If it was a tall day, I could stretch myself all the way up to four feet. Big Rita had me by a head, maybe two. Hers was a big head too almost troll like in stature. Being cornbread fed, she easily had me by 30 pounds. Big Rita did not like me. On reflection, she did not like anyone.
If I have learned one thing in all the years I have been writing these posts it is that the mere mention of God is the best generator of keyboard borne venom. Last week, I wrote that our country’s founding principle is God-given freedom. In 2010, I posted Our Foundation is the Spirit of Freedom. It was my first post after a year long hiatus. So, it is not a new thought to me (or to history), but one I certainly hold to dearly.
I was questioned about where in our constitution is any reference to God or Jesus or any specific religion. The answer is in specific terms nowhere. With a rudimentary understanding of Judeo-Christian values and phrases like “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” and given the religious inclinations of the American populace at the time the phrase was penned, it is not a great leap of logic to conclude to which Creator the reference was made. I was asked whether I thought my rights came from God or some question similar to that and the answer is profoundly yes. Our Declaration of Independence is quiet clear on the origin of those unalienable rights among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. With that declaration in mind, those unalienable rights are protected in our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. So, where is God in our Constitution? He is all over it brother.
And another, the one that forever flies off the keyboard. If your God is so great, where was he when…” and just fill in whatever atrocity comes to mind. The answer to that (although the question itself exposes the questioner’s ignorance of Christianity and the Christian God) is that God lets people choose their way. God wants you to accept him by your own free will. If by your free will you choose another path he will turn you over to it as is well explained in Romans 1: 18-32. So let’s not blame God for the choices made by men. Then there is the Darwin worshipper who declares that belief in God is just an example of scientific ignorance. Might I ask? Is this the same science that declares man-made global warming is destroying the planet and the solution to that problem is a global wealth redistribution scheme?
The left (communists, Marxists, socialists, progressives, liberals…) mostly rejects Judeo-Christian values out of hand. Sure, there are those who lean left in their ideology who are Church goers and proclaimed Christians, but they have embraced things simply are not Biblical. The right (wholly evil in the minds of many on the left) certainly has its share of people who are as anti-Christian as anyone on the left could ever hope to be. What both have in common is the rejection of a higher moral authority – a rejection of God and his commandments.
Without a moral authority, who decides what is good or bad. Who would decide for people that it is wrong to murder – or for that matter, to do anything else? Moral relativism, for as destructive as it is we see it every single day. When an ultimate moral authority is rejected so is civil society and so is freedom.
I just heard presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, in a speech, declare that in our country we are going to have to modify deeply held religious beliefs adding that no one should be discriminated against because of who they love (with the exception of those having deeply held religious beliefs). I certainly agree with the part about not discriminating. Choosing your path in life whatever it is should not require that anyone else embrace it. In that light, Mrs. Clinton I refer you to the first commandment: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. While doing that, and in light of the most recent revelations you may want to contemplate the remaining 9 as well. I recommend Dennis Prager’s short book, The Ten Commandments: Still the Best Moral Code.
In our military, we are also seeing people persecuted because of their Christian beliefs. The worst of which, Chaplains are being disciplined for counseling from a Biblical perspective or praying in the name of Jesus. From what other perspective would one expect a Christian Chaplain to counsel or pray? History is quite clear about what Godless armies are capable of and their ultimate destruction.
It is also quite clear on the destiny of Godless nations. History is littered with their remains.
© 2015 J. D. Pendry American Journal All Rights Reserved
“And another, the one that forever flies off the keyboard. If your God is so great, where was he when…” and just fill in whatever atrocity comes to mind. ”
I am always struck me when evangelical atheists use this condemnation of Christianity — Christians somehow do not measure up to some secular morality or “Christianity” (however collectively defined) failed in some historical period.
Invariably, the moaral standard by which these Christians fail is one that represents an internalized morality that comes *directly* from the Christians these petty antichristians despise.
When I talk to these evangelical atheists about their particular antichristian faith and I ask them for the basis of their morality, the answer is always ultimately that it is self-evident. Even those who claim to be utilitarians end up that way when pushed on how to define “greater good.”
Why is that morality self evident? Because this is a Christian nation that, until recently, had a consensus morality. They grew up in it, and they accept it — with certain modifications for self-justification, of course.
I amuse myself now asking them exactly *what makes* the morality of the Moslems fighting for ISIS inferior to theirs. Their answers are, invariably superficial and thoughtless — because they can’t get beyond the self-evident part. The morality of the Islamists is also “self-evident” to the Moslems to accept it.
Evangelical atheists…
That’s excellent. I tell them to read CS Lewis Mere Christianity and get back to me. They never do.
Well, JD, are you vaguely aware that certain primitive tribes believe that everything, including blades of grass and rocks, has a living spirit attached to it?
Have you ever stopped to think that perhaps we have a monotheistic spirituality because Akhenaten, also known as Amenhotep IV, wanted it that way, and persecuted all the temple priests who disagreed with him? Or that the reason the Hebrews bailed out of Egypt had less to do with poor wages than it did with the reinstallation of Egyptian polytheism when Amenhotep died?
If Constantine hadn’t caved in and declared the cult of Christianity to be the official religion of the Roman Empire, there likely wouldn’t BE a Christian faith at all. Christianity did not become an actual religion until the 4th century. Just so you know.
It was, after all, a cult before it was a religion. And persecuting a religious cult was expensive. It cost a lot less to embrace it than it did to persecute it.
And for your info, the Ten Commandments are also known as the Mosaic Code. They are of Jewish origin. They were around long before Jesus was ever conceived.
The first commandment is NOT ‘love the Lord thy God’. That is incorrect.
It is: ‘I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the House of Bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.’
I can run through the entire list, if you like.
You provided no backup for what you said. Which Christian denomination is being persecuted in the military? There are quite a few, you know: Lutherans, Presbyterians, Anglicans, Catholics, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Pentecostals, Orthodox, Unitarian, etc. I’ve lost count of the various denominations.
Judaism is not a Christian denomination. Jesus was raised in an orthodox Jewish home. My sister converted to Judaism becuase her husband was Jewish. It really pissed off my sanctimonious, hypocritical, holier-than-thou mother who converted from Unitarianism to the Anglican church. She could never bring her pompous-assed self to accept her grandchildren – my two nephews – for who they were – human beings – because they were raised as Orthodox Jews. Some of the things she said behind my sister’s back were so obnoxious, I can’t repeat them.
Am I going to get whacked by you because I might say I’m a Buddhist or a Druid, or that I worship wine and cheese?
Those things have nothing to do with morality. Morality comes from within.
It’s the easiest thing in the world to corrupt someone’s morals and brainwash him into believing that being a murdering thug of the most vile sort is okay, because someone said so and the idiot is afraid to question that.
Hitler was VERY good at corrupting the morals of an entire nation. So was Joseph Stalin, ditto Mao Tse-tung. And need I bring up the entire slate of the Kim family of North Korea? Or the heinous, vicious criminality of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge? Did it even occur to you that those who are now adults in Cambodia, who were taught as children to murder their parents, have so little regard for human life that they will sell their own children for the price of a carton of cigarettes?
Morality stems from within, as I said. It has nothing to do with religious beliefs.
I don’t like brillary any more than anyone else does. I think she’s as corrupt as a human can be, and that means she’s worse that the Kims and Vlad Putin put together. I firmly believe that she will say and do anything to get what she wants. That has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with being a control freak who is addicted to being the center of attention, to power and to position.
If you’re going to gripe and gritch about the jackass in the White House, go ahead. I didn’t vote for that jackass. His give-a-shit attitude has cost him a LOT, no matter how the lefties try to spin it.
