• ALIENated said on Jul 16, 2008....

  
  God yes, you are a racist. So am I, if asking questions makes you a racist.
  Asians out perform everyone because they have a strong work ethic. It comes
  from centuries of being kicked around by Shoguns and Samarais. Latinos come
  from the tropics where it is too hot to work for long periods. So instead of
  doing their math and science homework, they take a siesta. Here it is cooler
  and they work as hard as the rest of us. Latinos have a hard time in school
  because their stupid parents and our stupid government let them come here 
  before they could speak English and, consequently, they barely know what 
  their teachers are talking about. And they get all kinds of mixed signals about
  remain loyat to their Mexican heritage instead of being proud to be an 
  American. And the older kids use that as an excuse and want everyone to 
  speak Spanish. (If they want to speak Spanish, they should go back to 
  Mexico.) There is no superior or inferior race. There are only bad governments,
  bad leaders, and stupid parents who fail to teach their kids anything. Black
  kids (and I am speaking in generalities here) could be as smart as any other
  kids if they had fathers who would stay at home and be fathers instead of 
  roaming the streets and acting like jackasses. That is one thing Borax is
  right about and Jesse Jack(ass)son is wrong about. Jesse is the real racist,
  and Al (notso) Sharpton. They want blacks to remain uneducated so they
  will have to depend on their racist leaders. Teach a man to fish, not give
  them a fish. And that is what is wrong with the Democrat party in general.
  They want everyone to depend on the government for everything so they
  will continue to have a job. Republican, in general, try to lessen the role
  of government and consequently work themselves out of a job. A catch 22.
  
  

• brit said on Jul 16, 2008....

  IMHO, Asians outperform because of their upbringing, their culture, their society. They study study study, (and maybe play some video games). Yes, I suppose you could say they have a strong work ethic.

  I dunno what race performs the worst academically. I dunno if you're a racist, but if you have to ask if you are I wouldn't take that as a good thing! LOL

  Thanks a lot for making me think ;-P  j/k

• D6fer said on Jul 16, 2008....

  brit.......I ask the original question simply because I spotted the article.....I think that race plays no role in any individuals natural ability to learn.....there are plenty of people of every race on the planet far smarter than I.......but I think that the issue is a can of worms that needs to be opened......we need to get minority kids that historically perform lower to do better.....and the only way to do that is to first admit that there is a divide.....and to address he real reasons as to why.......it's not because whitey brought it up.......too many latinos are involved in gangs......hip hop and rap culture is destroying our youth......and liberalism is greasing the wheels of that runaway train.

• brit said on Jul 16, 2008....

  d6 dude, I hear ya. please define this awful liberalism you speak of ;-P so I may understand that point better.

• D6fer said on Jul 16, 2008....

  it's simple......liberalism is all for self expression....no rules for personal behavior....and rights for criminals who deserve none......liberalism is the new slave master....it keeps minorities on the welfare roles under the guise of compassion....doing no one any favors.....it destroys the family by putting non-families on a pedestal, under the guise of fairness....it destroys what binds the nation together, our commonality.....specifically, our language......creating a bi-lingual nation is counter productive, inefficient and dangerous. .....I could go on and on....but I hate long rants.    

• silverwhisper said on Jul 17, 2008....

  no, liberalism is not about self expression, d6. would you like it if i described conservatism as clinging reflexively to the ways of the past that still considers monarchy a great idea?
  
  ed

• ALIENated said on Jul 17, 2008....

  
  Hey, a word from someone who disproves your hypothesis.
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 17, 2008....

  It's all about the culture, I garuntee if you were to swap the children at birth and have black parents with Asian kids and Asian parents with black kids the trend would largly reverse instantly.
   
  That said even if rap was destroying the world (which it isn't) the system that puts millions and millions in jail often for very minor crimes, not to mention the brilliance that is three strike laws where in theory three bounced checks could get you life in jail has created the enviroment that takes parents from children.

