• 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!

US Christians seek legal advantage over the rest.

Thought about starting a thread based on the article I have linked here but it looks like this thread is already on the subject of Church and State as it is being manipulated by Trump and his supporters.

Researchers: Fear of America losing Christian identity motivates many Trump voters

Religious identity played a key role behind President Trump's surprise 2016 victory, according to pollster Dan Cox, research director of the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI).

“We talk a lot about changing race and ethnicity but we don’t talk as much about the changing religious landscape as well,” Cox said during a Friday episode of “What America’s Thinking,” Hill.TV’s show about public opinion and polling.

“If you look at the percent of white Christians in the country, it’s declining precipitously, and that’s another part of the story,” Cox said.

He continued: “This sort of fear of tectonic changes that are occurring, that are roiling our political environment, and I think that is what has people up in arms. If you look at what animated voters to Trump, particularly among white, working class, it was these cultural concerns, much more than the economic.

Too many who call themselves Christian and American - looking at you Mike Pence - have come to believe the false history promoted by the charlatans like David Barton. It's not just the white supremacists who are supporting Trump but also as the study noted here found, those who see their faith as being persecuted, their beliefs being ostracised who continue to support a man who exemplifies exactly the lifestyle they claim is so evil.
 
The Christians didn’t impeach him. They were eager to judge. They were outraged about the morality of a presidential infidelity, not about some legal technicality of lying under oath. I guess you “forgot”.

For some reason Clinton never got the “mulligan” they so easily bestowed on Trump.

Apples and Oranges. Clinton had an affair in the White House. Trump's alleged affair was more than ten years ago, well before he was president.
 
Well, I'm not likely to post yours.:mrgreen:

and that Paula Jones was not assaulted. These are facts, not opinions. You just don't like them.

I don't know how you can be certain of that.
 
I want you to look at the history. I will criminally summarize:

- The Enlightenment understood that society's liberty, prosperity, and health meant that religion had to be separated from government. These were European Christians who began presenting their philosophies through practicalism, not the religious dogmatism that had haunted all of Europe through the Dark Ages.

- It was Christians in the sixteenth and seventeenth century who were hunting, hanging, drowning, and burning witches and demons. In the late seventeenth century, Christians in America were doing the same thing. For the sake of reference, the Salem Witch Trials occurred in 1692 and 1693. Their grandsons were our Founding Fathers a century later. They understood all too well their own family histories. They understood what religion had to offer in terms of government and expressly followed in the footsteps of the Enlightenment philosophies.


So, declaring that it is because of Christianity that we have the Bill of Rights is falsely presented. It's because of how Christians behaved that the Bill of Rights omits Christianity as a base. It is easy to fall back on the idea that Christianity had everything to do with everything. But this is because Christianity was the religion of the masses. The spirit of the Ten Commandments are found written across all the major religions (even those that predate Christianity) and have been codified as basic human law in virtually every single constitution on the planet. The suggestion that it was because of Christian moral discipline that we have built our Western society, is to declare that the absence of Christianity in Asia equates to no moral discipline. Obviously, this can't be true. Moral discipline is a feature of human decency.

The whole proposition that christianity created modern civilization requires one to ignore the Greeks and just pretend they and their influence didn't exist when in fact much if not most of christianity came from the Greeks.
 
Thought about starting a thread based on the article I have linked here but it looks like this thread is already on the subject of Church and State as it is being manipulated by Trump and his supporters.



Too many who call themselves Christian and American - looking at you Mike Pence - have come to believe the false history promoted by the charlatans like David Barton. It's not just the white supremacists who are supporting Trump but also as the study noted here found, those who see their faith as being persecuted, their beliefs being ostracised who continue to support a man who exemplifies exactly the lifestyle they claim is so evil.

"David Barton is Satan's tool."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Danbury ministers.
 
The whole proposition that christianity created modern civilization requires one to ignore the Greeks and just pretend they and their influence didn't exist when in fact much if not most of christianity came from the Greeks.

They can't even argue it, because modern civilization was created out of the Enlightenment, which involved shoving religion to the personal space.

More closer to home, I believe this is more of an American debate and they like to argue as if the Constitution was ripped right out of the Bible. Of course, this means ignoring the historical facts.

We can even compare the democratic constitutions of the Middle East. In the preambles they all state something to effect of, "In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate..." This is somewhat out of tradition and somewhat as a tool to strip argument away from Islamists. But it is also a sincere declaration that even in a democracy that God is the ultimate sovereign. But these same constitutions guarantee the freedom of the press, the peaceful transition of government, and religious freedom.

There is no shout out to God in our Constitution before it goes on to guarantee these same freedoms. Hell, "under God" wasn't in the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954 and "In God We Trust" wasn't put on our currency until 1956. Surely, if our nation was created from Christianity, such things would have been there from the beginning.
 
One factor in the theory of Social Democratic's, they look a century ahead of time. I look at the make-up of the courts and the Christian right will stay in power into the 2030's. The fact is, people calling themselves Christian is getting smaller and less then the force coming next. With a Trump court, and less people supporting organized religion: this is the last time they can control the courts.
 
For those who like to 'quote' Founding Fathers in their attempts to justify forcing their version of Christianity into the American legal system, I here offer a few words from Thomas Jefferson, taken from a letter to Dr Thomas Cooper, 10 Feb 1814
If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
(. . .)
We might as well say that the Newtonian system of philosophy is a part of the common law, as that the Christian religion is. The truth is that Christianity and Newtonianism being reason and verity itself, in the opinion of all but infidels and Cartesians, they are protected under the wings of the common law from the dominion of other sects, but not erected into dominion over them.
 
They can't even argue it, because modern civilization was created out of the Enlightenment, which involved shoving religion to the personal space.

More closer to home, I believe this is more of an American debate and they like to argue as if the Constitution was ripped right out of the Bible. Of course, this means ignoring the historical facts.

We can even compare the democratic constitutions of the Middle East. In the preambles they all state something to effect of, "In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate..." This is somewhat out of tradition and somewhat as a tool to strip argument away from Islamists. But it is also a sincere declaration that even in a democracy that God is the ultimate sovereign. But these same constitutions guarantee the freedom of the press, the peaceful transition of government, and religious freedom.

There is no shout out to God in our Constitution before it goes on to guarantee these same freedoms. Hell, "under God" wasn't in the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954 and "In God We Trust" wasn't put on our currency until 1956. Surely, if our nation was created from Christianity, such things would have been there from the beginning.

Good post. Thanks.
It's appropriate that those mentions of God were made in the '50's, too. I say that conservatism is about taking a snapshot of a moment in history, calling it the perfect moment and trying to preserve that moment through legislation and for many conservatives that moment happened in the '50's.
Liberalism, of course, is about saying that if it isn't perfect for everyone it isn't perfect for anyone and we haven't found that perfect moment yet.
 
Last edited:
Good post. Thanks.
It's appropriate that those mentions of God were made in the '50's, too. I say that conservatism is about taking a snapshot of a moment in history, calling it the perfect moment and trying to preserve that moment through legislation and for many conservatives that moment happened in the '50's.
Liberalism, of course, is about saying that if it isn't perfect for everyone it isn't perfect for anyone and we haven't found that perfect moment yet.

Exactly. There's a reason traditionalism normally falls within the conservative mind and progressiveness falls within the mind of the liberal. History is full of examples of nations failing because they either tried to progress too fast (plenty of communist examples here), or clung too tightly to tradition (Islamic examples). We in the West tend to routinely balance the two, despite the appearance that we would love to rip each other's throats out even over the most mundane things.

A momentary snapshot in time is a perfect metaphor. It gets worse when we assign "golden age" to that snapshot.
 
Back
Top Bottom