Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 279

• 0%

  Goppy2 months, 4 weeks ago

  See, I just dont get that. I mean, a Religion Based Nation is what we Christian Conservatives want.

  But after readin this extensive story tracin the roots of John McCain ... his life story as it were ... I just dont think hes the one to do it.

  http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2008/06/08/t...

  Reply

  94 Replies

  • 0%

    Locky122 months, 4 weeks ago

    Say what you will...

    But the 9th Amendment to the Constitution means that we should not just assume we have our rights just because they are written in the constitution. Rather our rights come from God. They are divinely given and therefore NOBODY can take them away. Not the state, not congress, not popular vote nor an overzealous court.

    At least John McCain understands that much!

    I'll take that over a Rev. Wright disciple any day!

    Reply

    83 Replies

    • 0%

      mntnman4442 months, 4 weeks ago

      The 9th and 10th amendments also make it clear that citizens have the right to marry who they choose and that people own their body and can put into it and take out of it what they choose.

      Reply

      22 Replies

      • 0%

        Wolfie20072 months, 4 weeks ago

        mintnman

        "The 9th and 10th amendments also make it clear that citizens have the right to marry who they choose and that people own their body and can put into it and take out of it what they choose."

        Oh, really, that is a matter of opinion. The 9th and 10th amendments give all not mentioned in the previous amendments of the Bill of Rights to the people or to the states to regulate. Neither the 9th or 10th amendments endorse anarchy.

        Reply

        7 Replies

        • 0%

          dunkirk2 months, 4 weeks ago

          roflmao, But it establishes a religious basis for the country? Seems neither the 9th or 10th amendments endorse a religion. ALtho I guess if you have to Allah did grant us the rest right or do you think it was Zeus? Since it doesn't define Creator which is the actual word used in the COnstitution.

          Reply

          3 Replies

          • 0%

            Codi69342 months, 4 weeks ago

            There you go again!!

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • 0%

              scott42612 months, 4 weeks ago

              {yawn!}

              Thank you Ronald Reagan!

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • 0%

                dunkirk2 months, 4 weeks ago

                ROFLMAO

                Reply
        • 0%

          mntnman4442 months, 4 weeks ago

          A matter of opinion? LMAO!Beau was kind enough to post it...Since there is no "enumeration" concerning marriage or federal restrictions on marriage in the constitution,the right to marry anyone you choose under state law falls under the 9th.The federal govt has absolutely no right to place restrictions on who a citizen can marry.The constitution is the law of the land ,not the bible.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            Teech2 months, 4 weeks ago

            Guess we know where Crazy John stands on separation of church and state. Pandering for the votes of the religious right worked for Bush with over 96% of Bible thumpers casting votes for Dumbya. It never hurts to let Christians know that there are billions and billions of non-accountable dollars to be passed out to churches for "faith based" help programs....as long as those pulpits preach vote Republican and remember all rights come from Jesus.

            Those millions whose God is NOT some dead guy on a stick are just out of luck.

            So, wave that cross, thump that Bible, and kill a moslem for Christ! There's plenty of money in it for ya'!

            Reply
          • 0%

            ProudBlueTexan2 months, 3 weeks ago

            It's about the Constitution, not the Bible.

            Reply
      • 0%

        truthiness2 months, 4 weeks ago

        Amendment IX

        The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

        [no comment on religion I can see. appears to simply say the govt can not use the bill of rights as a tool to take away non-listed rights.]

        Amendment X

        The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

        [again, nothing about religion, it just says this is the govts jurisdiction and no more]

        Reply

        13 Replies

        • 0%

          truthiness2 months, 4 weeks ago

          Amendment IX

          The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

          Amendment X

          The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            truthiness2 months, 4 weeks ago

            propellered

            Reply
        • 0%

          MisterX2 months, 4 weeks ago

          There used to be a thing called "separation of church and state" also.

          Reply

          6 Replies

          • 0%

            truthiness2 months, 4 weeks ago

            Amendment I

            Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

            [separation of church and state is not actually stated in the Constitution. what it says is that no laws shall be made to affect religion one way or another. the goal was to prevent a state religion. some founders were christian some deist some atheist. they had citizens of all sects from all over the globe. the goal was to prevent any of them being forced to obey the will of another on matters of faith. this does not prevent congressional silent prayer or allowing religious charities to be supported as other charities are. it just prevents the government from telling you what religion should be.]

            Reply

            5 Replies

            • 0%

              Leemck022 months, 4 weeks ago

              Truthiness, what about the concept of intellectual property? The writers of the Constitution did admit several places they used the Bible as a guide. To do so is not establishing religion, rather resourcing. Therefore, Giving credit where it is due, as the presumption is that God is the principle inspiration and author. Americans must admit the document is functional, though twisted beyond recognition at times. The point is it has potential to foster tranquility and stuff when not hijacked by the temporary fanatics that come through history once in a while.

              Reply

              4 Replies

              • 0%

                CaptainLucid2 months, 4 weeks ago

                "The writers of the Constitution did admit several places they used the Bible as a guide."

                Name one.

                Reply

                3 Replies

                • 0%

                  Leemck022 months, 4 weeks ago

                  You called me up on that one, taking a little liberty for the sake of brevity; which I should not have done, knowing the subject is a mine field. Allow me to define my use of the phrase "did admit". Constitutional scholars and political historians, see books like "A Worthy Company: Brief of the Framers of the United States Constitution", "The Origins of American Constitutionalism", and others did find some portion of the founders and framers of the Constitution to be of a religious faith; some were Christian. Tommie Jefferson, defiant, in his Jefferson Bible, wanted to rewrite it. In writings and letters some expressed their thoughts as influenced by the Bible. Post limits prohibit extensive research findings. Religious references were tossed about drafting the Constitution, some tossed out. If one bit of Bible influenced one person who participated or signed, then I say they were guided, influenced, stimulated, etc. and credit is due.

                  Reply
                • 0%

                  Leemck022 months, 4 weeks ago

                  CaptainLucid, I ran out of post, but I do want you to know I am not trying to pass myself off as a Constitutional, history or Theology scholar, that question mark was truly a question. I was seeking a comment to see where others come from; not taking a stance of correctness. I don't know but I can explain why I came up with my question, being uncertain. I do stand by the latter part where I stated, "The point is . . . . I ran out of post there too before I could develop the idea, we need to be more concerned about protecting the Constitution, and religion itself isn't bad. Like John Adams said, "that for the people religion is dear, but for the government it is merely useful".

                  Reply

                  1 Reply

                  • 0%

                    CaptainLucid2 months, 3 weeks ago

                    I have done a good amount of research on the subject. Most of the founders would be best described as deists. While some may have been devout christians the document as a whole takes very little input from the bible. To say they founded the nation as a christian nation would be grossly incorrect. They saw that when religion and politics mix it is to the detriment of both.

                    Reply
        • 0%

          JoseMadre2 months, 4 weeks ago

          "The 9th and 10th amendments also make it clear that citizens have the right to marry who they choose and that people own their body and can put into it and take out of it what they choose."

          Since no state allowed anything other than one man, one woman marriage till this century and since every state outlawed attempted suicide for at least two centuries after ratification of the the Bill of Rights, your statement is proven incorrect.

          Reply

          3 Replies

          • 0%

            earthlingerer2 months, 4 weeks ago

            There have been MANY laws that were unconstitutional until this century. One of those "tyranny of the majority" kind of things that the constitution tried to prevent.

            Reply
          • 0%

            dunkirk2 months, 4 weeks ago

            Well actually NO state defined marriage as a joining of a man and a woman, that seems to be what the fundies want. Im always amazed at how if same sex coules are allowed to marry this will be the end of marriage.

            And as for your second statement, NO he is not proven false in essence he is proven correct since it has only gbeen illegal for 200 years or since the STATES passed laws against it. Please read the X Amendmenet

            Amendment X

            The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

            Seems the states have prohibited it.

            Reply
          • 0%

            decipher2 months, 4 weeks ago

            ""Since no state allowed anything other than one man, one woman marriage till this century""

            now mommy, don't forget the state(s) that allowed the one man many women rule to come into play.

