Do MAGAs want a Christian Nation or a Free Nation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sweden, Denmark, high proportion atheist population. Not all of Europe is so religious.

Denmark is a high trust society. mostly because it is homogeneous.

https://www.helenrussell.co.uk/books/the-year-of-living-danishly/

now in the US diversity means 80% Indians in IT and a token white person.

but to progressives that is ok.

Australia, also high atheist population, also diverse.

You guys keep citing Christian countries. Where are your non-Christian examples? You know the places that never were Christian… Surely you must have at least one paradise where no one celebrates Christmas.

*Uh not really. Not if the majority of a country is atheist. It is more about FREE countries. With true religious freedom, there will probably be some celebration if Christmas and other religion holidays. We don't want forced atheism either. Just freedom.

There are very few true atheists, but a lot of lazy people that don’t want to render unto God what is God’s.

Those people can live off the fruits of their forefathers for a time, but things decay over time.

What you perhaps actually like is to live off the accumulated social capital without having to do anything yourself to maintain it. Much like some people like to live off inherited wealth without having to work hard. That certainly can be appealing.

This is why I’m poking you to name a truly non-Christian nation that meets your definition of freedom. Because such a thing cannot exist without generations of Christians doing the hard work.

DP...I didn't have to look very far because Canada is a non-Christian nation that meets my definition of freedom.

When would you say Canada became a non-Christian nation?

DP. It's in their constitution. From the founding, then.

The constitution provides for freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression. Every individual is equal under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination based on religion. The law imposes “reasonable limits” on the exercise of these religious rights only where such restrictions can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The law permits individuals to sue the government for violations of religious freedom. Federal and provincial human rights laws prohibit discrimination based on the grounds of religious belief. Civil remedies include compensation and changes to the policy or practice responsible for the discrimination.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-report-on-international-religious-freedom/canada#:~:text=The%20constitution%20provides%20for%20freedom,without%20discrimination%20based%20on%20religion.

Their Constitution dates back to 1982, not the founding btw. They were founded as a Crown Colony, and the Crown is the head of the Anglican Church. So that's 200+ years of being an officially Christian nation, and 43 of being merely culturally Christian.

Once again, you people seem to really like formerly Christian nations that are frittering away their spiritual inheritance, much like one might befriend a trust-funder who spends his parents wealth. But we all know the shirt-tails to shirt-tails story.

And I'm still waiting for an example of a free nation without a deep Christian heritage.

Yes, Canada began as its own nation -- not as a colony of the British Empire -- with the patriation of its constitution. It has been an independent country since 1982.

If you wanted its history as a colony, you should have asked for that.

Please give it up, Canada is a member of the commonwealth for goodness sake.

Yes, but as its own nation, no longer as just a colony since patriation of its Constitution in 1982.

This is not hard.

Canada was not self-determining before 1982, and now it is. When do you think the USA started its history as a nation? Back while we were still a colony of the Brits? Come on.

Behold the atheist. Got something completely wrong and is now doubling down in the most cringe inducing manner rather than admit a fault. Atheistic morality requires one to string self-serving lies together to preserve your worldview.

Thank you for illustrating to anyone on the fence what it will be like if atheists ever take control of.

Thomas Jefferson would vomit on you if he still were alive and could do it, poster.

You are nearly deranged in your misunderstanding of the intent of the primary founders of this nation. By the way, the most notable of them were deists and not Christians, and they enshrined the separation of church and state above all other precepts - which is why it is included in the very first amendment.

In fact, on his tombstone Jefferson dictated that his crafting of the Declaration and of the Virginia statute for separation of church and state be the only inscriptions, as they were the things for which he wanted to be remembered - there is no mention that he was a president of the United States.

We are NOT a Christian nation, we are a nation of laws based in enlightenment principles.

Preach. Blow their mind and tell them that the whole Judeo-Christian thing is a myth.

[Anonymous]

Doesn't matter what they want, they are ending up with neither.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This White House document about religious freedom seems self-contradictory. A free nation (and the leader thereof) should not specify that people must believe in a single creator or any creator.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/09/president-trump-champions-religious-freedom-unveils-america-prays/

Personally, I value us as a "Free nation." I am also, admittedly, an atheist. Am I still welcome in the US? Or do conservatives want religion as a litmus test for being a "true" American?

I think this is an interesting question. Historically, the USA had religous tests for state office rather than federal office.

I'm not sure what you are defining a christian nation as. Nation: a country considered as a body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular area or territory.

Arguably there is a historical "American nation", that is to say those who derive descent from the original mostly Dutch, British, and German peoples (and potentially those of African descent) who resided here who were overwhelmingly Christian, which would mean that there is a body of people united by common descent, history, culture (religion) who inhabit a particular area. That can get into a wierd/uncomfortable historical argument as to whom the posterty is that is referenced in the constitutional preamble is refering to. Is a Christian nation, a nation of which the majority of the people are Christian, or a nation within a country that has an established Christian church?

You also have to define what limits there are to freedom in general before you can have a conversation because I don't believe there has ever been an absolute to freedom in the USA, and most modern peoplek in the USA wouldn't tolerate it anyways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sweden, Denmark, high proportion atheist population. Not all of Europe is so religious.

Denmark is a high trust society. mostly because it is homogeneous.

https://www.helenrussell.co.uk/books/the-year-of-living-danishly/

now in the US diversity means 80% Indians in IT and a token white person.

but to progressives that is ok.

Australia, also high atheist population, also diverse.

You guys keep citing Christian countries. Where are your non-Christian examples? You know the places that never were Christian… Surely you must have at least one paradise where no one celebrates Christmas.

*Uh not really. Not if the majority of a country is atheist. It is more about FREE countries. With true religious freedom, there will probably be some celebration if Christmas and other religion holidays. We don't want forced atheism either. Just freedom.

There are very few true atheists, but a lot of lazy people that don’t want to render unto God what is God’s.

Those people can live off the fruits of their forefathers for a time, but things decay over time.

What you perhaps actually like is to live off the accumulated social capital without having to do anything yourself to maintain it. Much like some people like to live off inherited wealth without having to work hard. That certainly can be appealing.

This is why I’m poking you to name a truly non-Christian nation that meets your definition of freedom. Because such a thing cannot exist without generations of Christians doing the hard work.

DP...I didn't have to look very far because Canada is a non-Christian nation that meets my definition of freedom.

When would you say Canada became a non-Christian nation?

DP. It's in their constitution. From the founding, then.

The constitution provides for freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression. Every individual is equal under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination based on religion. The law imposes “reasonable limits” on the exercise of these religious rights only where such restrictions can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The law permits individuals to sue the government for violations of religious freedom. Federal and provincial human rights laws prohibit discrimination based on the grounds of religious belief. Civil remedies include compensation and changes to the policy or practice responsible for the discrimination.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-report-on-international-religious-freedom/canada#:~:text=The%20constitution%20provides%20for%20freedom,without%20discrimination%20based%20on%20religion.

Their Constitution dates back to 1982, not the founding btw. They were founded as a Crown Colony, and the Crown is the head of the Anglican Church. So that's 200+ years of being an officially Christian nation, and 43 of being merely culturally Christian.

Once again, you people seem to really like formerly Christian nations that are frittering away their spiritual inheritance, much like one might befriend a trust-funder who spends his parents wealth. But we all know the shirt-tails to shirt-tails story.

And I'm still waiting for an example of a free nation without a deep Christian heritage.

Yes, Canada began as its own nation -- not as a colony of the British Empire -- with the patriation of its constitution. It has been an independent country since 1982.

If you wanted its history as a colony, you should have asked for that.

Please give it up, Canada is a member of the commonwealth for goodness sake.

Yes, but as its own nation, no longer as just a colony since patriation of its Constitution in 1982.

This is not hard.

Canada was not self-determining before 1982, and now it is. When do you think the USA started its history as a nation? Back while we were still a colony of the Brits? Come on.

Behold the atheist. Got something completely wrong and is now doubling down in the most cringe inducing manner rather than admit a fault. Atheistic morality requires one to string self-serving lies together to preserve your worldview.

Thank you for illustrating to anyone on the fence what it will be like if atheists ever take control of.

So what is the date of the USA beginning as a nation?

You’d save everyone a lot of trouble if you looked at Wikipedia before posting.

While you’re looking at it, look at a $20 CAD bill too. You can oddly even find examples printed before 1982.

Yes, when Canada was a colony. They have not been a colony of the British Empire since 1982, but the colony did carry the name of Canada before that -- as a colony, not as a separate nation. The nation of Canada began with the patriation of their Constitution -- same as the USA.

Again, this is not hard.

Your original claim was Canada was founded in 1982 as an atheistic country. No Canadian would agree with you on either point. Canada is generally considered to have been founded in 1867.

To this day, Charles III is the head of state of Canada, and once again he is also the head of the Anglican Church. In this sense Canada is more a Christian nation than the USA.

The bigger point being is that truth is meaningless to an atheist. Words mean whatever you want them to mean in a moment. They are the “always have been at war with…” meme taken flesh.

Anyone of sufficient intelligence and historical knowledge can see where this kind of thinking leads: gulags and open graves full of people foolish enough to still believe what they were told yesterday instead of today.

When Canada was a colony, they did not determine the structure of their own government or the principles on which it was based. That is what "being a colony" means.

When they established themselves as a nation of its own, they wrote their own constitution and imbued it with religious tolerance -- very clearly, very explicitly.

Again, none of this is hard. But as much as I can explain it for you, I cannot understand it for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sweden, Denmark, high proportion atheist population. Not all of Europe is so religious.

Denmark is a high trust society. mostly because it is homogeneous.

https://www.helenrussell.co.uk/books/the-year-of-living-danishly/

now in the US diversity means 80% Indians in IT and a token white person.

but to progressives that is ok.

Australia, also high atheist population, also diverse.

You guys keep citing Christian countries. Where are your non-Christian examples? You know the places that never were Christian… Surely you must have at least one paradise where no one celebrates Christmas.

*Uh not really. Not if the majority of a country is atheist. It is more about FREE countries. With true religious freedom, there will probably be some celebration if Christmas and other religion holidays. We don't want forced atheism either. Just freedom.

There are very few true atheists, but a lot of lazy people that don’t want to render unto God what is God’s.

Those people can live off the fruits of their forefathers for a time, but things decay over time.

What you perhaps actually like is to live off the accumulated social capital without having to do anything yourself to maintain it. Much like some people like to live off inherited wealth without having to work hard. That certainly can be appealing.

This is why I’m poking you to name a truly non-Christian nation that meets your definition of freedom. Because such a thing cannot exist without generations of Christians doing the hard work.

DP...I didn't have to look very far because Canada is a non-Christian nation that meets my definition of freedom.

When would you say Canada became a non-Christian nation?

DP. It's in their constitution. From the founding, then.

The constitution provides for freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression. Every individual is equal under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination based on religion. The law imposes “reasonable limits” on the exercise of these religious rights only where such restrictions can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The law permits individuals to sue the government for violations of religious freedom. Federal and provincial human rights laws prohibit discrimination based on the grounds of religious belief. Civil remedies include compensation and changes to the policy or practice responsible for the discrimination.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-report-on-international-religious-freedom/canada#:~:text=The%20constitution%20provides%20for%20freedom,without%20discrimination%20based%20on%20religion.

Their Constitution dates back to 1982, not the founding btw. They were founded as a Crown Colony, and the Crown is the head of the Anglican Church. So that's 200+ years of being an officially Christian nation, and 43 of being merely culturally Christian.

Once again, you people seem to really like formerly Christian nations that are frittering away their spiritual inheritance, much like one might befriend a trust-funder who spends his parents wealth. But we all know the shirt-tails to shirt-tails story.

And I'm still waiting for an example of a free nation without a deep Christian heritage.

Yes, Canada began as its own nation -- not as a colony of the British Empire -- with the patriation of its constitution. It has been an independent country since 1982.

If you wanted its history as a colony, you should have asked for that.

Please give it up, Canada is a member of the commonwealth for goodness sake.

Yes, but as its own nation, no longer as just a colony since patriation of its Constitution in 1982.

This is not hard.

Canada was not self-determining before 1982, and now it is. When do you think the USA started its history as a nation? Back while we were still a colony of the Brits? Come on.

Behold the atheist. Got something completely wrong and is now doubling down in the most cringe inducing manner rather than admit a fault. Atheistic morality requires one to string self-serving lies together to preserve your worldview.

Thank you for illustrating to anyone on the fence what it will be like if atheists ever take control of.

So what is the date of the USA beginning as a nation?

You’d save everyone a lot of trouble if you looked at Wikipedia before posting.

While you’re looking at it, look at a $20 CAD bill too. You can oddly even find examples printed before 1982.

Yes, when Canada was a colony. They have not been a colony of the British Empire since 1982, but the colony did carry the name of Canada before that -- as a colony, not as a separate nation. The nation of Canada began with the patriation of their Constitution -- same as the USA.

Again, this is not hard.

Your original claim was Canada was founded in 1982 as an atheistic country. No Canadian would agree with you on either point. Canada is generally considered to have been founded in 1867.

To this day, Charles III is the head of state of Canada, and once again he is also the head of the Anglican Church. In this sense Canada is more a Christian nation than the USA.

The bigger point being is that truth is meaningless to an atheist. Words mean whatever you want them to mean in a moment. They are the “always have been at war with…” meme taken flesh.

Anyone of sufficient intelligence and historical knowledge can see where this kind of thinking leads: gulags and open graves full of people foolish enough to still believe what they were told yesterday instead of today.

What a profoundly ignorant statement. Aristotle and Socrates were writing about universal truths centuries before the birth of Christ.

Neither one was an atheist, and Socrates was basically murdered for asking too many uncomfortable questions.

After stating that “without Christ, you will not find freedom”, now you’ve moved the goalposts again to claim that it’s religion in general. Sorry, but your thesis has been debunked.

This just a few posts after you had the nerve to proclaim this:

The bigger point being is that truth is meaningless to an atheist. Words mean whatever you want them to mean in a moment. They are the “always have been at war with…” meme taken flesh.

If anyone is bending the truth here, it’s you.

If you asked Socrates, would he say he lived in a free society? Would he consider himself an atheist? Those were two claims being made that needed rebuttal.

As a matter of fact, Socrates very likely would consider himself an atheist. He turned away from myth and gods as explanations for anything, and was put on trial for impiety.

Alas, no truths can penetrate PP's armor of certainty and self-superiority. Ah, well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sweden, Denmark, high proportion atheist population. Not all of Europe is so religious.

Denmark is a high trust society. mostly because it is homogeneous.

https://www.helenrussell.co.uk/books/the-year-of-living-danishly/

now in the US diversity means 80% Indians in IT and a token white person.

but to progressives that is ok.

Australia, also high atheist population, also diverse.

You guys keep citing Christian countries. Where are your non-Christian examples? You know the places that never were Christian… Surely you must have at least one paradise where no one celebrates Christmas.

*Uh not really. Not if the majority of a country is atheist. It is more about FREE countries. With true religious freedom, there will probably be some celebration if Christmas and other religion holidays. We don't want forced atheism either. Just freedom.

There are very few true atheists, but a lot of lazy people that don’t want to render unto God what is God’s.

Those people can live off the fruits of their forefathers for a time, but things decay over time.

What you perhaps actually like is to live off the accumulated social capital without having to do anything yourself to maintain it. Much like some people like to live off inherited wealth without having to work hard. That certainly can be appealing.

This is why I’m poking you to name a truly non-Christian nation that meets your definition of freedom. Because such a thing cannot exist without generations of Christians doing the hard work.

DP...I didn't have to look very far because Canada is a non-Christian nation that meets my definition of freedom.

When would you say Canada became a non-Christian nation?

DP. It's in their constitution. From the founding, then.

The constitution provides for freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression. Every individual is equal under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination based on religion. The law imposes “reasonable limits” on the exercise of these religious rights only where such restrictions can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The law permits individuals to sue the government for violations of religious freedom. Federal and provincial human rights laws prohibit discrimination based on the grounds of religious belief. Civil remedies include compensation and changes to the policy or practice responsible for the discrimination.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-report-on-international-religious-freedom/canada#:~:text=The%20constitution%20provides%20for%20freedom,without%20discrimination%20based%20on%20religion.

Their Constitution dates back to 1982, not the founding btw. They were founded as a Crown Colony, and the Crown is the head of the Anglican Church. So that's 200+ years of being an officially Christian nation, and 43 of being merely culturally Christian.

Once again, you people seem to really like formerly Christian nations that are frittering away their spiritual inheritance, much like one might befriend a trust-funder who spends his parents wealth. But we all know the shirt-tails to shirt-tails story.

And I'm still waiting for an example of a free nation without a deep Christian heritage.

Yes, Canada began as its own nation -- not as a colony of the British Empire -- with the patriation of its constitution. It has been an independent country since 1982.

If you wanted its history as a colony, you should have asked for that.

Please give it up, Canada is a member of the commonwealth for goodness sake.

Yes, but as its own nation, no longer as just a colony since patriation of its Constitution in 1982.

This is not hard.

Canada was not self-determining before 1982, and now it is. When do you think the USA started its history as a nation? Back while we were still a colony of the Brits? Come on.

Behold the atheist. Got something completely wrong and is now doubling down in the most cringe inducing manner rather than admit a fault. Atheistic morality requires one to string self-serving lies together to preserve your worldview.

Thank you for illustrating to anyone on the fence what it will be like if atheists ever take control of.

So what is the date of the USA beginning as a nation?

You’d save everyone a lot of trouble if you looked at Wikipedia before posting.

While you’re looking at it, look at a $20 CAD bill too. You can oddly even find examples printed before 1982.

Yes, when Canada was a colony. They have not been a colony of the British Empire since 1982, but the colony did carry the name of Canada before that -- as a colony, not as a separate nation. The nation of Canada began with the patriation of their Constitution -- same as the USA.

Again, this is not hard.

Your original claim was Canada was founded in 1982 as an atheistic country. No Canadian would agree with you on either point. Canada is generally considered to have been founded in 1867.

To this day, Charles III is the head of state of Canada, and once again he is also the head of the Anglican Church. In this sense Canada is more a Christian nation than the USA.

The bigger point being is that truth is meaningless to an atheist. Words mean whatever you want them to mean in a moment. They are the “always have been at war with…” meme taken flesh.

Anyone of sufficient intelligence and historical knowledge can see where this kind of thinking leads: gulags and open graves full of people foolish enough to still believe what they were told yesterday instead of today.

When Canada was a colony, they did not determine the structure of their own government or the principles on which it was based. That is what "being a colony" means.

When they established themselves as a nation of its own, they wrote their own constitution and imbued it with religious tolerance -- very clearly, very explicitly.

Again, none of this is hard. But as much as I can explain it for you, I cannot understand it for you.

Wierdly they have taxpayer funded religous education

https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art29.html

[Anonymous]

Christian, duh

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sweden, Denmark, high proportion atheist population. Not all of Europe is so religious.

Denmark is a high trust society. mostly because it is homogeneous.

https://www.helenrussell.co.uk/books/the-year-of-living-danishly/

now in the US diversity means 80% Indians in IT and a token white person.

but to progressives that is ok.

Australia, also high atheist population, also diverse.

You guys keep citing Christian countries. Where are your non-Christian examples? You know the places that never were Christian… Surely you must have at least one paradise where no one celebrates Christmas.

*Uh not really. Not if the majority of a country is atheist. It is more about FREE countries. With true religious freedom, there will probably be some celebration if Christmas and other religion holidays. We don't want forced atheism either. Just freedom.

There are very few true atheists, but a lot of lazy people that don’t want to render unto God what is God’s.

Those people can live off the fruits of their forefathers for a time, but things decay over time.

What you perhaps actually like is to live off the accumulated social capital without having to do anything yourself to maintain it. Much like some people like to live off inherited wealth without having to work hard. That certainly can be appealing.

This is why I’m poking you to name a truly non-Christian nation that meets your definition of freedom. Because such a thing cannot exist without generations of Christians doing the hard work.

DP...I didn't have to look very far because Canada is a non-Christian nation that meets my definition of freedom.

When would you say Canada became a non-Christian nation?

DP. It's in their constitution. From the founding, then.

The constitution provides for freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression. Every individual is equal under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination based on religion. The law imposes “reasonable limits” on the exercise of these religious rights only where such restrictions can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The law permits individuals to sue the government for violations of religious freedom. Federal and provincial human rights laws prohibit discrimination based on the grounds of religious belief. Civil remedies include compensation and changes to the policy or practice responsible for the discrimination.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-report-on-international-religious-freedom/canada#:~:text=The%20constitution%20provides%20for%20freedom,without%20discrimination%20based%20on%20religion.

Their Constitution dates back to 1982, not the founding btw. They were founded as a Crown Colony, and the Crown is the head of the Anglican Church. So that's 200+ years of being an officially Christian nation, and 43 of being merely culturally Christian.

Once again, you people seem to really like formerly Christian nations that are frittering away their spiritual inheritance, much like one might befriend a trust-funder who spends his parents wealth. But we all know the shirt-tails to shirt-tails story.

And I'm still waiting for an example of a free nation without a deep Christian heritage.

Yes, Canada began as its own nation -- not as a colony of the British Empire -- with the patriation of its constitution. It has been an independent country since 1982.

If you wanted its history as a colony, you should have asked for that.

Please give it up, Canada is a member of the commonwealth for goodness sake.

Yes, but as its own nation, no longer as just a colony since patriation of its Constitution in 1982.

This is not hard.

Canada was not self-determining before 1982, and now it is. When do you think the USA started its history as a nation? Back while we were still a colony of the Brits? Come on.

Behold the atheist. Got something completely wrong and is now doubling down in the most cringe inducing manner rather than admit a fault. Atheistic morality requires one to string self-serving lies together to preserve your worldview.

Thank you for illustrating to anyone on the fence what it will be like if atheists ever take control of.

So what is the date of the USA beginning as a nation?

You’d save everyone a lot of trouble if you looked at Wikipedia before posting.

While you’re looking at it, look at a $20 CAD bill too. You can oddly even find examples printed before 1982.

Yes, when Canada was a colony. They have not been a colony of the British Empire since 1982, but the colony did carry the name of Canada before that -- as a colony, not as a separate nation. The nation of Canada began with the patriation of their Constitution -- same as the USA.

Again, this is not hard.

Your original claim was Canada was founded in 1982 as an atheistic country. No Canadian would agree with you on either point. Canada is generally considered to have been founded in 1867.

To this day, Charles III is the head of state of Canada, and once again he is also the head of the Anglican Church. In this sense Canada is more a Christian nation than the USA.

The bigger point being is that truth is meaningless to an atheist. Words mean whatever you want them to mean in a moment. They are the “always have been at war with…” meme taken flesh.

Anyone of sufficient intelligence and historical knowledge can see where this kind of thinking leads: gulags and open graves full of people foolish enough to still believe what they were told yesterday instead of today.

When Canada was a colony, they did not determine the structure of their own government or the principles on which it was based. That is what "being a colony" means.

When they established themselves as a nation of its own, they wrote their own constitution and imbued it with religious tolerance -- very clearly, very explicitly.

Again, none of this is hard. But as much as I can explain it for you, I cannot understand it for you.

Wierdly they have taxpayer funded religous education

https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art29.html

Are you pointing this out as a bug, or as a feature, and why does it matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This White House document about religious freedom seems self-contradictory. A free nation (and the leader thereof) should not specify that people must believe in a single creator or any creator.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/09/president-trump-champions-religious-freedom-unveils-america-prays/

Personally, I value us as a "Free nation." I am also, admittedly, an atheist. Am I still welcome in the US? Or do conservatives want religion as a litmus test for being a "true" American?

That's just it - they don't know what they want that's why they like a felon telling them what they should want and should not want and how to want it and how not to want it --authoritative daddy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sweden, Denmark, high proportion atheist population. Not all of Europe is so religious.

Denmark is a high trust society. mostly because it is homogeneous.

https://www.helenrussell.co.uk/books/the-year-of-living-danishly/

now in the US diversity means 80% Indians in IT and a token white person.

but to progressives that is ok.

Australia, also high atheist population, also diverse.

You guys keep citing Christian countries. Where are your non-Christian examples? You know the places that never were Christian… Surely you must have at least one paradise where no one celebrates Christmas.

*Uh not really. Not if the majority of a country is atheist. It is more about FREE countries. With true religious freedom, there will probably be some celebration if Christmas and other religion holidays. We don't want forced atheism either. Just freedom.

There are very few true atheists, but a lot of lazy people that don’t want to render unto God what is God’s.

Those people can live off the fruits of their forefathers for a time, but things decay over time.

What you perhaps actually like is to live off the accumulated social capital without having to do anything yourself to maintain it. Much like some people like to live off inherited wealth without having to work hard. That certainly can be appealing.

This is why I’m poking you to name a truly non-Christian nation that meets your definition of freedom. Because such a thing cannot exist without generations of Christians doing the hard work.

DP...I didn't have to look very far because Canada is a non-Christian nation that meets my definition of freedom.

When would you say Canada became a non-Christian nation?

DP. It's in their constitution. From the founding, then.

The constitution provides for freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression. Every individual is equal under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination based on religion. The law imposes “reasonable limits” on the exercise of these religious rights only where such restrictions can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The law permits individuals to sue the government for violations of religious freedom. Federal and provincial human rights laws prohibit discrimination based on the grounds of religious belief. Civil remedies include compensation and changes to the policy or practice responsible for the discrimination.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-report-on-international-religious-freedom/canada#:~:text=The%20constitution%20provides%20for%20freedom,without%20discrimination%20based%20on%20religion.

Their Constitution dates back to 1982, not the founding btw. They were founded as a Crown Colony, and the Crown is the head of the Anglican Church. So that's 200+ years of being an officially Christian nation, and 43 of being merely culturally Christian.

Once again, you people seem to really like formerly Christian nations that are frittering away their spiritual inheritance, much like one might befriend a trust-funder who spends his parents wealth. But we all know the shirt-tails to shirt-tails story.

And I'm still waiting for an example of a free nation without a deep Christian heritage.

Yes, Canada began as its own nation -- not as a colony of the British Empire -- with the patriation of its constitution. It has been an independent country since 1982.

If you wanted its history as a colony, you should have asked for that.

Please give it up, Canada is a member of the commonwealth for goodness sake.

Yes, but as its own nation, no longer as just a colony since patriation of its Constitution in 1982.

This is not hard.

Canada was not self-determining before 1982, and now it is. When do you think the USA started its history as a nation? Back while we were still a colony of the Brits? Come on.

Behold the atheist. Got something completely wrong and is now doubling down in the most cringe inducing manner rather than admit a fault. Atheistic morality requires one to string self-serving lies together to preserve your worldview.

Thank you for illustrating to anyone on the fence what it will be like if atheists ever take control of.

Thomas Jefferson would vomit on you if he still were alive and could do it, poster.

You are nearly deranged in your misunderstanding of the intent of the primary founders of this nation. By the way, the most notable of them were deists and not Christians, and they enshrined the separation of church and state above all other precepts - which is why it is included in the very first amendment.

In fact, on his tombstone Jefferson dictated that his crafting of the Declaration and of the Virginia statute for separation of church and state be the only inscriptions, as they were the things for which he wanted to be remembered - there is no mention that he was a president of the United States.

We are NOT a Christian nation, we are a nation of laws based in enlightenment principles.

+ 1 million

We were and are intended to be a nation of enlightened people who accept their neighbors with the common American bond without regard to religious beliefs.

Jefferson and most other founding fathers would vomit if they heard of this very pathetic conversation we're having in 2025.

BTW- religion served it's purpose of policing society for a few millenniums but it's the atheists who have a much better track record of love and peace than the Christians, Muslims, and Jews over the past 500 years. Facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try pushing LGBTQ in an Islamic country and see how that works out for you. Write back.

Nobody is “pushing lgbtq” on anyone.

Try “not pushing” lgbtq on anyone in an Islamic country. What freedoms you take for granted are entirely dependent upon a Christian heritage.

Which brings me back to my original question. What country that was never Christian do you consider free?

Cato rates Japan as freer than the United States, or is Cato too woke and leftist for your kind ever since they published a report finding that politically-motivated violence is primarily a right-wing issue?

In any event, you can stop with the non sequiturs now that someone has held your hand and spoonfed you the information you were looking for.

Japan has also been occupied by the USA, a Christian nation, who wrote their constitution for them. At least you tried.

Japan's Constitution was indeed written by the US but it has absolutely no Christian doctrine in it whatsoever, and in fact has nothing at all to do with Christianity. Furthermore, it strongly promotes separation of church and state, which was an intentional choice made to prevent Japan from returning to the State Shinto that drove its militarism.

"At least you tried" - and failed - to imply Christianity had some value there.

I think you’re making my point for me here. Japan never developed freedom or even chose it. It was imposed during a military occupation, which is pretty lulzy. It’s akin to the situation in Hong Kong, where it was free only so long as the British occupied it. That freedom didn’t survive a generation on its own.

Neither Japan nor Hong Kong ever become free without occupation by a Christian nation, a topic which probably deserves its own thread.

My thesis remains, without Christ you will not find freedom.

LOL, so when the crusaders ransacked the middle east, was that freedom? When the Christians ransacked the native Americans, the central Americans and south Americans, was that Freedom? I think you don't understand the full history of Christianity in the world. You know, those Christians who worked with African tribes to steal humans and sell them for money in the new world?

I have plenty of freedom and have no need for Christ in any capacity and certainly not the way the Evangelicals are using him.,

Islam never attempted to expand into Europe, Europeans just decided to invade for no reasons at all because they are jerks. Islam allows for tremendous personal freedom, of course it translates to, "I shall not submit" so people can do whatever they want so Europeans should have welcomed any freedoms offered.

I'm not saying that the Europeans didn't genocide the whole planet at one time or another but please, don't say something stupid if you don't know what you're saying. At least pass it though GPT.

The Moors invaded and conquered the Iberian Peninsula and were kicked out by Ferdiand and Isabella. The Ottomans invaded Turkey and parts of eastern Europe.

Congrats you got the point. At least the first Crusade was in part in response to aggressive expansionism. Some of the more aggressive convertsions by the sword that later happened occured after european exposure to the 2nd (umayyad) caliphate. Though for those decrying Christianity because of the crusades, do you think any modern Pope would call for one in the defense of Christiandom?

I'd say thats unlikely.

For the better part of modern history Europe was nothing if nothing but a side note scribbled in the margins. They built castles because they couldn't defeat the hordes from the Asian steps Khan et al. in battle. They built the castles so that some of them could survive when millions of horseback riders raped and pillaged. When they weren't getting beaten by the Asians the North Africans were going up the Iberian Peninsula.

The real interesting conflicts during this time were between the Asian's and African, Khans vs the Mamluks, it was epic.

That is until... until Europeans discovered America. That's when it started clicking for a brief time maybe a couple hundred years, until they realized they kicked a sleeping giant. Now Europe is sort of receding back into the background. A mere peninsula off the major continent of Asia consisting of a large number of warring tribes that drink alcohol and can't communicate amongst themselves. (at least Islam got the alcohol thing right.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sweden, Denmark, high proportion atheist population. Not all of Europe is so religious.

Denmark is a high trust society. mostly because it is homogeneous.

https://www.helenrussell.co.uk/books/the-year-of-living-danishly/

now in the US diversity means 80% Indians in IT and a token white person.

but to progressives that is ok.

Australia, also high atheist population, also diverse.

You guys keep citing Christian countries. Where are your non-Christian examples? You know the places that never were Christian… Surely you must have at least one paradise where no one celebrates Christmas.

*Uh not really. Not if the majority of a country is atheist. It is more about FREE countries. With true religious freedom, there will probably be some celebration if Christmas and other religion holidays. We don't want forced atheism either. Just freedom.

There are very few true atheists, but a lot of lazy people that don’t want to render unto God what is God’s.

Those people can live off the fruits of their forefathers for a time, but things decay over time.

What you perhaps actually like is to live off the accumulated social capital without having to do anything yourself to maintain it. Much like some people like to live off inherited wealth without having to work hard. That certainly can be appealing.

This is why I’m poking you to name a truly non-Christian nation that meets your definition of freedom. Because such a thing cannot exist without generations of Christians doing the hard work.

DP...I didn't have to look very far because Canada is a non-Christian nation that meets my definition of freedom.

When would you say Canada became a non-Christian nation?

DP. It's in their constitution. From the founding, then.

The constitution provides for freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression. Every individual is equal under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination based on religion. The law imposes “reasonable limits” on the exercise of these religious rights only where such restrictions can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” The law permits individuals to sue the government for violations of religious freedom. Federal and provincial human rights laws prohibit discrimination based on the grounds of religious belief. Civil remedies include compensation and changes to the policy or practice responsible for the discrimination.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-report-on-international-religious-freedom/canada#:~:text=The%20constitution%20provides%20for%20freedom,without%20discrimination%20based%20on%20religion.

Their Constitution dates back to 1982, not the founding btw. They were founded as a Crown Colony, and the Crown is the head of the Anglican Church. So that's 200+ years of being an officially Christian nation, and 43 of being merely culturally Christian.

Once again, you people seem to really like formerly Christian nations that are frittering away their spiritual inheritance, much like one might befriend a trust-funder who spends his parents wealth. But we all know the shirt-tails to shirt-tails story.

And I'm still waiting for an example of a free nation without a deep Christian heritage.

Yes, Canada began as its own nation -- not as a colony of the British Empire -- with the patriation of its constitution. It has been an independent country since 1982.

If you wanted its history as a colony, you should have asked for that.

Please give it up, Canada is a member of the commonwealth for goodness sake.

Yes, but as its own nation, no longer as just a colony since patriation of its Constitution in 1982.

This is not hard.

Canada was not self-determining before 1982, and now it is. When do you think the USA started its history as a nation? Back while we were still a colony of the Brits? Come on.

Behold the atheist. Got something completely wrong and is now doubling down in the most cringe inducing manner rather than admit a fault. Atheistic morality requires one to string self-serving lies together to preserve your worldview.

Thank you for illustrating to anyone on the fence what it will be like if atheists ever take control of.

So what is the date of the USA beginning as a nation?

You’d save everyone a lot of trouble if you looked at Wikipedia before posting.

While you’re looking at it, look at a $20 CAD bill too. You can oddly even find examples printed before 1982.

Yes, when Canada was a colony. They have not been a colony of the British Empire since 1982, but the colony did carry the name of Canada before that -- as a colony, not as a separate nation. The nation of Canada began with the patriation of their Constitution -- same as the USA.

Again, this is not hard.

Your original claim was Canada was founded in 1982 as an atheistic country. No Canadian would agree with you on either point. Canada is generally considered to have been founded in 1867.

To this day, Charles III is the head of state of Canada, and once again he is also the head of the Anglican Church. In this sense Canada is more a Christian nation than the USA.

The bigger point being is that truth is meaningless to an atheist. Words mean whatever you want them to mean in a moment. They are the “always have been at war with…” meme taken flesh.

Anyone of sufficient intelligence and historical knowledge can see where this kind of thinking leads: gulags and open graves full of people foolish enough to still believe what they were told yesterday instead of today.

What a profoundly ignorant statement. Aristotle and Socrates were writing about universal truths centuries before the birth of Christ.

Neither one was an atheist, and Socrates was basically murdered for asking too many uncomfortable questions.

After stating that “without Christ, you will not find freedom”, now you’ve moved the goalposts again to claim that it’s religion in general. Sorry, but your thesis has been debunked.

This just a few posts after you had the nerve to proclaim this:

The bigger point being is that truth is meaningless to an atheist. Words mean whatever you want them to mean in a moment. They are the “always have been at war with…” meme taken flesh.

If anyone is bending the truth here, it’s you.

If you asked Socrates, would he say he lived in a free society? Would he consider himself an atheist? Those were two claims being made that needed rebuttal. They also practiced slavery in their time just in case anyone forgot. Which makes the whole digression weird.

It’s a lot easier to just accept your patrimony and be thankful than to squirm around trying to invent a past that never existed.

It still stands that your definition of freedom is only possible in a nation formed by Christianity. Had Christ never come to Earth, you would not know freedom.

That is the biggest load of BS I have read in a long time. Do you think Native Americans were not free before the Christians came and conquored them? the Mayans? the Aztecs? Hundreds if not thousands of other societies that existed around the world before and after Christ and Christianity?

By the definition set early in this thread, no. Choosing the Aztecs in particular as an example was certainly a choice.

But it seems we’ve veered from talking about freedom to a general airing of grievances. Though maybe some of you do consider slavery, child sacrifice and savagery as freedom…

how are the aztecs any different than the Christian colonialists in terms of slavery and savagery?

They were worse. The dirty little secret was that the few hundred European's didn't defeat the Aztecs in battle. They just quickly organized the other Mesoamerican tribes (they had horses)... Mesoamerican tribes that were unhappy with the Aztecs, because what's to like. The Mesoamerican tribes then defeated the Aztecs and accepted the Spanish as leaders more or less.

In other areas it didn't go so well for the Europeans. In North America the Spanish wrote home, "Stay away they have armor piercing arrows, there is no gold there." Their early militias were soundly defeated. It really wasn't until after all of the disease had run their course that English were able to get a foot hold.

The Native Americans actually had some things going on and often are attributed to our cherished Federalist system, which were non-existent in the Old World. You look at contemporary Old World politics they were all Monarchies. Even today they don't get it.

It's a pretty sore point, that people keep coming here. Economic migrants and don't really understand this. It's like that scene from the movies. "Take me to your leader."

Well... it doesn't work like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try pushing LGBTQ in an Islamic country and see how that works out for you. Write back.

Nobody is “pushing lgbtq” on anyone.

Try “not pushing” lgbtq on anyone in an Islamic country. What freedoms you take for granted are entirely dependent upon a Christian heritage.

Which brings me back to my original question. What country that was never Christian do you consider free?

Cato rates Japan as freer than the United States, or is Cato too woke and leftist for your kind ever since they published a report finding that politically-motivated violence is primarily a right-wing issue?

In any event, you can stop with the non sequiturs now that someone has held your hand and spoonfed you the information you were looking for.

Japan has also been occupied by the USA, a Christian nation, who wrote their constitution for them. At least you tried.

Japan's Constitution was indeed written by the US but it has absolutely no Christian doctrine in it whatsoever, and in fact has nothing at all to do with Christianity. Furthermore, it strongly promotes separation of church and state, which was an intentional choice made to prevent Japan from returning to the State Shinto that drove its militarism.

"At least you tried" - and failed - to imply Christianity had some value there.

I think you’re making my point for me here. Japan never developed freedom or even chose it. It was imposed during a military occupation, which is pretty lulzy. It’s akin to the situation in Hong Kong, where it was free only so long as the British occupied it. That freedom didn’t survive a generation on its own.

Neither Japan nor Hong Kong ever become free without occupation by a Christian nation, a topic which probably deserves its own thread.

My thesis remains, without Christ you will not find freedom.

LOL, so when the crusaders ransacked the middle east, was that freedom? When the Christians ransacked the native Americans, the central Americans and south Americans, was that Freedom? I think you don't understand the full history of Christianity in the world. You know, those Christians who worked with African tribes to steal humans and sell them for money in the new world?

I have plenty of freedom and have no need for Christ in any capacity and certainly not the way the Evangelicals are using him.,

Islam never attempted to expand into Europe, Europeans just decided to invade for no reasons at all because they are jerks. Islam allows for tremendous personal freedom, of course it translates to, "I shall not submit" so people can do whatever they want so Europeans should have welcomed any freedoms offered.

This thread continues to astound by the ignorance of the comments.

“
Islam never attempted to expand into Europe
“

I do hope that you are joking, or perhaps utilizing sarcasm.

On the (likely) chance that you believe the falsehoods that you are posting, please google the battle of tours and report back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try pushing LGBTQ in an Islamic country and see how that works out for you. Write back.

Nobody is “pushing lgbtq” on anyone.

Try “not pushing” lgbtq on anyone in an Islamic country. What freedoms you take for granted are entirely dependent upon a Christian heritage.

Which brings me back to my original question. What country that was never Christian do you consider free?

Cato rates Japan as freer than the United States, or is Cato too woke and leftist for your kind ever since they published a report finding that politically-motivated violence is primarily a right-wing issue?

In any event, you can stop with the non sequiturs now that someone has held your hand and spoonfed you the information you were looking for.

Japan has also been occupied by the USA, a Christian nation, who wrote their constitution for them. At least you tried.

Japan's Constitution was indeed written by the US but it has absolutely no Christian doctrine in it whatsoever, and in fact has nothing at all to do with Christianity. Furthermore, it strongly promotes separation of church and state, which was an intentional choice made to prevent Japan from returning to the State Shinto that drove its militarism.

"At least you tried" - and failed - to imply Christianity had some value there.

I think you’re making my point for me here. Japan never developed freedom or even chose it. It was imposed during a military occupation, which is pretty lulzy. It’s akin to the situation in Hong Kong, where it was free only so long as the British occupied it. That freedom didn’t survive a generation on its own.

Neither Japan nor Hong Kong ever become free without occupation by a Christian nation, a topic which probably deserves its own thread.

My thesis remains, without Christ you will not find freedom.

LOL, so when the crusaders ransacked the middle east, was that freedom? When the Christians ransacked the native Americans, the central Americans and south Americans, was that Freedom? I think you don't understand the full history of Christianity in the world. You know, those Christians who worked with African tribes to steal humans and sell them for money in the new world?

I have plenty of freedom and have no need for Christ in any capacity and certainly not the way the Evangelicals are using him.,

Islam never attempted to expand into Europe, Europeans just decided to invade for no reasons at all because they are jerks. Islam allows for tremendous personal freedom, of course it translates to, "I shall not submit" so people can do whatever they want so Europeans should have welcomed any freedoms offered.

This thread continues to astound by the ignorance of the comments.

“
Islam never attempted to expand into Europe
“

I do hope that you are joking, or perhaps utilizing sarcasm.

On the (likely) chance that you believe the falsehoods that you are posting, please google the battle of tours and report back.

I pointed it out to a level of absurdity.

[Anonymous]

The Founding documents were also about extending that religious freedom to some
Variants of religion that might have been considered controversial and fringe back in the day. Rhode Island provided a haven for quakers as well as a lot of Jewish citizens for example. The founders were a lot more tolerant than Trumps cabinet today. They acknowledged that religious belief was personal and that it might include having neighbors who believed things that you yourself didn’t. They were aware of the existence of religions like Islam and didn’t wish to force one way of worshipping in everybody or to explicitly forbid any type of religious belief or practice even if it was one that might have made them personally uncomfortable. Also they would have known that the earliest colonists did things like fining and punishing you if you missed Sunday services and they specifically didn’t want that,