On Fri, August 14, 2009 9:57 pm, Cindy Mulvey wrote:

> What you have written is not what I and many see

I didn't write the opinion of the unanimous
U.S. Supreme Court in 1892 that America is
a Christian nation. You refuse to see the truth.

> read this is GOD OF ALL
> http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/dispatch/fathers_quote2.htm

None of these quotations contradict the
unanimous opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court
that America is a Christian nation, much
less prove that the Court is wrong.

http://KevinCraig.us/EndTheWall/anti-trinity.htm

But the Supreme Court's opinion -- and all
the quotations and constitutions and other
evidence the Court cites -- contradicts
the claim that America was a secular
(atheistic) nation.

None of the quotations your author provides
prove that the U.S was intended to be an
atheistic nation, or a nation that tolerates
human sacrifice or other religious practices
which are contrary to Christian morality.

> Now it seems, by the way, that the Founders, even if they were devout
> Christians, did not desire a thorough-going Christian nation. How do
> I know that? Because they built into the First Amendment a non-
> establishment clause in which it was very clear that there was meant
> to be a healthy religious pluralism from the perspective of the states.

A Christian nation does not criminalize non-
Christian BELIEF. However, it DOES criminalize
non-Christian ACTION such as cannibalism,
suttee, polygamy, and human sacrifice.
The U.S. Supreme Court has REPEATEDLY ruled
that there is no freedom of religion for
non-Christian practices, even if they
are motivated by sincerely held non-Christian
religious beliefs, because this is a
Christian nation.

http://vftonline.org/TestOath/mormon.htm

None of your quotations disprove this article:

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=23909

>> This man seems to know more the Media & religiosity ever showed us
>> if you have any a thought that he is wrong email him.
>> http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/dispatch/stand_reason.htm

I have no reason to believe that this man
is interested in my opinion.

The article he quotes, written by Greg Koukl of
"Stand to Reason" ministry, is a poorly-argued article.
I like Koukl when he argues against Mormons and
Jehovah's Witnesses, but not when he practices
constitutional law.

Koukl says:

> From this perspective of the state's involvement or
> encouragement there was to be a healthy pluralism
> in which the state allowed the development of
> any religious belief and expression without interference.

Belief, yes.
Expression, no.
"Expression" of religion will be interfered with
if it contradicts "the Laws of Nature and of
Nature's God."

http://KevinCraig.us/religion/nature.htm

As I said, the Supreme Court has ruled over and
over that someone relying on the First Amendment
to practice polygamy or cannibalism will still
be arrested and charged with a crime. The Court
said this is true BECAUSE we are a Christian nation.
The First Amendment does NOT protect religious
"expressions" which are contrary to the morals
of a Christian nation that recognizes "the Laws
of Nature and of Nature's God."

There is NOT ONE Founding Father who would
disagree with that last paragraph.
Not one.



Kevin Craig
Powersite, MO 65731-0179
www.AnarchistBibleBet.com