Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Conservatives Want America to be a "Christian Nation" -- Here's What That Would Actually Look Like
Source:
AlterNet
URL Source: http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/152564
Published: Oct 5, 2011
Author: Adam Lee
Post Date: 2011-10-05 14:51:23 by Brian S
Keywords: None
Views: 29410
Comments: 74
In a campaign speech in September, Rick Perry hit upon some familiar Republican themes. According to a Bloomberg Businessweek article: It's worth calling attention to Perry's obnoxious rhetorical ploy of using "Christian values" to refer only to his own very specific, right-wing set of beliefs -- preemptive war, gay-bashing, tax cuts for the rich, creationism in schools, deregulating corporations, dismantling the social safety net, the standard Republican package -- as if he owned or had the right to define all of Christianity. In reality, there's such a huge diversity of opinion among self-professed Christians past and present that the term "Christian values" could mean almost anything. Christians have been communists and socialists (including Francis Bellamy, the author of the Pledge of Allegiance); Christians have supported empire and dictatorship (including Mussolini, who made Catholicism the official state religion of fascist Italy). Christians have advocated positions across the political spectrum, from environmental preservation to environmental destruction, from pacifism to just war to open advocacy of genocide, from civil rights to segregation and slavery. This broad range of opinion comes about because the Bible never mentions many of these issues, and addresses others in only vague or contradictory passages scattered throughout its individual books. This gives individual Christians wide latitude to find support in the text for virtually any political position you'd care to name. However, there's one area where there's much less room for debate, and that's the question of political organization. The Bible sets out a very clear picture of what its authors believed the ideal state would look like. Coincidentally, this is the same subject Rick Perry was speaking to: "those Christian values that this country was based upon." We can compare this statement to the dictates of the Bible to see what it would mean to have a government based on "Christian values." Then we'll be in a better position to decide whether America has such a government. According to the Old Testament of the Bible, after escaping Egypt and reaching the promised land, the twelve tribes of Israel were united into a single country under David and Solomon. After Solomon's death, there was a rebellion, and the country split into two separate kingdoms, Israel and Judah, which lasted until the Assyrian empire destroyed Israel and carried its people off into exile. Both these kingdoms survived for several hundred years, and therefore there's more than enough written history to tell what the Bible's authors thought of as a good state or a bad state. But right away, there's a problem. The Bible never even mentions democracy -- that concept was completely unknown to its authors. The system of government it enshrines is divine-right monarchy -- and not just monarchy, but kingship. Under normal circumstances, the Bible is very clear that the throne passes only from father to son. (The sole exception was Athaliah, a queen of Judah who came to power in a bloody coup and whose reign lasted only six years.) Even more to the point, the Bible's ideal government is unequivocally a theocracy: a country where the church and the state are one, where there's an official religion which all citizens are required to profess, and where law is made by the priests. There was no religious freedom in the ancient Israelite kingdoms: all people were required to worship the same god in the same officially approved ways, on pain of death. For instance, when Moses comes down from Mt. Sinai and finds the Israelites worshipping a golden calf, his immediate response is to order the butchering of everyone who participated in idolatry (Exodus 32:27). Many of Israel's subsequent kings do likewise. The Bible goes so far as to say that, if pagan worshippers are discovered in any city, the entire city should be burned down and everyone who lives there should be killed (Deuteronomy 13:12-16). The Bible also puts a high value on racial purity. The Israelites were the chosen people of God, and were instructed to keep themselves separate. Time and again, they were sternly warned against marrying people of another race, tribe or ethnicity. For instance, the Old Testament pronounces a perpetual curse on the neighboring Ammonite and Moabite tribes, saying that any person descended from either one, even down to the tenth generation, "shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord" (Deuteronomy 23:3). In one of the Old Testament's most gruesome stories, a priest named Phinehas finds an Israelite man having sex with a Midianite woman, and impales them both on the same spear (Numbers 25:6-8). For doing this, he's praised as a hero of faith, and God rewards him with "the covenant of an everlasting priesthood." When the Israelites invade and conquer neighboring lands, God instructs them to massacre all the captives, including women, so that they're not tempted to intermarry with them (Deuteronomy 7:2). By the time of the New Testament, much of this had changed. Christians weren't all of one ethnicity, nor did they have