And for your info, the far-lefties really don’t like brillary any more because she isn’t radical enough for them.
I never have figured out why some of the wealthiest people in this country, e.g., the clintoons and bodaprez, despise anyone who worked hard to earn a good living and by doing so, made him/herself a fortune in the process. It’s as though we should not work hard, because ‘making it’, the way Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg did, is all wrong.
It doesn’t matter that these people were dedicated to accomplishing something whidh has benefited all of us, which they did by hard work and staying focused, or that they pay their employees well. They have all that money, so they are horrible, horrible people. The hypocritical jealousy of the lazy-assed left is just disgusting.
EX-PH2 … Did you just call JD … Hitler?
I could not tell as I just skimmed your response.
You sounded upset by his post.
I don’t know!
Hope all is well.
@ EX-PH2:
Can you bake a blackberry cobbler pie?
Gee, Master Chief, I thought I was pretty clear.
A – I despise anyone who proselytizes. They’re all con artists and power freaks,
B – Mixing up Jewish laws with a religion that didn’t exist until 38 centuries later (Hebrews: 3500BC, Christianity: 313AD) annoys me.
C – Well, never mind….
All is well in my kingdom. I’ll go back to worshiping cats, wine and cheese now. 🙂
I really can’t type today. That shoudl be 3500BCE (before current era). My bad, didn’t proof it. Sorry.
Cats … I saw the play!
It sucked bad … But the after party was Fabulous!
Seabees and Combat Engineers have lots of Cats to play with.
I’ve heard they sometimes skin those Cats.
@ MCPO NYC USN RET:
Your comment reminds me of years ago, when I was an actor on stage in community theatre plays at the “ROXY” Theatre in Saint Anthony, Idaho, and after the play closed, we’d go to Rexburg for our cast party.
One of the actresses, when seeing me perform during a dress rehearsal, said I was God’s gift to the theatre.
When I played my guitar and sang, “RIDERS IN THE SKY”, a local newspaper reported that it sent chills up their spine.
Nifty stuff, huh?
You should have seen me performing for the Salvation Army at Wal-Mart during the Christmas season.
I loved doing that!
You’re talking about my old neighborhood Mr. Mallarnee. I spent my formative years just down the road in Driggs, the cultural hub of the universe!
Your unstated assumption is that all religions are equally wrong in their connection with God. And, since all religions are wrong, then all their moral systems are essentially equivalent.
Alister McGrath, in his wonderful book “The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World” does a wonderful job of describing your tactic. He notes that of all religions, atheism is the one that *must* be the most intolerant. Almost all other religions accept that the other religions have some small part of the truth. All religions envision God, but some do it more correctly than others. In contrast, atheism demands that *all* other religions are completely wrong, because it cannot allow God to be “partially” there. There is *no* belief in a real God that can be correct at all. And that belief that all religions are wrong, and thus are all essentially equivalent drives the kind of argument you make here.
It is now not Christianity that is rigid and intolerant, engaging in hyperbole and lies against unbelievers. This isn’t 1500 AD. It is atheism.
It’s telling that your great examples of “corruption” of morals are all those of atheistic regimes. Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Plutarco Elias Carras in Mexico, etc. are all bringers of secular illumination.
They are not examples of “corruption of morals” but of the inevitable *expression* of the atheistic “morality that comes from within.”
Of course, your claims are both incorrect and ahistorical. Christianity is unaware of it’s Jewish roots? Really? Constantine “caved” in to a Christian religion that didn’t actually exist? Rome stopped persecuting “cults” upon the adoption of Christianity by Constantine?
Please.
Oh! I’m wrong? Oh! That’s so blatantly intolerant of you! I don’t know if I can live with it! I’ll go put my head in the oven right now!
‘Your unstated assumption is that all religions are equally wrong in their connection with God. And, since all religions are wrong, then all their moral systems are essentially equivalent.’ – your words. Apparently, you can’t read for context, because I didn’t say anything of the kind. I don’t believe you have a fucking clue about spirituality or history, brillopad.
When the Emperor Constantine persecuted Christians, he declared them to be following an illegal cult until he changed his mind, coverted to Christianity, and declared it to be the official religion of the Roman Empire.
When he did that, everything that had been associated with the pagan Roman empire, including bathing, was declared sinful by the Church of Rome. The Romans were very clean people. The public baths, which they all frequented, were social clubs and everything that went on there, including gambling and homosexuality, was declared to be sinful. EVERYTHING. That included medical knowledge, because it was based on pagan practices.
Lack of tolerance has been the theme of the Catholic church for centuries. It seems to be dissipating now. But if it didn’t exist in the Christian religion, then explain the suppression of people with healing skills and their execution as witches. Explain the Auto da Fe and the Inquisition, which was nothing more than zealotry and intolerance toward Jews. It was ‘convert or die’. Those were their choices.
But I wasn’t talking about the 1500s. Rather, this addresses the so-called Dark Ages after the fall of Rome, when every freakin’ tribe in Europe ran roughshod over the carcass of the old Roman Empire. How the hell do you think the Moors got all the way up to Paris?
Entire libraries were looted and destroyed. The only people who were actually literate were the Irish monks who sat in stone-walled cells copying everything that was brought to them. If it hadn’t been for them, civilization was a goner. The monks copied everything that was brought to them.
The Ten Commandments as given in the Exodus and Numbers were not numbered in their original text. That was added by the Church.
You know what the Nicene Creed is? No, I didn’t think so. Do you know what is meant by a catholic and apostolic church? I doubt that you do, but I grew up with it.
If you think the Church didn’t suppress things, you’re mistaken. Galileo was excommunicated for showing that the sun, which was supposed to be perfect, had sunspots, and for comparing Jupiter’s planetary system of moons to be a duplicate of the solar system. It took the Church 400 years to pardon him and admit its error.
Every one of the examples I provided was that of a proselytizing control freak, whose need to be in control of everyone was more important than anything else.
For your information, Hitler’s religion was Catholic. He was not an atheist. He was a Jew whose mother was treated for breast cancer by a Jewish doctor, but because there was no cure for it then, Hitler blamed her death on the doctor who treated her.
He spoke, unashamedly, about God, fanaticism, idealism, dogma, and the power of propaganda. Hitler held strong faith in all his convictions. He justified his fight for the German people and against Jews by using Godly and Biblical reasoning. Indeed, one of his most revealing statements makes this quite clear:
“Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” – Mein Kampf.
One of the Dead Sea scrolls contains what is believed to be the words of Jesus: “The temple of the Lord is within you. Lift a stone and you will find it. Touch a blade of grass and you will know it.” It is the Power that binds the Universe together and it is all around you.
When this was translated in the 1940s, the Catholic Church declared it to be heresy. But the truth is never heresy. And the truth is that without a congregation, there would be no Catholic or any other kind of church, no mosque, no temple, no ritual, nothing. Just a simple belief in a divine power is not enough, you see.
Ritual is something humans invented. I don’t think God really cares one way or another. If you don’t get that faith is an internal quality, and has nothing to do with buildings and taxes and hounding people to follow your instructions, you’ll never understand anything, oh, ye of little faith.
I wish I could write like that. I understand we may differ in our beliefs, much respect for yours.
Semper Fi.
He leveraged that background to get elected. But, once solidly in power, he recreated religion to one that worshiped him… one that was Hitler centered.
Hitler was as Catholic as Che Guevara.
OK, then. It’s not 400 AD, either.
And, actually, your statement of equivalency is all there — Egyptian religion, Judaism, Christianity, they are all equally bullshit to you. If not, then feel free to tell me *which* provides a better vision of God.
Constantine didn’t “cave” in to Christianity. He co-opted it. Christianity was not the dominant religion of the time and had limited political influence, particularly because the early Fathers were first and foremost apolitical.
