Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

what are you reading for pleasure?


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#41 south

south

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts

Posted 09 March 2017 - 07:07 PM

 founded on Christian beliefs 

 

That's a common misnomer or misconception.  One of the main points of the formation of the government - with a "wall of separation between church and state" was to exclude religion from government, and vice versa, specifically Christianity.  Theocracies don't work, as we can see from a casual glance at the news.  

 

Having been burned, and realizing that religion is a tool to control people, most of the Founders - many of them anti-religious and certainly not Christian - went decidedly in the other direction.  

 

This is why we have no mention of religion in the documents that form our government.  Look as hard as you like, take your time - it isn't there.

 

There are few after the fact justifications of why one committee member voted - especially in trying to sell this new government to the Confederacy.  Ironically, using religion to convince people of an essentially anti-religious idea, which I find fascinating.  

 

I say "misnomer" because 95% of the same beliefs are found in every religion and are copied from the religion before that, and before those, outside sources.  Common knowledge that justice / righteousness is good, and here are some rules for that, for instance. Found in every philosophy, old and new. 


  • Reality Check 2 likes this

PA-C

USA


#42 rev ronin

rev ronin

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,931 posts

Posted 09 March 2017 - 11:01 PM

One of the main points of the formation of the government - with a "wall of separation between church and state" was to exclude religion from government, and vice versa, specifically Christianity.   

People say this all the time without understanding how not true it actually is. Certain of the original 13 colonies (Massachusetts, etc.) had tax-supported churches well into the 1800's.  The first amendment was, in part, designed to keep a federal established church from disenfranchising the various tax-supported state churches.  "Wall of separation" comes from a Jeffersonian letter, later quoted in various places, not any of the founding documents.  Misunderstanding the religious situation of the founding of America is clearly not limited to people who think there was an intent to create a Christian theocracy.



#43 Boatswain2PA

Boatswain2PA

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,227 posts

Posted 10 March 2017 - 05:39 AM

I finished 'The Total Money Make Over' and 'Minimalist Budget: live more and spend less' yesterday. Heading home from work in a little bit to find 'How to Win Friends and Influence People' book.

 

 

I have been on a Dave Ramsey binge. Read TMM and have the podcast playing on my commute. Must be my impending loan repayments.
I have also been reading Dave Allen 'getting things done'. I haven't started the whole work flow process but I am making more lists.
Finally after being hired for an acute care residency I thought I best read 'house of god' again. Bad idea. I keep telling myself health care has changed and hospitals aren't like that any more...Not sure if I believe myself.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

 

Dave Ramsey really changed my life.  While not saddled with huge student loans, I had "leveraged" debt and bought multiple rental properties.  About 2 years ago I hit peak earning, and about 6 months ago my wife hit great earning, and since then we have thrown HUGE amounts against those leveraged debts.

 

Today we are (just about) debt free with multiple income streams.

We think we just found our half-million-dollar dream house.  We look at it Sunday.  We may able to pull it off with 30% down and pay it off in 5 years.

 

That's a common misnomer or misconception.  One of the main points of the formation of the government - with a "wall of separation between church and state" was to exclude religion from government, and vice versa, specifically Christianity.  Theocracies don't work, as we can see from a casual glance at the news.  

 

Having been burned, and realizing that religion is a tool to control people, most of the Founders - many of them anti-religious and certainly not Christian - went decidedly in the other direction.  

 

This is why we have no mention of religion in the documents that form our government.  Look as hard as you like, take your time - it isn't there.

 

There are few after the fact justifications of why one committee member voted - especially in trying to sell this new government to the Confederacy.  Ironically, using religion to convince people of an essentially anti-religious idea, which I find fascinating.  

 

I say "misnomer" because 95% of the same beliefs are found in every religion and are copied from the religion before that, and before those, outside sources.  Common knowledge that justice / righteousness is good, and here are some rules for that, for instance. Found in every philosophy, old and new. 

Please show me where ANY of our founding documents, or the federalist papers (written by our founding fathers), talk about a "wall of separation" between church and state.

 

The Constitution clearly prohibits a State-Sponsored religion.  This, like the prohibition against "quartering" soldiers, was a result of looking at the history of England (and other) European failures; Specifically the establishment of the Anglican church (which every Englishman was required to attend) because a certain British King couldn't get divorced in the Catholic Church.

The "wall" you refer to was built by the supreme court more than a century later.

A perfect example why liberals (and all Americans) should read not only the Constitution but ALSO the Federalist papers.



