stoned gays

weeell...
The Constitution doesn't exactly say that. All it says is that 1) the government can't restrict the free practice of religion, and 2) the government's can't establish a national religion.

In terms of demographics, the US is a mostly Christian nation. It is also historically and culturally Christian, in the sense that most of original settlers were Christian and their values and practices largely shaped the development of the modern United States. That is not to say all Americans are Christian, or that they have any obligation to be.
I can't comment on "conservative" because such terms are ambiguous and subjective.

besides, our founding fathers were deists.

If the government can't establish a national religion, that means that we're _ not_ a Christian nation. Yes, we may be mostly Christian, however, we are not a Christian nation

Semantics. A nation is defined by the people that constitute it, not by the government. A nation can be Christian (or Islamic, or otherwise) demographically or culturally or historically without that religion being established by law.
Here's what dictionary.com has to say:
"a large body of people, associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own".

If you were to say a Christian state, that's different. The United States is not a Christian state.

Also, you'll have to do some research about the Founding Fathers being Deists. It is a claim often made by those who want more separation of church and state, and it is misleading. There were quite a few men who are considered to be founding fathers, and they were certainly not all Deists. In terms of religious affiliation, the overwhelming majority of those at the Constitutional Convention and who signed the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and/or the Articles of Confederation were Christian. No, for the most part they weren't fundamentalists, and yes, many of them were certainly less religious than their Puritan predecessors, and indeed some of them openly questioned the Church and Biblical doctrine. But to say in general terms that "our Founding Fathers were Deists" is disingenuous.

In any case, the religion personally practiced by each of the Founders is not important. What matters is that the Constitution established freedom of religion and explicitly forbid the establishment of an official religion (like Anglicanism in England). This indicates that they though religion was a private matter with which the state should not concern itself.

Well, the original laws we have reflect the laws of protestants (the religion of our country's fathers). Like the ten amendments(commandments).

The founding fathers were deists, a religion that actually makes sense. Get your facts straight.

>religion
>makes sense

you can only have one

I see what you did there. Well a religion that makes a little more sense than most around.

No. No they don't. The ten Amendments of the Bill of Rights are not even remotely connected to Ten Commandments, and it's a coincidence that there happens to be ten of each. The Ten Commandments are rules concerning with how people should behave. The Ten Amendments do not restrict individual behavior at all. They're there to restrict government power and to protect the rights of the citizens.

Now, the original settlers and Americans were mostly Protestant Christians, and the values and culture of their society reflected that. The Constitution was undoubtedly influenced by the Christian culture of the time and place in which it was written. But it was not based upon the Christian religion.

tell that to any politician running for reelection in america.

In theory. Unfortunately, we let Religion make too many decisions.

Damn, I forgot the book of Ezekiel was an erotica novel within the Bible

So essentially, it's telling us that slavery is out of bounds.
Women were regarded as property back then of the husband or the father, and to have another man as property was apparently a stoning sentence.

Am I on the right track here? It's hard to keep up with context.

I'm following you. might not be perfectly on target, but it's not any less accurate than the ways fundies misuse bible verses

nah, think you missed the mark there

There was a picture that explained it much better, but I forgot what exactly it said

But then I lol'd

Religion has no place in government

I know, that's my point. But my question is, why is there still religion in government when they promise there won't be.

Because the government is a bag of dicks

No arguments there.

basicly saying it cant be a law because its religious is violating the first amendment right of all religious people. as long as it is not infringing on someone elses religious rights then there really is no problem. religious beliefs become personal views. personal views if shared by enough people become laws

Because it's easier for a party to push a religious issue when there is a religious majority. The whole purpose of the (rather badly done) attempt at a separation of church and state is to protect the minority from the majority, but it's very easy to influence people to vote for things they already agree with (gay marriage is bad, etc) than to convince them to be accepting of other cultures. White people have never been very good at accepting other cultures, we seem to like to give them all malaria and force them into Christianity.

"It's suppose to be "Separation of church and state" "

True, and communism was supposed to be a perfect utopia, the world leaders are supposed to be smart individuals with good ideas, life is supposed it be a nice time where everyone lives long and happy, and Canada is supposed to be a fascist regime slowly conquering all other nations (at least in my dreams).

Point is, nothing happens the way it's suppose to.

Because we now realize that the founding father weren't the brightest people after all. In the end, the were a couple of rebels with some cool ideas.

BTW: aren't you some kind of celebrity around here?

It's just that for a nation that preaches how it's free and you can practice any religion or have any idea here, it sure likes to tell you how those ideas are wrong.


And I wouldn't really consider myself a celebrity, just an average Joe who used to make comics.

Yeah, i agree that it's really ironic that we accept all religions as a country even though we were obviously founded on Christian morals. it's even more ironic that we separate church and state and God is in our Pledge of Allegiance.

Why did you stop making comics? And I've always wondered how old you are (I'm 18)? The reason for the second question is that I've always been curious on how many people of what age are on Funnyjunk. EX: I think the majority of Funnyjunk is mad up of kids from 9-12. I'm curious to hear your view.

I'm currently 17 (about the turn 18 in 2 months). I stopped making comics because I got real tired of the shit you have to deal with when posting to this site. The site is never happy and try to tear you down every chance they get. I can handle negative criticism, but you don't get criticism on Funnyjunk, you get insults and banned (a proxyfag got me banned a few times by flagging ever reaction picture I posted if though nothing was wrong with it).
That's why anything I make I post to deviantArt now.

That's too bad. I remember when you posted your complaint about that. I can easily see how someone could pick a bone with you like that. Can I friend you? How long have you known about FJ now and been on it? I've been here since 2005

I've been around since it was early green. I remember when it still has some flash games on it.

Created an account a little over two years ago.

That's just a way of saying that nature caused it. There's a great movie with billy Connolly in it where he attempts to sue the church over an act of God".

dafuq? I'm still puzzled. Wouldn't that mean that anything can be an act of nature?

Even if we were to say it was an act of nature, wouldn't writing it on legal paperwork as "Act of God" be considered an inclusion of religion ?

The film is The 'Man Who Sued God ', well worth the watch.

It was the insurance company that calls it this to get out of having to pay for damages.

the constitution actually states the government shall not infringe on the rights to follow or practice and shall not establish a national religion. many of the laws that are taken from the bible have become people personal beliefs so they stick

Hold on, so you're saying that there are laws in the United States taken from Christianity?

So you can follow any religion, yet you abide by laws established by the the teachings of the bible?

to a certain extent. they actually arent religious beliefs exactly. the only two i know of are gay marriage and abortion. the bible only speaks on homosexuality in the terms of sex and almost any christian will say they dont follow the old testament. however it is still seen as wrong. abortion is taken from the thou shall not kill part but it doesnt actually say no abortion.

personal views with semi logical reasons that have religious background

So the constitution doesn't say that you can't establish laws based on religion ?

as long as they dont infringe on religion and can be justified as necessary to the country then yes. for instance the death penalty was put in because of the eye for an eye idea put in the bible but it is seen as a way to punish people. a taxto give money to the church however will never pass. as long as its beneficial to the state or country it is allowed regardless of its origins

I see now. So even if the laws have come from religious backgrounds, it won't mean anything since they benefit the state. It will be like any law, just inspired by religion.

But when you say infringe on religion, how does that make strip clubs and brothels (Nevada) legal? I am confuse and a dense motherfucker I know just bare with me

there existence doesnt infringe on any religion i know of. if you were to go into the place then that would be your own fault. if there was a law stating every man must go to a strip club once a month that would be infringing. recently there was an issue that we were violating the first amendment right of a man who followed shirai law (muslim law) and wanted to kill his wife for whatever reason. the only way your constitutional right will be infringed is if it directly violates human rights

Oh sorry, I interpreted the word infringe the other way.

Thanks for the info ma man

I have but 5 times to thumb you, and I shall use them all

"Act of God" is a legal term, meaning, nothing you could do could have prevented it.......like a tree falls on your car, it's an "act of God"
it's not really religious as it sounds

People are douchknockers.

Funny. Pillars of the Earth, which is a very accurate book, have the religious people dislike herbwomen, or witches, who all these plants and herbs to heal, instead of praying and bleeding people

i think that was in genesis. idk

Yep, that is why rastafarians are legally allowed to smoke weed.

They use that as "prove" that God wanted us to smoke weed but I don't think they are allowed legally to do it...

It is one of those, "It is part of my religion so i can do what i want" things

Correct. Pot is illegal in Jamaica, but nobody actually cares.

but he said to follow god

If Christians are being persecuted, then why doesn't God stop it?
Them: 0
Me: 1