Weaver95: you are either very poorly educated or deliberately lying.

I'd say the truly poorly educated are those who base the belief of their entire existence upon a THEORY.

lymond01: The bible may have the basic tenets of our laws but it is not our law.

It does? Like what? Thou shalt not kill? Thou shalt not steal?
Those are universal enough rules (i.e. virtually every society, even non-Christian, has them) that it doesn't make any case at all for calling our laws "Christian".

Otherwise, we have no laws about purely religious things. We don't have to keep the sabbath. We don't even have to obey most of the commandments, the supposedly most important and fundamental rules of Christian and Jewish faith. Coveting thy neighbors junk is not only legal it is routine. Adultery is frowned upon, but decidedly legal. Idolatry isn't illegal either.

So the question remains... in what sense, exactly, are our laws based on the Bible?

Has he always been a whiny little biatch?

Those of you saying Santorum must be "trolling" because he "can't possibly be this crazy" need to get out more. Anger at the separation of church and state is bedrock conservatism. Conservatives quite often and earnestly make statements like "there is no separation of church and state in the Constitution." On a technical level they're right: the words "separation of church and state" do not in fact appear in the Constitution.

The words "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof" are in the Constitution. But read the first clause closely, and listen carefully whenever a conservative quotes it. They almost always misquote it. They like to eliminate the word "respecting the," change the word "establishment" to "establishing," and replacing the "of" with "a," or "any particular."

To compare:

The real Constitutional language:

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion,"

The false Constitutional language conservatives try to sell us:

"Congress shall make no law establishing a religion."

The difference in meaning is vast. That word "respecting" means "relating to." That phrase "establishment of religion" is much broader than "establishing a." With their edits, conservatives change a broad prohibition on any Congressional action that so much as relates to religion into a narrow bar against establishing any particular state religion.

Joe Sixpack doesn't know the difference. Usually, when a lay conservative misquotes the Establishment Clause, he does so unintentionally. He's just parroting the dishonest radio hosts, preachers, and Republicans he's heard misquote it. But do not doubt that those dishonest radio hosts, preachers, and Republicans know the real Constitutional language, and intentionally misquote it. Their goal is to tear down the wall of separation the Establishment Clause builds, and build a theocracy upon its ruins.

Rick Santorum is not crazy. He is conservative. The only difference between Santorum and other conservatives is that Santorum has decided that it suits his purposes to let a little of the crazy go public just at the moment.

Gyrfalcon: Makes me want to assemble all the Muslims I know to give it a try.

Do it!
Either he shuts up and supports them, leading to his massive failure with the GOP,
or he opens his yap and admits he is a hypocrite.

xl5150: You can deny it all you want and try to be as pedantic as you can possibly get, but the truth is that the US is a Christian nation based on Christian principles.

Funny. I thought it was based on freedom?

But then again, the founding fathers lived even before it was understood that microorganisms caused sickness.

xl5150: Weaver95: you are either very poorly educated or deliberately lying.

I'd say the truly poorly educated are those who base the belief of their entire existence upon a THEORY.

10/10. A masterpiece.

Weaver95: Santorum is either a profoundly stupid man, or he's an exceptionally poor liar.

I've noticed that GOP policy these days seems to be justified by outright lies ...

My favourite is low taxes for the rich. Quite apart from the fact it's been well established by many economists that this doesn't create wealth or jobs for the lower classes, it defies simple logic - decisions to hire are based on increasing the operating profit of a business, not on what percentage of that profit goes to the taxpayer after the business owner receives it. Some of the best economic growth in US history was during periods of normal taxation.

They have to toss a few bones to the bigots to get their votes, but a lot of the rest are aspirational stupidity - I'll vote for the party that makes things better for rich people, because I want to be rich one day.

People are fundamentally gullible - repeat anything often enough, and they'll believe it. This is how Iraq 2 was justified to the masses - the WMD bullshiat was just PR cover, the real way the hearts of the unthinking proles were won was to have Bush make tons of speeches where 9/11 and Iraq were mentioned in succession. Even today, most Americans think Iraqis had a hand in 9/11.

