TAKING OVER THE CRA/NFRA AND THE CHALCEDON FOUNDATION - ARE WE BEING MANIPULATED?

[tpaine]

I've said what I mean very plainly, numerous times on this tread.. You say you 'get' what I imply? -- Then spit it out, or shut up..

Just when is your constitutional nirvanna going to return to earth, and will there be a theme song? and just what does it have to do with the subject of this thread?

Bizzare line.. ---- Cocktail time Habs?

Of course it's cocktail time..how else do you expect anyone to try to get through what you post?

I expect very little from self-admitted bozos.. Thanks..

[PhiKapMom]

Have you noticed the amount of spin going on when we dare question what is going on?

[LPM1888]

Good idea, I did too.

[CobaltBlue]

Most of the Founders were Christians. That much is true. Some weren't all that devout, some very devout.

But when we speak of the Foundation, we speak about the federal government, as embodied in the United States Constitution.

The US Constitution is NOT a Christian document. It's an amalgam of good ideas, some derived from English common law, some from the English Constitution, some from the ideals of the Enlightenment, some from the Romans and the Greeks, some truly inspired results of plain old brilliance and hard-core "horse-trading." The fact that some (most?) of the Founders were devout Christians no doubt had some influence on their thoughts.

They most assuredly did not agree that religious men should have dominion over the federal government.

[CobaltBlue]

This is all new to me.

[LPM1888]

Get well soon!

[CWOJackson]

Scorched earth conservatives.

[strela]

Thanks. I just lost a little bit of hide, but it could have been a lot more.

[tpaine]

The code upon which our government is based is Judeo-Christian. The U.S. Constitution is the legal construct which reflects that code.
Maybe you haven't read enough of the words of the founding fathers to understand this.
58 -spiff-

---

Spiff.. --- You have read ~some~ of the words of ~some~ of the founders, and willfully misunderstand their intent in forming our constitutional republic.
They did not intend the U.S. Constitution to be a legal construct which reflects only the Judeo-Christian code..

-- They intended to guarantee a ~new~ republican form of government, based on the individual rights to life, liberty, & property of every person, under the supreme rule of our ~new~ constitutional law..

A constitution that only mentioned religion twice. -- No religious test for office, and; --- as per the 1st amendment, religious freedom, -- along with freedom FROM government laws respecting religions 'establishments'..


You are directly urging that such Judeo-Christian establishments [doctrines] be enshrined as our basic code..

-- Get a grip.
132 -tpaine-

---

CobaltBlue wrote:
Most of the Founders were Christians. That much is true. Some weren't all that devout, some very devout.

But when we speak of the Foundation, we speak about the federal government, as embodied in the United States Constitution.
The US Constitution is NOT a Christian document. It's an amalgam of good ideas, some derived from English common law, some from the English Constitution, some from the ideals of the Enlightenment, some from the Romans and the Greeks, some truly inspired results of plain old brilliance and hard-core "horse-trading." The fact that some (most?) of the Founders were devout Christians no doubt had some influence on their thoughts.

They most assuredly did not agree that religious men should have dominion over the federal government.
-cb-

---

I have no argument with your comments.. Did you intend to reply to spiff?

[PhiKapMom]

I had never even heard of CFRA until a little over a week ago when someone posted on a thread about how people needed to leave the CA GOP and go there. I asked who they were and then did some research -- looks like I wasn't the only one to do some reasearch. CP did a lot more than I did and came up with the Chalcedon who I had never heard about.

Not dismissing any of this based on the research I started -- just know a lot more needs to be researched -- something is wrong but that is a hunch and need facts to back up hunches.

[Diva]

Well the Rushdooney followers here in Michigan are not all in political agreement with each other. Another interesting ingredient are the Dominionist Pentecostals.

[LPM1888]

Intellectual liberty (where secularists fit in department): "All sides of the humanistic spectrum are now, in principle, demonic; communists and conservatives, anarchists and socialists, fascists and republicans," explains Rushdoony. "When someone tries to undermine the commitment to Jehovah which is fundamental to the civil order of a godly state--then that person needs to be restrained by the magistrate...those who will not acknowledge Jehovah as the ultimate authority behind the civil law code which the magistrate is enforcing would be punished and repressed," wrote Bahnsen.

On ultimate goals: "So let us be blunt about it," says Gary North. "We must use the doctrine of religious liberty to gain independence for Christian schools until we train up a generation of people who know that there is no religious neutrality, no neutral law, no neutral education, and no neutral civil government. Then they will get busy in constructing a Bible-based social, political and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God."

If these paragraphs don't make their goals clear I don't know what will.

Terrific find!

[habs4ever]

Who is bozo? Diaper rash got you down again? Try more vasoline...

[fightu4it]

"I wouldn't want to live in an America where a Jew, a Hindu, a Buddhist or any one of a hundred different faiths was not welcome at the halls of Government."

To each his own. As for me I'll cast my fait with the Christians and console myself with the memories of a once great country founded on Christian values. It's amazing how many people in this country have bought into this multiculturalism BS.

[LPM1888]

Have you noticed the amount of spin going on when we dare question what is going on?

Absolutely!

[tpaine]

Why don't you go 'chat' with someone else..

[habs4ever]

Give my regards to Nurse Ratchett!

How do you cope being the world's greatest living constitutional scholar in an era where you are as relevant as..the crossbow?

[CobaltBlue]

Did you intend to reply to spiff?

Well, no. Should I?

I mean, I am willing to make an effort to communicate with people who back up their arguments with sources.

When people say "you need to read the Constitution!" and leave it at that, I figure they're probably still using training wheels and coaster brakes.

Still, maybe you know spiff better than I do. If there's a cogent argument to be made that the Constitution is a Christian document, I am interested in seeing the proof.

[rwfromkansas]

not much, though Scripture says God determines rulers. But it has no practical application really.

[CobaltBlue]

I can't think of anything finer than to take over the Republican party and kick the cenbter [sic] pole out of the "big tent"! Hopefully all the clowns (RINOs) will go join the democrap party where they belong.

Errr -- wow!

Talk about violating the 11th Commandment! ("Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.)

My first ever tug on Superman's cape.

Is "kicking the center pole out of the Big Tent" what we're up to here?

My argument is that we need to get Republicans elected to the legislature and the executive branch so they can pass good laws and appoint good judges.

I wonder whether dalereed thinks Dubya is a RINO? How about Nixon? How about Reagan? Inquiring minds want to know.