I am a christian - and it affects ALL of my political views.

[SmileyRose]

I believe christian ideals did have a little something to do with what our founding father hoped this country would become.

We should do everything we can to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, take care of the vulnerable.

I believe the christian foundation of our nation requires us to be peaceable and respectful of our neighbors in the world, turn the other cheek until we run out of cheeks and even then do everything humanly possible to avoid violence. (But even Jesus got violent in the temple and righteously so)

I get angry when the holier than thou's (pharisees) use their power and position to crap on everyone else.

Although I live well below the "median" income in America, I share what I have with people who have less.
(Even if it's only a couple fish and a crust of bread)

And when it comes to laws governing social behavior, I'm more concerned about the board in my eye than the speck in someone else's. My Bible taught me the good Samaritan (heathen) was more christian than most of Christians (believers). So it's best to let the judgement part up to God and live and let live instead.

As a christian nation our government should hold the ideals of mercy, kindness, generosity, humility, charity and such in the highest value.

I don't know if we ever really were a christian nation. If so we have not been so in my lifetime. We are always off in some other place killing people. We spend more time worshiping the rich instead of serving the poor. We spend most of our public discourse making uniformed judgements about other people's most private choices.

The reason why I voted for Barack Obama is because he was more likely to move our government toward christian ideals - even if just a little. The reason I vote for anyone will be the same reason.

[bloomington-lib]

1. "So it's best to let the judgement part up to God and live and let live instead."

I wish everyone could practice this.

[msongs]

2. the USA is not founded as a christian nation. some of its founders were christians. there is a

difference between those two.

"As a christian nation..." - This is NOT a christian nation no matter how much you want to make it one

You vote only for christians, that's your choice under our system of government, though there are many christians who would like to take away that choice.

[SmileyRose]

4. small c not big C

some of the best christians I know are atheists.

And yes, I have no doubt there was a better way to word it. Words aren't exactly my best thing so I'm merely trying to clarify that I did not mean to say I think the USA is Christian (big C) nation.

[peacebird]

8. Ok - some of the best christians i know are also athiests... Sorry, i missed the small "c"

[Lionessa]

9. That's the most ridiculous thing I've read to date.

Atheists do not make good christians big or little c. We can be good people and bad people just like christians large c and small c and islamists and jews and every other type of group you might choose, but to say they are better christians is poppycock and insulting.

I wouldn't want to lower my humanity to fit within any christian considerations or other religions for that matter.

[Voice for Peace]

18. How about small c consistently compassionate.

Within every human heart is compassion, joy, love, peace,
wisdom, tolerance -- all of that.

We also have a built in brain-heart connection called
conscience -- to alert us when we are going in the wrong
direction.

This is the divinity inside of us, and it doesn't matter if you
call it God, or if you call it christ, or evolution, or Carol, or
Energy, or Mz, or Allah or allah or Oprah or science or magic.

It is what it is and it doesn't need a name. There is an
ocean of it. If Jesus lived, that's what he was into --
helping people of his time to discover the infinite compassion
within themselves.. NOT to become religious, dogmatic
or submissive; but to become free. Mohammed did
the same thing and so have others. Buddha et al.

The poster speaks of her own heart, and her own
understanding, and calls it small c christian -- and also
that it describes people who may be of any religious or not-
religious persuasion.

Your objection is just about semantics.. what she wrote
was not ridiculous at all.
small c consistently compassionate.
Or big C Caring.

[Lionessa]

21. Not to me. Atheists make good humans, not good christians no matter how twisty

or large or small you make the c.

As an atheist I take offense to the comment and mentioned so.

Furthermore not every human heart has compassion, not to mention compassion isn't in the heart, the heart pumps blood. It's a function, one of many, that reside in the brain.

Honestly, I sure wish people would start dealing with reality. Not all people are born good, not all are capable or even willing to be compassionate. So long as we "bleeding heart" liberals believe that pie in the sky bull, we will continue to lose ground.

[Voice for Peace]

74. just for balance.. I do know atheists who are arrogant egomaniacs

-- neither kind nor considerate, & extremely closed-minded.
I also know people who, even though they identify with a
religious label, are kind, compassionate, smart, funny, interesting,
and open minded.

I try not to pigeonhole anyone on account of a label -- though
I do generalize, and generally I don't like any religion to
impose its beliefs into my space.

[Lionessa]

80. No doubt, I do think I say that somewhere, but the point is they NEVER

make good christians since first and foremost to be a good christian, one has to believe in the whole christ myth, and we clearly do not.

