Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

The Conservative War on Religious History in America

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Conservative War on Religious History in America

    Thomas Jefferson made his own Bible, in which he cut out all references to miracles.

    Why? As he explained in a letter to William Short dated April 13, 1820:

    "Among the sayings and discourses imputed to Him by His biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others, again, of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same Being."

    This is what he had to say about Catholicism:
    History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government, and In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.

    And Christmas? Here's what Jefferson had to say about that in a letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823:

    "The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors."

    That's right Sarah. And all you Palin enthusiasts. Jefferson is calling you "the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus."

    So, fine. You are free to disagree with Thomas Jefferson. We are free do have our own beliefs, thank god, and thank Thomas Jefferson and people like him. We would not be free to have our own beliefs, I believe, it if was up to people like...Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is so steeped in her own selfish beliefs and so ignorant of our history that she doesn't even have a clue what this nation is about.

    Here's what Palin has to say about religion in America:

    She told the audience of students that the U.S. Constitution was written by and for moral and religious people, and that nonreligious people probably were incapable of appreciating its principles.

    [fuck you, sarah. I appreciate it far more than you. Most of all, I appreciate Freedom of Speech, although that includes letting ignorant individuals like yourself lie. In public. For money.]

    If you lose that foundation, John Adams was implicitly warning us, then we will not follow our Constitution, there will be no reason to follow our Constitution because it is a moral and religious people who understand that there is something greater than self, we are to live selflessly, and we are to be held accountable by our creator, so that is what our Constitution is based on, so those revisionists, those in the lamestream media, especially, who would want to ignore what our founders actually thought, felt and wrote about in our charters of liberty - well, thats why I call them the lamestream media, Palin said

    Thomas Jefferson and his thinking, I believe that much of it fundamentally came from this area, having spent his summers here, having spent influential years here, two miles away from Liberty University, Palin said. Man, theres something in the water, perhaps, around here - again you are fortunate you get to taste it.

    Palin said Jefferson would likely agree that secularists had set their sights on destroying the religious themes in Christmas celebrations.

    He would recognize those who would want to try to ignore that Jesus is the reason for the season, those who would want to try to abort Christ from Christmas, she said. He would recognize that, for the most part, these are angry atheists armed with an attorney. They are not the majority of Americans.

    Palin said there was a double standard that protected atheists at the expense of the religious.

    Why is it they get to claim some offense taken when they see a plastic Jewish family on somebodys lawn - a nativity scene, thats basically what it is right? she said. Oh, they take such offense, though. They say that it physically even can hurt them and mentally it distresses them so they sue, right? [Wrong. Show me an example of someone suing a private individual. What the objection to is displays on public, taxpayer-supported property. But it's not like her audience has their brains turned on.]

    But heaven forbid we claim any type of offense when we say, Wait, youre stripping Jesus from the reason, as the reason for the season, but heaven forbid we claim any type of offense, Palin said. So that double standard, I think Thomas Jefferson would certainly recognize it and stand up and he wouldnt let anybody tell him to sit down and shut up.

    No, but he'd say that you have no idea what he believes and he'd be totally frustrated that a freak like you dares use his name in this manner.

    Don't believe me? Here's some more of what he thought on this matter:

    Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and State.
    -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802

    Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
    -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

    There's no excuse for this ignorance of American history. Or is it simply a deliberate strategy of disinformation?

  • #2
    Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
    John Adams

    ?


    • #3
      Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

      ...referring to the 1804 version (of The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth), Jefferson wrote...
      Originally posted by Thomas Jefferson
      A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus.

      ?


      • #4
        Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

        IN fact, Jefferson rejected the deity of Christ so him calling anyone an enemy of Christ's teachings is as meaningless as calling Jefferson a "Deist."

        In his adult life, he never associated with any congregation or denomination other than sometimes attending an Episcopalian service, but he also espoused Unitarian philosophies.

        SO, I'm not entirely sure of the importance you seem to be placing on just what Jefferson thought. Clearly higher than the importance I place in him.

        ?


        • #5
          Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

          Originally posted by Good1 View Post
          IN fact, Jefferson rejected the deity of Christ so him calling anyone an enemy of Christ's teachings is as meaningless as calling Jefferson a "Deist."

          In his adult life, he never associated with any congregation or denomination other than sometimes attending an Episcopalian service, but he also espoused Unitarian philosophies.

          SO, I'm not entirely sure of the importance you seem to be placing on just what Jefferson thought. Clearly higher than the importance I place in him.
          Just another drive by troll.

          badassbuddy_com-drive-by.gif
          Last edited by OldmanDan; 12-11-2013, 05:31 AM.

          ?


          • #6
            Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

            As with everything, this comes down to context. No matter which set of quotes we go pull from whatever document we can find the simple truth is America was not founded as a Christian nation. Sure some of our founders were Christian of some denomination but several others were not. But the concept of a Christian nation goes directly against the concept of liberty to worship freely or not at all per one's individual conscience. As such there is no evidence to suggest that this nation was intended to be theocratic or aligned to a religion. With that liberty comes the fact that the majority of the nation is Christian of some denomination thus Christianity has always indelible to our society. The other truth is we should not want this any other way.

            In that sense... yes, Sarah Palin is an idiot.

            Overall the Founding Fathers worked hard to *not* create a secular government because of a general dislike of religion mixed with government. Many may have been believers in some sense, but that does not negate the recent to them historical lessons of church-state union. They all knew all too well what was going on in Europe and even to some degree right here in the early US. Open up any history book of our nation's founding at the college level and there is plenty of description of brief periods during colonial times up to US founding of "alliances" between local governments and majority religion in the area. It produced what you think it would, tyranny and even religious persecution of "outsiders." Minority dissenters to that authority faced ridicule, isolation, imprisonment, torture and what a shock... even death.

            To go through each one quoted somewhere above here would be an ordeal but there are some other simple truths to consider. There seems to be plenty of evidence that both Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson were Deists (at least at some point in their lives.) George Washington seems to have almost unique opinions of Christianity, a sort of quasi-religious convitions with roots in Christianity and what some of the period would call "age of enlightenment." The right today would call that writing one's own moral code. John Adams seemed to be all over the place throughout his life from Congregationalism to Unitarian, both rejecting the concept of Trinity. Alexander Hamilton ended up Christian later after being Anglican, some suggest having to do with a duel and the loss of his son Philip. Ironically, he lost his own life in the same way, a duel with Burr.

            Why mention all this? Context of the period. Honor (ego,) and stature (ego,) and ties to aristocracy (ego) were rampant at our nation's founding. There is plenty of historical reference to many of these gents telling jokes that going to heaven only means going somewhere else to continue arguing about whatever they argued here. Despite all of there shortcomings (example, Hamilton went through a period of disgrace over an affair) these were very intelligent men who knew then there was no reason to operate a government with a tie to religion. Elements might have made its way in over the years but that was not by design, we did that as a sort of degrade of the intended divide between a government authority and a religious authority (which by the way did not have the organization then that religion enjoys today.)

            So whatever quotes we go find next, understand the context might means something very different then than you are trying to suggest it means today. Regardless, America was by design to be a country free of tie to any religion. You are more than welcome to have your religion, even organize and enjoy community with it. But it should not be intertwined with government authority, history tells us why, and our Founders clearly knew that. Like many things, we ignored the history and did it anyway. Look at us now.

            ?


            • #7
              Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

              Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
              Just another drive by troll.

              [ATTACH=CONFIG]14953[/ATTACH]
              How is this any worse than the topic you post in repeatedly about things Liberals say?

              ?


              • #8
                Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

                Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                How is this any worse than the topic you post in repeatedly about things Liberals say?
                I stick around to discuss the issues I post. I don't just post something controversial and then leave, never to address the thread again.

                ?


                • #9
                  Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

                  Granted, Sarah Palin is dumber than a bag of hammers.

                  However, I don't think you'd be too interested in Thomas Jefferson. He has some nice quotes..
                  Like these:
                  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/01/op...rson.html?_r=0
                  Black people according to Thomas Jefferson | Abagond

                  He pretty much came up with Jim Crow. The arguments he uses are the same used to justify jim crow.

                  ?


                  • #10
                    Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

                    Originally posted by reality View Post
                    Granted, Sarah Palin is dumber than a bag of hammers.

                    However, I don't think you'd be too interested in Thomas Jefferson. He has some nice quotes..
                    Like these:
                    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/01/op...rson.html?_r=0
                    Black people according to Thomas Jefferson | Abagond

                    He pretty much came up with Jim Crow. The arguments he uses are the same used to justify jim crow.
                    You can allege that Sarah Palin is dumb but you can't dispute the fact that she makes a lot of money using her abilities. In fact, she just got a new TV gig. I should be so dumb.

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

                      Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                      You can allege that Sarah Palin is dumb but you can't dispute the fact that she makes a lot of money using her abilities. In fact, she just got a new TV gig. I should be so dumb.
                      You can allege that Faye Reagan is dumb but you can't dispute the fact that she makes a lot of money using her "abilities". In fact, she just got a new gig. I should be so dumb. And flexible.

                      (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

                      You may also substitute the following names for "faye reagan"; Tanner Mayes, Dani Jensen, Marie McCray, Zeina Heart, Ashli Orion, Lexi Belle, Jenna Haze, Sasha Grey, Madison Scott, Britney Beth, or any other porn actress you can find on Freeones.com or a similar site.

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

                        Originally posted by reality View Post
                        You can allege that Faye Reagan is dumb but you can't dispute the fact that she makes a lot of money using her "abilities". In fact, she just got a new gig. I should be so dumb. And flexible.

                        (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

                        You may also substitute the following names for "faye reagan"; Tanner Mayes, Dani Jensen, Marie McCray, Zeina Heart, Ashli Orion, Lexi Belle, Jenna Haze, Sasha Grey, Madison Scott, Britney Beth, or any other porn actress you can find on Freeones.com or a similar site.
                        Guess I don't recognize any of them.

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

                          We are off the mark here. It does not matter how any of us feels about Sarah Palin, what matters is how wrong she is about American History as it relates to Religion. Few may want to hear this but our history is not filled with sunshine and roses, the same applies to religion in this nation. The truth is going back to the colonial times Religion has been a source of division in this nation. Our Founders did not have to just look over at Europe to see what was happening when Religion and Government mixed, some of it was happening right here before we fought for our independence.

                          All sorts of denominations of Christianity as well as Judaism all made it here before America was America. We know some colonies here even went so far as to establish recognized church authority to deal with the influx of others. In short, we brought all of Europe's problems with Religion mixed with Government right here before we formed our own nation. Our Founders knew then it would be problematic to establish the US as a Christian nation with all these examples of why it does not work.

                          The OP is right, Sarah Palin is painting the wrong picture of what really happened here. More to the point we are taking these quotes out of context to make them mean something different today than what they were really saying way back when.

                          ?


                          • #14
                            Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

                            Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                            Guess I don't recognize any of them.
                            That's why I gave you the .com Research.

                            But basically what you need to know is that I compared sarah palin and her "abilities" to that of known prostitutes. They make money too. Doesn't mean I want to give them the driver's seat.

                            ?


                            • #15
                              Re: The Conservative War on Religious History in America

                              Originally posted by reality View Post
                              That's why I gave you the .com Research.

                              But basically what you need to know is that I compared sarah palin and her "abilities" to that of known prostitutes. They make money too. Doesn't mean I want to give them the driver's seat.
                              Have you been paying Palin for something we should know about? Might be a conflict of interest here.

                              ?

                              Working...
                              X