McCain in Michigan: 'We are Judeo-Christian' nation: The Swamp
 
The Swamp
-
Posted January 14, 2008 1:45 PM
The Swamp

by Rick Pearson

KALAMAZOO, Mich.—In an appearance at Kalamazoo Christian High School today, Republican presidential candidate John McCain today urged that votes keep in mind that this is a "Judeo-Christian valued nation" in dealing with the issues of displaced workers and illegal immigrants.

But the Arizona senator told reporters later he was not attempting to reach out to religious conservatives in Michigan, which have become the target base for rival Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and Baptist minister.

On the eve of a Michigan primary that may be critical in providing some guidance to a muddled GOP field, McCain also acknowledged his campaign had sent mailers critical of Mitt Romney to voters in South Carolina, which holds its GOP primary on Saturday.

McCain said the mailers were in response to TV ads and mailings critical of the Arizona senator that were placed by Romney, a Michigan native who is seeking a home-state victory to keep his campaign viable.

Appearing in the high school's gymnasium before several hundred people, McCain hailed labor-management agreements with the automakers that would put the union in charge of health-care cost management. Those pacts, he said, put domestic car manufacturers on a "level playing field" with foreign automakers.

With Michigan's troubled economy taking center stage in the state's primary contest,

"I will herald a new day for Michigan and I will do everything I can to make sure the heartland of America, the state that saved the world during World War II, will again resume its rightful place in our economy in our nation and the world," he said.

McCain also criticized existing federal programs for displaced workers, saying they "don't work" and were "designed for the '50s" when people were laid off but returned to the same job or occupation.

"We can't leave people behind. That's not America," McCain said. "We're a Judeo-Christian valued nation. We're not going to leave these people behind. We're going to give them the kind of education and training to re-enter the workforce."

Later, in answering a question about illegal immigration from the audience, McCain said that of those undocumented immigrants in the country who do not have a criminal record, none "will be rewarded or have any advantage over anyone else because they broke our laws."

Still, McCain said, "There are situations where we have to look at this issue from a humane and compassionate fashion. We are a Judeo-Christian valued nation. These are God's children. But also, our first priority has to be our nation's security and that will be my first and foremost priority."

Asked by reporters about his use of the term "Judeo-Christian" values, McCain denied he was making a special appeal to religious conservatives and contended his comments "have been exactly the same in every town hall meeting."

"I talk about our commitment to those who are less fortunate than we are and our Judeo-Christian values of our nation, whether it be someone who's here as an illegal immigrant or someone who's a laid off worker or a low-income person, and I rely on our Judeo-Christian values," he said.

McCain said he supported new domestic oil-gathering technology but also said he was against drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge and would abide by the decisions of coastal states that oppose more deep-sea exploration.

"I think it's a pristine part of the world that I just don't think we ought to or need to go to," McCain said of ANWAR.

When challenged that it will take a long time to move America off its dependence on foreign oil, McCain said a visit to the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, which he and his two rivals planned to do Monday, will show that " a lot of the technology is there. And then we've got to expand it and manufacture it and get it out to the consumer."

McCain also defended his support of the Iraq surge and said its architect, Gen. David Petraeus, should have been named Time magazine's "man of the year" instead of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I looked into his eyes and saw three letters—a 'K,' a 'G' and a 'B,'" McCain said, referring to the Russian spy agency.

McCain also appeared to take a shot at the Bush White House foreign policy, which rival Huckabee has accused of being "arrogant." The Arizona senator said that if he is elected, he would "start traveling around the world and I'd be very humble."

With the voting yet to begin in Michigan, the GOP candidates also are focused on the South Carolina primary on Saturday and McCain defended his campaign's latest mailing to voters that is critical of the fiscal policies Romney practiced as Massachusetts governor, including raising taxes "by $700 million" and providing taxpayer funding for abortions.

Romney's campaign has complained that the mailer is incorrect and has previously said that taxpayer funding for abortions for the indigent was required by the independent panel set up to operate Massachusetts' massive expansion of health care.

McCain contended the mailer was a "response" piece to what he called the "millions" Romney spent " attacking me" in South Carolina. Asked what attack he was responding to, McCain said, "Which one? Just choose. There's a stack of mailers this high attacking me, literally this high that have flooded South Carolina for the last six months."

Asked by reporters if he wasn't engaging in the same kind of negative campaigning that McCain has criticized Romney for, the Arizona senator said it was an attempt to point out what the former Massachusetts governor's "record is, particularly since he has changed his positions on many issues."

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo

Comments

That's right Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddists, and all practitioners of non-judeo-christian faiths, John McCain thinks your values are un-american. John McCain thinks that you are less than fully american. Remember that when it comes time to vote.


The "Pander Bear" strikes again.

John McCain grew up Episcopalian. He went to an Episcopalian high school. For at least 15 years, he has been listed as an Episcopalian in authoritative directories such as the Almanac of American Politics and Congressional Quarterly's Politics in America 2008. He told a reporter from McClatchy News Service in June 2007 that he was an Episcopalian.
Suddenly, in September 2007, he's campaigning in South Carolina, the heavily Baptist state where George W. Bush barely managed to stop McCain's presidential campaign 8 years ago. And guess what? McCain tells a reporter "By the way, I'm not Episcopalian. I'm Baptist."

When pressed, he said he's attended the North Phoenix Baptist Church in Arizona for more than 15 years, though he has never been baptized in that church. Now see, that's exactly the problem. Baptism is kind of a big thing in the Baptist Church. (That's how they got the name.) No baptism, not Baptist.

Anyway, details aside, this is one very clear indication of how McCain has changed. Now, he's just another hungry politician, happy to pander if it helps him win. Which eliminates the very reason people were excited about him in 2000 -- his honesty.