their own country. They were scattered throughout the powerful, militaristic Roman Empire, governed by absolute rulers who were brutally intolerant of dissent. In light of this, it's little surprise that the New Testament teaches the virtue of submission to the authorities. It states unequivocally that earthly rulers, even when they act unjustly, are ordained to their position by God and that Christian believers should obey them without question -- in fact, it states that those who resist are in peril of eternal damnation (Romans 13:1-2). All these ideas, so clearly advocated in the Bible, are utterly contrary to what this nation stands for. The idea of divine-right kingship is what our founders successfully rebelled against in bringing forth this country. America is a democracy where the people choose their leaders, a constitutional republic where the powers of those leaders are strictly defined and limited by law. America is a multicultural, multiethnic nation founded on the idea of welcoming immigrants, the homeless and tempest-tossed of every land. Submission to the established authorities, of course, isn't an American value: Americans have a long and colorful history of debate, protest, and civil disobedience, and the right to criticize our leaders is sanctified in the Constitution. And most of all, America is a secular nation with a separation of church and state. We have no official faith, no national church as many European countries still do. But America's Constitution is more than just a secular document; it's literally godless. It doesn't claim that the ideas it contains were the product of divine revelation. It states that governing power comes from the will of the people, not the commands of a deity. It doesn't assert that God has specially blessed this nation or shown it special favor -- in fact, it never mentions God at all. And it mentions religion in only two places, both of them negative mentions: in Article VI, which forbids any religious test for public office, and in the First Amendment, which forbids Congress from passing any law respecting an establishment of religion. If America's founders had meant to establish a Christian nation, this is where they would have said so. But they said no such thing. And this leads into a historical fact that the religious right would dearly love to forget: the godlessness of the Constitution was a point of major controversy in the debate over ratification. When it was drafted, the fact that it made no explicit mention of God or Christianity wasn't a minor oversight. It was a major, deliberate omission that was obvious to all. Religious language was omnipresent in other legal documents and charters of the day, including the ones that inspired the Constitution in the first place. For example, the Constitution's precursor, the Articles of Confederation, explicitly gives God the credit for making the state legislatures agree to it: "...it hath pleased the Great Governor of the World to incline the hearts of the legislatures we respectively represent in Congress, to approve of, and to authorize us to ratify the said articles of confederation and perpetual union." Going back further, the 1620 Mayflower Compact, made by the Pilgrims just before their landing, begins, "In the name of God, amen" and describes the purpose of their voyage as "for the glory of God and advancements of the Christian faith." Another foundational legal document, the 1689 English Bill of Rights, was based on the political thinking of John Locke and may have been part of the inspiration for our own Bill of Rights. This document calls the U.K. "this Protestant kingdom," states that "it hath pleased Almighty God to make [King William III] the glorious instrument of delivering this kingdom from popery" and declares that no Catholic will ever be allowed to hold the throne of the U.K. And lastly, there's the document at the root of the Western legal system, the Magna Carta. Like the others, it's woven throughout with religious language: its preamble begins "Know that before God..." and states that it was created "to the honor of God" and "the exaltation of the holy church." In the light of these documents, it's easy to see just how unique, unusual, even unprecedented the Constitution is. The United States of America was the first modern republic that was created on the foundation of reason, without seeking blessings from a god, without imploring divine assistance or invoking divine favor. And, as I said, this fact was not overlooked when the Constitution was being debated. Very much to the contrary, the religious right of the founding generation angrily attacked it, warning that ratifying this godless document as-is would spell doom for the nation. For instance, at the Constitutional Convention, the delegate William Williams proposed that the Constitution's preamble be modified to read: "We the people of the United States in a firm belief of the being and perfection of the one living and true God, the creator and supreme Governor of the World, in His universal providence and the authority of His laws... do ordain, etc". A failed Virginia initiative attempted to change the wording of Article VI to say that "no other religious test shall ever be required than a belief in the one only true God, who is the rewarder of the good, and the punisher of the evil". The Maryland delegate Luther Martin observed "there were some members so unfashionable as to think that... it would be at least decent to