It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ketsuko
It's not religion in a recognized sense, but in an emotional sense.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
Sanders isn't using religion, but the same irrational following is happening.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
originally posted by: ketsuko
It's not religion in a recognized sense, but in an emotional sense.
Then, it's not religious. It's support.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
Sanders isn't using religion, but the same irrational following is happening.
What's irrational about it? In fact, it's EXTREMELY rational. People support him because they agree with his positions. Positions he's had his ENTIRE career. That's not religion nor is it irrational. It's not religion any more than Trump's support is.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
What's irrational about it? In fact, it's EXTREMELY rational. People support him because they agree with his positions. Positions he's had his ENTIRE career. That's not religion nor is it irrational. It's not religion any more than Trump's support is.
originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: crustyjuggler27
Well, some seem to think so, but since our government is secular, and not theocratic, no. Religion has no place in our government in any way, shape, or form.
this is not a bash the other guys religion thread. if i see it i will remove it
Psssst. You have to be a mod to remove posts.
originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: BuzzyWigs
From the founding documents of this nation it is obvious of the intent to keep "God" and get rid of the "Church".
Taxpayer dollars have been used to pay chaplains of the House and Senate since the spring of 1789, when the first of 106 different ordained Christian ministers were elected to those jobs.
swampland.time.com...
The Senate has elected a Chaplain since 1789 to serve as pastor, deliver opening prayers and presiding at funerals and memorial services for departed members.
Both the House and the Senate follow the same practice and employ a Chaplain who typically performs that duty, typically assisted by religious officials from outside Congress who come to deliver an opening prayer as guests on a regular basis.
originally posted by: ketsuko
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
originally posted by: ketsuko
It's not religion in a recognized sense, but in an emotional sense.
Then, it's not religious. It's support.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
Sanders isn't using religion, but the same irrational following is happening.
What's irrational about it? In fact, it's EXTREMELY rational. People support him because they agree with his positions. Positions he's had his ENTIRE career. That's not religion nor is it irrational. It's not religion any more than Trump's support is.
Same fervor of emotion to it.
Just because Bernie hasn't declared it the Church of Bern like Beyoncé has the Beyism to channel that fervor makes no difference. THe fanaticism is there.
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: crustyjuggler27
Well, some seem to think so, but since our government is secular, and not theocratic, no. Religion has no place in our government in any way, shape, or form.
this is not a bash the other guys religion thread. if i see it i will remove it
Psssst. You have to be a mod to remove posts.
I think you can edit your OP to be blank. Or ask that it be removed.
originally posted by: Klassified
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: crustyjuggler27
Well, some seem to think so, but since our government is secular, and not theocratic, no. Religion has no place in our government in any way, shape, or form.
this is not a bash the other guys religion thread. if i see it i will remove it
Psssst. You have to be a mod to remove posts.
I think you can edit your OP to be blank. Or ask that it be removed.
Yes you can, but the OP was talking about removing other members posts. Not your own.
Well, considering US law and the foundations of government are almost entirely Judeo-Christian
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: infolurker
Well, considering US law and the foundations of government are almost entirely Judeo-Christian
I'll ask you again. What laws?
What are the Jewish laws? What are the Christian laws? How do any of our laws relate to the Bible?
Freedom of religion as a concept is embraced neither by the Jewish God nor Christian doctrine.
So, what exactly are the foundational laws of the US government that embody Judeo-Christian laws?
Historical Development of Civil Law
The term civil law derives from the Latin ius civile, the law applicable to all Roman cives or citizens. Its origins and model are to be found in the monumental compilation of Roman law commissioned by the Emperor Justinian in the sixth century CE.
Historical development of English Common Law
English common law emerged from the changing and centralizing powers of the king during the Middle Ages. After the Norman Conquest in 1066, medieval kings began to consolidate power and establish new institutions of royal authority and justice. New forms of legal action established by the crown functioned through a system of writs, or royal orders, each of which provided a specific remedy for a specific wrong.
Courts of law and courts of equity thus functioned separately until the writs system was abolished in the mid-nineteenth century. Even today, however, some U.S. states maintain separate courts of equity. Likewise, certain kinds of writs, such as warrants and subpoenas, still exist in the modern practice of common law. An example is the writ of habeas corpus, which protects the individual from unlawful detention. Originally an order from the king obtained by a prisoner or on his behalf, a writ of habeas corpus summoned the prisoner to court to determine whether he was being detained under lawful authority. Habeas corpus developed during the same period that produced the 1215 Magna Carta, or Great Charter, which declared certain individual liberties, one of the most famous being that a freeman could not be imprisoned or punished without the judgment of his peers under the law of the land—thus establishing the right to a jury trial.
OK, what are US laws based from?
At both the federal and state levels, the law of the United States is largely derived from the common law system of Christian English law
originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: infolurker
OK, what are US laws based from?
At both the federal and state levels, the law of the United States is largely derived from the common law system of Christian English law
No.
It is not.
It is based on the people who fled the country and refused to go along with the church doctrine and the forced slavery in the name of the crown.
What do you not get about this?
Okay, yeah.
Good night folks.
Sleep on all of this....it will do you good.
The Origin of Law
So where does law come from? In America, our law system came from Great Britain. The settlers of the original thirteen colonies came from Europe, and they brought with them their own set of rules and principles to be used in their new society.
The English common law was the system of law in England at that time and was quickly adopted throughout the colonies. The English common law is rooted in centuries of English history. Much of the common law was formed in the years between the Norman Conquest of England in the early 11th century and the settlement of the American colonies in the early 17th century.
Blackstone's Contribution
Shortly before the American Revolution in the last half of the 18th century, Sir William Blackstone published Commentaries on the Laws of England as a complete overview of the English common law. This publication spanned four volumes!
Blackstone described the English common law as an ancient collection of unwritten maxims and customs upon which English judicial decisions were made. Judicial decisions are decisions made by a court and are also known as case law. Therefore, Blackstone defined the English common law at that time as a large collection of cases.
Blackstone's Commentaries were crucial during the formation of the United States of America. Our Founding Fathers were looking to establish a government, and they had no other viable reference to written law. The U.S. adopted this system of common law, and it is still used today.
England is the origin of the common law that exists in the U.S..
The English common law originated in the early middle ages in the King’s Court (Curia Regis) and eventually led to the formulation of various viable principles through which it continues to operate. The common law has its roots in the U.S continent with the first English colonists who claimed the common law system as their birthright.edit on 22-9-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)
OK, what are US laws based from?
At both the federal and state levels, the law of the United States is largely derived from the common law system of Christian English law, which was in force at the time of the Revolutionary War.
.
A democratic republic is, strictly speaking, a country that is both a republic and a democracy. It is one where ultimate authority and power is derived from the citizens, and the government itself is run through elected officials. Wikipedia
Athens in the 4th to 5th century BCE had an extraordinary system of government, whereby all male citizens had equal political rights, freedom of speech, and the opportunity to participate directly in the political arena. This system was democracy. Further, not only did citizens participate in a direct democracy whereby they themselves made the decisions by which they lived, but they also actively served in the institutions that governed them, and so they directly controlled all parts of the political process.
www.ancient.eu...
The zealous fervor with which his supporters are in his corner.