I was more focusing on the idea that it isn't a religion that makes people good or bad, it's their humanity. Regardless of how religious on person may think they are, their religion is likely not supporting their ideals. For example, though Mother Teresa was a wonderful human, it wasn't her religion that held her up through all the crap and hardship and hatred her church threw at her, it was her own personal belief system which she attributed to her religion. Her religion didn't reciprocate for decades so it couldn't actually have been her religiosity that did the good, it was the goodness in her ownself that she forced and demanded be part of her religion.

[me b zola]

37. A beautiful post

One that I would hope we could all rally around,

[cbayer]

72. Well said. Thanks.

[Goblinmonger]

81. Here's what my objection is.

If I am a good person and do good things and then someone says I'm a good "small c christian" that puts all the emphasis and praise on the christian part and I AM NOT THAT. Don't co-opt me for your own label.

Now, if she had said that someone who is an atheist is a good person because they are consistently compassionate, that would be fine.

One shouldn't use a label for their religion (regardless of capitalization) for those that are not part of one's religion to make one's religion look better. Words have meanings.

[mistertrickster]

99. There's an old story about the small-town folk that

always said of the local rabbi, "he's such a good Christian."

One could be called a lot worse . . .

[Humanist_Activist]

126. That's mighty white of you.

Now, question, is that worse or better than saying someone is a good Christian?

[mistertrickster]

127. Dial back the anger and hate. nt

[Humanist_Activist]

128. What anger? What hate? I'm just trying to illustrate to christians why...

using Christian as interchangeably with good is offensive to non-christians.

[SmileyRose]

133. haha

I asked a customer today how his Easter weekend was and the dead silence on the other end of the phone still took me a full -15 sec to realize the customer is Jewish. Needless to say I tripped all over myself apologizing. Fortunately he knows me well enough to know I meant well.

I'm small town barely made it through high school. If they want intellectual from me they'll be disappointed. But to quote Popeye I yam what I yam.

Thanks for your kindness in this thread.

[Voice for Peace]

110. yes but even big wars start over very small silly things

If someone wants to call me a christian, or call me an atheist,
it has absolutely no bearing on my experience. It's their
problem, not mine.

Words mean different things to different people. For many,
the word "christian" does not mean a set of beliefs -- other
than believing one should walk the talk, as Jesus supposedly did.
Even if you object to this, it's still a word in common usage.
I think it has less religious connotation than humanistic,
social.

[Humanist_Activist]

116. Given that, christian as a word(capitalized or not) is meaningless...

as is the religion its attached to. Words have meaning for accuracy's sake if nothing else, throw that out, and you have nothing left.

[dmallind]

24. Insult after insult

Nice people are neither big C nor small c christians - any more than they are big J or small j jains. You do NOT get to make the name of your own superstition mean "good person" because doing so screams that those who do not share it are bad people - and all the disingenuous BS in the world will not change that loathsome lie.

[mistertrickster]

95. Totally unfair.

Just because one believes that her faith is good, doesn't mean that she believes everyone who doesn't share that faith is bad.

It reminds me of the "liberal" who chastised Will Pitt for using the phrase "my hero" when he introduced a speaker. "What about the people, Mr. Pitt, who don't have heroes? Aren't you making them feel bad?"

C'mon . . . this is just looking for a fight.

Also, she went out of her way to say that atheists can be good people too.

[dmallind]

108. Totally irrelevant

You can believe your faith is good I agree - but to change the word "good" into the name for your faith is arrogance, bigotry and irrationality all rolled up into one. Making "christian" even with a small c stand in for "good" cannot mean anything else.

She went out of her way to say atheists could be "christians" right here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=534531

Only an utterly hateful partisan would consider this the same thing as considering them to be good people.

[mistertrickster]

121. You can't take a compliment. nt

[mistertrickster]

33. That's a very good point

In the sense that atheists can practice what Christ taught often better than so-called Christians.

[Goblinmonger]

82. Maybe the point is that what Christ taught

was not unique to Christ and that it is just about being a good person.

[mistertrickster]

93. Who's disputing that? nt

[Goblinmonger]

94. My point would then be

that why does it all have to come back to Christ? Why this small c/captial C business. You are a good person because you are a good person. It doesn't need to be defined by christian as sub-threads here seem to want it to be.

Even your response (I paraphrase): atheists can be better christians.... Why not just "atheists can be better people..."?

[SmileyRose]

129. christian

Only because that's my lens. It isn't everyone's nor should it be. Good is good. The label is less important to me than it seems to be to a few DUers.

