My post quoting the Treaty of Tripoli was NOT to champion atheism (even though the constitution guarantees anyone the freedom to believe what he wants or to have no belief at all). It was to point out that we did not establish Christianity as the country's religion and that everyone posting on a SHMB should especially fear the attempts by many among the radical religious right to thrust their moral values on us. The potential to the sport we all play or write about will absolutely suffer if that attitude continues.
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
Please read:
Article 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.
Now look at the
Massachusetts’s Constitution written in 1780 (still in effect)
by John Adams: @
http://www.malegislature.gov/laws/constitution. Make sure you read it through to
Chapter VI. Oaths And Subscriptions. And then refer back to the 10th Amendment.
After I posted, I continued reading and studying the Treaty of Tripoli (BTW, that is the only real reason I bother to participate in this mental masturbation in the first place – it prompts me to learn and justify my opinion with more than hot air). It’s been some time since I studied this issue, but what I found is very interesting.
“THE ORIGINAL [Tripoli] TREATY
“The first to be noted is that which contains the original treaty. It is a book in the literal sense. There are fourteen pages of Arabic text; all of these are right-hand pages. In the Arabic order, the first of them is the ‘note’ of the money and presents, mentioned, according to the Barlow translation, in Article 10 of the treaty; the second is the ‘receipt,’ also mentioned in that article, and this page, like the first, is sealed with the seal of the Dey of Algiers. Then come the twelve pages of the treaty; the preamble is on the first of these with Article 1;
and there is one article on a page, except that the script on the page between Articles 10 and 12, is, as fully explained in the annotated translation of 1930, not an article at all. The last of those twelve pages has also the seals and superscriptions, of which there are eleven In all, including one for the Dey of Algiers. The fourteen pages of Arabic text are reproduced above in left-to-right order of pagination; but the twelve treaty pages come first and then the ‘receipt’ and then the ‘note.’”
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796n.asp#n1
There is an interesting debate about the origins and veracity of Article XI. These Yale authors don’t dismiss the article out of hand, but they do say it is suspect. Furthermore, the authors point out that when the treaty is updated eight years later, it contains no equivalent text.
Way off the mark, IB, just like your inference that defending atheism was the underlying reason for my posting Article 11 in the Treaty of Tripoli.
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
But this
is the same argument put forth by atheists.
My reason was to point out the danger I see in the religious right's efforts toward establishing an unconstitutional state religion trough changing textbook, enforcement of certain laws and general dominance of the national dialog about morality and "family values". I see the insertion of the 76% figure as an attempt to defend and then effect a dictatorship by majority without affording constitutional rights to any moral or religious minority, which INCLUDES EVERYONE posting on a SHMB!
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
What you are in fact witnessing is a response from the religious right to the self same incursions you describe driven by the left. All here know what makes up the text to the Pledge of Allegiance. It hasn’t changed since 1954. So I ask again, “Why did they do it?” Could it have been a “mistake”? No. It was a complex montage that involved too many people—someone along the way would have pointed out the omission (and probably did, but he or she was still ignored).
Was there a profit motive? No. As cited above, 76% of Americans (per wiki) describe themselves as Christians. All NBC did was antagonize a large part of their audience.
The only alternative then is that who ever made and approved the “selective editing” was seeking to shove a thumb into the collective eye of 76% of American citizens. NBC’s behavior reminds me of the stupid kid with the too short stick jabbing at a hornet’s nest. The left needs to be wiser in selecting its battles.
Despite what you may believe, you belong in the 24% if you reject the "sensibilities" of the 10 Commandment and because you are posting here, I am going to suppose that you disagree with at least TWO of those "sensibilities" (the ones dealing with "bearing false witness" and "committing adultery". Not that you would, but please don't get into the "only Jeebus was perfect" defense argument here because we can expand that to cover all of the sins you attribute to TTH and me and thereby negate this whole discussion.
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
I attempt do so covertly and without antagonism. And I admit I sometimes speed on Interstate, but that doesn’t mean I do not respect the rules and why they were conceived. Hell, the laws are already there. I’m not seeking to re-impose anything. Plus, if I recall correctly, it was President Carter that said looking at woman and having “lust” in your heart was a sin. Carter isn’t on the right.
Not one single one of you whining about NBC's Faux Pas
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
It wasn’t a Faux Pas, that is the issue. It was an intentional poke in the eye.
would be doing anything but squealing if MMMiche/lle/BBBBach/mannn were elected and began to impose her way out religious beliefs by beefing up Christian Morality-based LE activity! And that would be true even if it were only to concentrate on hyper enforcement the laws already in place.
Be careful what you wish for.
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
Hmm, and this might be hard for you to accept, but a city council woman in a city I know about recently had “solicitation” raised to a felony offense. And she’s a liberal Dimocrat.
My pet peeve is spending millions to re-write textbooks that encourage a return to some form of Biblical "Science" when (1) we've got far better things that need funding and (2) because letting those thoughts and teachings re-enter the eduction process is another step backward for the education gap we've allowed to occur between us and countries we used to regularly beat in science and math and (3) it is a HUGE STEP TOWARD Ten Commandment Justice.
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
I agree. Genesis belongs in Church and in literature classes, not in a science classroom. But I must point out, that for some reason, since liberal activists have pushed the state to remove morality from the classroom and include “touchy feely,” “feel good” subject matter, there has been a corresponding drop in education.
That 10 Commandment Justice, my fellow SHMB posters, would make the things we write about here sheer HERESY!
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
Not heresy, they are just good rules to live by in order to preserve social harmony in a community of men and women.
If being burned at the stake or dunked in an elaborate dunking stool until you drown is what you want, then by all means, please SUPPORT what you've been supporting because that is where this giant coalition of single-issue voters you identify with and that was once called the "Moral Majority" by JJJ/erry/FFFal/wellll has come together to form this awful and totally intolerant attitude.
Originally Posted by Little Stevie
Hitler and Stalin both persecuted sexual deviation. They didn’t need religion to justify their actions. They just used the law.
