Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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: Greg or e who wrote (18941)	12/11/2004 12:54:30 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

"So now you're saying that the Framers were a bunch of liars?" No. I said the use of "Nature's God" was consciously used to exclude the idea of Christian and other superstitions penned by men. This preserved religious neutrality in preparation for a secular society with religious freedom and rights guaranteed by reason and not religious zeal. "Nature's God" was the explicit reference to the "God" who was impersonal and uninvolved in the affairs of people. In other words....not a "God" at all as you consider "God". Your comment is contrived and rather ignorant. I suppose you missed the entire post and were just too unimaginative to relate "level playing field" to religious neutrality and my explanation "Once the justification had been given and shielded with a vague reliance upon some amorphous "Nature's God", they proceeded in due course to write an entirely SECULAR Constitution". It was a sharp way to create a level playing field in preparation for a secular Constitution where religion was a private matter for all individuals and no concern of the State except where it harmed the rational rights and freedoms of "WE THE PEOPLE"--(NOT, we the Christian people--LOL!). Message 20846907