Posted on 08/01/2006 12:42:58 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Evolutionist FReepers constantly bawl and squall about creationists harming the conservative movement. But what is the conservative movement about if not G-d?
Obviously these people are Randian money-worshippers. They can go fight with Al Sharpton about taxes as far as I'm concerned.
"I'm curious; you make such a clear case for the deity yearning in all human societies yet you claim to be absolutely certain there is no God represented in any of these societies?"
Human beings have intelligence and are able to wonder about things. They wonder now, and have wondered ever since there were human beings.
They wonder about their own existence, the existence of the earth, the existence of lights in the sky. They wonder about what happens when they die, since humans are aware of the fact they they die.
There are other basic questions humans wonder about. None of them had any answers until fairly recently in human history. Human beings don't like questions without answers.
Some sort of deity or deities is the answer that is easiest to come to if there is no path to understanding the real answers.
Deities are also useful in other ways in human society. That's why virtually every society and culture on this planet has a deity or deities. Sometimes there's just one; other times there are many...one for each need.
It is that very act of creating deities to answer questions and fill needs that led me to atheism. I find deities extremely useful, but recognize that man creates them, rather than the other way around.
That is what I believe. Your beliefs may differ.
When in the course of this nation did that change? Because that used to be the oath taken and a real Bible of OT and NT was placed under the left hand while raising the right hand ... I did this ritual many years ago in a court just as I have described it. What influenced the change to no longer use the Bible or require the fealty? And without the fealty then you ahve a self-fulfilling loop where only threat of being discovered in the here and now prevents lying to achieve whatever goal one has. Do you see the difference in what is at work in the human value system when that fealty to your Cretaor is removed for the purpose of 'separation of church and state'?
I sincerely appreciate the lesson in radio astronomy. Thanks for helping me understand the situation better.
"When in the course of this nation did that change?"
Actually, if you'll look at the oaths of office in the Constitution, you will find that they contain nothing about Bibles or deities. One may swear or affirm any oath of office in the U.S.A.
In the courts, the change took place in various places at various times.
Think about it. Only Christians could swear an oath on the entire Bible. Even some Christians don't swear any oaths at all.
Hindus, for example couldn't swear an oath on a single diety, and atheists and agnostics would be telling a lie if they swore an oath to a deity.
You are not required to use a bible or add the words "so help me God" in any court. If you think about it, you'll understand why. In most jurisdictions, no Bible is even offered. Even if it is, you may simply say to the Bailiff, "I will affirm my oath."
Same is true in the military. You needn't invoke the name of any deity in your oath when you join the military.
Not everyone in this wonderful country is a Christian, so the oaths you remember do not apply to everyone. Think about it.
Well and truly stated. It would be an interesting study to see what past members of the military who are Freepers remeber reagrding the oath they took when taken into the military ... weren't the oaths then sworn as an allegiance to the country and the flag? Has the ACLU managed to remove even fealty to the nation?
I'd say it started with the pre-Christian Greeks.
I think the unique nature of Christianity just might explain why TheGunny is confident that he does have the only truth.
Once again, do you not believe that every practioner of a religion believes that their religion is unique?
"It would be an interesting study to see what past members of the military who are Freepers remeber reagrding the oath they took when taken into the military "
I took my military oath when I joined the USAF in 1965. In it, I swore to obey orders and uphold the Constitution of the United States. We were told that we could either use the word "swear" or "affirm" in the oath and that the words, "so help me God" were optional. Then we were sworn in.
The military oaths are modeled after the oaths of office specified in the Constitution. The Constitution says "swear or affirm" and makes no mention of any "so help me God" phrase.
Since American citizens come in all faiths, and some in no faith at all, all oaths required of American citizens must be of a form that all American citizens can say in good faith.
Here are the oaths for enlisted service personnel. Note that the oath for National Guard personnel is slightly different.
As far as I know, this has been the form of the oath for a very, very long time. Nothing about the flag in there. Never was.
I think of it like this:
“If you have to ask what jazz is, you'll never know.”
- Louis Armstrong
That's not a good tactic to take with a lot of atheists, saying "If only you give him a chance." A lot of us, like me, were in the church and had our eyes and ears open as you say. Been there, done that, not for me.
The options posed are to "swear or affirm." I affirmed.
I think I need to set a few things straight about Atheists and correct a few misconceptions.
First, there are 'types' of atheist. We appreciate the irony of that (it has a sectarian feel to it), but we also appreciate that its part of human nature. These can be divided into two loose categories:-
1. Agnostics - people that neither believe nor disbelieve in God. Although they would certainly be amenable to new evidence proving the problem either way, they generally believe that the essential nature of a deity can neither be proved nor disproved. These form the majority of atheists.
2. Anti-theists. Atheists who live with the absolute conviction that God doesn't exist. Agnostics (like myself) would argue that this stance is somewhat dogmatic in its own right. Anti-theists are the evangelical wing of atheism and are largely responsible for all the lawsuits concerning religious expression.
My own opinion on the separation of Church and State is simply that it means the government is not allowed to sponsor any one particular religious ideology (a very good thing for anyone familiar with 17th century English history). It does not mean that government should be atheistic. Atheism and secularism are not one and the same. For all the bad press secularism gets, when it comes to a nation of many Christian denominations - all of which have at some point had violent clashes with one or more of the others in the past - secularism is far preferable to the unstable alternative of government embracing a particular Christian creed (or inventing a new one as happened in my own country).
But what is the conservative movement about if not G-d?
Less government. Freedom. The constitution. Sorry if you find those principles unworthy.
BUMP
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.