The Secular Humanist Playbook
The secular humanist religion does not have anything similar to the Ten Commandments. They do not stress theirselves out by believing that to tell a lie is a sin. Actually they believe that telling a lie can be helpful in obtaining something that you really, really want, like trying to bamboozle the citizens of the Great State of Texas into voting against Proposition Two. Read this story to find out what they lied about,
Texans Gear Up to Decide on Gay Marriage
By KELLEY SHANNON
The Associated Press
Thursday, November 3, 2005; 8:00 AM
AUSTIN, Texas -- Opponents of a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages in Texas have a message for you: The proposition could mean trouble for marriage between a man and woman.
With telephone calls, e-mails and Internet postings, gay rights activists and others opposed to Proposition 2 are spreading that idea as part of their longshot battle to derail the measure in Tuesday's election.
The tactic has supporters of the same-sex marriage ban crying foul. It has opponents boasting that they may have a chance at defeating the measure _ in Texas, of all places, the conservative home state of President Bush.
Texans Gear Up to Decide on Gay Marriage
By KELLEY SHANNON
The Associated Press
Thursday, November 3, 2005; 8:00 AM
AUSTIN, Texas -- Opponents of a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages in Texas have a message for you: The proposition could mean trouble for marriage between a man and woman.
With telephone calls, e-mails and Internet postings, gay rights activists and others opposed to Proposition 2 are spreading that idea as part of their longshot battle to derail the measure in Tuesday's election.
The tactic has supporters of the same-sex marriage ban crying foul. It has opponents boasting that they may have a chance at defeating the measure _ in Texas, of all places, the conservative home state of President Bush.
posted by BigBubba at 9:17 AM
![[Link to THOMAS Home Page]](http://thomas.loc.gov/images/link.gif)
22 Comments:
I don't understand how you think that Texas is the national laughingstock. You are aware that, like you, Hanoi John, Tanked Teddy, Tanker Dukakis, and Barney Frank all call Taxachusetts home? Not to mention that you are pretty hilarious yourself.
Mr. Ducky what causes a chuckle in a blue state does not constitute "National laughingstock." It represents a dimbulb minority position.
Whatever, Duck, and the Republicans are in charge because us flyover, red states hayseeds don't buy into your b.s. We are God fearing voters who believe that this is a Christian Nation despite what you and your secular humanist co-religionists think.
What to say about this nonsense except if you want to make soup, you have to stir the base.
I think your base is a couple of ounces short of a real soup and stirring wouldn't help.
Yeah, yeah, "Christian nation." Can't blame a guy for "a-wishin, a-hopin, a-prayin."
I hate to break it to ya, but we're more than that, Big Bubba. Always have been.
Norm you need to take that up with George Washington,
"Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
or, Thomas Jefferson,
"Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?"
or, Samuel Adams, upon signing the Declaration of Independence,
"We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven, and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let his kingdom come."
or, Daniel Webster,
"Let us not forget the religious character of our origin. Our fathers brought hither their high veneration for the Christian religion. They journeyed by its light, and labored in its hope. They sought to incorporate ... and to diffuse its influence through all their institutions, civil, political and literary."
or, Benjamin Franklin,
"I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the Ground without his Notice, is it probable that an Empire can rise without his Aid?"
or, Patrick Henry,
"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this
very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of
worship."
or, Noah Webster,
"The religion which has introduced civil liberty, is the religion of Christ and his apostles ... This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free constitutions and government ... the moral principles and precepts contained in the Scripture ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws."
or, Andrew Jackson,
"The Bible is the rock upon which our Republic rests."
Finally, Norm, let us remember George Washington's admonition,
"The Hand of providence has been so conspicuous in all this, that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more than wicked, that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his
obligations."
Norm, I know that the historical record must be damned inconvenient for those of the secular humanist religious faith, progressive liberal demoracists, social engineers and those in general who fancy theirselves much smarter than G-d. I don't know what to tell you, Norm, other than try a little intellectual honesty and see where that takes you.
