America's Long History of Religious Prosecution

Dr. Jones wrote:It's amazing how we are still fighting the same fight our founding fathers did well over 200 years ago.  We all know Thomas Jefferson was a staunch supporter of a strict separation of church and state.   What we may not realize is how the religious right of the time slandered him over his position.  Jefferson himself was most certainly a religious man,  but being a deist made him realize that American citizens should have every right to cling to their own personal beliefs.  This is precisely why Jefferson drafted the Virginia Statute for Religious Fredom that would ensure these rights would be permanent for all Virginia residents.  Not surprisingly, this legislation came front and center in his bid for the Presidency.  He was labeled an atheist for believing that Americans should have the right choose their own type of faith.  Some things never change.   Hats off to Thomas Jefferson.

http://www.pbs.org/godinamerica/people/thomas-jefferson.html

Jammer wrote:    NOTHING BUT LIBERAL LIES - PURE BULLSHIT    

Dr. Jones wrote:Our nation was born in an era of Enlightenment.  The Age of Enlightenment was a time when progressive thinkers around world the began to question many of the ideals regarding government and religion that had been tightly held for centuries.  Advances in science and centuries of religious war had them reassessing their own faith.  Opressive government rule had these pioneers rethinking the role of government.

American Enlightenment is a huge part of our heritage, without it we likely would have never had an American Revolution.  American Enlightenment was indoctrinated, by our forefathers, into our Declaration of Independence among other documents.  For many Deism was a part of this Enlightenment.  It's not to say that they were athiests.  They just realized that there were things in the bible that didn't add up.  People needed to have free range when it came to their faith.  Thomas Jefferson, among many others, was instrumental in making this dream a realty. 

http://www.iep.utm.edu/amer-enl/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Faiths_of_the_Founding_Fathers

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Our nation was born in an era of Enlightenment.  The Age of Enlightenment was a time when progressive thinkers around world the began to question many of the ideals regarding government and religion that had been tightly held for centuries.  Advances in science and centuries of religious war had them reassessing their own faith.  Opressive government rule had these pioneers rethinking the role of government.

American Enlightenment is a huge part of our heritage, without it we likely would have never had an American Revolution.  American Enlightenment was indoctrinated, by our forefathers, into our Declaration of Independence among other documents.  For many Deism was a part of this Enlightenment.  It's not to say that they were athiests.  They just realized that there were things in the bible that didn't add up.  People needed to have free range when it came to their faith.  Thomas Jefferson, among many others, was instrumental in making this dream a realty. 

http://www.iep.utm.edu/amer-enl/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Faiths_of_the_Founding_Fathers

The ignorance is great with his one. What a load of codswallop. The main reasons for the Revolution were essentially taxes, tariffs (trade) and political representation. If religious liberty was considered to be a major cause of the Revolution, then established churches by the States would not have continued to exist well into the 1800s.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Our nation was born in an era of Enlightenment.  The Age of Enlightenment was a time when progressive thinkers around world the began to question many of the ideals regarding government and religion that had been tightly held for centuries.  Advances in science and centuries of religious war had them reassessing their own faith.  Opressive government rule had these pioneers rethinking the role of government.

American Enlightenment is a huge part of our heritage, without it we likely would have never had an American Revolution.  American Enlightenment was indoctrinated, by our forefathers, into our Declaration of Independence among other documents.  For many Deism was a part of this Enlightenment.  It's not to say that they were athiests.  They just realized that there were things in the bible that didn't add up.  People needed to have free range when it came to their faith.  Thomas Jefferson, among many others, was instrumental in making this dream a realty. 

http://www.iep.utm.edu/amer-enl/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Faiths_of_the_Founding_Fathers

The ignorance is great with his one. What a load of codswallop. The main reasons for the Revolution were essentially taxes, tariffs (trade) and political representation. If religious liberty was considered to be a major cause of the Revolution, then established churches by the States would not have continued to exist well into the 1800s.

