| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
26 Mar 2007 05:43:42 AM |
| Object: |
1995 #1 Bible only book in colonial America |
1995 #1
Message #8810 of 8820
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
SOME THINGS NEVER CHANGE OTHERS DO
I began posting on line in Usenet Newsgroups in Feb 1995.
Some of the common arguments back then offered by the RRR types are no
longer mentioned in this day and age.
Just a few examples you almost never see anyone offer anymore but were
common arguments back:
1. Christinaity is part of the Common Law
2. The Northwest ordinance proved separation of church and state is a
myth.
3. the Bible was the basis of American law, the Constitution etc because
it was the only book available in America
4. The US Supreme Court ruled America was a Christian Nation,
For my part I have learned a great deal more since these particular
discussions took place in 1995.
Enjoy.
###new###To:
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,a\
lt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.usa.misc,talk.pol\
itics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,alt.politics.econ\
omics,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.correct,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.g\
-gordon-liddy,alt.society.conservatism
Subject: Re: Prayer in school? Never been illegal
From: me
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 15:59:39 GMT
I beg to differ with you, but you are in error. First things first, in
1776 only 17 percent of the white population of what was to become
known as the United States were "Churched." That doesn't support your
claim that religion played a HUGE part in everyday life. It might for
some, but that was not universal among all people of that time.
There is no evidence that any who attended the Constitutional
Covention drew from religious beliefs in the writing of that document.
You will have to supply documented evidence to support your claim, and
your going to have a problem doing that, because there is none. I have
studied the records of the debates of that convention and with the
exception of Ben Franklin suggesting well into the convention that
they begin each day with a prayer, which was not adopted, nor done,
there is almost no mention of religion,
and no mention of religious beliefs, dogmas, doctrines, etc.
The Constitution of the United States is not based on any religion.
Your in error again, the majority of the Men who wrote the
Constitution of this nation had been university educated, some in this
country, some abroad. Most were lawyers, most had a very broad
education, could speak and write several languages, had studied all
the classical writers of history, were well versed in history Roman
History, Greek history, etc. Most could quote from the Bilbe, just as
they could quote from Plato, Lock, and scores of other writers of many
subjects. Jefferson had hundreds, perhaps thousands of books in his
personal library. You have a very limited view of the facts of that
time period. Books were plentiful, books of all types. The bible was
far from being the only book available.
Sorry, almost all their education did not come from the bible.
The flow came from their knowledge of the past, and not any religious
past. It came from their knowledge of Greek History, Roman History,
the great minds of the past who wrote on the subject of government,
humankind, why even the Indians had an influence, since they had the
only working democracy in existence at that time. Franklin had studied
the Indian cultures in the early 1750's and had been highly
influenced by them, and had written about them.
I would suggest you brush up on some unbiased studies of American
History. Your claims aren't even close to the factual history that did
exist.
**********************
###new###To:
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,a\
lt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.usa.misc,talk.pol\
itics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,alt.politics.econ\
omics,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.correct,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.g\
-gordon-liddy,alt.society.conservatism
Subject: Re: Prayer in school? Never been illegal
From: me
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 17:00:43 GMT
Hmmmm, well why not consider that they might have bought them. There
were printing presses in this country, as well as other countries. Why
would it be hard for you to imagine that there were books around and
about?
Then too, we haven't even mentioned that most of these people were
well educated, and the various universities they had attended also had
libraries. Then I would have to say that this Plymouth Plantation is
not accurately depicting history. But wait, Plymouth plantation, huh?
Exactly what does that depict? What period of history? From the time
of the Puritans and Pilgrims landing on these shores to the time we
are speaking of here over a hundred years had passed. In the early to
mid 1600's I would imagine that there were not a large supply of books
around in this nation, but by the mid to late 1700's there were ample
supplies of books of all types.
I think maybe you are combining periods of history here and thinking
that what was in the mid 1600's was still the same in the mid to late
1700's. Sorry, just wasn't so. The Nina? Your way off time wise. I
think you had better take a crash course in American History.
Well.lets see, it was written by a committee of three, but most of the
actual writing was done by Thomas Jefferson in the late spring early
summer of 1776. It was submitted for debate and several revision were
made to it, and it was finally signed in July 1776. (Some signed it
then, others signed it over a period of several weeks, I believe)
I think that several of us have already answered this question, there
were thousands of books available in this country by the time period
we are speaking of. I can't believe how little you seem to know about
the history of this nation.
Dates? what dates do you want? Dates each and everyone of these books
were published? Impossible to supply. The bible was a book that was
around in the Colonies, but by no means was it the only book around.
