Did you know

[Revmitchell]

DID YOU

KNOW As you walk up the steps
to

the building which houses the
U.S. Supreme Court

you can see near the top of the
building
a row of the

world's law givers and each one is
facing one in the middle

who is facing forward with a full
frontal view ... It is Moses

and he is holding the
Ten Commandments!

DID YOU KNOW? As you enter the Supreme
Court courtroom, the two huge oak
doors have the Ten Commandments

engraved on each lower portion of
each door.




DID YOU KNOW? As you sit inside the courtroom,
you can see the

wall, right above where the Supreme
Court Judges sit, a display of

the Ten Commandments



DID YOU KNOW?




There are
Bible

verses etched in stone all over the
Federal

Buildings and Monuments in
Washington ,

D.C.
DID YOU KNOW?




James Madison, the fourth

president, known as 'The Father
of Our
Constitution' made the Following

statement:
'We have staked the whole of all
our
political
Institutions upon the capacity of
mankind
for
Self-government, upon

the capacity of each and all of
us to
govern ourselves, to

control ourselves, to sustain
ourselves according to The Ten Commandments of God.'

DID YOU KNOW? Every session of Congress
begins with a prayer

by a paid preacher, whose salary has
been paid by the

taxpayer since 1777.
DID YOU

KNOW?
Fifty-two of the 55
founders of the Constitution
were members of the established
Orthodox churches in the colonies..
DID YOU KNOW?



Thomas Jefferson worried

that the Courts would overstep their
authority and

instead of Interpreting the law
would begin
making law an

oligarchy: the rule of few over
many.
How then, have we gotten
to the
point that
everything we have done for
220 years in this
Country is now suddenly wrong
and
Unconstitutional?
Lets put it around the world and let
the world
see and remember what this great
country was Built on The Holy Bible
and belief in GOD!

 

[LadyEagle]

Amen and Amen!

 

[saturneptune]

It is hard to pinpoint an exact date or event that took us from the picture you painted to the godless society we are now. However, I think two events, taking God out of public schools in 1954, and the legalization of abortion in 1973, are two of the major reasons. Add those two to the march towards legalization of gay marriage in all fifty states, and that about seals the deal.

Personally, I think the origin of this on a political basis started in the early days of the Cold War, by socialism and communism, tearing down the pillars of our nations, ever so slowly, that we did not even realize what they were doing. One can also see it in the quality of candidates for President and Congress that have deteriorated over the decades, from men of high quality at our founding, to today, a collection of common thieves, self indulgent slobs, bribers, liars, and traitors to this nation.

From a moral standpoint, I believe the change was motivated by greed of the American people starting in the late 50s or early 60s. Look at a retail store. Back then, customers went to the store to buy a product, got good service and left. Today, the customer thinks the red carpet should be rolled out and trumpet sounded everytime they enter an establishment. I guess that is why I am not in customer relations, because quite frankly, while I treat others with respect and dignity, I am not about to treat them like they are from Divine stock. The last I heard, we are 3% of the world's population and consume about 28% of its goods. In other words, we are a nation of basically spoiled brats. We as Americans are the ones that presided over the change spoken of here.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Mohammad is also depicted in the Supreme Court building. So are other supposed lawgivers of history. So what?

 

[go2church]

Looks like someone has been reading David Barton's Wallbuilders propaganda!

 

[Alcott]

Mohammad is also depicted in the Supreme Court building. So are other supposed lawgivers of history. So what?

So, I suppose this country must be anti-muslim, since a visual depiction of Hammy is forbidden.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Looks like someone has been reading David Barton's Wallbuilders propaganda!

Yep.

Even David Barton has finally admitted that the Madison quote is "undocumented." His work is unreliable.

For what it's worth, here's the Snopes entry on what was apparently quoted in the OP: http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/capital.asp

 

[Revmitchell]

Nobody pulled anything from Barton. Poor little libbies cannot stand that this nation was founded on Christian principles so they find just a few errors in anything they do not like and try to paint the whole thing that way. It is ungodly and shameful behavior and I doubt they would want to be treated that way.

By the way I do not care one iota what snopes says.

I feel sorry for you.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Nobody pulled anything from Barton.

