Christian Nation Quote

Pamela - posted on 05/19/2011

This is the kind of shit (word used very deliberately) that really angers me:

http://www.propublica.org/article/forced...

Conservatives are supposedly all about private landownership. What do you say this particular article? Are you all right with this?

Pamela - posted on 05/18/2011

I've said this before but I'll say it again: taxes pay for our infrastructure. They pay for our roads, our railways, our clean water and air. They also help grandma from being put out on the street homeless or forcing her to choose between medication and dog food for dinner.They help people who are disabled and cannot work because of an injury or perhaps a congenital disability with their medication and housing. Are these the "soulless parasites" as Kelly so describes them everyone keeps harping about? Are these the "entitlements" you alls keep wanting to take apart?



I have absolutely no problem with my money being used to help people. Personally I'd rather see my money go towards programs such as WIC, Headstart, public education and the like rather than the wars of empire we always seem to be fighting. It is by far a better investment in our children.



Could these programs be tweaked, revised, updated, reformed? Of course they could and they should be. But contrary to popular conservative belief, charities alone cannot cover the needs.



And if you want to talk entitlements, then look at the tax breaks the corporations get. By the way, those tax breaks do not create more jobs. They just create much wealthier CEO's. That's called "corporate welfare".

Jennifer - posted on 05/18/2011

This issue should not be about wealth redistribution through taxes but about giving of one's own resources to help those less fortunate. The government should not be taking my money and giving it to others. I should be giving directly to the charities that I want to support. And by the way, Americans give more of their own personal money than any other people on the planet, so we may be complaining about the government forcing us to pay higher taxes but we are opening our hearts and our wallets to those in need.

Janessa - posted on 01/06/2011

80% of americans and 70% of Canadians are christians lol. I am not sure about those numbers because how many actually go to church and once a year does not count so they can look good around the holidays. How many of those people practice Christianity.

Pamela you hit it out of the park great job agree with you 100%.

ME - posted on 01/03/2011

Standing O for Pamela...I ♥ you!

Pamela - posted on 01/02/2011

Sorry folks. I did it again. Went on too long.

Pamela - posted on 01/02/2011

A. I don't hold that this is a "Christian" nation. It was founded on Enlightenment ideals and certainly influenced by Christian ideals as well. But we are quite integrated and pluralistic in this country - meaning there are folks of many different beliefs. As a Christian, I don't believe my allegiance is to this country but rather, it is to Christ and to his agenda, which is to love God, love people, period.



2) The point that Colbert is making here is a valid point. If certain people are going to make the claim that this country is Christian, then this country should live up to what are Christian principals and precepts. This would include serving the needy, because the poor, the marginalized, the destitute are very important to the heart of God. Read Isaiah 10. Read some Amos, maybe even a bit of Ezekial and Obadiah. Check out Mary's Magificant and some of what even Jesus said - oh and Paul too. Let's not forget most of the letter of James. If you read the first few chapters of Acts, the early church sounds awfully "liberal" or even...gasp...wait for it...SOCIALIST.



The fact is, many who yell the loudest about how this is a "Christian" nation, have some of the smallest and hardest hearts I've ever seen. I suspect that those who holler the loudest about God and country, are not too concerned with the concerns of God or country.



If we claim the Christian faith, and if we claim it for this nation, then we'd best be takings issues of social justice seriously.



Jesus actually did "just give" to people. He healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, and set people free. The Kingdom of God is based on grace - and in the Greek that word means "gift" and "undeserved favor".



He feed the 5,000 - not because they deserved it but because he saw a need and had compassion on them. He walked the path of compassion.



Who is worthy and who is not worthy of mercy? Who makes that determination? Frankly, we are all in need of mercy, every stinking one of us.



By the way, Jesus told the Jewish leaders to "render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" - the context was taxes. He was saying, "Pay Your Taxes".



When he told his Jewish audience to "walk that extra mile", that was in context of their Roman oppressors forcing them to carry their packs. Jesus was saying when the Romans command you to carry that pack the first mile, you are to go the extra mile and willingly carry it for the next mile.



Also, Coulter is taking 2 Corinthians 9.7 completely out of context. Paul is not referring to the government or to taxes. He is referring to a giving campaign for Christians who are under heavy persecution and suffering poverty because of it. He is calling on the Corinthians to give money in aid to those suffering. And as he states, if he shows up and they have nothing for him, wouldn't they all be embarrassed? "Don't be stingy!" Paul basically tells them. He is not talking about taxes to the Romans or anyone else. It was a giving campaign. Apples and oranges come to mind.