hold out some distinction between the professors of Christianity and downright infidelity or paganism." However, the Constitution's defenders held firm, and all the attempts to Christianize it failed. And the religious right of the day bitterly lamented that failure. One anonymous anti-federalist wrote in a Boston newspaper that America was inviting the curse of 1 Samuel 15:23 - "Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, he hath also rejected thee." In 1789, a group of Presbyterian elders wrote to George Washington to complain that the Constitution contained no reference to "the only true God and Jesus Christ, who he hath sent." In 1811, Rev. Samuel Austin claimed that the Constitution's "one capital defect" was that it was "entirely disconnected from Christianity." In 1812, Rev. Timothy Dwight, grandson of the infamous preacher Jonathan Edwards, lamented that America had "offended Providence" by forming a Constitution "without any acknowledgement of God; without any recognition of His mercies to us, as a people, of His government, or even of His existence." What the religious right failed to achieve at the Constitutional Convention, they kept trying to do in the following decades. The National Reform Association, founded in 1863 by a group of clergy, proposed a constitutional amendment which would have changed the preamble to read, "We, the people of the United States, humbly acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all authority and power in civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ as the Ruler among the nations, His revealed will as the supreme law of the land, in order to constitute a Christian government... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Throughout the late 1800s and early 1900s, they repeatedly brought this proposal before presidents and congresses, getting turned down each time. As recently as 1954, the National Association of Evangelicals was still trying to amend the Constitution with language such as, "This nation divinely recognizes the authority and law of Jesus Christ, Savior and Ruler of Nations, through whom are bestowed the blessings of Almighty God." Only within the last 50 or 60 years, now that they've finally accepted they have no realistic hope of changing it, has the religious right flip-flopped and started claiming that the Constitution meant to establish a Christian nation all along. This staggeringly dishonest, wholesale rewriting of history has become their stock in trade, to the point of having full-time propagandists who obscure historical fact and promote the Christian-nation myth. These falsehoods filter into the political mainstream, until we have absurdities like Rick Perry claiming that the United States, a secular and democratic republic, was based on the legal code of an ancient theocratic monarchy. We, as liberals and progressives, should know better than to accept this falsehood. We have every reason to speak out and uphold America's proud history as a secular republic founded on reason and governed by the democratic will.
Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry, in an appeal to evangelical voters, said "Christian values" and not "a bunch of Washington politicians" should be the touchstone guiding how Americans conduct their lives. ...
"America is going to be guided by some set of values," Perry told a crowd of 13,000 students and faculty members yesterday at a sports arena on the school's campus. "The question is going to be, 'Whose values?'" He said it should be "those Christian values that this country was based upon."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Brian S (#0)
It would be OK if we were an enforced Christian nation with Christian values but the last time the Evangelical Protestants held sway over America we got Prohibition which would have made Jesus a criminal for turning water into wine. To this day I don't get how a Christian can be against alcohol and claim wine has no place in a Christian nation when it is explicitly referenced in the Bibles. The only way the Protestants could get over this inconvenient fact is to make up a BS story that what the Bible was talking about was a strong grape juice drink rather than fermented wine. So if Protestant evangelical conservative Christians did rule America based on the NT it would be distorted version of what Jesus teaches.
"This is what economic policy in the West has become--a tool of the wealthy used to enrich themselves by spreading poverty among the rest of the population." Paul Craig Roberts
Yeah, if you hate the U.S. Constitution it seems OK..
Wishing this nation to embrace "Christian values" is NOT the same as claiming "Conservatives want America to be a 'Christian Nation'". Nice try, azzholes. Brian, you and you distempered, kooky ilk of social misfits are liars. But go ahead and continue to convince the sane what is right, and what is OBVIOUSLY wrong. Your values suck. You possess ZERO ethics. You embrace ZERO virtues. The degree of your collective insane obsession with lying and mis-characterizing of Christians and conservatives is about your rejecting the very traditions and heritage of the United States of America. If you don't like it, move to the inner-city plantations or any number dopey pasty-azzed socialist liberal enclaves.
"It's not surprising, then, they [White Pennsylvanians] get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." ~ Comrade-in-Chief Barry Hussein 0bama
Mike, I'm embarrassed for you.
"It's not surprising, then, they [White Pennsylvanians] get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." ~ Comrade-in-Chief Barry Hussein 0bama
No need. He embraces the embarrassing.
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
'Enforced Christian Nation' = Theocracy I take exception to this notion of his that such a thing as enforcing any one religion as the state religion would be a good thing.
Yeah, if you hate the U.S. Constitution it seems OK.. What I was illustrating was the fact that in the hands of the right wing whackos the true message of Jesus would be perverted to fit their agenda. For example, you have Protestant right wingers preaching the prosperity bible and that Jesus was rich and he wants you to be rich on earth as well. If Protestants can twist the Bible to mean that Jesus was rich and against drinking wine then imagine what hell they would make America if in power?
"This is what economic policy in the West has become--a tool of the wealthy used to enrich themselves by spreading poverty among the rest of the population." Paul Craig Roberts
As usual, the left gets is exactly wrong. We already have examples of Christian Nations. Norway is one great example. What is the result? Only 26% believe in God. Almost no one goes to church. There are large numbers of anti-Christian militants include a Satanist group that burns down old Christian churches. The government destroys every single thing it touches. Getting government's sticky fingers all over religion would destroy Christianity in America, not turn America into a Theocracy.
Predominantly Atheist Countries Have Lowest Crime Rate According To Study Several weeks ago, a ground-breaking study on religious belief and social well-being was published in the Journal of Religion & Society. Comparing 18 prosperous democracies from the U.S. to New Zealand, author Gregory S Paul quietly demolished the myth that faith strengthens society. Drawing on a wide range of studies to cross-match faith – measured by belief in God and acceptance of evolution – with homicide and intimate behavior, Paul found that secular societies have lower rates of violence and teenage pregnancy than societies where many people profess belief in God. Top of the class, in both atheism and good behavior, come the Japanese. Over eighty percent accept evolution and fewer than ten percent are certain that God exists. Despite its size – over a hundred million people – Japan is one of the least crime-prone countries in the world. It also has the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy of any developed nation. (Teenage pregnancy has less tragic consequences than violence but it is usually unwanted, and it is frequently associated with deprivation among both mothers and children. In general, it is a Bad Thing.) Next in line are the Norwegians, British, Germans and Dutch. At least sixty percent accept evolution as a fact and fewer than one in three are convinced that there is a deity. There is little teenage pregnancy , although the Brits, with over 40 pregnancies per 1,000 girls a year, do twice as badly as the others. Homicide rates are also low -- around 1-2 victims per 100,000 people a year. At the other end of the scale comes America. Over 50 percent of Americans believe in God, and only 40 percent accept some form of evolution (many believe it had a helping hand from the Deity). The U.S. has the highest rate of teenage pregnancy and homicide rates are at least five times greater than in Europe and ten times higher than in Japan.
"This is what economic policy in the West has become--a tool of the wealthy used to enrich themselves by spreading poverty among the rest of the population." Paul Craig Roberts
Thanks for the response.
To this day I don't get how a Christian can be against alcohol and claim wine has no place in a Christian nation when it is explicitly referenced in the Bibles. The only way the Protestants could get over this inconvenient fact is to make up a BS story that what the Bible was talking about was a strong grape juice drink rather than fermented wine. So if Protestant evangelical conservative Christians did rule America based on the NT it would be distorted version of what Jesus teaches. I agree with you.
I don't agree with you. In fact your comment is stupid. Par for a liberal bed wetter.
There is one true "religion". It isn't yours. Yours leads people to pain in this world and hell in the next.
Jesus wasn't poor. His cloting was first class. Romans gambled to possess them.
That's a Christian's take on the desire some have to ignore the First Amendment's separation of church and state. Other Christians and many conservatives agree with the First Amendment's keeping religion out of government. Your childish words of insult don't change the way the U.S. Constitution was written.
So you are intolerent of any religion you don't see as serving the needs of your idea of Christianity; that is your cross to bear, not mine. I respect other religions. It's your problem when you don't do the same.
Rules for Leftards #17). Try to shame others into doing something I won’t do myself!!!!
