What idiotic thing will she say next?????

[sjt18]

Two things Volburgers:

1) You have posted quotes from a very small minority of the Founders and have not provided context nor balanced other statements they've made. For instance, Adams defended Christianity against Paine as the greatest religion in history.

2) The men you mention in spite of their religious views promoted the ideals of individual liberty, rights, and sovereignty. They distrusted gov't and religion for the same reason... they were concentrations of power that could be used by corrupt men to steal freedom. Except for possibly Paine, they would all have a bigger problem with public education than religious education.

 

[sjt18]

So I take you will offer no response regarding the other 10+ including two others from John Adams? Should I post some more?

If you do, you should provide the reference and/or context rather than trusting some quote site.

 

[VolBurgers]

Two things Volburgers:

1) You have posted quotes from a very small minority of the Founders and have not provided context nor balanced other statements they've made. For instance, Adams defended Christianity against Paine as the greatest religion in history.

"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?" John Adams

edit, here: -letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816

 

[tigervol9802]

For the record, here are the quotes that VB is misquoting to prove his point.

"When we say God is a spirit, we know what we mean, as well as we do when we say that the pyramids of Egypt are matter. Let us be content, therefore, to believe him to be a spirit, that is, an essence that we know nothing of, in which originally and necessarily reside all energy, all power, all capacity, all activity, all wisdom, all goodness."
-Letter to Thomas Jefferson (17 January 1820)

The Europeans are all deeply tainted with prejudices, both ecclesiastical and temporal, which they can never get rid of. They are all infected with episcopal and presbyterian creeds, and confessions of faith. They all believe that great Principle which has produced this boundless universe, Newton’s universe and Herschell’s universe, came down to this little ball, to be spit upon by Jews. And until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world.
-Letter to Thomas Jefferson (22 January 1825)

-Twenty times, in the course of my late reading, have I been on the point of breaking out, 'this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!!!!' But in this exclamation, I should have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in public company—I mean hell.
-Paul F. Boller, Jr. and John George, They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, and Misleading Attributions (Oxford University Press, 1989

Now, while Adams was a Unitarian, at least make sure you are using his quotes correctly to prove your point. Adams did believe in a higher power, although not the Christian God.

 

[gsvol]

That settles it, if I'm living in Delaware, I'm voting for the witch!!

 

[VolsSportsFan]

If you are hoping that I will defend those who overreact to every single coincidental display of a religious icon or symbol on public property, I hate to disappoint but I roll my eyes at them just as much as I do at the O'Donnell's of the world.
I cannot imagine that some kid somewhere is substantively influenced by meaningless Thanksgiving songs selected as much because they translate easily to the kazoo as that they promote a religious theme.

I am with you there.

But I know full well that people like O'Donnell, or joevol, or gsvol, or Palin, have in mind to go quite a bit farther than that, even if they have to engage in some tortured mental gymnastics to try to read out of the First Amendment what it clearly states: spearation of church and state.

Yeah sure you do. Another attempt to paint yourself as some kind of independent, when the truth is you throw out a line like this but the only thing you ever post about is the side you hate.

 

[sjt18]

For the record, here are the quotes that VB is misquoting to prove his point.

"When we say God is a spirit, we know what we mean, as well as we do when we say that the pyramids of Egypt are matter. Let us be content, therefore, to believe him to be a spirit, that is, an essence that we know nothing of, in which originally and necessarily reside all energy, all power, all capacity, all activity, all wisdom, all goodness."
-Letter to Thomas Jefferson (17 January 1820)

The Europeans are all deeply tainted with prejudices, both ecclesiastical and temporal, which they can never get rid of. They are all infected with episcopal and presbyterian creeds, and confessions of faith. They all believe that great Principle which has produced this boundless universe, Newton’s universe and Herschell’s universe, came down to this little ball, to be spit upon by Jews. And until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world.
-Letter to Thomas Jefferson (22 January 1825)

-Twenty times, in the course of my late reading, have I been on the point of breaking out, 'this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!!!!' But in this exclamation, I should have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in public company—I mean hell.
-Paul F. Boller, Jr. and John George, They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, and Misleading Attributions (Oxford University Press, 1989

Now, while Adams was a Unitarian, at least make sure you are using his quotes correctly to prove your point. Adams did believe in a higher power, although not the Christian God.

Say it isn't so... a liberal or anti-Christian bigot quoting Founders out of context? Can't be.

 

[sjt18]

But I know full well that people like O'Donnell, or joevol, or gsvol, or Palin, have in mind to go quite a bit farther than that,

Really? Where have they said they want gov't to impose some religious point of view through gov't force?

YOU are transferring your own intents and preferred methods on them. You think that because you would use the Federal gov't to impose gay rights or achieve your concept of social justice that those who oppose you would as well.

The thing you do not like to think about is that WE do not have to impose our point of view through force to have it meaningful in society. You do. If you let freedom take its natural course then those who engage in "unprofitable" or socially undesirable behaviors will eventually suffer the consequences enough to change their behavior.

Prior to drug laws the US had sporadic instances of severe drug abuse. Churches and others responded by condemning the behavior while reaching out charitably to the addicts. It worked. The problem never became anywhere close to as pervasive as it is today when we do basically the opposite. Gov't tries to stop it by force but the users are treated as victims rather than transgressors. Their behavior is subsidized by welfare programs and treatment programs that seldom work.

When someone acting freely has to bear the consequences themselves or humble themselves to depend on the charity and good will of others, it simultaneously discourages the behavior amongst others and motivates that person to change.

I believe that gov't should guarantee you the right to make your own choices according to your own conscience... so long as YOU bear the full brunt of responsibility for the outcome.

even if they have to engage in some tortured mental gymnastics to try to read out of the First Amendment what it clearly states: spearation of church and state.

Simply put: The 1st Amendment does not state that. It states specifically that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Before the Progressive era that began in earnest with a speech given by Willams Jenning Bryan at the 1908 Dem Convention, the establishment clause was NOT read as it is commonly accepted today as a prohibition of religious activities on public grounds.

FWIW, I do NOT want funding charities of any kind to include religious charities. The act of redistributing wealth IS a violation of the Establishment Clause since it imposes a clearly moral point of view on many who are unwilling. Care for the poor, disabled, and elderly should go back to those who very adequately took care of it for over 150 years- churches, communities, charities, and families. Those institutions took care of them without bankrupting and dividing the country.