Let's look at Titus 3.1,2



"Remind the people to respect the government and be law-abiding, always ready to lend a helping hand. No insults, no fights. God's people should be bighearted and courteous."



But really, are we bighearted? Are we courteous, refraining from insults? Is that what we hear from those who are looking in from the outside of our faith? Not really - and that is sad and I think it breaks the heart of God.



Or how about James 1.9-10



"When down and outers get a break, cheer! When the arrogant rich are brought down to size, cheer! Prosperity is as short-lived as a wildflower, so don't ever count on it."



Christianity is a religion of humility and humbleness. There is no place in it for haughtiness and pride. Plenty of passages talking about how God will bring down the proud.



And anyway, why put our trust in riches? It can come and it can go like those wildflowers out a field. Look at the Stock Market. It's about as reliable as my 1981 Datsun 510. Which means it's not reliable at all.



Then there's James 1.27



"Real religion, the kind that passes muster before God the Father, is this: Reach out to the homeless and loveless in their plight, and guard against corruption from the godless world."



What is the godless world? It is the world system that is run on the fuel of greed. The love of money, Jesus warned us, is the root of all evil. I don't think he was saying that to blow smoke.



If we claim Christianity and we claim to follow Jesus, then we should have the biggest, most generous hearts in the world. If my taxes help a child get an education, then I'll gladly pay those taxes. If my taxes help poverty stricken children get a hot school lunch, then I'll gladly pay them. If my taxes can help someone who got downsized and let go from a company they worked for, from ending up on the street, I'll gladly pay them.



Is the system perfect? Of course not. Is there corruption? Of course there is. Should we toss out the baby with the bath water? No. We shouldn't. Should we work to reform the parts that aren't working well? Yes. We should.



Jesus transcends the whole conservative/liberal thing. He'd piss us all off because his agenda is almost never our agenda. But what we need to discover is what God's agenda is. It'll have something to do with healing, compassion, love, peace, healing, kindness, perseverance, patience, gentleness, joy and a conviction that a basic holiness permeates all things and all people. These are all (and it's not exhaustive by any means) the fruits of the Spirit. These character qualities are what should define us as followers of Christ and as we dive into the depths of Christ, we will be transformed into a people who love exuberantly.

Rosie - posted on 12/28/2010

i hear ya kelly, i just think that those people wouldn't have as much of a problem with homosexuals if their religion wasn't involved. i'm sure there'd be a few, but not nearly in the numbers there are now. they all defend it cause of freedom of religion which drives me batty. i don't see why they don't understand they're forcing their religious beliefs on the rest of the community. basically wanting their religion to rule, sounds kindof like islam to the extreme in other parts of the world.



environmental issues, feminists, animal rights activists are different in those are just their societal beliefs, not influenced by religion. i think for me, being an atheist makes me see things differently than a christian. i can make my own decisions, and thoughts without being dictated by what "god" told me to believe. i'm certainly not trying to say all christians are like that, cause i know they're not, in fact i've "met" a few christians on COM that have given me a new outlook on christians. :) i'm just talking about the ones that let it rule their way of thinking, and can't seem to think past the bible.

Kelly - posted on 12/28/2010

I see what you mean Kati. However, I think that is a matter of people following their beliefs when they go to the polls. Judges absolutely, and to a certain extent Politicians, SHOULD follow the laws of the land and not be swayed by their personal opinion when it comes to creating new law. Citizens however, vote for those who most closely represent their feelings. I would be lying if I said that Religious beliefs didn't sway how a person feels, thinks and votes.

Religions help define a society and what the society deems acceptable as a whole. Just look at countries that don't have separation of church and government to see that. I guess what I am trying to say, is that you may see it as "forcing their religion" on others when people vote out politicians or judges that don't stand for what they believe in. I see it as the majority standing up for what they think is socially acceptable. If I happen to not be a part of that majority, of course I am going to be mad or upset with the outcome. That is one of the frustrating parts of a democracy I guess. Even if you remove Religion, people are always trying to force their beliefs on others regarding topics they feel strongly about. Environmentalists, Feminists, Animal Rights Activists, etc. all try to get legislation changed to further their agenda.

**And your memory serves correct. Personally I don't see an issue with things like gay marriage. I just don't want ANYONE'S sexuality shoved in my face or down my throat. :)

Rosie - posted on 12/27/2010

. "Those crazy Republicans" also are well aware of the distinction. Most Conservative people favor the Constitution, which allows and in fact guarantees religious freedoms, not forcing Christianity on anyone who doesn't want it.



i would have to diagree with that statement kelly. if my memory serves me right you are a supporter of gay rights, correct? majority of christians use their religion as an excuse to discriminate against homosexuals. therefore forcing their beliefs on others. they seem to think that their religion is the only one out there that is protected by the constitution.



my state is a perfect example. i live in iowa, we allow gay marriage. last election we ousted 3 judges who held up the decision to allow gays to marry. apparantly people still think their religion gives them the right to dictate other peoples beliefs. now hopefully new judges that are elected will uphold the law, but it sickens me to think we can be so political about this issue.

Kelly - posted on 12/26/2010

Jenny, I understand that Gates and Buffet gave a crap load of money away. The debate could go either way here. Are we going to debate Liberal vs Conservative giving, or Christian vs non-Christian giving? If it is strictly Christian vs non-Christian, almost 80% of Americans self-identify as Christians, so it is safe to say they give more than the other 20% or so of the population. Even in Canada, where it can be argued that you are moving towards more of a secular state, about 70% still self-identify as Christians.

As far as your "non-charitable" area, I don't know what to tell you.

Kelly - posted on 12/26/2010

Seriously Janessa? Most Christians are well aware that Jesus was not born on December 25th, that is just the time of year that we celebrate his birth. Eashoa, or Yeshua *the Hebrew spelling* is actually his name in the original Aramaic language of Caanan, the area he is from. Pagans developed more in the Baltic / Slavic region, not in the Mesopotamian region which is the birthplace of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Paganism pre-dates Christianity, and if you know history, you understand that most Christian holidays have Pagan roots. Constantine incorporated pagan holidays into the church rituals around 4AD when he supposedly became a Christian. In this way he consolidated the Pagans and Christians under his rule.

As far as America being a Christian Nation, I as the lone voice of opposition in this thread have already agreed that we are not an "official" Christian Nation, nor should we be. I have stated that we are a nation made up largely of Christians. "Those crazy Republicans" also are well aware of the distinction. Most Conservative people favor the Constitution, which allows and in fact guarantees religious freedoms, not forcing Christianity on anyone who doesn't want it.

Janessa - posted on 12/26/2010

Wow interesting post America is not a christian nation period. I do not know where those crazy republicans think that america is a christian country lol. Someone mentioned making fun of christians during this holiday season. Well let me tell you Christmas is Not a Christian Holiday it was never. It is a Pagan Holiday by the way and Jesus was never Born On Christmas actually all those lies it is sick and Jesus was born in the spring time and his name was never Jesus it was a Pagan orgins lol It is actually Yeshua. I dislike those who try and forced they believes on others and have no idea where they religion came from.

Jenny - posted on 12/24/2010

"As far as your comment about Christian's acting like tight fisted, money grubbing jerks, that has been proven time and again to be false and baseless. Conservative, Religious Christians have been shown constantly to be the most giving. Liberal voters, and of course politicians, want to give too, through entitlement programs funded by someone else's money. There is a big difference between giving freely from the heart, and being forced to give through taxation."



What are you basing this on? I don't think it's actually true. Bill Gates (agnostic) and Warren Buffet (athiest) alone gave a HUGE chunk of money to charity recently. Non-believers don't generally give in the name of non-believing unless it's through Dawkin's charity or something though so it's harder to track.



I live in a very religious area and the lack of charity (not just monetary charity either) is astounding. Christians have just changed their mantra to "Help those who help themselves" to justify it. It's complete and total BS.

ME - posted on 12/23/2010

"Keeping people in poverty on purpose for votes is the most criminal act of all."

What evidence do you have for this horrendous accusation? None? Yeah...that's what I thought...You say Christians give with their hearts...but they only/mostly give to charities that have "Christian" values (or that they believe have Christian values), which leaves out a whole lot of people/charities...Jesus said, "whenever you do for the least of these, you do for me"...I would venture to guess that he was talking about those who desperately need help (you know, like the perpetually unemployed/underemployed, and the poorest of the poor). There are 5 unemployed people right now in this country for every job...so, where are the other 4/5 supposed to find work? So-called Christians are either unaware of the FACTS about poverty or they aren't practicing what they are preaching in this country (which was Mr. Colberts point, I believe)...Conservatives got what they wanted with huge tax cuts for billionaires...where are ALL THOSE JOBS that were supposed to be coming if we gave them 700 billion dollars?...Happy Holidays...I won't be back til after Christmas...