"CHANGE" you can step in..... You are an idiot. Up until the early 20th century even rags were worth something. And even if Jesus was dressed with good quality clothing, how does that prove he was "rich", the clothes could have been donated by a rich follower, just like Jesus' tomb was donated by a rich admirer. It is clear Jesus was living through donations and the hospitality from followers not from an inheritance nor from his labor.
"This is what economic policy in the West has become--a tool of the wealthy used to enrich themselves by spreading poverty among the rest of the population." Paul Craig Roberts
Why should I respect evil? I mean your a witch. Witch equals evil.
There you go lying again. That text isn't in the constitution. If it was millions of people wouldn't be voting in churches.
There you go lying again. That text isn't in the constitution. Here is a case of a conservative ignoring or denying "original intent" because we have the author of that text describe it as meaning a "wall of separation". Fucking conservative hypocrites. I am glad I left the American conservative movement and I am ashamed I was a Republican party member for so long. http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter: Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
"This is what economic policy in the West has become--a tool of the wealthy used to enrich themselves by spreading poverty among the rest of the population." Paul Craig Roberts
Hamilton, who wrote most of the B/R, recognized it was well: Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history. --ESTABLISHMENTS OF RELIGION by JAMES MADISON ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Given the Citizens United case and the doctrine of corporate "personhood". Hamilton also had this general warning about ALL corporations: But besides the danger of a direct mixture of religion and civil government, there is an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity [forever] by ecclesiastical corporations. The power of all corporations, ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses. -op. cit
America...My Kind Of Place... "I truly am not that concerned about [bin Laden]..." "THE MILITIA IS COMING!!! THE MILITIA IS COMING!!!" I lurk to see if someone other than Myst or Pookie posts anything...
Using a church building for a secular function is not a new thing. It just aids in the function of providing a physical building to vote in. You have made no point here. But you have again showed the sanity of the policy of the government not to let church's keep their tax free status if they do something like endorse a candidate officially.
You sound like people who hate all Jewish people as evil. If you can't respect another's right to practice their faith and keep it unmolested by childish name calling, you are no better then any other religious bigot out there. I know this is a hard concept for you to grasp, especially seeing how you have mistaken my disgust for the concept of Zionism for antisemitism, but that to is your problem, not mine.
Is not the constitution. Does not have any basis on law.
There is no such thing as separation of church and state. You are still a liar. A documented one. Like your boy Obama.
Riight...what does Madison* know anyway? *Corrected from Hamilton...
Stay Hungry...Stay Foolish --Steve Jobs
You were never a conservative.
No I don't. I say people who practice witchcraft are evil. Wicca is witchcraft.
You certainly aren't...
Stay Hungry...Stay Foolish --Steve Jobs
Whatever he said. It only applies to who? Answer: congress. So much for your theory of the constitution only being restrictions on government.
Mike. Wicca and witchcraft are evil. Deal with it.
It only shows framer's intent when they wrote the First Amendment insuring freedom of religion by keeping it separate from the government. There is no official religion in the United States, and your refusal to grasp a very basic concept of American Government is on you, not us.
You were slapped down on this last week. Article VI binds judges to the USCON and 14A binds state and local governments to the B/R...if Congress can make no law which abridges a right, neither can any other government entity.
Stay Hungry...Stay Foolish --Steve Jobs
I made no mistake. You cloak your antisemitism in the word "zionism". You and Arafat, Saddam and Khadaffi have something in common.
I am not your type of conservative since the term is subjective - like arguing if AC/DC is "Heavy Metal" or not. Depends on your point of view/criteria. But I was certainly a registered Republican party member and voter since I was 18 until Bush, Jr came along. I am pretty sure I did not become a Republican because I was a liberal...... Also, this is the second or third person that reacted like Stone did when I revealed I used to belong to the Republican party and identify as a conservative. It is like they freak out at the idea someone left the reservation.
"This is what economic policy in the West has become--a tool of the wealthy used to enrich themselves by spreading poverty among the rest of the population." Paul Craig Roberts
You're dreaming. What I say is truth.
Stick your religious bigotry up your fat ass.
Your mindset is not that of a conservative. I will take your word that you were a Republican. AC/DC is just hard rock, not metal.
Whom to believe...Madison or Stone...Madison or Stone...
