The Underlying Reason Why Identity Politics Thrives

[boxcar]

Political Activists Who Aren’t Really Arguing about Politics at All

The more time I spend covering politics, the more I’m convinced that a significant chunk of grassroots political activists aren’t really arguing about politics at all. These folks are actually grappling with personal psychological issues and projecting it onto the world of politics. Every problem they had with a parent is projected onto authority figures. Every religious person who ever scolded them or made them feel guilty becomes the embodiment of organized religion and demonstrates its menace. Because they’ve had a bad experience with a member of a minority group, that experience reveals something sinister about every member of that minority group. The cop who wrote them a ticket instead of giving them a warning demonstrates the danger and corruption of law enforcement, the boss who fired them for shoddy work exemplifies the inherent cruelty of the capitalist system, and every frustrating experience they had with an ex-girlfriend demonstrates some defect in all women.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/political-activists-who-arent-really-arguing-about-politics/

I think this is so spot on, it deserves a spot of its own on Off Topic.

[Greyfox]

The #MeToo movement is loaded with feminists who have "Daddy" problems (Conflict with authority figures).
The anger of these conflicted women makes America a very dangerous place for men in these days.
Unfortunately their outrage towards men seems contagious, like a disease.

[burnsy]

The #MeToo movement is loaded with feminists who have "Daddy" problems (Conflict with authority figures).
The anger of these conflicted women makes America a very dangerous place for men in these days.
Unfortunately their outrage towards men seems contagious, like a disease.


No, the disease is the two party system of govt. Its not freedom, its not individual rights its actually mob rules. The interest groups are all funneled into the system...one side or the other. Then everything becomes generalizations. Your statement and the writing in the original post are all generalizations and not individual facts. There is a problem with organized religion....some of it has been corrupt for centuries. Well before they were raping little kids. It has had its hand on power for centuries. Its one of the reasons this Republic was formed. They didn't just fear the King, they feared the Church. If one is truly a Christian how can they sit there and support what's happening around here? Christ himself would tear most of these churches down like he did before the so called "Spiritual Leaders" nailed him to the cross. That's the part they find so convenient to leave out.


There are people that have been abused by cops, by parents and by men. Not everyone of them is just bitching for no reason.....it happens.
The boot lickers (conservatives) of the world and the liberals see this world as some happy, Kumbaya place, especially our country, when, I don't care how many rules and laws they make....it will never be. The Nationalism is sickening. Then I guess if they show up at church on Sunday and throw a few bucks in the plate....all is forgiven? Total fraud.

This is why I agree with mostly Libertarian foundations. Because all this crap that's going on....we were warned about by the founders of this country. If people actually picked up some of their writings , its all there in black and white. Some of them predicted the "party system" would be a grab for power and no better than serving royalty. They predicted the loss of the individual and the painting of every issue with a broad brush, which is exactly what we are moving towards. Hell, people are no longer accountable for their actions. Somehow even personal responsibility is "political". Yup, we were warned.

Critical thought is not even taught and the "disease" spreads like wild fire. If it were taught people would understand that every cause and affect is an "individual event" not a one size fits all. And that's what both sides deal in...…...generalizations. And as dumb as that is, its portrayed as intelligent debate. Yup, George Orwell 1984 is a coming.

[Buckeye]

Democracy led to both the Russian Revolution and French Revolution.

The Framers knew all about it-- ever before it happened!

Go home and read all about it.

Mob rule solves nothing.

[boxcar]

Democracy led to both the Russian Revolution and French Revolution.

The Framers knew all about it-- ever before it happened!

Go home and read all about it.

Mob rule solves nothing.

Mob rule is what pure democracies are. The U.S. isn't a democracy. It's a constitutional representative republic. It would be more appropriate to characterize the corrupt swamp of the U.S. government as an oligarchy.

[Show Me the Wire]

burnsy,

I agree and respectfully disagree with you. The founders of this country were wise and inspired men. Men who understood human nature, knowing men have as affinity for mob rule under certain sets of circumstances and the foresight to know a two party system would serve other men, who have the ability, to take advantage of human nature to gain power for themselves. A two major party is an effective tool for creating and fostering identity politics, but in itself it is not the disease.

[boxcar]

burnsy,

I agree and respectfully disagree with you. The founders of this country were wise and inspired men. Men who understood human nature, knowing men have as affinity for mob rule under certain sets of circumstances and the foresight to know a two party system would serve other men, who have the ability, to take advantage of human nature to gain power for themselves. A two major party is an effective tool for creating and fostering identity politics, but in itself it is not the disease.

Correct, it is one of those parties capitalizing on the disease and manipulating the diseased people.

[Buckeye]

It would be even more appropriate to admit the Framers were Geniuses!

[Show Me the Wire]

It would be more appropriate to admit the Framers were Geniuses!

Ok:ThmbUp:

[VigorsTheGrey]

The real reason for the persistence of identity politics lay in the “Divide and Rule” playbook of the Globalist Power Structure...and it is happening all over the world, not just in America...hopefully one day partisans of all flavors will wake up and realize that they are being used to facilitate a strategy of deliberate and continuous tension...I would greatly recommend reading this article to its end, that is, if you really want the truth of what is really happening to us all...

https://www.globalresearch.ca/divide-and-conquer-the-globalist-pathway-to-new-world-order-tyranny-from-a-geopolitics-perspective/5483935

“Too many ignorant distressed Americans and Europeans latch onto the old blame the victim game, increasingly resenting and scapegoating darker-skinned outsiders as the mistaken cause of all their perceived problems such as lack of jobs they insist illegals are stealing and paying high taxes to support a welfare state the illegals are allege to be abusing. Obviously this globalist mixing of races and religions is causing mutual distrust, enflaming racial discrimination and open hostilities triggering massive protests and an alarming rise of racially motivated hate crimes across both North America and Europe.”

[boxcar]

It would be even more appropriate to admit the Framers were Geniuses!

I third that motion. :ThmbUp:

However, as noble, well-intentioned and well-reasoned their settled upon form of government was, it must inevitably fail due to the corrupt human nature of man. Can't get spring water from a sewer.

[VigorsTheGrey]

http://www.globalistagenda.org/quotes.htm

"Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property (that's you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency.

Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges.

They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.

This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call "Social Insurance". Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation (USA) to foment this plan against America."

