Wake Up America! Don’t Let Activist Atheists Rewrite History

Your point is well taken, however you are off topic for this thread. Open a new topic if this is what you wish to discuss.

 

Psalms 53:1. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

Scripture states that the athiest is a fool. Militant Islam are not fools. Which had you rather do battle with?

 

The article had nothing to do with re-writing history. It was about citizens who are atheists having the same right of free speech as Christians today, in Washington state. If you don't believe in free speech you should listen to the Unfair and Unbalanced news.

 

How do you define "the founding fathers?" Signers of the Declaration of Independence?

 

Where does this talk about history?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wake Up America! Don’t Let Activist Atheists Rewrite History

Get pumped up. Kill a pine tree. Paste paper snow flakes on your picture window. Take time off from work. Shop ’till you drop. For behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all people; in the Northern Hemisphere we are about to celebrate the Winter Solstice—the moment the sun’s position in the sky is at its greatest angular distance from the observer.

This is the very boring message professed by a group of modern-day Scrooges, dressed in the cloak of militant atheism. Indeed, they love December, but their tidings of joy have nothing to do with nature’s seasons or the position of the sun.

Freedom From Religion Foundation sign (FNC)

Their secret reference point is the same as ours, December 25th, the day on which Christians worldwide celebrate the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, the Prince of Peace.

Last night, a representative from the “Freedom From Religion Foundation”—sour representatives of the many honest seekers in our country who call themselves agnostics and atheists—had the chutzpah to play the Winter Solstice card with me during a joint appearance on FOX News’ “America’s News HQ.” To read the transcript, click here.

He did it to defend his group’s placement of an anti-religion sign next to the Nativity Scene at Washington State’s Capitol building. Their sign reads:

“There is only one natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

Thanks to the wisdom of our God-fearing founding fathers and their respect for the sacred dignity of every human being in this great country of ours, we will continue to defend the right of non-believers to express their opinion, as reasonable and considerate, or silly and disrespectful, as the case may be.

And we will prolong their wisdom by speaking out every time this right is abuse.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation is today’s example. Their stated goal is to “promote the constitutional principle of separation of state and church.” How do they do this? By freeing us from all religion—as the Constitution obviously intended, but forgot to mention. Besides the posting of anti-Christmas signs in honor of the Winter Solstice, their most recent efforts include campaigns to:

A) stop people from voting in churches

B) force the Boy Scouts of America (a private, religious organization) to accept non-religious members (as unconstitutional as that would be) and…

C) pressure cable channels to cut off religious programming

Wake up America! If we allow these activists to re-write history, they will. They will deny the faith of our fathers and offer blasphemous interpretations of our Constitution. They will start with their own version of the separation of church and state, then move on to whitewashing the public square to rid it of all religious expression, and finally arrive at an atheistic indoctrination of our children.

When this happens, we will not be a more tolerant, pluralistic, or diverse country. We will, in fact, be much like the atheist regimes of past and present that must empty culture of its richest forms only to fill it with self-protecting ideologies of one kind or another.

If these are difficult times, it is not because there is too much religion. It is because there is not enough of it — the real kind — the kind that makes us free.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Fox commentator made that statement but it had nothing to do with the situation being described. Oh well, What a waste of time.

 

I wasn't being silly. Who do you define as the founders of our country?

 

Comments like "You've got to be kidding me" and "Don't be silly" are substitutes for "I was talking out of my hat and can't defend it". C'mon Mitch. Try again! We will give you those as mulligans. :laugh:

 

Can you give a straight answer? Maybe your comments are computer generated (random).

 

You talk about the founding fathers all the time but think that asking who they are is a ridiculous question? i don't think you know who the founding fathers are.

 

What do the names of our founding fathers have to do with the subjuct of the OP? It seems to me that the subject of the OP centers on the debate over "seperation of church and state" and idea of freedom of religion as opposed to "freedom from religion." It would seem appropriate to me that if anyone wants to discuss/debate purely historical issues such as the identities of the founding fathers it should be done in the History Forum here on the BB.

 

Well, here's the original post.
Rev
..........Wake up America! If we allow these activists to re-write history, they will. They will deny the faith of our fathers and offer blasphemous interpretations of our Constitution. They will start with their own version of the separation of church and state, then move on to whitewashing the public square to rid it of all religious expression, and finally arrive at an atheistic indoctrination of our children...........

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems to be about history to me. But in fact I was criticized by the Rev. for saying the following:
The article had nothing to do with re-writing history. It was about citizens who are atheists having the same right of free speech as Christians today, in Washington state. If you don't believe in free speech you should listen to the Unfair and Unbalanced news.
Rev
Then you didn't read the article. What these atheists have done is the equivalent to the KKK setting up a sign next to a Martin Luther King Jr. display during Black Appreciation Month. What it is not about is free speech.
We had one post which provided quotes from prominent early Americans and then this:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Revmitchell
More historical revisionism. There were only 3 deists--Williamson, Wilson, and Franklin. The others were 28 Episcopalians, 8 Presbyterians, 7 Congregationalists, 2 Lutherans, 2 Dutch Reformed, 2 Methodists, 2 Roman Catholics, 1 unknown,

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you define "the founding fathers?" Signers of the Declaration of Independence?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So what's the thread about?

 

Well,

since RevM started the thread he is the best qualified to say what topic on which he hoped the thread would focus. However, after reading the OP I guess that the discussion/debate ought to center on the current national debate over the phrase "separation of church and state" with respect to the idea of freedom of religion vs. the idea of freedom from religion.

I further suspect that RevM’s reference to “re-writing history” applies to those revisionist historians, who attempt to re-write history, because they are pushing a “freedom from religion” political agenda. Therefore, I assume that RevM would want to discuss the originalist interpretation of the Constitution and specifically the First Amendment vs. the interpretation offered by revisionists and others (such as atheistic groups). However, one thing I would say that is clear is that the identities of all the founding fathers is not the focus of the thread (other than to reference something one of them may have said that is germane the subject).

 

Well,

You know what they say about great minds and thinking alike and all that...:wavey:

 

You don't have the call as you reminded me. I was chastized by the Rev for saying the article was not about history so I would assume the thread is about history. Once again, he's just trying (unsuccessfully) to insult me without cause.