Similarly, if you keep telling people there are invisible sky wizards from when they are young children without critical thinking skills, they rarely question it ... this is how religions survive. It should be obvious to anyone with even modest intelligence that there are no gods, but they don't choose to think about it.

xl5150: Weaver95: you are either very poorly educated or deliberately lying.

I'd say the truly poorly educated are those who base the belief of their entire existence upon a THEORY.

A theory that can be scientifically analyzed, measured and studied, compared to belief in magic and supernatural beings? Just because you believe in God, Santa Claus and Peter Pan doesn't mean that you are right.

mekki: Only a small fraction of a fraction of the population would vote for him.

xl5150: You can deny it all you want and try to be as pedantic as you can possibly get, but the truth is that the US is a Christian nation based on Christian principles.

You can keep on screaming that as loudly as you want, but it's not true. You failure to acknowledge the secular nature of our nation doesn't change that reality.

bugontherug: Those of you saying Santorum must be "trolling" because he "can't possibly be this crazy" need to get out more. Anger at the separation of church and state is bedrock conservatism. Conservatives quite often and earnestly make statements like "there is no separation of church and state in the Constitution." On a technical level they're right: the words "separation of church and state" do not in fact appear in the Constitution.

The words "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof" are in the Constitution. But read the first clause closely, and listen carefully whenever a conservative quotes it. They almost always misquote it. They like to eliminate the word "respecting the," change the word "establishment" to "establishing," and replacing the "of" with "a," or "any particular."

To compare:

The real Constitutional language:

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion,"

The false Constitutional language conservatives try to sell us:

"Congress shall make no law establishing a religion."

The difference in meaning is vast. That word "respecting" means "relating to." That phrase "establishment of religion" is much broader than "establishing a." With their edits, conservatives change a broad prohibition on any Congressional action that so much as relates to establishing religion generally, into a narrow bar against establishing any particular state religion.

Joe Sixpack doesn't know the difference. Usually, when a lay conservative misquotes the Establishment Clause, he does so unintentionally. He's just parroting the dishonest radio hosts, preachers, and Republicans he's heard misquote it. But do not doubt that those dishonest radio hosts, preachers, and Republicans know the real Constitutional language, and intentionally misquote it. Their goal is to tear down the wall of separation the Establishment Clause builds, and build a theocracy upon its ruins.

Rick Santorum is not crazy. He is conservat ...

Pardon me.

Marcus Aurelius: [diplomatdc.files.wordpress.com image 500x305]

Oh Jesus. That's the first picture where you can see that creepy doll's eyes. It's staring right through my soul!!!

xl5150: Weaver95: you are either very poorly educated or deliberately lying.

I'd say the truly poorly educated are those who base the belief of their entire existence upon a THEORY.

Bevets: Santorum also on Sunday told Meet The Press host David Gregory that separation of church and state was "not the founders' vision."

The 'Wall of Separation' is sacred to Secular Fundamentalists and invisible in the constitution.

Do the arguments you create ever evolve?

Bevets: The 'Wall of Separation' is sacred to Secular Fundamentalists and invisible in the constitution.

Well, there's this bit --

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, 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." (emphasis mine)

meathome: Backwards Cornfield Races: Okay seriously, who paid this guy to say all this stuff. No one is literally this crazy, he must being getting paid by the obama camp to help their campaign

Oh no, this is not shilling. It's what he actually believes.

Even the GOP in PA got sick of his stuff after a year or two and promply tossed him out of office during the next election.

This. He thinks the entire US is like Butler, PA.

lymond01: The bible may have the basic tenets of our laws but it is not our law.

The bible takes positions on rules and laws that are the complete opposite of the positions found elsewhere in the bible, so it has the basic tenets of any conceivable system.

Ding ding ding ding!! Bevets is here! I feel like it's 2004 all over again!

Gawdzila: xl5150: You can deny it all you want and try to be as pedantic as you can possibly get, but the truth is that the US is a Christian nation based on Christian principles.

