A countryman between two lawyers is like a fish between two cats. – Benjamin Franklin
H.CON.RES.274: ‘Reaffirming “In God We Trust” as the official motto of the United States and supporting and encouraging the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions.’
I sent a letter to my congressman this morning regarding this resolution*; those of like mind are encouraged to do the same. Here’s what I said:
Rep. Van Hollen,
I’m writing to you because I’d like to know your stance on H.CON.RES.274; a house resolution titled:
‘Reaffirming “In God We Trust” as the official motto of the United States and supporting and encouraging the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions.’
But before we get to that, I’d like to point out that (as you are probably well aware) this resolution is highly unconstitutional. “In God We Trust” and “One Nation Under God” are remnants of McCarthyism — a dark period in our nation’s history where the lives of many innocent people were needlessly destroyed in a storm of nationalist fervor. Proponents of this resolution will argue that since these mottoes make no reference to any specific religion, they don’t exclude anyone. But this is poor logic at best. In order to believe that, you’d have to believe that everyone in the U.S. believes in a god of some sort, which is definitely not the case.
This resolution also has the effect of reaffirming the myth that the U.S. was founded upon “Christian” values/ideals and was intended by the founding fathers to be a “Christian” nation. History is full of evidence to the contrary — the “Treaty of Tripoli” for example, explicitly states that the U.S. is not ‘in any sense’ founded upon the Christian religion. However modern day revisionists are doing their best to push this myth down the collective throat of the public.
I’m sure that you’re aware of what is going on in Texas currently; Religious zealots have taken over the school board and are pushing for a curriculum that marginalizes the civil rights movement, evolution, Thomas Jefferson; attempts to whitewash the less-savory parts of American history (e.g., the near-extinction of native Americans, slavery, McCarthyism, etc.) And — this is the worst part — furthers the misguided idea known as “American Exceptionalism”. This is the idea that the U.S. is somehow special; that we are immune to the ills that plague other nations because we have been chosen by God to be an example for other nations to emulate. This idea is extremely self-serving and jingoistic. It breeds arrogance and an attitude that the U.S. is the only relevant nation in the world — we can do whatever we want, invade anyone we want, we are accountable to nobody. In effect, this idea has turned us into the world’s bully.
You don’t have to look too far to see that we’re on a dangerous path towards fascism. Today, a large portion of Americans have forgotten the difference between patriotism (e.g., dissent, honesty, civil discourse) and nationalism (e.g., blind adherence to an idealized version of our nation, demonization of unpopular speech and the people doing the speaking). These same Americans wear their ignorance as a badge of honor — they harbor contempt for people who disagree in the slightest sense, and they’re willing to do violence to further their “cause”. They have absolutely no regard for the rights of those whose beliefs conflict with their own; indeed, the spread of eliminationist rhetoric by conservative media outlets has had the effect of dehumanizing anyone who doesn’t see things their way. When politicians speak of “True Americans(tm)” as if some of us are lesser citizens, we should all be worried because we’ve heard this sort of rhetoric in the past and we know exactly what it leads to… in case this isn’t clear enough, I’m talking about Germany in the 1930′s.
I’m pleading with you as a concerned citizen and a veteran of the U.S. Army who served his country in Iraq — a veteran who knows all too well what the current climate of ignorance, fearmongering, lies, religious zealotry, and propaganda has done to his country… please, do not support this resolution, or even better, do everything within your power to kill it outright. We need not reaffirm this myth! Doing so is only adding more fuel to the fire. Those who worship at the altar of nationalistic religious fascism will only use it as a weapon against their fellow citizens.
Thank you.
Charles E. Hamilton III
I’ll post the response (I’ve e-mailed Rep. Van Hollen in the past; he usually responds) when I get it.
Thanks for reading!
*Correction; this is a resolution and not a bill. The original letter uses the term ‘bill’.
@Preston
It’s funny you mention Thomas Jefferson and that quote “I’m a real Christian…” This should actually be taken more literally than most people realize, because he rewrote the Gospels to only include the teachings of Jesus and removed all of the supernatural references which include but are not limited to: the resurrection, any miracles, and any reference to prophecy. Jefferson believed that the four evangelists for whom the four gospels are named altered the text to fit their beliefs. So while Jefferson was Christian, he was Christian in the more literal sense that he believed and followed the moral teachings of Jesus, however you and he would disagreed on most points of theology. Religiously I believe that the evidence supports that Jefferson was heavily influenced by both deist and unitarian philosophy as well as the influences he had being brought up in the Episcopalian church.
