Originally Posted By imadisneygal "their Creator" Exactly. THEIR creator. Whomever or whatever that may be. Thanks for proving my point with our Declaration. The document doesn't scare me. The bastardization of it by religious zealots does.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn There's only one who created all. Your creator does not belong to you. You (and all the rest of us) belong to our Creator
Originally Posted By plpeters70 Whether you like it or not, the founding documents that you love so much also established the concept of the separation of church and state - to protect the rest of us from people with ideas like yours!
Originally Posted By ecdc As to the original topic, I think the lawsuit is ridiculous because this is a cultural icon that meant something to thousands of workers. It's not like some strident fundamentalist (like a poster here, for example) is trying to insist some other cross be at the memorial. This was at Ground Zero, it was a symbol and a sign to believers that God was with them. Unless you're a hypersensitive tool, atheists like me ought to see that such a reaction is a part of our cultural history worth preserving.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 ">>Acknowledgement of Christ as our Lord<< Jesus is mentioned nowhere in the founding documents. The DOI is as vague as possible about the "Creator" and "Providence"'because we were already a pluralistic society. (And the DOI was also an advocacy piece, don't forget--that bit is essentially saying to the British "God is on our side here" and rebuking the equally fervently held belief on the other side of the Divine Right of Kings. Essentially saying "You think God's on your side, George? Nuh uh. He's on ours.") The Constitution, of course, makes no mention of religion except to say that the government shall nit interfere with it and VICE VERSA.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Oprah. lol. Plp: I didn't make the ideas. I'm just reading the docs as they're written. Separation of Church and State is nothing more than an exercise in preferred behavior. It is not supported by the founding document, contrary to anything Justice Hugo Black or any of his predecessors determined.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Oh what bothers people like you is that people like me DO understand it. And no weasley phrases like "preferred behavior" will change that. My view as been proven correct, not only by a non-tortuous reading of the Constitution itself, but by 220+ years of consistent court decisions. Sorry. You lose.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Oh, it's way less that 220+. And it's not me who loses. The United States loses. If Christ cannot be recognized as Lord; if the Creator, Supreme Judge of the World; and our dependence on God's providence (and therefore our nation's independence) cannot be recognized, then the Constitution instantly loses its value and power as any sort of document-in-effect. It says so by its own terms. It's premable in its most simple terms reads "We do ordain and establish". We know that the details of what is to "do" (the meat with the Constitution) is complete and approved, because of its complement at the bottom of the document, beginning with the word "Done". The "ordaining and establishing", by the attestation of the signators, is "Done". But "Done" can be interpretted as either true or false. For the Constitution to be effective, "Done" needs to be true - for the entire life of the document. "Done" is followed by a long list of prepositional phrases - modifiers - terms that are connected to "Done". These modifiers set the event of "Done" into a complete, unambigious position in space, time, and logic. The spatial modifier (in Convention) and logic modifier (by the Unanimous Consent of the States) of "Done" are quick and easy. The time modifier of "Done" is quite lengthy - careful attention emphasized by the designers of the document. The time modifier includes two major components, each providing redundancy to heavily-position the "Done" event on the scale of time. That time modifier includes recongition of Christ as Lord, and of the Independence of the United States. Christ must be affirmable to recognize the truth of "Done" in terms of its time modifier, and therefore to recognize the existence of the Constitution. Our independence (and of the Independence...) must be simultaneously affirmable likewise. The only vehicle to recognize our independence is the Declaration. In order to recognize that doc, "God" must be recognized, "Creator" must be recognized, "Supreme Judge of the World" must be recognized, and "our firm reliance of Divine Providence" must be recognized. Else, "Done" can be affirmed as "true"... and neither can the Constitution... and neither can the courts. Seem like a stretch? It's way less of a stretch than drawing out "Separation of Church and State" from the Constitution or its amendments.
Originally Posted By mawnck <------ thinks we may have a newly-minted astroturfer in our midst. Hey mrkthompsn, you didn't happen to attend any religious events in Texas recently, did you?
Originally Posted By ecdc Jefferson: Not a Christian Washington: Not a Christian Franklin: Not a Christian Monroe: Not a Christian
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Franklin & Washington: Christians, contrary to popular belief - by admission within their own autobiographies. Nevertheless, it doesn't matter. Their testimonies and biographies are not the Constitution. What matters is the text of the Constitution.
Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1 "Acknowledgement of Christ as our Lord; as God as our Creator; our established dependence of God's providence - should all be portrayed at ALL American memorials, museums, and other institutions." Even Jewish ones? Yeah, try that. No. REALLY!
Originally Posted By dshyates Wow, mrkthompson, that is some pretty impressive mental gymnastics. I give you an 8.5 for sheer limberness. Otherwise that's total horse pucky conceived by someone who wants it to mean that. Which plainly it doesn't. I guess you missed the part about making any laws recognizing any religion. And the Constitution is our leading legal document, therefore if what you believe were true, the Constitution itself would be unconstitutional. But nice try to those that thought that up and told you all about it.
Originally Posted By ecdc Presentism all over this topic. Creator, providence, and other terms do not equal Christ. Washington was not a Christian. Nor Franklin. Unfortunately there's a lot of people (Glenn Beck, crazy person, is one) who take selective quotes or lines and insist it's evidence for the Founders' Christianity, while ignoring a lifetime of evidence. By mrkthompsn's logic, I'm a Mormon. The Founders were what they were. They were not anti-religious, and Atheists are often just as guilty of taking quotes out of context. They believed in public religion, by and large, but not state or institutionalized religion. They navigated the issue rather brilliantly. mrkthompsn's tortured logic notwithstanding.
