http://www.beliefnet.com/story/220/story_22001_1.html

Q:

A recent poll found that 55 percent of Americans believe the U.S. Constitution establishes a Christian nation. What do you think?

A:

I would probably have to say yes, that the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation. But I say that in the broadest sense. The lady that holds her lamp beside the golden door doesn’t say, “I only welcome Christians.” We welcome the poor, the tired, the huddled masses. But when they come here they know that they are in a nation founded on Christian principles.

Fifty-five (55%) percent…?

I do deny it. Show statistics, and correlate those statistics with some rise and fall of religiousness in this country. THen show that this decline in religiousness is the cause, and not merely an effect, of some other phenomena you mentioned. Perpahps the rise of mass communication, mass media, or industralized consumerism brought about this degradation of the american psyche, if in fact one occured. Your circular, unsupported, and self-conclusory “logic” isnt worth the bytes its represented by…

Ah so you support a constitutional amendment to allow citizens of other dimensions to run for president then? Good man…

>What’s the difference between Islamofascism & Christofacism?

Heres a scarier one for the the biblehumpers to answer. What is the english translation for “allah”?

>Xisithrus, they just don’t believe that Jesus was the Son of God.

Ok jake, so the point of contention between christianity and islam essentially being that christians believe that god somehow got his holy semen into a human and muslims don’t. so basically all the conflict between islam and xtianity over the years boils down to a disagreement about one holy money shot. muslims beleive christ had 23 chromosomes and chrisitans believe he had 23+ infinity chromosomes or something.
(I still wonder what christians think we woud see if we put some of christs blood cells from the shroud of turin under a microscope. or do they think he wasnt made of cells or chromosomes at all? )

gosh, you guys arent really so different after all, are ya? could it be that all this fighting, for all these years, isnt really over what was floating in the blood of jesus, but instead was all about power and control and a convenient excuse to find a way to convince your brothers to fight and die for land, resources, and power?

Comment by bitblt

” religious groups in the colonies: Protestants, Jews, Catholics, as well as the unique religious experiences of Native Americans and African Americans.”

Were the Iroquois really Christian in the 1770s? Ya think?

What an ignorant statement.

The Founders meant for America to be a country in which ALL religions could flourish – including those Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and Wiccans (who are NOT witches, BTW, but pagans who worship the Goddess).

Stop being such an idiot.

Comment by Leftside Annie — October 2, 2007 @ 4:56 pm

Do you have some historical references to confirm your assertion concerning this list of faiths?

You seem to be saying that just because the Founders were themselves Christian (which is not true), that the country they founded had to be also be Christian…?

That’s a completely specious and nonsensical argument. In simpler terms, to make sure you understand, it’s just plain bullsh*t.

The Founders meant for America to be a country in which ALL religions could flourish – including those Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and Wiccans (who are NOT witches, BTW, but pagans who worship the Goddess).

Stop being such an idiot.

The U.S. Constitution has three references or allusions to Christianity.
The last reference/allusion is the dating of the document as in the “Year of our Lord.” I assume A.D., or perhaps even C.E., was available to the writers. So, I further assume that they wanted to say, “Year of our Lord.”

Well, first off, A.D. is the abbreviation for the Latin phrase, anno Domini meaning “in the year of the/our lord”. (Technically, the translation is “the” but it’s been wrongly accepted as meaning “our”.) Secondly, the use of CE is a fairly recent derivation (coming into any serious usage in just the past 50 or so years). Third, A.D. was traditionally used in most legal documents, even when drawn up by Jewish moneylenders and lawyers, regardless of religious intent.

The second allusion is noting that Sunday is not to be considered a day for doing business. Sunday is the Christian day of worship.

Well, no. The only point is that the President need not worry about a Sunday in consideration of any bill that had been presented to him. NOTHING states that business may not be conducted on Sundays.

The first reference/allusion is the First Amendment itself. Writings of numerous people, including Jefferson, make it clear that the federal government was not going to establish a state religion the way many of the colonies had. The federal government was not going to pick a one Christian denomination above the others lest membership in this one be considered a qualification for public office.

Well, the WRITINGS of these numerous people are NOT the same as the Constitution itself. The CONSTITUTION makes NO reference to Christianity. The reasoning behind the First Amendment (which, it should be noted, was introduced as part of a Bill of Rights only to ease the delegates of the “Several States” that the Federal Government would not have the same authority that the British Monarch had at that time) was to affirm that the Federal Government would show no favoritism to one specific religion or denomination nor would the Federal Government speak against any specific religion or denomination. As to your final statement, the Constitution did NOT specify “Christian denomination”; it says quite distinctly (in Article 6) “NO religious test shall ever be required” (emphasis mine). There’s nothing to specify WHAT kind of religion is discussed. No one’s religion is to be a hindrance to his/her holding a public office or civil service position.

That the first amendment means today exactly what it meant when it was written…? I see no reason to think that the first amendment was written to mean that God was to be removed from the public square.

It also does not state that Christians had any “right” to impose their religious beliefs on the nation. If anything, it affirmed the right of ALL peoples (regardless of degree of faith or particular brand of faith) to pursue their convictions in such a manner as not to offend those who believe differently.

(Try the U.S. Constitution.

Why would anyone adhere to the U.S. Constitution?

Well, for one thing, that document is the basis for this country’s system of laws and government. It may have its flaws but it’s also a document which has inspired other documents dedicated to affirming human rights.

Is it because they’re nice people? Is it because they’re “nice” people and because they want everyone else to be nice people?

Well, not necessarily “nice”, but, on the other hand, why should anyone adhere to the Bible or the Tanakh or the Qu’ran? Because *they* are “nice people”?

Is it because the U.S. has been so successful as a nation?

Remember when this nation was put together, there was no hint they it would be as successful as it has been.

And what does the second point have to do with the first? Are you seriously suggesting that when Yeshua was crucified that HE knew that his teachings would be “so successful”? Do you honestly think that he would feel any sort of connection with the vast majority of those who *claim* to follow his teachings?

So what’s made the US so successful? The words and meanings recorded in the Constitution, or the Christian people who have lived under this document?

Comment by bitblt — October 2, 2007 @ 12:38 pm

Well, given the fact that many so-called Christian people also engaged in slavery and were greedy pigs who exploited others, your “Christian people” reference falls by the wayside. The simple fact is that MANY people of MANY faiths (even of NO faith) have helped make this country successful. Religion hasn’t been the overriding factor; in fact, it’s been a negative factor. Prohibition was an overall negative proving the old adage “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions”. People wanted liquor so badly they were willing to deal with gangsters and break the law to get it.

You’re right. That’s why we live in a constitutional republic, and not a true democracy. Because the founding fathers didn’t want minority groups to get trampled by the majority. After all the majority is not always right, and can be quite callus.

What I meant is that we need a government that is honestly looking out for the welfare of the people in this country. A goverment that is truelly transparent and free of corporate influence. A governemt that wants peace, not profits. A government that respects international law, and educates people on it’s importance, rather than undermining it, etc., etc., I could go on all day…. but I think you get the idea.

I’m not talking about left versus right, I’m not talking about liberal versus conservative. I’m talking about a goverment that works better than the one we have.

“Why vote for the lesser evil”

Comment by Krazny — October 2, 2007 @ 12:36 pm

Well, the least you can do Krazny is to spell their names correctly. It should be
Cthulhu/Yog-Sothoth 2008.

(Proud supporter of the “Cthulhu for President” campaign since 1988!)

Comment by DigDug — October 2, 2007 @ 2:23 pm

I was not being clear.

The majority of Americans do want representative government.
But I do not feel the majority of Americans agree with what we have to say. For example, gay marriage. The majority of Americans don’t support it, but I do. If we are to have a truly representative government, gay marriage won’t have a chance of being legal, because the majority of Americans don’t support it.

However, I don’t care what the majority of Americans think.

Another example would be the whole Christian thing. I would agree that the majority of Americans are some form of Christian. But I don’t feel this is a Christian nation, nor do I think it should be.

I’m not angry with you. I’m angry with the way that the two parties have run our country.

What you say makes sense, but to me it sounds like accepting the status quo. To me it’s a hard pill to swallow.

You may be right too. But, I hope that there is still a chance for us to turn things around in this country though. To change the staus quo.

“But as far as I’m concerned, the majority of Americans do NOT agree with you and if what YOU want is representative government then you will not get the government you truly want.”

This part though, doesn’t make sense to me.

The majority of americans don’t want a representative government?

Your anger at me is misdirected.

Considering we (and I am not speaking for you) could not elect mainstreamer candidates like Gore and Kerry, then why should I waste my time with your idealistic candidate?

Also please remember, there is something called compromise. Do I agree with everything the front runner candidates have to say? No, but I accept the reality that they are the best chance I have.

Say whay you want. Vote for who you want. But as far as I’m concerned, the majority of Americans do NOT agree with you and if what YOU want is representative government then you will not get the government you truly want.

Comment by jake3988 — October 2, 2007 @ 1:52 pm

It just seems that way because the douchebags have pretty much hijacked the faith from what Jesus intended. It has gotten bad enough that I am actually embarrassed to tell people I’m a Christian, for fear others will somehow tie me to the Pat Robertsons and James Dobsons of the world.

Most of us real Christians keep their piety to themselves as Jesus directed them to do in His Sermon on the Mount — praying in the privacy of their closets and living their lives by being the example Jesus wants them to be instead of judging others. Christians of this type are seldom “prominent” for that reason, but Jimmy Carter is a good example. And even he isn’t prominent for being a Christian (his fame comes from being president).

Comment by Johnny Swank — October 2, 2007 @ 1:56 pm

Ah, the good old days of the 1950s propaganda.

The truth is that in modern Russia, the dogma of the Orthodox Church is being mandated in the classroom.

People need to get caught up with the situation in Russia, which is no longer the Soviet Union, and no longer the chaotic mess left after the collapse of the Soviets.

Do you believe Sen. McCain was pandering to the Christian Conservative Community, when he proclaimed the U.S a Christian Nation? ——–> http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=623

Comment by jake3988 — October 2, 2007 @ 1:52 pm

That’s only because the loudmouths get all the coverage. You don’t get your own show on CBN by being a moderate, tolerant, ecumenical Christian who respects diversity of belief.