• Fallyn said on Jul 17, 2008....

  when i was living in colorado i ran into teachers there that treated the hispanic kids like second class citizens regardless of whether or not they could speak english.
  racism in that environment was rampant.
  i don't know about other places but in that area at least most people think that all hispanics are illegal and treat them as such
  

• D6fer said on Jul 17, 2008....

  sean....you are absolutely right about the switch thing....what does that tell us?
  
  you are wrong about rap.....I should clarify.....gangsta rap.....there is a race war brewing.....they even rap about it.
  
  maybe the millions of people committing minor crimes should quit committing them....wouldn't that be a better solution than letting them off the hook, thereby making the laws they are breaking non existent and then the next lower rung of laws take their place as being "no big deal"
  

• D6fer said on Jul 17, 2008....

  Ed.....so you have never heard of all those stinking 60's hippies and their beloved freedom of speech? and it's perverted translation? btw....they are pretty much running this country today....the ACLU is loaded with them and their demon offspring.....pissing on the flag, religion, and the rights of those who choose to be religious. (I don't even attend church, but I will defend those who do)

• brit said on Jul 18, 2008....

  Is there a definition of liberalism that is not biased? Just thought I'd point that out mr d6!

• silverwhisper said on Jul 18, 2008....

  d6: "they're running this country"? i'm sorry, but what demographic voted our failure of a president into office a second time? give me a break, d6!
  
  brit: it's very hard to define either liberalism or conservatism, b/c you kind of have to define both of them to go anywhere, i've always felt, and neither are easy to define.
  
  ed

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 18, 2008....

  D6, the fact is that gansta rap claiming there is a race war is of only slightly more significance than the Godfather and Goodfellas claiming that Italians are gonna put horse heads in your bed.  They don't and can't create the culture they are merely commenting on it.
   
  For starters when you start talking about people serving years in jail for being caught with a bong we're outo f line to begin with.  But it falls under one of those times when you need to serioiusly look at the outcome of your actions, noble though they may be, and look at the end result.  These people get caught smoking a joint are thrown in jail for years forced to interact with REAL criminals are often abandoned by friends and family get back out can't get a real job and have a lot of criminal contacts and thus become real criminals.  In a perfect world we wouldn't have welfare or social security.  You'd be your own responsibility your entire life.  Reality is that a lack of SS and retirement plans keeps old people working and once they've reached the top the new guys can't make it because there is no room at the top.  The reality is that many people will steal when feeding themselves becomes an issue.  You can't let your poor get beyond a certain point because then they get violent.  I could go on and on but the reality here is you need to look at the result and see if the result is good.
   
  I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that hippies rrun the country. 

• silverwhisper said on Jul 19, 2008....

  cuz he hates hippies and sees them everywhere, sean.
  
  ed

• D6fer said on Jul 19, 2008....

  ed......they are now called "professors" and "psychiatrists" and "Journalists" and "teachers" and "lawyers" and yes even "politicians" but make no mistake about it, they are still here....and they are providing us with all of the political correctness we can stomach.
  
  Sean......It takes about 7 arrests for car theft, before they throw a thief n jail for any real length of time.....I find it hard to believe that they are going to lock someone up for having a joint, unless they have some prior offense......our prisons are overcrowded and people with much worse crimes are being set free prematurely.
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 19, 2008....

  No our prisons are jammed with druggies, and there are a few other people who actually deserve to be in there.  http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm  A little over one in five is in jail simply for drug related charges though the first few sites I've dug up aren't specific other than they weren't violent.  Thanks to three strikes law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_strikes_law there is no way you were convincted of stealing cars 7 times before you got put away for ever.  You might even have gotten unlucky and not really been that bad a guy.

• D6fer said on Jul 19, 2008....

  I didn't say they were convicted for stealing cars 7 times.....I am saying they were picked up for it....there is a big difference.

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 19, 2008....

  Ok fair enough.  Still our current law system is assinine.  (and I'm pro-capital punishment.  If anything I would abolish life without parole as both overly cruel and more than that pointless.)

• D6fer said on Jul 19, 2008....

  btw......I don't consider 20% of the prison population "jamming" and that number is down from 22% in 1995
  
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 20, 2008....

  I think prison should pretty much be exclusive to people who are violent, and or theives.  Also this number doesn't reflect people who went to jail for drugs, got out, couldn't get a job and went back for other charges which is quite common.

• stopmediabias said on Jul 20, 2008....

