Do MAGAs want a Christian Nation or a Free Nation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want it to be a free nation with Christian ideals.

I do not want the level of national religious coercion that I see in Europe. For example, our IRS should not levy a tax on us to force tithing and then redistribute it to the church like they do in Germany and other places. Not the state's role.

Lucky for you no one is doing that here. They are simply saying that all should have religious freedom and we should not have Christianity shoved down our throats. (And ftr, I am Christian).

[Anonymous]

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?

[Anonymous]

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?

Not that PP but while perhaps Canada not fully non-Christian yet, the western part of it is majority irreligious

[Anonymous]

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.

They seem to be attempting to make the point that many free nations historically were founded by Christians, so they can only attribute their success to that and not other things like basic evolution of human intelligence, ability for empathy, and level of education. Ultimately it is a giant correlation argument. Nevermind that atheists are "lazy."

The hilarious part is that the ideals that make nations free, such as individual liberty, reason, natural rights, and freedom of the press, speech, and religion, came from Enlightenment thinkers. Who were fiercely opposed by Christians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want it to be a free nation with Christian ideals.

I do not want the level of national religious coercion that I see in Europe. For example, our IRS should not levy a tax on us to force tithing and then redistribute it to the church like they do in Germany and other places. Not the state's role.

Lucky for you no one is doing that here. They are simply saying that all should have religious freedom and we should not have Christianity shoved down our throats. (And ftr, I am Christian).

Having laws that Christians agree with is not "Having religion shoved down your throat."

[Anonymous]

Rather have a Christian nation than an Islamic one. Secularism is too fractured to stand up religious forces.

So if a religion is going to take over I’d rather it be Christianity than Islam. I really wish atheists would stop attacking Christianity because they are doing the work of the extreme islamists.

[Anonymous]

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.

I'm pretty sure atheist countries suck the (looking at China).

The thing is all these religions have embedded in them social hierarchies and sort of rules of the road as to how people in various classes are to be treated, which is pretty much absent in atheism.

I think it's instructive but many religions consist almost exclusively of elite, but others are popular amongst the masses. Judaism is good example of this where are the poor Jews, I think most just leave (not to pick sides because Muslim countries are known to treat workers the worst.) I'm reminded of the Hannakah festival where the Rabbi made a point to call out every politician and or wealthy entity in attendance.

Anymore when interviewing I'm careful to read the religious vibes, and I'm not even a woman. The preference is for defacto American religion, that celebrates federal holiday's and days off.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

I'm pretty sure atheist countries suck the (looking at China).

The thing is all these religions have embedded in them social hierarchies and sort of rules of the road as to how people in various classes are to be treated, which is pretty much absent in atheism.

I think it's instructive but many religions consist almost exclusively of elite, but others are popular amongst the masses. Judaism is good example of this where are the poor Jews, I think most just leave (not to pick sides because Muslim countries are known to treat workers the worst.) I'm reminded of the Hannakah festival where the Rabbi made a point to call out every politician and or wealthy entity in attendance.

Anymore when interviewing I'm careful to read the religious vibes, and I'm not even a woman. The preference is for defacto American religion, that celebrates federal holiday's and days off.

There is a difference between a nation that requires atheism and restricts religion, vs one which allows freedom and happens to end up with a large number of agnostics/atheists

The freedom is the difference and the key to success.

For the rest of your comment, you sound awful and prejudiced and isolated. I hire a lot of people and their religion does not factor into it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want it to be a free nation with Christian ideals.

I do not want the level of national religious coercion that I see in Europe. For example, our IRS should not levy a tax on us to force tithing and then redistribute it to the church like they do in Germany and other places. Not the state's role.

Lucky for you no one is doing that here. They are simply saying that all should have religious freedom and we should not have Christianity shoved down our throats. (And ftr, I am Christian).

Having laws that Christians agree with is not "Having religion shoved down your throat."

If it's a law that only people of Christian faith would support, then yes it is. For example, requiring teaching of the Bible in public school, but not teaching any other religious texts.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rather have a Christian nation than an Islamic one. Secularism is too fractured to stand up religious forces.

So if a religion is going to take over I’d rather it be Christianity than Islam. I really wish atheists would stop attacking Christianity because they are doing the work of the extreme islamists.

No one is attacking Christianity. We want true freedom of religion. Do you not want freedom?

[Anonymous]

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.

They seem to he doing just fine with the frittering so we will keep them. Yay freedom!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather have a Christian nation than an Islamic one. Secularism is too fractured to stand up religious forces.

So if a religion is going to take over I’d rather it be Christianity than Islam. I really wish atheists would stop attacking Christianity because they are doing the work of the extreme islamists.

No one is attacking Christianity. We want true freedom of religion. Do you not want freedom?

Good Christians will tell you that true freedom is found only through the acceptance of Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior. So for a government to forcibly impose that upon you is simply enabling your everlasting freedom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A Christian nation. They won't care about freedom until fellow Magas come for them, for whatever reason.

Did you have this much angst when democrats were pushing the state of Michigan to install foot baths in State Universities for muslims at public expense?

1. Student fees, not tax dollars, paid for the foot baths.

2. The university, not Democrats, pushed for this. Students were using regular sinks, which were getting pulled away from the wall and causing water damage to the bathrooms.

3. Using bathroom sinks is unhygienic and dangerous for students who have to balance on one foot on a slippery tile floor.

4. At any university, school funds go towards providing services that not everyone uses. Hillel and kosher meals for Jewish students. The Catholic Campus ministry for Catholic students. LGBTQ for LGBTQ students, and so on. In this case, the foot baths are available to everyone. Many non-Muslim students have expressed interest in using them, such as athletes.

5. “Democrats” and “Muslims” should be capitalized. We know you’re not uneducated because you were careful to capitalize Michigan and State Universities. Are you doing this subconsciously out of disrespect?

6. Always get the full story before forming an opinion. Right wing outrage bait simplifies everything and is lying to you.

Student fees did not pay for them. The government did. That's why the ACLU brought it to court.

Inclusivity is not taking anything away from you. You are not harmed by someone having access to something that allows them to practice their religion. Now, if the universities were forcing us all to wash our feet in religious observance, you'd have something legitimate to be angry about. But this is not that.

Actually it does in the same vein that Muslims are upset when we observe Christmas and the Sabbath. It's like all the ethnic groceries, nothing wrong per se but where are all the local root cellar type stores and BBQ places they take up space. Why don't they learn to sing Christmas carols. They just don't like the same things we do. And why are you going to try to paint me as the bad poster for pointing that out. Your argument itself is irritating.

You’re upset that Muslims don’t want to sing Christmas songs and that you don’t live near any good BBQ? Ummm ok.