[MissMarple]

140. Some of us can our knickers all in a twist over anything.

It's easy to wear our feelings a bit too much on our sleeve. Or maybe it's just a bad day. And some just like to be contrarian. I like your post. But some atheists do seem to resent being called christian what ever the c. So, we won't call them that. But many of them do seem to live by Christian ideals, as do deists, neo pagans, etc... Good, prickly people are everywhere. And sometimes I can be one, as well. Peace.

[Marr]

41. Christians are not "good people".

Any more than Muslims or Buddhists or Hindus or Satan worshippers are "good people". You don't get to claim virtue itself as synonymous with your religion.

The Bible can be interpreted to mean child murder and slavery just as easily as kindness and generosity.

[peacebird]

3. I am wiccan. I believe in the three fold law. That which I send out to the world returns 3x to me.

My husband and I send out checks to each of the two local food banks every month, have done for the last four years. We also send a monthly check to Amnesty International, and to the local free clinic. Generally each check is at least $75, more inthe winter when needs are highest.
I get really TOTALLY p'od when someone claims that xtianity is the only path to all that is good i the world.

We are so totally NOT rich, but once our son ended his college years we decided to keep spending his tuition amount to help others.

Xtianity is NOT the end all and be all. Think of the crusades. Think of the burning times. Xtianity has had more people slaughtered in its name than has Wicca.

Xtian "ideals" are claimed by westboro and so many other haters. If you are concerned about xtain values then work to reclaim Christs good name from the fundies and haters.

[ZombieHorde]

15. Does the three fold law dictate that people deserve what they get?

In other words, why do bad things happen to good people, and why do good things happen to bad people?

How does the (universe/Goddess/???) decide what is good and what is bad?

[peacebird]

16. Nope. That is not partof the three fold law. All it says is that what I send out into the world will

Be returned 3x. In other words - do not treat others differently than you wish to be treated.

[Voice for Peace]

19. I have never heard of that law!! but I've noticed the phenomenon

and have often scratched my head about it,
wondering if it were my imagination, but there
seemed to be some kind of natural law involved.

I've never actually measured the amount that
comes back, whether it's 2x or 10x, and I do think
it's been variable. But I've definitely observed this
for years -- that both my good and bad choices return
in much greater abundance than when they left.

[peacebird]

20. When i was ten a friends mom told me about karma, that youndon't need to "pay someone back" for

an injustice, it will happen as a result of karma.

The threefold law has always sounded like karma to me.

[mistertrickster]

100. You realize that when atheists ridicule and demean Christians for "illogical and unscientific"

thought, they are demeaning and ridiculing you as well?

In that sense, Wiccans and Christians are alike. We both believe in metaphysics, as well as ordinary physics.

[Lionessa]

5. I am sorry for our nation then, folks mixing their religions no matter

well meaning they are, screw things up dramatically because some other person, group, sect, cult will claim that their interpretation of christianity is more pure, more whatever, and not just christianity though that's the garbage being presented in this op.

If you can't find it in your humanity to have those values, I truly feel sorry for your limitations in personal maturity and integrity.

[Skittles]

12. I AGREE

[mistertrickster]

29. You mean like Lincoln? Nt

[Lionessa]

30. Huh?what does Lincoln have to do with this thread?

[mistertrickster]

32. He applied his religious beliefs to gov't.

To see the right as providence gives us to see the right.

[Lionessa]

35. I'm sorry but christians of his time didn't agree with his perception of

his religion. Hence why there was a war. He wasn't in alignment with the religions of the day, he was in alignment with his humanity.

[Marr]

42. Slavery's defenders were on more solid footing in the theological debate over slavery.

The Bible spells out very precisely how slaves are to be treated, and even encourages slaves to 'serve their Christian masters especially well'.

I'm not actually aware of any theological arguments made by Lincoln against slavery, either. I know some did argue that way, but you can use the Bible to back up an amazing variety of conflicting positions if you search through it.

[mistertrickster]

48. The letter of the law killeth,

but the spirit giveth life.

[Goblinmonger]

83. Translation:

Yeah, I know that's what the holy book actually says but it's not what it really means. It REALLY means what I say it means.

[el_bryanto]

71. I'm curious about the reference to integrity

I am Christian - Mormon actually, and it affects everything I do. It seems like it would show less integrity for me to pretend that my faith didn't inform or affect my life, including my political beliefs.

Possibly I'm misunderstanding you.

Bryant

[ZombieHorde]

6. I suspect your political views are what affects your religious views.

Politics generally seems to trump religion. The conservative parts of the Holy Bible are generally explained away by liberal Christians, while the liberal parts of the Holy Bible are explained away by conservative Christians.