Colonel Edward Mandell House is attributed (but unverified) with giving a very detailed outline of the plans to be implemented to enslave the American people. He stated, in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President 1913 - 1921)

[Buckeye]

I'm an optimist. Nothing of this kind can ever happen in our Country.

Talk about resistance!

[Buckeye]

No, the disease is the two party system of govt. Its not freedom, its not individual rights its actually mob rules. The interest groups are all funneled into the system...one side or the other. Then everything becomes generalizations. Your statement and the writing in the original post are all generalizations and not individual facts. There is a problem with organized religion....some of it has been corrupt for centuries. Well before they were raping little kids. It has had its hand on power for centuries. Its one of the reasons this Republic was formed. They didn't just fear the King, they feared the Church. If one is truly a Christian how can they sit there and support what's happening around here? Christ himself would tear most of these churches down like he did before the so called "Spiritual Leaders" nailed him to the cross. That's the part they find so convenient to leave out.


There are people that have been abused by cops, by parents and by men. Not everyone of them is just bitching for no reason.....it happens.
The boot lickers (conservatives) of the world and the liberals see this world as some happy, Kumbaya place, especially our country, when, I don't care how many rules and laws they make....it will never be. The Nationalism is sickening. Then I guess if they show up at church on Sunday and throw a few bucks in the plate....all is forgiven? Total fraud.

This is why I agree with mostly Libertarian foundations. Because all this crap that's going on....we were warned about by the founders of this country. If people actually picked up some of their writings , its all there in black and white. Some of them predicted the "party system" would be a grab for power and no better than serving royalty. They predicted the loss of the individual and the painting of every issue with a broad brush, which is exactly what we are moving towards. Hell, people are no longer accountable for their actions. Somehow even personal responsibility is "political". Yup, we were warned.

Critical thought is not even taught and the "disease" spreads like wild fire. If it were taught people would understand that every cause and affect is an "individual event" not a one size fits all. And that's what both sides deal in...…...generalizations. And as dumb as that is, its portrayed as intelligent debate. Yup, George Orwell 1984 is a coming.

It's the worst system except for all the others.

[boxcar]

I'm an optimist. Nothing of this kind can ever happen in our Country.

Talk about resistance!

It will happen. The Tower of Babel, Part II has been under construction for centuries. The world will once again unite.

And it will happen because it's been foreordained before the foundation of the world.

[Buckeye]

http://www.globalistagenda.org/quotes.htm

"Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property (that's you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency.

Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges.

They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.

This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call "Social Insurance". Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation (USA) to foment this plan against America."

Colonel Edward Mandell House is attributed (but unverified) with giving a very detailed outline of the plans to be implemented to enslave the American people. He stated, in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President 1913 - 1921)

Wilson was a traitor and dope from of all places Princeton!

I'm beginning to suspect your motives too.

[sammy the sage]

I'm an optimist. Nothing of this kind can ever happen in our Country.

Talk about resistance!

Wrong...we're already halfway there...:eek::puke:

and the people and many politicians are even DEMANDING that we pass laws to go further down THAT dark path...

[chadk66]

Only chance there is of cleaning up the mess in this country is a no party system.

[hcap]

It will happen. The Tower of Babel, Part II has been under construction for centuries. The world will once again unite.

And it will happen because it's been foreordained before the foundation of the world.So the religious threads are dead and you must regurgitate your proclamations out here?

[thaskalos]

I third that motion. :ThmbUp:

However, as noble, well-intentioned and well-reasoned their settled upon form of government was, it must inevitably fail due to the corrupt human nature of man. Can't get spring water from a sewer.

I knew that this would eventually devolve to Religious thread Part III...although it happened sooner than I expected. :rolleyes:

[thaskalos]

As long as "reelection" remains the main preoccupation of today's politicians...there can be no hope for the betterment of the world's political landscape. To paraphrase a brilliant saying..."Politicians are like underwear. They get dirty quickly...and should be changed often".

[boxcar]

So the religious threads are dead and you must regurgitate your proclamations out here?

The only thing really dead around here and is foul smelling is the gray matter between your ears. :coffee:

[boxcar]

I knew that this would eventually devolve to Religious thread Part III...although it happened sooner than I expected. :rolleyes:

You look at everything in the world through the very dark prism of your skepticism. I, on the other hand, look at everything in the world through prism of light known as biblical theism. And the twain shall never meet.

So...it's not a matter of "religion" per se, but a worldview. Your worldview is secular. Mine is theistic viewed through divine revelation. :coffee:

[hcap]

The only thing really dead around here and is foul smelling is the gray matter between your ears. :coffee:I guess now that no one is responding to your sphincter emitted nonsense, on the religion II thread, you must find satisfaction extolling equally absurd points of view out here in the real world.

Sorry for your loss of purpose. It shows.

[thaskalos]

You look at everything in the world through the very dark prism of your skepticism. I, on the other hand, look at everything in the world through prism of light known as biblical theism. And the twain shall never meet.

So...it's not a matter of "religion" per se, but a worldview. Your worldview is secular. Mine is theistic viewed through divine revelation. :coffee:

Yes...but in this thread, you've dressed up your "theistic" views in 'political' garments, and tried to present them as if you were interested in starting a "political" discussion...when the reality is that you are only interested in rehashing your inane religious argument about the "corrupt nature of man". :ThmbDown:

[MargieRose]

The 'corrupt nature of man' is clearly evident in today's politics, most especially on the Demo side, and is a legitimate argument to ponder; at least, from my point of view. I don't see why the two should be separated from thought in contemporary political discussion.

[Greyfox]

The 'corrupt nature of man' is clearly evident in today's politics, most especially on the Demo side, and is a legitimate argument to ponder; at least, from my point of view. I don't see why the two should be separated from thought in contemporary political discussion.

Well said. :ThmbUp:

[Clocker]

when the reality is that you are only interested in rehashing your inane religious argument about the "corrupt nature of man". :ThmbDown:

I agree. The "corrupt nature of man" is a value judgement based on faith. I find it insulting to those who don't happen to share that same faith.

I would suggest that the OP is wrong, and that identity politics is driven by human nature, specifically the herd instinct. Some people have a strong need to belong and to believe in a cause. That instinct varies in intensity from person to person, and identity politics satisfies some who have a high degree of herd instinct. As does organized religion.