[Citation needed]


Citation? Sure, look around. It's called REALITY. I don't see them making Eid-al-Adha a national holiday. CHRISTmas, on the other hand....

PLEASE Michigan. I'm begging you. Give this guy the victory. America needs to see how ugly the Republican Party can get. What I wouldn't give to watch Santorum get crushed in the general election, and have him take down a few dozen House Republicans along with him.

untaken_name
Ooohhh....Mithra! Yikes, that there would even be a reference to Mithratic based religion here! I'm gonna add Dionysus-what with the rituals, re-birthing, wine, woman, song for the win!

xl5150: Weaver95: you are either very poorly educated or deliberately lying.

I'd say the truly poorly educated are those who base the belief of their entire existence upon a THEORY.

I can see someone had a poor science education. I'd blame the teacher if it weren't for the other clear problems with your post. It appears you're a low quality student who's more than a tad resentful of it. Tell me, what caused your feeling of inadequacy? Did someone make fun of you? Did you not live up to your own expectations?

Anyone happen to have a pit of tigers?

Are they hungry?

Weaver95: Letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT. (1 January 1802) This statement is the origin of the often used phrase "separation of Church and State".

These are the words of the Founding Fathers themselves, well documented and well known.


Sure sure sure, but do the words "wall of separation between Church and State" occur in the Constitution?

/Sarcasm off

JeffMD: why? why do the republicans make this so easy?

Do you know why this post scares me? Because I grew up a Red Sox fan. In fact, a fan of Boston/New England sports in general. I grew up knowing what it was like to believe that my team was on such an unstoppable roll that the season was in the bag, only to have them choke and blow it in humiliating fashion in the playoffs.

Sure, it's the Democrats' game to lose. But that isn't saying that they won't crash and burn in the home stretch.

The worst thing that anyone could do is assume that reelection is a given.

Please don't flame me, but what are the odds of Santorum getting elected? This man scares the hell of me.

We joke about it, but all it might take is a few swing states.

ib_thinkin: JRoo: The founders of America were fleeing state-sponsored religious persecution and wanted a nation where all their religions were was allowed.

If you're talking about the Pilgrims, the Colonies, or even the early States, FTFY (new window).

"In newly independent America, there was a crazy quilt of state laws regarding religion. In Massachusetts, only Christians were allowed to hold public office, and Catholics were allowed to do so only after renouncing papal authority. In 1777, New York State's constitution banned Catholics from public office (and would do so until 1806). In Maryland, Catholics had full civil rights, but Jews did not. Delaware required an oath affirming belief in the Trinity. Several states, including Massachusetts and South Carolina, had official, state-supported churches."

And that was a good thing in your opinion? I believe they also kept slaves and burned witches. Just as society's progress should not stop in the 5th century**, neither should it stop in 1776.

** or whenever that farking bullshiat they use to justify their bigotry was written down

Look farkheads and subby, as a Republican, I wouldn't vote for this anti-Libertarian social conservative Santorum to get out of a burning phone booth, and he scares the fark out of me in terms of ruining a chance to eject Obama from the White House, but the expression "separation of church and state" is not, in fact, "one of the core tenets of American democracy."

It's a term used in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to Bible-thumping Connecticut Baptists - who would make Santorum look like Bill Maher - assuring them that yes, you will be able to practice your nice little religion in this new federal system. In fact, Connecticut had an official state religion until 1818 (Congregational Church). New Hampshire had one until 1877!

The Bill of Rights didn't even apply to the states until like 40 years after Jefferson's death. The First Amendment's Establishment Clause was not incorporated (applied to the states) until 1947!

So, to recap, the term "separation of church and state" was not:

1) Ever actually in the Constitution;
2) Written by the author of the First Amendment (Madison);
3) Used by Jefferson to advance the Establishment Clause (it was actually used to advance the Free Exercise Clause).
4) Even relevant to the States until roughly the time of the Roswell incident.

Other than that, spot-on, Fark constitutional historians!

ktybear: [www.gardentones.com image 336x429]

This.