For example, the New Testament says men are the head of women, but American liberal politics says men and women are equal. If Christianity truly dictates your politics, then you will agree with the Christian Holy Bible, but if your politics dictates your religion, then you can just say that part doesn't count for whatever reason makes you happy.

[SmileyRose]

14. you might be right

I do find a lot of the biblical ideals I gravitate toward are ones shared by decent people no faith or all faiths or however one might put that.

Thanks for you post..... got me thinking.

[Zalatix]

58. Not so sure about that.

I've visited a few strongly Christian churches led by women pastors.

[ZombieHorde]

88. I am not sure what your point is.

Can you elaborate?

[Zalatix]

105. Women pastors violate the "man as the head" idea.

For example, the New Testament says men are the head of women, but American liberal politics says men and women are equal.

Any church that has a woman as a pastor, by that definition, puts the woman at the head. A pastor is the head of the church; so a woman pastor is the head of men and women. That violates the rigid interpretation of the New Testament.

That would come to the far-out conclusion that politics actually dictates that entire church's belief system...

[ZombieHorde]

112. Yes, the church is probably liberal, or at least moderate. nt

[liberalmuse]

7. I wish all Christians were like this...

but they aren't. I stay the hell away from people pronouncing their Christianity, because more often than not, they are toxic assholes who, while well-meaning, only end up hurting and destroying people. I think "Christians" are probably the most harmful entities on this planet right now. No single group has caused more bloodshed and harm to the living beings on this planet. Hey, if you're a "nice" Christian, good for you, but you're in the vast minority.

[Iggo]

10. Christian nation?

Do you have any idea how much that pisses off us non-Christians?

[liberalmuse]

11. Thank you.

I'm tired of reiterating that our founding fathers were Diests, not "Christians". We are NOT a Christian nation, nor were we ever meant to be such.

[Initech]

34. And the two times religion is actually mentioned in the constitution it's negative.

"No religious test shall be required for public office."
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

[Live and Learn]

13. Very well said in my opinion. nt

[mistertrickster]

17. Thank you, Rose.

I've been seeing a lot of Christian bashing around here lately, and it's nice to see someone standing up for what they believe in.

Martin Luther King, Jr, Benjamin Tutu, Oscar Romero, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton fight (fought) injustice with their grounding in the Christianity.

Presumably the oh-so-superior atheists here at DU can respect that at least.

[dmallind]

25. So because a minimum of 60% of the world's most generous philanthropists are nonbelievers

And the world's single most successful charitable event was created by another, when will Christians "respect" atheists enough to pretend that "C(c)hristian" and "good person" are not synonyms, as you are so speciously applauding?

[mistertrickster]

27. I have no problem whatsoever with atheists.

Except when they bash Christians.

I just want atheists here to back off the Christian bashing.

In other words, treat me like I treat you.

[Major Nikon]

38. That is rich

Your words...

Presumably the oh-so-superior atheists here at DU can respect that at least.

So you have absolutely no problem throwing all athiests on DU into your pigeon hole, yet you expect to be treated differently?

I don't bash individual Christians. I bash the idea of Christianity which very much does need to be bashed. With a few exceptions, that's what I see the majority of athiests on DU doing. If it bothers you so that your religion is being bashed, and you take that as a personal affront from all athiests on DU, perhaps your belief is not nearly as strong as you thought.

Just sayin'

[mistertrickster]

52. Some atheists attack my belief system by acting superior.

Since I don't do that to them--I don't say they'll burn in hell for all eternity, say--I'd simply appreciate the same treatment I give them.

[Humanist_Activist]

132. Oh, you have other ways to act superior, they are all over this thread...

What was that quote from your books, something about removing a plank from your eye before noticing the splinter in another's. Something like that.

[Marrah_G]

22. I think that you sound like a really good role model

[Air Marshal8]

23. I was raised to be a Xian, but about 40 years ago I found this seminal quote

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then why does evil exist?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Epicurus

----------------------------------------------------------------
which is why I became an unapologetic atheist.

[mistertrickster]

28. If God stops evil,

Then we have no free will.

We're automatons.

[Tikki]

31. Seems like many Christians are nothing but automatons...

[Marr]

43. How about if we skip the word "evil" and just focus on, say, tsunamis.

Surely, god could stop a tsunami. There's nothing evil about tsunamis, and just giving some coastal village another pleasant sunny day instead of a pile of dead children wouldn't be removing their free will in any way that I can see.