            Reply
    • 0%

      jordan112 months, 4 weeks ago

      Yes Locky, the founders did agree that our rights come from our creator. Who or what that 'creator' is, wasn't their point, which is why they didn't say 'god.' And that's where people get jumbled in the message. Some say that creator is the Christian 'god.' Some say it's Allah, and so on. The point was, we all share the same rights by being human beings, regardless of who or what we believe that 'creator' to be. All of that gets lost in the insistence that christianity is what should rule people. Christianity and its dogma, & its rules, and its patriarchal views. By demanding that christianity rules our nation, the entire concept of "all men are created equal" is trashed.

      Reply

      12 Replies

      • 0%

        antibrainwasher2 months, 4 weeks ago

        Some say there is no God. And lack of evidence for the absurdity of any of the thousands of gods people have invented over the millions of years backs up this rational conclusion.

        To base any political system on a god, is just theocracy, and insanity.

        You want one nation under a god? Move to Iran.

        Reply

        11 Replies

        • 0%

          dissent2 months, 4 weeks ago

          actually human beings have only been around for 80 thousand years. now the dinosaurs were here for about 100 million years, a heckuva lot longer, which stands to reason they had a lot more time to invent a lot more gods

          Reply

          4 Replies

          • 0%

            tkyrchncs2 months, 4 weeks ago

            Our genus Homo (true humans) has been around for about 2.5M years; our species sapiens for at least 250k.

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • 0%

              dissent2 months, 4 weeks ago

              hmmmm.... i picked that little tidbit up from an excellent doco called journey of man. here's what wiki had to say "Anatomically modern humans first appear in the fossil record in Africa about 130,000 years ago, although studies of molecular biology give evidence that the approximate time of divergence from the common ancestor of all modern human populations was 200,000 years ago."

              still, whatever it is it's a drop in the bucket compared to the long reign of the dinosaurs. we tend to think that the earth began for our benefit. my point is that we're new to the neighborhood. the more we learn the more we realize how insignificant we are. late comers to a small rock around an average star on the outer edges of an ordinary galaxy in a seemingly infinite universe. religion is the business of saying the opposite and that everything pivots around us. that was fine when we thought we and the land we stand on was the center of all things. well it isn't and neither are we

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • 0%

                tkyrchncs2 months, 4 weeks ago

                I cannot argue with your conclusion as to the grand scheme, but still believe us and our near relatives (whom we likely exterminated) to be the most remarkable creatures ever to live in this biosphere. And it ends up the same for us as sentient beings whatever we may know: each of us IS the center of his own experiential universe, and we would be even if we were anywhere else in the universe. For most of us that universe is primarily a combination of absorption from, and reaction to, a HUMAN physical, intellectual, and emotional environment.

                "Wherever I go, there I am"

                Reply
          • 0%

            RussianThreats2 months, 4 weeks ago

            Hmmm...I thought dinosaurs were Adam's pets in the Garden of Eden?

            (yuck yuck yuck)

            Reply
        • 0%

          JoseMadre2 months, 4 weeks ago

          "Some say there is no God. And lack of evidence for the absurdity of any of the thousands of gods people have invented over the millions of years backs up this rational conclusion"

          The rational conslusion that an entropic universe simply exists of its own power? hahahahahahahaha Now THAT is ignorant.

          Reply

          3 Replies

          • 0%

            dissent2 months, 4 weeks ago

            ignorance is when what is not known is explained away by the supposed presence of a god which in itself cannot be explained or defined, which just takes us full circle. now THAT is ignorant

            Reply
          • 0%

            dunkirk2 months, 4 weeks ago

            ROFLMAO, yeah but a mythical being snaps his fingers and we appear, yeah that really ties all those ends together.

            Reply
          • 0%

            decipher2 months, 4 weeks ago

            sounds more like faith to me.

            Reply
        • 0%

          JoseMadre2 months, 4 weeks ago

          "Some say there is no God. And lack of evidence for the absurdity of any of the thousands of gods people have invented over the millions of years backs up this rational conclusion"

          The rational conslusion that an entropic universe simply exists of its own power? hahahahahahahaha Now THAT is ignorant.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            CaptainLucid2 months, 4 weeks ago

            Not half as absurd as thinking there is some magical power that listens to your prayers and thinks you are more special than any of the other 6 billion people. Hell there are nowhere near 6 billion people on propeller but we have already figured out your opinion is crap. And you think somehow there is a supreme being? If there is he would neg your dumb ass just like we do when we are not ignoring you.