Oh...and Ann Coulter wouldn't know satire if it jumped up and bit her in the butt...you have to have some intelligence to read it, let alone to write it...

Kelly - posted on 12/23/2010

Eh, I feel the same way about people like Colbert. (Waste of space) However, I find it mystifying that "Open Minded Liberals" aren't ever open minded enough to try to understand the other side of issues. Are you afraid Ann Coulter might have a valid point or two mixed in with her own satire?



I don't think that this country should be an established Christian Nation in the sense that it is an "official" Religion. However, people's religious beliefs sway the way they vote on certain issues, and that should be respected. When our elected officials stop listening to the majority we get crap like the healthcare bill shoved down our throats.



As far as your comment about Christian's acting like tight fisted, money grubbing jerks, that has been proven time and again to be false and baseless. Conservative, Religious Christians have been shown constantly to be the most giving. Liberal voters, and of course politicians, want to give too, through entitlement programs funded by someone else's money. There is a big difference between giving freely from the heart, and being forced to give through taxation.



The fact that Republicans want people to take the initiative to stand on their own doesn't make them cruel or un-Christian. Welfare and unemployment are good programs if used the way they were intended for. TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE. When people are going on 2 plus years of not being employed at all, or have been living in Sec. 8 and on welfare their whole lives, it is an epidemic. Democrats better wake up soon. Keeping people in poverty on purpose for votes is the most criminal act of all.

ME - posted on 12/23/2010

But...that's the point of Satire...Colbert is NOT suggesting that we ARE a Christian nation...he is suggesting that Christians, who seem to desperately want this to BE a Christian nation, don't act at all like Christians. No liberal that I know thinks this is or should be a Christian nation...for any reason ever...Not Colbert and not any regular old average citizen. It is NOT a Christian nation...it is a Nation that is populated by a lot of Christians that also promises FREEDOM of religion to ALL people, and that it will NEVER establish any type of state religion...What Liberals like myself and (probably) Colbert would like to see is Christians acting like Christians and not like a bunch of tight fisted, money grubbing, jerks...because that would make the most logical sense to us...if they want this to be a Christian nation...I would suggest that Christian attitudes would be a good place to start, because legally (as in making this a "christian nation"), it ain't gonna happen...

As for Swift, I was talking about "A Modest Proposal"...check it out, if you are interested in satire, anyway...

I don't read anything by AC anymore...she's a waste of space...

Kelly - posted on 12/22/2010

Thought this was slightly relevant...........

Scrooge Was A Liberal
by Ann Coulter
12/22/2010


It's the Christmas season, so Godless liberals are citing the Bible to demand the redistribution of income by government force. Didn't Jesus say, "Blessed are the Health and Human Services bureaucrats, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven"?

Liberals are always indignantly accusing conservatives of claiming God is on our side. What we actually say is: We're on God's side, particularly when liberals are demanding God's banishment from the public schools, abortion on demand, and taxpayer money being spent on Jesus submerged in a jar of urine and pictures of the Virgin Mary covered with pornographic photos.

But for liberals like Al Franken, it's beyond dispute that Jesus would support extending federal unemployment insurance.


This has absolutely nothing to do with the Bible, but it does nicely illustrate Shakespeare's point that the "devil can cite Scripture for his purpose."

What the Bible says about giving to the poor is: "Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." (2 Corinthians (9:7)

Being forced to pay taxes under penalty of prison is not voluntary and rarely done cheerfully. Nor do our taxes go to "the poor." They mostly go to government employees who make more money than you do.

The reason liberals love the government redistributing money is that it allows them to skip the part of charity that involves peeling the starfish off their wallets and forking over their own money. This, as we know from study after study, they cannot bear to do. (Unless they are guaranteed press conferences where they can brag about their generosity.)

Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks' study of charitable giving in America found that conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than liberals do, despite the fact that liberals have higher incomes than conservatives.

In his book "Who Really Cares?" Brooks compared the charitable donations of religious conservatives, secular liberals, secular conservatives and "religious" liberals.

His surprising conclusion was ... Al Franken gave the most of all!

Ha ha! Just kidding. Religious conservatives, the largest group at about 20 percent of the population, gave the most to charity -- $2,367 per year, compared with $1,347 for the country at large.

Even when it comes to purely secular charities, religious conservatives give more than other Americans, which is surprising because liberals specialize in "charities" that give them a direct benefit, such as the ballet or their children's elite private schools.

