America-Christian Nation

[Sierra Nichole]

Im wondering how many ppl still agree with this statement?

I personally dont like hearing it because if America is known for being a "Christian" Nation then what kind of message are we sending to the world? That its ok to be gay, have premarital sex, engage in witchcraft, have abortions, etc.

These are things are country believes in yet as Christians we try to keep saying that we are a Christian Nation.

We may have been founded on Christian principles but by no means do we act as a Christian Nation.

Am I the only one who has a problem with that?

[Lisa]

Pilgrims and some other founders wanted not freedom of religion, but freedom from the state church. In other words to be Catholic, Protestant, or maybe even atheist as they chose.
European nations of the time (at least England) expected citizens to follow the religion accecpted by the king.

Regarding your statistics: The trappings of wealth all of it. Most of us who are impoverished (by Uncle Sam's standard) are indeed very rich compared to the rest of the World.

Did the Lord's blessing or the work of man lead to this wealth. Was it the Lord working through man and making it appear to be the work of man?

James said:

I don't like it because it is not true. Our Nation was founder on secular ideas. People came here to get away from being controlled by religion.Why would they want to to the same thing here?

You think being gay or having premarital sex, belief in witchcraft,having abortions as being the biggest problems we in the United States are showing the world.

How about the United States being only 5% of world population but consume 24% of the world's energy.

Americans eat 815 billion calories of food each day - that's roughly 200 billion more than needed - enough to feed 80 million people.

Americans throw out 200,000 tons of edible food daily.

The average American generates 52 tons of garbage by age 75.

The average individual daily consumption of water is 159 gallons, while more than half the world's population lives on 25 gallons.

What the world see is a powerful country taken what ever we want using what ever means we have to get what we want. The world see us as a mean bully.

[James]

WOW, I get a different meaning from the 10th Amendment then you. I get powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.

What you said would make the United States a democracy. The united States is not a democracy but a Federal Republic.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Steve Belttari said:

Since you mentioned the Treaty of Paris, I thought that this was a good time to bring up why the U.S. Constitution is a treasonous document, and why the government it created needs to be abolished and replaced with a new form of government, that has the consent of the governed. Article VI clause 2 says:

"This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Let me interpret, anything in this constitution(10th amendment) or the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding(nullification). So if the people of a state seek redress of grievences through their local or state governments, a treaty takes precedence over our own laws. This is treason, plain and simple. So if someone wants to use the U.S. Constitution to marginalize Christianity, they are also being treasonous.

[James]

I agree with our founding fathers not wanting government in religion by keeping a state run chruch out of government.

I believe man only has made the United States what it is today good and bad man did it all with out any deities help.


Lisa said:

Pilgrims and some other founders wanted not freedom of religion, but freedom from the state church. In other words to be Catholic, Protestant, or maybe even atheist as they chose.
European nations of the time (at least England) expected citizens to follow the religion accecpted by the king.

Regarding your statistics: The trappings of wealth all of it. Most of us who are impoverished (by Uncle Sam's standard) are indeed very rich compared to the rest of the World.

Did the Lord's blessing or the work of man lead to this wealth. Was it the Lord working through man and making it appear to be the work of man?

James said:

I don't like it because it is not true. Our Nation was founder on secular ideas. People came here to get away from being controlled by religion.Why would they want to to the same thing here?

You think being gay or having premarital sex, belief in witchcraft,having abortions as being the biggest problems we in the United States are showing the world.

How about the United States being only 5% of world population but consume 24% of the world's energy.

Americans eat 815 billion calories of food each day - that's roughly 200 billion more than needed - enough to feed 80 million people.

Americans throw out 200,000 tons of edible food daily.

The average American generates 52 tons of garbage by age 75.

The average individual daily consumption of water is 159 gallons, while more than half the world's population lives on 25 gallons.

What the world see is a powerful country taken what ever we want using what ever means we have to get what we want. The world see us as a mean bully.

[Steve Belttari]

Since I am an antifederalist, your definitions really don't mean a whole lot to me. I would define the United States as being a popular democracy, the people are sovereign. Based on this, I envision the United States breaking up into 2 nations, one nation outside of the elitist constitution/federalism. I think that there will be some territorial changes, but it will be mainly a question of allegience. People will get to choose what nation/government that they want to be under right where they are at(panarchy).

James said:

WOW, I get a different meaning from the 10th Amendment then you. I get powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.

What you said would make the United States a democracy. The united States is not a democracy but a Federal Republic.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Steve Belttari said:

Since you mentioned the Treaty of Paris, I thought that this was a good time to bring up why the U.S. Constitution is a treasonous document, and why the government it created needs to be abolished and replaced with a new form of government, that has the consent of the governed. Article VI clause 2 says:

"This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Let me interpret, anything in this constitution(10th amendment) or the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding(nullification). So if the people of a state seek redress of grievences through their local or state governments, a treaty takes precedence over our own laws. This is treason, plain and simple. So if someone wants to use the U.S. Constitution to marginalize Christianity, they are also being treasonous.

[James]

Okay, that explains a lot. I don't see the United States breaking up any time soon. This country will one day fail.History teaches us that. I do not see a bunch of free states comming out of it. A Dictatorship is what I see as the end of the United States.Thats is many years from now.

Steve Belttari said:

Since I am an antifederalist, your definitions really don't mean a whole lot to me. I would define the United States as being a popular democracy, the people are sovereign. Based on this, I envision the United States breaking up into 2 nations, one nation outside of the elitist constitution/federalism. I think that there will be some territorial changes, but it will be mainly a question of allegience. People will get to choose what nation/government that they want to be under right where they are at(panarchy).

James said:

WOW, I get a different meaning from the 10th Amendment then you. I get powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.

What you said would make the United States a democracy. The united States is not a democracy but a Federal Republic.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Steve Belttari said:

Since you mentioned the Treaty of Paris, I thought that this was a good time to bring up why the U.S. Constitution is a treasonous document, and why the government it created needs to be abolished and replaced with a new form of government, that has the consent of the governed. Article VI clause 2 says:

"This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Let me interpret, anything in this constitution(10th amendment) or the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding(nullification). So if the people of a state seek redress of grievences through their local or state governments, a treaty takes precedence over our own laws. This is treason, plain and simple. So if someone wants to use the U.S. Constitution to marginalize Christianity, they are also being treasonous.

[Steve Belttari]

I don't see the nation as failing(whatever that may mean), only splitting into two distinct nations. I think that we are already under a dictatorship, some people are going to exercise their sovereignty and free themselves from this tyranny. Many will remain slaves under the constitution/federalism, but many will free themselves with the American Revolutionary War/Declaration of Independence as their guide.

James said:

Okay, that explains a lot. I don't see the United States breaking up any time soon. This country will one day fail.History teaches us that. I do not see a bunch of free states comming out of it. A Dictatorship is what I see as the end of the United States.Thats is many years from now.

Steve Belttari said:

Since I am an antifederalist, your definitions really don't mean a whole lot to me. I would define the United States as being a popular democracy, the people are sovereign. Based on this, I envision the United States breaking up into 2 nations, one nation outside of the elitist constitution/federalism. I think that there will be some territorial changes, but it will be mainly a question of allegience. People will get to choose what nation/government that they want to be under right where they are at(panarchy).

James said:

WOW, I get a different meaning from the 10th Amendment then you. I get powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.

What you said would make the United States a democracy. The united States is not a democracy but a Federal Republic.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Steve Belttari said:

Since you mentioned the Treaty of Paris, I thought that this was a good time to bring up why the U.S. Constitution is a treasonous document, and why the government it created needs to be abolished and replaced with a new form of government, that has the consent of the governed. Article VI clause 2 says:

"This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Let me interpret, anything in this constitution(10th amendment) or the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding(nullification). So if the people of a state seek redress of grievences through their local or state governments, a treaty takes precedence over our own laws. This is treason, plain and simple. So if someone wants to use the U.S. Constitution to marginalize Christianity, they are also being treasonous.

[James]

That reminds me. I need to buy more ammo. When seconds count the cops are minutes away.


I take it you would like the states to be able to have a state supported religion. If thats not it why you feel the United states is a dictatorship?


Steve Belttari said:

I don't see the nation as failing(whatever that may mean), only splitting into two distinct nations. I think that we are already under a dictatorship, some people are going to exercise their sovereignty and free themselves from this tyranny.

James said:

Okay, that explains a lot. I don't see the United States breaking up any time soon. This country will one day fail.History teaches us that. I do not see a bunch of free states comming out of it. A Dictatorship is what I see as the end of the United States.Thats is many years from now.

Steve Belttari said:

Since I am an antifederalist, your definitions really don't mean a whole lot to me. I would define the United States as being a popular democracy, the people are sovereign. Based on this, I envision the United States breaking up into 2 nations, one nation outside of the elitist constitution/federalism. I think that there will be some territorial changes, but it will be mainly a question of allegience. People will get to choose what nation/government that they want to be under right where they are at(panarchy).

James said:

WOW, I get a different meaning from the 10th Amendment then you. I get powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.

What you said would make the United States a democracy. The united States is not a democracy but a Federal Republic.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Steve Belttari said:

Since you mentioned the Treaty of Paris, I thought that this was a good time to bring up why the U.S. Constitution is a treasonous document, and why the government it created needs to be abolished and replaced with a new form of government, that has the consent of the governed. Article VI clause 2 says:

"This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Let me interpret, anything in this constitution(10th amendment) or the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding(nullification). So if the people of a state seek redress of grievences through their local or state governments, a treaty takes precedence over our own laws. This is treason, plain and simple. So if someone wants to use the U.S. Constitution to marginalize Christianity, they are also being treasonous.

[Steve Belttari]

I am against having a state supported religion, especially the one we have now(evolutionary humanism). I think the 1st amendment should be put in its proper context. The United States would have been better off under the more decentralized Articles of Confederation, there would have been state church holdouts(probably New England states), but state supported churches would have been disestablished without the Constitution and the mercantilist commercial empire it created. As a rule, all empires will become interventionalist abroad and tyrannical within, this holds true for the American commercial empire, which is why we are under a dictatorship.

PS It is good that you are arming yourself, before His death, Jesus Christ commanded His disciples to begin arming themselves, not to prevent His death, for this would have defeated the purpose for why He came into this world, but as a long range plan of God.

James said:

That reminds me. I need to buy more ammo. When seconds count the cops are minutes away.


I take it you would like the states to be able to have a state supported religion. If thats not it why you feel the United states is a dictatorship?


Steve Belttari said:

I don't see the nation as failing(whatever that may mean), only splitting into two distinct nations. I think that we are already under a dictatorship, some people are going to exercise their sovereignty and free themselves from this tyranny.

James said:

Okay, that explains a lot. I don't see the United States breaking up any time soon. This country will one day fail.History teaches us that. I do not see a bunch of free states comming out of it. A Dictatorship is what I see as the end of the United States.Thats is many years from now.

Steve Belttari said:

Since I am an antifederalist, your definitions really don't mean a whole lot to me. I would define the United States as being a popular democracy, the people are sovereign. Based on this, I envision the United States breaking up into 2 nations, one nation outside of the elitist constitution/federalism. I think that there will be some territorial changes, but it will be mainly a question of allegience. People will get to choose what nation/government that they want to be under right where they are at(panarchy).

James said:

WOW, I get a different meaning from the 10th Amendment then you. I get powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.

What you said would make the United States a democracy. The united States is not a democracy but a Federal Republic.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Steve Belttari said:

Since you mentioned the Treaty of Paris, I thought that this was a good time to bring up why the U.S. Constitution is a treasonous document, and why the government it created needs to be abolished and replaced with a new form of government, that has the consent of the governed. Article VI clause 2 says:

"This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Let me interpret, anything in this constitution(10th amendment) or the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding(nullification). So if the people of a state seek redress of grievences through their local or state governments, a treaty takes precedence over our own laws. This is treason, plain and simple. So if someone wants to use the U.S. Constitution to marginalize Christianity, they are also being treasonous.

[James]

I am armed big time.

The Articles of Confederation lacked the necessary provisions for a sufficiently effective government. There was no president or executive agencies or judiciary. There was no tax base. There was no way to pay off state and national debts from the war years. There was no freedom of religion,also had no power to regulate commerce between and among the states, leading to bitter tariff wars between them.

Articles of Confederation members of Congress were appointed by state legislatures not by a vote of the people.there was no Supreme Court. The united States and every state could make its own money.

I could not dis-agree with you more. It appears the only thing we agree on are gun rights.O by the way gun rights was missing from the Articles of Confederation too.


Steve Belttari said:

I am against having a state supported religion, especially the one we have now(evolutionary humanism). I think the 1st amendment should be put in its proper context. The United States would have been better off under the more decentralized Articles of Confederation, there would have been state church holdouts(probably New England states), but state supported churches would have been disestablished without the Constitution and the mercantilist commercial empire it created. As a rule, all empires will become interventionalist abroad and tyrannical within, this holds true for the American commercial empire, which is why we are under a dictatorship.

PS It is good that you are arming yourself, before His death, Jesus Christ commanded His disciples to begin arming themselves, not to prevent His death, for this would have defeated the purpose for why He came into this world, but as a long range plan of God.

James said:

That reminds me. I need to buy more ammo. When seconds count the cops are minutes away.


I take it you would like the states to be able to have a state supported religion. If thats not it why you feel the United states is a dictatorship?


Steve Belttari said:

I don't see the nation as failing(whatever that may mean), only splitting into two distinct nations. I think that we are already under a dictatorship, some people are going to exercise their sovereignty and free themselves from this tyranny.

James said:

Okay, that explains a lot. I don't see the United States breaking up any time soon. This country will one day fail.History teaches us that. I do not see a bunch of free states comming out of it. A Dictatorship is what I see as the end of the United States.Thats is many years from now.

Steve Belttari said:

Since I am an antifederalist, your definitions really don't mean a whole lot to me. I would define the United States as being a popular democracy, the people are sovereign. Based on this, I envision the United States breaking up into 2 nations, one nation outside of the elitist constitution/federalism. I think that there will be some territorial changes, but it will be mainly a question of allegience. People will get to choose what nation/government that they want to be under right where they are at(panarchy).

James said:

WOW, I get a different meaning from the 10th Amendment then you. I get powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.

What you said would make the United States a democracy. The united States is not a democracy but a Federal Republic.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Steve Belttari said:

Since you mentioned the Treaty of Paris, I thought that this was a good time to bring up why the U.S. Constitution is a treasonous document, and why the government it created needs to be abolished and replaced with a new form of government, that has the consent of the governed. Article VI clause 2 says:

"This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Let me interpret, anything in this constitution(10th amendment) or the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding(nullification). So if the people of a state seek redress of grievences through their local or state governments, a treaty takes precedence over our own laws. This is treason, plain and simple. So if someone wants to use the U.S. Constitution to marginalize Christianity, they are also being treasonous.

[Steve Belttari]

For the exact reasons that you mentioned, delegates from the states were sent to Philadelphia to AMEND the Articles of Confederation, not to create a new government of their liking. The Articles of Confederation would have probably needed to be amended many times to make a confederated government work.

James said:

I am armed big time.

The Articles of Confederation lacked the necessary provisions for a sufficiently effective government. There was no president or executive agencies or judiciary. There was no tax base. There was no way to pay off state and national debts from the war years. There was no freedom of religion,also had no power to regulate commerce between and among the states, leading to bitter tariff wars between them.

Articles of Confederation members of Congress were appointed by state legislatures not by a vote of the people.there was no Supreme Court. The united States and every state could make its own money.

I could not dis-agree with you more. It appears the only thing we agree on are gun rights.O by the way gun rights was missing from the Articles of Confederation too.


Steve Belttari said:

I am against having a state supported religion, especially the one we have now(evolutionary humanism). I think the 1st amendment should be put in its proper context. The United States would have been better off under the more decentralized Articles of Confederation, there would have been state church holdouts(probably New England states), but state supported churches would have been disestablished without the Constitution and the mercantilist commercial empire it created. As a rule, all empires will become interventionalist abroad and tyrannical within, this holds true for the American commercial empire, which is why we are under a dictatorship.

PS It is good that you are arming yourself, before His death, Jesus Christ commanded His disciples to begin arming themselves, not to prevent His death, for this would have defeated the purpose for why He came into this world, but as a long range plan of God.

James said:

That reminds me. I need to buy more ammo. When seconds count the cops are minutes away.


I take it you would like the states to be able to have a state supported religion. If thats not it why you feel the United states is a dictatorship?


Steve Belttari said:

I don't see the nation as failing(whatever that may mean), only splitting into two distinct nations. I think that we are already under a dictatorship, some people are going to exercise their sovereignty and free themselves from this tyranny.

James said:

Okay, that explains a lot. I don't see the United States breaking up any time soon. This country will one day fail.History teaches us that. I do not see a bunch of free states comming out of it. A Dictatorship is what I see as the end of the United States.Thats is many years from now.

Steve Belttari said:

Since I am an antifederalist, your definitions really don't mean a whole lot to me. I would define the United States as being a popular democracy, the people are sovereign. Based on this, I envision the United States breaking up into 2 nations, one nation outside of the elitist constitution/federalism. I think that there will be some territorial changes, but it will be mainly a question of allegience. People will get to choose what nation/government that they want to be under right where they are at(panarchy).

James said:

WOW, I get a different meaning from the 10th Amendment then you. I get powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people.

What you said would make the United States a democracy. The united States is not a democracy but a Federal Republic.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Steve Belttari said:

Since you mentioned the Treaty of Paris, I thought that this was a good time to bring up why the U.S. Constitution is a treasonous document, and why the government it created needs to be abolished and replaced with a new form of government, that has the consent of the governed. Article VI clause 2 says:

"This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Let me interpret, anything in this constitution(10th amendment) or the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding(nullification). So if the people of a state seek redress of grievences through their local or state governments, a treaty takes precedence over our own laws. This is treason, plain and simple. So if someone wants to use the U.S. Constitution to marginalize Christianity, they are also being treasonous.

[James]

To Steve Belttari,

I am curious.How would religion work in your confederated government.

[Steve Belttari]

In theory, we already are supposed to be a confederated government, that is what federalism is after all. The word anti-Federalist was used by the Federalists to denigrate their oppostion, meaning they(anti-Federalists) were against federalism. The anti-Federalists were not against federalism per se, what they were against was a new consolidated nation with a strong central government. So as the constitutional convention deliberated in secret, one of the committees voted 7 to 3 in favor of a new national government where the states(nations) were no longer sovereign. As things played out, to get their radical agenda ratified by the states, the Federalists had to acquiesce to a Bill of Rights, which gave the appearance of a confederated(federal) government, but in reality the states(nations) were now administative units of the new central government. So how would religion work if we were actually a confederated government? The way I see it, some states would have initially have had more religious freedom than others. However, as time went on, the less free states would have been positively influenced by the more free states and would have become bastions of religious liberty themselves. Overall, I think genuine Christianity would have thrived under this arrangement. For our purposes today, I think it would be instructive to see what a revamped 21st century version of the Articles of Confederation would look like. Maybe Bill Collier could put his version on Kingdom Insight for us.

James said:

To Steve Belttari,

I am curious.How would religion work in your confederated government.