In response to the other main point you made about proselytizing. I think what you are perhaps not recognizing is that the vast majority of secular humanitarians, like myself, and atheists don’t want to eliminate religion. Despite the many weaknesses of religion I also recognize that it can be beneficial, it simply isn’t for me, and I believe that the perspectives of most people like me is that religion is a personal choice which needs to stay in the home and has no right to serve a function in political decisions. “In God We Trust” and “Under God” as the American motto and in the pledge of allegiance respectively misrepresent this country as something it isn’t and never was. Both of those phrases appeared in the 1950′s during an age when we were at war with the “godless communists” and as a result this country’s leaders chose to distinguish the United States from the communists with both the motto and the pledge.
So in response to your final comment, I would argue that most people aren’t trying to limit peoples access to religion, we are simply trying to put it in a proper context. One should not have to go to school and recite the Ten Commandments, because that is a breach of the students rights of personal choice concerning religion. If one wants to learn about religion then there are more than enough churches in this country and the internet has literally all the information you could ever desire.
Mr. Preston, it is good that you will discuss these issues with others. Our culture is becoming too balkanized, with many people unwilling to engage with differing views.
As for Thomas Jefferson, here are some other quotes:
“But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
“History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.”
“Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”
Thomas Jefferson was culturally a Christian, but not religiously. He respected Jesus as a philosopher, but did not think Jesus had supernatural powers. In short, Jefferson was a deist like most of the founding fathers. He believed in a creator god, but saw no sign that the creator meddled with or even cared about the world once it was created.
You might order the “Jefferson Bible” from Amazon.com. Jefferson decided to improve the New Testament by removing all the supernatural events and magic.
But this is all beside the point. Even if our country were started by those who wished a partial theocracy, it still wouldn’t justify spending my money to promote someone else’s religion.
I’ve seen democracy jokingly defined as “three wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.” And this is the perfect example of that problem: The majority wanting to abuse their position of power over the minority. That is why we have the bill of rights – to prevent a potential tyranny of the majority.
What we hope for is what the founding fathers wanted: a religiously neutral government. Our shared country should neither promote my religious views nor yours. It should not promote monotheism, atheism, polytheism, or any other -theism. Nor (in my opinion) should it grant special benefits to churches that other non-profit organizations don’t get.
As for the benefits of different religious beliefs, compare apples to apples. Among democracies, the least religious are generally the most stable and happy. Look at majority atheist/agnostic Scandinavian countries for an example of that.
Even in our own democracy, there is a correlation between religiosity and social problems. The more Christian areas of the country have more poverty, higher divorce rates, and more crime.
But obviously, correlation does not equal direct causation. These facts don’t mean that Christianity causes these problems. Nor do they imply that atheism is better.
What they do show is that any benefits Christianity might bring are too small to measure. And that should give you pause.
If you’d like to understand how the other side thinks, I’d recommend the book Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris. It’s a quick read – short and too the point.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814
If we did a good act merely from love of God and a belief that it is pleasing to Him, whence arises the morality of the Atheist? …Their virtue, then, must have had some other foundation than the love of God.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Law, June 13, 1814
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787
Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
I concur with you strictly in your opinion of the comparative merits of atheism and demonism, and really see nothing but the latter in the being worshipped by many who think themselves Christians.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Richard Price, Jan. 8, 1789 (Richard Price had written to TJ on Oct. 26. about the harm done by religion and wrote “Would not Society be better without Such religions? Is Atheism less pernicious than Demonism?”)
I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Hopkinson, March 13, 1789
They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion.
-Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush, Sept. 23, 1800
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802
History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.
The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814
Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors.
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825
We should use the most evidence and the least faith in the development of our own personal code of morals; it is the place we can least afford error if we are truly empathic towards humanity. The largest crimes against humanity were perpetrated due to the morals of the perpetrator.
Arguing for the use of faith in developing morality is synonymous with arguing against showing empathy towards humanity.
Preston is displaying his true colors as a liar for Jesus.
