Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

mattyrm wrote:

AustonT wrote:

mattyrm wrote: This thread is positively brimming with wrong, I think I learned more about US history shagging my American missus than some of the Americans in here learned in ten years of school!

The American education system is abysmal most places. There's a book called, "lies my teacher told me," that examines history books used by schools and deconstructs some common misconceptions and oversights.

Seriously though, who was it said all of the founding fathers were Christians?!

Even I know that almost all of them had at one point gobbed off about the whole state Religion thing, Benjamin Franklin, Paine, Adams, Jefferson, James Madison and even big bad George, I am pretty certain, if I could be arsed to google it, would all have been extremely critical at least once or twice of organised Religion at one point or the other. I remember my missus telling me that one of them famously said he absolutely hated going to church and only went to placate the masses, it might even have been George.

Who was the guy who said something like "Lighthouses are more use than Priests" was that Franklin?

yep it was franklin, and "Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."

mattyrm wrote:

AustonT wrote:

mattyrm wrote: This thread is positively brimming with wrong, I think I learned more about US history shagging my American missus than some of the Americans in here learned in ten years of school!

The American education system is abysmal most places. There's a book called, "lies my teacher told me," that examines history books used by schools and deconstructs some common misconceptions and oversights.

Seriously though, who was it said all of the founding fathers were Christians?!

I dunno, did anyone actually say that in the thread or did we jump to that assumption at some point?

AustonT wrote:
I dunno, did anyone actually say that in the thread or did we jump to that assumption at some point?

Aye Austin, this bloke..

40kFSU wrote:Anyone who thinks the Founding Fathers weren't Christian, or didn't set up the country based on those principles, didn't want Christian leaders, simply hasn't read any of their writings.

I havent read all of their writings, but I still know the above is total nonsense.

I mean, what would be an accurate description of them?

Most were Deists right? They certainly didn't believe that everything in the bloody bible was literally true for example. His post just reeks of revisionist bs that Creationist Americans are attempting to spread.

I mean, sure some were devout Christians, but some blatantly weren't right?

Ahh...I read that post but apparently it didn't click.
Religious: yes
Christian: maybe (but mostly: no)



Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:

I mean, what would be an accurate description of them?

Free. (it's a cheesy answer but largely true, before the revolution as well as after distance from England made them free to pursue their religious beliefs)

Most were Deists right? They certainly didn't believe that everything in the bloody bible was literally true for example. His post just reeks of revisionist bs that Creationist Americans are attempting to spread.

I mean, sure some were devout Christians, but some blatantly weren't right?

I dunno if I would say most. There's some obvious ones: Thomas Paine, Franklin (although he could have been happily pagan who knows), Madison, and Hamilton. but Jefferson and (John) Adams were Unitarians. Samuel Adams was a Puritan if memory serves, and a pretty devout and open one at that. Washington was probably an Anglican with a splash of Diesm, etc. They were a pretty eclectic mix of guys, and there's probably no good answer your last line is probably the best description.

AustonT wrote:Why don't you provide a few examples?

Love thy neighbours (unless they art gay evil sinners)?

SilverMK2 wrote:

AustonT wrote:Why don't you provide a few examples?

Love thy neighbours (unless they art gay evil sinners)?

Love your non-gay neighbors, but love them in a non-gay non-sexual way?

d-usa wrote:Love your non-gay neighbors, but love them in a non-gay non-sexual way?

Platonic love for all straight people! But no coveting wives!

SilverMK2 wrote:

AustonT wrote:Why don't you provide a few examples?

Love thy neighbours (unless they art gay evil sinners)?

oh do you mean?
thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself?
It's weird I've never seen parenthetical quotation in the bible. So you couldn't be bothered to find actual examples and this is the weak gak you actually came up with?

AustonT wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:

AustonT wrote:Why don't you provide a few examples?

Love thy neighbours (unless they art gay evil sinners)?

oh do you mean?
thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself?
It's weird I've never seen parenthetical quotation in the bible. So you couldn't be bothered to find actual examples and this is the weak gak you actually came up with?

Even you have to admit there is a big difference between what is in the bible, and what christians actually believe right? Most can't even agree on if the old testament is to be followed or not.

sirlynchmob wrote:

AustonT wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:

AustonT wrote:Why don't you provide a few examples?

Love thy neighbours (unless they art gay evil sinners)?

oh do you mean?
thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself?
It's weird I've never seen parenthetical quotation in the bible. So you couldn't be bothered to find actual examples and this is the weak gak you actually came up with?

Even you have to admit there is a big difference between what is in the bible, and what christians actually believe right? Most can't even agree on if the old testament is to be followed or not.

You must then surely admit that lumping a billion christians into one stereotyped group while posting clearly satirical youtube videos as cover for your beliefs doesn't appear to mark you as a person who has an objective and learned view on Christianity then does it?

AustonT wrote:oh do you mean?
thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself?
It's weird I've never seen parenthetical quotation in the bible. So you couldn't be bothered to find actual examples and this is the weak gak you actually came up with?

Well, I assumed that you would be aware of the two biblical examples I was referring to, since they are reasonably well known. But no, I can't be bothered to google some examples, because they have been posted umpteen million times before and frankly "debating" the same things every week (as referenced by Frazz) is kind of boring.

What's this "even you" nonsense? There's a HUGE difference between what's in the bible and what Christians actually believe; you'd be hard pressed to find Christians who actually have read the bible.

I asked you to provide a few examples for your statement, you didn't even give one less than a bumper sticker. I'm not trying to bag on you, but if you can't give an example then why bother making a statement like, "Christianity is the worst source for morality." If it was the "worst" source for morality you'd think it would be easy to come up with dozens of supporting statements.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverMK2 wrote:

AustonT wrote:oh do you mean?
thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself?
It's weird I've never seen parenthetical quotation in the bible. So you couldn't be bothered to find actual examples and this is the weak gak you actually came up with?

Well, I assumed that you would be aware of the two biblical examples I was referring to, since they are reasonably well known. But no, I can't be bothered to google some examples, because they have been posted umpteen million times before and frankly "debating" the same things every week (as referenced by Frazz) is kind of boring.

Lame and weak.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

AustonT wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:

AustonT wrote:Why don't you provide a few examples?

Love thy neighbours (unless they art gay evil sinners)?

oh do you mean?
thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself?
It's weird I've never seen parenthetical quotation in the bible. So you couldn't be bothered to find actual examples and this is the weak gak you actually came up with?

Even you have to admit there is a big difference between what is in the bible, and what christians actually believe right? Most can't even agree on if the old testament is to be followed or not.

You must then surely admit that lumping a billion christians into one stereotyped group while posting clearly satirical youtube videos as cover for your beliefs doesn't appear to mark you as a person who has an objective and learned view on Christianity then does it?

they lump themselves together so they appear to be a bigger organization than they actually are. there are only 313,544,041 in the US, so how can 3x that many be christian? so if we accept that 81% of the citizens are christians that puts them at 253,970,673. Now if we take those and evenly distribute them between the 40,000 different christian denominations we get 6,350 per denomination. YMMV.

Of course you can't lump them all together, you can't ask 2 christians a simple question on the bible and come up with 1 answer. They cant even agree if the bible is 100% fact or just a book of metaphors. But when addressing any part of them, its easier just to type christians, then list some portion of the 40,000 groups that you know think that way. Christians do it to seem united as one big religion, I do it for convenience.

the youtube video is not cover for my beliefs, it is a accurate portrayal of what christians sound like to me, when they say the us is a christian nation. do you ever hear any christian saying its a Melkite Greek Catholic nation? or a westboro baptist nation?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AustonT wrote:What's this "even you" nonsense? There's a HUGE difference between what's in the bible and what Christians actually believe; you'd be hard pressed to find Christians who actually have read the bible.

I asked you to provide a few examples for your statement, you didn't even give one less than a bumper sticker. I'm not trying to bag on you, but if you can't give an example then why bother making a statement like, "Christianity is the worst source for morality." If it was the "worst" source for morality you'd think it would be easy to come up with dozens of supporting statements.

I could, but that would have really taken us off topic and back to many other topics discussed lately. But I'd agree, very few christians have actually read the bible.

Eh, I had a long response typed out, but lost it due to internet shenanigans. ah well. You type something like "Christianity is the worst basis for morality" (paraphrasing) and then when challenged you say that Christians can't agree on what part of the Bible to follow. When you talk to Christians you think of a satirical cartoon. So I suppose what I'm saying is that I have a hard time thinking you're coming at this from a very unbiased view of Christianity.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:Eh, I had a long response typed out, but lost it due to internet shenanigans. ah well. You type something like "Christianity is the worst basis for morality" (paraphrasing) and then when challenged you say that Christians can't agree on what part of the Bible to follow. When you talk to Christians you think of a satirical cartoon. So I suppose what I'm saying is that I have a hard time thinking you're coming at this from a very unbiased view of Christianity.

everyone is biased, thats what makes us human.
but those are two different points.
1. the bible is a horrible source for morality. Lets go Godwin's law and call it a day Hitler tries to commit genocide on the jews, everyone can agree hitler was immoral. God (if you accept him and the biblical flood as factual) Flooded the entire world reducing the entire human population down to 6ish people, and most species down to 2 that's moral because god did it. How are the two different? god clearly killed an untold magnitude more than even conceivable, but that's ok because he's the god of love? but hey lets everyone play along, judging by your own morals, if your neighbor did and ordered everything in the bible, which parts would you say were immoral?

2. no two christian denominations will ever agree complete on what the bible says. or weather it is even true or metaphor. Now add in good moral christian people like Anders Breivik, and see how quickly other christians quickly label him "not a true christain" and even here on Dakka, the mormons aren't even true christians. But then that begs the question, well which of the 40,000 types of christians are the true christians? Because what if it is the mormons, then you would be in the not a true christian group.

TO THE OP:

They don't. A lot of Christians (not all) are very clear that they want a theocracy.

LoneLictor wrote:TO THE OP:

They don't. A lot of Christians (not all) are very clear that they want a theocracy.

Thanks for being on topic

And yet I assume they're proud of being a good old USA-ian?

Lux_Lucis wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:TO THE OP:

They don't. A lot of Christians (not all) are very clear that they want a theocracy.

Thanks for being on topic

And yet I assume they're proud of being a good old USA-ian?

Yep. And they don't see the contraditition in their position either.

Joey wrote:Because the prevailing politics of a nation have little to do with its constitution in reality, which is as it should be.
The founders of the USA were by-and-large secular, but the modern populace (and by extention the people they elect) are overtly religious.

Well there's the unfortunate truth.

AustonT wrote:Lame and weak.

*Shrugs*

If you really want to continue having an argument where neither party is likely to change their mind, go right ahead, I don't see the point any more and will bow out. Feel free to type something like "moral contradictions in the bible" into google and go and spam the comments sections of any websites that come up telling them they are wrong.

SilverMK2 wrote:

AustonT wrote:Lame and weak.

*Shrugs*

If you really want to continue having an argument where neither party is likely to change their mind, go right ahead, I don't see the point any more and will bow out. Feel free to type something like "moral contradictions in the bible" into google and go and spam the comments sections of any websites that come up telling them they are wrong.

This is why everyone knows atheists have absolutely no morality.

But I'm not interested in having an argument where neither party is likely to change their mind.*

* The above post is not meant to be taken seriously.

We don't need morality since there is no all powerful being judging us every second of the day

Now, if you will excuse me, I'm going to go off and take advantage of being able to do whatever I want

I'm a gay satanic witch who gets Christian virgins pregnant and pressures them into abortions. That's what it means to be an atheist for me at least.

(Yes, I'm obviously joking)

Hey as long as you're not looking for a government handout party on...

AustonT wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:I'm a Catholic who gets Protestant and preferably Evangelical virgins pregnant and pressures them into abortions. That's what Jesus told me it means to be an American Catholic at least.

(Yes, I'm obviously joking)

I fixed this for you so you can still be a politician in America.

AustonT wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:I'm a Catholic who gets Protestant and preferably Evangelical virgins pregnant and pressures them into abortions. That's what Jesus told me it means to be an American Catholic at least.

(Yes, I'm obviously joking)

I fixed this for you so you can still be a politician in America.

I felt like it made sense, does it not?

AustonT wrote:I felt like it made sense, does it not?

I'm not sure if it's a joke, or if someone can actually become a politician with that sort of background.

LoneLictor wrote:TO THE OP:

They don't. A lot of Christians (not all) are very clear that they want a theocracy.

I'm going to pray in church or at home when I damn well please. I don't need my government enforcing my religion.

DoctorZombie wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:TO THE OP:

They don't. A lot of Christians (not all) are very clear that they want a theocracy.

I'm going to pray in church or at home when I damn well please. I don't need my government enforcing my religion.

Exactly. One should carry out his beliefs in a way that he sees fit (Unless of course those actions infringe on the well-being and beliefs of others). No one should be able to dictate otherwise.

Sadly, it would seem that there are quite a few who would see the puritanical regime of the 17th century restored...