[Show Me the Wire]

As long as "reelection" remains the main preoccupation of today's politicians...there can be no hope for the betterment of the world's political landscape. To paraphrase a brilliant saying..."Politicians are like underwear. They get dirty quickly...and should be changed often".

Is it possible for politicians to "get dirty quickly" without the innateness of dirtiness?

[thaskalos]

The 'corrupt nature of man' is clearly evident in today's politics, most especially on the Demo side, and is a legitimate argument to ponder; at least, from my point of view. I don't see why the two should be separated from thought in contemporary political discussion.

Boxcar is clearly implying that "man's corrupt nature" is inherent and shared by all...and it's attributed to the "sins" that man has inherited from birth. This view is strictly of a RELIGIOUS nature, and it cannot pass as a "political theory", IMO...no matter how Boxcar tries to disguise it.

[boxcar]

Yes...but in this thread, you've dressed up your "theistic" views in 'political' garments, and tried to present them as if you were interested in starting a "political" discussion...when the reality is that you are only interested in rehashing your inane religious argument about the "corrupt nature of man". :ThmbDown:

Since I have a theistic worldview, then that by definition would necessarily encompass all in the world, not only including politics but especially politics, since human government is a God-ordained institution -- kinda like marriage is between a man and a woman.

Got it now? :rolleyes: :coffee:

[boxcar]

I agree. The "corrupt nature of man" is a value judgement based on faith. I find it insulting to those who don't happen to share that same faith.

I would suggest that the OP is wrong, and that identity politics is driven by human nature, specifically the herd instinct. Some people have a strong need to belong and to believe in a cause. That instinct varies in intensity from person to person, and identity politics satisfies some who have a high degree of herd instinct. As does organized religion.

Do you have a right to not be insulted by someone's worldview? Do you have some innate right to never be offended by anyone else's views?

I had no idea you identify with snowflakes so well. :coffee:

[thaskalos]

Since I have a theistic worldview, then that by definition would necessarily encompass all in the world, not only including politics but especially politics, since human government is a God-ordained institution -- kinda like marriage is between a man and a woman.

Got it now? :rolleyes: :coffee:

According to you..."human government is a God-ordained institution"...whereas I happen to believe that God is a "man-ordained institution". We are both entitled to our respective opinions...NO?

[Clocker]

Do you have a right to not be insulted by someone's worldview? Do you have some innate right to never be offended by anyone else's views?


Where did I say anything even close to that? Just because I find something to be insulting doesn't mean that I take it personally or get upset by it. I just consider the source and ignore it.

[boxcar]

Where did I say anything even close to that? Just because I find something to be insulting doesn't mean that I take it personally or get upset by it. I just consider the source and ignore it.

I'm delighted to hear that you don't take any "gross indignity" personally. :cool: :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

As long as "reelection" remains the main preoccupation of today's politicians...there can be no hope for the betterment of the world's political landscape. To paraphrase a brilliant saying..."Politicians are like underwear. They get dirty quickly...and should be changed often".

And sometimes they sneak up behind you and get you in a death grip!

[hcap]

Since I have a theistic worldview, then that by definition would necessarily encompass all in the world, not only including politics but especially politics, since human government is a God-ordained institution -- kinda like marriage is between a man and a woman.

Got it now? :rolleyes:You have an irritating tendency to issue proclamations as though your opinions are more than yours.

Some of us take objection to your raging ego pretending your rather pedestrian non-expert speculations are more "righteous" than any one else's. There are good reasons for separation of church and state.

The Calvinistic "utter corruption of man" is not in the constitution
It is not a given in non religious discourse. Mankind has problems obviously, but much of modern socioeconomic policy tries to help man, not perfect man

[Buckeye]

Try naming the first thing Socioeconomics ever did to improve the human condition.

[boxcar]

You have an irritating tendency to issue proclamations as though your opinions are more than yours.

Some of us take objection to your raging ego pretending your rather pedestrian non-expert speculations are more "righteous" than any one else's. There are good reasons for separation of church and state.

The Calvinistic "utter corruption of man" is not in the constitution
It is not a given in non religious discourse. Mankind has problems obviously, but much of modern socioeconomic policy tries to help man, not perfect man

Object away. Hey...even feel free to get offended if you like. Whatever floats your lily white bar of Ivory in your make believe world. :rolleyes:

The biblical doctrine of the "utter corruption of man", while not explicitly expressed in the Constitution, nevertheless is logically inferred throughout the Constitution, since, as your anointed one himself once upon a time lamented, the Constitution is a legal document of negative rights; for the framers of it understood all too well that government could not and should not be TRUSTED with very much power. (The operative term here is "trusted".) This is why virtually all the limitations of power are placed upon government, and why power is shared equally among the three branches of government.

Trust...Hmm...have we ever discussed the universal Law of Distrust, which is an airtight affirmation of the "utter corruption of man"? :coffee:

Night, night...

[hcap]

Try naming the first thing Socioeconomics ever did to improve the human condition.Helped Man to advance away from literally one dog eating another dog. It's called civilization.

Of course if you favor dog meat, eat up

[hcap]

Object away. Hey...even feel free to get offended if you like. Whatever floats your lily white bar of Ivory in your make believe world. I suspect your literal adherence to make believe doctrines like your "universal Law of Distrust", and the "utter corruption of man" interferes with the biochemical interactions of your few reaming synapses working together.

There are no such things, nor is the constitution based on any of it. If so, prove it.

Some bad people and their bad actions do not demonstrate a "universality"

[boxcar]

I suspect your literal adherence to make believe doctrines like your "universal Law of Distrust", and the "utter corruption of man" interferes with the biochemical interactions of your few reaming synapses working together.

There are no such things, nor is the constitution based on any of it. If so, prove it.

Some bad people and their bad actions do not demonstrate a "universality"

Did you say "some bad people and their bad actions"? :lol::lol::lol:

You really need to get out more.

The Law of Distrust is as plain as the nose on your face, but you'd rather bite off your nose to spite your face. I have given numerous everyday, common examples of how the law is applied by every single one us. Here's another one, Humpty, that you can add to the list and that I personally experienced very recently.

A few days ago, I deposited 8K into one of MY bank accounts. But before the bank could process the deposit, they required my driver's license -- even though I provided them with the account number on the deposit slip and my ATM card. Of course, the bank, acting as an agent for the IRS (another reason to hate the income system), apparently didn't TRUST me. Perhaps they had in mind to file a SARs report with the IRS. :rolleyes:

Anyhow...the point is (because I know you will want to miss it) is that this little incident neatly demonstrates the Law in action. After all...the Law states: All people unknown to others are presumed by others to be untrustworthy until they can prove otherwise.

As far as this Law and the Constitution is concerned, the framers clearly did not have a lot of trust for government. Bone up on American history, why the British colonialists migrated here to this country, etc. Even your low wattage anointed one, who is hardly the brightest bulb in the factory, clearly understood that the founding fathers' sole purpose in establishing the nation's government was to limit its power because government was not to be trusted. This is precisely why they established three co-equal branches, so that each branch would be a check on the other two.

Also, this is why the electoral college was firmly established, especially when the 12 Amendment was ratified. The central idea behind the electoral college was to AVOID investing all power in one body of people, thereby circumventing a pure democracy. The genius behind the electoral college was to dencentralize power -- divide the power among the people of each sovereign state, thereby effectively avoiding mob rule, which is what a pure democracy is.

So, yes, the U.S. Constitution actually reflects the universal principle of Distrust. This is why we're not a monarchy, not a totalitarian state or a pure democracy.

Live it, love it and learn it. :coffee:

[hcap]

Did you say "some bad people and their bad actions"? :lol::lol::lol:

You really need to get out more.

The Law of Distrust is as plain as the nose on your face, but you'd rather bite off your nose to spite your face. I have given numerous everyday, common examples of how the law is applied by every single one us. Here's another one, Humpty, that you can add to the list and that I personally experienced very recently.

A few days ago, I deposited 8K into one of MY bank accounts. But before the bank could process the deposit, they required my driver's license -- even though I provided them with the account number on the deposit slip and my ATM card. Of course, the bank, acting as an agent for the IRS (another reason to hate the income system), apparently didn't TRUST me.
Locks are to discourage thief's. By themselves mechanical devices and identifying serial numbers have no means of discrimination between crooks and non crooks.

Or proves only the bank distrust wild-eyed self important blathering evangelicals like you.

[MargieRose]

Boxcar is clearly implying that "man's corrupt nature" is inherent and shared by all...and it's attributed to the "sins" that man has inherited from birth. This view is strictly of a RELIGIOUS nature, and it cannot pass as a "political theory", IMO...no matter how Boxcar tries to disguise it.
I understand the religious connotation of Boxcar’s theory; however, one can not ignore nor deny that for the majority God resides in all aspects of life including governmental and political philosophy. Our forefathers thought so, too: “In God we trust;” “...one nation under God;” etc.

Although I do not believe in the literal existence of Adam and Eve, I do believe that the story was created to explain man’s first cognitive realization of sin (the nature of corruption, if you will), and that the concept of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ evolved, as did man.

Personally, today, to her detriment, I believe Eve would be a hardcore liberal.

Some food for thought, IMO:

(https://lifehopeandtruth.com/life/what-is-the-meaning-of-life/what-is-human-nature/)What Is Human Nature? (https://lifehopeandtruth.com/life/what-is-the-meaning-of-life/what-is-human-nature/)

So while all of us as human beings have a mind capable of analytical thought and reason, we don’t all behave and respond in the same way. The vast majority of us (https://lifehopeandtruth.com/bible/blog/a-wicked-and-evil-humanity) continue to yield unknowingly to the constant bombardment from Satan that manifests itself in selfishness and evil desires far too often.

[MargieRose]

Locks are to discourage thief's. By themselves mechanical devices and identifying serial numbers have no means of discrimination between crooks and non crooks.

Or proves only the bank distrust wild-eyed self important blathering evangelicals like you.
It's high time that you start showing respect toward people who have beliefs and points of view that differ from yours. And, thank GOD that most do have different beliefs than what you incessantly, arrogantly spew!

[Suff]

however, one can not ignore nor deny that for the majority God resides in all aspects of life including governmental and political philosophy. Our forefathers thought so, too: “In God we trust;” “...one nation under God;” etc.

[/URL]

E pluribus unum was the motto of the Founders. One Out Of Many.

In God we trust was adopted in 1955.

[hcap]

It's high time that you start showing respect toward people who have beliefs and points of view that differ from yours. And, thank GOD that most do have different beliefs than what you incessantly, arrogantly spew!Disagreeing with biblicas literalness and fundamentalism is not disrespecting religion.

You said you don't take Adam and Eve literally didn't you

Although I do not believe in the literal existence of Adam and Eve, I do believe that the story was created to explain man’s first cognitive realization of sin (the nature of corruption, if you will), and that the concept of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ evolved, as did man.
Btw, nor do I believe literally in sin.

[Tom]

It's high time that you start showing respect toward people who have beliefs and points of view that differ from yours. And, thank GOD that most do have different beliefs than what you incessantly, arrogantly spew!

One cannot respect others when one has no respect for one's self.

[ReplayRandall]

E pluribus unum was the motto of the Founders. One Out Of Many.

In God we trust was adopted in 1955.


Actually, In God We Trust first appeared when Congress passed the Act of April 22, 1864 during the Civil War. This legislation changed the composition of the one-cent coin and authorized the minting of the two-cent coin. The Mint Director was directed to develop the designs for these coins for final approval of the Secretary. IN GOD WE TRUST first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin.

[boxcar]

Locks are to discourage thief's. By themselves mechanical devices and identifying serial numbers have no means of discrimination between crooks and non crooks.

Or proves only the bank distrust wild-eyed self important blathering evangelicals like you.

"By themselves"? Did locks invent themselves? :rolleyes:

As usual, you bring nothing to this discussion for the simple reason you cannot refute the Law of Distrust since this universal principle pervades all societies in all nations.

And by the way, if you think for a moment that you can open up a bank account without proving who you are, what would that make you?

Or go to doctor or dentist for the first time without I.D. and see how far that gets you?

Or try to get a business license without I.D.

Or try to get a marriage license without I.D.

Or when the IRS requires that your furnish proof of something, try telling them the burden of proof lies with them.

The Law of Distrust utterly destroys the stupid, feel good, self-aggrandizing theory that says that all men are basically good because if the world truly believed that we wouldn't have to put locks on our valuables, or have to prove who we are, or have to have passwords, or have to have background checks, or require proof of any our professional or scholastic credentials, or nations have to arm themselves to protect themselves against untrustworthy nations etc., etc., etc. That ignorant theory flies in the face of reality as we all know it.