And, like most evangelical atheist bigots, you can’t look at Christianity of today. Your view of Christianity can’t get past the Middle Ages. All you can do it pretend that the past is today, and use that to condemn people who do not believe what you pretend they do believe.
You are no different that the Moslems who justify every murder of a Christian by evoking the Crusades. I never said the Catholic church didn’t suppress things. I said this wasn’t 1500. It’s not 1300, either. Or 1200. Or 400. Get over it.
And, of course, Hitler was no more a Catholic than you are an Anglican. Your petty antichristian bigotry can’t seem to deal with this, either
I always love it when an antichristian bigot gets on the “Hitler was a Catholic” bandwagon. All the pretense of learning they have goes out the window.
Hitler believed with Marx that religion was the opiate of the people to be used to manipulate them. When he sat down with his confidants, he was clear about that. When he made his plans for the new Berlin for the eternal fourth Reich, he told Albert Speer not to put in any churches.
As noted by Albert Speer: “Around 1937, when Hitler heard that at the instigation of the party and the SS vast numbers of his followers had left the church because it was obstinately opposing his plans, he nevertheless ordered his chief associates, above all Goering and Goebbels, to remain members of the church. He too would remain a member of the Catholic Church he said, although he had no real attachment to it. And in fact he remained in the church until his suicide.”
From the Wikipedia page:
“…once I have settled my other problem,” [Hitler] occasionally declared, “I’ll have my reckoning with the church. I’ll have it reeling on the ropes.” But Bormann did not want this reckoning postponed […] he would take out a document from his pocket and begin reading passages from a defiant sermon or pastoral letter. Frequently Hitler would become so worked up… and vowed to punish the offending clergyman eventually… That he could not immediately retaliate raised him to a white heat…”
When Albert Speer was designing the new Berlin for Hitler, he was told that churches were not to receive building sites.
Hitler said to his friends “The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science. Religion will have to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble. All that’s left is to prove that in nature there is no frontier between the organic and the inorganic. When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know that the stars are not sources of light but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds like ours, then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.”
He doesn’t sound like a Catholic. He sounds like you.
And the rest of your ahistorical diatribe is just as poorly-considered. Your description of the fall of Rome is silly. The Dark Ages you invoke are a convenient myth created by the Victorians. Literacy was just as high or higher in the Byzantine empire than in Rome (forgot about them, eh?). The so-called Dark Ages in the West saw the establishment of the University. The foundations of modern scientific thinking were established. Mathematics transitioned to positional notation and the concepts of algebra, probability, etc were begun. There were innovations in law to deal with increased interactions of diverse cultures acting as equals. Slavery became officially discouraged, primarily by the Church, and the widespread practice of slavery progressed to serfdom, another step on the path of Christian abolitionism.
None of the Dead Sea Scrolls refer to Jesus. Nice use of the fake passive voice there. And the fake quote. It ain’t there. You are quoting a movie (Stigmata) that misquotes the Gospel of Thomas. And you misquote that.
If you want to play Gnostic, then be honest about it. But if you do, you can’t pretend to be an atheist and that morality comes from within.
Billo, just where the fucking hell do you get the information that I’m an atheist?
How dare you?!?
Who the bloody hell do you think you are, to say something like that?
OK, then, just someone who doesn’t believe in God, and who is an antichristian bigot.
Happy?
And just where did I say that? I did not say anything of the kind.
Seem to me it’s closer to the bigoted fat pot – THAT’S YOU – calling the kettle black.
Silly game, Ex-PH2. You claim that morality “comes from within” and doesn’t have anything to do with religious belief. So, where does it come from, if not God?
You got so caught up with trying to bash Christianity, you have now tied yourself in knots trying to both have your cake and eat it, too.
So, are you now claiming that you *do* believe in God, and that morality *does* come from God? It’s just that you hate Christianity?
Or are you just going to play the “no matter what you say, that’s not what I believe” game that people like you run to when you paint yourselves into a corner.
Heh. I’ll play, because I find it amusing. Let me guess. Umm…. You believe that we are all “God,” that God is in the trees and birds and butterflies and we all have that little spark that makes us *all* God.
Then I’m God. So hear me. You are full of shit, mortal. Drop and give me 50, maggot. ( I always wanted to be a DI, but I guess I’ll have to settle for being God).
So you think it’s okay to lie about someone?
Well that tells us everything anyone needs to know about you.
It’s OK to infer things when people write. Even when they write badly.
If you don’t want to be misinterpreted, then write clearly. State what you believe, and then people will know.
Apparently you believe *something.* But God only knows what. You write like an evangelical atheist. But, whatever kind of antichristian bigot you are, I’ll be happy to acknowledge it. Just stop playing the “Guess what I am!” game follwoed by “You’re wrong, and because you’re wrong, you’re a liar!.”
That’s pretty pathetic, actually. If you’ve got something more than “Christians suck,” and “All Christians are ignorant,” then bring it on. Otherwise this game of dissembling, being coy, and then crying “you lie” is just bullshit.
They’re “likely to not have a Christian faith at all” would’ve lead to the collapse of western civilization, and we’d be not that much different today than what they were during the “dark ages.”
American concepts of freedom and democracy wouldn’t exist either.
If Constantine didn’t do that, western civilization would’ve collapsed in response to the “barbarian” migrations/invasions and we wouldn’t have achieved the technological development that we ultimately achieved. More on that later.
That was no cave in, but a matter of practicality. Christianity was spreading real fast and had reached/converted enough people to where it made sense for the emperor to embrace it as a form of increasing his legitimacy. Christianity continued to spread until it spread well beyond the borders of the Roman Empire.
Many of the “barbarians” that overran the western part were also Christians. This played an important role in the church being able to preserve… and even save… western civilization. The “barbarian” kings didn’t know how to administer large areas that had already urbanized to the extent that the Romans had.
They turned to the Church for help… they had influence over the Christians. Many of these “barbarian” kings converted to the Christianity that the locals already engaged in from the one they previously engaged in… in order to gain legitimacy among their new subjects.
The church leveraged this relationship and talked the new rulers into supporting the idea of learning centers, and knowledge preservation. The church was able to continue on to bridge the gap between ancient knowledge gathering and modern science. In fact, the church developed and utilized “modern scientific thought” before modern science kicked in.
It built into the Judeo Christian philosophy of taking “God’s creation” apart and putting it back together… which lead to increased learning about the things around us.
Contrary to misconception, the Church didn’t have problems with the idea that the earth orbited the sun. Their issue with Galileo was that he was teaching something as fact that was still considered as theory. At the same time Galileo was threatened for doing what he was doing, the Church was paying a group of Jesuits who were mathematically proving that the Earth went around the sun.
When they mathematically proved it, the church accepted that fact.
The church also brought in mechanization. A better way had to be found to mark the time throughout the day, so that they could hold mass at consistent times of the day… during a period that was supposed to be “the dark ages.” They would’ve brought the industrial revolution in centuries early had it not been for the monarchy putting a stop to it in England.
The church’s efforts lead to the concept of continuous scientific knowledge improvement, and continues technological improvement… as opposed to creating a technology and sticking with it for centuries.
Preserving and developing knowledge lead to the first universities. The Christian concept of helping those in need, to include helping the sick in groups, contributed to the development of the hospital concept. In fact, it helped win converts to Christianity.
On the subject of natural rights and common law… Christian friars first argued the concept of “equal treatment under the law.” Spanish colonial administrators violated the civil rights of the natives who refused to convert to Christianity. These friars leveraged Sunday mass to talk about how “we were all God’s children,” and how we had to be treated equally, regardless of whether we were Christians or not.