*************************
###new###To:
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,a\
lt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.usa.misc,talk.pol\
itics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,alt.politics.econ\
omics,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.correct,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.g\
-gordon-liddy,alt.society.conservatism
Subject: Re: Prayer in school? Never been illegal
From: me
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 17:01:48 GMT
sailor@ici.net (Captain Kidd) wrote:
On 11 Dec 1995 17:53:40 -0500, (william c
anderson) wrote:
No, of course their weren't. The ideas were, in fact, planted
largely the European writers of the Enlightenment, especially
John Locke and David Hume.
I see that I am dealing with another one from a "edu" ! OK, here we
go again.... from 1755 back... show me where anyone could go, to read
a book, other than the Bible..!
I will supply you with just two examples, if you care to know more you
can look them up yourself.
Thomas Jefferson was born in 1743. "As a child he enjoyed to the full
the numerious advantages accompanying his family's substantial
position: the BOOKS, the horses, the good life of the 'big house' at
Tuckahoe and Shadwell." (The life and selected writings of Thomas
Jefferson, edited by Adrienne Koch and William Peden)
Thomas jefferson's father "was careful to direct that his son be given
complete classical training. Years later, Thomas Jefferson often
referrred to the effect the classical moralists, philosophers, poets,
and dramatists had had upon him. Quite honestly he could say in 1800,
'I thank on my knees (My father) who directed my early education, for
having put into my possession this rich source of delight; and I would
not exchange it for anything which I could have acquired.' No matter
how scientific and progressive Jefferson became in his outlook, the
moral and political wisdom of Greece and Rome continued to give depth
and flavor to his thought."
(The life and selected writings of Thomas Jefferson, edited by Koch
and Peden)
In 1758 he spent two years studying under a Classical scholar and then
entered William & Mary in 1760 and graduated from same in 1762. he
then spent five years studying law under George Wythe.
James Madison was born in 1750 and had a similar early education and
then attended Princeton where he graduated in three years. Every
single one of the Founders was very highly educated. Sorry to burst
your bubble.
You want to SAY the above, but where
did they go to read what those you listed, wrote? Give me the dates,
when libraries were available to people to read those works.. Or where
they got them to read... pre-1755 ! I KNOW every home had a Bible in
it, but you tell me where they obtained those "works" !
you seem to forget that most if not all the Founders were from wealthy
families, and as such they had private libraries in their own homes in
many cases. In addition the childern of these familes were sent to
tutors or private schools and then they went on to College.
The average Joe Blow in the street may not have had these
opportunties, but those who became the Founders of this nation were
not the average Joe Blow in the street.
And, by the way, the United States in the mid-1700s was in many
ways far less religious than it is today.
Yeah, right!
It is quite true, even if you don't want to believe it. Less than 17
percent of the white population of this country in 1776 were affliated
with a church, otherwise known as "churched."
The myth of this being a very pious people walking through the
snowdrifts to attend church, etc is just that, a myth. In the New
England states 1/4 of all first born childern were born before nine
months after the wedding, young women were more likely to be sexually
active then to attend church.
You could find more people in the taverns on a Sat night then you
would find in church on Sunday.
You been to Plymouth
Plantations, Boston, Sturbridge Village? Any place that is an exact
restoration of the building, and way of life then? I have..... and
that statement is so far out in left field that I am stunned you even
could utter it!
I take it that this Plymouth Plantations is a replica of life in the
early to mid 1600's, depicting the Puritans or Pilgrims way of life?
If so they had what was very much like a theoracy type of culture, and
it was not representative of the rest of the country, and in fact
wasn't even represenative of that part of the country by the late 1700's.
Study history, don't just rely on one restored villiage.
The authors of the Constitution were, for the most part, highly educated
men, acquainted not only with the Bible but with the classics, and with
the intellectual writings of their contemporaries. The idea that the
Bible was the only book any of them had ever read just isn't true.
OK... I'll ask you the same question... Pre-1755 where did they get
the books? What you are implying is like me saying Gen Grant knew what
Lee was wearing to the Court House, because he saw him getting dressed
on TV... CNN carried it live!
The above isn't even good reasoning. It makes no sense at all. As to
where they got the books, they ordered them. Books were printed in
this country, and of course books were printed in Europe. We did trade
with Europe, so it would not be at all difficult to order books.
Franklin ran a printing publishing business.
I don't know how old you are, or what your background is as far as
education goes, but you really do need to brush up some on American
History at the very least.
Come down here to Virginia and visit colonial Williamsburg, it will
give you a more accurate picture of the life and times of the late
1700's in this country, than that Plymouth Plantation will based how
you have described it.
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: 1995 #1 Bible only book in colonial America |
26 Mar 2007 06:43:23 AM |
|
|
In our last episode,
<cu8f031su7u0008hjes8dgrpou9l50o8b9@4ax.com>,
the lovely and talented
broadcast on alt.atheism:
1. Christinaity is part of the Common Law
Lie.