The Colonists' acting on their grievances with the British was only part of their overall Enlightenment.  The notion that the government was there to serve it's citizens, instead of the other way around, was no more or less important than their desire to instill religious freedom in our new counrty.  And they did just that, there were a handful of states that took a little longer to come around, but that's too be expected.  They had every right to do so.

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Our nation was born in an era of Enlightenment.  The Age of Enlightenment was a time when progressive thinkers around world the began to question many of the ideals regarding government and religion that had been tightly held for centuries.  Advances in science and centuries of religious war had them reassessing their own faith.  Opressive government rule had these pioneers rethinking the role of government.

American Enlightenment is a huge part of our heritage, without it we likely would have never had an American Revolution.  American Enlightenment was indoctrinated, by our forefathers, into our Declaration of Independence among other documents.  For many Deism was a part of this Enlightenment.  It's not to say that they were athiests.  They just realized that there were things in the bible that didn't add up.  People needed to have free range when it came to their faith.  Thomas Jefferson, among many others, was instrumental in making this dream a realty. 

http://www.iep.utm.edu/amer-enl/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Faiths_of_the_Founding_Fathers

The ignorance is great with his one. What a load of codswallop. The main reasons for the Revolution were essentially taxes, tariffs (trade) and political representation. If religious liberty was considered to be a major cause of the Revolution, then established churches by the States would not have continued to exist well into the 1800s.

The Colonists' acting on their grievances with the British was only part of their overall Enlightenment.  The notion that the government was there to serve it's citizens, instead of the other way around, was no more or less important than their desire to instill religious freedom in our new counrty.  And they did just that, there were a handful of states that took a little longer to come around, but that's too be expected.  They had every right to do so.

Sorry but your copy of "American History for Fcukstiks" is wrong. At the time of the ratification of the Bill of Rights, over half of the 13 States (hardly a "handful") still had preferential or non-preferential establishment in the form of religious assessment taxes supporting ministers, churches or church schools. Most of the States still had some sort of religious test to hold office or vote. The First Amendment prohibition of established churches did not apply to the States as it was meant to protect against Congressional interference with state governments' involvement with religion.

As for your explanation of Social Contract theory, it is so puerile that it isn't worthy of comment. Why not read a little Locke and Rousseau and then we'll talk.

Our incomes are like our shoes; if too small, they gall and pinch us; but if too large, they cause us to stumble and to trip.

Dr. Jones wrote:Since we're on the subject of Locke, here's a quote of his:

Our incomes are like our shoes; if too small, they gall and pinch us; but if too large, they cause us to stumble and to trip.

Locke undoubtedly was a believer in the free market.  I am as well, until it becomes regressive and actually stifles competition.  Given his quote,  what do you think he would say about the income inequality we are seeing today?

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Since we're on the subject of Locke, here's a quote of his:

Our incomes are like our shoes; if too small, they gall and pinch us; but if too large, they cause us to stumble and to trip.

Locke undoubtedly was a believer in the free market.  I am as well, until it becomes regressive and actually stifles competition.  Given his quote,  what do you think he would say about the income inequality we are seeing today?

It's not his quote. It's Charles Caleb Colton's, an English cleric and writer. Several of his books were collections of aphorisms. His most famous was "Imitation is the sincerest [form] of flattery"

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Since we're on the subject of Locke, here's a quote of his:

Our incomes are like our shoes; if too small, they gall and pinch us; but if too large, they cause us to stumble and to trip.

Locke undoubtedly was a believer in the free market.  I am as well, until it becomes regressive and actually stifles competition.  Given his quote,  what do you think he would say about the income inequality we are seeing today?

It's not his quote. It's Charles Caleb Colton's, an English cleric and writer. Several of his books were collections of aphorisms. His most famous was "Imitation is the sincerest [form] of flattery"

What makes you think John Locke never said this?   Site after site credits it to him.  Certainly none of the typical debunking you see when someone is misquoted.  What gives?  Given Colton's biography, his quote "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" certainly wouldn't rule out plagerism.

Dr. Jones wrote:Since we're on the subject of Locke, here's a quote of his:

Our incomes are like our shoes; if too small, they gall and pinch us; but if too large, they cause us to stumble and to trip.

Locke undoubtedly was a believer in the free market.  I am as well, until it becomes regressive and actually stifles competition.  Given his quote,  what do you think he would say about the income inequality we are seeing today?

nightlight88 wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:Since we're on the subject of Locke, here's a quote of his:

Our incomes are like our shoes; if too small, they gall and pinch us; but if too large, they cause us to stumble and to trip.

Locke undoubtedly was a believer in the free market.  I am as well, until it becomes regressive and actually stifles competition.  Given his quote,  what do you think he would say about the income inequality we are seeing today?

How can a free market be regressive and stifle competition?

Locke had a foundational role in the Age of Enlightenment.  Revolutionary leaders like Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington were, as you well know, cut from the same cloth as Locke.  Knowing what we know about Locke, and those who followed his theology,  we know that your statement about the First Amendment protecting the states religous rights from the federal government is pure BS.  The Bill of Rights set the standard for religous freedom in America.  A standard that states quickly followed.

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Locke had a foundational role in the Age of Enlightenment.  Revolutionary leaders like Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington were, as you well know, cut from the same cloth as Locke.  Knowing what we know about Locke, and those who followed his theology,  we know that your statement about the First Amendment protecting the states religous rights from the federal government is pure BS.  The Bill of Rights set the standard for religous freedom in America.  A standard that states quickly followed.

Actually Jefferson, Franklin and Washington weren't cut from the same cloth as Locke. For example Locke was a Calvinist much of his life but at the end he seemed to be practicing Socianism and/or Arianism. A Deist he was not.

While Locke espoused religious toleration in his philosophy, he carved out an exception for atheism. He also didn't care much for Muslims, calling them sodomites and libertines.

States don't have rights but they do have powers. "States Rights" is a misnomer. The 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment originally only applied to the Federal government hence the prohibition on Congress: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Your claim that the 1st Amendment set the standard for religious freedom is just wrong. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution because of demands of the anti-Federalists who came whisker close to stopping the ratification of the Constitution. In fact Alexander Hamilton argued against a Bill of Rights in Federalist Paper #84: " For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?"

It was actually the State's Bill of Rights that influenced the Federal Bill of Rights. In particular the Virginia Declaration of Rights was the major influence for the 1st Amendment.

You fail ..... yet again.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Locke had a foundational role in the Age of Enlightenment.  Revolutionary leaders like Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington were, as you well know, cut from the same cloth as Locke.  Knowing what we know about Locke, and those who followed his theology,  we know that your statement about the First Amendment protecting the states religous rights from the federal government is pure BS.  The Bill of Rights set the standard for religous freedom in America.  A standard that states quickly followed.

Actually Jefferson, Franklin and Washington weren't cut from the same cloth as Locke. For example Locke was a Calvinist much of his life but at the end he seemed to be practicing Socianism and/or Arianism. A Deist he was not.

While Locke espoused religious toleration in his philosophy, he carved out an exception for atheism. He also didn't care much for Muslims, calling them sodomites and libertines.

States don't have rights but they do have powers. "States Rights" is a misnomer. The 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment originally only applied to the Federal government hence the prohibition on Congress: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Your claim that the 1st Amendment set the standard for religious freedom is just wrong. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution because of demands of the anti-Federalists who came whisker close to stopping the ratification of the Constitution. In fact Alexander Hamilton argued against a Bill of Rights in Federalist Paper #84: " For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?"

It was actually the State's Bill of Rights that influenced the Federal Bill of Rights. In particular the Virginia Declaration of Rights was the major influence for the 1st Amendment.

You fail ..... yet again.

If there's one thing for which you can be counted on, it's an entertaining bending the facts to fit your flavor-of-the-week narrative.


First off,  Alexander Hamilton was a big government, big big businesses, big bankster, Federalist.  These weren't people who gave a shiit about states' rights.  They wanted a strong federal government, so that they could support their cronie business interests.  Thomas Jefferson actually was the one who believed power resided in the hands of the states.  Hamilton and Jefferson locked heads in this constantly as they were both in Washington's cabinet, much to Washington's credit for consulting both opposing views.


