quote:

Originally posted by Shakka How could the US have been founded by Neo-Nazis when the first generation of Nazi's was still 150 years off??

Irrelevent and beside the point - the analagy stands. Replace neo-nazi with Southern Baptist and you're in buisness.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Or the constitution!

Haha, that too. It's interesting to note that the constitution carries no reference to god, the bible or religion - apart from enforcing strict separation of church and state, and dictating that the government may neither endorse or restrict religion.

quote:

Good point about deists as well - everybody is quick to scream "Christianity" as soon as they hear or see the word "God", but I think that in those times almost everybody was a member of some deistic religion, and the notion of atheism would have just been strange and unheard of. Thus a lot of those references to "God" really are independent of any specific religion, and in fact back then it was probably thought of as quite secular.

That's an interesting point actually. Atheism has undoubtedly been around since the dawn of mankind - but I don't disagree with you when you say that the majority of people in the US at that time were in fact theists. That being said, deism and pantheism are completely different to Christianity, and if anything, I'd lump deists and pantheists in with the 'freethinker' movement, which as we know, includes atheists, agnostics , secular humanists and so on.

Somewhat off topic - but have you ever read "The Age Of Reason' by Paine? In my mind it's one of the most important pieces of literature ever written with regards to deism/atheism/agnosticism, and gives an interesting insight into how some deists back then viewed Christianity and it's practices. I don't know if atheism would have been entirely unheard of, but there certainly wouldn't have been as many atheists and humanists as there are today.

Lastly - what do you mean by "those references to God"?

___________________
Currently Whoring:

• Space Tribe Vs Electric Universe - Rabbit Hole
  
• CPU - So It Begins
  
• Too Short & Mistah FAB - The Sideshow
  

quote:

Originally posted by arctic Somewhat off topic - but have you ever read "The Age Of Reason' by Paine? In my mind it's one of the most important pieces of literature ever written with regards to deism/atheism/agnosticism, and gives an interesting insight into how some deists back then viewed Christianity and it's practices. I don't know if atheism would have been entirely unheard of, but there certainly wouldn't have been as many atheists and humanists as there are today.

Haven't - what's the author's thesis?

quote:

Lastly - what do you mean by "those references to God"?

Pledge of allegiance, for example. Obviously not the constitution itself.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by arctic Somewhat off topic - but have you ever read "The Age Of Reason' by Paine? In my mind it's one of the most important pieces of literature ever written with regards to deism/atheism/agnosticism, and gives an interesting insight into how some deists back then viewed Christianity and it's practices. I don't know if atheism would have been entirely unheard of, but there certainly wouldn't have been as many atheists and humanists as there are today.

Funny you should mention Paine ... anyway, here's the link renegade originally posted with regards to the founding fathers.

http://www.infidels.org/library/mod..._till/myth.html

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Funny you should mention Paine ... anyway, here's the link renegade originally posted with regards to the founding fathers. http://www.infidels.org/library/mod..._till/myth.html

Funny, I read that article a few weeks ago. What a fantastic read, BTW. Infidels.org has some killer info. like that.

Oh yeah, I'm still working on a response for the tax cut thread. Just taking me a while to do a little reading - some conflicting data on both sides, coupled with the fact that it's certainly not my strong point.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

MY OPINION SO DO NOT FLAME ME!!!!

The way I see it, the Western governments is deriding civil liberties in an attempt to stop us being "free". ID Cards, CCTV in every building and street, countless records of me kept by various government departments & corporations, my life is a mouseclick away. The more advnaced we get the easier it is to keep tabs on us.

Since the advent of the communication age (which I class as when the Internet became the global force it is today), people have been able to discuss topics & look a information they could have never done so freely and easily as before. This scares the government. People thiking is not what any government wants, fact. They want workers to keep the capatalistic system ticking onwards. Don't believe me? look at the decline of science and other thinking subjects in UK universities and the rise of courses such as design and law. Both pamper to a Western society and require no radical independant thought outside of the sphere of society. Television pampers for the modern man, Reality TV, soap operas, sitcoms. There are relatively few "clever" programmes on TV and those that are usually deal with current events, not radical thinking or boundary research which causes people to question their existence in society.

So what can the government do? A war on terror that's what. A terrorist atatck is "inetivable" on UK soil we are told day after day. ID Cards, restrictions on people's freedoms, barbaric laws which would have seen normal in a fascist dictatorship such as ares without charge & arbiatrary imprisionment are now allowed under Anti terror legislation. Most people will consider this loss of freedom a small price to pay for security, but I personally see it as a a to subjugate the population, the government can no longer throw us off out common land and starve us but they can ensure population loyalty just as Hitler did with laws which are there to protect us which are really there to control us.

BTW i've never read any orwell, after this i'm off to teh library tomorrow to get some out

she makes me like bush.

this resembles that bush resume:|

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Haven't - what's the author's thesis?

I've only just started reading it, but it's basically a demolition job on Christianity - which as you can imagine, was rather revolutionary at the time. Thomas Paine is a pretty important figure in American history, as the following site would seem to suggest:

quote:

http://www.ushistory.org/paine/ His career turned to journalism while in Philadelphia, and suddenly, Thomas Paine became very important. In 1776, he published Common Sense, a strong defense of American Independence from England. He joined the Continental Army and wasn't a success as a soldier, but he produced The Crisis (1776-83), which helped inspire the Army. This pamphlet was so popular that as a percentage of the population, it was read by more people than today watch the Superbowl.

As you can imagine, he was rather revolutionary for his time, and almost managed to get himself arrested and killed because of his writings, on a number of occasions. I've had lots of people recommended that I read The Age Of Reason, as it's not only a good read, but it's of significant historical importance with regards to scepticism, deism and atheism.

The full text is available at (surprise surprise) Infidels.org or at Amazon if you're one of those money-spending types.

It's old, but good.

quote:

Pledge of allegiance, for example. Obviously not the constitution itself.

That's actually an interesting example of the lengths Christians are willing to go to so as to distort the intent of the founding fathers and the law.

The original pledge was written in 1892 by a Baptist minister by the name of Francis Bellamy. From memory, he was either a socialist or an anarchist. Interestingly, the pledge didn't actually contain the under god phrase.

This is how the original pledge read:

quote:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

As you can see, no references to god. This was how the pledge remained until 1954, when congress decided to insert the words "under god", basically to assist in the fight against what they termed 'godless communism'. There are number of organizations who run campaigns to restore the pledge to it's original state (au.org is one such group). There's also a guy by the name of Dr. Michael Newdow has a case before the supreme court at present, but sadly in the religion-charged atmosphere in the US at present he doesn't have much of a chance of winning. Apparently the pledge was ruled unconstitutional two years back, but the implementation of the decision was adjourned for some reason.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Funny, I read that article a few weeks ago. What a fantastic read, BTW. Infidels.org has some killer info. like that.

Completely agreed, infidels.org is by far the best resource on the net when it comes to atheism, religion & Christianity – the sheer amount of articles and documents they provide is amazing.

The forum is fantastic as well, the vast majority of the people are extremely knowledgeable, so much so that I feel completely out of my depth, and generally lurk rather than post. It's well worth taking a look at them if you're ever looking through their library/book reviews etc.

___________________
Currently Whoring:

• Space Tribe Vs Electric Universe - Rabbit Hole
  
• CPU - So It Begins
  
• Too Short & Mistah FAB - The Sideshow
  

quote:

Originally posted by arctic As you can see, no references to god. This was how the pledge remained until 1954, when congress decided to insert the words "under god", basically to assist in the fight against what they termed 'godless communism'. There are number of organizations who run campaigns to restore the pledge to it's original state (au.org is one such group). There's also a guy by the name of Dr. Michael Newdow has a case before the supreme court at present, but sadly in the religion-charged atmosphere in the US at present he doesn't have much of a chance of winning. Apparently the pledge was ruled unconstitutional two years back, but the implementation of the decision was adjourned for some reason.

I disagree with you on this one. I would bet money that the "under god" bit of the pledge will be ruled unconstitutional. It might even be a 6/3 or 7/2 (hopefully) decision....

quote:

Originally posted by mps242 I disagree with you on this one. I would bet money that the "under god" bit of the pledge will be ruled unconstitutional. It might even be a 6/3 or 7/2 (hopefully) decision....

You underestimate the power of the ultraconservative Justices like Scalia, Rhenquist, and Thomas. I really think these guys will pull out at all stops to persuade the moderate conservative Justices. As much as I'd like to see this phrase be deleted for obvious logical reasons, I'm not optimistic enough to realize the power of the "dark side" fundies on the ultra-conservatives.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 You underestimate the power of the ultraconservative Justices like Scalia, Rhenquist, and Thomas. I really think these guys will pull out at all stops to persuade the moderate conservative Justices. As much as I'd like to see this phrase be deleted for obvious logical reasons, I'm not optimistic enough to realize the power of the "dark side" fundies on the ultra-conservatives.

It's becoming more apparent to me that both sides like to label the other side as "Ultra" or "Extreme", when in fact they are nothing close to "Ultra-right". It is becoming a political game to try and convince your supporters that your views are merely 'moderate' or 'centrist', when in actuality you are just as far from the center as the person you are criticising. Ultra-conservative to me would be someone like Pat Buchanan or David Duke. Come on, Opus.

P.S. there is no "Republican Attack Machine", Kerry is doing just fine digging his own grave these days.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 You underestimate the power of the ultraconservative Justices like Scalia, Rhenquist, and Thomas. I really think these guys will pull out at all stops to persuade the moderate conservative Justices. As much as I'd like to see this phrase be deleted for obvious logical reasons, I'm not optimistic enough to realize the power of the "dark side" fundies on the ultra-conservatives.

Well remember, Scalia recused himself on this case (thus my #'s were fucked up) I think it will come down 5/3 or 6/2 (although a 4/4 decision would be fine as it wouldn't overrule the 9th circuit). With no scalia I really think it will be thomas and rhenquist that vote to uphold "Under God," but it will be tough for them to argue with the fact that this isn't mere acknowlegdement of our religious history, but is instead a PLEDGE to be UNDER GOD...

Frankly, I'll be devastated if somehow a 5/3 majority comes together to rule Under God is ok... The past year has had a slew of good decisions coming from the court, I'd hate to see them fuck it up on this one...