You may not have pulled it from David Barton, but someone did. It is clear that you did not originate this material. Almost all of this is from David Barton's early works, especially his video "America's Godly Heritage."

I've followed Barton for nearly 20 years and know his material. Barton is often plagiarized by other "Christian" authors, but this material originated with Barton.

{quote]Poor little libbies cannot stand that this nation was founded on Christian principles so they find just a few errors in anything they do not like and try to paint the whole thing that way.[/quote]
It's not a "few errors", but rather historical revisionism. The founding of this nation is much more complex than the revisionists like to claim. The revisionists also tend to tell only one side of the story and ignore the massive social changes that occurred during the nation's formative years surrounding the founding of the colonies, the Great Awakening, the Revolution, the period of the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitutional Convention.

I've read the primary source documents for this era and have a pretty good understanding of the original intent of the First Amendment in the historical context.

The primary source documents (objective things) are not "liberal" or "conservative" - they simply exist and explain what the framers of the Constitution were thinking about and arguing for. There was quite a bit of debate about the First Amendment and it is clear that the original intent of the First Amendment was to impose and institutional separation of church and state at the federal level, just like in some of the former colonies like Rhode Island and Virginia.

It is ungodly and shameful behavior and I doubt they would want to be treated that way.

Accusing people who care about facts as being "libbies" is ungodly and shameful behavior.

By the way I do not care one iota what snopes says.

So do you care about what is true?

Are you going to check it out for yourself from primary sources like a disciple of Jesus would do or are you simply going to make false accusations and ignore what is true like a disciple of the accuser of the brethern?

I feel sorry for you.

Likewise. You are better than that. You could be a powerful advocate for Christ if you would engage instead of accuse.

 

[Revmitchell]

You may not have pulled it from David Barton, but someone did. It is clear that you did not originate this material. Almost all of this is from David Barton's early works, especially his video "America's Godly Heritage."

The fallacy here is that only Barton has seen this quote as legitimate.

I've followed Barton for nearly 20 years and know his material. Barton is often plagiarized by other "Christian" authors, but this material originated with Barton.

Of course then you can have just one single boogy man to demonize.

It's not a "few errors", but rather historical revisionism. The founding of this nation is much more complex than the revisionists like to claim. The revisionists also tend to tell only one side of the story and ignore the massive social changes that occurred during the nation's formative years surrounding the founding of the colonies, the Great Awakening, the Revolution, the period of the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitutional Convention.

Yea says you.

I've read the primary source documents for this era and have a pretty good understanding of the original intent of the First Amendment in the historical context.

Of course and you and your opinion is the only one that is right. I see

The primary source documents (objective things) are not "liberal" or "conservative" - they simply exist and explain what the framers of the Constitution were thinking about and arguing for. There was quite a bit of debate about the First Amendment and it is clear that the original intent of the First Amendment was to impose and institutional separation of church and state at the federal level, just like in some of the former colonies like Rhode Island and Virginia.

The liberal version of the separation of church and state is not the founders version.

Accusing people who care about facts as being "libbies" is ungodly and shameful behavior.

Uh no, a liberal is a liberal and a conservative is just that.

So do you care about what is true?

I do and of course the carvings on our government buildings to include Moses and the Ten Commandments are always ignored so that a boogy man can be created out of Barton. The treatment of Barton by the left is nothing but shameful. Because liberals do not like the over all picture. I knew when I posted this who would comment on it. But then I do not believe that you and other liberals are actually only concerned with truth. You have an agenda and you all constantly demonize Barton. Even when his name is not involved like this thread. You brought Barton up for the sole purpose of trashing him. Shame on you.

Are you going to check it out for yourself from primary sources like a disciple of Jesus would do or are you simply going to make false accusations and ignore what is true like a disciple of the accuser of the brethern?

I have not made any false accusations.

Likewise. You are better than that. You could be a powerful advocate for Christ if you would engage instead of accuse.

Accuse is all you have done in this thread. Nothing but accuse the brethren.