  Sean-I think prisons are a joke today, we keep adding more laws and adding more time, when they should lower the time & bring prisons back to punishment facilities instead of summer camps.  If some asshole gets caught with heroine and he has to do a year on brutal chain-gang I think somehow he's gonna get clean and learn his lesson.

  It is the same with schools, we have politically correct schools, and schools that have ridiculous things like tenure.  Schools should challenge not patronize.

  I don't think any race is any smarter than any other.  IMO I think it's environment, upbringing, and quality of teachers.

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 20, 2008....

  The only part I disagree with is that a guy on heroine should go to jail.  If the only person you hurt with your actions is yourself, and the only person youre likely to hurt is yourself then you shouldn't do time.  So driving under the influence (or anything) still qualifies as something you should go to jail for but you shouldn't  go to jail at all for say sitting out on your lawn and and smoking a joint.

• D6fer said on Jul 20, 2008....

  supply and demand....that is how business works.....even illegal business.....if there is no deterrent to the demand side, then it will only increase.

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 21, 2008....

  The problem is that your right.  It is a supply and demand problem and since policeman often become police man there is a pretty large block of interest to keep prisons packed and more opening.

• silverwhisper said on Jul 21, 2008....

  d6: yes, and of course it's only hippies who've gone on to do those things. right. gotcha.
  
  d6world must be a very, very strange place: it's so different from this one. :>
  
  ed

• stopmediabias said on Jul 21, 2008....

  I think government over does it when they determine what should be illegal, they don't update our laws as often as they should.  Such is the case with marijuana. 

   

• silverwhisper said on Jul 21, 2008....

  [blinks]
  
  omg...smb, i actually agree with you without having to issue any kind of disclaimer or qualification!
  
  [checks to see if the 6 other seals have been broken]

• D6fer said on Jul 21, 2008....

  Sean....I almost agree with you there....but for me it is lawyers and judges.....I see it as a criminal justice industry.....not a system.
  
  If I were supreme leader and made all of the rules, we would bring back hard labor.....cities and counties would be allowed as many prisoners needed to do whatever needs to be done.....litter control.....weeding......fixing roads.....whatever.
  They would pay the prisons 4 or 5 bucks an hour for the workers, that would offset some expense for the prisons as well as provide cheap labor for the taxpayers.
  
  I would erect tent cities surrounded by fences with razor wire, dogs , guards...........anyone convicted of any crime would spend at least the first 30 days of incarceration in one of these.
  
  If you make prison miserable enough, you will have far fewer idiots going for strike three.
  
  @ ed.......those are the strong holds of liberalism.....media and education.....the ACLU......a completely liberal and anti-american organization.
  

• silverwhisper said on Jul 21, 2008....

  dude, the ACLU is a lot more than you think it is.
  
  ed

• D6fer said on Jul 21, 2008....

  oh please ed....The ACLU is the biggest waste of taxpayer dollars in the budget......why should taxpayer dollars be spent to fund such a liberal, secular humanist organization, whose prime objective seems to be beating religion out of America? We need to pull the plug!
  

• silverwhisper said on Jul 22, 2008....

  spare me your WND lunacy, d6--those clowns wouldn't recognize good reporting if it walked up & kicked 'em in the nuts.
  
  if they even have nuts.
  
  ed

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 22, 2008....

  D6, lets be honest.  You're talking about slave labor.  I'm all for it, covered it nearly two years ago when I first started on Soulcast.  I was called a racist.
   
  I'm not in disagreement that there need to be changes to prison but scaring them straight can't be the only method we HAVE to offer a path back into society and that means making a decent living.  Or else all we will accomplish is more violent criminals who would rather die (and kill cops on the way down) than return to prison which obviously isn't the goal but that would be the result.

• D6fer said on Jul 22, 2008....

  Ed......what in the article was untrue?
  
  Sean.....I see a big difference between what I propose and slave labor.....I am not talking about rounding up innocent people and forcing them into bondage......the rules are right there for everyone to choose to do right or wrong.....if they choose to do the crime, then the punishment of hard labor awaits them......I am certainly not against re-educating the prison population.....but they need to earn the privilege  to receive that education....good behavior.....hours of labor.....I could agree with a small portion of a prisoners "pay" going into a savings account that would await him upon release.
  

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 22, 2008....