So why do we have tsunamis?

[mistertrickster]

118. Because everything that lives must die. nt

[Marr]

130. If your baby died in a tsunami, you'd just sigh and say,

"oh well-- everything that lives must die"? I rather doubt it.

That's an awfully casual dismissal of death and suffering, I've got to say-- especially in defense of a loving god.

[trotsky]

50. Is there evil in heaven? n/t

[mistertrickster]

54. No. Presumably there's no free will in heaven either.

All will act in accordance with God's will.

[trotsky]

67. Sounds like a lovely place.

Filled with automatons.

[mistertrickster]

75. One can't reduce the ineffable mind of God

to terms that humans can fully understand.

If we could fully understand God, he wouldn't be very complex--no more complex than human understanding.

[trotsky]

79. Ah yes, "god works in mysterious ways."

And the discussion is ended. The theologian's iron curtain to stifle all the tough questions.

Funny how you were the one trying to explain the ineffable mind of your god by saying that evil was necessary to preserve our free will - but once your reasoning was exposed as faulty, the curtain came down.

[mistertrickster]

86. You are a legend in your own mind.

Einstein said that "God does not play dice with the universe."

Take it up with him.

[trotsky]

98. Time for the dueling Einstein quotes already?

He also said, "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

[mistertrickster]

101. Fair enough, but he also criticized atheism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein's_religious_views

[trotsky]

102. He criticized what is classified as "strong" or gnostic atheism.

From your link:

"Einstein firmly rejected the label atheist, which he associated with certainty regarding God's nonexistence."

Regardless, Einstein's thoughts on the topic are irrelevant to the dogmatic trap you wedged yourself in, and tried to escape using the "god's mysterious ways" excuse. I do not see much value in any system claiming to have knowledge which then immediately slams the door on inquiry.

[mistertrickster]

119. Many people rejected Jesus during His lifetime.

If he couldn't convince everyone then, I'm certain I can't do it now.

[trotsky]

137. I guess we are just stupid or refuse to give up our evil ways.

Thanks for sort of trying. At least you will have the enjoyment of knowing I'm burning in hell forever!

[Marr]

104. Now wait a minute.

We're talking about the same god who made "don't you dare use my name in vain" one of the top guidelines to living. That doesn't seem like the sort of thing you'd get from ineffable mind. It's quite human, and petty at that. God's wrath is all over the Bible, and always incurred for reasons any four year old could understand. Judeo-Christian religion itself is one huge claim to understanding how the universe works, and what god wants.

You can't just throw up your arms and say god's mind can't be understood by mortals whenever the logic breaks down.

[mistertrickster]

120. The way humans see God changed greatly

over the 800 years that the Bible was written.

The God of the Bible represents the ways the human mind could understand the concept at that time in history.

[Marr]

131. So... what? Those wrathful episodes didn't actually happen?

That third commandment was a transcription error?

[Air Marshal8]

117. If we have free will, "god" is superfluous

and has no purpose. Which is precisely the case.

[SmileyRose]

45. It does have a lot to do with upbringing

and functioning in the world me and mine live in. Like someone else in the thread said, I've learned to take the parts of Christian teaching that work for me and use them to live by, and rejected the parts that don't. No doubt their is a bit of insanity in that whole thing but so far it works for me.

Anyways thanks for your post.

[JDPriestly]

26. SmileyRose, a number of the Founding Fathers

would have agreed with you.

Let your beliefs guide you personally, but don't try to impose them on others. You can't go wrong, and you may persuade a lot of people to share your opinions if you do that.

[MuseRider]

36. What on earth did people do before the Christians came along and invented good people?

All those lovely Christian values were unknown before? Really?

[Marr]

44. Homo sapiens were all murderous assholes for 48,000 years.

Then, about 2000 years ago, god decided it was time to pop in and give us a nice orientation meeting. And it's all been rosy ever since.

[Iggo]

64. Home School History 101.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

114. Homeschooling with a 48,000 year old earth? I don't think so.

The universe has only been here for 6000 years now, according to homeschooling godhistory.

[Iggo]

115. Excellent point, sir!

Score yourself five bonus points!

[Egalitarian Thug]

39. So, are you saying that without your belief you would be a cruel, selfish, parasite? n/t

[Major Nikon]

40. You're confusing religion with morality

You're also making the mistake of claiming that those christians who don't think the way you do must not be real christians. The whole idea of organized religion is that someone else gets to tell you what to believe and on a more basic level how to think. Because they have a different interpretation doesn't make them any less of a christian than you.