 

[Oldtimer]

It is hard to pinpoint an exact date or event that took us from the picture you painted to the godless society we are now. However, I think two events, taking God out of public schools in 1954, and the legalization of abortion in 1973, are two of the major reasons. Add those two to the march towards legalization of gay marriage in all fifty states, and that about seals the deal.

Look further back in time. Specifically, the era when Woodrow Wilson was in office. I've only recently begun to study the timeframe around WW1 and Wilson's policies, as time permits. While there's always been a "liberal" element, since our founding, it seems that one of the pivotal times was during his term in office.

Here's a starting point if you would like to look into this further.

You want a more 'progressive' America? Careful what you wish for.
Voters should remember what happened under Woodrow Wilson.

That's a shame, because Wilson's two terms in office provide the clearest historical window into the soul of progressivism. Wilson's racism, his ideological rigidity, and his antipathy toward the Constitution were all products of the progressive worldview. And since "progressivism" is suddenly in vogue – today's leading Democrats proudly wear the label – it's worth actually reviewing what progressivism was and what actually happened under the last full-throated progressive president.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2008/0205/p09s01-coop.html

Here's some more results from a quick search using the keywords:
Woodrow Wilson Progressive
Woodrow Wilson Segregated Military

Woodrow Wilson: Progressive
Wilson represented the first truly liberal president in history and his policies established precedents followed by every Democratic Administration since.

-------
While tackling the banks, Wilson also moved to lower the tariff. The Underwood Tariff dramatically reduced import duties to an average of 26%. At the same time, the 16th Amendment was ratified ushering in the income tax. Wilson hoped to recover the revenues lost from the tariff reduction through the federal income tax.

---------
Woodrow Wilson dramatically restructured the relationship between government and business. His reforms were designed to reign in big business and aid labor. He fulfilled his promise to lower the tariff, bust trusts, and reform the banks. His support for organized labor led to the 8-hour workday and collective bargaining rights. However, questions remain about whether Wilson’s progressive reform actually helped the country or hurt it.
http://www.examiner.com/article/woodrow-wilson-progressive

Few presidents are as revered as Woodrow Wilson in academia. He was, after all, the last academic elected to America’s highest office.

Beyond that, much ink is spilled and many lectures devoted to his policies which many professors are enamored of, chiefly the progressive income tax at home and the League of Nations abroad. As Black History month draws to a close, we should highlight a Wilsonian trend in policy that is relevant to both his national and international outlook—segregation.

--------
The ultimate irony is that Wilson’s attitudes on race, which academics abhor, mesh nicely with the “progressivism” they champion and clash with the conservatism and libertarian impulses they eschew. After all, slavery and segregation are the ultimate form of government regulation.
http://www.academia.org/progressive-segregation/

Woodrow Wilson's record on race relations was not very good. African Americans welcomed his election in 1912, but they were worried too. During his first term in office, the House passed a law making racial intermarriage a felony in the District of Columbia. His new Postmaster General also ordered that his Washington offices be segregated, with the Treasury and Navy soon doing the same. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/wilson/portrait/wp_african.html

During WWI, a war 'he reluctantly led the U.S. into,' he cracked down on the citizenry through the re-introduction of the Alien and Sedition Acts. His anti-democratic tendencies are interesting when one takes into account: "Under Wilson, the United States intervened in Latin America more often than at any other time in our history," and the dictators who were consequently able to come to power -- reverberations that have been felt ever since as social justice movements in Latin America continue to fight for democracy.

One of the biggest changes under Wilson that goes unreported even in the following piece was the privatization of our National Bank. In December 1913, when the Senate privatized it during recess with a vote of 3-0, the name was changed to the Federal Reserve, and Wilson gleefully signed the bill into law just 2 days before Christmas, when most lawmakers were with their families on vacation. Many economic recessions occurred within its first 25 years, including the Great Depression.

Many of the changes ushered in during the Progressive Era, including women's suffrage, happened despite, not because of, Wilson's best efforts. In paying tribute to this man with our statue, we're honoring a man who ignored the citizenry, i.e. "democracy", to promote his own transgressive agenda.