Hamilton's quote,  being one of your favorites, doesn't actually mean what you think it does.  Hamilton is extremely disingenuous in his comments on the Bill of Rights, he is pretending to support the notion that it shouldn't exist because it could actually be used to place restrictions on the lives of the American people.  Federalists were big believers in loose construction, which means they wanted to be able to more freely interpret the Constitution. What he was really afraid of was that the additional verbage contained in the BoR would restrict their elasticity in being able to interpret Constitution, and the therfore restrict the ability of Federalists to bend it to fit their needs.

nightlight88 wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Locke had a foundational role in the Age of Enlightenment.  Revolutionary leaders like Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington were, as you well know, cut from the same cloth as Locke.  Knowing what we know about Locke, and those who followed his theology,  we know that your statement about the First Amendment protecting the states religous rights from the federal government is pure BS.  The Bill of Rights set the standard for religous freedom in America.  A standard that states quickly followed.

Actually Jefferson, Franklin and Washington weren't cut from the same cloth as Locke. For example Locke was a Calvinist much of his life but at the end he seemed to be practicing Socianism and/or Arianism. A Deist he was not.

While Locke espoused religious toleration in his philosophy, he carved out an exception for atheism. He also didn't care much for Muslims, calling them sodomites and libertines.

States don't have rights but they do have powers. "States Rights" is a misnomer. The 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment originally only applied to the Federal government hence the prohibition on Congress: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Your claim that the 1st Amendment set the standard for religious freedom is just wrong. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution because of demands of the anti-Federalists who came whisker close to stopping the ratification of the Constitution. In fact Alexander Hamilton argued against a Bill of Rights in Federalist Paper #84: " For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?"

It was actually the State's Bill of Rights that influenced the Federal Bill of Rights. In particular the Virginia Declaration of Rights was the major influence for the 1st Amendment.

You fail ..... yet again.

If there's one thing for which you can be counted on, it's an entertaining bending the facts to fit your flavor-of-the-week narrative.


First off,  Alexander Hamilton was a big government, big big businesses, big bankster, Federalist.  These weren't people who gave a shiit about states' rights.  They wanted a strong federal government, so that they could support their cronie business interests.  Thomas Jefferson actually was the one who believed power resided in the hands of the states.  Hamilton and Jefferson locked heads in this constantly as they were both in Washington's cabinet, much to Washington's credit for consulting both opposing views.


Hamilton's quote,  being one of your favorites, doesn't actually mean what you think it does.  Hamilton is extremely disingenuous in his comments on the Bill of Rights, he is pretending to support the notion that it shouldn't exist because it could actually be used to place restrictions on the lives of the American people.  Federalists were big believers in loose construction, which means they wanted to be able to more freely interpret the Constitution. What he was really afraid of was that the additional verbage contained in the BoR would restrict their elasticity in being able to interpret Constitution, and the therfore restrict the ability of Federalists to bend it to fit their needs.

You really need to document where you get this bullshite, you sure aren't smart enough to come up with it yourself.

Dr. Jones wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Locke had a foundational role in the Age of Enlightenment.  Revolutionary leaders like Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington were, as you well know, cut from the same cloth as Locke.  Knowing what we know about Locke, and those who followed his theology,  we know that your statement about the First Amendment protecting the states religous rights from the federal government is pure BS.  The Bill of Rights set the standard for religous freedom in America.  A standard that states quickly followed.

Actually Jefferson, Franklin and Washington weren't cut from the same cloth as Locke. For example Locke was a Calvinist much of his life but at the end he seemed to be practicing Socianism and/or Arianism. A Deist he was not.

While Locke espoused religious toleration in his philosophy, he carved out an exception for atheism. He also didn't care much for Muslims, calling them sodomites and libertines.

States don't have rights but they do have powers. "States Rights" is a misnomer. The 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment originally only applied to the Federal government hence the prohibition on Congress: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Your claim that the 1st Amendment set the standard for religious freedom is just wrong. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution because of demands of the anti-Federalists who came whisker close to stopping the ratification of the Constitution. In fact Alexander Hamilton argued against a Bill of Rights in Federalist Paper #84: " For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?"

