Theism and Christianity gave us our founding documents, which fly in the face of everything Progressive.

FAIL: The writers of the constitution on christianity:
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance, or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others. Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force the...

Theism and Christianity gave us our founding documents, which fly in the face of everything Progressive.

FAIL: The writers of the constitution on christianity:
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance, or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others. Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights.
- Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Paine denounces the very idea of creed-based religion; for him, "Truth is not declared in the words of a creed, but understood by the rational mind using the divine gift of reason." From his treatise "The Age of Reason."

Ben Franklin saw religious dogmatism as hindering, rather than helping individuals become virtuous.

I could go on. American fundamentalist protestant christianity did not exist at the time of the writing of the constitution. That is the dogma that has taken over the most conservative wing of the Republican party. It's adherents have gained a foothold on the airwaves and in the churches. They are anti-progressive all right, and neither libertarian (by virtue of their willingness to impose federal laws on morality) or anti-"fascist"--they coronated Bush and cronies after all. We're all guilty of putting up stupid leaders who would not meet the founding father's requirements for service. Your loyalty to your dogma perhaps sometimes blinds you to reality in favor of idealism.

Deb, you really are sadly deluded. For every wedge you try to toss out suggesting the Founders sided on secularism, I can toss out 20 showing they sided with Libertarianism and a reliance upon divine providence. They even instituted in LAW in passage of the Northwest Ordinance.

State churches that use government power to support themselves and
force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil
rights.
- Thomas Jefferson

True. That would also be un-Christian.

In Jefferson’s later letter to Samual Miller in 1808 he wrote “the
power to prescribe religious exercise, or to assume authority in
religious discipline, has been delegated to the states, as far as...

Deb, you really are sadly deluded. For every wedge you try to toss out suggesting the Founders sided on secularism, I can toss out 20 showing they sided with Libertarianism and a reliance upon divine providence. They even instituted in LAW in passage of the Northwest Ordinance.

State churches that use government power to support themselves and
force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil
rights.
- Thomas Jefferson

True. That would also be un-Christian.

In Jefferson’s later letter to Samual Miller in 1808 he wrote “the
power to prescribe religious exercise, or to assume authority in
religious discipline, has been delegated to the states, as far as it
can be in any human authority.”

You sadly try to cajole Jefferson into a Totalitarian box. His view was that Liberty is the natural state of man, and that ultimate power lies in individuals. We have been flipped upside down. The highest social power was to be in communities, to the states, and then to the Federal government. Now, it is the all powerful Federal Government, weakened States, and communities have practically no power at all. That leaves individuals voiceless, except for our vote. That is not how it was intended. Our sole source of governing power comes from God. It does NOT come from the State.

The issue with your stance is not that Christians seek to mold society to their beliefs. The issue is that you want to mold society to your materialist beliefs and you are entirely intolerant of someone having different views and expressing them in civil discourse if they are ideas with which you disagree. I know this is true because you have to go to great lengths to represent the founders as men who believed religion in general, or Christianity in particular, were weights upon the development of a free society. They deemed Religion and Christianity in particular vital to the well-being of the Republic.

Well you said progressiveness is a religion so it qualifies....While I stand by my position, I don't discount yours-these were mostly religious men, some unitarian, some deist, some more dogmatic than others, and there is nothing wrong with religion, unless....
they become un-christian by imposing their views and faith on others- I do see a "not libertarian" trend that I don't know how you can deny in the conservative christian movement. They often want to use the law to restrict what they deem immoral. And politicians who have been supported by this group have done nothing but grow government and pursue imperialistic goals. There really is nothing you have said that disputes that this grou...

Well you said progressiveness is a religion so it qualifies....While I stand by my position, I don't discount yours-these were mostly religious men, some unitarian, some deist, some more dogmatic than others, and there is nothing wrong with religion, unless....
they become un-christian by imposing their views and faith on others- I do see a "not libertarian" trend that I don't know how you can deny in the conservative christian movement. They often want to use the law to restrict what they deem immoral. And politicians who have been supported by this group have done nothing but grow government and pursue imperialistic goals. There really is nothing you have said that disputes that this group of people are a mobilizing force for their agenda, in the same vein as progressives, Acorn or whoever else you singled out. I think your idealism is wonderful, it's even refreshing in an age of cynicism. Who's the right leader who would pursue 100% libertarian principles without imposing their morals on society? Who's the talent that can accomplish your ideals in today's America? I'm all ears.

they become un-christian by imposing their views and faith on others-

How convenient and intolerant. All views are imposed on some. Abortion is imposed upon a majority. Oppressive taxation is imposed upon a majority. Government healthcare may be imposed upon a majority. TARP was imposed on a majority. We are compelled to support drug abusers and people who won't work. We are compelled to give vast amounts of tax dollars to nations where the money does nothing but line the pockets of brutal dictators. Some had it imposed upon them to go to Iraq and fight a war, or to have the war fought in their name. Yet, I assume you would feel put upon by Christians who might, if it were i...

they become un-christian by imposing their views and faith on others-

How convenient and intolerant. All views are imposed on some. Abortion is imposed upon a majority. Oppressive taxation is imposed upon a majority. Government healthcare may be imposed upon a majority. TARP was imposed on a majority. We are compelled to support drug abusers and people who won't work. We are compelled to give vast amounts of tax dollars to nations where the money does nothing but line the pockets of brutal dictators. Some had it imposed upon them to go to Iraq and fight a war, or to have the war fought in their name. Yet, I assume you would feel put upon by Christians who might, if it were in their power, seek to de-legitimize abortion? A faith imposed is not a faith on the one it is imposed upon. Are you imposed upon because are civil laws are founded in Judeo-Christian values? What an imposition that must be for you.

By the way, for the sake of accuracy: you said:

While I stand by my position, I don't discount yours-these were mostly
religious men, some unitarian, some deist, some more dogmatic than
others,

The fact is:

Of those 55 Founding Fathers, we know what their sworn public confessions were. Twenty-eight were Episcopalians, eight were
Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutheran, two
were Dutch Reformed, two were Methodist, two were Roman Catholic, one
is unknown, and only three were deists–Williamson, Wilson, and Franklin.

How convenient and intolerant.

The words you describe as convenient and intolerant were copied from your words and those of Jefferson, scroll up. I was repeating your own words, check it out. That is why after my statement there is a ...... before using your own words in describing what Jefferson would be opposed to. You said it would be unchristian and intolerant for churches to force their views on others, I repeated it. You said progressivism is a religion, I repeated. Perhaps your own words are coming back to bite you.

Abortion is not imposed on the majority. No one is forced to get an abortion. That is the most illogical thing you have ever said, I think. That's like ...

How convenient and intolerant.

The words you describe as convenient and intolerant were copied from your words and those of Jefferson, scroll up. I was repeating your own words, check it out. That is why after my statement there is a ...... before using your own words in describing what Jefferson would be opposed to. You said it would be unchristian and intolerant for churches to force their views on others, I repeated it. You said progressivism is a religion, I repeated. Perhaps your own words are coming back to bite you.

Abortion is not imposed on the majority. No one is forced to get an abortion. That is the most illogical thing you have ever said, I think. That's like saying car buying or eating hamburgers is imposed on the majority. Making abortion illegal is NOT ever libertarian, and you know it.

Just because one is religious does not mean they are dogmatic, intolerant, etc, or vice versa. Today's christian mobilizers ARE intolerant however. You can call our founding fathers religious and that doesn't mean they wanted this country to be run by people who are dogmatic about it, like the current christian conservative movement. It's twisting their words to fit your ideal.

And it's very telling that your idealism means governing by doing zero in order to reverse 80 years of idiocy. Who are you gonna vote for and how are you going to get that in Congress? Your idealism is so unrealistic its hardly worth having a conversation about, but you will go on, with your terms and boxes and labels and defense of all things religious. The religious right needs to keep their mouths shut outside of church for 80 years. There are many moral and reasoned people who do not use religion as a foil, tool, badge, etc. They aren't the christian conservatives, and they aren't the radical muslims. Both of these groups are mobilizers, both have an agenda, and both want to impose their agenda on the rest of us.

deb, your last comment is a contorted, twisted ramble of incoherence. The best I can gather from your incoherence is that you suggest I am being inconsistent in my view about the institution of State churches. Even still, your comment makes no sense at all. I do not support state churches. I support a state's right to establish a church, whether it be a mosque in Michigan or a New Age/Scientology church in California, Atheist Humanism in Vermont, etc... That is called tolerance. You are intolerant, so you have difficulty with that.

Christianity becomes un-Christian when it imposes Faith on others, NOT when individual Christians exercise their First Amendment Rights, which is what you are i...

deb, your last comment is a contorted, twisted ramble of incoherence. The best I can gather from your incoherence is that you suggest I am being inconsistent in my view about the institution of State churches. Even still, your comment makes no sense at all. I do not support state churches. I support a state's right to establish a church, whether it be a mosque in Michigan or a New Age/Scientology church in California, Atheist Humanism in Vermont, etc... That is called tolerance. You are intolerant, so you have difficulty with that.

Christianity becomes un-Christian when it imposes Faith on others, NOT when individual Christians exercise their First Amendment Rights, which is what you are implying is forcing a religion on socitiey. It is simply bigoted, hate-smearing, and beyond idiotic.

Abortion is not imposed on the majority.

Legal abortion is law. It is imposed upon those who disagree as much as those who agree. Just like the war in Iraq was imposed upon the nation, whether one agrees or disagrees. That is the nature of a Representative Republic...all laws are imposed on some. Slavery was imposed upon the nation. Are you saying that if someone did not own a slave, then the law was not imposed on them? You're being idiotic. Actually, what you are saying is that if abortion were made illegal, then that law would be imposed on you, but since it is legal, it is NOT imposed on me.

Deb, the more you comment, the more of a bigot you seem to be. The only person that wants to impose an agenda is you and your hateful, murdering ilk. The agenda I and most Christians seek is one of free will, libertarianism, under natural law and individual sovereignty. That is freakin' IT! You are the one trying to contol, propagandize, hate, mobilize, divide, and more hate. It is ALL you!

This from the person who
1. implies those who disagree with Obama want him dead, while ignoring the constant assasination chatter about Bush, the relentless and unwarranted attacks on Palin of which you are a part, and portray the Leftist murderers in our society as lone actors or products of the Right.
2.implies Palin and Bachman are idiots.
3. Implies Christians exercising their first amendment rights is equal to forcing their views on society.
4. Implies that someone who did not own a slave did not have the legal reality of slavery imposed upon them.
5. Who equates people of faith who gather in churches, mosques, temples, or whatever as mobilizing society.
6. Rambles incoherently and...

This from the person who
1. implies those who disagree with Obama want him dead, while ignoring the constant assasination chatter about Bush, the relentless and unwarranted attacks on Palin of which you are a part, and portray the Leftist murderers in our society as lone actors or products of the Right.
2.implies Palin and Bachman are idiots.
3. Implies Christians exercising their first amendment rights is equal to forcing their views on society.
4. Implies that someone who did not own a slave did not have the legal reality of slavery imposed upon them.
5. Who equates people of faith who gather in churches, mosques, temples, or whatever as mobilizing society.
6. Rambles incoherently and implies utter nonsense regarding my comments.
7. Expresses utter bigotry about the views of those on the Right, rather than correctly placing them in the context of Libertarian and Constitutional values, which uphold individual sovereignty.

You continue on and on with all that and then say That I no longer know how to have a civil conversation?

Priceless.

I am sorry you feel that way.