[SmileyRose]

46. Maybe

I'm not judging whether a person who wants to go murder brown people on the other side of the planet is a real Christian or not. Some people's idea of what a real Christian is are a little screwy as far as I'm concerned but they can believe any dang thing they want. However, on the actual deed of going on the other side of the world and murdering brown people I'm against that, and I don't mind saying my upbringing amongst a group of liberal christians had something to do with that.

I realize it seems convoluted but I won't apologize for what I am and honestly, I try very hard not to judge other people's beliefs. Now what they do is a whole other thing.

[lunatica]

47. Those aren't Christian values

Those are humane and moral values.

Do you really think Jesus invented them and taught them for the first time ever?

If you weren't a Christian do you think you'd be much different than you are now?

[mistertrickster]

49. Abraham Lincoln's Christian faith in action:

From the 2nd Inaugural Address--

Both <the North and the South in the Civil War> read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."

With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

******

The United States is not a Christian nation, and that is how it should be. But to argue that none of the leaders we admire ever invoked or drew upon their Christian principles in running the country is simply re-writing history.

[trotsky]

51. George W. Bush's Christian faith in action:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1007-03.htm

To ignore that the leaders we don't admire all that much ALSO drew upon their Christian principles in running the country is simply re-writing history.

[mistertrickster]

53. True. But I didn't "ignore" it.

I think every person acts on the basis of their ethical system, or pretends to.

If it's grounded in Christianity, then it will be Christian. But in the Father's house are many mansions, and Christianity can be used to justify many different and contradictory conclusions.

[cleanhippie]

55. "Christianity can be used to justify many different and contradictory conclusions."

Which makes it pretty much worthless as any kind of standard to live up to.


How about being a good person and doing the right thing because it's the right thing to do? No god or religion is needed to do that.

[mistertrickster]

56. Oh, it's you again.

And you're wrong again.

How about--I won't demean and ridicule you for the group you self-identify with and you do the same for me?

It's called "accepting diversity" which is something I thought we liberals were supposed to believe in.

[cleanhippie]

60. Accepting diversity does not include tolerating intolerance.

As soon as religion stops using its influence to oppress others, we'll talk about "accepting diversity."

[mistertrickster]

61. Some do, some don't.

Yours is the same justification that says burn down the Muslim's house because they attacked us on 911.

I have no problem attacking Christians for what they DO wrong. I do that too.

What you do is attack Christians for what they believe--their essential tenets of faith.

That's just wrong, and it's unjustified against any creed.

Also, it's hypocritical. I don't see you ridiculing the Wiccans for "superstition." (Please note--I would never call what they do "superstition.&quot

[cleanhippie]

66. I find it curious how you only see whast you want to.

Could be that THAT is where the problem starts.

[mistertrickster]

77. Not an actual rebuttal, is it.

Swing and a miss . . .

[cleanhippie]

78. Just following your lead.

Strike three, you're out.

[mistertrickster]

87. You'd expect something clever-er than that

from a cartoonist.

On the other hand, the cartoons aren't very clever either.

[cleanhippie]

107. Bwahahahaha! Even your Ad Hominem attacks are weak.

WEAK!

And so full of fail.

[mistertrickster]

122. Ad hominem, au contraire

Strictly factual observation.

[cleanhippie]

138. Je le répète, "Weak and full of fail."

[trotsky]

68. If it's grounded in unsugared porridge, will it be Scottish?

You're right, you aren't ignoring it, you're just discarding the examples you don't like.

[Goblinmonger]

84. You mean the same Lincoln that said this?

"The bible is not my book and Christianity is not my religion. I could never give assent to the long complicated statements of Christian dogma."

"My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them."

[mistertrickster]

85. Whoa . . . never saw that before. Link? nt

[Goblinmonger]

89. I had heard them before and just did a quick google search for the actual wording

It was from an atheist site that lists quotations from figures about their non-Christian statements. I could find that site, but it doesn't give the primary source. I could search for the primary source some other time than now (kind of jumping back-and-forth between theis and planning out my month of teaching).

[mistertrickster]

91. Sounds kinda bogus to me.

I've read a couple of bios on Lincoln and I never saw that.

But it's possible . . . I'll try to follow up too.

[Goblinmonger]

92. I'm not putting any money on their authenticity

but I remember reading them in multiple places.

When I feel confident that I am ready to teach this week, I'll do some quick searches (or when I need a longer break).

[MadHound]

57. Sorry, but I disagree with your contention that the US is a Christian nation,

Whether you spell Christian with a large or small C.

