Without France, there probably wouldn't have been an America. Most likely wouldn't, actually.
Correct. The problem is that they helped us before the atheists took over in their revolution, sad sack.
Posted on 09/18/2009 9:22:24 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
Without France, there probably wouldn't have been an America. Most likely wouldn't, actually.
Correct. The problem is that they helped us before the atheists took over in their revolution, sad sack.
In all likelihood more peopled died in American abortuaries TODAY than died in the Spanish Inquisition.
“I reject it altogether. That doesn’t make me any less conservative.”
Would I be off-track to spectulate that, while you reject it, you do not despise it as do the goyim God-haters?
Saw O Jerusalem today. Thought it was great.
Oh.
Never mind.
When quoting someone else, you should put the words in quotes and give them credit. Otherwise, it is plagerizing. >>>
grow up already. Nobody is taking credit or writing a book or term paper...
I’m indifferent to it. There are certain aspects of it that I don’t care for but nothing that gets me bent out of shape.
Ah, justice. :)
*********************
She does!
There is nothing atheistic about a scientific theory.
That is the talk of one who has willingly retarded thier intellectual and theological understanding.
Leaving the Episcopalianism of George Washington and James Madison aside for a moment, it was widely thought by Hamilton and the Federalists that Jefferson was a flake. Whether the main problems were sexual, who knows. The "wall of separation" comment in a private letter on disputes between Baptists and Anglicans in Virginia is a private opinion, is not in the U.S. Constitution, and has no force of law, however many secular humanist crackpots invoke this as part of their anti-Christian theology.
"In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible."
If he were a secular humanist opposed to Christianity, this was a funny way to show it.
LOVE your screen name.
Fair enough.
Oh, but didn’t mean to imply that I don’t think it is true.
If the whole bunch of them were secular humanists, or atheists, as so many like to try to claim, they sure had a funny way of showing it.
But the current crop of secular humanists would deny the Christian heritage and beliefs of the Founding Fathers, and the Christian roots of this country. They are up to no good.
The Founding Fathers saw to it that there was no state religion capable of being imposed on the citizens of this country as there was in England at that time with the Church of England. However, recognizing and encouraging Christianity, in no way establishes a religion or establishes a state sponsored religion, or gives one denomination precedence over another.
That’s either a misconception, by the ignorant who have been lied to, or a lie, perpetrated by the atheists of our day to remove any trace of Christianity from our government.
Denying the Christianity or Christian influence that was intricately tied to the foundation of this country, will ultimately destroy this country, something the atheists are working in cahoots with groups like the ACLU to accomplish.
People who malign Christianity and call into question the Christianity of the Founding Fathers, just because they find some odd quote and take it out of context, are up to no good. There’s no reason for this except to undermine the foundations this country is built on.
Did some of the Founding Fathers say odd or inconsistent things? Sometimes. But being imperfect human beings as all of us are, that doesn’t automatically invalidate their faith, or the government that was built on that faith and those principles.
Why are you so fixated on calling people *retards* or *retarded* when they don’t agree with you and your take on the ToE?
While scientific theories, in and of themselves, contain no morals, they can certainly be used, or misused, but the unscrupulous to advance their causes, as has happened greatly with the ToE.
The problem comes in when the theory is hijacked by special interest groups to push their atheistic, liberal, God hating agenda with not only nary a whimper, but with the full support and blessing of those who otherwise call themselves Christian and conservatives.
Evos can call themselves what they want, but actions speak louder than words and when those evos who call themselves Christians and conservatives align themselves with groups like the ACLU and give their support and approval to their actions, they prove that they are neither conservative, nor likely Christian.
You simply cannot betray everything that conservatives and Christians stand for and adhere to and expect to convince anyone else that you are yet either of those.
Thank you. :)
Don't presume to try to tell me that I cannot be a Christian and accept the theory of evolution.
Piety and devotion to our Lord Jesus the Christ is not based on a sliding scale with how wacky your cosmology is and how much you hate science and ascribe atheist belief to the mainstream position of Christian thought.
You're outta there!
Yeah, a guy who published a version of the New Testament so people could learn Christ’s “pure principles”, a guy who attended church in the Capitol and gave money to Christian missionaries out of the U.S. Treasury...nope, no connection to Judeo-Christian tradition there...
I said they contain no morals, not that they were not atheistic. The ToE allows no room for God by the demand for the assumptions by the evos that it be mechanistic and materialistic.
Don't presume to try to tell me that I cannot be a Christian and accept the theory of evolution.
I never said that Christians can't accept the ToE. They can be wrong about that just like Christians can be wrong about other things.
Piety and devotion to our Lord Jesus the Christ is not based on a sliding scale with how wacky your cosmology is and how much you hate science and ascribe atheist belief to the mainstream position of Christian thought.
Nor is one's piety and devotion to Christ based on some wacky scale of how closely one's views conform to *mainstream Christian thought*, especially when mainstream Christian thought these days denies things like the Bible being the inspired work of God, the virgin birth, the Bible even being factual, but rather just allegory, supports abortion and homosexual marriage.
Mainstream Christian thought is pretty liberal and is not representative of the Biblical position on most issues.
A Christian's views should be in conformity to those of Jesus, not popular church opinion.
Piety and devotion to Christ certainly doesn't leave much room for the vitriol and hatred towards other Christians who disagree with them that some on both sides of the debate have shown. It also does not leave much room to excuse misrepresenting others and lying about them by calling them science haters and calling them retards (or cretards). I can just see Jesus calling someone who disagrees with him a *retard* using a description of some unfortunate people in our world as a pejorative, with the scorn and contempt that evos use towards creationists, especially when they mock them for actually holding to the integrity of Scripture.
The question remains. Not. "And as for the term *cretarded*, are you really the 10 year old that you talk like? "
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.