Norm, if not a "Christian Nation" what are we? "Infidel Nation?" "Secular Humanist Nation?" Why don't you come up with what we are and back it up with selected quotes from our nation's history to prove your point. Should be easy enough. We are waiting, Norm.
Well, for one thing, we've got these Jews that are "here on our forbearance."
So now we're a "Judeo-Christian" nation, with assorted Buddhist, Muzzie, pantheist, atheist voters in tow.
Except that when you talk about the key guys--Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, even Adams (Unitarian)--we're talking about Deists. They had "faith," they talked about a "Creator"....it's just that all the other stuff didn't sit very well with them.
They were "pro-Christianity." Really very few people are "anti-Christianity," Bubba--unless you're a paranoid slackjawed charismatic thumper who thinks of Christians as a persecuted minority in the U.S.--and I know that ain't you, munificent blog host Bubba.
So..."Deist Nation?" That sits better with me. We say "Have faith."
And "Do good deeds."
Yeah, that's it: Faith AND Deeds.
heh heh
mr. ducky,
In answer to your question "what sort of sub-humans must Republicans be that would allow them to feel such a 100-mile-high rage over Bill Clinton and blowjobs…and feel nothing whatsoever over the myriad high crimes, plunder, graft, lethal cronyism, endless lies and outright treason carried out three inches in front of their noses, in broad daylight, by the highest officials in the United States government?"... I respond:
Some men view things from the top down, others from the bottom up. We are either Big-Enders or Little-Enders. A Little-Ender who accuses a Big-Ender of improperly breaking his eggs is likely to be perceived as suffering from other deficiencies not directly attributal to ones own self and so by extension, one's fellow Big-enders in general.
And so when a fellow Big-Ender is first "attacked" based upon a Small-Ender's reading of "The Common Book" of egg-breaking etiquette, he circles his wagons sometimes until a point sometimes well beyond which ALL the facts become known regarding the ettiquette based "egg-breech error". For there is always the hope that excupatory evidence may be yet be introduced in the near future. Innocent until proven guilty.
This is particularly true if the accused offender is tried in a court already controlled and presided over by "Little Enders"... and NOT one's true "peers".... or if rumours of exculpatory evidence being omitted in consideration of the offense have been delilberately overlooked.
Compounding this problem is the fact that when the ettiquette offense is attributed to those of the "leading class", the citizens are seldom their leader's "peers", for leaders MUST sometimes break eggs from BOTH sides... and sometimes even, the dreaded middle.
Seldom is there a giant like Gulliver to mediate or intervene and admonish ALL parties regarding their pettiness in the dispute and force them to lay their squabble to rest. All they typically have is the "Common Book" of egg-breaking etiquette to guide them.
And only a few of these books are very-well written.
Well, gotta go now. I hear there's a fire in Lilliput's castle that needs putting out.
;-)
-FJ
Of course, you can always find a few Middler's who don't believe in the Common Books End-Breaking etiquette at all. And so they pour water on the "master" book's printing plates hoping to make the writing less legible, for they tend to rust with the passage of time (unless oil is constantly re-applied).
One day, the Middler's dream, we'll write a NEW book... a book which doesn't prescibe any "ends" for egg-breaking. Only then, they dream, will they be perfectly "free".
-FJ
Congratulations, Norm, you have avoided my challenge to label the nation and back it up with historical quotes. The answer to why not is painfully obvious. I can come up with quotes from now 'til never to back my premise that this is a Christian Nation. You have nothing, Norm, nothing. That is why you gave me nothing.
Benjamin Franklin,
"...if a sparrow cannot fall to the Ground.." (Matthew 10:29 (King James Version) 29Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.)
Samuel Adams,
"....let his kingdom come." (Matthew 6:10 (King James Version) 10Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.)
Nice try, Norm. Care to try again without mistaking obfuscation for argument. The premise is simple, Norm. If this is not a "Christian Nation" how shall we label our nation? Once you come up with your label then enlighten us with quotes from the history of our nation to support your label. Very simple, Norm, go.