It was actually the State's Bill of Rights that influenced the Federal Bill of Rights. In particular the Virginia Declaration of Rights was the major influence for the 1st Amendment.

You fail ..... yet again.

If there's one thing for which you can be counted on, it's an entertaining bending the facts to fit your flavor-of-the-week narrative.


First off,  Alexander Hamilton was a big government, big big businesses, big bankster, Federalist.  These weren't people who gave a shiit about states' rights.  They wanted a strong federal government, so that they could support their cronie business interests.  Thomas Jefferson actually was the one who believed power resided in the hands of the states.  Hamilton and Jefferson locked heads in this constantly as they were both in Washington's cabinet, much to Washington's credit for consulting both opposing views.


Hamilton's quote,  being one of your favorites, doesn't actually mean what you think it does.  Hamilton is extremely disingenuous in his comments on the Bill of Rights, he is pretending to support the notion that it shouldn't exist because it could actually be used to place restrictions on the lives of the American people.  Federalists were big believers in loose construction, which means they wanted to be able to more freely interpret the Constitution. What he was really afraid of was that the additional verbage contained in the BoR would restrict their elasticity in being able to interpret Constitution, and the therfore restrict the ability of Federalists to bend it to fit their needs.

You really need to document where you get this bullshite, you sure aren't smart enough to come up with it yourself.

This is simple US history.  You can look all this shiste up.  Federalists believed that the road to success was to be a manufacturing powerhouse, and they were going to use the strength of the federal government to do so.  But they needed money to build this infrastructure, which is why Hamilton was hell bent on setting up a national bank and treasury.  These would provide a place for people in the US and abroad to invest in our country.  These investments would provide the needed capital to create their capitalist utopia.  Federalists also believed that the Constitution was designed to be interpreted by the federal government as they saw fit to promote the wellbeing of the counrty. 

Jefferson and the Republicans, which eventually turned into Democrats, saw all of this as being the type of tyrannical government overreach they had just revolted against. 

It's pretty simple really.

Jammer wrote:Jackoff Jones is a?

A.  Liar
B.  Stupid
C.  The devil
D.  All of the above


Nobody should believe a word this man says.  He wants people to believe that Thomas Jefferson was a democrat, you know the same gang that Jackoff Jones belongs to.  Well WRONG.

You can trace all the history you want,  You can draw all the lines you want between the Democrat-Republican Party, the Whig Party, the democrat party and the Republican Party, but you are only fooling yourself if you try to say that Thomas Jefferson was a democrat.

Just an interesting tidbit of history is that the early Democrat-Republican party called themselves Republicans.  However, it was the Federalists who tagged them with the democratic nomenclature because they saw democracy as being a danger.

Anyhow, if you want to try to figure out what Thomas Jefferson would be if he lived in today’s world of American politics forget trying to draw lines to connect dots that don’t connect.  Take 2 buckets and label one democrat and one Republican.  Then list all of the values and principles that each political party espouses today and place them in the bucket of one of the political parties.

Once all of the values and principles are categorized remove the democrat and Republican names from the buckets.  Give the buckets to a jury along with what the Federalists and Anti-Federalists believed in back in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s and ask them to label the buckets.  You will then realize that if you were to align today’s political parties with our early Founders you would have:

Federalists (Hamilton & Adams) = democrats
Anti-Federalists (Jefferson & Madison) = Republicans

If you want to draw a line back from today’s democrat party, you will probably see that at the end of the line will be Andrew Jackson and wasn’t he something special.  He was pretty much the father of today’s democrat party even though it has become much more evil than even Jackson could have hoped for.

Mister forum moderator, I would like to make a motion that Jackoff Jones be forever banned from this forum because the answer to the question above is D.

Skeptical wrote:
He is only regurgitating the authorized NEA sanctioned version of history according to the liberals/progressives/socialists remake of society according to the socialist agenda.