Have you ever researched the religion of Hitler? Go on, I’ll wait…
Now that we’ve established that he was, in fact, Christian, how can you possibly, with any ounce of intellectual honesty say something like this:
“And although many atrocities in the past may have been committed in the “name” of Christianity; none were committed by Christians…none!”
I’ll help you out a little bit here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
The last 50 years have been an incredible time of great scientific discovery and rapid technological development. I’m not surprised as this coincides with most great periods of development (The Renaissance and The Enlightenment), while particularly religious periods are fraught with stagnation (The Middle Ages).
I, for one, hope that we as humans can finally put the final nails in the coffin of ancient superstitions, and finally embrace a permanent era of reason, and logic.
Oh, and my condolences about your family member. Our thoughts will be with you.
Come on, Preston, you’re playing a dangerous game of historical revisionism where you modify your chosen definition of “Christian” so that all the sectarian murder and violence peppering Christianity’s past can be wiped clean from the slate. That’s utterly dishonest.
And, to be frank, it can be easily flipped around to totally nullify your second point about the supposed “atheist” death toll of the 20th century. Mao, Pol Pot, the Emperor, Hitler, Stalin? Not real atheists. Nope. They did their killing in the name of nationalism, centralization of power, over adherence to a destructive ideology (now, why does that sound familiar?), outright lust for power, a good dose of insanity and paranoia, to capture scarce resources, to cement a place for themselves in history, due to treaty obligations their nations held, and because they had such wonderful 20th century weapons to make it all happen with … but atheism? Bah, they aren’t atheists. REAL atheists live in Sweden and Finland and are polite, kind and happy. These aren’t real atheists.
See how it works? If you don’t want the group you belong to to look badly, you can just play around with definitions and all of a sudden all the bad people are no longer part of that group anymore. Presto, magico! Aren’t words amazing things?
Oh, wait … those 20th century leaders DID commit all that murder because of those reasons and really DIDN’T do it in the name of atheism. Heck, some of them weren’t even atheists at all! Emperor Hirohito enshrined Shinto as the official state religion of Japan and Hitler was a known Catholic, had the support of both German churches, and his SS marched to war with a phrase about God on their belts. Even Stalin resurrected the Orthodox church prior to WWII and was educated in a seminary.
But don’t let facts get in the way of a good rant. You’ve shown a remarkable ability to pick and choose the “facts” that agree with you and to leave out the rest, so why stop a good thing? I mean … Jefferson did write a secular bible, after all, with all references to religion and deities removed from it, so perhaps his definition of “Christianity” and thus the quotes he said about it, had just a TAD different meaning than what you’re attributing to them? Maybe?
I’m sorry to hear that, truly I am. Last year I lost two relatives; my stepfather and my grandmother on my (biological) father’s side of the family.
I am sorry for these short responses, but I do have a very dear relative who recently went in the hospital and we found out today the he will most likely pass away within the month.
So, in reponse to a part of your somewhat, in my view, skewed logic:
RE: “…a curriculum that marginalizes the civil rights movement, evolution, Thomas Jefferson; attempts to whitewash the less-savory parts of American history…”
Here’s an intro and a few of President Jeffersons’ “less-savory” comments:
Thomas Jefferson:
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; DIPLOMAT; GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA; SECRETARY OF STATE; THIRD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
“The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.” — Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XV, p. 383, to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse on June 26, 1822.
=====================================================
“The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.” — Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Alberty Ellery Bergh, editor (Washington D.C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XII, p. 315, to James Fishback, September 27, 1809.
====================================================
“I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.” — Thomas Jefferson, Memoir, Correspondence, and Miscellanies from the Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, editor (Boston: Grey & Bowen, 1830), Vol. III, p. 506, to Benjamin Rush, April 21, 1803.
====================================================
“I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.” — Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, editor (Washington, D.C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XIV, p. 385, to Charles Thomson on January 9, 1816.
Yep, that’s logical; Barton’s lying and all the other folks are lying too! Everyone is a liar; again, a tired old tactic. You know, I bet Jefferson was lying too!
Mr. Hamilton, please consider the “…subtleties of”…your “…brain…” Please consider your characterizations of Christians as those trying to dominate the U.S. and the world by pushing their views down the throats of the people. The offer of the gospel and salvation to you and others is just that…an offer. You may choose to reject God. But please understand; the actions by Christians of late is only a retaliation in respone to those who would otherwise deny Christians the ability to make the offer. Pray about it.