            Reply
    • 0%

      Beau78902 months, 4 weeks ago

      I don't know where you get your information, Locky.

      Here is the 9th amendment, in its entirety:

      "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

      Here's a link to the entire text of the Constitution:

      http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

      There is NO mention of God or Christianity.

      What the 9th amendment means is that just because the Constitution lists some specific rights does not mean it should be interpreted to deny those not mentioned.

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        bruhaha2 months, 4 weeks ago

        "I don't know where you get your information, Locky."

        He got it from the Christian nationalist constitution....you know the one that is "replete with references to God"

        Reply
      • 0%

        tkyrchncs2 months, 4 weeks ago

        Or more specifically, that it is unconstitutional for the government to restrict rights on the basis of their not having been enumerated.

        Reply
    • 0%

      smithichie2 months, 4 weeks ago

      I see Lockey12 and John McCain aren't "originalists" when it comes to the Constitution, instead they would like to add things that aren't there. Maybe they just haven't ever read it.

      Reply

      9 Replies

      • 0%

        Beau78902 months, 4 weeks ago

        That's why I posted the link. When I quoted the Constitution last week to birddog54, he called it "gibberish."

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          bruhaha2 months, 4 weeks ago

          Seems like there is some other constitution floating around out there that certain politicians and propeller members are reading.

          Reply
      • 0%

        Beau78902 months, 4 weeks ago

        double...

        Reply
      • 0%

        bamababy2 months, 4 weeks ago

        You understand,a continuation of sorts of the Bush/Cheney policies of" because it's what I want TO dO,so I do it..."The republicans or a certain base of them seem to think that they have the right to rewrite constitutional law to fit their own agenda's. Hello, is this not why they need to go far far away? No way we can afford this man in the white house absolute idiocy to even entertain the thought of another bush junkie in command. So called pro lifers, but lets go make war and kill thousands upon thousands of innocents, don't mistreat our soldiers, but god help you if we "catch" you... they want everyone else to play by the written rules while they make their own up as they go along. The American people have said enough already and we are uniting and reclaiming that which is ours. This country,our freedom from criminal activity among our leaders, Revisiting the good old constitution on which this counry was founded

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          obiefrommuskogee2 months, 4 weeks ago

          Using God as a marketing tool to justify "mob" behavior is thoroughly revolting. Now the justification is the "judeo Christian mob. There were no "judeo" beginnings to this country.

          Nothing the neocons do is justified. It is simply selfcenteredness projected on the external world.

          Remember "My God is bigger than your God."

          Or how about Bush telling the media, when asked about the death of american soldiers: " God has a funny way of doing things." As if the decision to go to war was directed by God.

          This is megalomania of the most dangerous form. The reason Bush is called the chimp is because his behavior stems from our chimp legacy. Evidently, the guy is not as evolved as the rest of us, and he caters to the lowest form of behaviors centered in our primitive brain.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            tchef2 months, 4 weeks ago

            He's also called the chimp because many of his facial expressions resemble a chimp.

            http://www.bushorchimp.com/

            Reply
      • 0%

        CaptainLucid2 months, 4 weeks ago

        Originalist is just a right wing code word like "states rights" that means we support discrimination and jesus in government.

        Reply
      • 0%

        Lurch2 months, 4 weeks ago

        Ted Sampley, who fought with US Special Forces in Vietnam and is now a leading campaigner for veterans' rights, said: 'I have been following John McCain's career for nearly 20 years. I know him personally. There is something wrong with this guy and let me tell you what it is â;; deceit.

        'When he came home and saw that Carol was not the beauty he left behind, he started running around on her almost right away. Everybody around him knew it.

        'Eventually he met Cindy and she was young and beautiful and very wealthy. At that point McCain just dumped Carol for something he thought was better.

        'This is a guy who makes such a big deal about his character. He has no character. He is a fake. If there was any character in that first marriage, it all belonged to Carol.'

        One old friend said: 'Carol always insists she is not bitter, but I think that's a defence mechanism.`

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10249...

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          Lurch2 months, 4 weeks ago

          McCain better thank God we are not a Constitutionally Christian country. He would be one of the first to be disqualified for public service.

          Reply
    • 0%

      Blackacereturn2 months, 4 weeks ago

      If there is a hell the so-call Christian Conservatives in this country will all be there with me and bush and this entire bunch!

      They are the most ungodly bunch of people i have ever placed my eyes on.

      Like the constitution the ten commandments means nothing to them.

      The following are the 10 commandments and may god forgive me for posting it in such a place in such a post but maybe just maybe you will remember what god is all about!

      Reply

      18 Replies

      • 0%

        Blackacereturn2 months, 4 weeks ago

        First

        "I am The Lord your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me."

        Second

        "You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I The Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate Me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love Me and keep My Commandments."

        Reply

        17 Replies

        • 0%

          Blackacereturn2 months, 4 weeks ago

          Third

          "You shall not take The Name of The Lord your God in vain; for The Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His Name in vain."

          Fourth

          "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work; but the seventh day is a Sabbath to The Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your manservant, or your maidservant, or your cattle, or the sojourner who is within your gates; for in six days The Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore The Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it."

          Commandments Five to Ten:

          How To Live In Peace With Humanity:

          Fifth

          "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which The Lord your God gives you."

          Sixth

          "You shall not kill."

          Seventh

          "You shall not commit adultery."

          Reply

          16 Replies

          • 0%

            Blackacereturn2 months, 4 weeks ago

            Eighth

            "You shall not steal."

            Ninth

            "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."

            Tenth

            "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor's."

            Reply

            15 Replies

            • 0%

              Blackacereturn2 months, 4 weeks ago

              Pay attention to these two and think of Iraq

              Nine

              "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."

              Tenth

              "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor's."

              'or his OIL

              Reply

              11 Replies

              • 0%

                DeadXXXManXXXTalkin2 months, 4 weeks ago

                where's 'Thou shalt not lie'?

                Reply

                6 Replies

                • 0%

                  scott42612 months, 4 weeks ago

                  Number 9

                  Reply

                  4 Replies

                  • 0%

                    DeadXXXManXXXTalkin2 months, 4 weeks ago

                    That one seems to have a loophole in it by saying 'against your neighbor', unless you wanna say me telling a woman 'that dress looks good on you' effects my neighbor adversely, or that any lie is 'against my neighbor' because the truth serves everyone, and a diminishment of the general truth effects us all adversely. I sincerely always wondered about that one

                    what's with spellcheck underlining 'diminishment'.

                    I hate looking up stuff for no reason

                    Reply

                    3 Replies

                    • 0%

                      cushi2 months, 4 weeks ago

                      May be it's a matter of perception. To me it means that everyone was considered a "neighbor" then, hence, the commandment applied to all. The Israelites were relatives and extended family who lived close together in Egypt's slave quarters. The broader application is to all mankind because throughout the biblical text, we are instructed to love one another as brothers, and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves (equivalent to the secular adage known as the "golden rule").

                      As to the issue of complimenting someone when you don't really believe what you are saying, it is a form of bearing false witness. It should not be done, not only because it is hypocritical, but because when you lie about one thing, however harmless or even "good" it may seem, it becomes easier to lie about many things.

                      But we, in the natural, are deceptive by nature, and we convince ourselves that it's okay to tell a "white" lie to make somebody feel good.

                      Reply

                      2 Replies

                      • 0%

                        DeadXXXManXXXTalkin2 months, 4 weeks ago

                        lies are the grease that keep the gears of existence turning

                        also, the Hebrews of the time were a tribal people and these commandments were most likely seen as applying only to their own people. Hence Joshua, Moses's right hand man, could genocide the people of Canaan and still be considered devout and not a breaker of the Law

                        Joshua was one of the few people in the bible who could approach the 'holy of holies' when God was said to fill the tent of meeting 'with his glory' if I remember right

                        but anyway if a woman asks you if her butt looks big, either lie and say 'no' or say 'hell yes it does, that's why I like it'

                        Reply
                      • 0%

                        Blackacereturn2 months, 4 weeks ago

                        I think it meant what it says. Anyone alive.

                        Reply
                • 0%

                  tkyrchncs2 months, 4 weeks ago

                  None of them says this. Bearing false witness is only one form of lying: the kind that gets others in trouble because you either claim that they did something they did not do, or because you claim they did not do something they did do.

                  Reply
              • 0%

                NoWayMan2 months, 4 weeks ago

                I coveted my neighbor's ox yesterday. what should I do?

                Reply

                3 Replies

                • 0%

                  antibrainwasher2 months, 4 weeks ago

                  move immediately to a red state, where that kinda kink is right as rain.

                  Reply

                  1 Reply

                  • 0%

                    CaptainLucid2 months, 3 weeks ago

                    But if it is not your neighbor's ox but his ass you covet like the commandment mentions come to California. We just made it legal to covet thy neighbors ass.

                    Reply
                • 0%

                  decipher2 months, 4 weeks ago

                  what else has he got?

                  Reply
            • 0%

              blackandwhitekitty2 months, 4 weeks ago

              So let's get this straightened out.

              Is McCain bearing false witness against the founding fathers when he says that their (all too human) creation, the Constitution, is based on Judeo-Christian principles?

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                CaptainLucid2 months, 4 weeks ago

                Yes because he is old enough to have been there when they were writing it so he should know better.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  antibrainwasher2 months, 4 weeks ago

                  That is correct. McCain is now 360 years old given he was 30 at the time he was captured and held prisoner by the Red Coats.

                  Reply
    • 0%

      Lurch2 months, 4 weeks ago

      > At least John McCain understands that much!

      Why do you contradict yourself Locky?

      McCain is all for immunity for the telecoms that stole our rights and helped the Bushies spy on us seven months before 9/11.

      McCain wants the unconstitutional govt to continue, wants to repeal Roe Vs Wade, and wants to continue the fascism imperial expansion that is driving our nation into the toilet.

      McLawsforLays knows God like he knows economics.

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        tkyrchncs2 months, 4 weeks ago

        If you check the contracts you signed for telecom services, most of them allow the company to share information on you upon request (as opposed to being required to have a warrant) by government officials

        Reply
      • 0%

        memestryker2 months, 4 weeks ago

        I am so underwhelmed by our choices for president, because they both have clearly indicated they wish to abridge more rights--they just disagree on which rights to infringe. But I'll be glad to see Bush go.

        Reply
    • 0%

      decipher2 months, 4 weeks ago

      yes, and it's true locky even if your god didn't have any kids.

      Reply
    • 0%

      memestryker2 months, 4 weeks ago

      Our rights are "natural" and not from a patriarchal "God." "Creator" is a more general term, and is aligned with the separation of church and state that Jefferson and others advocated.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        antibrainwasher2 months, 4 weeks ago

        The almighty bacterium creator that all humanity evolved from billions of years ago. That was some bacteria. Turned CO2 into O2, created an atmosphere that gullible humans can inhale and then yell, praise the ammunition, pass the lord!

        Now, excuse me, I have to speak in tongues and handle some snakes.

        Reply
    • 0%

      Leemck022 months, 4 weeks ago

      Locky12, when Reverend Wright runs for President then you have a comparison; where did he come from. In the meantime, McCain is in question, he should stand on his own for what he said. I can sympathize with the position, but his involvement with some of these shaky deals concerns me more than the moral right.

      Reply
    • 0%

      obiefrommuskogee2 months, 4 weeks ago

      Our rights as citizen come from the Constitution, not God.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Leemck022 months, 3 weeks ago

        Obiefrommuskogee, no conflict there, the bible is clear on its purpose. It does not claim to be the essence of any policy, though it does speak of public servants; they screwed up back in Jesus day too. It is about God's love, that opportunity to embrace the eternal promise, or not. The bible does not impose upon people; you choose. It does offer a way and if you choose that way, then God will do as promised. You give unto Caesar, or deciders, what is due to them. The bible is very clear that governance is a totally different issue than God's plan. Pilot found no fault on that count, Jesus as King or ruler; his teaching. People try to transfer; If they can make a case they are of God, then they share his divinity, silly logic by greedy men usually. 'Servant obey your master' and the depiction of Jesus as a white man are common. Then you have those using the logic, God can't be, so I am here to fill the gap, then they do the communo-fascist, LoL, things that are repubganant.

        Reply
    • 0%

      sailr2 months, 4 weeks ago

      yes, but whose God? Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, Visnu? You see, it does not say CHRISTIAN God!

      You dolts. This was all made up after Reagan got in bed with radical right wing evangelicals.

      McCain is just continuing the lies of the right wing Republicans...pandering to the radical bible thumpers!

      DEFEAT MCPAIN IN NOVEMBER!

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        antibrainwasher2 months, 4 weeks ago

        NYT yesterday, june 9, evangelicals don't support McCain. Tony Perkins and Dobson and the anti-abortion creationist sociopaths just ain't feeling the love. A sizeable percent of snake handling creationist inbred red state trailer walmart trash are backing the Irish muslim, O'bama.

        Reply
      • 0%

        Blackacereturn2 months, 4 weeks ago

        These are names that means the same thing: yes, but whose God? Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, Visnu? There is no difference in what the mean. The they all end up in the same place this is why i find it so sily that we fiht over a name, while we serve the same god! McCain is attempting to erode what was good about this country and it's laws. I cant see why something that worked to guide us to one of the strongest nation in the history of man is all of a sudden useless! If it aint broke dont fix it!

        Reply
    • 0%

      djn3nunez32 months, 4 weeks ago

      "Rather our rights come from God."

      Yeah right that's why they started the thing out with

      "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure.... "

      Futhermore why on earth would they put this in (from Article VI):

      "..., shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

      Reply
    • 0%

      ProudBlueTexan2 months, 3 weeks ago

      I'll take the Constitution over the Bible any day.

      That means the Constitution as it was written, not as you re-interpret it.

      (Submitted from a small town in Germany where no one is trying to cram their theology down my throat)

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Leemck022 months, 3 weeks ago

        ProudBlue, some people do get mixed up between spreading the good news and cramming it. Both reads are available when you decide to do so for yourself. You will find the laws of the land and the WORD are vastly positioned apart, though sharing some common topics.

        Reply
  • 0%

    NoWayMan2 months, 4 weeks ago

    "Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together."

    - James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution" in a letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822.

    Reply

    6 Replies

    • 0%

      smithichie2 months, 4 weeks ago

      Madison was absolutely correct. Look at how many varied religions and sects of Christianity have had their start right here in America, everything from Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Scientology to Flying Spaghetti Monsters. Would all these representations of religon been available had we had a state religion? I think not.

      The separation of church and state is a benefit, not a hindrance, to religion.

      Reply

      5 Replies

      • 0%

        doggammit2 months, 4 weeks ago

        Historically, the separation of Christianity into warring factions and fanatical deep enders is no treat either. Were it not for dogma, the world would be a quieter more peaceful place - which is precisely how the founding fathers saw thire world and why they responded with as much empiricism as they could muster in those days. McClown and his Christian conservative zealots need to stand back, stand down and find a new lie to beat to death. This old nugget is well past its shelf life.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          antibrainwasher2 months, 4 weeks ago

          Hey, don't put down heaven yet, Joel Olsteen is banking a million a month selling Haratio Algier protestantism and heaven to stadiums full of the faithfull.

          Reply
      • 0%

        bamababy2 months, 4 weeks ago

        Jus don;t let the priest know if you're going to vote demacrat cause there goes communion for you. Someone forgot to tell the Catholic Church to mind hteir own business when it comes to whom their parishoners care to vote for. No church,will dictate my vote.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          tkyrchncs2 months, 4 weeks ago

          Neither does the Catholic Church. Clerics are forbidden specifically from preaching partisan politics or participating in politics in any manner that would suggest the Church endorses any particular party or candidate. Issues only, and none is a "defining" issue, as our government cannot constitutionally support the entire moral agenda of the Church. Voting is a matter of conscience, and members of both parties are active practicing Catholics.

          Reply
      • 0%