  What you propose is slave labor wether a person is "rounded up" and captured, defeated in during a war, or sold off because they are unable to pay their debts slavery is still slavery.  I'm not disagreeing with your idea I'm just calling a spade a spade.
   
  I'm half and half on wether they should need to "earn" the privlege it's just like my reasoning for saying that we need welfare, its not that I approve of a free ride but I know that once you back people into a corner they become violent and that should be avoided for our good.

• D6fer said on Jul 23, 2008....

  well then I guess I am all for slavery by your definition then!
  
  I can't see rewarding for continued bad behavior......good prisoners deserve better treatment......job training....early release...etc....bad ones need to learn a lesson......I don't care how bad ass a guy thinks he is.....he can be broken down and built back up.
  

• stopmediabias said on Jul 23, 2008....

  I saw a thing on TV about an Arizona warden who makes his prisoners wear pink underwear, live in tents in the Arizona heat, and work in a chain gang.  They say he runs one of the toughest prisons in the country.
   
  There was an article on CNN about it:
  http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Southwest/10/29/chain.gang.reut/
   
  Surprising it says 60% return after they leave and it also says critics of the prison say their is no evidence this stuff is a deterrent.  I agree with the prison (the pink underwear is a little weird) and find it hard to believe it has a return rate of 60%.  I can't imagine it being that high, this prison is like hell.

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 23, 2008....

  They are unable to rejoin society after that point, they have a prison record and can't get hired any more.  And again it's really scary to see how many of these people are just druggies, even if you take the lowest estimate which is 20% that's one in five in there for hurting themselves, and the 60% return rate . . .means that a lot of people who probably did their first stretch for drugs are in there now for more violent crimes.  We put them through hell and expected them to come out clean and new instead of violent and evil.

• silverwhisper said on Jul 25, 2008....

  d6, i'll start actually reading WND links if you can prove to me that they're reporting, not the usual editorials.
  
  ed

• D6fer said on Jul 25, 2008....

  so you didn't even read it ed? If you aren't even going to read it, then why bother commenting?

• silverwhisper said on Jul 26, 2008....

  i was talking about the ACLU bit. you seem to think that we should take WND seriously and i'm pointing out that's a bad thing to think.
  
  ed

• D6fer said on Jul 27, 2008....

  do you think that WND is the only ones who feel this way ed?......this country is predominately Christian......and having their institutions under constant barrage by the ACLU does not endear the organization to them.

• silverwhisper said on Jul 28, 2008....

  except that as usual with archconservatives, esp the ones who appear to get their marching orders from talk radio, you appear completely unaware that you're missing the whole story, d6. these are just two such cases. :>
  
  d6, the world really isn't quite as black and white as you seem to think.
  
  ed

• D6fer said on Jul 29, 2008....

  keep going ed....Im sure there are hundreds more examples right?.....when you are finished then it will be my turn.
  

• silverwhisper said on Jul 29, 2008....

  pfft, all i really need is 2 examples. you insist the ACLU is "constantly barraging" christian institutions. i've just proved that you're wrong. to be constant it would have to be never-ending and exclusively attacks. that simply isn't the case.
  
  ed

• D6fer said on Jul 29, 2008....

  hmmmmm....how about the boy scouts.....christmas....the ten comandments.....marriage.......any of those ring a bell?

• SeanRenaud said on Jul 30, 2008....

  What about Boy Scouts and Marriage?
   
  What happened with Christmas is annoying touchy, same with the 10.

• silverwhisper said on Aug 01, 2008....

  d6: i'm myself a former boy scout, as surprising as that might sound. and when you come right down to it, a private organization should, IMHO, be entitled to run its operations as it sees fit. i disagree w/ the ACLU about that. so what's your specific beef re: the ten commandments or marriage? i already know the deal re: christmas.
  
  ed

• D6fer said on Aug 01, 2008....

  all of the above

• silverwhisper said on Aug 01, 2008....

  dude, c'mon: be specific.
  
  ed

• bloc said on Aug 04, 2008....

  d6 thinks the 10 commandments should be plastered on the white house, and that our democracy should become a theocracy. We can't have any of that crazy hippy freedom of speech, expression, or religion.
  
  
  Hell, while we're at it we can even force our slave labor to convert to christianity and love thy neighbor, turn the other cheek, help the poor, ... oh wait. d6 is a christian in name only and I doubt he could recite the 10 commandments from memory. But by golly, he is certain they need to be in government buildings!