This snowballed into the philosophy that everyone, up to and including the monarch, were subject to the law… that nobody was above the law. That was like saying that you were above God’s own law.
Prior to the time these friars challenged the colonial authority’s lack of equal treatment of the governed, criticizing the government was a serious offense. It could get you accused of plotting treason.
The idea of Separation of Church and State? Christian monks argued that centuries before our founding fathers argued it.
A lot of our concepts of “right and wrong,” and a lot of our concepts of civil governance, evolved from Christian philosophy. Our founders included natural rights, common law, etc., under the concept of “God’s Law.”
Why is it that a person has a right to be tried by jury when he/she stands to lose his/her life, property, or freedom (jail time)? Because our life and freedom, and the property gained from using our “God given talents,” were not the state’s to give to us in the first place.
The state didn’t give those to us. Our founders saw that God gave us those rights. This is why King George III acknowledged the state’s rights to operate independently. He didn’t grant it, because he didn’t grant it in the first place, neither did his ancestors. We always had freedom and independence, even under the English/British Monarchs.
During their time, if you wanted to be tried by the jury, you requested trial “By God and country.” God “manifested” himself via a religious raised jury applying religious… specifically christian based philosophy… to weigh facts and make a decision.
You swore with your palm on the Bible during these court proceedings. Lying and sinning against other people wasn’t as grave on the people’s mindset as sinning and lying against God.
And following that principle didn’t bode well for previous democracies. You illustrated an example of how human based morality could lead to different concepts of what’s “right or wrong.” This difference could change over time. This change threatened democracy.
Our founders understood that they had to peg morality, and what’s right or wrong, to a constant. That constant is what they saw in Christian philosophy.
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2015/March/Chaplains-Choice-Religious-Freedom-or-Your-Career/
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/04/07/lawmakers-question-navy-chaplains-removal.html
http://dailysignal.com/2014/12/14/military-punishes-chaplain-for-referencing-bible-during-suicide-prevention-seminar/
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/12/09/chaplain-punished-for-sharing-his-faith-in-suicide-prevention-class/
http://www.stripes.com/news/airman-opposed-to-gay-marriage-files-complaint-after-being-transferred-1.236835
http://www.examiner.com/article/when-military-chaplains-cannot-pray-jesus-name
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/open-hostility-to-christians-in-u-s-military/
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/10/14/us-army-defines-christian-ministry-as-domestic-hate-group/
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/atheist-accuses-christians-of-treason-over-beliefs/
Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. Deuteronomy 6:4-6
One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. ’This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ Matthew 22:35-39
@ J. D. PENDRY, Et Alii:
Thank YOU for posting this!
It’s very much in line with what EVERY person I knew took for granted when I was a boy growing up in a racially segregated Southern military community, which was openly unapologetic about its religious and patriotic heritage.
When I was in the Seventh Grade, our teacher, the wife of a Baptist minister, asked us who our heroes were.
Many of the kids said, “Robert E. Lee”, or “Jeb Stuart”, et cetera.
Having just seen the movie, “THE TEN COMMANDMENTS”, at the Starlight Drive-In Theater a couple of nights before, I said that Joshua was my hero.
The teacher replied how disappointed she was that not one of us had mentioned Jesus Christ as being our hero.
It was not uncommon to discuss the Bible and Christianity in our local public school classes, and nobody objected.
Our daily classes always began with recitations of the Lord’s Prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance.
That was Spring Lake School in Spring Lake, North Carolina, just outside the main gate of Fort Bragg.
Today, Spring Lake School is called Lillian Black School, after my Fourth Grade teacher.
The Starlight Drive-In Theater is long gone, replaced by a shopping center.
https://youtu.be/_dUg2Opk6xM
“SPRING LAKE, NORTH CAROLINA”
Words and Music by:
JOHN ROBERT “SAIGON” MALLERNEE
Wednesday 13 May 1992
VERSE # 1:
I grew up in
Spring Lake, North Carolina,
A little Army town
Outside Fort Bragg.
A sergeant was my Dad
When I was just a lad
With all the other children
Playing tag.
In the woods
Around our home,
I always loved to roam;
Picked blackberries for
My Mama’s cobbler pie.
Played soldier
With my pals;
Threw pine cones
At the gals.
I never thought those
Happy times would die.
VERSE # 2:
I went back to
Spring Lake, North Carolina
To see how big
The little town had grown.
There’s pollution
And there’s crime
As a consequence of time.
Nothing stays
When changing winds
Have blown.
The woods have
All been paved.
The good times
Were not saved.
There’s buildings
And there’s garbage
All around
The Starlite Drive-in’s gone,
T’weren’t nothing left alone.
Mama’s dead
And buried in the ground.
REPEAT FIRST VERSE
CONCLUDE:
I never thought those
Happy times would die.
https://youtu.be/K_pFn20Hl5I
This was the song I performed, a capello, the very first time I ever sang in public, when I was in the Third Grade at Spring Lake School in Spring Lake, North Carolina.
_____________________________________
“OLD FOLKS AT HOME”
Stephen Collins Foster
(1826 – 1864)
VERSE # 01:
Way down upon
The Swanee River,
Far, far away;
There’s where my heart
Is turning ever.
There’s where the
Old folks stay.
All up and down
The whole Creation,
Sadly, I roam,
Still longing for
The old plantation,
And for the
Old folks at home.
CHORUS:
All the World
Am sad and dreary
Everywhere I roam.
Oh, Darkies,
How my heart
Grows weary
Far from the
Old folks at home!
VERSE # 02:
All ’round the little farm,
I wandered
When I was young.
Then, many happy days,
I squandered.
Many’s the song,
I sung.
When I was playing
With my brother,
Happy was I.
Oh, take me to
My kind old mother!
There, let me
Live and die.
VERSE # 03:
One little hut
Among the bushes,
One that I love,
Still, sadly to my
Memory rushes,
No matter where
I rove.
When will I see
The bees a humming
All ’round the comb?
When will I hear
The banjo strumming
Down in my
Good old home?
JD,
As always, great article.
I agree with you position.
MCPO
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights….”
The position by our Forefathers is definitely that a person has God-given rights. It is also very plain that they viewed the Constitution as an agreement among Men for human purposes:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
In this Constitution, the Legislature, is denied any and all power to compel religious practice:
Amendment I: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ….
With no laws, the Executive Branch cannot act. Nor can the Judiciary issue a decision.
Because the entire government is denied the ability to take any action with respect to religion, the government is subordinated to individual religious concerns.
Without those good old fashioned traditional, all-American, Christian, family moral values, what is left to inspire us to be willing to voluntarily fight for this Country, and to love our own people?
Maybe that’s the whole idea, huh?
OK, I am with Ph2 here. Not a Christian, however I do have good morals. Not everyone who is a *good* person believes the same. Hell, in front of my house deep in bible territory I have a gargoyle. Try and explain that it is something that was created to protect. Take a look at European churches for example. I don’t bash the way anyone else believes, however that IS enshrined in our Constitution. I believe our troops should be free to worship however they want. I also believe that morals are not enshrined in one religion.
/off soapbox
You missed the point!
Back then it WAS different.
Most people most certainly DID believe in something substantial.
But what do I know.
PS: If I had a chance to do it all over I would wish I was a colonist in the Hudson Valley of NY during the Revolution and through the defeat of the British … As they were fighting for two things …
@ MCPO NYC USN RET:
Gosh, gee whillikers, YOU are admitting you’d want to be a treasonous Rebel, risking death, deprivation, and dishonor to fight for a newly created country that seceded from the recognized established government?
Hmmmm – – – ,
Now, where have I seen that before?
John, that wouldn’t be the War of Northern Aggression, now would it? 🙂
Also known as the Second American Revolutionary War, or the War for Southern Independence.
And/or “the recent unpleasantness”.
Also known as Star Wars.
//I had friends on that Death Star.
The Easter Rising!
@ MCPO NYC USN RET:
“The Easter Rising!”
Aw, shucks, now I’ll have to post ANOTHER homemade video recording of ME(!) singing.
https://youtu.be/R0rtAOSunRM
“GRACE”
BY: Sean O’Meara and Frank O’Meara
VERSE # 1:
As we gather in the chapel
Here in old Kilmainham Jail,
I think about
These past few days.
Oh, will they say
We’ve failed?
From our school days,
They have told us
We must yearn for liberty.
Yet, all I want
In this dark place
Is to have you here with me.
CHORUS:
Oh, Grace, just hold me
In your arms
And let this moment linger.
They take me out at dawn
And I will die.
With all my love,
I place this wedding ring upon your finger.
There won’t be time to share our love,
For we must say goodbye.
VERSE # 2:
Now, I know it’s hard
For you, my love,
To ever understand
The love I bear
For these brave men,
My love for this dear land.
But when Padhraic
Called me to his side
Down in the GPO,
I had to leave
My own sick bed,
To him, I had to go.
VERSE # 3:
Now as the dawn is breaking,
My heart is breaking too.
On this May morn,
As I walk out,
My thoughts will be of you.
And I’ll write
Some words upon the wall,
So everyone wlll know
I love so much,
That I could see
His blood upon the rose.
************************
************************
If ever you have a trip to Dublin, Ireland, visit Kilmainham Jail and do the tour.
You’ll learn the story of this lovely song.
Joseph Mary Plunkett was arrested for taking part in the 1916 Easter rising in Dublin.
On 03 May 1916, in the evening, he was allowed to marry Grace Gifford in the prison chapel.
The couple were then separated.
Next morning she was summoned to say goodbye to her husband of a few hours.
They spoke for about ten minutes and then Joseph was executed by firing squad.
The line that says “I had to leave my own sick bed” refers to the fact that Joseph was suffering from tuberculosis at the time.
The last verse mentions “the blood upon the rose”, which was the title of a poem by Joseph, which was taught in Irish schools.
The blood upon the rose is a reference to the blood of Jesus Christ.
@ MCPO NYC USN RET:
Wherever you are right now, I know you’re in a hospital and under the knife.
So, I hope you get to see this homemade video recording of, “GRACE”, and I’ll definitely include you in my prayers.
God bless you, Master Chief!
https://youtu.be/LDJvxlbR_jM
“MY OWN NATIVE LAND”
From the singing of:
John McGoldrick,
of County Clare
and
Joe Heaney,
of County Galway
Composer Anonymous
There’s a dear little isle
In the Western Ocean.
‘Tis an island of purity,
Holy and grand.
It’s name fills
Its daughters
And sons with emotion
When they are out on
A far distant strand.
‘Tis Ireland, my country,
The birthplace of heroes,
The home of the patriot,
Warrior and sage,
Of bards and of chieftains,
Whose names live in story.
May they live forever
On history’s page.
You once were a proud
And a glorious nation.
Your name and your fame
Were known all
Over the world.
But misfortune o’ercame you
And sad desolation.
Your emerald banner
In slavery lay unfurled.
They tortured your children.
They spoiled your
Green banner.
They tried to
Exterminate you
Long, long, long ago.
But the Irish are somehow
Like wild creeping flowers.
The faster you pluck them,
The quicker they
Seem to grow.
I love every blade
Of grass green
On your mountain,
Every leaf on your tree,
And every rock
On your strand.
I love your green valleys
And murmuring fountains.
I love you, a cushla,
My own dear native land,
My Ireland!
___________________
NOTE: “a cushla” is a Gaelic phrase meaning, “my pulse”.
I learned this song by listening to the album, “ONE AND ALL: THE BEST OF CHERISH THE LADIES”, recorded by the group, CHERISH THE LADIES.
I’d like to point out that many “leftists” satisfy their craving for being part of something greater than themselves, which provides a moral compass to live by as well as a belief in a higher power, by internally establishing government in place of a deity. The most obvious example is Communism, but modern Progressivism is also useful.
This sort of thing appeals to rationalists who reject a deity as rank superstition, but still crave what religion may provide. The body & method of science, by itself, does not generally satisfy what seems to be a near-universal human need to look for a Creator (or at least Master Watchmaker {g}), but totalitarian ideology -intentionally or not- establishes that framework.
Modern 20th-century ideologies such as Progressivism or Technarchy at least pay lip-service to human freedom, but they tend to talk more about freedom than liberty. They also tend to see government as the source of both wisdom and power.
I won’t address the question whether it is possible to establish a belief or culture with an external moral code absent religion, but I will point out that since the French Revolution atheistic regimes have oppressed, tortured, and killed far more people than Torquemada could ever dream about.
Pop quiz: who was the biggest mass murderer in the 20th Century? Who was #2? Hint: neither one was Hitler.
Biggest 20th cenury mass murderer?
Uh, Stalin? Juan Peron?
Stalin and Mao were the two most prolific mass murderers in history. Not even close. Even the collective deaths caused by colonialism over roughly 4 1/2 centuries doesn’t total what either of them is estimated to have done.
The best available estimate is that the government of the USSR under Stalin outright murdered, worked to death, or starved to death by policy something on the order of 61 million individuals. Mao’s Communists in China similarly did in a minimum of 76 million.
In contrast, the best estimate of the number of people outright murdered by Nazi Germany under Hitler is slightly less than 21 million. And the collective impact of colonialism worldwide since Columbus’ first voyage is estimated to have been on the order of 51 million – which is still less than either Stalin’s USSR or Mao’s China killed.
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM
Make sure you see the “Important Note” for the update there regarding Mao’s China and deaths due to colonialism.
Please note that the above figures do not include deaths due to war. Rather, they are deaths caused by deliberate government policy outside of war.
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DBG.CHAP1.HTM
This 6 minute clip does a fabulous job of summing up The Great Leap Forward. It’s a damn shame millions of people had to starve to death in order to prove that “hope and change” would not put food on the table. Death in the name of Public Good. Lars would be proud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlbB3cmgPmo
Hondo got it. 🙂 Mao is #1, and Stalin #2.
This is the sort of thing that makes lefties heads explode. Heh.
In my journey I have found that there is one principle by which, if I live, it will never fail to keep me in everlasting ignorance. That principle is contempt prior to investigation.
I respect your right to believe as you choose, I will accept nothing less than being free to live without them.
“I have observed, indeed, generally, that while in protestant countries the defections from the Platonic Christianity of the priests is to Deism, in catholic countries they are to Atheism. Diderot, D’Alembert, D’Holbach, Condorcet, are known to have been among the most virtuous of men. Their virtue, then, must have had some other foundation than the love of God.
[Letter to Thomas Law, 13 June 1814]”
― Thomas Jefferson, Letters of Thomas Jefferson
The idea that morals and virtue are derived from a supernatural source is demonstratively false, and honestly a shallow thought.
Dave, if I can wade in without pissing anyone off….
The way I look at it is the fact that water flows downhill does not require the intervention of a supreme being, just as “doing good is always good, and doing bad is always bad (Socrates I think)” i.e. “morality” is likewise possible without divine guidance or intervention.
Maybe it is just me, but the value of making a moral decision under the duress of eternal damnation vs. eternal reward has always seemed cheapen the process.
For those of you that I have pissed off, I am sorry. I covet your happiness that your relationship with God gives you. It just doesn’t work for me. I respect all of you… Billo, ExPH2, 2/17 AirCav, JRM, The Besig, CSM Pendry, etc. Just sharing what I think and feel and I appreciate your thoughts and input as I continually try to learn and evolve.
Thanx for the post. Interesting that you mention Socrates. I think for a long time those of us that held no belief in a God sat quietly and were respectful of others beliefs. Which I of course have no objection to.
This unfortunately had the effect of allowing religious dogma to expand unquestioned to a large degree. With the advent of the internet many people, but particularly the young among us have access to information that decades past would have been unthinkable.
Even when I am invited to a public debate, I try hard to not disrespect the individual who holds a belief in the very thing I am debunking. I wish I was much better at that.
Tolerance of others views and beliefs is what the First Amendment guarantees. Our government may not have a religion and is therefore Secular. Those that are convinced that the particular understanding of their God must be correct often have difficulties defending the rights of other views.
Socrates of course was sentenced to death for “refusing to recognize the gods recognized by the state” and “of corrupting the youth.” Forgive me if I do not drink of the cup as others do.
Semper Fi.
GDContractor, you haven’t pissed me off at all. We’re all entitled to believe whatever we wish, but someone forcing his beliefs on others is not about faith, it’s about control. I see very little difference between the Inquisition and Pol Pot’s behavior, for example.
What started this discussion was the statement that servicemembers who were in Christian denominations were being persecuted for their beliefs, which is illegal under any circumstances. It just kind of ballooned from there.
Dave, a coherent set of ethics and morals may not be of supernatural origin, but how many non-religious ethical/moral codes are in widespread use? Besides none? Not being a smartass, just observing the world.
Whether it’s turning towards God, or evolutionary pressures which influenced our internal wiring, human beings generally tend to look for something greater than themselves, which can give them a sense of connection with the world.
Erich Fromm, in his works Escape from Freedom and The Art of Loving describes this search as a function of self-awareness. As a person grows he or she eventually becomes self-aware in that they realize they are a being separate from the rest of the world. IIRC Fromm describes the stages as 1) The world, wherein an infant has no self-awareness, 2) Myself, wherein a youth/adolescent holds a solipsist view that they are the world, and 3) I am, wherein a human becomes aware of themselves as an individual separate from the world around them.
This sense, once developed, creates a following sense of apartness or loneliness. One form of addressing this is joining a greater group or belief system {not necessarily religion).
Like I said, you can call that God’s way of encouraging you to accept Him, or evolutionary pressure in which we ended up wired a certain way as self-aware predatory apes. Both work.
I like the question. I would have to ponder on it a bit to fully answer it with earnest. The question infers a false supposition, suggesting that ethical/moral codes have a foundation in religion.
Most every civilization that I know of had the same basic moral/ethical foundation. Murder, stealing, adultery, fraud, and so on have universally been considered wrong.
These moral/ethical practices most assuredly predate our ability to write or possibly even a developed language. Many cultures predate the monotheistic faiths and all had a cultural conviction to moral/ethical behavior.
Simply put, our need for socially approved behavior predates any known religion. Recent archaeological sites such as Göbekli Tepe now date advanced cultures existed some 12,000 years ago.
I will have to dust off the extensive studies for my GED but Fromm and many others offer theory into human behavior. I would say Maslow and his hierarchy toward a level of self-actualization best describes the potential for human development.
I agree that both do work, albeit not as effectively or with congruence. Work at achieving what? I would suggest that the more we peruse down each path, the more mutually exclusive the ideologies become.
The thought must occur then, “If others do not believe as I do, something is either wrong with my belief or theirs”. If any conscious doubt of belief is seen as leading to immortal damnation, the mechanism to thwart critical thought exists.
Often I am nothing more than a low brow hominid a half a chromosome away from a chimpanzee looking for a cigar and a bottle of Basil Hayden.
I should clarify. To answer the question succinctly, I believe all moral/ethical codes are non-religious.
As Hitchens often said, there is no moral/ethical act that I as a non-believer can not do that a person that believes could.
I don’t need to spew any kind of religious theory or anything else.
I simply look at the way the whole system fits together with all of God’s creatures playing a significant part in the world we share with them.
I look at the universe through the eyes of the Hubble and the internet and all the beauty that it can bring.
The best thing I can think of is to say that God, to me, is an artist, one hell of an artist and a mathematician beyond all others.
It is not for me to figure out that he either is or is not there, I only enjoy the fruits of his labor of love to bring this entire place to life.
I am not, nor is the entire human race collectively smart enough to understand his ways and they way that he has put this place together.
I am quite comfortable and at true peace with myself knowing that he has acted for me in my life to bring it to a place where everything makes perfect sense to me.
I have had numerous near death experiences in my life and my life has been saved all of those times by a longshot that things and people were in my life at that exact moment, at that exact second to keep me alive for something he wishes for me to accomplish.
If there was ever a case to be made for Guardian Angels, you’re reading something from it…
I don’t need to brag, God was good to me in the talent department and I proved it again today on stage.
I don’t need to prove myself to anyone or anything else today.
I only have to accept the tender mercies he has bestowed on me.
Great article and Ex-PH2 I hope that you are able to come to a point in your life that you can be at peace with yourself, your family and the things that make you who you are today.
None of us are perfect beings, we make mistakes, follow the wrong path and act really stupid at times. But, we are perfect enough just to be here at the same time and perfect at being ourselves.
There is another side, I’ve seen it, felt it and felt the good parts of it coming into my life, and that is what put me at peace with everything and everyone.
I cherish each day and each person that God has put in my life, even those that I disagree with. Without a bunch of dumb fuckhead liberals to beat up on, how would we ever have any fun !!!
I hope that you are able to come to a point in your life that you can be at peace with yourself, your family and the thing that make you who you are today.
If that hope sounds a bit condescending, it should. It sounds contemptuous and assumes you are not at peace with yourself.
I see the Universe with beauty and awe, love and cherish my family and friends. I simply have no need for a creator of any kind.
Semper Fi.
‘Ex-PH2 I hope that you are able to come to a point in your life that you can be at peace with yourself’ – well, that is THE most condescending, arrogant piece of unmitigated crap I’ve been handed in a long, long time!
I am gobsmacked that you somehow extrapolated my NOT having peace of mind out of what I said. I never in any way indicated that or anything like it. You certainly are a presumptive twit.
Well, you did talk about your mother in a pretty negative light and the rifts in your family, so it’s not a huge leap to assume you or your family isn’t totally at peace. I’m sure the poster meant nothing condescending or hateful of it.
I completely understand where you’re coming from, Brother.
” If your God is so great, where was he when…”
I’ve heard that one, or the more common one, “If God is so loving, why … (fill-in-the-blank) …?”
Both are simply answered by two words. Free will. The Adversary has free will, Man has free will. Free to make choices. From bad choices, bad consequences come (addressing the Human perspective).
As far as proselytizing, yeah, that can be irritating. The extreme case would be conversion at the point of the sword. Unless love and fealty is freely given, it is utterly worthless, except, possibly as a feel good thing for the proselytizer. It was as useless for the Christians, as it is for ISIS.
To this day, some Jews consider Christianity as a cult. They are free to choose. Very many of the Sanhedrin and the Pharisees chose to look at Y’shua as a nut-ball. Despite all the miracles that were displayed before them. Thus, having rejected Messiah, they were rejected and chastised for nearly two millennia, and reaped the consequences of rejecting Him in the time of visitation.
Decisions have consequences. Always. Strive to make good ones.
I’m really tired and need to hit the rack. Keep up the good fight, Brother.
Hitler was Catholic about as much as the Pope is Muslim. Yes, he was born to a Catholic mother and was baptized into the faith. Yes, he was dragged off to church as a boy, but that’s about where his Catholicism ends. He used Christianity as a tool. He was never, ever a Christian. He was a social Darwinist. In fact, Goebbels wrote in 1941 that Hitler “hates Christianity, because it has crippled all that is noble in humanity.” Four years prior to that, the Pope Pius that Hitler had “open fundamental hostility to Christ and His Church.” Albert Speer’s great city was to contain no churches, Catholic or otherwise. So, there is a great wealth of information supporting Hitler’s disdain for Christianity generally and Catholicism particularly. To contend otherwise is to play fast and loose with the facts.
Well, all I did was summarize it, AirCav. His mother was Jewish, and he was baptized Catholic as a baby. I preferred to summarize it instead of going into a long-winded explanation. I didn’t bring up Hitler’s mentor, Dietrich Eckart, either. His influence had a great deal to do with Hitler’s rise.
I don’t come to this blog to read about religion. I will say this one thing, and then I’m done with this subject on here. God never did anything to hurt me. Men and women, parading around as God’s servants, were the ones that hurt me. Do I still believe in God and worship him? Yes. Do other people of any sort, kind, or type, factor into my worship anymore? No. Period.
^^^That Girl Right there^^^
Slow Clap.
You said it.
My neighbor, a christian, hates the gays…he and his wife happily head to church and hate the gays with their friends in the church. He likes to tell me all about how christians are persecuted and that’s why they need laws like the ones in Indiana…when I ask him if he even knows what classes of people are protected classes under the Indiana public accommodation laws he can’t answer. I explain that in Indiana gays are not now and haven’t been a protected class under current, existing public accommodation laws thus Indiana’s inhabitants have been free to discriminate against gays without legal repercussion right along. So how is religion being persecuted when there is no existing right of gays under public accommodation laws currently?
Christians are upset because more people are asking questions, christians have had their way for so long they don’t even understand how coddled and protected they’ve been.
Persecuted my ass, I wore “NO PREF” on my dog tags and I can give you hundreds of examples of what “good christians” had to say to me about my views. Try being a non-believer during the 70s and 80s in the military and you might understand persecution…to this day I don’t ask the VA for a fucking thing. I won’t take a VA loan, a VA health care, VA nothing fuck the US government I won’t take a fucking penny from them. I did my duty and was discharged honorably. I acted honorably during my service and did all that was asked. My good christian brethren? Yeah, not so much.
Persecution? Christians in the US have no fucking idea what that even means.
It is interesting to note how christians are constantly pissing and moaning about how tough they have it and constantly whining about when things were better….better for whom? What decade do christians wish to return us to?
The 50s when blacks and whites couldn’t attend the same schools as good christians? The 60s when blacks finally were allowed by writ of law and protections of Guardsmen to enter a college with some white people? Or the 70s when we murdered twice as many people as we do now?
As religion has become less influential our lives have gotten better in terms of safety, in terms of medical treatment, in terms of equal protection under the law for all Americans.
The response from christians has been to cry they are somehow being persecuted, well guess what you’re not being persecuted you’re just finally being forced to act like real Americans and accept the idea this country wasn’t built to kiss your godly asses all the day and night long and now you have to buck up and treat all Americans with dignity under the law.
About fucking time.
I’m not sure what that was all about, VOV. You write as if your neighbor is the go-to authority on matters Christian. Many Christians detest sex between members of the same gender but do not hate gays. There is a difference. And I am not all familiar with a general claim by Christians that we are being persecuted. The persecution of Christians, both legally and extra-legally, is a fact in the ME and elsewhere. And here, in the US, I am aware of no persecution claims, but I am well aware of the conflict between abortion advocates and Catholic hospitals when it comes to Obamacare, but I don’t recall hearing or reading that characterized as persecution by church officials. You write, “Try being a non-believer during the 70s and 80s in the military and you might understand persecution.” Given that line in context, I guess that you someone you knew was persecuted. What was the nature of that persecution? Were you imprisoned? Were you beaten, tortured, or denied Apple Jacks?
The poster claims persecution in the US military for christians, perhaps more than I experienced which was certainly not of the middle eastern variety as I am sure you are well aware and as I am sure you understood I was not implying anything of that serious a nature.
My neighbor is an illustration, same as the OP’s illustration that if there’s no god how does someone like VOV know what’s right or wrong?
C’mon man if we’re posting hyperbole I’m allowed to respond in kind…as if I can’t understand murder, rape, and theft is a crime because i don’t buy his version of god….I’ve heard that stupid shit forever and a day and it’s about as illogical as one can be regarding morality.
If ISIS aren’t real muslims, then slave owners and segregationists weren’t real Christians. There, see how easy that is?
Oh, I had “no preference” on my dog tags too. But I didn’t experience any push back. My rights end where my neighbors rights begin. I don’t tell others what to believe.
Christians are being attacked by the LGBT community. Otherwise why haven’t Muslim bakeries or black churches with the same beliefs been setup?
Okay. Fair enough. Yes, you are free to hyperbolize. Besides, you probably don’t even like Apple Jacks.
I’m not going to offer a fancy explanation on religion or historical acts that were committed by Christians or in the name of Christianity. I only have my personal experiences and beliefs. I am a Christian, even though at times I have questioned my own faith. I have wondered “what if I’m wrong?”, well that in its self is the definition of faith, right? I am probably one of worst Christians that you will find. I am full of sin, I don’t get up every Sunday morning to go to church because I’m lazy, I say things about people that do not have to be said. I do not do the work of a missionary that all Christians are supposed to do. BUT I still believe.
Am I wrong for looking to ” the invisible man in the sky” for guidance? I don’t think so. Do I feel that being a Christian requires me to hold myself to a higher moral standard than I otherwise would? YES. I didn’t say a higher moral standard than others. I sure hope I am right and that this
Iife is not all there is.
So, why does God let things happen? My answer is he doesn’t. Man does that because God gave us free will. Free will is what separates us from the animals( and the angels ).
I can tell you this, also a personal experience, I have never had any one be so offended by MY faith as an atheist ( I can give times and places) even when I was not trying to “push religion” on them. I actually said have a happy Easter to a colleague, and thought that we were going to fight. I felt it was a little much on his end. I have had Muslims wish me a blessed Ramadan before and I simply said thank you and went on my way. Again, I am speaking of personal experience and not pointing a finger at anyone.
Do you have to have religion to have morals? No. But for some of us, it helps keep our moral compass straight.
Is it really so hard to keep religion out of the political discourse?
As long as you follow the 3 principles of conservatism, free market capitalism, small goverment, and our constitutional rights, I do not care what your religion is, and you should not care what my religion is.
The problem, my friend, is that there are at least two kinds of conservatives: political conservatives -to whom you refer- and social conservatives.
While many of the latter have become at least resigned to gay rights, a significant minority, most of whom are very politically active, don’t like Teh Gays (to paraphrase Backstrom). At least they get upset over gay marriage and such.
On the other hand, the Social Justice Warrior types seem determined to shove their idea of “tolerance” down everyone else’s throat, which convinces social cons that they’re being persecuted. The SJWs then feel persecuted because they can’t tell everyone else what to think.
Meanwhile you and I are off in the corner wishing they would all just keep their hands to themselves. 🙂
Mankind has the power to create and the power to destroy.
We can do great good when we choose to. We are a fickle group of beings.
We fight over religion, but we loose faith in doing so.
I dont care if a person is christian, muslim, hindu or believes that a peanut butter and jelly sandwich has all the answers.
What I do care about is the content of a persons character, things like compassion and a willingness to make the world a better place for all of us are more important then what religion osstamped on a Dogtag.
Peace to all of you.
The important thing to remember is that our rights do not come from our government, and rigorous restrictions must be imposed on government, lest it become oppressive tyranny.
That is a concept that arose from religious idealism, particularly those suffering Christians who sought religious freedom.
