now ?...really...for me...the memories of my childhood...through my teens...and into my 20's...was a glorious time for me...like I've said before...we were alive when we were young...now we just live...ohhhhhhhhh for the 50's... ....lol

Well im sorry for the misunderstanding. As I said if you knew me you too would find it funny. All Im trying to say people have fond memories of times in their life's. Those same times might not be fond for all. I was not alive in the fifties. Yes the sixties seen a lot of turmoil for a lot of people but some still have fond memories of that time. Some of our children will have fond memories of the last 8 yrs. Personally I will not but I will not take those memories away from them. It seems we are being unfair to Gio for having fond memories of a time in his life. Just because he does doesn't take away from those who dont. We all live different lives and have different circumstances that affect those life's. So if Gio wants to remember the fifties as good times why does anyone want to take that away from him. Im sure you have had good times in your life while others struggled just to get by. Do you having those memories make it wrong. No!

Red brings up some excellent points in the post on I think page two of this thread.

The Code of Hammurabi is acknowledged as influencing our law. These were not however the earliest laws and if you study abit you will find a nod to earlier law in his code. Hammurabi says these directives were sent to him from Sumerian gods.

There you have it. A ruler making mention of God or Gods and implying he has authority over the common man bestowed on him by the greatest authority, the gods, those unseen and powerful entities who could cause drought or rains, who could cause their crops and animals to thrive or die, who could punish or protect the mere mortal.

Enter the bogey man...he's still with us today.

Authority based on divine direction!

Who could argue eh? You better follow the law as pronounced by this ruler or surely you will be struck down by the gods.

Superstitious people who cowered at the mysteries of the world must have been fairly impressed eh?

Since then many rulers have asserted that they derive if not their power then their direction from the divine. Some still do...

This sort of thing worked out well for many rulers, despots, kings and others who sought to maintain power and control populations by asserting divine direction. They directed armies, controlled resources, demanded tribute...you all know the story right?

You can't maintain that sort of control over people without also keeping people scared and ignorant of alternatives.

Now of course I am over simplifying but I hope you get my point here. The powerful, asserting divine authority, controlling resources and information and maintaining it was for the good of the people.

Fast forward...

Along comes the age of enlightenment. When by no coincidence education becomes more widespread.

People started to question the bogey man approach and instead began to discuss the idea that authority should be based in reason.

Imagine how scary that was for those who had for generations upon generations had maintained their influence and power over the rabble??

Basing government, society and law upon reason and not divine authority?? Wow, if we allow people to do that our power base might be threatened.

Our founders knew those authorities well and sought to embrace reason and reject the authority of sovereigns and churches. This is very clear in the letters and other writings of the founders. Were they men or faith? There is little doubt but they were also men of reason.

What a concept eh?

Authority based in reason and not sent down by the gods??

I am not addressing you nor was I ever however. I was speaking in general terms so if you define yourself as a conservative, right wing Christian than my comment would have applied directly to you.

woohoooooooo...

More people need to read this instead of worrying about what Gio or I think of times that were good. Thx for sharing it Lets get back on topic!!

Since I was only 1 in the 50's, I can't say they were my best years. I don't see how Gio can say it either. He's 5 yrs. older then me. Actually, I've like all of the years.

I see a lot of negatives in the 50's though.

OMG, I see it clearly now. You loved your childhood, teens, and 20's. Then....you had to grow up. That's why you liked it so much back then.

But...he was only 5 yrs. old and under in the 50's.

exactly...well...kind of sort of...lol

Lynann,

Thank you for the compliment.

The Truth of the matter is that a society's Moral fiber is based upon the ethics, spirituality (view of the divine), and traditions of the community.

It is ironic that that in this society where we value religious freedom there seems to exist a double standard. That being: yes, you can have your freedom as long you agree with me. Because of that different religious groups and non-religious groups believe their agenda is correct.

This is never more true then in the attempt of the Separation of Church and State. History is full of examples where this has not been the case. For example the Utah Territory was not allowed to become a state until the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints outlawed polygamy. Then there is the hypocrisy of the treatment of Native Americans. Rather than learning about their Spirituality they were often forced to deny their culture, their belief, and their language.

But then God, Gold, and Glory were powerful motivators for the early explorers. Not to mention this nation belief in Manifest Destiny. Which conscientiously or unconscientiously is still an aspect of our foreign policy.

As an educator I am aware that there are students who for religious reasons do not believe in saying the Pledge of Allegiance. To respect their beliefs they are given the option - step out of the room during the Pledge or simply stand. To date I have not had a student or a parent complain about this.

The tension between the Separation of Church and State is going to continue to exist. For it includes ethics and respect of others.

Will future decisions make everyone happy? Probably not.

Do we need to continue to have open and honest dialogue? Definitely yes.

Is there no pleasing you? I have went out of my way to explain what I said. What she posted is not off topic if you go back before all this crap start about Gio. You just keep the argument going. Hey everyone I am a right wing nut job! That is diffently shown in all my posts. Its way obvious I dont support gay rights, abortion should be band, the goverment should have final say in our schools!!!!!!!!!! I have misled you all from the begining. Im some sick freak that enjoys lying about his views so I can manupulate yours. I havnt made that clear to you all. I think GWB is the best president since slice bread!!!! I give up. What do you want out of me. These forms are getting to the point you cant say anything without it being twisted around. What is dam funny from what I have read that you posted we agree on a lot. So lets all contiue to worry about my friend Gio. Hell theres nothing else to worry about. I sorry no one agrees with my views so I guess I will quit posting... Sorry Im Fnnn

Oh stop it. I told you that my comment was not directed at you and you yourself said it was I told you that my comment would only apply to you if in fact you did consider yourself a "right wing conservative Christian". I dont know how else to explain this to you. Shall I try interpretive dance?

do you have rhythm ?...this I've got to see !...

Alright, enough already. Back on topic any day now boys.

I give you the floor...if not for dancin'...then for whatever you have on your cheast...no pun intended...gulp !!...

One of the most common statements from the "Religious Right" is that they want this country to "return to the Christian principles on which it was founded". However, a little research into American history will show that this statement is a lie. The men responsible for building the foundation of the United States had little use for Christianity, and many were strongly opposed to it. They were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were Deists who did not believe the bible was true.

When the Founders wrote the nation's Constitution, they specified that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." (Article 6, section 3) This provision was radical in its day-- giving equal citizenship to believers and non-believers alike. They wanted to ensure that no single religion could make the claim of being the official, national religion, such as England had. Nowhere in the Constitution does it mention religion, except in exclusionary terms. The words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution-- not once.

The Declaration of Independence gives us important insight into the opinions of the Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the power of the government is derived from the governed. Up until that time, it was claimed that kings ruled nations by the authority of God. The Declaration was a radical departure from the idea of divine authority.

duly noted...I'll settle...for just plain old principles...

You wanted to get back on topic so....take her away big boy. You brainiac you.