If you must label, which is stupid to begin with because there's no need, but if you must:
"Deist Nation"
Understand the difference between that and "Christian Nation." That's your job.
John Adams
From a letter to Charles Cushing (October 19, 1756):
“Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, ‘this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.’”
Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11: Written during the Administration of George Washington and signed into law by John Adams.
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
Thomas Jefferson to Horatio G. Spafford, January 10, 1816
"You judge truly that I am not afraid of the priests. They have tried upon me all their various batteries, of pious whining, hypocritical canting, lying & slandering, without being able to give me one moment of pain. I have contemplated their order from the Magi of the East to the Saints of the West, and I have found no difference of character, but of more or less caution, in proportion to their information or ignorance of those on whom their interested duperies were to be plaid off. Their sway in New England is indeed formidable. No mind beyond mediocrity dares there to develope itself. If it does, they excite against it the public opinion which they command, & by little, but incessant and teasing persecutions, drive it from among them. Their present emigrations to the Western country are real flights from persecution, religious & political, but the abandonment of the country by those who wish to enjoy freedom of opinion leaves the despotism over the residue more intense, more oppressive. They are now looking to the flesh pots of the South and aiming at foothold there by their missionary teachers. They have lately come forward boldly with their plan to establish " a qualified religious instructor over every thousand souls in the US." And they seem to consider none as qualified but their own sect."
Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
"One day the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in the United States will tear down the artificial scaffolding of Christianity. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."
Bubba, does it have to be so easy? Here's more:
Jefferson's Autobiography
“[A]n amendment was proposed by inserting ‘Jesus Christ,’ so that [the preamble] should read ‘A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion’; the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination”
Benjamin Franklin
“...Some books against Deism fell into my hands....It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quote to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations, in short, I soon became a thorough Deist.”
Ethan Allen
From Religion of the American Enlightenment:
“Denominated a Deist, the reality of which I have never disputed, being conscious that I am no Christian.”
George Washington, the "old fox," is well-known never to have uttered a word that would have identified him, personally, as a Christian.
Talked a lot about Providence, though, as deists are wont.
Norm, did you forget the end of the quote?,
"...but we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this artificial scaffolding and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors."
The Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, dated April 11, 1823, also included "....he [Calvin] was indeed an atheist which I can never be..."
Jefferson letter rails against Calvinism, Christian Sects and religious leaders. The controversies continue down to our day and age.
Jefferson's letter to Spafford did not include the quote that you cited. The quoted material was sent to the Richmond Inquirer with a note. Mr. Spafford wanted Jefferson to pass on a Presbyterian pamphlet to the President of the United States. Mr. Jefferson was appalled by the contents and would not pass it on to the President.
Perhaps B. Franklin flirted with Deist idealogy earlier in his life but in 1787 he was withing three years of his end. Perhaps Big Bubba has been remiss and left out the end of the quote,
"I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings that "except the Lord build they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall be become a reproach and a bye word down to future age. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human Wisdom, and leave it to chance, war, and conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move -- that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that service."
I have been browsing John Adams correspondence. He used the word "G-d" literally hundreds of times. In his correspondence to Abigail he was fond of quoting passages of sermons that impressed him. Quoted without disagreement,
Letter from John Adams to Abigail Adams, 3 - 5 July 1774
" . . . e had engaged a Dinner at Littlefields , so we returned there, dined and took our Horses to Meeting in the Afternoon, and heard the Minister again, upon "Seek first the Kingdom of God and his Righteousness, and all these Things shall be added unto you." -- There is a great Pleasure in Hearing Sermons so serious, so clear, so sensible, and instructive as these. . . . "
John Adams believed that "Solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty" would be appropriate to future celebrations of the Fourth of July,
Letter from John Adams to Abigail Adams, 3 July 1776, "Had a Declaration..."