• bloc said on Aug 04, 2008....

  btw sean, you made me smile with the supply and demand of the prison industry :)

• D6fer said on Aug 04, 2008....

  Our laws are based on Christian law I see no reason why they can not be displayed on courthouse grounds.

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 05, 2008....

  Same reason we don't have the Magna Carta displayed in government buildings despite the fact that much of our modern politics had it's beginings in that document.
   
  Not to mention of the laws we took from Christianity are rather self evident.  It's not like Indians, Chinese and Eskimo didn't figure out on their own that theft and murder were wrong, every civilization ever has figured that out on their own.  So just because we were founded by group A who claims that these truths come from this source than than that is wierd.

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  "Our laws are based on Christian law"
  
  
  No they aren't. One of the top christian laws is that there shall be no other gods before us. American law specifically says the exact opposite. 
  
  
  There are many other examples as well. If our laws were based on christianity then sex outside of marriage would be illegal! 

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 05, 2008....

  I gotta side with D6 here.  The overwhelming majority of our country was (and is) Christian.  To claim that Christian laws were not a huge influence on American (and Western law in general) is a folly.  Perhaps based on is the wrong terminology but that's splitting hairs.  Hell a good majority of our sex laws are clearly both Christian and draconic (and many have been overturned)

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  "To claim that Christian laws were not a huge influence on American (and Western law in general) is a folly."
  
  
  Being an influence and basing our laws on christianity are two entirely different things.
  
  
  If our laws were based on Christianity then the 10 commandments would be law. What to know the difference, look at countries that enforce sharia law. That is an example of laws based on a religion, our laws are not based on a religion.

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 05, 2008....

  Again I think your splitting hairs.  It's like saying that Romeo Must Die isn't based on Romeo and Juliet because the main charachters survive the story.  Based on and carbon copy are clearly different.  But defining a difference between based on or originating in (and I think a strong case could be made that all western laws were based on religious laws and eventually were changed) and influenced by are similar enough.

   

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  bloc.....some of the 10 commandments are law.....I didn't say that our law was based on the 10 commandments....I said they were based on Christian law......as far as the 10 commandments being displayed on courthouses, they are not displayed as law, but as art.....hasnt the ACLU went to bat for artists depicting Jesus covered in urine or feces? In public museums funded by tax dollars? 

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  @d6
  our laws are not based on christian laws. The 10 commandments are christian law!!! How many of them are american law?
  
  
  @sean
  our founding fathers specifically said that we are not a christian nation, that all religions have equal footing in american. You know christianity pretty well. Ask yourself how many christian beliefs are american law and you'll answer, not too many.
  
  
  how many of the 10 commandments are laws?
  Is sex out of marriage a crime?
  is adultery a crime?
  is porn illegal?
  is masturbation illegal?
  
  
  "Do not have any other gods before me". Is this a law?
  
  "You shall not make for yourself an idol", Is this a law?
  
  "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God", is this a law?
  
  "You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.", is this a law?
  
  "Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.", is this a law?
  
  "But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work", is this a law?
  
  "You shall not covet your neighbour’s house; you shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour", is this a law?
  
  
  Lets be real. Very few of christian rules are encoded in our laws. Please tell me which of our laws are decidedly christian and why you feel those laws are the basis of our legal system? Is our Constitution decidedly christian? The bill of rights? 

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  The U.S. Congress officially recognized the Noahide Laws in legislation which was passed by both houses. Congress and the President of the United States, George Bush, indicated in Public Law 102-14, 102nd Congress, that the United States of America was founded upon the Seven Universal Laws of Noah, and that these Laws have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization. They also acknowledged that the Seven Laws of Noah are the foundation upon which civilization stands and that recent weakening of these principles threaten the fabric of civilized society, and that justified preoccupation in educating the Citizens of the United States of America and future generations is needed. For this purpose, this Public Law designated March 26, 1991 as Education Day, U.S.A.

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  wrong again. Again, most of these are NOT american law
  
  
  1. Prohibition of Idolatry: You shall not have any idols before God.
  2. Prohibition of Murder: You shall not murder. (Genesis 9:6)
  3. Prohibition of Theft: You shall not steal.
  4. Prohibition of Sexual Promiscuity: You shall not commit adultery.
  5. Prohibition of Blasphemy: You shall not blaspheme God's name.
  6. Prohibition of Cruelty to Animals: Do not eat flesh taken from an animal while it is still alive. (Genesis 9:4)
  7. Requirement to have just Laws: You shall set up an effective judiciary to enforce the preceding six laws fairly.

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  @sean
  
  
  Allow me to lay out my argument in clear terms.
  
  
  1. The core legal foundation of the US is the Constitution
  2. The core concepts in the Constitution are separation of powers, checks and balances, the right to free speech, religion, etc. Privacy rights, etc etc
  3. Virtually NONE of the concepts laid out in the Constitution are core christian teachings. 
  4. The core christian teaching are the 10 commandments
  5. Most of the 10 commandments are NOT american law
  
  
  conclusion: american law is not based on christianity.
  
  
  Please tell me which of my premises are false, or why you don't think my conclusion follows from the premises I laid out.

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  the 102nd Congress said so 102 to 14
  
  so you are wrong
  

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  the 102nd congress didn't found our nation and most of the seven laws are NOT american law. Please tell me which of my premises are false or why my conclusion doesn't follow from the premises.

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  let me ask you a question......If a man lead a perfect Christian life, could have he broken any laws?

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 05, 2008....

  Yes. Granted I haven't red Leviticus cover to cover recently but I'd be willing to wager that neither vandalism nor many cyber laws are covered.  I can't think of anything covering privacy specifically either. 

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  It has been said that “No proper estimate has been made of the effects of Christianity on English law, but there is no shadow of doubt that it was far-reaching.” Our legal system was formed and developed over centuries under the dominating influence of the Christian religion. The ideals and standards of justice that informed our law were derived largely either from the Bible directly or from ancient pre-Christian institutions that have been so completely transformed under the influence of the church that the original pre-Christian practices from which they originate are no longer discernible in the Christianised forms in which we know them. Our very concepts of justice, due process and the rule of law are Christian ideals that we should never have known had the Christian faith not taken root in this land and transformed the nation from a pagan into a civilised society.   source

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  "If a man lead a perfect Christian life, could have he broken any laws?"
  
  
  of course, but the question is meaningless. If a person leads a perfect buddhist life (there probably isn't such a thing) could he be a model citizen? this doesn't mean american law is based on buddhism.

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  sean.....wouldn't you consider vandalism a form of theft? If your property is vandalized it loses value right? Or costs you money to repair.

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 05, 2008....

  D6, I'm mostly on your side here.  I gotta call that a stretch.  Don't get me wrong if I'd found the guy who hit my car. . .well I'd be hoping he couldn't ID me in a line up right now but there is a clear difference between spray painting a wall and stealing.  Just like I wouldn't consider hacking theft.  I haven't looked up the dictionary definition, but I wouldn't consider destruction of property as theft.

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  @d6
  that quote is pure conjecture with nothing to back it up.
  
  
  "due process and the rule of law are Christian ideals that we should never have known had the Christian faith not taken root"
  
  
  This is demonstrably false. Due process and rule of law exist in many societies that are not Christian.
  
  
  Again I ask, which of my premises are false or why doesn't my conclusion follow from the premises?

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  What impact has Christianity had on the law from its beginnings to the present day? This introduction explores the main legal teachings of Western Christianity, set out in the texts and traditions of scripture and theology, philosophy and jurisprudence. It takes up the weightier matters of the law that Christianity has profoundly shaped – justice and mercy, rule and equity, discipline and love - as well as more technical topics of canon law, natural law, and state law. Some of these legal creations were wholly original to Christianity. Others were converted from Jewish and classical traditions. Still others were reformed by Renaissance humanists and Enlightenment philosophers. But whether original or reformed, these Christian teachings on law, politics and society have made and can continue to make fundamental contributions to modern law in the West and beyond.   source

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  bloc....you seem to be clinging to the idea that I think that all law is based in religion, and that all 10 commandments are law.....i never said that......i am saying that are laws have heavy Christian influence........that influence has many commonalities with other religions....so what?
  

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  The enlightenment was a far greater influence on our laws than christianity and it was a very secular movement. 

