Posted on 06/30/2024 3:17:32 PM PDT by DeweyCA
The singular difference between the United States and all the nations that had gone before was its open, explicit recognition of natural rights, the idea that all humans are created equal and granted unalienable rights by their Creator. And that, therefore, governments can’t arbitrarily and capriciously take those rights away, as has happened in virtually all monarchical and totalitarian governments throughout history. If that is the “godliness” that so disturbs the MSNBC talking head, so be it.
The founders did not intend for the United States to be an overtly Christian nation, in terms of an official, government sanctioned religion. Nor did they wish it to be a “theocratic state.” That said, they did found the nation on certain Christian moral truths. And they did believe that the law of God should form the basis of good—and legitimate-- human laws.
Make no mistake: those who proclaim their “progressiveness”-- and who disdain “godliness”—are actually regressive…and looking to take those rights away from us.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
John Adams said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
But to a lib, their "church" IS the state.
The Voodoo community is outraged.
MSNBC is Comcast. Comcast hates America. Comcast hates you!
Our laws are already based on Christian values.
Maybe a few months under Sharia law would change his or her viewpoint.
btt
Christian values were central to the abolition of slavery in the United States.
But we can’t expect the highly educated MSNBC elite to know this.
Slight disagreement. Our laws should should be based on Judeo-Christian values.
...I see what you did there
Who cares what anyone on MSNBC thinks.
I’m shocked and offended that she’s shocked and offended.
I’m shocked and offended that she’s shocked and offended.
Separation of church and state means the folks in power can’t lop your head off for not being a certain religion as in not Catholic or Protestant.
Agreed.
In the absence of such, one cannot explain or provide a reasoned response to why an unjustified killing of another should be “illegal,” for example.
In the absence of an external source of limits on man’s behavior, the legality of any behavior becomes debatable.
If it is debateable, it is therefore debateably permissible.
I agree, Dewey. Without Judeo-Christian values, there would be no US Constitution, no liberty, no Western Civilization at all.
Bookmark.
I have a feeling there will be quite a few MSM hosts “shocked” about a lot of things that will be brought to their attention in the next few months.
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.