Ramakazee, What a shame the Constituion had not yet been signed when these statements were made. Some were made before the United States had even won it's revolution. The sole exception being George Washington's farewell speech. Even then he only mentions "religious people" and does not specify which religion. Guess that wasn't important to him. Just to help you out in the future the Constituion was signed 9/17/1787 and the 1st Ammendment, which this conversation is supposed to be about, was ratified dec. 15, 1791. Anything before that was just some guys opinion.
We are ALL "braddah's" in the eyes of God my lad. On Nov 13, 11:26 am, Kamakazee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lemme help you braddah: > > George Washington: > > Farewell Address: The name of American, which belongs to you, in your > national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, > more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With > slight shades of difference, you have the same religion" ...and later: > "...reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national > morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle..." > > “ It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and > Bible.” > > “What students would learn in American schools above all is the > religion of Jesus Christ.” [speech to the Delaware Indian Chiefs May > 12, 1779] > > "To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest > glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian" [May 2, > 1778, at Valley Forge] > > Uncle? > > On Nov 13, 11:08 am, Kamakazee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Holly, still waiting. > > > On Nov 13, 7:55 am, Kamakazee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > How many treaties has the US had since its inception? You grab a line > > > out of one and act as if you've struck gold. > > > > You've got nothing. Even less then that. > > > > On Nov 12, 5:49 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Gaar, > > > > > Too late to save you boy, he's left the field. > > > > What you are talking about lad is a official document, you know like a > > > > TREATY, that is ON display. And that document dosen't say a fucking > > > > thing about religion other than that this country will NOT have an > > > > official one. Yep, I checked, right there in the First Ammendment. > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:02 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > One of those "diplays" is of the U.S. Constitution... > > > > > > As many others just quote from it. > > > > > > Which isn't "U.S. Policy", it should be the Fucking Law of the Land. > > > > > > Your ignorance on the matter notwithstanding. > > > > > > On Nov 12, 1:59 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Ramakazee, > > > > > > > Explain how my comparison of private opinions differ from public > > > > > > opinions expressed in the capacity as a national office holder is > > > > > > nonsensical. > > > > > > > Never been to D.C. Seen pictures, documantaries and movies of > > > > > > tourists > > > > > > standing in front of them getting their pictures taken. Symbolism > > > > > > for > > > > > > the masses, not official statements of U.S policy lad. > > > > > > > Don't run away, try harder. Your rolling over and giving up like the > > > > > > Ram's defensive line. LMAO! > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 3:44 pm, Kamakazee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > It's only difficult because you argue a nonsensical position. > > > > > > > > Have you been to DC? "tourist attractions"???. > > > > > > > > I think you're referring to the Smithsonian's exhibit on Uranus. > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 3:39 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Ramakazee, > > > > > > > > > Sure you can, primarily in their PERSONAL LETTERS to friends and > > > > > > > > associates. And i can find as many from other FF's that do not > > > > > > > > support > > > > > > > > religion, all depends on WHICH FF I dig up and at WHAT point in > > > > > > > > his > > > > > > > > life. > > > > > > > > Monuments? Tourists attractions lad. NOT official documents > > > > > > > > stating > > > > > > > > federal Govt. policy. You understand that a Treaty has to be > > > > > > > > ratified > > > > > > > > by Congress, right? > > > > > > > > Is is beyond you to understand that a man might have a personal > > > > > > > > opinion that is quite different from an opinion he might hold > > > > > > > > as a > > > > > > > > public official when his/her decisions might very well impact > > > > > > > > on the > > > > > > > > entire country? Is this too difficult for you to understand? > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:16 pm, Kamakazee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > For every "Treaty of Tripoli" snippet you dig up (and I > > > > > > > > > suspect there > > > > > > > > > aren't many) I can pull up 10 snippets directly related to > > > > > > > > > the faith/ > > > > > > > > > belief/religions the found fathers expressed in other > > > > > > > > > writings. And > > > > > > > > > produce 10 pictures of monuments in DC referring to each. > > > > > > > > > > PS. Of course the Establishment Clause is intended to > > > > > > > > > prevent the > > > > > > > > > establishment, by the govt, of any state sponsored religion. > > > > > > > > > And of > > > > > > > > > course one is free to chose no religion, but it's not > > > > > > > > > specifically > > > > > > > > > stated in the USC, that was my point. > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 1:39 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Ramakazee, > > > > > > > > > > > Please tell me you're not this dense. > > > > > > > > > > The constituion specifically forbids the establishment of > > > > > > > > > > ANY state > > > > > > > > > > religion. Look it up. > > > > > > > > > > Now, if there IS no officially sanctioned religion that > > > > > > > > > > means you can > > > > > > > > > > never be "punished" for not following the "approved" > > > > > > > > > > religion as no > > > > > > > > > > such thing exists. That, of course means you are not > > > > > > > > > > required to > > > > > > > > > > practice ANY religion. The end result or effect is to make > > > > > > > > > > one "free" > > > > > > > > > > from religion is one so chooses. > > > > > > > > > > Regarding a specific religion such as Christianity the U.S. > > > > > > > > > > Govt. made > > > > > > > > > > a clear statement in the Treaty of Tripoli signed and > > > > > > > > > > ratified in 1797 > > > > > > > > > > "as the Government of the United States is NOT, in any > > > > > > > > > > sense founded > > > > > > > > > > on the Christian religion". John Adams was president at the > > > > > > > > > > time, most > > > > > > > > > > of our "Founding Fathers" were still living. Just Google > > > > > > > > > > "treaty of > > > > > > > > > > Tripoli" if you doubt my word and read the damn thing. > > > > > > > > > > > That enough help for you? Need more? > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 11:56 am, Kamakazee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorta, but where is that found? In the freedom of > > > > > > > > > > > expression clause? > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe the establishment clause? > > > > > > > > > > > > Help a guy out here. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 9:14 am, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > mark, > > > > > > > > > > > > > It guarantee freedom FROM religion as much as it > > > > > > > > > > > > guarantees freedom to > > > > > > > > > > > > practice a given religion of choice. Anyone try to stop > > > > > > > > > > > > you from > > > > > > > > > > > > practicing your religion lately? > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:53 am, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > try reading the constitution just one time. you will > > > > > > > > > > > > > find that peskt > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1st amendment that provides for the freedom of > > > > > > > > > > > > > religion. all > > > > > > > > > > > > > religions. I realize libs, and nobama will try and > > > > > > > > > > > > > rewrite the > > > > > > > > > > > > > constitution in their pagan image, but as of now it > > > > > > > > > > > > > allows for freedom > > > > > > > > > > > > > of religion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:05 am, "mike [move on] 532" <[EMAIL > > > > > > > > > > > > > PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So who defines ethical behavior these days? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good question ! i don't believe we a religious > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cleric or evangelical > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fanatic setting governmental policy for the country > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:46 am, rigsy03 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So who defines ethical behavior these days? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aristotle was a good > > > > > > > > > > > > > >ading the constitution just one time. > beginning- > > > > > > > > > > > > > >pre-Jesus. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:40 am, "mike [move on] 532" <[EMAIL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Keep Religion Personal, Not Political > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/Davidow/59 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > People really have to stop referring to this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > country as a Christian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nation. The founders took great pains to avoid > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > incorporating religious > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > references into the Constitution, even going so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > far as to state > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > plainly that no religious test should ever be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prerequisite for holding office. Somewhere > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along the line things have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gone way off track, as conservative groups > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > assume they have a right to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > define the country's core values and to dictate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > acceptable behavior > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for everyone else.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
