Don't like it? Get out!

[xoxoxoBruce]

Well, if you heathens don't like it, we've lots of good Catholic Mexicans to take your place. :p

Pakistan and Northern Indian have had endless problems because there are two sets of laws - secular versus religious. In the more rural, Muslim areas of these two nations, the Muslim clerics seem to win out.

Don't forget Canada. Quebec has accepted sharia law for their Muslims that prefer it.

So many people base the fact that the original writers of the constitution were Christian, but really, that was just coincidence.

If you do some reading on the "Founding Fathers", I think you'll find the influential ones, the ones that contributed most to the Constitution, were in fact not really Christians, or at best, Christian light.

Either way, they definitely wanted a separation from religion influencing the government, or being promoted by the government. That makes sense because they had seen all the shit, the mixing of the two had caused in Europe.

[OnyxCougar]

If I recall correctly, Sharia law is a set of specific rules and punishments that exist outside the "law of the land" of Australia (An out of my ass example would be: If you are Muslim, and you steal, you get the Australian punishment, but you also get the Sharia punishment, like your hand gets cut off.)

Please explain to me, since we're using Christianity as an example, what religious laws in the United States are you referring to?

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

Please explain to me, since we're using Christianity as an example, what religious laws in the United States are you referring to?

Well, I can think of one in the news, recently.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I wouldn't call that a Christian law.

[Trilby]

OC?! *drops dead of shock*

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by Brianna

OC?! *drops dead of shock*

miss me?

[Happy Monkey]

Right, but the people proposing it would.

Since there's no non-theocratic reason to have it, and the people clamoring for it call themselves Christian, it counts.

[OnyxCougar]

From your own source:

"The union of a man and a woman is the most enduring human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith," Bush said.

(emphasis mine)

Right, but the people proposing it would.

That is an assumption, not backed by fact.

Since there's no non-theocratic reason to have it, and the people clamoring for it call themselves Christian, it counts.

There is a non-thoecratic reason, namely economics. One example is: Insurance companies don't want to have to cover same sex relationships.

[Happy Monkey]

There is a non-thoecratic reason, namely economics. One example is: Insurance companies don't want to have to cover same sex relationships.

Insurance companies don't want to cover anything, even if they already do cover it. That's not a reason.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Insurance companies will cover anything they can make money on.....strictly business.

Every successful politician knows (has known) that nothing keeps people in line like the fear of God. You can hide from the law but you can't hide from God.
Also, nothing justifies authority like religious/moral superiority.
The wild, wild west was subdued not by lawmen but by the importation of women and their churches.

[Pie]

Found this one via BoingBoing. That solid red block scares me. I guess that's why the call it the bible belt.

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by Pie

That solid red block scares me. I guess that's why the call it the bible belt.

After looking at the image, I'd call it an "irritating rash in the country's nether regions". Living in the middle of it, I assure you, is no picnic, either.

Long time/no see, OC! That's a lot of material to read and not enough coffee to go with it. Whoa.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Insurance companies will cover anything they can make money on.....strictly business.

Right, I was using two meanings of "cover", as the incurance companies do. They'd love to cover1 gay marriages, but once they have they'll try and find ways that they aren't actually covered2. But that's no different from straight marriages, or hurricane or flood insurance for that matter.

1. Collect insurance fees from
2. Eligable to recieve money

[OnyxCougar]

Snopes:

The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said, "Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers."

John Jay, one of the framers of the Constitution, was appointed by George Washington in 1789 to be the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (and later served two terms as governor of New York). He wrote, in a private letter (1797) to clergyman Jedidiah Morse:

Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.

It is to be regretted, but so I believe the fact to be, that except the Bible there is not a true history in the world. Whatever may be the virtue, discernment, and industry of the writers, I am persuaded that truth and error (though in different degrees) will imperceptibly become and remain mixed and blended until they shall be separated forever by the great and last refining fire.

Also snopes:

Every session of Congress begins with a prayer by a paid preacher . . . whose salary has been paid by the taxpayer since 1777.

Congress has indeed retained paid (Christian) chaplains since 1789 (not 1777) to open sessions with prayer and to provide spiritual guidance to members and their staffs upon request. This practice was strongly opposed by James Madison at its inception.

[OnyxCougar]

I know it's alot to read, but its there if anyone cares to read it.

I'm not advocating everyone being forced to be religious, but I think it's clear that the "founding fathers", many of the significant ones, if not most of them were, in fact, very Christian men, and with the (state) Constitutions stating what they do, BY LAW, I would have to assert that America was a very Christian country, back in the day, and I note in my research that it started to shift about the time of Darwin's theory coming out.

But that's another thread.