• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Congress does it's Christian duty

/me quietly waiting for equivalent resolutions supporting Islam, Judaism and Hinduism.

/me isn't even pretending to fool himself about a resolution supporting atheism.

What bothers me about it is it gives the "Christian Nation" proponents something to point to and say "see, I told you!" That it is completely meaningless is beside the point.

The persecuted Christian dig was a nice touch.
 
Apparently, the House has passed similar resolutions regarding Hinduism and Islam, per the Representative King.... don't have time to google this right now.

If so, why did they pass the first two - where the hell is the wall between state and religion?
 
JoeEllison said:
"Whereas we depend on Christian voters on election day, we'll pretend that western civlization has 'its roots in Christianity', one of the more popular Lies for Jesus"... how's that for a translation?
Click to expand...
Pretty weak, actually. Nice word twist. They didn't say "western civlization has its roots in Christianity."

Oh FYI to a large extent, it in fact does....but feel free to proceed with your Christian bashing which many here are claiming is so exaggerated. :rolleyes:

Like danielk, to me this seems to be a lot of huff about something pretty harmless which yeah, is probably more of a hopeful vote-getter thing as much as anything. Gee and that from politicians, go figure.
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
The ignorance of the resolution is shown by the made-up definition they use to identify who is a Christan and who isn't: "Whereas Christians identify themselves as those who believe in the salvation from sin offered to them through the sacrifice of their savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and who, out of gratitude for the gift of salvation, commit themselves to living their lives in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Bible;". That is not a definition that would be acceptable to the Roman Catholic Church since Roman Catholicism does not accept the Protestant (or other "Christian") Churches as being "real Churches", in the word of the Pope, they are deficient.
Click to expand...
:confused: Catholics also "identify themselves as those who believe in the salvation from sin offered to them through the sacrifice of their savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and who, out of gratitude for the gift of salvation, commit themselves to living their lives in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Bible." ie this doesn't exclude Catholics whatsoever. And the RCC on the whole recognizes Protestants as "real Christians" FYI, unless they came out w/some decree I'm not aware of (possible but I'm betting not).
 
Last edited:
Boo said:
(5) rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide; and
Click to expand...
Yeah, my poofy Congressional friends, where is the resolution to welcome, with open arms, all Chaldean Christian refugees from Iraq?

Nowhere. These guys speak with forked tongue.

So, with that resolved, what about this problem with the national debt? Appropriations? A border?

Hmmmmmmm

I don't need Congress to tell me, or much of anyone else, about Christmas. It's got its own momentum. (Whoever said grandstanding . . . yep.)

For those of you making a big to do about the Puritans, I'd like to know what in the Sam Hill that has to do with America as it grew and developed, that collection of colonies?

One of the clever things early American colonists did, like Roger Williams, was exploit the availability of land to move away from uptight arseholes, and the Cromwellian, humorless dipsticks who populated the more Puritan colonies. By the time of the Constitution's drafting, and the formation of the nation as something other than a bunch of overseas Brits, those Puritans were hardly the driving force. They had to compromise with other folks, and how they saw things, in order to get the union formed.

Pointless cherry picking for fifty, Adams. :p

DR
 
Last edited:
Does anybody know

a) if this bill (resolution?) has passed?

b) who sponsored it?

And I'd be curious to see a list of yeas and nays, to see if I need to complain to my Congressman. Anybody know where to find that as well?
 
NobbyNobbs said:
Does anybody know

a) if this bill (resolution?) has passed?

b) who sponsored it?

And I'd be curious to see a list of yeas and nays, to see if I need to complain to my Congressman. Anybody know where to find that as well?
Click to expand...
I would bet that it passed "without objection, so ruled..."
 
A new low, even for the grandstanding idiots in Congress we're used to.

2006 was a good start, but clearly we need to kick the rest of these bums out.
 
Last edited:
bigred said:
:confused: Catholics also "identify themselves as those who believe in the salvation from sin offered to them through the sacrifice of their savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and who, out of gratitude for the gift of salvation, commit themselves to living their lives in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Bible." ie this doesn't exclude Catholics whatsoever. And the RCC on the whole recognizes Protestants as "real Christians" FYI, unless they came out w/some decree I'm not aware of (possible but I'm betting not).
Click to expand...

See: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3236697#post3236697
 
NobbyNobbs said:
Does anybody know

a) if this bill (resolution?) has passed?

b) who sponsored it?

And I'd be curious to see a list of yeas and nays, to see if I need to complain to my Congressman. Anybody know where to find that as well?
Click to expand...

Nobby,

Here is a list of the sponsors and it was passed with only 9 Reps either abstaining or voting against.


Mr. KING of Iowa (for himself, Mr. AKIN, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. BAKER, Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CARTER, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. FEENEY, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Ms. FOXX, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GINGREY, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. HAYES, Mr. HERGER, Mr. ISSA, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. JORDAN of Ohio, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. KLINE of Minnesota, Mr. KUHL of New York, Mr. LAHOOD, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LAMPSON, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. MCCAUL of Texas, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mrs. MUSGRAVE, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. POE, Mr. SALI, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. TERRY, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. WALBERG, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, and Mrs. DRAKE)
Click to expand...




Boo
 
bigred said:
Pretty weak, actually. Nice word twist. They didn't say "western civlization has its roots in Christianity."

Oh FYI to a large extent, it in fact does....but feel free to proceed with your Christian bashing which many here are claiming is so exaggerated. :rolleyes:

Like danielk, to me this seems to be a lot of huff about something pretty harmless which yeah, is probably more of a hopeful vote-getter thing as much as anything. Gee and that from politicians, go figure.
Click to expand...

In the original, the wording certainly seems to imply constitutional republic = western tradition = roots in Christianity.

I see no even remotely reasonable evidence that there is any link between Christianity and its doctrines and constitutional republics. If you have any such linkage, I'd be very interested to see it.

If they were not trying to imply this linkage, then the statement is purposely confusing at best.
 
Sefarst said:
The United States has it's roots in Christianity in that the majority of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Christians. It's the same way that we have our roots in brown hair, given that the majority of the signers of the Declaration of Independence had brown hair.
Click to expand...

Yeah...almost exactly "the same". *eyeroll*

I'm sure in their documents the Founders talked about their brown hair. Maybe they talked about atheism too.
 
Resolution tending to recognize Ohio State University as the established college football team of the United States.

Resolution tending to recognize Grand Valley State University as the established college football team of the United States.

Resolution commending mentors.

Resolution tending to recognize Western Kentucky University University as the established college football team of the United States.

Resolution tending to recognize the Tampa Bay Buccaneers as the established professional football team of the United States.
Tough :talk034:, Cowboys fans.
Resolution tending to recognize the University of Portland as the established women's college soccer team of the United States.

Resolution tending to recognize Messiah College as the established men's college soccer team of the United States.

Resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding polio.
They were against it...
...in 2003...
...about fifty years after the introduction of the Salk vaccine.


Resolution recognizing Shemp's fondness for goats.
Okay, I made that one up.
 
Last edited:
When will we tire of wedge issues designed to put people in a difficult position
whether they vote for or against? Issues only meant to creat problems.

There is an answer. Vote against every incumbent in November. How bad could it be? What message would it send?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom