SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: E. Charters who wrote (18819)12/2/2004 9:14:42 PM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 28931
 
HA! HA! MR. Charters!

The DOI was NOT the Constitution. It is one thing to appeal to a Higher Law to justify the dissolution of law. Without such an appeal you are merely a criminal! It is quite another to explicitly avoid any reference to a Higher Law when you are CREATING a society based on secular principles!

Thus, the breaking of law needed to appeal to a higher law. That is the way it is done. But it is not simple forgetfulness that when they CREATED law...it was based on "WE, THE PEOPLE"--and there was not one single solitary reference to anyone or anything HIGHER than "WE THE PEOPLE"!

CASE CLOSED! The Constitution intended and succeeded to form a Nation on principles of rationality--where all religious beliefs were equally acceptable, and where no religious beliefs were germain to Government. CASE CLOSED!

Good to see you are still kickin!

__________________________

ED BUCKNER, PH.D.

"The best evidence for our this-is-not-a-Christian-nation argument, and it is in fact good enough to stand alone, is the godless Constitution. (For details, see Kramnick and Moore, The Godless Constitution: The Case Against Religious Correctness.) The Constitution is in fact the first significant governing charter in the history of mankind that does not invoke any deities, even impersonal ones, for support. This can hardly be an accidental omission, and the opponents of the Constitution during the ratification process made much of its godless nature. What we should remind our "Christian-nation" friends is that the framers had many documents to model their work on, including many state constitutions—remember that Independence came by 1781 but the U.S. Constitution was not written until 1787—and all of those state charters plus many from other cultures explicitly invoked God. Most were specifically Christian, some were explicitly Protestant, and some, like Massachusetts, established a specific church (the Congregationalists, descendants more or less of the Pilgrims) as the state church. If you lived in Massachusetts before 1833 you were required by law and the state constitution to support the Calvinistic Congregationalists. The Articles of Confederation, which the Constitution replaced, referred to God, and six of the states had "multiple establishments"—arrangements where government supported all religions or at least all Protestant Christian sects, without favoring any. In this context it is clear that the framers knew they were breaking precedent by ignoring God and religion, other than carefully declaring that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." This was perhaps more revolutionary than the 1776 rebellion, but the godless Constitution was ratified and is still our fundamental governing document. It is certainly not a Christian document, though neither is it an anti-Christian document."



To: E. Charters who wrote (18819)12/4/2004 4:30:31 AM
From: Greg or e  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 28931
 
"It seem evident that there was a religious basis for the constitution, herein seen referred to as an implicit basis from the DOI. It was not necessarily Christian but was based in part on some Christian principles."

You don't think those who deny the obvious might have an agenda do you?

On another subject; What do you know about MIX-TSX-V ?