#44 south

south

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts

Posted 10 March 2017 - 07:41 PM

That quote is from Thomas Jefferson (surely you would agree a Founding Father) in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Church in December of 1802.  It serves the same purpose as the Federalist Papers - to explain the reasoning behind and "sell" the Constitution to those who may be on the fence or need explanation or motivation.  

 

Those are his exact words, written personally, by him.   

 

People hold up the Federalist Papers as some kind of authority sometimes.  They aren't law.  Let's not get crazy here.  


PA-C

USA


#45 south

south

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts

Posted 10 March 2017 - 08:10 PM

The idea of religious group-moral founding of our nation is the ultimate non-starter argument.  It's just not there.  Not in the Constitution, any of the Amendments, or even in the Declaration of Independence (which does make casual mention of a non-specific deity).  

 

Some folks like to claim morality as their own, forgetting the fact that many - if not most - of the Founding Fathers were not of certain groups, some anti-religion to varying degrees.  Lots of deists.  

 

Anyway, If it's there, by all means, anyone making that claim, post it up and it will be revealed to all.

 

If they wanted to put that in there, had meant to erect a theocracy - they would have done so.  They passed.

 

The ONLY function of government with respect to religion is to zealously protect individual freedom to worship.  

 

The Federalist Papers, according to a book I had to read that duly listed every SINGLE reference to religion in the essays, freely express the individual's faith as a reasoning behind the decisions that were made, but...

 

in fact...

 

go way out of their way to erect and support that "wall of separation" idea that Jefferson later explained.  

 

This makes sense, because the authors (Jay, Hamilton, Madison) all have a history or distrust of organized religion.  John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and an Episcopalian, for instance, sought an amendment to Pennsylvania's Constitution severely restricting the rights of religious groups unless they swore fealty to the government over their church.  (it was defeated).

 

Now THAT's distrust of religion!

 

Hell, I'm starting to think Jefferson probably got the entire idea from the Federalist Papers.  


  • Reality Check 2 likes this

PA-C

USA


#46 south

south

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts

Posted 10 March 2017 - 08:26 PM

I guess I hijacked the thread.  Sorry.  

 

Reading the Anti-Federalist Papers and Common Sense by Thomas Paine.  


PA-C

USA


#47 Croooz

Croooz

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,468 posts

Posted 10 March 2017 - 08:27 PM

I agree that no one wanted a national church.  One would be hardpressed to find proof of any obvious Christianity in the Founding Fathers.  Many were deists and one can read Christianity into their words but that is an issue of the reader not the author.  The issue my fellow Christians who want it to be a theocracy always fail to see is what happens when it's not a Christian national church?  Any national church would be disastrous for this experiment.

 

Just finished Common Sense by Paine.

Started Think and Grow Rich again...


-Not a PA, but I've seen one on TV. :D
-It's easier to ask forgiveness than to ask permission.

#48 ryebread203

ryebread203

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44 posts

Posted 10 March 2017 - 08:33 PM

I guess I hijacked the thread.  Sorry.  

 

Reading the Anti-Federalist Papers and Common Sense by Thomas Paine.  

 

Yup, agree with you on the prevalence of Deism in the colonial era, but terribly off topic.

 

I was reading The Warded Man series (Peter V. Brett) and the Raven's Shadow series (Anthony Ryan) before course work got too busy.

 

Any other good fantasy reads out there?



#49 south

south

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts

Posted 11 March 2017 - 05:46 AM

It is, and I hereby apologize.  My previous degrees are in colonial history/constitutional law/civil rights and I get a little crazy.

 

Recent reads include Freakonomics 1 and 2, and a book called the Survivor's club, about folks who survived stuff they had no business whatsoever.

 

The Worst case Scenario books are completely awesome for the bathroom, although now they are getting a little silly with the franchise.  


PA-C

USA


#50 roger777

roger777

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 91 posts

Posted 12 March 2017 - 02:46 AM

Agree with much of the above. The founders were deists which can be thought of as a degree away from agnostics. They felt comfortable using God in the texts precisely bc. their conception of such was highly unaffiliated. They very much would not have agreed with the sort of scriptural justification of various laws that is often seen today and would have viewed many so-called strict constructionist arguments as disingenuous (and wrong). To the degree that the Bible and the Constitution are similar it is that they are both often flexible (and often downright ambiguous) by design. Neither prescription nor proscription travels well and the authors wanted to create durable documents. Relatedly, to the degree that the Constitution attempts to place limits on government, it also was very much intended to be expansive and to allow those in power TO GOVERN. Without mentioning specific amendments and clauses, this is the only explanation for the ambiguous wording often seen in the text; if the authors had wanted to legislate in the text they were more than competent to use clear language do so.  



#51 roger777

roger777

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 91 posts

Posted 12 March 2017 - 03:06 AM

Yup, agree with you on the prevalence of Deism in the colonial era, but terribly off topic.

 

I was reading The Warded Man series (Peter V. Brett) and the Raven's Shadow series (Anthony Ryan) before course work got too busy.

 

Any other good fantasy reads out there?

I apologize too and did not see all of later posts before posting. OK if someone wants to delete. That said, I will never initiate a conversation about religion/politics, but I don't really feel obligated to not post if someone else has posted about same. Count me among those who would prefer to never see it on this board, at work or on other job boards (It has largely ruined Linkedin for example).



#52 Boatswain2PA

Boatswain2PA

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,227 posts

Posted 12 March 2017 - 03:52 PM

That quote is from Thomas Jefferson (surely you would agree a Founding Father) in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Church in December of 1802.  It serves the same purpose as the Federalist Papers - to explain the reasoning behind and "sell" the Constitution to those who may be on the fence or need explanation or motivation.  

 

Those are his exact words, written personally, by him.   

 

People hold up the Federalist Papers as some kind of authority sometimes.  They aren't law.  Let's not get crazy here.  

I hadn't read that letter before.  Do you know what his letter was in response to?  

 

Nobody is "holding up the Federalist Papers as some kind of authority."  However they do provide a context of the discussions of the day, which likely resemble the discussions had in that small room in Philadelphia a decade or so earlier. 

Regarding my statement that we were "founded on Christian beliefs" - Our FOUNDING document, our Declaration, clearly states in it's introduction and preamble of WHY we are going to set up our own nation; because man has a NATURAL right (enabled by Nature's GOD), and an UNALIENABLE right (endowed by the CREATOR) to freedom.  

So whether some of our founding fathers were Christians (most were staunch Christians), or deists, or (like most of us during our lives) evolved their belief systems through their lives....we were certainly founded on a belief of natural rights (referenced in Jefferson's letter to Danbury congregation), which I think everyone agrees means rights endowed by a Judeo/Christian styled God/Creator (and not Quetzlecoatl, Sheva, or some other diety).

And of course the disagreement whether the Declaration/Constitution/Federalist Papers/early letters show a foundation in Christianity or not is only part of why I suggested every American (and especially liberals) read them.  They also show we were founded on the beliefs of PERSONAL liberty and responsibility, and LIMITED government.  Something that we are certainly getting away from in the past 50 years.

Lastly - we should be able to talk about, including disagree about, religion and politics without being disrespectful to each other.



#53 GetMeOuttaThisMess

GetMeOuttaThisMess

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 12 March 2017 - 05:45 PM

Job listings?


  • sk732 and Reality Check 2 like this

#54 ryebread203

ryebread203

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44 posts

Posted 13 March 2017 - 03:07 AM

Lastly - we should be able to talk about, including disagree about, religion and politics without being disrespectful to each other.

 

Thats fine. Just start a new thread. The above comments about colonial religion derailed this thread away from wizards and vampires. Unimpressed.

 

Back to the topic at hand. Hoping to have time at the end of the term to finally finish Terry Goodkind's "Wizard's First Rule."



#55 Dono

Dono

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts

Posted 13 March 2017 - 12:41 PM

Let's stay on topic haha. How is everyone reading the books? hardcover, softcover, PDF, iPad, and/or Kindle? I have a goal to write a book, but I procrastinate with writing things.


IG: @ChristopherDono

Twitter: @C_J_Dono


#56 GetMeOuttaThisMess

GetMeOuttaThisMess

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 13 March 2017 - 01:01 PM

Kindle only.

#57 beattie228

beattie228

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 213 posts

Posted 13 March 2017 - 01:41 PM

About 90% Kindle app via my iPad. There's something about holding an actual book but I enjoy the clutter-free life an e-reader affords.



#58 ryebread203

ryebread203

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44 posts

Posted 13 March 2017 - 03:58 PM

My local library uses the OverDrive app for audiobooks. Listening at x1.5-x2 was perfect for my 45 min commute last year. Now that I commute in town I listen to fewer books during the drive.

 

For nonfiction, I very highly recommend Joby Warrick's "Black Flags: The Rise of ISIS" or Mitchell Zuchoff's "13 Hours".



#59 sk732

sk732

    Registered

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 517 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 04:11 PM

Just started reading "Shit Your Ego Says"...apparently I listen to mine a bit too much.  Watch and shoot.

 

SK



#60 Dono

Dono

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:39 PM

Just started reading "Shit Your Ego Says"...apparently I listen to mine a bit too much. Watch and shoot.

SK

Sounds like I need to check that out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IG: @ChristopherDono

Twitter: @C_J_Dono





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users