Re: SANTORUM: SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE 'MAKES ME WANT TO THROW UP'

I am a "xian" and I do NOT get excited or give a rats ass about British Royalty... Now I did have a thing for Diana,,, I thought she was hot.

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:

Huh?
---

Christianity supports the Divine Rights of Kings -- you know, King

George et al -- rather than Natural Rights as noted in the Declaration
of Independence

more proof that religion is not something we want in our government

have you noticed how xians get all excited when the see british
royalty?

On Feb 29, 10:02 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> At 10:43 AM 2/29/2012, you wrote:rather than Natural Rights as noted in the Declaration of Independence
> ---
> oops!

> Huh?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 & 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 withinherent and* [certain]* inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, & 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 abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it's foundation on such principles, & organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness. Prudence indeed will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light & transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown 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 & usurpationsbegun at a distinguished period andpursuing 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, & to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; & such is now the necessity which constrains them toexpunge[alter] their former systems of government. The history of the present king of Great Britain is a history ofunremitting[repeated] injuries & usurpations,among which appears no solitary fact to contradict the uniform tenor of the rest but all have[all having]in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this let facts be submitted to a candid worldfor the truth of which we pledge a faith yet unsullied by falsehood.Legitimate Government secures (natural) rights.
> This is quite different from Divine Rights of Kings ...Romans 13:1-2 clearly forbids rebellion against the established authorities and was, moreover, written about the pagan government of the Roman Empire, which actively persecuted Christians: "Every person must submit to the supreme authorities.There is no authority but by act of God,and theexistingauthorities are instituted by him; consequently, anyone who rebels against authority is resisting a divine institution, and those who so resist have themselves to thank for the punishment they will receive." George III, it should be noted, was a Christian monarch; if Paul commanded obedience by Christians to the pagan and tyrannical Roman emperors, surely he would have demanded equal obedience by Christians to the avowedly Christian (and far less cruel or oppressive) British king and parliament.Regard$,

> --MJ
> From all which it is evident, that though the things of Nature are given in common, man (by being master of himself, and proprietor of his own person, and the actions or labour of it) had still in himself the great foundation of property; and that which made up the great part of what he applied to the support or comfort of his being, when invention and arts had improved the conveniences of life, was perfectly his own, and did not belong in common to others. -- John Locke

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.