2. The Northwest ordinance proved separation of church and state is a
myth.
Lie.
3. the Bible was the basis of American law, the Constitution etc because
it was the only book available in America
Enormous lie.
4. The US Supreme Court ruled America was a Christian Nation,
Lie.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> <http://myspace.com/larseighner>
Countdown: 666 days to go.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 1995 #1 Bible only book in colonial America |
26 Mar 2007 08:32:36 AM |
|
|
Lars Eighner <usenet@larseighner.com> wrote:
:|In our last episode,
:|<cu8f031su7u0008hjes8dgrpou9l50o8b9@4ax.com>,
:|the lovely and talented
:|broadcast on alt.atheism:
:|
Very cute. Child like cute, even.
It would be far more interesting if you actually dropped the cute for
facts
But this provides the context which you felt you had to leave out:
1995 #1
Message #8810 of 8820
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
SOME THINGS NEVER CHANGE OTHERS DO
I began posting on line in Usenet Newsgroups in Feb 1995.
Some of the common arguments back then offered by the RRR types are no
longer mentioned in this day and age.
Just a few examples you almost never see anyone offer anymore but were
common arguments back:
1. Christinaity is part of the Common Law
2. The Northwest ordinance proved separation of church and state is a
myth.
3. the Bible was the basis of American law, the Constitution etc because
it was the only book available in America
4. The US Supreme Court ruled America was a Christian Nation,
For my part I have learned a great deal more since these particular
discussions took place in 1995.
Enjoy.
****************************************************
The above followed by the rest of what I had actually posted
has far more value than yyour efforts to be cute
does.
:|> 1. Christinaity is part of the Common Law
:|
:|Lie.
:|
:|> 2. The Northwest ordinance proved separation of church and state is a
:|> myth.
:|
:|Lie.
:|
:|> 3. the Bible was the basis of American law, the Constitution etc because
:|> it was the only book available in America
:|
:|Enormous lie.
:|
:|> 4. The US Supreme Court ruled America was a Christian Nation,
:|
:|Lie.
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kevin Cunningham" |
|
| Title: Re: 1995 #1 Bible only book in colonial America |
26 Mar 2007 02:15:13 PM |
|
|
<> wrote in message
news:rpif03pc5hjmjmkv8dg1qlikgglv8djc7q@4ax.com...
Lars Eighner <usenet@larseighner.com> wrote:
:|In our last episode,
:|<cu8f031su7u0008hjes8dgrpou9l50o8b9@4ax.com>,
:|the lovely and talented
:|broadcast on alt.atheism:
:|
Very cute. Child like cute, even.
It would be far more interesting if you actually dropped the cute for
facts
But this provides the context which you felt you had to leave out:
It would be fun to take you on but you just don't know what you are talking
about. At all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 1995 #1 Bible only book in colonial America |
26 Mar 2007 04:14:24 PM |
|
|
"Kevin Cunningham" <smskjv@mindspring.com> wrote:
:|
:|< > wrote in message
:|news:rpif03pc5hjmjmkv8dg1qlikgglv8djc7q@4ax.com...
:|> Lars Eighner <usenet@larseighner.com> wrote:
:|>
:|>>:|In our last episode,
:|>>:|<cu8f031su7u0008hjes8dgrpou9l50o8b9@4ax.com>,
:|>>:|the lovely and talented
:|>>:|broadcast on alt.atheism:
:|>>:|
:|>
:|> Very cute. Child like cute, even.
:|>
:|> It would be far more interesting if you actually dropped the cute for
:|> facts
:|>
:|> But this provides the context which you felt you had to leave out:
:|>
:|>
:|It would be fun to take you on but you just don't know what you are talking
:|about. At all.
:|
Your unsubstantiated claim is noted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ordinary or extraordinary claims require ordinary or extraordinary proof.
If you're going to claim something and especially something outlandish
you're going to need some pretty extraordinary and/or irrefutable proof to
back up such a claim. "Where's the beef?" Where's the ordinary or
extraordinary proof for their ordinary or extraordinary claims? If one is
not responding with ordinary or extraordinary, *factual* proof, then the
claim is not worth considering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[ as Homer@nospam said]
Why is asking for "proof" considered truculence? Do you consider it
truculence for a judge to ask for evidence in a trial. Would you rather
that
people just testified that they believed in the guilt of the suspect?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[as Gray Shockley said:]
Your "opinion" is not an adequate citation.
You forgot your citations.
Or, are your opinions more valid than facts?
You do realize, do you not?, that opinion without substantiation is just
propaganda for those without critical thinking abilities and originate with
those who are attempting to manipulate rather than those who are attempting
to clarify.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
Go for it
ll I see is meaningless words
All words no action, huh?
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
