in Iraq are "victims of harassment, intimidation, kidnapping, and killings" and that "frequent sectarian violence included attacks on places of worship."

Iraq Theocracy, Civil War and Genocide Watch


So how I don't know how in the world it can be claimed my position has been debunked. People can split hairs about narrow definitions of "Theocracy" but the evidence from the ground leaves their position as bald and bumpy as a golf ball.
All that crap about the founders not being christian is a lot of leftwing gobbldigook. They were religious as were most all people of the time. That's doesn't mean they believe everyone should worship the same. Trying to associate the lack of a reference to Christianity to a lack of Christian value in the founding of this nation, is ridiculous and illogical.
 
No, you are still missing the point. It is irrelevant to whether any of these issues pre-dated Christianity. The mindset of the founding fathers is what is relevant, and these principles were used based on their belief system, which was Judeo-Christian.

And your definition of a theocracy is faulty. Pay attention to the things I place in bold:



Here is the statement that you must refute, taken from the above definition: The US is not a theocracy, but is meerly influenced by theological (Judeo-Christian) concepts.

Good luck. Since your definition is faulty and been proven inaccurate, therefore, making your premise a non-sequitur, your position has now been thoroughly debunked.


(Was distracted during first reply so quoted this again to finish.)

I'm having trouble keeping up with your claims. In post 146 you quoted BW who said we live under a secular structure but are a Christian nation. Your response was to start off with "No." followed by saying we were founded on Christian principles but we are not a Christian nation. Later, in post 169 you mis-quote obama by a long shot then claim we are a Christian nation by a landslide. So in addition to what appears confusing (unless I quoted the wrong poster) about that you move your claim of being "founded on Christian principles" to simply saying our nation was influenced by Christian theology. I see those two as completely different and agree with the latter.
 
I agree that, governmentally, we are not, and should not be categorized as "any kind of a religion nation."

I speak in terms of the nation being the people it's made up of rather than the government. Thus the confusion. My bad.

Sure, you got your Islamic mosque here, and your synagogue there, and your buddist (whatever they call their temples) and wiccan covens here and there. But everywhere I have lived, and visited from coast to coast, those religious institutions are, if not an anomaly (sp?,) at minimum an exception to the rule. Meanwhile, there are countless christian churches on nearly every corner.

That's what I mean when I say we are a christian nation. Hope I cleared that up.

This is because this is a capitalist nation.

And Church is more of a business than a place of worship here in America.

Thats why there is a church on nearly every corner, just like your local McDonalds.
 
Thats why there is a church on nearly every corner, just like your local McDonalds.

Or it could mean that we're primarily a Christian nation. ;) Just sayin' ...
 
The only people in this country that would be so presumptuous and egocentric to declare the USA a "Christian Nation" are the right-wing fundamentalists who's agenda it is to MAKE this Country a "Christian Nation".

Most Christian (not "Christian") people that I know consider America to be a land of religious freedom and multi-diverse in the choice of those religions.

Obama was 100% correct when he said that We do not consider ourselves to be a "Christian" country.
 
All that crap about the founders not being christian is a lot of leftwing gobbldigook. They were religious as were most all people of the time. That's doesn't mean they believe everyone should worship the same. Trying to associate the lack of a reference to Christianity to a lack of Christian value in the founding of this nation, is ridiculous and illogical.

Most "Christians" I know don't have a clue as to what true Christian values are.
 
Or it could mean that we're primarily a Christian nation. ;) Just sayin' ...

Nope.

Because when your "christian" leaders who preach things and then go out and get arrested for the same things they are telling you not to do, its obvious that they are just acting, in a church, which is their place of business.

I don't like churches, Jesus said you didn't need to pray in public like the hypocrites, he was right.
 
Or it could mean that we're primarily a Christian nation. ;) Just sayin' ...


That's like saying all of the wedding rings being worn in the US right now is proof adultery doesn't happen.
 
Nope.

Because when your "christian" leaders who preach things and then go out and get arrested for the same things they are telling you not to do, its obvious that they are just acting, in a church, which is their place of business.

I don't like churches, Jesus said you didn't need to pray in public like the hypocrites, he was right.

George Carlin once said the church was just a place for women to compare clothing :mrgreen:
 
Maybe that speaks more to the type of people you hang out with.

No. Most Christians I know live very Christ-like lives....however those who are "Christian" for the most part are pre-occupied with pursuing their political agenda and proseltyzing their perverted version of "Christianity" and actually focus very little on the principles and example that Christ taught.
 
No. Most Christians I know live very Christ-like lives....
I hear this statement a lot. If all the Christians are leading Christ-like lives, kinda makes me wonder where all the sin is coming from.

Unless some of those Christians are lying......
 
I hear this statement a lot. If all the Christians are leading Christ-like lives, kinda makes me wonder where all the sin is coming from.

Unless some of those Christians are lying......


Re-writing a post to take a jab is no less offensive than when some re-write the bible to fit their agenda. (Ie Sodom and Gomorah being destroyed because of gays)

The post didn't come anywhere close to making a claim about "all" Christians.
 
This is another example of why you weren't suposed to vote for Obama.

We're not a Christian nation.

So on the very rare occasion Obama can speak the truth. That makes him an even more dangerous liar, doesn't it?
 
"One nation under God" does not specify which God

More importantly, that's just meaningless poetry written more than a hundred years after the republic was founded.

Most importantly of all, the poet that wrote that socialist pledge of allegiance didn't have those words in it. That was added by Congress in one of it's many many forays into violating the Constitution.
 
Back
Top Bottom