Dumb as a Fucking Rock

[ThePinsir]

"I think we got off the track when we allowed our government to become a secular government freed the slaves"

"But it was the REPUBLICANS who freed the slaves!"

smh

Idontwanttoliveonthisplanetanymore.jpeg

[Minimalist]

Yes, James Madison, the MAN who did write the constitution in the main, had such a glowing opinion of fucking churches!

What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient allies.
-- James Madison, A Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, addressed to the Virginia General Assembly, June 20, 1785

[Ryantology]

The Constitution explicitly recognizes the right of Americans to practice any religion they want without being punished or killed for doing it, which is, as we all know, definitely a recurring theme in the Bible. I just can't remember which books had God saying this. Perhaps someone can remind me.

[Faith No More]

I don't know which is worse, the historical revisionism necessary to support this claim or the fact that that this guy has no problem claiming that the idea that a slave only counts as 3/5 a person is based on his religious principles.

[EgoRaptor]

I am actually surprised, even for a Republicunt this is a new level of inanity.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I'm not so deeply educated in things American, but I would think the date when America became secular was roughly pretty much exactly on July 4th, 1776, no?

Just to be all pricky-shit about it, it was actually 4 March, 1789.

Boru

[Angrboda]

Right, because the Bible demonstrates nothing so much as Yahweh's deep love of the principles behind the 1st Amendment. Do these idiots ever listen to themselves?

Not to nitpick, but the first amendment lagged behind the original constitution by about a decade, and was explicitly excluded to ease passage of the original constitution. I think, like Christians and the bible, many people have this idea of what's in the constitution which is wholly inaccurate. It's a relatively short document, so I urge all interested parties to actually read it. It's primarily a document with two apparent goals, a) to set up governmental procedure, and b) to put explicit bounds on state and federal powers. The "granting of rights" part came later; there are almost no individual rights actually specified in the constitution itself.

[Crossless2.0]

Right, because the Bible demonstrates nothing so much as Yahweh's deep love of the principles behind the 1st Amendment. Do these idiots ever listen to themselves?

Not to nitpick, but the first amendment lagged behind the original constitution by about a decade, and was explicitly excluded to ease passage of the original constitution. I think, like Christians and the bible, many people have this idea of what's in the constitution which is wholly inaccurate. It's a relatively short document, so I urge all interested parties to actually read it. It's primarily a document with two apparent goals, a) to set up governmental procedure, and b) to put explicit bounds on state and federal powers. The "granting of rights" part came later; there are almost no individual rights actually specified in the constitution itself.

You're absolutely correct. The original document had the more limited goals you stated above. Of course, "The Constitution" is whatever it is at any given time, and I rather doubt that the Tom Delays of the world think their god authored the original, more strictly procedural version of the Constitution and not the part prohibiting the federal government from establishing a religion or sect to the exclusion of others or interfering in the individual's free exercise of religion.

In any case, I see little cause to link the original Constitution with Biblical sources, David Barton notwithstanding. The framers were much more interested in the ancient Roman republic, ancient Greek thought on constitutions, the experiences of the Renaissance city-states of what is now Italy, and of course English law and practice. Yahweh's anointed kings and priestly caste played no part in it. (Not that you're arguing otherwise; just saying.)

[Mr. Moncrieff]

The constitution is obviously a fucking 'revelation' to this guy as he seems to possess little understanding of the contents otherwise...

[Simon Moon]

Morons will be morons.

How many times are the words: God, Jesus, lord, Bible, 10 Commandments, used in the Constitution again?

I lost count at ZERO.