Were it not for those fervent Christian pilgrims risking all to establish the basic principles of morality and liberty here in the raw wilderness of the New World, we would almost certainly be living under a despotic king or dictator.
In fact, as we view the current consequences of the on-going contemporary war on the traditional moral family values of Christianity, that is indeed how our Country has so sadly and rapidly (i.e., in my lifetime) forfeited so much liberty, and simultaneously, also produced a population which is not as literate as their forefathers.
Those suffering Christians were seeking religious freedom from whom? The answer of course was a government ruled by other Christians.
From whom were the Christians that Jefferson was seeing rights to free expression being persecuted. The answer of course was other Christians.
May I suggest the possibility that family values of Native Americans, Aboriginal, Nordic, and a long list of others are every bit as moral/ethical.
If you choose to believe that you will become a God yourself in the hereafter, so be it. Claiming some moral superiority over families that are not Christian is just repugnant.
Thank you, JD. Your piece is refreshing to read.
Apparently, some people take exception to my saying that morality comes from within and has little to do with religion or God. In fact, one imbecile has decided that this means I’m an atheist, which I am not. He must enjoy lying about people.
Okay. Fine. You have the right to disagree with me. But since I can back up what I said, here you are.
From the Bishops’ Accountability site:
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/AtAGlance/USCCB_Yearly_Data_on_Accused_Priests.htm
This goes back to 1950. 6,427 clerics credibly accused of sexually abusing minors, going back to 1950. This is just in the USA.
The worldwide numbers are even worse. These country-by-country accounts have cited references.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country
I can also cite fundamentalists who abused the good nature and gullability of their parishioners, starting with familiar names like Jim Jone (Jonestown Massacre, 1977). I lost track of a good friend and found her picture on the front page of victims’ photographs.
And my personal favorites: Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker. ‘Send us all the money you can. You’ll be SO close to God when you do.’
And yea, Hitler was baptized a Catholic and used his religious connection as an excuse to start slaughtering Jews and those who were imperfect, e.g., epileptics, mentally challenged, Down Syndrome, etc., et.c, or who he just didn’t like, e.g., Gypsies, Poles, etc. He did, in fact, kill off about 14 million people, 6++ million of whom were Jews. Oh, I know – he didn’t actually do it himself. He employed his abiltiy to corrupt people to do it for him.
Perhaps someone besides me should read Jonathan Swift’s satirical essay on the problem of the Irish poor: A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People From Being a Burthen to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick.
Like I said, morality is an internal thing. It has far less to do with religion and God than it does with you personally. You either have morals, or you don’t.
And I don’t give a crap if any of you take offense at what I said. Judge not lest ye be likewise judged.
You haven’t answered the basic question. Who says what morals are “right?” If they don’t come from God, and they just come from “inside,” then *my* morality is just as valid as yours. And if my morality says it’s great to kill people and drink their blood, then who are *you* to say that my morality is wrong?
And, OK, you claim not to be an atheist. But you haven’t said what you *are.* You write like an evangelical atheist.
But, OK. What are you? Running around saying “liar, liar” is bullshit when you get this coy about things. If you make people guess, and write like an atheist, then it’s not a “lie” when people interpret what you say the way it sounds.
So, tell us what you are. Then there won’t be any mistake.
Yeah, I get it. Christians fail to live up to your high standards. You still haven’t told us where those standards come from, other than from your internalized Christian upbringing and personal arrogance, thinking that *you* set the moral standard for the universe.
OK, you are going to cling to this bullshit Hitler thing until your dying breath, regardless of the facts. I get it.
What you haven’t been able to do is to show how Hitler’s morality is any less valid than yours *by your own measure.* If morality comes from within, and there is no external judge of morality, than Hitler’s morality is just as valid as yours.
I am not here to defend ExPH2, she’s a honey badger.
Please don’t call me an evangelical atheist or an anti-Christian bigot until I earn it.
In reply to your last question about Hitler, I tend to think along the lines that morality is self serving. Given the Hitler committed suicide in a bunker at age 56, and EXPH2 will probably live to be in her 90’s and succumb to a non-violent death… my calculus says that EXPH2’s morality wins.
From what I gather, almost everyone who is a believer, has a unique personal relationship with their God. It seems to me that this allows for an infinite number of interpretations of God’s will, morality, etc. Ultimately, isn’t “Christian Morality” possibly a human construct because of the interpretive process?
Not trying to force any beliefs on you Billo. I admire and respect your intellect and experience. Just looking for answers.
Of course it’s an interpretive process. Christian orthodoxy generally agrees with that, e,g. as Paul said in First Corinthians,
“It’s like this: when I was a child I spoke and thought and reasoned as a child does. But when I became a man my thoughts grew far beyond those of my childhood, and now I have put away the childish things. In the same way, we can see and understand only a little about God now, as if we were peering at his reflection in a poor mirror; but someday we are going to see him in his completeness, face-to-face. Now all that I know is hazy and blurred, but then I will see everything clearly, just as clearly as God sees into my heart right now.”
But here’s the key. There’s a difference between saying “We all interpret Gods morality with varying degrees of error,” and “Morality comes from the individual.”
If one accepts that there is a truth, then one can look at which interpretation better approaches it. If one simply stops at “it’s all interpretation” or “it’s all personal” or somesuch, then all moralities are equivalent.
This is a little like saying that all rangefinders have some error. Thus, if one is looking at something 1000 yards away, some will say it’s 990 yards, some will say it’s 998 yards, some will say that it’s at 1000.1 yards, some will say it’s at 1150 yards. All the estimates will have error. But the thing is still 1000 yards away, and that 1000 yard distance stands independently of the estimates. We can argue about which measurement is the best, but the “real” range is still what it is.
That’s completely different than saying that “because each of the rangefinders give a different answer, the target is at a different place for each person.” No. The target is at the same place. There are just differing degrees of error.
The “last man standing” approach you provide, of Hitler vs ExPH2 really doesn’t work. If Hitler’s morality was deficient simply because he died at an earlier age, then does that imply that Hitler’s morality was superior to that of all the children he executed, since they died at an earlier age than did he?
Any utilitiarian measure falls apart, not just because you really can’t measure the consequence (since you don’t know all of the ultimate consequences of an action), but also because the idea of an ultimate good still has the same problem.
From a utilitarian perspective, any evil can be justified on the basis of some global maximum. If committing genocide averts a war three generations in the future that would kill even more people, then the genocide is “good”. If raping a woman causes her to miss getting on a plane that crashes, and thus saves her life, then raping her was a “good” act.
Worse, the utilitarian judgment that the murder of a million people is better than a war in which two million people die is itself a moral decision, and the problem of the basis of *that* moral decision is no different than the more immediate one of whether it is moral to murder at all.
I am an Evangelical Atheist. I have absolutely no belief in a God or supernatural being of any kind.
What morals did you get from a God that I do not posses? I have committed the “unforgivable sin” countless times. Here, I will do it again.
I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit, I reject Gods word, I reject the idea that Jesus died for my sins. No only do I reject such a thing, I find the thought of it disgusting.
There you go, I can never be forgive. (thats about the 300th time I can never be forgiven)
That means that I along with about two thirds of the rest of this planet will die in a state of disbelief.
The arrogance of thinking that morals can only come from some God you believe in is, silly.
Fact: most of this world goes about its daily endeavors adhering to the same moral ideals you do.
Fact: most of this world does not believe in your God or has rejected such a God outright.
You claim morals come from a God, I say you have no evidence of that whatsoever. Anything that can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
I enjoy watching your form of mental masturbation from time to time. And, by the way, all evidence shows Hitler became alarmed of the power the Chruch (not just the Catholic church) had and how it might circumvent his power, he also died a Catholic.
ExPH2 is not an Atheist……I can always have hope.