Just a quick reply about the video. Of course a religiously-oriented program is going to attempt to support the case that the U.S. is a Christian nation — this much should be obvious. Also, David Barton is not a historian, he’s a liar. I’ve watched your video and found it to be the usual fundamentalist propaganda. Here’s more info on Barton:
http://home.comcast.net/~pobrien48/Lies%20for%20Jesus%20and%20Christiaity.htm
http://candst.tripod.com/boston1.htm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-rodda/dont-mess-with-me-david-b_b_177687.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-rodda/david-barton-glenn-beck_b_521485.html
http://pubrecord.org/commentary/2686/idiocy-texas-threat-david-barton/
http://www.goddiscussion.com/30268/exposing-david-bartons-lies-majority-of-signers-of-the-declaration-of-independence-were-clergy/
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/individuals/david-barton
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/29547
http://open.salon.com/blog/akopsa/2010/02/11/glenn_beck_david_barton_host_lie-a-palooza_2010
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/4/1/853089/-David-Barton-Keeps-Up-His-Lies-at-Glenn-Becks-American-Revival-Event
http://maryreannon.blogspot.com/2010/03/david-barton-lies-again.html
But let’s assume for a moment that Barton was right about the U.S. being founded as a Christian nation — does that mean that Christians should be a privileged class in American society? (Like Muslims in Saudi Arabia, for example.) Would that give Christians the right to subjugate, suppress, and discriminate against people who hold different beliefs? Because let’s face it, this is what it’s all about: Christians want to be recognized as the “real” Americans while everyone else is regarded as second or third class citizens. They can’t stand the fact that our secular government does not afford their beliefs a “preferred” status in American society, that’s why Evangelicals and Fundamentalists have been pushing so hard to revise the history of the United States. They believe (mistakenly) that if they can “prove” that the U.S. was founded upon Christian ideals, then they will somehow become the preferred class. The U.S. was intended to be a nation where equality and justice for ALL — not just “some” — were foundational ideals upon which the rest of our laws were built. Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, and Dominionists are trying to undo the very principles that make this nation great.
I will respond in full, but excuse me now…got a bunch on my plate,,,”I shall return”
Re: “And my plea would be to stop trying to link patriotism to God; the two have absolutely nothing to do with each other.”
Please in the mean time, please go here http://www.ingodwetrust-arkansas.org/ and watch the second (bottom) video. And please watch it in full and repond, don’t just say you did and offer more of these same old talking points!
Believe me Makenzie, that last argument is full of holes! For example, taking one (and I’m sure there were hundreds) of disingenuous Hitler comments to bolster your case? Ridiculous!
See you in a bit
Thanks for posting, but you haven’t really destroyed any part of my argument — quite the contrary. You’ve only proven my point that religious fascists are trying to push their beliefs onto others; welcome or not, while also revising history. Let’s take a look at your claims, shall we?
#1: Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and the Japanese Emperor weren’t Christians.
So what? Saying that they weren’t Christian doesn’t automatically mean that they’re atheists and that atheists are evil by extension. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a deity, nothing more. The aforementioned dictators definitely paid homage to the supernatural, and as ruthless dictators often seem to do, they cultivated a “cult of personality” with the intent of becoming “living gods” so to speak. To say that a lack of Christianity is to blame for their crimes is grossly oversimplifying reality.
FACT: Hitler invoked Christian rhetoric on a regular basis, publicly and privately. Take the following quote from “Mein Kampf” for example:
“I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews. I am doing the Lord’s work.”