But go head, bite off your snout to spite your face. Go choke on it, denier of reality!

[MargieRose]

E pluribus unum was the motto of the Founders. One Out Of Many.

In God we trust was adopted in 1955.
I didn't say "Founders."

A 'forefather' is an ancestor; an 'ancestor' is a person from whom one is descended; forebear; progenitor; a 'progenitor' is a person or thing that first indicates a direction, originates something, or serves as a model; predecessor; precursor.

[boxcar]

Disagreeing with biblicas literalness and fundamentalism is not disrespecting religion.

You said you don't take Adam and Eve literally didn't you

Btw, nor do I believe literally in sin.

And because you don't believe in sin, you once again fly in the face all reality as we know it. For the very essence of sin is lawbreaking; and all laws across all spectrum of societies in all nations exist because governing authorities presume everyone is a lawbreaker (and rightfully so, since every one of us at one time or another has broken some law -- no matter how trivial we may think it was at the time). The megabytes of irony is that human laws affirm the biblical doctrine of the universal Law of Sin.

I guess after you have no more nose to chomp on, Mr. Denier of Reality, you could start dining on one of your limbs? :coffee:

[hcap]

Actually, In God We Trust first appeared when Congress passed the Act of April 22, 1864 during the Civil War. This legislation changed the composition of the one-cent coin and authorized the minting of the two-cent coin. The Mint Director was directed to develop the designs for these coins for final approval of the Secretary. IN GOD WE TRUST first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin.The point was the founders were not necessarily all religious literal Christians.

Many were deists Like Jefferson, Washington and Adams....

“Many of the leaders of the French and American revolutions followed this belief system, including John Quincy Adams, Ethan Allen, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Thomas Paine, and George Washington.”

Did they disrespect religion too?

[MargieRose]

Disagreeing with biblicas literalness and fundamentalism is not disrespecting religion.

You said you don't take Adam and Eve literally didn't you

Btw, nor do I believe literally in sin.
I said "respect toward PEOPLE."

Spewing "wild-eyed self important blathering evangelicals like you." is certainly disrespecting the PERSON(s) holding certain beliefs. Your view of religion has nothing to do with it.

[hcap]

And because you don't believe in sin, you once again fly in the face all reality as we know it. For the very essence of sin is lawbreaking; and all laws across all spectrum of societies in all nations exist because governing authorities presume everyone is a lawbreaker (and rightfully so, since every one of us at one time or another has broken some law -- no matter how trivial we may think it was at the time). The megabytes of irony is that human laws affirm the biblical doctrine of the universal Law of Sin.

I guess after you have no more nose to chomp on, Mr. Denier of Reality, you could start dining on one of your limbs? :coffee:You have the perfect opportunity to engage new believers on the dead religious thread.

Your arguments do not belong here.

[MargieRose]

You have the perfect opportunity to engage new believers on the dead religious thread.

Your arguments do not belong here.
Dictators don't belong anywhere here, either.

[hcap]

Dictators don't belong anywhere here, either.????????????

Please explain

[thaskalos]

I said "respect toward PEOPLE."

Spewing "wild-eyed self important blathering evangelicals like you." is certainly disrespecting the PERSON(s) holding certain beliefs. Your view of religion has nothing to do with it.

Hcap's initial reply in this thread was in post #19...to which boxcar responded in post #22. Which reply do you deem to be the more "respectful"? How can boxcar deserve "respect" from the opposing views here...when he has never shown such respect HIMSELF?

[boxcar]

You have the perfect opportunity to engage new believers on the dead religious thread.

Your arguments do not belong here.

You're the one who brought up sin. :rolleyes:

[TJDave]

IN GOD WE TRUST first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin.

Not a coincidence. On his best day, what God is worth.

[Greyfox]

Identity politics thrives because of the human need to belong.
It makes no demands on CHARACTER.
Instead membership is determined by D.N.A. - skin color, gender, sexual preferences enable members to believe that they are part of oppressed victim groups. "Poor me, I'm a victim" types feel empowered by the thought that they have found others who believe that they are oppressed just like them. They never take responsibility for their present lot in life.
It is easier for them to blame straight white males and the rich for their circumstances than accept personal responsibility.
As I said, it makes no demands on CHARACTER.

[MargieRose]

Hcap's initial reply in this thread was in post #19...to which boxcar responded in post #22. Which reply do you deem to be the more "respectful"? How can boxcar deserve "respect" from the opposing views here...when he has never shown such respect HIMSELF?
Sorry, but the use of the word "regurgitate" (by Hcap), an unpleasant visual, would set me off, too.

As to "never" (referring to Boxcar), I strongly disagree. I would be very much more hard-pressed to find a respectful post from Hcap. Maybe we just read things differently.

[barahona44]

It is easier for them to blame straight white malesand the rich for their circumstances than accept personal responsibility.


Two groups that do more than their share of blaming ,bitching and playing the victim card themselves.

[Tom]

Oh please......:rolleyes:

[Tom]

As to "never" (referring to Boxcar), I strongly disagree. I would be very much more hard-pressed to find a respectful post from Hcap. Maybe we just read things differently.

:lol::lol::lol:
A respectful post from hcap - would make as much sense as "Hand me the piano." :lol::lol::lol:

[thaskalos]

Sorry, but the use of the word "regurgitate" (by Hcap), an unpleasant visual, would set me off, too.

As to "never" (referring to Boxcar), I strongly disagree. I would be very much more hard-pressed to find a respectful post from Hcap. Maybe we just read things differently.

Yes...I think it's safe to assume that we read things differently. The "disrespect" between Hcap and boxcar goes both ways...and it may very well be equally justified and well-deserved. But you took notice of Hcap's disrespectful tone, while ignoring boxcar's...and that just ain't fair, IMO.

[Buckeye]

Did you say "some bad people and their bad actions"? :lol::lol::lol:

You really need to get out more.

The Law of Distrust is as plain as the nose on your face, but you'd rather bite off your nose to spite your face. I have given numerous everyday, common examples of how the law is applied by every single one us. Here's another one, Humpty, that you can add to the list and that I personally experienced very recently.

A few days ago, I deposited 8K into one of MY bank accounts. But before the bank could process the deposit, they required my driver's license -- even though I provided them with the account number on the deposit slip and my ATM card. Of course, the bank, acting as an agent for the IRS (another reason to hate the income system), apparently didn't TRUST me. Perhaps they had in mind to file a SARs report with the IRS. :rolleyes:

Anyhow...the point is (because I know you will want to miss it) is that this little incident neatly demonstrates the Law in action. After all...the Law states: All people unknown to others are presumed by others to be untrustworthy until they can prove otherwise.

As far as this Law and the Constitution is concerned, the framers clearly did not have a lot of trust for government. Bone up on American history, why the British colonialists migrated here to this country, etc. Even your low wattage anointed one, who is hardly the brightest bulb in the factory, clearly understood that the founding fathers' sole purpose in establishing the nation's government was to limit its power because government was not to be trusted. This is precisely why they established three co-equal branches, so that each branch would be a check on the other two.

Also, this is why the electoral college was firmly established, especially when the 12 Amendment was ratified. The central idea behind the electoral college was to AVOID investing all power in one body of people, thereby circumventing a pure democracy. The genius behind the electoral college was to dencentralize power -- divide the power among the people of each sovereign state, thereby effectively avoiding mob rule, which is what a pure democracy is.

So, yes, the U.S. Constitution actually reflects the universal principle of Distrust. This is why we're not a monarchy, not a totalitarian state or a pure democracy.

Live it, love it and learn it. :coffee:

Amen Brother. One of the best posts I've read on this Forum.

[Buckeye]

One cannot respect others when one has no respect for one's self.

One step further Tom, one cannot earn respect without first showing respect.

[Buckeye]

All men are not equal, all men are created equal (big difference), "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."

[MargieRose]

Yes...I think it's safe to assume that we read things differently. The "disrespect" between Hcap and boxcar goes both ways...and it may very well be equally justified and well-deserved. But you took notice of Hcap's disrespectful tone, while ignoring boxcar's...and that just ain't fair, IMO.
I've pretty much tried to ignore most of what Hcap posts. By 'ignore' I mean read them/don't respond/just burn and move on...a lost cause, IMO. By 'lost cause' I mean his refusal to take to heart the many criticisms of his demeaning writing style/comments aimed at mostly, but not limited to, posters here. He is capable of offering up reasonable opinions; the rub is when they can't stand alone.

Also, I see most of the so-called "disrespectful" retorts aimed at Hcap as usually counterpunches. In your example, post #22 followed post #19. Counterpunches can certainly escalate, if provoked often enough. It's also why I added my two cents, where normally I would just 'move on.'

In addition, I understand that Boxcar's religious convictions can irritate some who are less so inclined, such as yourself and Hcap. However, in this particular political thread I could see the point that he was trying convey...like I said, the majority could relate to it.

Whatever the impetus was for Boxcar starting this thread, personal slurs against what is thought to be his intentions is uncalled for. To be fair, THAT is where the brakes should have been applied...IMO.

[Buckeye]

To learn and receive respect, first you must show and give respect, that's what I meant to say above.

[hcap]

I said "respect toward PEOPLE."

Spewing "wild-eyed self important blathering evangelicals like you." is certainly disrespecting the PERSON(s) holding certain beliefs. Your view of religion has nothing to do with it.Which is it? Wild eyed or blathering, you think is disrespectful?

blath·er
/ˈblaT͟Hər/
verb

"talk long-windedly without making very much sense."

For example

And because you don't believe in sin, you once again fly in the face all reality as we know it. For the very essence of sin is lawbreaking; and all laws across all spectrum of societies in all nations exist because governing authorities presume everyone is a lawbreaker (and rightfully so, since every one of us at one time or another has broken some law -- no matter how trivial we may think it was at the time). The megabytes of irony is that human laws affirm the biblical doctrine of the universal Law of Sin.
One proclamation after another as he pretends to be god telling us all what reality is

Blathering and very disrespectful to non-"wild-eyed" evangelicals who believe otherwise. In other words the rest of the world's religions, including most Christians.

There have been two main threads here on religion, going back to the early 2000's. Boxcar would be less disrespectful of others to post his religious opinions thereabnd not disguise his religious views as politics.

Many of us have and no longer find his condescending rude and DISRESPECTFUF post to others there, appropriate to polite discourse.

[thaskalos]

I've pretty much tried to ignore most of what Hcap posts. By 'ignore' I mean read them/don't respond/just burn and move on...a lost cause, IMO. By 'lost cause' I mean his refusal to take to heart the many criticisms of his demeaning writing style/comments aimed at mostly, but not limited to, posters here. He is capable of offering up reasonable opinions; the rub is when they can't stand alone.

Also, I see most of the so-called "disrespectful" retorts aimed at Hcap as usually counterpunches. In your example, post #22 followed post #19. Counterpunches can certainly escalate, if provoked often enough. It's also why I added my two cents, where normally I would just 'move on.'

In addition, I understand that Boxcar's religious convictions can irritate some who are less so inclined, such as yourself and Hcap. However, in this particular political thread I could see the point that he was trying convey...like I said, the majority could relate to it.

Whatever the impetus was for Boxcar starting this thread, personal slurs against what is thought to be his intentions is uncalled for. To be fair, THAT is where the brakes should have been applied...IMO.

I disagree. IMO...the "brakes" should have been applied when you called for the "respect" that boxcar's posting style doesn't deserve, IMO. When boxcar starts respecting the conflicting opinions of others...then those conflicting opinions will respect boxcar's point of view. Respect is EARNED...it cannot be demanded.

[boxcar]

Yes...I think it's safe to assume that we read things differently. The "disrespect" between Hcap and boxcar goes both ways...and it may very well be equally justified and well-deserved. But you took notice of Hcap's disrespectful tone, while ignoring boxcar's...and that just ain't fair, IMO.

Well, 'scuse me all to the Lake of Fire -- but when have you ever called out Hcap for disrespecting me!? :bang::bang:

So...before trying to pull any perceived speck out of Margie's eye, methinks you should remove the plank that is very clearly embedded in your own. :coffee:

[hcap]

Sorry, but the use of the word "regurgitate" (by Hcap), an unpleasant visual, would set me off, too.

As to "never" (referring to Boxcar), I strongly disagree. I would be very much more hard-pressed to find a respectful post from Hcap. Maybe we just read things differently.Now regurgitate is disrespectful?

re·gur·gi·tate
/rəˈɡərjəˌtāt/
verb
verb: regurgitate; 3rd person present: regurgitates; past tense: regurgitated; past participle: regurgitated; gerund or present participle: regurgitating

bring (swallowed food) up again to the mouth.
"gulls regurgitate food for the chicks"
synonyms: disgorge, bring up
"a ruminant continually regurgitates food"
repeat (information) without analyzing or comprehending it.
"facts that can then be regurgitated at examinations"
synonyms: repeat, say again, restate, reiterate, recite, parrot
"regurgitating facts"

Hint to "repeat (information) without analyzing or comprehending it" is my rather colorful description.

So what?

[boxcar]

I disagree. IMO...the "brakes" should have been applied when you called for the "respect" that boxcar's posting style doesn't deserve, IMO. When boxcar starts respecting the conflicting opinions of others...then those conflicting opinions will respect boxcar's point of view. Respect is EARNED...it cannot be demanded.

You don't read too swell. I didn't disrespect Hcap's "opinion" in 22, I "disrespected" him. Learn the difference!

[Buckeye]

"When boxcar starts respecting the conflicting opinions of others...then those conflicting opinions will respect boxcar's point of view. Respect is EARNED...it cannot be demanded."

Well now, here we go exposing oneself again, there is no need for agreement.

If I say 2 + 2 = 4, where is the argument against it?

Style is never an issue. It's always a question of right vs. wrong.

Everyone has an opinion so what?

[thaskalos]

Well, 'scuse me all to the Lake of Fire -- but when have you ever called out Hcap for disrespecting me!? :bang::bang:

So...before trying to pull any perceived speck out of Margie's eye, methinks you should remove the plank that is very clearly embedded in your own. :coffee:

As I said...no one should demand respect from anyone...because "respect" is something that should be EARNED. I've never asked you to respect Hcap's opinion...nor have I asked Hcap to respect yours. That's where Margie errs...IMO. There has to be justice for all.

[hcap]

I didn't say "Founders."

A 'forefather' is an ancestor; an 'ancestor' is a person from whom one is descended; forebear; progenitor; a 'progenitor' is a person or thing that first indicates a direction, originates something, or serves as a model; predecessor; precursor.You are the one judging who can and who can not speak their beliefs.

FYI.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/americas-true-history-of-religious-tolerance-61312684/

"From the earliest arrival of Europeans on America’s shores, religion has often been a cudgel, used to discriminate, suppress and even kill the foreign, the “heretic” and the “unbeliever”—including the “heathen” natives already here. Moreover, while it is true that the vast majority of early-generation Americans were Christian, the pitched battles between various Protestant sects and, more explosively, between Protestants and Catholics, present an unavoidable contradiction to the widely held notion that America is a “Christian nation.”

I am not religious in your or boxcar's codified acceptable way. We all have the right to believe as we wish, and not to be dictated to by extremist religious types. I certainly can chose to not believe in sin. You and boxcar are the modern day " cudgels, trying to discriminate, suppress" other beliefs

Very disrespectful

[MargieRose]

As I said...no one should demand respect from anyone...because "respect" is something that should be EARNED. I've never asked you to respect Hcap's opinion...nor have I asked Hcap to respect yours. That's where Margie errs...IMO. There has to be justice for all.
I was never talking about respecting each other's opinions; just each other on a personal level.

Hcap is reading everything I said wrong, too. Jeez!!

A statement like this is just plain disrespectful...on a PERSONAL level:

"...wild-eyed self important blathering evangelicals like you."

[Buckeye]

You can believe anything you want hcap, and you could be wrong at the very same time.

Just because you I or anyone holds an opinion doesn't mean anything.

[hcap]

You can believe anything you want hcap, and you could be wrong at the very same time.

Just because you I or anyone holds an opinion doesn't mean anything.Our right to disagree without being judged by others as wrong and unworthy, sure does.

[thaskalos]

I was never talking about respecting each other's opinions; just each other on a personal level.

Hcap is reading everything I said wrong, too. Jeez!!

A statement like this is just plain disrespectful...on a PERSONAL level:

"...wild-eyed self important blathering evangelicals like you."


No one knows anybody here on a "personal level"; the "disrespect" that we see is aimed at the opposing OPINIONS...and not necessarily at the "person', him/herself. The arguments here sound a lot more personal than they really are, IMO. And..."wild-eyed self important blathering, whatever"...is rather tame compared to other expressions that I've seen during the political discussions here...from BOTH sides. If you are waiting for the conservatives and the liberals to start "respecting" each other here...then the best I can do is to advise you not to hold your breath.

[Buckeye]

Our right to disagree without being judged by others as wrong and unworthy, sure does.

Oh my God, now you're getting Spiritual all of a sudden.

[Buckeye]

If you are waiting for the conservatives and the liberals to start "respecting" each other here...then the best I can do is to advise you not to hold your breath.

Gotta hand it to you there, it's a battle between Good and Evil.

Like I said.

[thaskalos]

You don't read too swell. I didn't disrespect Hcap's "opinion" in 22, I "disrespected" him. Learn the difference!

The only thing that you know about Hcap are his online opinions; you know nothing about "him".

[hcap]

The only thing that you know about Hcap are his online opinions; you know nothing about "him".I told him I had a son. He pestered me continuously how I reconciled "original sin", which I think is nonsense, with educating him. And when I refused to discuss it, he only pestered me more anytime O.S. came up on the religious threads.

That told me tons about him personally.

[thaskalos]

I told him I had a son. He pestered me continuously how I reconciled "original sin", which I think is nonsense, with educating him. And when I refused to discuss it, he only pestered me more anytime O.S. came up on the religious threads.

That told me tons about him personally.

My own experience tells me that the social media often brings out the worst in people...so, I can't presume to know anything substantial about a person unless I interact with him/her OUTSIDE of the social-media landscape.

[Buckeye]

My own experience tells me that the social media often brings out the worst in people...so, I can't presume to know anything about a person unless I interact with him/her OUTSIDE of the social-media landscape.

Very good thaskalos, very good indeed.

[boxcar]

Our right to disagree without being judged by others as wrong and unworthy, sure does.

What judges you in being wrong are all your non-answers, non-rebuttals in your posts that consist for the most part of non sequiturs, straw men, red herrings and equivocations. Because you continually employ these deceptive tactics in your posts, I perceive that you're not a very honest person.

There! I said it. Take it or leave it!

[Buckeye]

What judges you in being wrong are all your non-answers, non-rebuttals in your posts that consist for the most part of non sequiturs, straw men, red herrings and equivocations. Because you continually employ these deceptive tactics in your posts, I perceive that you're not a very honest person.

There! I said it. Take it or leave it!

Wow!

I second that.

[hcap]

There! I said it. Take it or leave it! Fine with me. Btw, has anyone responded yet on the religious thread?

Looks like your effort here on this thread, is just as dead.

[hcap]

My own experience tells me that the social media often brings out the worst in people...so, I can't presume to know anything substantial about a person unless I interact with him/her OUTSIDE of the social-media landscape.Generally I agree with you. If it had been only a few interactions I would hold my assessment.

But after over 15 years of debating him, it is quite clear to me, what and who he is. I witnessed boxcar insulting too many people to think it was only me he put down as his preferred modus operandidi

[woodtoo]

Remember, it didn't start with gas chambers. It started with politicians dividing the people with 'us vs. them.' It started with intolerance and hate speech and when people stopped caring, became desensitized and turned a blind eye.

[TJDave]

Remember, it didn't start with gas chambers. It started with politicians dividing the people with 'us vs. them.' It started with intolerance and hate speech and when people stopped caring, became desensitized and turned a blind eye.

Gas chambers???

The left doesn’t want to send you to extermination camps. They just want to take away your guns and religion then force you to bake cakes for homosexuals.

And use unisex bathrooms!

[Tom]

Remember, it didn't start with gas chambers. It started with politicians dividing the people with 'us vs. them.' It started with intolerance and hate speech and when people stopped caring, became desensitized and turned a blind eye.

It evolved as the people allowed it to.
The lessons from that time period are the most important in history.

[boxcar]

Generally I agree with you. If it had been only a few interactions I would hold my assessment.

But after over 15 years of debating him, it is quite clear to me, what and who he is. I witnessed boxcar insulting too many people to think it was only me he put down as his preferred modus operandidi

Quit flattering yourself already. You have never truly debated me in anything because your gun is always loaded with blanks. :coffee:

[boxcar]

Fine with me. Btw, has anyone responded yet on the religious thread?

Looks like your effort here on this thread, is just as dead.

So, now you think you're a clairvoyant and can read my intentions?

You really need to get over yourself.

[Fred Mertz]

Have you read this one?


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7178/7046604803_126370a036_b.jpg


If not, I suggest you give it a try.

[boxcar]

Have you read this one?


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7178/7046604803_126370a036_b.jpg


If not, I suggest you give it a try.

Good read for people who need to be led to success. :coffee:

[hcap]

Quit flattering yourself already. You have never truly debated me in anything because your gun is always loaded with blanks. :coffee:
http://www.yiddishwit.com/pics/laugh.jpg
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Burls]

No one knows anybody here on a "personal level"; the "disrespect" that we see is aimed at the opposing OPINIONS...and not necessarily at the "person', him/herself. ...
Very insightful, thaskalos. :ThmbUp:

[xtb]

The point was the founders were not necessarily all religious literal Christians.

Many were deists Like Jefferson, Washington and Adams....

“Many of the leaders of the French and American revolutions followed this belief system, including John Quincy Adams, Ethan Allen, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Thomas Paine, and George Washington.”

Did they disrespect religion too?

https://www.wnd.com/2014/04/reclaiming-washingtons-christian-heritage/

There are also dozens of times recorded in Washington's personal diary where he stopped to pray with his troops during the Revolutionary War.

[hcap]

https://www.wnd.com/2014/04/reclaiming-washingtons-christian-heritage/

There are also dozens of times recorded in Washington's personal diary where he stopped to pray with his troops during the Revolutionary War.Hate to tell you this but the sources like Encyclopedia Britannica and other respected historians do not post on WND. Not ever

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/worldnetdaily


WorldNetDaily is an online publication founded and run by Joseph Farah that claims to pursue truth, justice and liberty. But in fact, its pages are devoted to manipulative fear-mongering and outright fabrications designed to further the paranoid, gay-hating, conspiratorial and apocalyptic visions of Farah and his hand-picked contributors from the fringes of the far-right and fundamentalist worlds.


Also

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/WND

[TJDave]

https://www.wnd.com/2014/04/reclaiming-washingtons-christian-heritage/

There are also dozens of times recorded in Washington's personal diary where he stopped to pray with his troops during the Revolutionary War.

OK. So if Washington were a deist, theist or atheist why would that matter?

[boxcar]

OK. So if Washington were a deist, theist or atheist why would that matter?

Because people see and understand the world through the prism of their belief system?

Atheism did not form the backbone to the founding fathers. Just sayin'....

[boxcar]

https://www.wnd.com/2014/04/reclaiming-washingtons-christian-heritage/

There are also dozens of times recorded in Washington's personal diary where he stopped to pray with his troops during the Revolutionary War.

Washington was a pretty inconsistent deist, since deism, strictly speaking, does not hold to the immanentism of God in his creation the way theism does. Prayer, therefore, contradicts deistic tenets. :coffee:

[Buckeye]

Confusion reigns supreme in this thread.

Respect is something earned not given not deserved.

You make your choice and take your chance in horse racing terminology.

Thanks to everyone who participated.

[Buckeye]

[QUOTE=hcap;2385741]Hate to tell you this but the sources like Encyclopedia Britannica and other respected historians do not post on WND.Not ever

The 11th Edition is a Classic.

[hcap]

[QUOTE=hcap;2385741]Hate to tell you this but the sources like Encyclopedia Britannica and other respected historians do not post on WND.Not ever

The 11th Edition is a Classic.WND is a rag.

WorldNetDaily is an online publication founded and run by Joseph Farah that claims to pursue truth, justice and liberty. But in fact, its pages are devoted to manipulative fear-mongering and outright fabrications designed to further the paranoid, gay-hating, conspiratorial and apocalyptic visions of Farah and his hand-picked contributors from the fringes of the far-right and fundamentalist worlds.

Sounds like a big hallucinating Chumpy rag

[woodtoo]

Your Big Orange Coiffed Hero scared you last night I see. :D

[azeri98]

As people get older they are more set in their ways, the chances of changing minds and beliefs is pretty well gone, if a Dem says to a Rep water is wet they would say no its not and vice versa if a rep said that to a Dem it would be the same, no its not.