Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Who says they are Christian? Most politicians will claim that..especially to gather votes from the Bible belt states. Their actions speak differently once in office. Obama is a prime example.
I think it has to do with the fact that no atheist is ever going to get into office.
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Who says they are Christian? Most politicians will claim that..especially to gather votes from the Bible belt states. Their actions speak differently once in office. Obama is a prime example.
If we're going by 'actions not words make one a Christian' (which I agree with), then there are very few Christians in this country, from what I've seen.
Originally posted by Peach
Swearing an oath on the Bible is not required by law.And considering the fact that the vast majority of people in power and in the government are Protestant Christians, yes. They do. Sticking your fingers in your ears and going "lalalala not listening" doesn't change the facts.
his point isnt necessarily invalid though
Originally posted by Autokrat
I think it has to do with the fact that no atheist is ever going to get into office.
If a Black man did it, then its only a matter of time. Besides, many historians believe Jefferson and Lincoln were non-believers.
There's more "No Religion" people in America than Jews, Blacks or Hispanics...so that's a lot of votes for an Atheist politician.
Originally posted by Robtard
If we're going by 'actions not words make one a Christian' (which I agree with), then there are very few Christians in this country, from what I've seen.
The Bible says "No good works" will get you into Heaven. So Christianity is a creed-based religion, not a deed-based religion.
Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
how do you know its only happened once?
We don't even know the kids who did this... you know who probably did know them though, the school staff. They have way more information on what these shirts were intended to accomplish, then you could surmise from a one-article snippet.
Originally posted by King Kandy
[B]I don't know if it happened more than once, but so far this seems to be the only time anyone in the thread has heard of it, which means my perspective is as valid as any here...
ive heard of and seen incidents like the one being discussed in this thread dozens of times. its one of the perks of going to a school in a border state.
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Well,The Bible is not my Book and Christianity is not my religion. I could never give assent to the long complicated statements of Christian dogma." — Abraham Lincoln.
Lincoln lived before the Evangelical Reactionary movement of the late 19th century and early 20th century. Any opinion poll today will show that very few people would vote for an open atheist.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
The Bible says "No good works" will get you into Heaven. So Christianity is a creed-based religion, not a deed-based religion.
Bibile says a lot of things; so did Jesus.
Jesus also said something along the lines that repentance is not lip service; you must live for the Lord(Jesus). Seems it's both, to me.
Originally posted by Robtard
Bibile says a lot of things; so did Jesus.Jesus also said something along the lines that repentance is not lip service; you must live for the Lord(Jesus). Seems it's both, to me.
The most common Protestant belief is that a true Christian that has accepted the holy spirit and Jesus, will show such belief in their character and ergo their actions. Works alone are useless, but true faith will bring about good works.
Originally posted by Robtard
I know and agree. But it isn't that simple in this case. Two sets of kids were wearing flags/patriotic material, why was one allowed and the other not, considering neither were offensive in nature.
It is not a what issue, but a why issue. The speech was not restricted because it is offensive in content. It was restricted, because its purpose is to antagonize, and be disruptive.
Originally posted by Autokrat
The most common Protestant belief is that a true Christian that has accepted the holy spirit and Jesus, will show such belief in their character and ergo their actions. Works alone are useless, but true faith will bring about good works.
Like I said, I've seen very few true Christians in my life, or what I would consider a true Christian.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
It is not a what issue, but a why issue. The speech was not restricted because it is offensive in content. It was restricted, because its purpose is to antagonize, and be disruptive.
The flag-shirts didn't do that by themselves though, it was other people who took that point of view and then reacted on it.
Could any other student have gone to the principle and stated "the Mexican patriotism apparel offends me, my grandfather is French(or Texan); I want it removed" and it would have been? No, it wouldn't have, because it's not offensive in the general sense of things; either is the American flag.
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Who says they are Christian? Most politicians will claim that..especially to gather votes from the Bible belt states. Their actions speak differently once in office. Obama is a prime example.
So you're relying on the silent majority or some particular definition of "christian".
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So you're relying on the silent majority or some particular definition of "christian".
I'm saying it is a mistake to label most of our government leaders as "christians" when that simply is not the case. If true evangelical christians were in office, it would re-shape U.S. policy dramatically.
Let's say that in the next election, every current member of Congress lost his/her seat to a true Christian. Immediately after taking office, they would attempt to overturn roe vs wade. They would make it impossible for homosexuals to marry or adopt children. They would still respect the separation of church and state, but their policy making would be influenced tremendously by their faith.
As far as the definition of "Christian"...there is only one definition. Being a Christian literally means to be.."Christ-like". A true Christian would live his/her life according to the standards that the Bible has prescribed for all followers of Christ. Do you really see elected members of Congress acting like the Apostles in the New Testament? Do you see them openly profess Christ to others..as the only standard to live by? I thought not!! When I say this, I don't mean to go around Capitol Hill and evanglize all over the place. Their faith would be noted in their off-time..while attending Church, witnessing to others, and their frequent participation in spiritual affairs. If they did these things, the media would publicize it.
Immediately after taking office, they would attempt to overturn roe vs wade. They would make it impossible for homosexuals to marry or adopt children. They would still respect the separation of church and state, but their policy making would be influenced tremendously by their faith.
...seriously?
Okay, a reality check here. Lawmakers already do what they can to restrict abortion as much as they possibly can without actually going against Roe vs. Wade, and there are attempts at overturning it quite often. It is currently illegal for homosexual couples to marry in almost every state in the US, and it is far more difficult for them to adopt children than a heterosexual couple. There are many policies that are directly influenced by the faith of those in government that are making the laws.
Your what-if scenario isn't a what-if, it's how things already are and have been for some time. And, which I should haven't to point out, NOT how things should be.