Furthermore, Hitler persecuted the “godless” as well as Jews, homosexuals, and other “non-christian” groups:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/unknown/hitler.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_homosexuals_in_Nazi_Germany_and_the_Holocaust
But none of this really matters because it ignores the fact that Hitler was a politician, and politicians are known for pandering to whichever group best suits their political needs at the time. The only person who can say whether or not Hitler was (or believed he was) a Christian, was Hitler; everything else is purely anecdotal. The Straight Dope has an excellent article on this very topic, I’d suggest that you read it:
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1699/was-hitler-a-christian
FACT: It’s extremely hard to tell whether or not Stalin was a Christian. Stalin did his best to silence anyone and everyone who knew him as a child. We do know that he attended a Russian Orthodox seminary as a teenager, but that’s about it. The general consensus is that he wasn’t a Christian. But to say that his crimes are a direct result of a lack of a belief in god is to ignore the fact that Christians also have a very bloody history when it comes to religiously inspired violence. Using the same logic you use in saying that Stalin’s “atheism” is why he was evil; we could just as easily use this logic to say that Christians are just as evil due to their own history of violence. So this is a fallacy; we can no more say that all atheists are evil because evil atheists exist and have existed, than we can say that all Christians are evil because evil Christians exist and have existed. The same argument goes for Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, or any other evil person/dictator — Mao was Chinese; does that mean that all Chinese are bloodthirsty dictators? No. Hitler was a vegetarian; are vegetarians automatically Nazis? Again, the answer is no. Christians like to point to these as examples of how non-religious ideology is inherently destructive, but you’d have to be a complete fucking moron to swallow that line of garbage — these ad-hoc analyses as fact.
#2: “although many atrocities in the past may have been committed in the “name” of Christianity; none were committed by Christians…none!”
Bullshit. This is called the “No-True Scotsman” fallacy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
Basically, you’re again attempting to whitewash history by making the claim that violence committed in the name of Christianity, wasn’t committed by “True Christians”. How utterly convenient. Ted Haggard was widely regarded as one of the truest of the true Christians by his congregation… of course until he was caught soliciting sex and crystal meth from a male prostitute. Many other Christian figureheads have met similar fates; see the following list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_evangelist_scandals
Are we to assume that they were all just wolves in sheep’s clothing? Or can we make the more reasonable (and rather generous) assumption, that while they may or may not have been deeply devoted to their faith, they were humans who had issues, questions, feelings, thoughts, etc. that weren’t being addressed by their religion? While I tend to believe that the vast majority of them were/are hypocrites who either use religion as a way to swindle the ignorant, -or- they’re ashamed of certain aspects of themselves so they make every effort to appear to be (on the outside) the exact opposite of whatever it is about themselves that they hate. However, I also tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, so out of the two aforementioned assumptions, I’d obviously choose the latter. The second assumption also has the added benefit of (1) not requiring a “conspiracy” of some sort, and (2) showing exactly how inadequate religious ideology is when faced with real human issues. In summary, your claim is bullshit revisionism.
#3: “We’ve seen for the last 50 years what turning away from God has produced in America”
What exactly have we seen? Please be specific. This is a common claim made by religious apologetics but it has absolutely no foundation in truth. For example, in 2005, the crime rate in the U.S. was the lowest it’s been in 30 years! So what _exactly_ are you talking about?
#4: “So my plea is you will not be distracted by the “Mr. Hamiltons” and find ways to promote God, family and patriotism in your home…in your city…and in America!”
And my plea would be to stop trying to link patriotism to God; the two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. What you’re talking about is actually Fascism. With regard to promoting “family” — I’m all for this. Stable families are important; they provide the foundation for a stable nation — ALL families; gay, straight, religious, non-religious; they all matter and they are all equal.
I would suggest to Mr. Hamilton, atrocities committed by the people below makes quite a statement. Notice anything they have in common? All non-Christian!
And this is a short list!
1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million
2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million
3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million
4. Japan, (1941-44) = 5 million
5. Pol Pot – around 1 million
Oh, almost forgot Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) – 49-78 million!
And although many atrocities in the past may have been committed in the “name” of Christianity; none were committed by Christians…none!
I could spend more time destroying Mr. Hamiltons’ preposterous argument, but more and more folks like this are becoming a bore; the arguments are old and fallacious. The main reason these folks get much attention at all is the media gives them air time to stir people’s emotions…so we’ll tune in…to sell commercial time…money!
It’s time for Christians to go about re-instilling those virtuous Christian values into the hearts and minds of our children so they may continue on a path that is a blessing to, and will be blessed by, God!
We’ve seen for the last 50 years what turning away from God has produced in America. So my plea is you will not be distracted by the “Mr. Hamiltons” and find ways to promote God, family and patriotism in your home…in your city…and in America! Amen
Good read. I’m excited to see how he responds.