Accept or reject these beliefs?

[xBiffx]

The point is they kept their personal spirituality out of public law...

Again, your ignorance is astounding.

 

[Angry Irishman]

Apples to oranges. Jefferson is talking about the appropriate balance of power of people vs. government, Obama was speaking against the lunatic paranoia that exists in certain segments of American society.

So, they're both right.

Oh good Lord....

 

[Moonbeam]

Oh good Lord....

Wat?

His was the best and most factual post in this thread. It was a complete and total descriptor of the subject. He totally nailed toe content and purpose of each statement leaving nothing further to say. Where the f did you get lost? And why did you even post this simple minded question and the first place? Do you realize how totally unbelievable it is that even after posting it you can't seem to see it. Is rational thought something you have mastered? If not, instead of inane questions you might want to look at that.

 

[Angry Irishman]

Wat?

His was the best and most factual post in this thread. It was a complete and total descriptor of the subject. He totally nailed toe content and purpose of each statement leaving nothing further to say. Where the f did you get lost? And why did you even post this simple minded question and the first place? Do you realize how totally unbelievable it is that even after posting it you can't seem to see it. Is rational thought something you have mastered? If not, instead of inane questions you might want to look at that.

Are you done now? I see the response as noncommittal and the easy way out....far from the enlightened description you've barfed up.

You might want to go to another post and lay off the drugs for awhile.

 

[FalseChristian]

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

'Nuff said.

 

[Moonbeam]

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

'Nuff said.

This is the mere regurgitation of horse shit. Power corrupts people who can be corrupted by power and nobody else. Some people are completely totally and utterly power corruptibility free. You say this because you have no moral core and no center. If you knew what has value in life you would know it is real self love and real self respect and nobody who has those things would ever trade them for something as meaningless as power.

 

[Moonbeam]

Are you done now? I see the response as noncommittal and the easy way out....far from the enlightened description you've barfed up.

You might want to go to another post and lay off the drugs for awhile.

What delusional commitment had you fantasized he should have taken? It was the easy way to tamp down the stupidity of your question because it was the obvious fact of the matter. And thank you for recognizing that my response was enlightened as that is the implication of your poorly worded and precision lacking language. And naturally it was easy to barf up because it was obvious to anybody with a few ounces of intuition. But the drug comment was highly original. I've had that come my way about only a million times. It makes you sound like a low brow ignorant putz but then what would you know.

 

[alzan]

I agree with both quotes on their separate topics; both are important to be mindful of and consider.

As to the off topic conversation; the Founding Fathers were a mixture of agnostics, deists and theists. All of them, in consideration of the situation they left, knew to keep their personal beliefs out of the government and it's laws.

It takes due diligence to keep that in mind when one is running for or in office, as well as when one is deciding for whom to vote.

 

[xBiffx]

As to the off topic conversation; the Founding Fathers were a mixture of agnostics, deists and theists.

Please tell me which you think were true agnostics?

All of them, in consideration of the situation they left, knew to keep their personal beliefs out of the government and it's laws.

Exactly opposite of what they did do.

 

[Angry Irishman]

What delusional commitment had you fantasized he should have taken? It was the easy way to tamp down the stupidity of your question because it was the obvious fact of the matter. And thank you for recognizing that my response was enlightened as that is the implication of your poorly worded and precision lacking language. And naturally it was easy to barf up because it was obvious to anybody with a few ounces of intuition. But the drug comment was highly original. I've had that come my way about only a million times. It makes you sound like a low brow ignorant putz but then what would you know.

You can stick your self righteous variety of intuition up your ass...clear enough for you? No answer or poll to vote in required.

Get out of my thread if you have nothing to add beyond answering the original question. You come on here and attack me with what could easily be perceived as drug induced babble and expect me to...what? thank you....nope.

 

[Angry Irishman]

This is the mere regurgitation of horse shit. Power corrupts people who can be corrupted by power and nobody else. Some people are completely totally and utterly power corruptibility free. You say this because you have no moral core and no center. If you knew what has value in life you would know it is real self love and real self respect and nobody who has those things would ever trade them for something as meaningless as power.

Holy shit....

 

[Agent11]

Apples to oranges. Jefferson is talking about the appropriate balance of power of people vs. government, Obama was speaking against the lunatic paranoia that exists in certain segments of American society.

So, they're both right.

It isn't paranoia if they are really out to get you.

I submit to you people's exhibit A:

 

[Angry Irishman]

It isn't paranoia if they are really out to get you.

I submit to you people's exhibit A:

Again, holy shit.....

 

[zsdersw]

Again, your ignorance is astounding.

Again, your idiocy is not at all surprising.

The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion….

 

[fskimospy]

It isn't paranoia if they are really out to get you.

I submit to you people's exhibit A:

Nobody is out to get you, which is my point. You might want to consider reading that famous article about the paranoid style in American politics.

This thread is a bit weird, as it asks which is correct out of two things that are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Apples to oranges. Jefferson is talking about the appropriate balance of power of people vs. government, Obama was speaking against the lunatic paranoia that exists in certain segments of American society.

So, they're both right.

Obama was not talking specifically about "lunatic paranoia". He was implying that anyone who is concerned about government tyranny is lunatic and paranoid.

The contrast between his comment and Jefferson's is entirely valid -- one thinks government is something to be trusted, the other, something to be feared.

PS Anyone who says the founding fathers were agnostics either doesn't understand what agnosticism is, or doesn't know much about the founding fathers.

 

[zsdersw]

PS Anyone who says the founding fathers were agnostics either doesn't understand what agnosticism is, or doesn't know much about the founding fathers.

I love it when you talk about yourself.

 

[fskimospy]

Obama was not talking specifically about "lunatic paranoia". He was implying that anyone who is concerned about government tyranny is lunatic and paranoid.

That is a simple failure in correctly reading the sentence attributed to Obama. He says people who say that tyranny is ALWAYS lurking around the corner are being paranoid... which is accurate. There is nothing in that sentence that says people should NEVER be concerned about tyranny, and I'm pretty confident that you would agree that Obama does not hold such a view.

The contrast between his comment and Jefferson's is entirely valid -- one thinks government is something to be trusted, the other, something to be feared.

No, one is saying that government is to be subservient to the needs of the people it governs, the other is saying that government need not always be feared. Both are accurate.

 

[xBiffx]

Again, your idiocy is not at all surprising.

Your ignorance is still second to none.

I never once said they were Christians. I never one said they belonged to a religion at all.

They still had spiritual beliefs. They still believed in God. Beliefs that they used and incorporated in the founding of this nation. You don't have to look much further than the Declaration and Constitution to see that.

Keep trying to make me look dumb. Its making you look more like an idiot every time you post.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I love it when you talk about yourself.

I see you're still as childish and petulant as ever. Do you have any actual evidence that the founding fathers were agnostic? Where is it? I'd suggest that you educate yourself, but I know from past experience that you have no interest, and that you are also one of those people who is incapable of ever admitting error. Having now declared that they are agnostics, you will never back down from that claim, even though there is absolutely nothing to support it.

The word didn't even exist when the founders were alive -- it was coined by Huxley in 1870. And while they could have had those beliefs before the term was invented, there is nothing I have ever seen to support that contention.

That is a simple failure in correctly reading the sentence attributed to Obama. He says people who say that tyranny is ALWAYS lurking around the corner are being paranoid... which is accurate. There is nothing in that sentence that says people should NEVER be concerned about tyranny, and I'm pretty confident that you would agree that Obama does not hold such a view.

He never actually used the word "paranoid". I might as well quote the whole paragraph:

Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems; some of these same voices also doing their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave and creative and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.

You seem to be saying that believing that government is a "separate, sinister entity at the root of our problems" is paranoia. I don't agree. It's possible to see something as a problem, or something to be feared, without thinking that it's "out to get you" or whatever.

