"First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

[sean miguel]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

in other words, we have nothing against you, why are you doing this to us??

god damn, what a bunch of pussies, but that should've settled it, right???

Yet we went to war them anyways.

liberals are fucking pussies when there's someone to stand up to them.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

from the Treaty of Tripoli, 1797:

"the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

Submitted by president John Adams and ratified unanimously by the U.S. Senate.

Of course the government was not founded on the Christian religion. The framers purposely sought to separate government from every aspect of their personal lives and is why that distinction was made.

Make no mistake, the framers were overwhelmingly Christian and the best way to insure that their freedom to practice their faith was to completely detach government from their faith.

 

[BlkHawk]

Re: A question for liberals in the U.S.

You missed the point.

There's one tyranny that will offend your sensibilities, there's another that will saw your head off with a knife. Pick one.

No you missed the point. the right wingers on this board want to sacrifice the first amendment, the left wingers want to sacrifice the second amendment; both sides want to surrender their freedoms to feel all safe, and fuzzy inside. This unfortunately is how many members of congress also feel; worse both sides regularly piss all over the fourth amendment, and very few people give a damn.

Both sides need to realize we are all willing giving up our freedoms for the sake of safety and convenience. Once we willing choose to give up our freedoms, or the freedoms of our neighbors out of fear, the chance of ever getting any of them back will be damn near impossible.

 

[BlkHawk]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

liberals and conservatives are fucking pussies.

Fixed that for you. The right thing is almost never the same as the easy thing.

 

[sean miguel]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

I want to thank you for that John Adams quote for my edification.

What a fucking pussy.

the more things change the more things stay the same.

there's nothing new under the sun.

 

[sean miguel]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

Putin. nuff said.

Obama is a fuckin pussy.

red line my ass.

 

[sean miguel]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

Trump 2016: he's our version of Putin.

 

[sean miguel]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. "

- Barack Obama addressing the Mullahs of Iran

 

[Johan]

Re: A question for liberals in the U.S.

if given the choice (and you have to pick one), between an islamic caliphate in the u.s. enforcing sharia law from sea to shining sea or a bunch of southern baptists outlawing abortion and gay marriage but otherwise leaving everything else the hell alone, which would you pick?

think about it. one one side you can still smoke dope, drink booze, fuck your partner (male or female) in the ass among a host of other things. On the other side, if you happen profane the prophet's name the penalty is death.

You know just like I do that your souther baptists won't stop after they outlawed abortion and gay marriage. They would pass laws comparable to the laws Putin passed in russia about homosexuality, then they would completely outlaw it. They would outlaw divorce, pre-marital sex, they would ban darwinism from school textbooks, they would make blasphemy towards christianity a crime, they would outlaw atheism and every religion other than christianity, etc.

OK, ISIS would probably do much worse thah that. But ISIS or any other radical muslim group is not targeted by democrat candidates as a group of people that they have to please to get their votes. Last time I checked there wasn't any radical muslim among the democrat candidates. But on the Republican side, you have someone like Mike Huckabee, who's clearly a radical evangelist. On the republican side, you have candidates like Ben Carson who's trying to appeal the the radical evagelists voters...

Trump 2016: he's our version of Putin.

This is great. Republicans keep saying that Obama's a dictator, that hey fear he's gonna stay after 2016 but they admire Putin, the man who's in charge of Russia since 1999. A mlan, when the Constitution forbid him to run for a 3rd term in a row, had his prime minister elected and became Prime Minister, thenn when he could run, ran for a 3rd and then a 4th mandate.
That's like Biden/Obama 2016 !

 

[Jack Davenport]

Re: A question for liberals in the U.S.

You know just like I do that your souther baptists won't stop after they outlawed abortion and gay marriage. They would pass laws comparable to the laws Putin passed in russia about homosexuality, then they would completely outlaw it. They would outlaw divorce, pre-marital sex, they would ban darwinism from school textbooks, they would make blasphemy towards christianity a crime, they would outlaw atheism and every religion other than christianity, etc.

OK, ISIS would probably do much worse thah that. But ISIS or any other radical muslim group is not targeted by democrat candidates as a group of people that they have to please to get their votes. Last time I checked there wasn't any radical muslim among the democrat candidates. But on the Republican side, you have someone like Mike Huckabee, who's clearly a radical evangelist. On the republican side, you have candidates like Ben Carson who's trying to appeal the the radical evagelists voters...

You know oh intelligent sir, that there was a time in this country that all of those religious ideals and constraints could have easily been implemented, laws passed and perhaps even constitutional amendments ratified yet it never happened. That in and of itself proves that the scare tactics by the whackos on the left is complete and utter bullshit. It is liberal totalitarianism that belies the so called freedoms and all that your ilk espouse.

 

[sean miguel]

Re: A question for liberals in the U.S.

This is great. Republicans keep saying that Obama's a dictator, that hey fear he's gonna stay after 2016 but they admire Putin, the man who's in charge of Russia since 1999. A mlan, when the Constitution forbid him to run for a 3rd term in a row, had his prime minister elected and became Prime Minister, thenn when he could run, ran for a 3rd and then a 4th mandate.
That's like Biden/Obama 2016 !

Putin is a villain to be sure but that hasn't stopped Obama from sucking his dick and being a subservient when it comes to Syria. Now if Putin was somehow allied with the tea party then that'd be different, Obama would have all the tools of the IRS at his disposal.

 

[sean miguel]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

I'm convinced that the reason the United States has enjoyed the freedoms it has is because of it's christian roots rather than in spite of it.

If muslims had founded this country do you think our freedoms would be different? Yeah.

If leftists/communists/weknowwhatsbestforyou/assholes founded this country do you think our current freedoms would be curtailed? Of course they would.


Our founders knew the sweet spot.

 

[ApolloBalboa]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

I'm convinced that the reason the United States has enjoyed the freedoms it has is because of it's christian roots rather than in spite of it.

If muslims had founded this country do you think our freedoms would be different? Yeah.

If leftists/communists/weknowwhatsbestforyou/assholes founded this country do you think our current freedoms would be curtailed? Of course they would.


Our founders knew the sweet spot.

If Christian roots established way back when have allowed the citizens of this country to enjoy the freedoms it has, doesn't that also apply to the current freedoms being offered or happening now, legalization of gay marriage being the first one that comes to mind? I don't see the correlation between "freedom" and "Christian" as evidently as you do, and I don't see the fact that all its founders were Christian as being the keystone for all the opportunities we're granted. I might as well say that if all the founders were Jewish, that there would be no national debt, Russia wouldn't have stepped into Ukraine, and the polar ice caps wouldn't be melting. Freedoms aren't a result of religion, nor are they instilled by them; freedom is non-domination, and I don't think anyone can say in good conscience that (any) religion has that as a tenet.

As for leftists/communists/weknowwhatsbestforyou/assholes destroying or curtailing freedom, I think it's fair to say that there's an equal number of those for rightists. It's foolish to hold any one group of people responsible for any societal failings, be they liberal, conservative, Muslim, Greek, Klingon, etc.

Our founders didn't know shit; if they had, everything they wrote as a means of governance would be universally understood and we still wouldn't be arguing over the tense of a sentence or statement over 200 years later.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

They didn't write it as a means of governance. They wrote it as an impedance to governance. They didn't know shit? Only knew enough to create the greatest document known to man. And it was the framers not founders

The fact that the constitution 200 plus years later can still be a blueprint for the limitations of this now massive government and still protects our basic rights is remarkable. And the so called greatest legal minds in the world argue and deliberate sometimes for weeks in decisions just to comply with that antiquated old rag .

 

[Johan]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

I'm convinced that the reason the United States has enjoyed the freedoms it has is because of it's christian roots rather than in spite of it.

If muslims had founded this country do you think our freedoms would be different? Yeah.

If leftists/communists/weknowwhatsbestforyou/assholes founded this country do you think our current freedoms would be curtailed? Of course they would.


Our founders knew the sweet spot.

If atheist had founded this country, would your freedoms be different ? Probably not

 

[ApolloBalboa]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

They didn't write it as a means of governance. They wrote it as an impedance to governance. They didn't know shit? Only knew enough to create the greatest document known to man. And it was the framers not founders

The fact that the constitution 200 plus years later can still be a blueprint for the limitations of this now massive government and still protects our basic rights is remarkable. And the so called greatest legal minds in the world argue and deliberate sometimes for weeks in decisions just to comply with that antiquated old rag .

I'm by no means as familiar with the ins & outs of the law as you are, but while they may have written it as an impedance to external rule, doesn't the Constitution itself, by establishing a federal government with certain powers, provide governance? Isn't the means of limitation of powers also an example of this? You are correct with the framers remark, I misspoke there.

I believe that the Constitution is a marvel for what it is, but not necessarily what it entails, even if I may be the beneficiary those rights myself (and I'm aware of the hypocrisy of this statement, believe me), and I don't believe that it's by any means a hallmark that should be equatable to what others have done or set forth as a pinnacle for other countries to follow. It works well enough for us, but it's by no means infallible, and I can only see deliberations as to what certain stanzas, passages, and articles mean in the present (and future) increase as time goes on.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

The constitution was written with the understanding that government was necessary but it was not a guideline for governance. It's number one focus is for the rights of citizens and that we all had inalienable rights and freedoms granted by God and not man or government. It spelled out congress' authority and enumerated powers. To the framers, government was necessary but the only thing that they mandated government to do was provide for the common defense.The rest consists of defining the limitations of government's reach or granting rights to the citizenry. That is why it is such a magnificent document. It is simple for the citizens to understand and gives the power to the citizens. And it allows for tweaking if the people so choose.

That is why the constitution is not as revered by the left, it impedes government's power over the people, and does not enhance it.

 

[ApolloBalboa]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

The constitution was written with the understanding that government was necessary but it was not a guideline for governance. It's number one focus is for the rights of citizens and that we all had inalienable rights and freedoms granted by God and not man or government. To the framers, government was necessary but the only thing that they mandated government to do was provide for the common defense.The rest consists of defining the limitations of government's reach or granting rights to the citizenry. That is why it is such a magnificent document. It is simple for the citizens to understand and gives the power to the citizens. And it allows for tweaking if the people so choose.

Fair enough, thanks for clearing that up.

 

[georges]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism", says christian ultra-conservative radio host

If atheist had founded this country, would your freedoms be different ? Probably not

You know jackshit about what you are talking, stick with la Seine St Denis, it is more of your knowledge.

- - - Updated - - -

The constitution was written with the understanding that government was necessary but it was not a guideline for governance. It's number one focus is for the rights of citizens and that we all had inalienable rights and freedoms granted by God and not man or government. It spelled out congress' authority and enumerated powers. To the framers, government was necessary but the only thing that they mandated government to do was provide for the common defense.The rest consists of defining the limitations of government's reach or granting rights to the citizenry. That is why it is such a magnificent document. It is simple for the citizens to understand and gives the power to the citizens. And it allows for tweaking if the people so choose.

That is why the constitution is not as revered by the left, it impedes government's power over the people, and does not enhance it.

Absolutely true :yesyes:

 

[ApolloBalboa]

Re: "First Amendment only applies to christianism"

You know jackshit about what you are talking, stick with la Seine St Denis, it is more of your knowledge.

georges, to be fair, you know no more about American politics than Johan, and having visited here a long time ago, nor championing Reagan or forsaking Obama, changes that. You have an outsider's perspective of a process that takes much more understanding than what you may see in your news there, the same view I would have understanding what Hollande does in France or what my Israeli friends are dealing with on a daily basis; issues that aren't played up by pundits both left and right and overexaggerated. I'll say this to Johan too: both your grasps of our government are superficial at best, and while you each are entitled to your opinion, neither of you has the right to pretend that you know more about the workings here then Americans do of Europe.