Indeed, religious people, Brooks says, "are more charitable in every measurable nonreligious way."

Brooks found that conservatives donate more in time, services and even blood than other Americans, noting that if liberals and moderates gave as much blood as conservatives do, the blood supply would increase by about 45 percent.

They ought to set up blood banks at tea parties.

On average, a person who attends religious services and does not believe in the redistribution of income will give away 100 times more -- and 50 times more to secular charities -- than a person who does not attend religious services and strongly believes in the redistribution of income.

Secular liberals, the second largest group coming in at 10 percent of the population, were the whitest and richest of the four groups. (Some of you may also know them as "insufferable blowhards.") These "bleeding-heart tightwads," as New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof calls them, were the second stingiest, just behind secular conservatives, who are mostly young, poor, cranky white guys.

Despite their wealth and advantages, secular liberals give to charity at a rate of 9 percent less than all Americans and 19 percent less than religious conservatives. They were also "significantly less likely than the population average to return excess change mistakenly given to them by a cashier." (Count Nancy Pelosi's change carefully!)

Secular liberals are, however, 90 percent more likely to give sanctimonious Senate speeches demanding the forced redistribution of income. (That's up 7 percent from last year!)

We'll review specific liberals next week.

Needless to say, "religious liberals" made up the smallest group at just 6.4 percent of the population (for more on this, see my book, "Godless").

Interestingly, religious liberals were also "most confused" of all the groups. Composed mostly of blacks and Unitarians, religious liberals made nearly as many charitable donations as religious conservatives, but presumably, the Unitarians brought down their numbers, making them second in charitable giving.

Brooks wrote that he was shocked by his conclusions because he believed liberals "genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did" -- probably because liberals are always telling us that.

So he re-ran the numbers and gathered more data, but it kept coming out the same. "In the end," he says, "I had no option but to change my views."

Every other study on the subject has produced similar results. Indeed, a Google study of philanthropy found an even greater disparity, with conservatives giving 50 percent more than liberals. The Google study showed that liberals gave more to secular causes overall, but conservatives still gave more as a percentage of their incomes.

The Catalogue for Philanthropy analyzed a decade of state and federal tax returns and found that the red states were far more generous than the blue states, with the highest percentage of tightwads living in the liberal Northeast.

In his book "Intellectuals," Paul Johnson quotes Pablo Picasso scoffing at the idea that he would give to the needy. "I'm afraid you've got it wrong," Picasso explains, "we are socialists. We don't pretend to be Christians."

Merry Christmas to all, skinflint liberals and generous Christians alike!

Kelly - posted on 12/22/2010

How many times have we run circles around it Dana? There are plenty in this group that claim we are NOT a Christian nation. Personally, I don't find Colbert funny or entertaining in the least. I think it is sad that especially at Christmas some feel the need to ramp up the Christian bashing. The "sick and laughable" feeling comes from the fact that Liberals tend to twist everything to suit their needs when it comes to religion. Since I don't watch Colbert, I am guessing the quote stems from the recent debate over extending (yet again) unemployment benefits for the people who haven't been able to find any job in the last 2 years. (Another debate all together) So when it comes to welfare, we should act like a Christian nation. But when it comes to a myriad of other topics, abortion, marriage, etc. we are NOT a Christian nation. Y'all need to make up your minds because you can't have it both ways.

As far as Swift goes, I am only familiar with Gulliver's Travels, and I thought it was very weird to put it nicely.

ME - posted on 12/22/2010

SATIRE is usually laughable, but this doesn't seem to be a "sick" example of that artform...now, Jonathan Swift was a little sick...:)

Dana - posted on 12/22/2010

Liberals spend all their time denying that this is a Christian nation unless it works in their favor? Where do you get that from Kelly? And why is it sick and laughable.
I actually posted this on my wall a few days ago, I wondered if it would go over heads, it seems it does.

Dana - posted on 12/22/2010

I loved that whole clip this was from. It had me literally laughing my ass off.

Kelly - posted on 12/22/2010

There is a difference between helping those who truly need it, and allowing soulless parasites to live off of the system in perpetuity. Jesus didn't just give to people, he also taught them how to provide for themselves and others. The problem now is that there are too many people that take advantage of Christians and their generosity. Then when we say no more, our religious beliefs are thrown up in our faces.

As far as the Colbert quote, I love how Liberals spend all of their time denying that this is a Christian nation, until it works in their favor. That is just sick, and laughable. So which is it? Do you believe we are a Christian nation Sara?