![]() |
Quote:
I'm only half-joking, though. Religions like Buddhism can instill a moral code that don't carry the threat of divine retribution. For them, life is a wheel of learning leading to Nirvana, instead of two ultimate and totally divergent paths. You eventually reach the top of the ladder, no matter what. On the other hand, you could argue that many lives spent on Earth could outdo a single sentence in Hell. I'll have to ponder that one :) |
Quote:
Following your suggestion, I read some American history and I’m getting a different perspective, that’s not to say you are wrong. The U.S. Constitution explicitly forbade Congress to create or in any way provide for an establishment of religion. During the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, a motion to pray collectively was voted down. Benjamin Franklin noted that there were only two or three besides himself who wanted to open with prayers. Ironically Franklin himself, during his time in England, had been a member of Sir Francis Dashwood's infamous Hell-Fire Club. A supposed Christian a member of this club? I see a direct parallel between him and our current person with the Bohemian Grove. In 1802 Thomas Jefferson made the Founders' concept of the First Amendment even more explicit, writing that its intent was to build "a wall of separation between church and state", adding that "I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature." During the eight years of his Presidency, Jefferson refused to issue a Thanksgiving proclamation. "Nor did the Founding Fathers put "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance or "In God We Trust" on U.S. currency. "Under God" was added to the Pledge by an act of Congress in 1954, during the McCarthy era. "In God We Trust" began appearing on coins in 1864 and became the official motto of the United States only in 1956. [The motto conceived by the Founding Fathers was "E Pluribus Unum" (Out of Many, One). Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of property----excuse me happiness. Yes, the Puritans wanted to escape the King’s grip, but fast forward that and I think the constitution was created with the understanding there would be evolution. The agreement between the founding fathers that owned slaves and those against was the understanding that they needed each other to beat England. The side against slavery understood the constitution would be the very thing that would set them free. My whole point/question/thought was for someone that is making the kinds of decisions the President has to make, I wonder what the effect would be for someone that has no doubt in their mind that an inevitable battle is coming. Would it be “not on my watch”? or Perhaps “It’s my destiny to be the one- he told me so”. In my opinion I’d rather see the President sworn in on a lie detector than a Bible. |
As I watched the GOP YouTube debates the other night I was thinking how much more effective it was to take questions from the general populous. Someone asked a question that made me think of this topic once again. Even though I disagree that the USA was founded on Christian-Judea philosophies, I believe many of the founders were Christian.
The question was “Do you believe every word of the Bible?” Even though the answers differed (Giuliani gave a safer answer) both were of the same essence. My underlying question remains: If a president is a Christian and believes the Bible to be a total reality, they then believe that Armageddon is inevitable. Could this situation cause a self fulfilling prophecy to occur? Would an agnostic approach guide the focus onto the here and now and direct an evolution of the population instead of expecting the end of the world to be approaching, and possibly influencing it to happen? http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m...armageddon.jpg |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:00 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project