" . . . ieve that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews , Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this . . . "
I cannot disagree with Thomas Jefferson's autobiographical remarks about "Jesus Christ." He was absolutely correct. That, of course, has nothing to do with the premise that we are a nation founded on Judeo-Christian principles.
Norm, my dictionary defines Providence as "God conceived as the power sustaining and guiding human destiny." Not a very good argument one way or another. Will this help you figure it out, Norm?
Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:" George Washington's 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation.
Here's the choices, Norm
a. Washinton was sly
b. Washington was a Deist
c. Washington was a two faced hypocrite.
d. Washington believed in God Almighty (Judeo-Christian G-d).
Bubba, as usual, I don't buy your "choices."
I'll grant that Adams was a religious man--a different case, for sure, than the others. Obviously Christianity was an effect on all of their lives.They certainly felt it was "good" for social order and common good. But from what you can gather of their own personal views, you may as well call 'em "monotheists."
By the obvious care they took, as the quote from Jefferson's autobiography indicates, to leave Christ OUT OF THE CONSTITUTION and even out of most of their public opinions...well, it kinda makes your term, "Christian Nation," a leap of faith, doesn't it?
I could be wrong, and maybe fj knows this, but I think I read somewhere where certain members of the Church saw Socrates and Plato as saints.
I believe what you are doing is called "revisionism."
Norm, your secular humanist religion has not led you to some special epiphany about Thomas Jefferson and the Constitution. Any Baptist would appreciate what Thomas Jefferson said about the issue and why. Not only that Baptists would applaude his efforts to keep Jesus Christ out of the Constitution. Now what does all that have to do with whether on not this is a nation founded on Judeo-Christian principles?
Hey, bubba. Don't call me a "secular humanist" simply because I don't have the arrogance to claim this is a "Christian nation." Because it is arrogance, and only a claim, and furthermore it would seem to contradict the very character of the Founders to make such a claim.
Yes we are a nation of Christians and I count myself one. Yes I understand, maybe not as well as you, the rival sectarians that sought to influence the nature of the Constitution. But I think the care the Founders took is obvious that the nation and its predominant religion not be yoked together.
By the way, I do not believe freedom of religion means freedom from religion. My "secularism" only goes so far.
Norm, I don't usually proclaim that this is a Christian Nation. You may have noticed I pulled back from that because I misspoke. Normally I always talk about a Nation founded on Judeo-Christian principles. That is my true belief, however, I do believe that whether or not this is a Christian Nation is a moot question.
G_d, in His infinite wisdom gave man "free will"... and we exercised it in the Garden of Eden.
The Founders created a country unique to the world in this very same respect.
The people were free to choose and enjoy life, liberty and pursue their own vision of happiness, and the government wouldn't choose for them. It was very Judeo-Christian in this respect (unlike many other governments around the world).
Negative vs positive liberty. No one claiming the right to tell another "how" to live or "what" constituted a "good life".
-FJ
...but
Free will and the ability to choose implies that we will have many opportunities to choose badly. Therefore I believe that the Founders "strongly suggested" that people attempt to model their lives' after that of Christ or the other secular saints and NOT embrace lives of sin and decadence.
They (the Founders) didn't want to force the "impossible" on the citizens. For it would not be virtue if it were coerced. It has to be voluntarily "chosen".
I don't know if some people considered Plato and/or Aristotle to be saints or not, only that Dante put them in the "first(?) circle" of Hell and they therfore were not punished as severly as many others.
There is much Platonism in Christianity, but Plato was not a Christian nor a believer in the possibility of Christ. He thought that the Creator set the world in motion and does NOT intervene in it, but remains eternally outside of and separate from it.... uncorrupted.
My fear is that we have been given our freedom to choose and no longer have leaders calling us back to virtuous models... that the massification of our society and the tearing down/ "equalization through relativism" of our role models is convincing more and more of us to "choose badly". (ie - killing the unborn... arguing that it is not yet "life" or does not yet possess a "soul")
-FJ
Post a Comment
<< Home