America's Obsession With Religion

The first ammendment doesn't mention seperation of church and state. Neither does any other document the US was founded on. The first ammendment says, "Congress shall establish no laws with regards to religion, or the free expression thereof." To have a law seperating religion from government would violate the first ammendment.

The intent of the first ammendment was to insure that the government did not establish a state church as was done in England. But, Frsnklin advised that citizens should take care to elect officials that had the influence of the Creator in him.

Seperation was and IS a one way street. Government must not do anything to influence a religion in any way but religion is free to influence government. No matter your opinion, the constitution says exactly that.

By the way, there were NO atheists at the constitutional congress, in fact, they had a clergyman say a prayer before starting everyday.

Read the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson appealed to God several times in its writing.

You are just plain WRONG.

...and I suspect a liar.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId= 56494

Your right about the language, but the spirit clearly implies that it is reciprocal. Second, assuming that listening to a clergyman makes you believe is is just a useless concept.
[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. Jefferson. Replace religion with philosophy. Additionally, the Supreme Court has upheld the suppression of any religious icons, etc that would unduly influence the government.

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Guess Who said that.

Ooh and this too.
"The Christian God can be easily pictured as virtually the same as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, evil and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed, beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of the people who say they serve him. The are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
-- James Madison

"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man"
-- Thomas Jefferson

And to Jimmy Carter. Wow. Just a stunning comeback.
I'm left speechless by your brevity and eloquence.

Next, onto the article. Who says he is a top shrink. Plus, most shrinks don't like being called shrinks. According to him, liberalism is a mental condition due to its irrationality. Obviously, there is no way that a conservative would believe that liberalism makes sense. So it is just a political opinion based on his inability to create a unbiased opinion. And it is just based upon the two current candidates with the Dems. Neither of whom I support or even like. both of them are idiots with no idea of how to run a country. I liked Edwards, but now I support McCain.
What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.
[James Madison, A Memorial and Remonstrance, 1785.]

I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!
[John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson.]

History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose.
[Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813.]

I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite Father, expects or requires no worship or praise from us, but that He is even infinitely above it.
[Benjamin Franklin, from Articles of Belief and Acts of Religion, Nov. 20, 1728.] More quotes. Even one from Franklin More Agnostic than atheist, but good enough for me.
"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."

On a more personal note, do you honestly support not voting for a President based on religious choices? I mean, come on. And again to the article, Invisible Enemies? Such as?

Thoth,
The 1st ammend. as written implies nothing more than what it says. You can not assume reciprocity from the language. And, you listen to a clergyman because you believe, not to gain the belief. Cause and effect...

The critical wording in your quote makes my point...

"[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in .....
..... and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."

The last sentence maintains my capacity, as it maybe, regardless of my belief, disbelief, expression thereof, anywhere, anytime, for any reason. The cout's suppression of my expression as influencial flies in the face of that sentence. The court was and is unconstitutional in those decisions.

Your quotes are unassailable. They are also the words of a deist rather than an agnostic. A bit overzealous to say the least. The three headed remark shows a basic lack of theological understanding as written, but as preached, he's pretty much on spot.

I could argue that the spirit of America, its ability to overcome adversity, the attitude of sticking up for the low man on the pole, etc, all stems from a belief in a being more powerful than man. The few attributes I allow Him in my mind are in harmony with the Bible, but I read the Book in the spirit with which it was written, a handbook on getting along on Earth, not a map to glory. Jesus told Jewish scribes that the measure of a man's life was what he had done for others.

pizza break...............

Whatever man has found to be wrong with God was, actually, man's own shortcomings, or more often, man's evil. Man portends to know and then implement God's plan. Know man knows the will of God, and if he did, he is unable to implement it. It is the perversity man has leant to religion that you take such objection to. You, nor I, have ever had the opportunity to analyze, much less judge our maker.

The psych's report is what it is. The opinion of a qualified medical professional as to the motivation and implementation of actions by people who have a stark opposite outlook on life and the means by which they choose to participate in society. It is sociopathy in its glory. (or rabidity)

Religion has no place in my decisions of whom to vote for, rather it is the dimeanor of the individual and how much he does for others.

In my own post that is...

Time to type a bit more astutely. Hehehe....

Whatever man has found to be wrong with God was, actually, man's own shortcomings, or more often, man's evil.

This is impossible to correctly argue. Not any attempt to insult you, just a fact. In truth, there is no way to argue either way. The founding father's beliefs are in the end irrelevant, and it's impossible to truly argue what they believed.

And in the end, a deist is in the end my preferred convert, just in case we end up with suicidal maniacs who suddenly feel the end in meaningless. Anyway, unless there is anything else you wish to add, its been fun. Though I do have a couple of questions.

Do you really support the idea of Iraq being a religious war?

Should religion be the bases of political choice?
I know that you said that you don't but overall, just asking?

Third, I still don't believe that the shrink is truly objective. I know, not a question but still.

Spelling is completely irrelevant. If it was a true measure of intelligence, the world, especially my generation, should all be laying in a bed being fed by an IV.

Any way, perhaps the best way to answer the question of this topic would be this, Would a atheist really destroy America?

Also, what does Glnwrs mean? Just curious. I assume that you understand mine. Anyway, its been fun. Onward Christian Soldiers, and whatever else the bloody song says.

You asked if think the war in Iraq is a religious war. I think the Islamofascists believe it is, obviously. But to the US, it a war to liberate the Iraqis and depose Sadam. The global war on terror is a war of self preservation for those who believe in the freedom and liberty of mankind.

I think the more religious a person is the better chance that he is an honest, responsible, caring human being. Not always, but for the most part. I believe that a belief in God genders a greater appreciation of all mankind and a willingness to stick up for the downtrodden. So yes, religious belief is a basis for change.

Would an atheist really destroy America? It depends on his belief regarding personal liberties, etc. I don't believe they are any more inclined to destroy America than Baptists, Catholics, or any other religion.

Lastly, glnflwrs is my name, Glenn Flowers, with no vowels.

Be seein' ya'.