--------------
Wilson displayed little regard for the rights of anyone whose opinions differed from his own. But textbooks take pains to insulate him from wrongdoing. "Congress," not Wilson, is credited with having passed the Espionage Act of June 1917 and the Sedition Act of the following year, probably the most serious attacks on the civil liberties of Americans since the short-lived Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. In fact, Wilson tried to strengthen the Espionage Act with a provision giving broad censorship powers directly to the president. Moreover, with Wilson's approval, his postmaster general used his new censorship powers to suppress all mail that was socialist, anti-British, pro-Irish, or that in any other way might, in his view, have threatened the war effort.
http://www.utwatch.org/funfacts/woodrowwilson.html

"Progressive" is indeed the right word. We have progressed far from what was intended by our founding fathers.

 

[saturneptune]

Look further back in time. Specifically, the era when Woodrow Wilson was in office. I've only recently begun to study the timeframe around WW1 and Wilson's policies, as time permits. While there's always been a "liberal" element, since our founding, it seems that one of the pivotal times was during his term in office.

Here's a starting point if you would like to look into this further.



Here's some more results from a quick search using the keywords:
Woodrow Wilson Progressive
Woodrow Wilson Segregated Military










"Progressive" is indeed the right word. We have progressed far from what was intended by our founding fathers.

OT,
This is a presidency I have just started studying since I found a connection on ancestry.com. My initial impression is that of shock at the way this administration trashed the Bill of Rights. There were people imprisioned for criticizing the Wilson Administration policies, especially foreign policies. These were enforced through national security laws of the time that were obviously unConstitutional. Of course, then there was the federal reserve and banking fiasco of 1913, and to top it off, he was unfit to govern for months, as in essence, his wife ran the country.

Like I said, I have just started studying this era, and have much to learn, but this is a presidency we have nothing to be proud of. Thank you for pointing out this monster. One of the reasons he was elected in the first place is the split between Taft and Roosevelt.

The next President, Warren Harding, died in office, and in fact, had one of the most corrupt administrations in history to date. I think his VP who took over, Calvin Coolidge, did a fairly decent job. In fact, his predecesor, Herbert Hoover, I believe got a lot of blame for the economy he did not deserve, as a leftover of the Wilson and Harding administrations.

 

[Baptist Believer]

The fallacy here is that only Barton has seen this quote as legitimate.

Actually, Barton has declared this quote as "unconfirmed" and recommends that people not use it.

Given that the quote in question runs contrary to Madison's views (well documented in works such as "A Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments," it is highly suspicious.

Yea says you.

And primary sources.

Of course and you and your opinion is the only one that is right. I see

There is only one truth. If there are two opinions about something, one of them is necessarily going to be closer to the truth than the other. That's reality. I'm not one of those people who think that there is no way to know what is true.

The liberal version of the separation of church and state is not the founders version.

I have no clue what you mean by the "liberal version of the separation of church and state," but you do see the separation of church and state implemented in Rhode Island and Virginia before the First Amendment was drafted. From the writings of the founders, that seems to be the model they looked to when they were struggling with the wording for the First Amendment.

I do and of course the carvings on our government buildings to include Moses and the Ten Commandments are always ignored so that a boogy man can be created out of Barton.

There are a number of lawgivers carved on the buildings, not just Moses. And the Ten Commandments are a fundamental text of law for our world. That's why they appear on the building.

But then I do not believe that you and other liberals are actually only concerned with truth. You have an agenda and you all constantly demonize Barton. Even when his name is not involved like this thread. You brought Barton up for the sole purpose of trashing him. Shame on you.

I have not made any false accusations.

Sure you have. The quote above is a prime example.
- I'm not a liberal
- I am passionate about truth, even if it upsets those on the left or right (remember, I am a big Second Amendment supporter around here)
- I am tired of dealing with Barton and would prefer not to have to ever think of him again.
- I haven't "trashed" Barton, just pointed out where he presents false information. I've done hundreds of hours of personal research fact-checking his material in dusty books long before anything like that was available on the internet. Have you done any real research?

 

[go2church]

Barton cronies are unflappable! They simply refuse to be moved by actual facts and correct information.

Jesus would be so proud that all his ministry, teachings, commands and sacrifice resulted in an Enlightenment era rebellion. Nice job on the whole scripture interpretation there folks:tonofbricks: