frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Does Christianity align with US values?

1234689



Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Dee - No.  I do not mean you should have cited Discovery News or ANY news to mount an analysis of the veracity of this archaeological find.  I mean you should have gone to the source as already stated by me, meaning the tests and records which authenticate it, including the live footage which verifies its empirical existence on a hillside, all of which I have provided.  How hard is that to understand?  Why do you people compel us to continually repeat ourselves?  Do you have no comprehension skills, no critical analysis to know how to mount an argument?  It certainly appears that way.

    Creationist adherence has nothing to do with empirical evidence on the ground, let alone with any of the processes carried out to test and authenticate the find, particularly when not carried out by "Creationists".  Again, you fall back on a fake arsenal to discredit, with no credibility yourself, politicizing that which can never be politicized, by adopting textbook Alinsky - "Rules for Radicals" - Rule No. 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  Next step PARALYZE the thinking skills and indoctrinate the target.  The "target" is always the people.  Obama taught Alinsky text when he was employed by the now discredited and de-registered organisation of ACORN.  Obama was a Marxist, his parents registered members of the Communist Party and the reason your generation influence peddle Marxism, unaware that you are, because it is a politic of stealth, never declaring its presence, never declaring its intent or Agenda.  .

    You are enacting it right here, picking Ron Wyatt as your target, freezing him, personalizing the discussion around him, by throwing up every UNACCREDITED  slur, slander, libel,  opprobrium, denigration and calumny that you can find on the internet, while deliberately ignoring the persistent 100% factual record and 100% authentication of every one of his archaeological finds.  Not a single one has been discredited by science, by professional archaeological testing, laboratory testing, forensics, dating testing or by any AUTHORITATIVE method of verification.  Not one, yet you chose to ignore all of that.  Why?  Because you choose to live a lie.  Lies are not knowledge.  Knowledge is the truth.  Anything which is not the truth is not knowledge.  Therefore, you don't deal in knowledge but ignorance.  Why do you choose to do that?  Because Marxism inculcates you to do so, to POLITICIZE everything, things which are not even political like religion, like sex, like gender, like children, like race, like ethnicity, like sports, like archaeology, etc.  Why can't you see this?
    Happy_Killbotsmoothie
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix You are talking about yourself right?
    Dee
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @Happy_Killbot

    Do your individual Atheist stance, align with United States values?
    smoothieHappy_KillbotGrafixDee
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Happy_Killbot

    Ha , Ha @Grafix could solve that one has he has a answer for everything else 
    Happy_Killbot
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Grafix

    ***No.  I do not mean you should have cited Discovery News or ANY news to mount an analysis of the veracity of this archaeological find.  


    Yet you cited them as your go to source 




    ****I mean you should have gone to the source as already stated by me, meaning the tests and records which authenticate it, 


    There are none.....


    Read it and weep .....again 

    After a few expeditions to the Durupınar site that included drilling and excavation in the 1990s, Fasold began to have doubts that the Durupınar formation was Noah's ark. He visited the site in September 1994 with Australian geologist Ian Plimer and concluded that the structure was not a boat.[15] He surmised that ancient peoples had erroneously believed the site was the ark.[15][17] In 1996, Fasold co-wrote a paper with geologist Lorence Collinstitled "Bogus 'Noah's Ark' from Turkey Exposed as a Common Geologic Structure", which concluded that the boat-shaped formation was a natural stone formation that merely resembled a boat. The same paper pointed out that the "anchors" were local volcanic stone.[17] The abstract reads:

    A natural rock structure near Dogubayazit, Turkey, has been misidentified as Noah's Ark. Microscopic studies of a supposed iron bracket show that it is derived from weathered volcanic minerals. Supposed metal-braced walls are natural concentrations of limonite and magnetite in steeply inclined sedimentary layers in the limbs of a doubly plunging syncline. Supposed fossilized gopherwood bark is crinkled metamorphosed peridotite. Fossiliferous limestone, interpreted as cross cutting the syncline, preclude the structure from being Noah's Ark because these supposed "Flood" deposits are younger than the "Ark." Anchor stones at Kazan (Arzap) are derived from local andesite and not from Mesopotamia.[17]

    In April 1997, in sworn testimony at an Australian court case, Fasold repeated his doubts and noted that he regarded the claim that Noah's ark had been found as "absolute ".[18][19][20]


    Wiki 


    *****including the live footage which verifies its empirical existence on a hillside, all of which I have provided.  How hard is that to understand?  Why do you people compel us to continually repeat ourselves?  Do you have no comprehension skills, no critical analysis to know how to mount an argument?  It certainly appears that way.


    Your whole narrative is B S if it was fact the whole world would sit up and take notice the only ones doing so are clowns like you who belong to a fringe creationist American cult 


    ***/Creationist adherence has nothing to do with empirical evidence on the ground, let alone with any of the processes carried out to test and authenticate the find, particularly when not carried out by "Creationists".  


    It has everything to do with it as it’s members are science deniers with zero credibility except within their own group of assorted nuts 


    *****Again, you fall back on a fake arsenal to discredit, with no credibility yourself, politicizing that which can never be politicized, by adopting textbook Alinsky - "Rules for Radicals" - Rule No. 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  Next step PARALYZE the thinking skills and indoctrinate the target.  The "target" is always the people.  Obama taught Alinsky text when he was employed by the now discredited and de-registered organisation of ACORN.  Obama was a Marxist, his parents registered members of the Communist Party and the reason your generation influence peddle Marxism, unaware that you are, because it is a politic of stealth, never declaring its presence, never declaring its intent or Agenda.  .


    You’re ranting again don’t blame me that your hero Wyatt was exposed as a cheap conman who spent a lifetime saying he’d found the Ark yet again 


    ***/You are enacting it right here, picking Ron Wyatt as your target, freezing him, personalizing the discussion around him, by throwing up every UNACCREDITED  slur, slander, libel,  opprobrium, denigration and calumny that you can find on the internet, while deliberately ignoring the persistent 100% factual record and 100% authentication of every one of his archaeological finds.  



    Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha read on son .....


    Ron Wyatt


    Ron Wyatt has made many amazing claims. Amazing claims demand amazing proof which Wyatt lacks.

    1. He claims to have found Noah's Ark. Answers in Genesis has written articles showing his claims are false. See Could this be Noah’s Ark?
    2. He claims to have found the Ark of the Covenant in a quarry outside Jerusalem. His pictures of the Ark are blurred so it could be any thing. To see the pictures from Wyatt's website see http://www.wyattarchaeology.com/ark.htm What Wyatt probably saw was an ossuary which is a box where bones are placed. Knights in medieval times probably also mistook ossuaries for the Ark of the Covenant. For more information see web page at Ron Wyatt's Discoveries
    3. Wyatt claims to have found Sodom and Gomorrah, but what he found was just a geological feature of salt.
    4. Wyatt claims to have found Mt. Sinai at Jabal al Law as does Bob Cornuke. See the Gold of the Exodus
    5. Wyatt claims to have found where Israel crossed the Red Sea, but there is no proof. He has supposedly planted a wheel in the wate



    ****Not a single one has been discredited by science, by professional archaeological testing, laboratory testing, forensics, dating testing or by any AUTHORITATIVE method of verification.  Not one, yet you chose to ignore all of that.  Why?  Because you choose to live a lie.  Lies are not knowledge.  Knowledge is the truth.  

    Anything which is not the truth is not knowledge.  Therefore, you don't deal in knowledge but ignorance.  Why do you choose to do that?  


    I’m starting to think you’re mentally unwell 





    ***Because Marxism inculcates you to do so, to POLITICIZE everything, things which are not even political like religion, like sex, like gender, like children, like race, like ethnicity, like sports, like archaeology, etc.  Why can't you see this?


    Oh right I’m a Marxist now .........Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha 

    Happy_KillbotTKDB
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot - Am I the subject of this debate?  Since when?  It's your topic.  You should know.

    After I wrote the following:
    @Dee - No.  I do not mean you should have cited Discovery News or ANY news to mount an analysis of the veracity of this archaeological find.  I mean you should have gone to the source as already stated by me, meaning the tests and records which authenticate it, including the live footage which verifies its empirical existence on a hillside, all of which I have provided.  How hard is that to understand?  Why do you people compel us to continually repeat ourselves?  Do you have no comprehension skills, no critical analysis to know how to mount an argument?  It certainly appears that way.

    Creationist adherence has nothing to do with empirical evidence on the ground, let alone with any of the processes carried out to test and authenticate the find, particularly when not carried out by "Creationists".  Again, you fall back on a fake arsenal to discredit, with no credibility yourself, politicizing that which can never be politicized, by adopting textbook Alinsky - "Rules for Radicals" - Rule No. 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  Next step PARALYZE the thinking skills and indoctrinate the target.  The "target" is always the people.  Obama taught Alinsky text when he was employed by the now discredited and de-registered organisation of ACORN.  Obama was a Marxist, his parents registered members of the Communist Party and the reason your generation influence peddle Marxism, unaware that you are, because it is a politic of stealth, never declaring its presence, never declaring its intent or Agenda.  .

    You are enacting it right here, picking Ron Wyatt as your target, freezing him, personalizing the discussion around him, by throwing up every UNACCREDITED  slur, slander, libel,  opprobrium, denigration and calumny that you can find on the internet, while deliberately ignoring the persistent 100% factual record and 100% authentication of every one of his archaeological finds.  Not a single one has been discredited by science, by professional archaeological testing, laboratory testing, forensics, dating testing or by any AUTHORITATIVE method of verification.  Not one, yet you chose to ignore all of that.  Why?  Because you choose to live a lie.  Lies are not knowledge.  Knowledge is the truth.  Anything which is not the truth is not knowledge.  Therefore, you don't deal in knowledge but ignorance.  Why do you choose to do that?  Because Marxism inculcates you to do so, to POLITICIZE everything, things which are not even political like religion, like sex, like gender, like children, like race, like ethnicity, like sports, like archaeology, etc.  Why can't you see this?

    You replied with this:

    Happy_Killbot - @Grafix ;- You are talking about yourself right?

    It seems to me that you simply cannot understand plain English, bouncing in with the very same strategy that Dee was just called out for - personalizing and polarizing the target - me this time.  Happy to be tarred with the same brush?  Logic?  Brains?  Critical analytical thinking skills?  Intellect? Or just too damned dumb lazy to read anything, intent only upon destroying our nation?  He who bashes our Constitution.  He who bashes the very document which enables him to choose to be an atheist in the first place.  He who bashes Christianity which tolerates his atheism and does not come after him with a great whacking scimitar to behead him.  

     I see you - straight through you, Karl Jihad.  Now go look up the definitions of "scimitar" and "Jihad", just to be sure you understand me fully.  How many Christians have died by the blade of the scimitar?  Billions.

    .

    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
     @Grafix

    Checkmate Atheists .........


    Happy_Killbot
  • RickeyDRickeyD 953 Pts   -  
    @Dee Dee is petulant servant of Satan...lost, defiled by choice, living without hope. May God have mercy on Dee's soul.
    Grafix
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -  
    @Dee - More of your "knowledge"?  LOL!
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @RickeyD

    ****  Dee is petulant servant of Satan...lost, defiled by choice, living without hope. May God have mercy on Dee's soul

    Why are you getting all butt hurt , you and @Grafix can use this as evidence for your young Earth claims  it’s better than what’s you have at the moment 
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @RickeyD

    ****
    ****  Dee is petulant servant of Satan...lost, defiled by choice, living without hope. May God have mercy on Dee's soul

    Why are you getting all hurt , you and @Grafix can use this as evidence for your young Earth claims  it’s better than what’s you have at the moment 
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Grafix

    *****  More of your "knowledge"?  LOL!

    No that’s your “knowledge “as  that’s what you and your new boyfriend @RickeyD believe ...remember ?
  • RickeyDRickeyD 953 Pts   -  
    @Dee ; Again, you have "chosen" to be a festering boil on the backside of America...your words are the words of your father, Satan, and I know him and his motives...meaninglessness and hopelessness, despair and ultimately death in Hell.


  • RickeyDRickeyD 953 Pts   -  
    @Dee ; Again, you have "chosen" to be a festering boil on the backside of America...your words are the words of your father, Satan, and I know him and his motives...meaninglessness and hopelessness, despair and ultimately nothingness in the Lake of Fire.


  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix So you were talking about yourself then.

    You are not the topic of this discussion, the topic is:

    Does Christianity align with US values?

    Dee
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @RickeyD ;

    **** Again, you have "chosen" to be a festering boil on the backside of America..

    Says the American “Christian “ who's from a country where the mainly “Christian “ population segregated blacks up to the 1960’s you have no right to deem others what you obviously are 

    .****your words are the words of your father, Satan, and I know him and his motives...meaninglessness and hopelessness, despair and ultimately nothingness in the Lake of Fire.

    Says the guy who hates everyone who’s not a racist , bigot and young Earth creationist like them 
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    Do your Atheist views, aling with United Kingdom values? 
    smoothie
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Dee, @Happy_Killbot - More of your Alinsky personalization and polarization, eh?   Addictions are fatal. Rickey and I are now the subject of this topic?  Since when?  Better check with Happy Killjoy on that.

    I can prove your faux "knowledge" in a single sentence.  LOL!  Dinosaurs were long extinct before the time of Christ.  LOL!

    Your so-called enlightened "knowledge" assumes that Rickey and I are sodomites. Really?  I'm proudly hetero.  Can't speak for Rickey.  We've never met.  LOL!  No duo between you and Happy Killjoy?  

    OBSERVATION:

    Interesting to witness how the topic quickly degenerated and descended rapidly into the gutter after posting the comment below, with every semblance of debate thrown out the window and suddenly reduced to peronalizing, polarizing and paralyzing opponents.  It's called diversion.  Alinsky authored that strategy too.  When all out of aces, attack your opponents. 

    DEBATING THE TOPIC:

    Below is the post that triggered this inglorious descent into the gutter.  The post has never been rebutted:  (Just any reply is not a rebuttal.)

    Grafix - 
    @Happy_Killbot ;- The source does not discredit the accuracy of Rickey's post, though.  It references facts and knowledge.  Show me any knowledge you have posted on this page.  Knowledge is not made-up crap by the way.  Knowledge is truth and only  truth. Even knowing that a fake claim to knowledge is fake, is also knowledge.   IF it is not truth, THEN it is not knowledge, but propaganda or mendacious fabrication.

    Your problem, Happy Killjoy, is that you are the victim of a deception, a mighty deception.  You've been taught that the Constitution is government law.  It is not.  It is to protect the people FROM government law that does not enshrine the Will of The People.  You have been taught that the U.S. "nation" is secular.  It is not.  The entire nation is anything but secular and the Constitution protects the right for us to be anything but secular.  The only branch of our society which must be secular, by law, is found in the execution of enacting the law, the legislation written by Legislators - government.  Even these Legislators are not required to be and can never be required to be secular.
     
    In your ignorance of the law, of the history of our nation and the history of the Founding Fathers, you have posed the most ridiculous question.  As the law itself requires that the law can only express the Will of The People, then HOW would it be possible for Christianity, which has no legislative powers, to even come close to "not aligning" with the "U.S." as you put it? We struggled with what you meant by "U.S." in the first place, but after much protest from me, you finally defined that to mean the founding documents.  Did you re-phrase your question to SAY that?  Nope. Your whole exercise is uneducated and unintelligent.

    The fact of the matter is this:  The only possible way for there to be a nonalignment of values between the founding documents and Christianity, would be if Christianity had legislative powers, but it doesn't.  So who does?  Congress.  Therefore if there is a perceived nonalignment between the two, then the fault must by obvious process, sit squarely at the feet of Congress. It makes your question a complete non-sequitur.  Get it now? 

    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @TKDB

    **** Do your Atheist views, aling with United Kingdom values? 

    What are “United Kingdom values” ? Also I’m not from the United Kingdom you clot 
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix So you acknowledge that dinosaurs:

    1. Existed
    2. Died off before the events of the bible

    You have argued before that the US moral values are true because they can be traced back to Adam and Eve, but then you say that dinosaurs existed, which completely dissolves the creation myth in the book of Genesis, indicating that it is not an accurate account of the world, and therefore would not be the original source of morality.

    Sorry son, you played yourself.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot

    Due to your amply demonstrated penchant for misquoting, misrepresenting and distorting others' words, the quintessential wordsmith, until you show by direct quotation that I have said what you claim, your comment must be ignored.  It must also be ignored for the very reason that it does not respond to the above post, i.e. fails to rebut the fact that your topic question is a complete and utter imbecilic non sequitur, by virtue of the process of government legislation.
    Happy_Killbot
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Grafix

    ***** I can prove your faux "knowledge" in a single sentence.  LOL!  Dinosaurs were long extinct before the time of Christ.  LOL! 

    Ken Ham in The Ark Park your fellow creationist will be shocked to hear this 

    ****Your so-called enlightened "knowledge" assumes that Rickey and I are sodomites. 

    Well @RickeyD never stops going on about it and you never stop licking his boots 

    ****Really?  I'm proudly hetero.  

    I think the lady doth protest too much 

    ***Can't speak for Rickey.  We've never met. 

    R is still in the closet 

     
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -  
    @Dee - Debate the post and quit the crap.  You have nothing, zero, zilch, to contribute, only vile venom, petty petulance and illogical looney bin bile.  Get over it.
    smoothie
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot - Debate the post and quit the crap.  You have nothing, zero, zilch, to contribute, only vile venom, petty petulance and illogical looney bin bile.  Get over it.
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix So dinosaurs existed right?

    And they are not in the bible, also right?

    Because of this we can conclude that the bible, or rather those who wrote it were blissfully unaware of the dinosaurs. That means that no person has ever seen a living dinosaur.

    If no one has ever seen a living dinosaur, then it must be because they were dead long before the people in the bible existed, and therefore it follows that because dinosaurs were real that the creation myth in the book of Genesis is false. The world is not 6,000 years old, and Adam and Eve were not the first people, if they ever even existed.

    The bible is a book of lies. If you are to claim that every moral thought can be traced back to Adam and Eve but you also believe in dinosaurs, then you have a contradiction in your own beliefs. Either way, you lose.

    The US was in no way founded on Christian morals or ethics. This is a myth.
    Dee
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot - Debate the post and quit the crap.  You contribute nothing to the conversation, only petty petulance and illogical looney bin bile.  Get over it.

    Here it is again:
    @Happy_Killbot ;- The source does not discredit the accuracy of Rickey's post, though.  It references facts and knowledge.  Show me any knowledge you have posted on this page.  Knowledge is not made-up crap by the way.  Knowledge is truth and only  truth. Even knowing that a fake claim to knowledge is fake, is also knowledge.   IF it is not truth, THEN it is not knowledge, but propaganda or mendacious fabrication.

    Your problem, Happy Killjoy, is that you are the victim of a deception, a mighty deception.  You've been taught that the Constitution is government law.  It is not.  It is to protect the people FROM government law that does not enshrine the Will of The People.  You have been taught that the U.S. "nation" is secular.  It is not.  The entire nation is anything but secular and the Constitution protects the right for us to be anything but secular.  The only branch of our society which must be secular, by law, is found in the execution of enacting the law, the legislation written by Legislators - government.  Even these Legislators are not required to be and can never be required to be secular.
     
    In your ignorance of the law, of the history of our nation and the history of the Founding Fathers, you have posed the most ridiculous question.  As the law itself requires that the law can only express the Will of The People, then HOW would it be possible for Christianity, which has no legislative powers, to even come close to "not aligning" with the "U.S." as you put it? We struggled with what you meant by "U.S." in the first place, but after much protest from me, you finally defined that to mean the founding documents.  Did you re-phrase your question to SAY that?  Nope. Your whole exercise is uneducated and unintelligent.

    The fact of the matter is this:  The only possible way for there to be a nonalignment of values between the founding documents and Christianity, would be if Christianity had legislative powers, but it doesn't.  So who does?  Congress.  Therefore if there is a perceived nonalignment between the two, then the fault must by obvious process, sit squarely at the feet of Congress. It makes your question a complete non-sequitur.  Get it now? 

    Happy_KillbotDee
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix Oh, but we are debating the post.

    You argument no longer holds any water, because I have proved to you that your very same worldview refutes the very argument you made.

    You argued that the US is based on Christian morality, when I said that this morality comes from other sources, such as the Sumerians who pre-dated the Hebrews and influenced them heavily, you said that wasn't possible because Adam and Eve came before them. However the existence of dinosaurs means that the creation myth is a lie, hence the book of Genesis being the foundation for all morality is not a valid argument, therefore the Sumerians did exist before the Hebrews, and they are therefore the source of most legal principals and US laws did not come from the bible, hence the US is not founded on Judaeo-Christian ethics.

    Your house of cards comes tumbling down.
    Dee
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    Proof?  You have posited proof on this page that Congress doesn't make the law?  You have posited proof on this page that instead Christianity does?  You have posited on this page that the law states that Christianity cannot uphold its own beliefs?  You have posited proof that Christianity's beliefs are imposed upon the people?  You have posited proof that Congress has not legislated six Christian tenets?  Those six being five of God's Commandments and one other from the Christian culture, monogamy, which is enshrined in the Marriage Act?  These are clearly the will of the people, otherwise the people would have rebelled and demanded that Congress re-write these laws.

    Where is this proof of yours that Christianity has legislative powers and has imposed those laws upon the will of the people and thereby created a nonalignment with the founding documents?  Where have you even argued what that non-alignment is?  You have not even bothered to defend the legitimacy of your own question.

    Please answer this question, which goes straight to the core of your own question, heading this topic:


    As Christianity is PROTECTED by law to be permitted to uphold its beliefs, then how can Christianity be in non-alignment with the founding documents, when those very same documents provide that very same protection to Christianity (and/or any other sect)? 

    Happy_KillbotDee
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Grafix

    *** Debate the post and quit the crap.

    I did and hammered you remember?

      ******You have nothing, zero, zilch, to contribute, only vile venom, petty petulance and illogical looney bin bile.  Get over it.

    Says the guy who believes a renowned con man found Noah’s Ark Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha  
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Grafix

    *** Debate the post and quit the crap.

    I did and hammered you remember?

      ******You have nothing, zero, zilch, to contribute, only vile venom, petty petulance and illogical looney bin bile.  Get over it.

    Says the guy who believes a renowned con man found Noah’s Ark Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha  
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix I have never argued on this page or anywhere that:
    • congress doesn't make the law
    • or  that Christianity does
    • or that Christians can not have their beliefs
    • or that Christianity imposes beliefs on people
    •  that Congress has legislated any Christian tenants because of Christianity
    •  those ten commandments are the basis of the laws
    • or that people do not approve of these laws
    I have never made any of these arguments.

    Christianity has no say nor should it ever have a say in what goes on in politics.

    Christianity doesn't align with US beliefs because if you follow Christian doctrines, then you have to deny the rights as laid out in the US constitution!


    In particular, Christianity doesn't guarantee:
    • Freedom of religion, if you are a Christian you can not also be a Muslim, Hindu, Atheist, Pagan, or anything else, this is self-evident
    • Freedom of speech, the ten commandments put limits on what you can and can not say such as "thou shalt not take the lords name in vain"
    • Basic human dignity, the bible says that everyone is born with sin and is unclean until they accept Jesus Christ. This is undignified.
    • Paying only what the court orders you to pay in a settlement (the bible says you must pay twice this amount Matthew 5:40-41)
    • Eating what you like, the bible explicitly condemns things like pork and  shellfish
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Dee - You have?  Coulda fooled me.  Where?  Like to show us as follows:

    Proof?  You have posited proof on this page that Congress doesn't make the law?  You have posited proof on this page that instead Christianity does?  You have posited on this page that the law states that Christianity cannot uphold its own beliefs?  You have posited proof that Christianity's beliefs are imposed upon the people?  You have posited proof that Congress has not legislated six Christian tenets?  Those six being five of God's Commandments and one other from the Christian culture, monogamy, which is enshrined in the Marriage Act?  These are clearly the will of the people, otherwise the people would have rebelled and demanded that Congress re-write these laws
    .
    Where is this proof of yours that Christianity has legislative powers and has imposed those laws upon the will of the people and thereby created a nonalignment with the founding documents?  Where have you even argued what that non-alignment is?  You have not even bothered to defend the legitimacy of the topic question.
    .
    Please answer this question, which goes straight to the core of the question, the heading to this topic:

    As Christianity is PROTECTED by law to be permitted to uphold its beliefs, then how can Christianity be in non-alignment with the founding documents, when those very same documents provide that very same protection to Christianity (and/or any other sect)? 

    When you have done all of the above, I shall doff my hat and agree that you have done as you claim.  I somehow don't think dinosaurs make the cut.

    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Grafix

    I don’t even know what you’re babbling about , calm down and try and post up something that doesn’t sound like the babbling of a Young  Earth Creationist ....Wait .....problem solved 
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot

    Man O' Man.  God give me strength.  You never ever needed to argue your bullet points below ....

    @Grafix I have never argued on this page or anywhere that:
    • congress doesn't make the law
    • or  that Christianity does
    • or that Christians can not have their beliefs
    • or that Christianity imposes beliefs on people
    •  that Congress has legislated any Christian tenants because of Christianity
    •  those ten commandments are the basis of the laws
    • or that people do not approve of these laws
    I have never made any of these arguments..

     ....for the simple reason that your Topic Question automatically PRESUMES  them.  Why can't you see that?  It sticks out like dogs' balls.  These presumptions are all  inherent in your question by virtue of the fact they would first be necessary to even consider that it is possible for Christianity to be non-aligned with the founding documents. .Such a situation could only ever occur if all of your bullet points were a FACT.  As they are not, then the premise of your question becomes an impossibility..  That is precisely why your question is a non sequitur from the very get go.

    But then you correctly acknowledge this ....
    Christianity has no say nor should it ever have a say in what goes on in politics.
    I agree it should not, does not and should never.  The quizzical thing about your knowing that, is why then can't you understand that it automatically annihilates your original question?  Your question necessitates that Christianity is a threat to the ethos of the founding documents and thereby potentially to our laws.   It is a contradiction in terms given that the founding documents protect Christianity.
    Christianity doesn't align with US beliefs because if you follow Christian doctrines, then you have to deny the rights as laid out in the US constitution!
    In particular, Christianity doesn't guarantee:
    • Freedom of religion, if you are a Christian you can not also be a Muslim, Hindu, Atheist, Pagan, or anything else, this is self-evident
    • Freedom of speech, the ten commandments put limits on what you can and can not say such as "thou shalt not take the lords name in vain"
    • Basic human dignity, the bible says that everyone is born with sin and is unclean until they accept Jesus Christ. This is undignified.
    • Paying only what the court orders you to pay in a settlement (the bible says you must pay twice this amount Matthew 5:40-41)
    • Eating what you like, the bible explicitly condemns things like pork and  shellfish
    Man O' Man.  Are you on crack?  No logic can be found here. Some of your bullet points are not what the Bible actually says, are misinterpretations by you, while other described practices have never been practised by Christianity.  You are confusing Old Testament Hebraic practices, (Judaism) with Christianity.. Christianity did not exist then.  It began with Christ, as its name implies..

    To the relevant point:  There is not a single religion on earth which doesn't require a faith in its doctrines.  Without doctrines a religion cannot be said to exist.  If you do not adopt its doctrines, then you cannot claim to belong to that religion.  There is no autocratic, despotic or dictatorial requirement by Christianity that we MUST adopt ANY of its doctrines, let alone believe them. That is entirely voluntary.  For example: If we choose not to accept that there is but one God, then the solution is simple.  We choose not to be a Christian.. Big Whoop.  That's our right.  However, if we choose that path, but the pastors then persecute, hound and oppress us for making that choice, then it is not the religion which is persecuting us.  It is the pastors.  

    You have great difficulty in SEPARATING dichotomies, the same way you could not separate the fact that the nation is non-secular from the fact that the government is secular. 
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix You are making dots and then connecting them where there are none. Never did I say any of those things, you assumed them, that is on you fully and you inability to understand my question, which you admitted before and still don't seem to grasp.

    I'm not arguing that someone can not be Christian, I am arguing that the US is not a Christian nation and it was not founded on Christian ideas, morals, or values. That is all.

    What I am saying is that there can be no freedom of religion without freedom from religion, meaning if someone wants to say "f*** you god, you are either a d*** or a lie" they can do that all they please.

    That is why I am pleased to say that I am an atheist because I don't subscribe to lies and instead prefer objective reality, nasty as it is. I don't delude myself with the promise of an "eternal afterlife" because I know that it isn't going to happen no matter how much traditions say so and I or anyone wants it to. Not only are all religions false, but there is no god, it is all made up, and you know that it is, you just make one exception. That is the difference between us. One exception.

    I don't think you know Christianity that well anyways, I believe you are a Catholic, is that correct? Your buddy Rickey doesn't think that Catholics are Christians just so you know.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot - You may well believe you never wrote those things, but the fact remains that the way you have framed your question, necessitates their very presumption, meaning the bullet points you took from my own statements.  I think it would be fair to say, that although you didn't mean to presume these things, your question does, which follows then that you don't understand the implications of your own question.

    As I have said repeatedly throughout, based on your own arguments, you needed to seriously reconsider and re-frame the wording of your question, but you refused to.  You have fallen on your own sword for that failure.
     I am arguing that the US is not a Christian nation and it was not founded on Christian ideas, morals, or values. That is all.

    If that is all you argued, then this debate would not now be in its sixth page.  Nevertheless, that aside, you have been amply proved wrong on that point  The scholars disagree with you, the many scholarly works which I have pointed you to, glibly ignored by you, prove it.  The law itself repudiates that claim with five Christian precepts enshrined in it and a moral precept also enshrined in it - monogamy enshrined in the Marriage Act.

    What I am saying is that there can be no freedom of religion without freedom from religion, meaning if someone wants to say "f*** you god, you are either a d*** or a lie" they can do that all they please.

    What makes you think Americans can't say that, now?  You have by virtue of your choice of atheism proved that they can.  To pretend it is not a freedom is the lie.  Anyone who knows you are atheist knows that is precisely what you are screaming back.  Your argument that there is no freedom to do this is rebutted soundly by your own situation.  Am gobsmacked you can't see that.  Excuse me while I pick myself up off the floor.

    Freedom from religion means oppression of religion and is a deceitful Luciferian trope, designed to persuade numbed brains.  The Constitution forbids such a law, anyway.

    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot

    **** I believe you are a Catholic, is that correct? Your buddy Rickey doesn't think that Catholics are Christians just so you know.

    He cannot possibly be a Catholic I’m a former Catholic and normally Catholics have pretty good  educational standards this guy is a clot even Catholics would disown him , I think  he’s a 7th day Adventist as his go to site was one that supports this cult, they’re normally too embarrassed to admit what abomination they follow 

    You’re spot on about R he calls Catholics....... “Satanists “ , they’re barking mad either way 
    Happy_Killbot
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix If it does that for you, then I suppose you are an island. If your psyche and worldview is so fragile that a single question can throw it into disarray, maybe you should get a stronger worldview.

    I don't have to re-frame my question or the challenge I have issued to suit your fragile ego, and besides I did it twice for you, once as a picture (that you thought was demographics for some reason) and once as a procedural list which can not be misinterpreted, so I guess you owe me.

    Oh, you mean the Noah's ark scholars? Yeah, those are reliable aren't they?

    Remember, part of the challenge is that they have to be unique to Christianity, and those that you mention are not unique to or sourced from Christianity, so they do not count as solutions to the challenge.

    I'm not arguing that people are not allowed to say these things, Americans can say that, Christians can not. That is my point, if you are a Christian then you can not accept the constitution because there are religious rules that say you can't. This is because to live as a Christian is to not live by the US constitution.

    As a Christian, are you free to say "F*** god, Jesus is a lie, believers are immoral"? If so, why don't you say it out loud then, unless you are afraid of hell or something.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    WOW!  200+ percentile points for abject, rabid, hostile bigotry and narcissism.  I though lefties were the champions of social justice.  Yeah right. 

    By the way.  You could not be more wrong.  I was educated in a private traditional Christian denominational school, not an Evangelical one and do not subscribe to Evangelism, which I believe the SDA do. 
    Keep guessing Miss Alinsky, but it is for me to know and you never to know.  None of your bleeding' busy-body business, completely irrelevant to the topic.  A low-brow mentality to even think it is.  Only  lefties do this nosey kind of personal probing.  Is necessary for their Agenda of ridicule, following their God Alinsky's little red book.  Conservatives never do it.  They have more respect for other's privacy.  Funny that.
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Dee So my theory that he is catholic is based on the observation that he calls out "protestants and atheists" in one of his comments as being wrong. I'm just playing the odds.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Dee - You're not very bright are you?  Ron Wyatt was an SDA.  That's why his website, Ark Discovery is run by the SDA.. UH DUH!  WHo's the clot?  Sigh.  ON this one, Killjoy is way out of your league.
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix Here is the thing about privacy, when you drop long comments on the internet you will inevitably reveal facts about you identity, it's essentially unavoidable. For example, we now know that you are not a protestant and specifically not an evangelical or SDA.

    We also know that there are lots of Catholic private schools, and they happen to be the largest group of private schools in the US.

    While this is not conclusive proof, it is statistically most likely that you would be Catholic.

    We do know that Rickey absolutely hates Catholics and non-protestants, because he has admitted to such, and I believe he started a thread a while back about it, if you ask him he will tell you all about it.

    All of this is more or less irrelevant to this discussion, but you should know that if you deviate from Rickey even just a little, he will try to hang you. He is also the reason I made this post, because he genuinely believes that the US is Christian founded by Christians for Christians to be Christian, and if you are a Catholic you don't count, and if you are Muslim you need to get out, and if you are an atheist you are the literal spawn of Satan and are everything wrong with America.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Grafix

    **** - You're not very bright are you?  Ron Wyatt was an SDA.  

    Which is exactly what I said you clot .... I think  he’s a 7th day Adventist as his go to site was one that supports this cult, 

    Wyatt’s religious affiliation was with the Seventh-day Adventist sect. Ironically, the most thorough exposé of the gentleman’s claims was produced by two scholars of his own denomination — Russell R. and Colin D. Standish.



    ****That's why his website, Ark Discovery is run by the SDA.. UH DUH!  WHo's the clot?  Sigh. 

    You are as you cannot even comprehend what 7th day adventist is unless it’s put in bold type as in in SDA 

     


  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Grafix

    **** - You're not very bright are you?  Ron Wyatt was an SDA.  

    Which is exactly what I said you clot .... I think  he’s a 7th day Adventist as his go to site was one that supports this cult, 

    Wyatt’s religious affiliation was with the Seventh-day Adventist sect. Ironically, the most thorough exposé of the gentleman’s claims was produced by two scholars of his own denomination — Russell R. and Colin D. Standish.



    ****That's why his website, Ark Discovery is run by the SDA.. UH DUH!  WHo's the clot?  Sigh. 

    You are as you cannot even comprehend what 7th day adventist is unless it’s put in bold type as in in SDA 

     


  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot ; - 

    I've already answered all of those points.  You are just regurgitating your same old same old, like a drunken parrot and not addressing my points at all.  I see no merit in turning up the volume for the deaf and the blind.  It will change nothing.  I asked you to explain your answer to a very specific question, which would unlock your myopic affliction, but I note you refrained.  That's telling.
    If you deviate from Rickey even just a little, he will try to hang you. He is also the reason I made this post, because he genuinely believes that the US is Christian founded by Christians for Christians to be Christian, and if you are a Catholic you don't count, and if you are Muslim you need to get out, and if you are an atheist you are the literal spawn of Satan and are everything wrong with America. 

    LOL!  Not that I needed a run-down of anyone's opinion of another commenter's private anguish.  As he is not here to defend himself and even if he were, I cannot know these things first-hand about him, so I shall simply refrain from commenting at all on that description.

    If his sentiments however, are what triggered your topic, I can only say they were poorly based on an emotional reaction.  Not a good start and poorly expressed, your question not meeting the necessary intellectual criterion of logic that could contrive any kind of logical debate.  I say again, your question is a non sequitur in and of itself.  Maybe you need to unlock the meaning of the Latin right there.

    It just simply is not possible to blame the very institution being protected by its protectors for being a protected institution, meaning religion, which is basically what your question ultimately grinds down to in the final analysis.

    Happy_Killbot
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Grafix I have never heard of a question being a non-sequitur, and frankly I don't think it's possible because a question doesn't prove anything, in order to be a non-sequitur it would have to prove something.

    The question in the title is open ended. You can say "yes" "no" or "Tuesday", but only one of these is non-sequitur.

    I say the answer is no because of the fundamental incompatibilities between the religion and the US Constitution, thus the two run contrary to each other in many instances and are therefore not aligned.

    Furthermore, I issue a challenge for anyone to show me any value unique to Christianity which is also a US founding value, for which the only answer thus far provided is racial slavery.

    You should go comment on Rickey's most recent post, which is itself a response to this one and ask him about Catholics.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot ; -  Non sequitur  means "does not follow"  logically.  A non sequitur  can occur in any linguistic format, be it a question, book title, comment, sentence, verbal upraiding, whatever.  There is no constraint on how it might be projected.  It simply means that it belies the premise it is based upon in any logical way, according to what preceded the remark, sentence.or query.

    So what is your question based on and what precedes it? The founding documents.  What is one of the characteristics of their purpose?  To protect our inalienable rights, one of which is the right to the freedom to practise the religion of our choice privately and publicly, that no government shall make a law which abridges that right.  Agreed?

    So as the Constitution protects our right to freedom of religion and as no government can make a law which abridges that freedom, and as religion has no power to legislate, then how can a religion not be aligned with the values expressed in the founding documents - the very same documents which protect the values expressed by any religion?  It makes no sense.  That is why it is a non sequitur..


    Happy_KillbotVaulk
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • GrafixGrafix 248 Pts   -   edited February 2020
    @Happy_Killbot - I gave you the answer to your "unique" question.  It is monogamy.
    The further back we look, the greater forward insight we can have. History speaks.
  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @Grafix The point is that it makes no sense and most religions can not be aligned with US values. The question has an answer, but only the answer "no" makes any sense. Some would like to argue a "yes" answer, but that comes with the necessity that all factors of that religion be the same as that religion. Most religions require you to only practice their beliefs, and all of these would automatically be excluded as potential "yes" answers, all major Christian denominations included.

    However, we could imagine a new religion that is, although this task is beyond the scope of this debate.

    To your proposal about monogamy, this is a little tricky to qualify for sure. There are many animals that are strictly monogamous and mate for life, and although they do not have marriage as an institution, it might be argued that animals invented it first, including most birds and mammals. That seems like a bit of a cop out, so lets only look at cultures which had or have some kind of formal marriage system and accompanying laws.

    I can find 2 examples of early marriage evidence which would qualify as a monogamous marriage:

    The Elephantine Papyri are a collection of ancient documents and manuscripts by a Jewish community. Among them is a marriage contract from the 5th BCE.
    http://jewishchristianlit.com/Topics/Contracts/marri05.html

    We also know that the Sumerians had some form of formal marriage dating back to about 2,2000 BCE.
    https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/ancient/mesopotamia-contracts.asp#Marriage

    Perhaps you would argue that these don't count because they are not a binding licence with the state. The English have required a marriage licence since 1215 with the Church and Hardwicke's marriage law of 1753 made it a legal requirement by the state.

    However the US was not entirely on board with this idea, at least on on a federal level. Common law marriage was recognized and in fact, is still fully recognized in 9 states (Texas calls it Informal marriage). The Libertarian party is generally against marriage requirements, believing that marriage is between individuals and not the state.

    If you have a better argument or more evidence to provide or clarifications to make, feel free to do so.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch