As you know Rob, I completely agree.

Somehow, these guys need to learn to leave religion out of politics. I’m going to try to get Hennen to address this on his show this week before the Tea Party on Thursday. I’m sure he’ll blow it off like last time.

Nice backstabbing, Rob; you obviously have the support of the lefties here. In fact, you are not excluded, as nothing you have cut and pasted contains any mention of exclusion for not being in agreement with that one provision that bothers you so much. This is nothing resembling “the Taliban”, as lying little buzzy says; it’s a statement of faith, and you choose to exclude yourself from it. It is obviously your freedom to exclude yourself from that, and no penalty is mentioned for that. You mistake an assertion for a command, something you do regularly, I notice.

someone

While it is incredibly distasteful to Rob and his anti-Christian pals at SAB like Buzzard, he (Rob) who at times and only when when convenient, appears to have some degree of respect for our Constitution, forgets that our National Charter, The Declaration of Independence contains these words:

“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.

It also contains a clear, national recognition of Nature’s God in all of our affairs. That charter, drafted by Jefferson, was our formal declaration of the principles upon which this nation was to be founded. The United States Constitution then enshrined those precious principles into Law, the LAW of this land. The basic goal of that Charter and our Constitution was to recognize a national dependence upon Almighty God as the sole Guarantor of our Liberty.

Now Rob and Buzzard and others would like to expunge Nature’s God from our National Charter, which is their right; that is, if and only if they Amend our Constitution to say that none of our laws are to in anyway reflect God’s Law and to say that our nation chooses not to recognize Him as the sole Guarantor of our Liberty.

Buzzard is deliberately, consciously engaging in lies when he in any way, shape, manner or form relates Christianity, its aims or methods to the Taliban. There has never been any movement to make America into a theocracy, to impose Christain priciples on anyone, or to annihilate or harm anyone. In matter of fact, he is describing Islam NOT Christianity.

On the other hand, like his fellow traveler Rob, he wants to deny Christians the right to prefer, support and only vote for political candidates and government appointees that share their Christian beliefs; and to try, through them, to influence our laws to conform to our Judeo-Christian moral beliefs. Unfortunately, IMO Rob and Buzzard believe the First Amendment means people have the right to worship, only in quiet, in their homes and churches and otherswise keep their mouths shut and get the hell out of the public square. Well, that is NOT what our Founding Father’s wanted and so they (Rob, Buzzard, et al) should at least have the guts to call for a Constitutional Convention and there modify the First Amendment to reflect their anti-Christian hatred.

In my opinion Rob is much worse and much more dangerous than Buzzard. Why? He pretends to have a toleration of Christianity, while out the other side of his mouth he constantly beats the drum for Christians to get the hell out of politics, the Republican Party and the Conservative movement. At least Buzzard is honest in his hate and does not want to tolerate Christians in America at all.

Even if you do NOT believe in God, your government has foundational roots in Christianity.

Our core principles root in the Judeo Christian ideals of responsibility and charity.

Even if you struggle with a deity at any level, He doesn’t struggle with you. He is who he is or isn’t regardless of what you do or don’t believe.

So, even if you don’t acknowledge his presence of believe in him, the bulk of people who believe most everything else you do will say at least at a nominal level they are believers.

It is a cohesion. You are just part of a greater whole. If you embrace that even if you don’t confess it you do no harm.

Trying to take God out of the equitation reduces cohesion. And that’s not good.

Rob makes his usual logical error when dealing with some subjects: assuming the opposite. He assumes, as did KKK member Justice Hugo Black, that professing one’s faith is the same as excluding everyone else. It’s not.

neiman, those men owned slaves, so we should own slaves?

You say rob is the worst type of conservative, I say you are the worst type of christian, those who hate and despise any who do not walk lock step with you.

Jesus laid with whores to save their soles, you try to save no one, only curse and damn them.

…those who hate and despise any who do not walk lock step with you.

A very accurate description of you and all the rest of your little a-hole shouter leftie buddies on this blog, little buzzy.
Yet another Freudian slip from you.

those men owned slaves, so we should own slaves?

……..would not Obama care, with a full intrusion into daily Indiv decisions be much worse?…..

I will soon be made to fear what I utterly failed to detect

Yet Beck’s 9/12 project would seem to explicitly exclude me, an ardent proponent of limited government, from the limited government movement.

Rob, obviously you don’t listen to Glenn Beck very much. When he started the 9/12 project Glenn Beck said repeatedly that anyone who agreed with at least 6-7 principles were welcome. So you don’t agree with one. That leaves 8 left and thus you haven’t been excluded from anything. Nice try at attacking Glenn for no reason though.

neiman, those men owned slaves, so we should own slaves?

The Democrat Party have plenty of slaves on their Welfare Plantation. It was a Republican president and Republicans then and in the Sixties that ended slavery and produced civil rights in this country. I should point out that our National Charter DOES NOT call for slavery, but declares all men are created equal. Anyway, it was a really stupid question.

I say you are the worst type of christian, those who hate and despise any who do not walk lock step with you.

(a) Nice that you can read my mind and tell me that I hate anyone. (b) Maybe you can point me to anytime I have expressed hatred of anyone? I do admit I hate evil, but I hate no person. (c) When and where have I demanded anyone walk in lock-step with me? Please be specific!

Or, can we say everything you accused me of cannot be proven and you are therefore a LIAR?

Jesus laid with whores to save their soles, you try to save no one, only curse and damn them.

1. That is utter blasphemy! Jesus never “laid” with anyone in a sexual context. He was free from all sins of the flesh! Yet, you cannot pass up the opportunity to project your filthy lifestyle on the the Lord, because of your own hatred for Him because as long as He exists, your sins remain on you and in you.

2. Why did Jesus try and save the soles of their feet?

3. When and where did I curse or damn anyone? Please provide quotes, dates, times, post headings.

4. You think saving people involves saccharine, sugary sweet language; but might I remind you that John the Baptist called people snakes and adulterers and otherwise forcefully exposed their sins that they might see their need for a Savior. So did the Lord! Not that I compare myself to them nor am free from flaws in my approach. Yet, how will people seek a physician unless first they are made aware they are desperately sick?

I understand your anger and need to strike out at me, no one feels good when their beliefs and actions are opposed. While I tried to deal in facts, you ran to the guter and skimmed up lies and filth to spew out.

He didn’t exclude anyone, Rob! You just do your usual logical fallacy of “assuming the opposite”. Affirming one’s faith doesn’t exclude others, and Glenn made no statements of exclusion. BTW, since our Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, no one is excluded. You seem eager to stab Republicans and conservatives in the back if they don’t subscribe to your narrow ideology.
It’s unfortunate, especially when the threat from the left has never been greater.

So if I don’t believe in god, and if god isn’t the “center” of my life, I’m not part of Beck’s movement.

I am shocked that anyone of your considerable intelligence can say anything so incredibly stupid and so wholly disconnected from reality. It has been pointed out to you over and over, wherein even you should have gotten the point by now that, he only suggested that if people can agree with 7 of 9 points, they still should be able to work together. You reject #2, so you are still far within the margin and in no way excluded; EXCEPT you want to DEMAND that a belief in God be removed from his list if your would deign to lower yourself and work with these people in furtherance of the other 8 points. That is extremism and rigidity based on hatred of the very idea there may be God.

Let us finally be clear, let there be no doubts, this proves once and for all that, you really have ZERO TOLERANCE for people that believe in God and because of that fact, you choose not to work with them, even if all your other goals are the same. That is why you have often told them to shut up about social-moral issues, or else you and YOUR Party and Movement can damn well do without them, right? It appears that yours is not a benign, tolerant atheism at all, but really a militant atheistic opposition to people of faith.

This my friend is cutting off your conservative nose just to spite your atheistic face! Just a tad STUPID!

Neiman, I tolerate your belief in your god. Why can’t you tolerate my lack of belief?

The problem is Rob, absent any malice or acrimony on my part, despite the way you approach the matter of people of faith, by your infrequent words to the contrary, I DO NOT believe you are tolerant of others belief in God at all. In what appears to me to be your intransigent and bitter opposition to Beck’s List, despite his assertions that no complete agreement with every item is required, is seems to me to be a pattern of your responses that, I honestly believe, betrays a deep seated hatred of Christians.

Oh, and it is inaccurate that I or any Conservative Christian do not only tolerate your atheist non-beliefs, but respect your right to be an atheist. What is in question here is not any intolerance on my part, but your pattern of words betraying, what appears to me to be, an intolerance of people of faith on your part, your infrequent denials notwithstanding.

This does not imply any lack of respect for you, your intellect, integrity or conservative values in any shape, manner or form. It is solely a desire for transparency on your part, an honest admission that you really are not very tolerant of people of faith at all.

Did Glenn Beck rape and murder a young girl in 1990?

Answer here.

Swing and a miss.

Sorry and nice try at using the religion card.

I doubt you are a tea party participant in good standing since you have zero facts about the 9 – 12 project.

So now in order to be part of the tea party movement I have to be a Glenn Beck disciple?

No at all, just assumed it since you are intentionally stating incorrectly that the 9 – 12 project requires a belief in god.

So if I don’t believe in god, and if god isn’t the “center” of my life, I’m not part of Beck’s movement.

No your not part of the 9 -12 movement because you choose not to be.

“We surround them.
At the origin of America, our Founding Fathers built this country on 28 powerful principles. These principles were culled from all over the world and from centuries of great thinkers. We have distilled the original 28 down to the 9 basic principles.
So, how do we show America what’s really behind the curtain? Read The 9 Principles . If you believe in at least seven of them, then we have something in common.
Welcome.”
http://www.the912project.com/2009/03/24/mission-statement-2/

What I don’t understand is why we can’t replace #2 with “I believe in the freedom of everyone to believe what they want when it comes to religion.”

Because that’s what the constitution says.

The constitution also has the right to free speech. That’s why you can’t replace number 2.

You a very confused but if you want to be a “Tea party Member in good standing” that spreads lies , fakes exclusionism, and wants to re-write or suppress speech you don’t agree with then be my guest.

However you are not in my estimation and not because you don’t believe in god.

How does one get this uncomfortable in their own skin anyway?

Rob feels excluded, because one of the tenants of Beck’s 9/12 movement is a belief in God. I fail to see how that’s stabbing anyone in the back, or destroying the Christian tradition.

Face it, there were a lot of Christian founding fathers, but there were plenty that weren’t. Belief in limited government shouldn’t require belief in God.

Rob feels excluded, because one of the tenants of Beck’s 9/12 movement is a belief in God. I fail to see how that’s stabbing anyone in the back, or destroying the Christian tradition.

Face it, there were a lot of Christian founding fathers, but there were plenty that weren’t. Belief in limited government shouldn’t require belief in God.

No that is not what his post stated. He clearly said he was excluded from the 9 – 12 project.

Now if Rob believes that #2 of the 9 principles is something he cannot reconcile even though he need only accept 7 of them then that is what he should have said.

If he cannot be comfortable walking among people who do be believe in god then those are his demons not Glen Becks.

However my point is not that of religious beliefs but rather of truth and Rob full well knows he crossed the line of personal integrity to further his position.

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.

The founders were all to clear on where the majority stood on the issue of god and country, yet they had the compassion and farsightedness not to exclude anyone.

Would Rob have sat out the revolution based on the Declaration of Independence?

Come on…

So if I don’t believe in god, and if god isn’t the “center” of my life, I’m not part of Beck’s movement.

Rob once again you lie. I posted where Glenn says that anyone who believes in at least 7 of the principles is welcome because they have common ground. If you don’t believe in number 2, then you still believe in 8 of them, which is more than 7. Are you really bad at math or do you refuse to admit that your statement is incorrect?

The first amendment was instituted to ensure that everyone was free to practice the religion of their choosing without the government prohibiting a specific denomination of faith. The general acceptance was that the vast majority if not all of the people had some belief in a higher power and thus a need to worship as they pleased. It does not guarantee a freedom from religion, religion was at the time considered a valuable part of everyone’s life.

I remember seeing a show on the History channel a few months back that claimed that all but 3 of the signers of the constitution were verifiably people that had to swear an oath to their god (not any specific one) in order to hold their office. Of the 3 that were not verified, only one was unknown for sure as the other 2 were avid church men. Frankly I seriously doubt that any of the founders of this country could even imagine any more than a fraction of a percent of people not believing in some sort of higher power, let alone an atheist movement that is a religion unto itself.

That said, Rob, most people do not have a problem with atheists, even the hardcore Christians (Though the latter does tend to go overboard with their quest to save souls). What they do have a problem with are the anti-theists. A very vocal subset of atheism is so adamantly opposed to the idea of a higher power that they demand that all religion is removed from the public square. Not to be satisfied with just that, they openly mock religious people.

As is the case with radical Islam, a small outspoken group of radicals makes the whole group look bad. Add in the fact that the large part of the group does little to stop them, and you start seeing people have a real problem with the whole movement.

Glenn Beck and his producers were actually making fun of people claiming Rob’s deeply flawed point on the first hour of Monday’s show. lol.

Manifestly untrue; the part of the First Amendment(known as the “Establishment Clause”) specifically prohibits the establishment of a Federal religion, but does not prohibit the establishment of the several States establishing their own religions. In a display of our religious tolerance, no State has done so, even though several of the Original Thirteen Colonies were founded by specific religious groups.

Exactly! It was against a federal Christian denomination or religion as was common in Europe, which had caused many Europeans to come here, for freedom from state regulated religious worship. In fact, the only thing that scum bag Hugo Black could refer to in falsely constructing the wall of separation argument was a letter by Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists. In that letter he meant to assuage their fears concerning rumors he would establish a Federal Church, so to make them feel better he spoke in one damn sentence about a wall of separation and Hugo Black used it to kick God out of the public square.

Neiman, I tolerate your belief in your god. Why can’t you tolerate my lack of belief?

This nation is founded upon the notion that we are granted inalienable rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, from God.

Those are truths I hold to be self-evident. If you want to believe they come from God that’s fine by me. But I fail to see why I have to believe in God to be part of the movement.

Far be it from me to force my beliefs on anyone – those people have to live (and die) according to their beliefs. And, conversely, I resent those with opposing views to try to force them on me. If people would live by the Golden Rule, our world would be in much better shape.

I agree, which is why I don’t understand why belief in god is part of Beck’s rules for being part of the limited government movement.

I’m not saying that we should take god out of the movement. If you want to believe, go right ahead. Just don’t set it out as a hurdle I have to jump over to participate.

Sorry and nice try at using the religion card.

I doubt you are a tea party participant in good standing since you have zero facts about the 9 – 12 project.

So now in order to be part of the tea party movement I have to be a Glenn Beck disciple?

Honestly, worshiping Beck like the left worships Obama isn’t going to get us anywhere.