Stay Hungry...Stay Foolish --Steve Jobs
My ass is not fat. And you are still worshiping satan. I have absolutely no respect for that. I mean come on, why should I respect evil? No real christian respects your gutter religion.
Comments (42 - 74) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Godwinson (#1)
"It would be OK if we were an enforced Christian nation with Christian value..."
#3. To: Brian S, 0bama's Commie Groupies (#0)
#4. To: Ferret Mike (#2)
Yeah, if you hate the U.S. Constitution it seems OK..
#5. To: Liberator (#4)
Mike, I'm embarrassed for you.
#6. To: Liberator (#4)
#7. To: Ferret Mike (#2)
"It would be OK if we were an enforced Christian nation with Christian value..."
#8. To: Brian S (#0)
(Edited)
Anarchists are simply unterrified Jeffersonian Democrats -- Benjamin Tucker 
#9. To: jwpegler, Brian S (#8)
What is the result? Only 26% believe in God. Almost no one goes to church. There are large numbers of anti-Christian militants include a Satanist group that burns down old Christian churches.
#10. To: Godwinson (#7)
#11. To: Godwinson (#1)
It would be OK if we were an enforced Christian nation with Christian values but the last time the Evangelical Protestants held sway over America we got Prohibition which would have made Jesus a criminal for turning water into wine.
#12. To: Ferret Mike (#2)
Yeah, if you hate the U.S. Constitution it seems OK..
#13. To: Ferret Mike (#6)
I take exception to this notion of his that such a thing as enforcing any one religion as the state religion would be a good thing.
#14. To: Godwinson (#7)
If Protestants can twist the Bible to mean that Jesus was rich and against drinking wine then imagine what hell they would make America if in power?
#15. To: A K A Stone (#12)
#16. To: A K A Stone (#13)
"There is one true "religion". It isn't yours."
#17. To: Ferret Mike (#15)
If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t help the poor, either we’ve got to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition, and then admit that we just don’t want to do it.
My dogs have created more shovel ready jobs than the self appointed Messiah!!!
#18. To: A K A Stone (#14)
Jesus wasn't poor. His cloting was first class. Romans gambled to possess them.
#19. To: Ferret Mike (#16)
I respect other religions. It's your problem when you don't do the same.
#20. To: Ferret Mike (#15)
That's a Christian's take on the desire some have to ignore the First Amendment's separation of church and state.
#21. To: A K A Stone, Ferret Mike (#20)
That's a Christian's take on the desire some have to ignore the First Amendment's separation of church and state.
#22. To: Godwinson, A K A Stone (#21)
Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter: Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
--GW Bush
--Sarah Palin's version of "The Midnight Ride of Paul revere"
#23. To: A K A Stone (#20)
"If it was millions of people wouldn't be voting in churches."
#24. To: A K A Stone (#19)
(Edited)
"Why should I respect evil?"
#25. To: war (#22)
Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter:
#26. To: Ferret Mike (#23)
#27. To: A K A Stone (#25)
(Edited)
#28. To: Godwinson (#21)
I am glad I left the American conservative movement
#29. To: Ferret Mike (#24)
You sound like people who hate all Jewish people as evil.
#30. To: A K A Stone (#28)
#31. To: war (#27)
Riight...what does Hamilton know anyway?
#32. To: Ferret Mike (#24)
If you can't respect another's right to practice their faith and keep it unmolested by childish name calling, you are no better then any other religious bigot out there.
#33. To: A K A Stone (#25)
#34. To: A K A Stone (#31)
(Edited)
Whatever he said. It only applies to who? Answer: congress.
#35. To: Ferret Mike (#24)
I know this is a hard concept for you to grasp, especially seeing how you have mistaken my disgust for the concept of Zionism for antisemitism
#36. To: A K A Stone, war (#28)
(Edited)
You were never a conservative.
#37. To: war (#34)
You wewre slapped down on this last week.
#38. To: A K A Stone (#32)
#39. To: Godwinson (#36)
Stone did when I revealed I used to belong to the Republican party and identify as a conservative. It is like they freak out at the idea someone left the reservation.
#40. To: A K A Stone (#37)
#41. To: Ferret Mike (#38)
Stick your religious bigotry up your fat ass.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]