The US was founded by people much like us, warts and all. Yes, they were moral men, but moral doesn't equate to Christian, nor Christian equate with moral.

In fact it surprises a lot of people when they find out that several of our founding fathers weren't even Christian, but were Deists instead.

I think you have made the common mistake of conflating the two terms of "moral" and "Christian". One doesn't have to be Christian in order to be moral, but sadly it seems as though that is the prevailing attitude. Perhaps we should work on correcting that.

As far as whether or not this is a moral country, ideally, yes. In practical operation, no. The pages of our history are too soaked with the blood of innocents for us to ever pretend that we are a moral nation. Even now, Obama and the rest of our democratically elected leaders are responsible for countless deaths of innocents in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Nor is this lack of morality confined to foreign affairs. One has but to look at the children dying of starvation and poverty in this land of plenty to realize that we cannot be a moral nation.

Ideally, we should be a moral nation. But the ruling elite have taken those ideals and twisted them to suit their own purposes. The only way to again achieve anything close to that ideal is for the people, the ultimate power in any democracy, to seize back the power from the ruling elite. Until we do that, morality is going to be in short supply.

[mistertrickster]

62. Some of them were deist, some of them were Christian

Washington was a pretty traditional Christian, some of them were atheists (Tom Paine).

It's complicated.

But we can agree that the US is not a Christian country.

[MadHound]

63. More complicated than you think

Paine was actually a Deist, and it is most likely that Washington, Jefferson and Franklin, among others, were as well.

But yes, we can agree, the US is not a Christian nation.

[mistertrickster]

76. You might be right. I know he condemned Christianity brutally.

And unfortuately with some cause.

[grantcart]

96. I would be interested in any citation you have that he was a traditional Christian

Everything I have seen supports the suggestion that he was a Deist.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/washington.htm

He attended two Churches regularly over an extended period of time and both pastors have stated that he never took communion;

that he would not again give cause for the repetition of the reproof; and that, as he had never been a communicant, were he to become one then, it would be imputed to an ostentatious display of religious zeal, arising altogether from his elevated station. Accordingly, he never afterwards came on the morning of sacrament Sunday, though at other times he was a constant attendant in the morning."


"In regard to the subject of your inquiry, truth requires me to say that General Washington never received the communion in the churches of which I am the parochial minister. Mrs. Washington was an habitual communicant. I have been written to by many on that point, and have been obliged to answer them am as I now do you."

"I find no one who ever communed with him."

"On communion Sundays, he left the church with me after the blessing, and returned home, and we sent the carriage back after my grandmother."

There are lots of quotes from pastors of the time like this one;

"I have diligently perused every line that Washington ever gave to the public, and I do not find one expression in which he pledges, himself as a believer in Christianity. I think anyone who will candidly do as I have done, will come to the conclusion that he was a Deist and nothing more."

[mistertrickster]

97. You probably won't find evidence for it on an atheist site.

I heard a historian speaking on NPR.

Will research it and get back to you when I can.

[grantcart]

113. lol no but what does the site reference have to do with anything?

The site is consistent with everything that I have read about Washington over the last 20 years that he demurred on all religious pronouncements, that he confided to his personal friends that he was a skeptic, and that he like most of the leading thinkers of the time (a time where rationalism was in fashion and religious orthodoxy was out of fashion) were deists and even those like Adams and Witherspoon were more "traditional Christians" were strong strong secularists.

Now this is from NPR

http://www.npr.org/2011/02/21/133943644/George-Washington-Separating-Man-From-Myth

Prof. LENGEL: Right. He was a very moral man. He was a very virtuous man, and he watched carefully everything he did. But he certainly doesn't fit into our conception of a Christian evangelical or somebody who read his Bible every day and lived by a particular Christian theology. We can say he was not an atheist on the one hand, but on the other hand, he was not a devout Christian.

. . .

He was not formally anything. He wasn't really a deist. I think if any philosophy influenced Washington more than another, it was stoicism. And it was a sense that he had a path that was laid out for him by providence that, by an act of will, he could either accept or reject. But he did not live by any particular tenets or theology.

I think that Lengel (who ironically wrote Inventing George Washington: America's Founder, in Myth and Memory characterization of Washington as a stoic is not inconsistent with the quotes taken from the 'evil' atheist site.

[Zalatix]

59. I'm a christian, too. However, I would say this in response.

I don't mind standing with any Muslims and Atheists who practice compassion and tolerance.

If (then candidate) Barack Obama was a Muslim who practiced tolerance and compassion, then I would have voted for him.

