What part of Christianity isn't compatible with the US Constitution...

That didn't take long for me to destroy your argument. You're easier than a fat girl on prom night.

(shaking head) You're a Slacker, Dark Soul. Instead of trying to Free the Holy Land from the Infidels, you're deadheading over here. Do you give a shit that the Jews killed your Savior?
 
Then you should have no problem explaining how.

Well if we're going by the Bible or the Church Fathers, Christianity opposes free speech. However, most Western Christians today do believe in free speech. So if we're going by the modern Western Christian community, Christianity does not oppose free speech.
 
Christianity does not mandate a theocracy. You made the claim, that Christianity is incompatible with the US Constitution. As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about.

It's not compatible with it, because of what's in the constitution. In my post it say's nothing of the sort you are talking about. The two are oil, and water. For people that got cranky, because a state government was being a nanny over soda sizes. I literally can not believe a single one of you, would want the federal government dishing out religious doctrine. But the hypocrisy is stagnant on the right. So much so, that I have trouble thinking of anything the democrats could do, to make me ever consider voting Republican. I love watching republicans sink themselves, and point at dems all the time instead. You're officially a Monty Python sketch.

ab5.jpg
:laugh:
 
Last edited:
(shaking head) You're a Slacker, Dark Soul. Instead of trying to Free the Holy Land from the Infidels, you're deadheading over here. Do you give a shit that the Jews killed your Savior?

give a shit that the Jews killed your Savior?

lol the goyim god on two sticks died and was buried end of story
 
It's not compatible with it, because of what's in the constitution. In my post it say's nothing of the sort you are talking about. The two are oil, and water. For people that got cranky, because a state government was being a nanny over soda sizes. I literally can not believe a single one of you, would want the federal government dishing out religious doctrine. But the hypocrisy is stagnant on the right. So much so, that I have trouble thinking of anything the democrats could do, to make me ever consider voting Republican. I love watching republicans sink themselves, and point at dems all the time instead. You're officially a Monty Python sketch.

ab5.jpg

A nation founded upon Christian principles is incompatible with Christianity. Got it. You still haven't produced a scintilla of evidence to support your position, I won't be holding my breath.
 
A nation founded upon Christian principles is incompatible with Christianity. Got it. You still haven't produced a scintilla of evidence to support your position, I won't be holding my breath.

Are you that daft? None of that matters. This nation was not founded on Christian values, it was founded as an escape of the religious indoctrination, and all the turmoil of Europe. You people can take your shitty religiousness, and keep it to yourselves. This country was supposed to be the evolution, but now we lag behind the very places we left.
 
I wish I knew why you, and your socks are always coat tailing me. Creepy stalker shit, dude.
I have no socks...perhaps you should consider the same;)
Originally Posted by RB 60 View Post
Why is that? You'd have trouble selling it then, they'd think you stole it.
"I might actually prefer people thinking I stole them, then have them think they are mine. I could just put up an Ebay page just for them." JD"s..uh.."apple's" post, btw;)
 
Last edited:
The parts against an established state religion. It takes a person back a bit, to hear anyone with at least a 6th grade education, talking about favoring Christianity

There is nothing in the Constitution about established state religion you moron. But what does that have to do with the thread's argument; that some say that Christianity isn't compatible with the US Constitution?
 
Oh Boy!
I guess I have to reply to this Moron and set him straight.
The Bible states that homosexuality is an 'abomination'.
The Supreme Court, 9 Judges (or at least 5 of them), have determined that 2 guys butt fucking each other is considered a Marriage.
So, when are you going to give up on the Bible and get your mind right?

THAT ... is the Question!



There is nothing in the Constitution about established state religion you moron. But what does that have to do with the thread's argument; that some say that Christianity isn't compatible with the US Constitution?
 
Religious Holidays.
Religious paraphernalia on Public Property.
Religious chants before Public Meetings.

Phantasmal supports students bringing Prayer Rugs to school, do you? How about Minarets. How many Minarets do you want in your neighborhood?

How is Islam consistent with our Constitution JackOFF?

Shariah is Anti-Constitutional

Whether pursued through the violent form of jihad (holy war) or stealthier practices that shariah Islamists often refer to as "dawa" (the "call to Islam"), shariah rejects fundamental premises of American society and values:

(1) the bedrock proposition that the governed have a right to make law for themselves;

(2) the democratic republic governed by the Constitution;

(3) freedom of conscience; individual liberty

(4) freedom of expression (including the liberty to analyze and criticize shariah);

(5) economic liberty (including private property);

(6) equal treatment under the law (including that of men and women, and of Muslims and non-Muslims);

(7) freedom from cruel and unusual punishments; an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism (i.e., one that is based on a common sense meaning of the term and does not rationalize barbarity as legitimate "resistance"); and

(8) an abiding commitment to deflate and resolve political controversies by the ordinary mechanisms of our democratic republic, not wanton violence. The subversion campaign known as "civilization jihad" must not be confused with, or tolerated as, a constitutionally protected form of religious practice. Its ambitions transcend what American law recognizes as the sacrosanct realm of private conscience and belief. It seeks to supplant our Constitution with its own totalitarian framework.

America's Founders and Islam

America's earliest presidents best understood these founding principles. They were not only deeply involved with their formal adoption, but they were professionally competent in explaining them. When confronted with an Islamic threat, they took the effort to consult primary sources and to conduct competent analysis of that threat.

In 1786, Thomas Jefferson, ambassador to France, and John Adams, ambassador to England, met with the emissary of the Islamic potentates of Tripoli to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, regarding the demands for tribute being made at the time by the so-called Barbary Pirates.

Afterwards, Jefferson and Adams sent a four-page report to the Congress describing this meeting. The relevant portion of their report reads:

"We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds of their pretentions to make war upon Nations who had done them no Injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.

"The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Qur'an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."


https://nccs.net/blogs/articles/the-u-s-constitution-and-sharia-law
 
Finally!
You support the Secular Humanists. Congratulation TD, you just might become an American one day.


How is Islam consistent with our Constitution JackOFF?

Shariah is Anti-Constitutional

Whether pursued through the violent form of jihad (holy war) or stealthier practices that shariah Islamists often refer to as "dawa" (the "call to Islam"), shariah rejects fundamental premises of American society and values:

(1) the bedrock proposition that the governed have a right to make law for themselves;

(2) the democratic republic governed by the Constitution;

(3) freedom of conscience; individual liberty

(4) freedom of expression (including the liberty to analyze and criticize shariah);

(5) economic liberty (including private property);

(6) equal treatment under the law (including that of men and women, and of Muslims and non-Muslims);

(7) freedom from cruel and unusual punishments; an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism (i.e., one that is based on a common sense meaning of the term and does not rationalize barbarity as legitimate "resistance"); and

(8) an abiding commitment to deflate and resolve political controversies by the ordinary mechanisms of our democratic republic, not wanton violence. The subversion campaign known as "civilization jihad" must not be confused with, or tolerated as, a constitutionally protected form of religious practice. Its ambitions transcend what American law recognizes as the sacrosanct realm of private conscience and belief. It seeks to supplant our Constitution with its own totalitarian framework.

America's Founders and Islam

America's earliest presidents best understood these founding principles. They were not only deeply involved with their formal adoption, but they were professionally competent in explaining them. When confronted with an Islamic threat, they took the effort to consult primary sources and to conduct competent analysis of that threat.

In 1786, Thomas Jefferson, ambassador to France, and John Adams, ambassador to England, met with the emissary of the Islamic potentates of Tripoli to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, regarding the demands for tribute being made at the time by the so-called Barbary Pirates.

Afterwards, Jefferson and Adams sent a four-page report to the Congress describing this meeting. The relevant portion of their report reads:

"We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds of their pretentions to make war upon Nations who had done them no Injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.

"The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Qur'an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."


https://nccs.net/blogs/articles/the-u-s-constitution-and-sharia-law
 
I have no socks...perhaps you should consider the same;)
Originally Posted by RB 60 View Post
Why is that? You'd have trouble selling it then, they'd think you stole it.
"I might actually prefer people thinking I stole them, then have them think they are mine. I could just put up an Ebay page just for them." JD"s..uh.."apple's" post, btw;)

What even is this? Apparently I'm not the only one you follow around. My sympathies to RB 60, and anyone else.

8c5c925d039e470b96f07c19fd66de6e--hands-praying-buddhist-prayer.jpg
 
Back
Top