• 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!

America is or is not a Christian Nation.

Is America a Christian Nation?

  • Yes

    Votes: 26 25.7%

  • No

    Votes: 75 74.3%
  • Total voters
    101
I'm unclear what are the characteristics of a Christian nation, so I don't know how to vote.
 
chromium said:
Really? Brazil has a huge statue of Jesus presiding over its major city. Latin America in general would qualify i think, and missionaries are always trying to turn Africa into Christian dominated territories that, among other things, pass laws to kill homosexuals.
Click to expand...

What do any of those have to do with other "nations" existing within the United States, which is what I was talking about. I wasn't talking about nations in other foreign states that could be considered christian.

It's impossible to imagine the US - with its founders' wisdom to separate religion from state and the court system as protection - allowing that kind of oppression.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that's one of the great things about seperating the Nation within a State from the Government within said State.
 
chromium said:
Wow talk about projecting. Your bias is really showing if you think that being a Christian nation is somehow progressive.
Click to expand...

You.....you're not actually reading my posts right? That's the only thing that could explain your past two non-sensical responses.

I'm not suggesting that somehow a "Christian Nation" equals a "Progressive Nation" or vise versa. I'm suggesting that using the logic one would TRY to use to claim that it's impossible to legitimately make a claim that the USA is a "Christian Nation", it would ALSO be impossible to claim that it's a "Progressive Nation".

It'd be like saying Gymanstics isn't a sport on the basis that it doesn't use a ball, and then turning around and claiming that Swimming is a sport.
 
Zinthaniel said:
and yet you haven't said anything to the user Bod who is doing the exact same thing, and he/she actually does believe his opinon is fact - stated so in two posts.
Click to expand...

First, the thread was multiple pages long when I started and I decided to comment on the OP and the debate point presented there.

Second, your posts is the OP and held the initial questionable claim that has since spawned others. As such, I tend to focus on the discussion set forth by the OP, if I find it interesting, when I start into a thread as it is the impetus for all that comes after it.

Third, I disagree with the claims of Bod and others asserting that this was a Christian Nation in my original post by suggesting I disagreed personally with suggesting it's a "Christian Nation" in the modern day. Those that disagreed with me on that point haven't continued a dialogue with me on my views and theirs; you have.

Fourth, I see a difference between declaring what you think is fact and declaring what anyone else thinks as illigitimate. One is an overvaluing of oneself, but is inherently individual. The other is a belittling of everyone else who disagrees with you nad a dismissal. The later happened to catch my interesitng more so than the first.

The little I've read of Bod's argument has largely been him claiming he thinks we're a christian nation, and then proceeding to claim it's a "fact". I disagree with him, and vocalized that disagreement in my original post and why I disagree with it. He's not put forth anything else of interest for me to write about.

Your argument with regards to men/women DID interest me, because it was someone who claimed other peoples viewes were not "legitimate" putting forth a piece of logic that SEEMED like it could be contradictory. Thus my follow up question based on your interesting post, and then an on going dialogue between the two of us. Nothing Bodi has said has been of real interest or caused any provactive thought as it just seemed like standard, run of the mill chest pounding about the notion of "christian nation". The potential to engage in a discussion about the potential illogic of a persons argument, or to see if the person was actually rather consistent in their logic which would be rather respectable, was of interest. Thus the reason for my initial response to your "male/female" question.

If over the course of this conversation you've changed from suggesting "There is no legitimate reason to refer to this Nation as Christian" to suggesting (paraphrased) "There is no legitimate reason to refer OBJECTIVELY to this Nation as Christian, becuase nations are subjective" then my apologizes for missing that how that transition of your original premise has occured and I'd agree...

One can not say objectively that this is a "Chrisitan Nation"; in part because the definition of Nation that one could be using, and the criteria related to it, are largely subjective in nature. However, one CAN legitimately make a claim that this is a "Christian Nation" for much the same reason.
 
Zyphlin said:
If over the course of this conversation you've changed from suggesting "There is no legitimate reason to refer to this Nation as Christian" to suggesting (paraphrased) "There is no legitimate reason to refer OBJECTIVELY to this Nation as Christian, becuase nations are subjective" then my apologizes for missing that how that transition of your original premise has occured and I'd agree...
Click to expand...

Touche. I did start of with a firm confident statement declaring my stance.
Though I personally stand by my argument, as a result of this thread I also now believe that my stance may be subjective. The criteria of what makes a nation is apparently different for different people.
 
Zinthaniel said:
Touche. I did start of with a firm confident statement declaring my stance.
Though I personally stand by my argument, as a result of this thread I also now believe that my stance may be subjective. The criteria of what makes a nation is apparently different for different people.
Click to expand...

Then it was not realizing that growth in your original stance that lead to much of my responses; as I was responding to you from a notion that you were still trying to argue that any such claim was "not legitimate".

One of the reasons I enjoy responding to interesting points that make me examine either my own, or someone else's, logic is it actually sometimes causes me to realize or hit upon things I had not really seen before. Yours did that actually with touching on the notion of White Privledge, and how that logic lends itself to an argument of the U.S. potentially being a Christian Nation.

White Privlege basically suggests that the very essence of being "white" is in and of itself a privledge due to the way society works. That when a person is being described that it's assumed they're white, unless said otherwise. That those we see in various forms of media by and large are white by default unless an effort to "diversify" is actively made. That due to the institutionalized barriers to other races over the years, on average a white individiual is better off from day one than a minority individual is likely to be in terms of wealth, location, educational oppertunities, and on and on. That essentially without any actual purposeful action or even intent, so much of it is ingrained as default in our culture that it provides a "privledge".

The same kind of logic in sorts could go to the notion of a "Christian Nation". You bring up the religious holidays that have no basically become "secular", celebrated by people across all stripes. But that could be argued that regardless of how they may be celebrated now or their loss of religious meanings, the fact that said religions "holidays" are still essentially viewed as the "default" and are widely celebrated, even outside of that religion, is a point in that religions favor. That essentially the spread of christian holidays to non-christians, even with the loss of the christian meanings, is actually an instance of christianity infiltrating the society and culture at an even greater mark. You look at what you did in regards to me, and the assumption that I'm christian. It's the default in this country by and large. Unless you're told someone is athiests or jewish or muslim the assumption typically is that they're christian. You hear the media talk about the potential "issues" someone may have due to being islamic and running for office, or even some of the "christian" sects that aren't viewed as christian like Mormonism (and all the talk surrounding Romney with that). Yet rarely do we hear talk about how a politicials religion will hurt them if that religion is "Christian". While it's intensity of its impact, and specifically it's religious impact, may be less significant it could be argued that the spread of said impact is just as large as it's ever been.

It's still a slowly forming thought in my mind, and given that I don't buy the white privledge logic to the degree that some do I don't know if it's an argument I ultimately would subscribe to myself, but coming at it from a devil's advocate stand point it's beginning to form an interesting platform of an argument in my head.
 
Zyphlin said:
You.....you're not actually reading my posts right? That's the only thing that could explain your past two non-sensical responses.

I'm not suggesting that somehow a "Christian Nation" equals a "Progressive Nation" or vise versa. I'm suggesting that using the logic one would TRY to use to claim that it's impossible to legitimately make a claim that the USA is a "Christian Nation", it would ALSO be impossible to claim that it's a "Progressive Nation".
Click to expand...

Your first post used the words "other nations" so forgive me for replying on that basis.

I don't see the connection between the arguments "Christian nation" and "progressive nation." One set of arguments is based on data - we are statistically majority Christian - and the other is simple opinion. The only thing that made sense in your reply to Zinth was that some make the case that Christians are immune to persecution and yet it's not a Christian-centric country. Yeah, some atheists are like that, but it's generally different people making those claims.

But then again, you said that because it's the most prevalent religion and 'culturally ingrained', it's reasonable to call this a Christian nation, then asserted that a theocracy would be irrelevant in defining this a Christian nation. How else would this become a theocracy except for the vast majority to approve? Basically, we're not Christian-centric enough for it to fully reach that point, and it's a damn good thing. Yet we're Christian-centric enough for Christians to be immune from persecution in the way that atheists frequently are not.

Yes, as you point out, laws are often passed because some ignoramus in office, with the majority's approval, decides to impose his beliefs on the minority. You could reasonably argue, i think, that Mississippi is a Christian state, a de facto theocracy, on the grounds that happens all the time. Or there are Christian counties, towns and so on. But to declare this a Christian nation, there's no basis for that.
 
chromium said:
Really? Brazil has a huge statue of Jesus presiding over its major city. Latin America in general would qualify i think, and missionaries are always trying to turn Africa into Christian dominated territories that, among other things, pass laws to kill homosexuals.
Click to expand...

Show me a 'Christian missionary who teaches that it's ok to kill homosexuals? What's his name and background? Because that's not taught in the New Testament I read.
 
chromium said:
Your first post used the words "other nations" so forgive me for replying on that basis.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. Your issue was that you didn't actually read my first post, but rather started on a post in a line of posts.

When I was speaking of "Nations" within the United States I'm speaking from the manner I noted in my first post....where "nation", plainly speaking, is speaking of a group of people within a location with a similar tie that binds them. One STATE (such as the State of Brazil or the State of Canada or the State of the USA) can have MULTIPLE nations within it potentially.

I don't see the connection between the arguments "Christian nation" and "progressive nation."
Click to expand...

My issue was that the various methods that Zinn disqualified the notion of the USA being a "Christian Nation" would by and large disqualify it from being a Progressive Nation.

But then again, you said that because it's the most prevalent religion and 'culturally ingrained', it's reasonable to call this a Christian nation, then asserted that a theocracy would be irrelevant in defining this a Christian nation.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've claimed that it's REASONABLE (not that I'd necessarily agree) to suggest that the United States is a "Christian Nation" in the common vernacular and in a political science sense based on the substantial majority of the population subscribing to said religion. I don't particularly agree, but it's reasonable. And yes...while the presence of a theocracy could strengthen the argument for a "Christian Nation", a theocracy isn't required for a "Christian Nation" to exist.

I'm going to relink to my first post in this thread, as I imagine that's may clear up some of the confusion. LINK
 
Last edited:
Zinthaniel said:
You can use the term nation to define any government regulated land of a group of people. How you define that nation is more than just Majority wins. Israel has an official religion. It enforces laws and a culture that is centered around that. That's the distinction.

Religion in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Click to expand...

Not according to you guys. A majority does not represent the whole. A government, just like me, can't just arbitrarily define the whole of the people living in its territory as one thing when there are distinct differences in that group. Sorry... can't have it both ways. The term "Nation" has a definition and only intellectual cowards would try to twist it like you are. :lol:
 
CLAX1911 said:
I disagree, and it isn't a fact. If the nation is the people than this can't be a Christian nation not all the people are Christian. All you can say is that it is a majority Christian nation.
Click to expand...

That is what I have said... but one step further. That the majority represents more of what the nation represents than some minorities thereby, for definition purposes and general knowledge, defines the USA as a Christian Nation.
 
Visbek said:
I'm in the "no" camp.

There is no question that Christianity is an important part of US history. But since we cannot have an official state religion, it's not a "Christian nation," in the same way that Islam is the official religion of Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...

But Islam does not represent the whole. There are Christians living in almost every Muslim nation. What a few government officials have to say is as irrelevant as what I have to say about the matter.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Not according to you guys. A majority does not represent the whole.
Click to expand...
Yeah it doesn't.
A government, just like me, can't just arbitrarily define the whole of the people living in its territory as one thing when there are distinct differences in that group.
Click to expand...
That may be true. But when a country has a majority that is also compounded by a government that makes that majorities beliefs law - and thus the standards of those beliefs are enforced across the country then yes the government has effectively defined that nation by enforcing those beliefs and regulating the culture by virtue of those beliefs. America only has a majority of christains, but our goverment has moved away from enforcing christain beliefs or enforcing christian standards in our culture. As a result our culture has moved away from christain teachings.

When the christians in our country complain about a lack of representation, feeling persecuted for their beliefs, or robbed of the right to excersise their beliefs I believe that is a tell tale sign that our country just may not be a Christain nation.

When devout Christians on a reality tv show are kicked off their own show for expressing Christian beliefs after recieving societal backlash - I think it's safe to say that the country is not a Christian Nation.

How many times do Christian celebrities or Politicians have to renig a comment they made honoring a scripture from the bible that also just so happened to piss of a group of people? Why would would these things happen in a Christian Nation?

Sorry... can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...
Too bad I never said I wanted it both ways.
The term "Nation" has a definition and only intellectual cowards would try to twist it like you are. :lol:
Click to expand...

Yes, you've described your self perfectly.
 
Last edited:
Bodhisattva said:
That is what I have said... but one step further. That the majority represents more of what the nation represents than some minorities thereby, for definition purposes and general knowledge, defines the USA as a Christian Nation.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't, where did you come up with that method to define it?
 
Zinthaniel said:
Yes, you've described your self perfectly.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry... but the "No I'm not... you are" grade school come back? That about sums this debate up.
 
CLAX1911 said:
No it doesn't, where did you come up with that method to define it?
Click to expand...

With the definition of the term "nation" and some common sense.

... this debate is getting tiresome to be honest. Why some of you want to argue against this is beyond me.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I'm sorry... but the "No I'm not... you are" grade school come back? That about sums this debate up.
Click to expand...

The fact that you continously hide behind your Ad hominems sums you up beautifully. You started the grade yard taunting - strangely enough your taunts are more applicable to yourself than they are to me. Perhaps it's a subconcious thing.
 
Zinthaniel said:
The fact that you continously hide behind your Ad hominems sums you up beautifully. You started the grade yard taunting - strangely enough your taunts are more applicable to yourself than they are to me. Perhaps it's a subconcious thing.
Click to expand...

:lol: Keep trying 'cause your smack sucks.
 
Bodhisattva said:
... this debate is getting tiresome to be honest.
Click to expand...
2800779.jpg
 
In one sense, America is a Christian nation because it is largely comprised of Christians.

In another sense, it has no official religion.

Capisce?
 
Bodhisattva said:
I don't bother being clever with those that show a near zero ability at understanding smack...
Click to expand...

to bad you didn't "smack" anybody. Your rebuttal was as lame as your arguments you have been using in this debate - Tired, paper thin, and, well, stupid.
 
Zinthaniel said:
to bad you didn't "smack" anybody. Your rebuttal was as lame as your arguments you have been using in this debate - Tired, paper thin, and, well, stupid.
Click to expand...

You are continuing to fail. You are being set up to self-smack and doing a brilliant job at it too...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom