Total Posts:29|Showing Posts:1-29
Jump to topic:

Founding Fathers

Viper-King
Posts: 4,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 8:38:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Founding Fathers are defined by Government Archives (http://www.archives.gov...) and Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com...) as the 55 delegates who attended the Constitutional Convention. Does that mean famous people like John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, John Hancock aren't the Founding Fathers?

2nd of all, is there anything between the Founding Fathers and the Separation of Church and State? If so, what did they mean by "The Separation of Church and State"?

3rd of all, if you could ask any questions to the Founding Fathers, what would they be?
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 10:48:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
1. The official definition doesn't necessarily override the cultural definition of a Founding Father

2. The Constitution never says "separation of church and state" all it says is that the government can't make laws concerning religion.

3. "Is this what you envisioned for America? And if not, what would you change?" (If they were here today.)
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 10:52:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
3. How do you reconcile your supposed support of liberty with your participation in slavery and genocide?
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 10:53:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 10:52:27 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
3. How do you reconcile your supposed support of liberty with your participation in slavery and genocide?

Genocide? Please don't bring up the Native Americans and if you do please look up the definition of genocide first, post it here and then justify yourself.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 10:59:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 8:38:55 PM, Viper-King wrote:
Founding Fathers are defined by Government Archives (http://www.archives.gov...) and Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com...) as the 55 delegates who attended the Constitutional Convention. Does that mean famous people like John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, John Hancock aren't the Founding Fathers?

As said before by another member, the "accepted" definition =/= the culturally determined definition. Since definitions are nothing more than an appeal to popularity (the popular meaning of a word becomes the real meaning of the word), the culturally determined definition is superior.


2nd of all, is there anything between the Founding Fathers and the Separation of Church and State? If so, what did they mean by "The Separation of Church and State"?

3rd of all, if you could ask any questions to the Founding Fathers, what would they be?

It would be, why don't these "rights" apply to blacks or women?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 11:22:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 10:53:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:52:27 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
3. How do you reconcile your supposed support of liberty with your participation in slavery and genocide?

Genocide? Please don't bring up the Native Americans and if you do please look up the definition of genocide first, post it here and then justify yourself.

Genocide: "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group" -Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"No nation rejecting our friendship, and commencing wanton and unprovoked war against us, shall ever after remain within our reach; it shall never be in their power to strike us a second time." -Thomas Jefferson

'Attack us for taking your land and we will respond with the destruction of your people'--sounds reasonable.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 11:38:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
That's a nonsense definition. The United States existed as a country for years before the adaptation of the constitution.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Viper-King
Posts: 4,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 11:42:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 11:38:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
That's a nonsense definition. The United States existed as a country for years before the adaptation of the constitution.

As in 1776?
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 11:43:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 11:42:35 PM, Viper-King wrote:
At 7/26/2012 11:38:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
That's a nonsense definition. The United States existed as a country for years before the adaptation of the constitution.

As in 1776?

Correct. That is one beginning someone could use. You could also choose to use when they adopted the Articles of Confederation.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 11:46:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 11:43:28 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/26/2012 11:42:35 PM, Viper-King wrote:
At 7/26/2012 11:38:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
That's a nonsense definition. The United States existed as a country for years before the adaptation of the constitution.

As in 1776?

Correct. That is one beginning someone could use. You could also choose to use when they adopted the Articles of Confederation.

Isn't bickering over 5 years kinda pointless?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2012 11:48:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 11:46:31 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/26/2012 11:43:28 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/26/2012 11:42:35 PM, Viper-King wrote:
At 7/26/2012 11:38:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
That's a nonsense definition. The United States existed as a country for years before the adaptation of the constitution.

As in 1776?

Correct. That is one beginning someone could use. You could also choose to use when they adopted the Articles of Confederation.

Isn't bickering over 5 years kinda pointless?

Yes. So is bickering over 100.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2012 6:00:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The main architects of the American Revolution, especially those who then had a hand in drafting the Constitution and/or formed governments within the same generation as those who did the latter two, is what I'd always taken a Founding Father to be.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2012 6:01:19 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
*not "latter two", I meant, "former two"
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2012 10:25:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 8:38:55 PM, Viper-King wrote:
Founding Fathers are defined by Government Archives (http://www.archives.gov...) and Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com...) as the 55 delegates who attended the Constitutional Convention. Does that mean famous people like John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, John Hancock aren't the Founding Fathers?

2nd of all, is there anything between the Founding Fathers and the Separation of Church and State? If so, what did they mean by "The Separation of Church and State"?


They meant the government has no right to meddle with religious freedom. Most of them supported laws backed by religion.

The wall of church and state did not exist until Justice Hugo Black took it from Jeffersons letters. Not the constitution.

3rd of all, if you could ask any questions to the Founding Fathers, what would they be?

How would you respond to the liberal anti gun crowd?
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2012 1:31:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 11:22:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:53:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:52:27 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
3. How do you reconcile your supposed support of liberty with your participation in slavery and genocide?

Genocide? Please don't bring up the Native Americans and if you do please look up the definition of genocide first, post it here and then justify yourself.

Genocide: "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group" -Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"No nation rejecting our friendship, and commencing wanton and unprovoked war against us, shall ever after remain within our reach; it shall never be in their power to strike us a second time." -Thomas Jefferson

'Attack us for taking your land and we will respond with the destruction of your people'--sounds reasonable.

We certainly did not deliberately and systematically kill all the natives. We weren't on good terms no, but we didn't outright kill them or try to create a system to eliminate them completely.

If you believe that we did than you're ignorant of history.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 2:45:09 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
1009 – Pope Sergius IV becomes the 142nd pope, succeeding Pope John XVIII.
1498 – On his third voyage to the Western Hemisphere, Christopher Columbus becomes the first European to discover the island of Trinidad.
1790 – The very first U.S. patent is issued: to inventor Samuel Hopkins for a potash process.
1886 – Franz Liszt dies.
1912 – Milton Friedman is born.
1932 – The NSDAP (Nazi Party) wins more than 38% of the vote in German elections.
1964 – Ranger program: Ranger 7 sends back the first close-up photographs of the moon.
1971 – Apollo program: Apollo 15 astronauts become the first to ride in a lunar rover.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 2:53:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 2:45:09 AM, FREEDO wrote:
1009 – Pope Sergius IV becomes the 142nd pope, succeeding Pope John XVIII.
1498 – On his third voyage to the Western Hemisphere, Christopher Columbus becomes the first European to discover the island of Trinidad.
1790 – The very first U.S. patent is issued: to inventor Samuel Hopkins for a potash process.
1886 – Franz Liszt dies.
1912 – Milton Friedman is born.
1932 – The NSDAP (Nazi Party) wins more than 38% of the vote in German elections.
1964 – Ranger program: Ranger 7 sends back the first close-up photographs of the moon.
1971 – Apollo program: Apollo 15 astronauts become the first to ride in a lunar rover.

Iiiiiiiiiignore that.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
HelterSkelter
Posts: 281
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 7:18:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
"Separation of church and state" does not appear as a phrase in the Constitution, but it is definitely a fair interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause combined. Thomas Jefferson was the one who came up with that idea ("wall of separation") in a letter.
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2012 7:54:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 7:18:12 AM, HelterSkelter wrote:
"Separation of church and state" does not appear as a phrase in the Constitution, but it is definitely a fair interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause combined. Thomas Jefferson was the one who came up with that idea ("wall of separation") in a letter.

Yeah, it's sort of like saying that because the Founding Fathers never said "Kowabunga!", they weren't ever happy.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Aaronroy
Posts: 749
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2012 12:07:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/31/2012 7:54:23 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 7/31/2012 7:18:12 AM, HelterSkelter wrote:
"Separation of church and state" does not appear as a phrase in the Constitution, but it is definitely a fair interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause combined. Thomas Jefferson was the one who came up with that idea ("wall of separation") in a letter.

Yeah, it's sort of like saying that because the Founding Fathers never said "Kowabunga!", they weren't ever happy.

It's pretty much granted by any fair-minded thinker that the a Separation of Church in state is implied, if not originally then at least by interpretation.

It almost seems that those who claim it's not part of the constitution are the sort that do not want a separation of church and state.
turn down for h'what
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2012 5:10:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/1/2012 12:07:48 AM, Aaronroy wrote:
At 7/31/2012 7:54:23 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 7/31/2012 7:18:12 AM, HelterSkelter wrote:
"Separation of church and state" does not appear as a phrase in the Constitution, but it is definitely a fair interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause combined. Thomas Jefferson was the one who came up with that idea ("wall of separation") in a letter.

Yeah, it's sort of like saying that because the Founding Fathers never said "Kowabunga!", they weren't ever happy.

It's pretty much granted by any fair-minded thinker that the a Separation of Church in state is implied, if not originally then at least by interpretation.

It almost seems that those who claim it's not part of the constitution are the sort that do not want a separation of church and state.

Yeah, it actually seems like it's principles were supposed to be stricter than was ever the case. Like, if I remember rightly, Madison thought that it should proscribe things like the Federal Government paying for chaplains, etc., but knew such a stance would be intolerable to many and would thereby have political ramifications.

So, from the very beginning it's been watered down in terms of implementation for expediency - which is why, imo, the relaxations which have happened in the centuries since are so offensive. It was already being made lame right after it'd left the stable, the cattlegrids that folks have been laying down since are pushing the boundaries of a piece of legislation which started off at the periphery of where it should have been.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
HelterSkelter
Posts: 281
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2012 6:27:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/27/2012 1:31:43 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/26/2012 11:22:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:53:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:52:27 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
3. How do you reconcile your supposed support of liberty with your participation in slavery and genocide?

Genocide? Please don't bring up the Native Americans and if you do please look up the definition of genocide first, post it here and then justify yourself.

Genocide: "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group" -Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"No nation rejecting our friendship, and commencing wanton and unprovoked war against us, shall ever after remain within our reach; it shall never be in their power to strike us a second time." -Thomas Jefferson

'Attack us for taking your land and we will respond with the destruction of your people'--sounds reasonable.

We certainly did not deliberately and systematically kill all the natives. We weren't on good terms no, but we didn't outright kill them or try to create a system to eliminate them completely.

We did slaughter a lot of them, but who cares? Property rights belong to those who can protect them with force.
If you believe that we did than you're ignorant of history.
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2012 9:24:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/1/2012 6:27:32 AM, HelterSkelter wrote:
At 7/27/2012 1:31:43 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/26/2012 11:22:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:53:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:52:27 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
3. How do you reconcile your supposed support of liberty with your participation in slavery and genocide?

Genocide? Please don't bring up the Native Americans and if you do please look up the definition of genocide first, post it here and then justify yourself.

Genocide: "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group" -Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"No nation rejecting our friendship, and commencing wanton and unprovoked war against us, shall ever after remain within our reach; it shall never be in their power to strike us a second time." -Thomas Jefferson

'Attack us for taking your land and we will respond with the destruction of your people'--sounds reasonable.

We certainly did not deliberately and systematically kill all the natives. We weren't on good terms no, but we didn't outright kill them or try to create a system to eliminate them completely.

We did slaughter a lot of them, but who cares? Property rights belong to those who can protect them with force.
If you believe that we did than you're ignorant of history.

It doesn't seem like it was a genocide, more total war at the drop of a hat. Like,

Government: "We know we signed this treaty with you, but your hill has gold."

Indians: "We don't want to give up the hill."

Government: "Give up the hill, or we'll take it from you."

Indians: "You can take gold from the hill, but you have to leave right after."

Government: "That's impossible. Give us the hill."

Indians: "No."

Government: "Right, we're at war with you. Send in the soldiers: destroy everything indiscriminately until they surrender."
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Erik_Erikson
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2012 6:00:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The only thing I know about the Found Fathers is that they absolutely loved Muslims.

Muslims. Muslims. Muslims.

Because Morocco was the first country to acknowledge the United States a fundamental nation rather then a colonial territory of England.

Gotta love those Muslims.
I know nothing. That is, probably, the first step to true knowledge (I'm not too sure).
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2012 9:06:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/2/2012 6:00:45 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
The only thing I know about the Found Fathers is that they absolutely loved Muslims.

Muslims. Muslims. Muslims.

Because Morocco was the first country to acknowledge the United States a fundamental nation rather then a colonial territory of England.

I thought that was England in the Treaty of Paris...


Gotta love those Muslims.
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2012 9:07:24 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/14/2012 9:06:38 AM, THEBOMB wrote:
At 8/2/2012 6:00:45 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
The only thing I know about the Found Fathers is that they absolutely loved Muslims.

Muslims. Muslims. Muslims.

Because Morocco was the first country to acknowledge the United States a fundamental nation rather then a colonial territory of England.

I thought that was England and its allies in the Treaty of Paris...

No actually France and Spain and many other countries who helped the States.



Gotta love those Muslims.
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/21/2012 10:03:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/26/2012 11:22:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:53:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 7/26/2012 10:52:27 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
3. How do you reconcile your supposed support of liberty with your participation in slavery and genocide?

Genocide? Please don't bring up the Native Americans and if you do please look up the definition of genocide first, post it here and then justify yourself.

Genocide: "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group" -Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"No nation rejecting our friendship, and commencing wanton and unprovoked war against us, shall ever after remain within our reach; it shall never be in their power to strike us a second time." -Thomas Jefferson

'Attack us for taking your land and we will respond with the destruction of your people'--sounds reasonable.

Agreed. Our Founding Fathers were quite hypocritical in some cases.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2012 9:51:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/27/2012 10:25:14 AM, 16kadams wrote:
They meant the government has no right to meddle with religious freedom. Most of them supported laws backed by religion.

The wall of church and state did not exist until Justice Hugo Black took it from Jeffersons letters. Not the constitution.


The Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution is the expression of Jefferson's concept of a wall of separation between church and state.