I do agree that Obama probably does have some concerns about tyranny. But from everything I have read, the founders' views on government far more resemble those of the people Obama is denigrating than those of Obama himself.

Brings to mind another famous quote:

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

Fire is essential, and it is dangerous. Fearing it is not paranoia -- it is caution. That's how I see most concern over government as well. To be sure, some go overboard, just as some think any flame will burn their house down. But that doesn't mean the fear is always paranoid.

 

[fskimospy]

I see you're still as childish and petulant as ever. Do you have any actual evidence that the founding fathers were agnostic? Where is it? I'd suggest that you educate yourself, but I know from past experience that you have no interest, and that you are also one of those people who is incapable of ever admitting error. Having now declared that they are agnostics, you will never back down from that claim, even though there is absolutely nothing to support it.

The word didn't even exist when the founders were alive -- it was coined by Huxley in 1870. And while they could have had those beliefs before the term was invented, there is nothing I have ever seen to support that contention.



He never actually used the word "paranoid". I might as well quote the whole paragraph:



You seem to be saying that believing that government is a "separate, sinister entity at the root of our problems" is paranoia. I don't agree. It's possible to see something as a problem, or something to be feared, without thinking that it's "out to get you" or whatever.

I do agree that Obama probably does have some concerns about tyranny. But from everything I have read, the founders' views on government far more resemble those of the people Obama is denigrating than those of Obama himself.

Brings to mind another famous quote:



Fire is essential, and it is dangerous. Fearing it is not paranoia -- it is caution. That's how I see most concern over government as well. To be sure, some go overboard, just as some think any flame will burn their house down. But that doesn't mean the fear is always paranoid.

So now we agree then? Nowhere did Obama say to never fear tyranny, and nowhere did we talk about who was closer to what the founding fathers wanted. (although I must admit I don't give a shit what people 200 years ago wanted)

Government should be subservient to the people, as Jefferson said. We are not always faced with imminent tyranny, like Obama said.

 

[Anarchist420]

Jefferson. Obama is a tyrant himself and so are those who support any gun control legislation whatsoever.

PS Anyone who says the founding fathers were agnostics either doesn't understand what agnosticism is, or doesn't know much about the founding fathers.

Agreed. They weren't all the same religion, but I don't think that any of them were athiests or agnostics.

 

[zsdersw]

Your ignorance is still second to none.

.. but enough about you.

They still had spiritual beliefs.

... which doesn't prevent them from being agnostic.

They still believed in God. Beliefs that they used and incorporated in the founding of this nation. You don't have to look much further than the Declaration and Constitution to see that.

You won't find "God" in the Constitution, and references like "Creator", "Nature's God", and "Divine Providence" in the Declaration of Independence were not "incorporated in the founding of this nation".

Keep trying to make me look dumb.

I'm not trying. You do that job better than I ever could.

Its making you look more like an idiot every time you post.

Just can't stop talking about yourself, can you?

 

[xBiffx]

.. but enough about you.



... which doesn't prevent them from being agnostic.



You won't find "God" in the Constitution, and references like "Creator", "Nature's God", and "Divine Providence" in the Declaration of Independence were not "incorporated in the founding of this nation".



I'm not trying. You do that job better than I ever could.



Just can't stop talking about yourself, can you?

You are hopeless. You will ague anything even when its proven completely wrong. Grow up and learn something. Your little insults only add to the vast amount of ignorance you've displayed here.

 

[zsdersw]

I see you're still as childish and petulant as ever. Do you have any actual evidence that the founding fathers were agnostic? Where is it? I'd suggest that you educate yourself, but I know from past experience that you have no interest, and that you are also one of those people who is incapable of ever admitting error. Having now declared that they are agnostics, you will never back down from that claim, even though there is absolutely nothing to support it.

Your petulance outshines anyone else's, to be sure. You're such a plucky little thing.

"Theistic rationalism" is a term you should look up. It's in your own Wikipedia article. You'll also find the relationship between rationalism and agnosticism is more complementary than contradictory.