[Cairycat]

65. I think anyone who uses their beliefs

(or lack thereof) to put others down is in the wrong. Knocking others' beliefs doesn't build up your own.

[BiggJawn]

69. Guess I can't count on your vote, then.

Because I would want to move the government in a secular direction. I would not do anything to 'outlaw" religion, but neither would I do anything to promote it.

The Office of Faith-Based Give-aways? gone. That money would be better spent at the National Science Foundation
The "National Prayer Breakfast"? Go ahead and have it, I'll send my regrets.
The "National Day of Prayer"? Not over my signature. MAYBE a "National Day of Reason".
And I would NEVER say "Gawd bless you,and Gawd bless the YOO-Knighted States!"

[Kablooie]

70. but some Christians think we should I handle snakes and others picket funerals.

You believe your Christianity and they believe theirs.
You say they are wrong they say you are wrong.
Who has the authority to decide which is right and which is wrong?

[mistertrickster]

90. No one has the right to decide for another.

That's why the idea of mutual respect and tolerance was widely accepted in the 1700's.

We call it the Age of Enlightenment.

That we could act a little more enlightened around here would be a very good thing.

[cbayer]

73. Well done, SmileyRose.

I was just having this conversation the other night.

While not true of all churches in all areas, many christian churches basically teach ideals, ethics and standards for living that are totally consistent those of the Democratic party. It continues to dumbfound me when I see people and organizations that call themselves christian, but don't adhere to what I was taught were the basic tenets of christianity.

Whether one considers themselves a christian, another kind of believer or a non-believer, if their perspective is similar to that of Jesus, I don't see how they could really be anything but a Democrat.

I think your piece was thoughtful and beautiful. Thanks for sharing it.

[PassingFair]

103. This country was "not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

Our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were borne of the Enlightenment.

A period of new ideas and the toppling of sacred cows, like the "divine right of kings".

You make the common mistake of equating the word "Christian" with the word "good".

The words are not synonymous.

Religious legislators kept slavery, segregation and miscegenation laws, alive WELL past their expiration dates,
and they CONTINUE to keep women and gay and lesbian people from being full citizens.

[Taverner]

106. This Atheist loves Christians like you

[mistertrickster]

123. Thank you for that message of respect. Back at you, nt.

[Taverner]

139. BTW...I don't think you really want religion in politics

I understand that you consult your ethics and morality when voting, and as a Christian that means looking at it from that perspective - but I think you're just as hell-bent against a theocracy as I am.

[mike_c]

109. I am an atheist, and I have to say that affects my politics, too....

First and foremost, I am convinced that religious belief is delusional at best, and a variety of mental illness at worst. Folks displaying those characteristics are hard to support for leadership positions outside the asylum.

[Humanist_Activist]

111. Oh great, a "left" theocrat is just as bad as a "right" theocrat...

If you want a christian nation so bad(and don't redefine christian into your perspective on good, that's just insulting), found your own theocracy, leave this officially secular nation alone.

[mistertrickster]

124. Wow, there's so much straw in that straw man,

a dropped match and the whole thread would go up in flames.

[Humanist_Activist]

125. Then what was the point of calling it, multiple times, a "Christian Nation"? n/t

[jcboon]

134. Most of the Founding Fathers were at least nominally Christian

but the Constitution owes more to Classical philosophy than to either Christianity or the Enlightenment. Educated people in Colonial times usually had a solid grounding in Plato and Aristotle but the ideas of Rousseau and Locke were relatively new.

[bhikkhu]

135. In one of the few references to religion during the constitutional convention...

as things dragged on during the sultry summer, one suffering "founder" suggested that perhaps they should engage a minister to open the discussions with a prayer for progress and toward a speedy resolution. Another "founder" questioned as to who should be expected to pay such a minister. A third "founder" declared that it was bad idea all around, and that their proceedings had no need for "foreign intervention"; and the matter was not brought up again.

That about sums up the religiosity of the constitutional convention, as detailed in the extensive notes and transcriptions of Madison. Of course, people can believe what they will, and its easiest if you squint your eyes just right when you look at history, or avoid looking altogether and instead concoct an image out of pure imagination.

[Kablooie]

136. Respectfully I don't think it does.

One can be a Christian have positive political views that coincide with your interpretation of religion.
One can be an Atheist and have the exact same political views.

One can be a Christian and have selfish, miserable political views that coincide with THEIR interpretation of the identical religion.
One can be an Atheist and have the same selfish, miserable views.

I believe your views come from YOU and they color your interpretation of religion, not the other way around.