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  saying things like "our laws are based on christian laws" gives a far different impression, and implies many things, that are not implied by something like "a bunch of stuff influenced our laws include the enlightment, christianity, deism, etc". 
  
  
  
  

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  a challenge

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

  We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

  He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

  He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

  He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

  He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

  He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

  He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

  He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

  He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

  He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

  He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

  He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

  He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

  He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

  For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

  For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

  For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

  For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

  For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

  For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

  For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

  For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

  For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

  He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

  He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

  He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

  He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

  He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

  In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

  Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

  We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

          This day I trust the reign of political protestantism will commence We have explored the temple of royalty and found that the idol we have bowed down to has eyes which see not ears that hear not our prayers and a heart like the nether millstone We have this day restored the Sovereign to whom alone men ought to be obedient He reigns in Heaven and with a propitious eye beholds his subjects assuming that freedom of thought and dignity of self direction which He bestowed on them From the rising to the setting sun may His kingdom come  .....Samuel Adams

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  what's fascinating is that the parts in bold have nothing to do with christianity. They specifically worded it to NOT be christian. This has been well documented. I also find it interesting that you didn't bold the "nature" part of "nature's God". 
  
  
  Does the Bible ever refer to God as Nature's God? There is a reason they chose these precise words.

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  On October 3, 1789, recognizing “the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God,” Pres. Washington declared a national day of thanksgiving and prayer thanking God for His "many signal favors," including the Constitution.

• bloc said on Aug 05, 2008....

  "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"
  
  
  Please tell me which part of the Bible this central peace of american foundation comes from?

• D6fer said on Aug 05, 2008....

  In A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), Thomas Jefferson wrote, “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.”

• stopmediabias said on Aug 06, 2008....

  Interesting debate,

  The one thing I see here, and I probably lean closer to D6's side, is when talking about Christianity as far as its affects on our laws, it is difficult because it is mixing religion with our legal system.  On the other hand, the founders of our country and the writers of our laws were profoundly affected by a belief in a higher power. 

  I found this also interesting:

   "1. The core legal foundation of the US is the Constitution

  2. The core concepts in the Constitution are separation of powers, checks and balances, the right to free speech, religion, etc. Privacy rights, etc etc

  3. Virtually NONE of the concepts laid out in the Constitution are core christian teachings. 
  4. The core christian teaching are the 10 commandments
  5. Most of the 10 commandments are NOT american law"
   
  In the context of this debate this is stretching it.  #1-The Constitution is an outline of our rights as free citizens not a legal foundation, it tells is what we have, not what we can and cannot do.  #2-I agree.  #3-Basic American law was founded on principles that come from the Christian bible.(Murder, Theft, Lieing, assault)  But to also make a broad statement like "our laws are based on Christian law" goes to far.  #4-The ten comm. tell us what we should never do, not what we are suppose to or should do so they are not technically the core of Christian teachings.  #5-The ten comm. are obsolete and many of them were the law and are still today.
   
  So IMO I think you are both right and both wrong in a sense.  The problem in our society is having the ten comm post somewhere, saying "under God", or having the word God on our money, or a Christmas tree in a town building lobby is NOT-"making a law respecting the establishment of religion."  Groups like the ACLU pin every expression of religion or God as the government make such a law.
   
   
   
   

• bloc said on Aug 06, 2008....

  @d6
  you realize that jefferson wasn't talking about the same god as you don't you? He was a deist.

• D6fer said on Aug 06, 2008....

  lol....you are splitting hairs there....i did not know that, but I'll take your word for it......there are many more examples of religious influence on our government.

• bloc said on Aug 06, 2008....

  i do not dispute the religious influence. I'm just saying that it wasn't a specifically biblical influence and our government was set up to NOT be the extension of any specific religious group or ideology. 

• D6fer said on Aug 06, 2008....

  fair enough.....but my original argument against the ACLU in the case of the removal of the artwork depicting the 10 commandments still stands.....this was merely that....artwork....with historical significance....They are a vile liberal organization that does not equally support the people that fund it.

Comment on "Are Asians smarter than Latinos?"

Currently tagged	education Latinos asians race learning right is right prisons schools (Click to add tags below)
Tag this post	(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)
Your comment
	Comment Anonymously