Full story:
http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm


"...I rely on our Judeo-Christian values,"

And what would those be?

Stoning adulterers to death?

Is bacon good...or bad?

You could go on and on. "Pander-bear" indeed. This guy wouldn't know a 'value' if it bit him in the rear. The only 'value' I want to hear about by a candidate is they obey The Golden Rule.


McCain is a guileless political hack who says what he thinks people want to hear, regardless of whether he believes it to be true. Here he panders to a bunch of Xtian freaks. Tomorrow he'll tell a group of Buddhists how we're a diverse society.

==


Maybe some of our "strict constructionists" out there would be so kind as to point where the text of the Constitution refers to this as a Judeo-Christian nation. I seem to have missed that.


When the British soldiers were shooting at us George Washington as a Commander in Chief was always on the Battle Front, on the line of fire, bullets were flying near his head, the sound of Cannons going off and dead soldiers all over the field.
A brave man George Washington was.

John McCain by his own words tells the world how he is going to lead our troops.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wru8NRLdFE

You be the Judge.

John McCain for President!


Why did John McCain recently say that he is Baptist and has been all along, and yet his books and in previous statements he identified himself as Episcopalian? Jeff help us out. Is this why AZ calls him Sir Pander Bear?


So now John McCain is trying to take the "Christian Leader" Mantle away from the most Reverend Mike Huckabee?

Well they have not won me over. I will be voting for Governor Mitt Romney because he gets the job done, and he respects and appreciates all faiths not just his own.


I was at the rally above, at which McCain spoke. He was terrific: honest, forthright, bold, energized, prescient, with great sense and good ideas about both our domestic and international future. The ONE thing you can't say about McCain is that he 'says what he thinks people want to hear' as 'a blinkin' idiotically said above.
McCain is about duty, service, integrity, and smarts. He is THE choice for our next President, and I hope he'll win both the nomination, and the Presidency.


a blinkin,
You will find the passage about our Judeo-Christian heritage immediately following the section that discusses Executive Priviledge.


a blinkin, everything from the Constitution to the Bill of Rights to the writings from the Founding Fathers refers to this country on Judeo-Christian principles and beliefs. Doesn't mean someone cannot believe in something else.
Do you know the Bill of Rights was based on the Ten Commandments?
In the Declaration of Independence is this phrase: "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."
Oh, and by the way, it is Freedom OF religion, NOT freedom FROM religion.


"What do I think of Western civilization? I think it would be a very good idea."

Mohandas Gandhi


85% of Americans are christian, of course it's a christian nation. The media constantly refer to Israel as a jewish state, despite 20% of the population being christian and muslim, where are the howls of protest? If one were to add in the 3-5% of Americans who claim to be jewish then close to 90% of Americans are of judeo-christian background. Saying we are a christian nation does not infer anything other than reflecting the reality of the population.


"Do you know the Bill of Rights was based on the Ten Commandments?"

What?

Are you trully ignorant?

NONE of the Ten Commandments are in the Bill of Rights. NONE.

The ten commandments are laws that the people must not break.

The Bill of Rights are rights of the people which may not be violated.

Other than the fact that there are 10 of them, ther eis no similarity. (Are David Letterman's top Ten lists based on the Ten commendments too?)

Oh, and John D, the Constitution never mentions that any portion of it is based on Judeo-christian beliefs, or mentions a supreme being in any way.

Did you fail American history?


John D:

I asked for a reference in the text of the Constitution that refers to this being a Judeo-Christian Nation. You of course have no textual reference so you moved the goal line.

That's all well and good. My only point is to remember this the next time you claim to be a big fan of "strict constructionist" Judges. There's not a strict constructionist in the land who can find a textual reference to support McSleepy's pandering point of the moment.


Oh, and by the way, it is Freedom OF religion, NOT freedom FROM religion.


Posted by: John D | January 14, 2008 3:02 PM
That would be seperation of church and state.


My friends, here's the "straight-talk" on John McCain: He's a clown

Frankly, you have to be suffering from short-term memory loss to consider his candidacy without laughing. In fact, the more you know of his record the worse it gets.

McCain Loan Could Violate Donor Privacy
http://www.politico.com:80/news/stories/0108/7837.html

McLame's Immigration Insanity
http://www.borderfirereport.net:80/letters-from-readers/mclames-immigration-insanity.html

Video: Liebs says McCain did not support amnesty for illegal aliens
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/05/video-liebs-says-mccain-did-not-support-amnesty-for-illegal-aliens

McCain: "We Are Not Going To Build Fences And Barriers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5G3kH1PvvU

Tom DeLay Disses McCain, Calls New Hampshire Win ‘A Blip’
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com:80/2008/01/09/tom-delay-disses-mccain-calls-new-hampshire-win-a-blip/

John McCain and Our Second Amendment
http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/mccain.htm

John McCain's Skeleton Closet
http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm#keating

The Conservative Case Against McCain
http://thenextprez.blogspot.com/2005/12/conservative-case-against-mccain.html

A Vote For McCain Is A Vote For Amnesty, Open Borders and Never Building A Fence
http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/01/a_vote_for_john_mccain_is_a_vo.php

#%&@# You McCain's Unstable Temper Raises More Doubt from Arizona News ( This site will not post actual title. Search Arizona News for John McCain. It's worth the effort to find it. )

Conservative Group Campaigns Against McCain: He's No Ronald Reagan
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Conservative_group_campaigns_again_McCain_Hes_0301.html

Former Senator Rick Santorum sees a lot of problems with John McCain's credentials
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/transcripts/Transcript.aspx?ContentGuid=e96c3803-c542-4a57-98bd-68635a744540&comments=true

John McCain's Temper Preceded Vietnam
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/8/30/123006.shtml

John McCain's Record of Economic Issues
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/03/arizona_senator_john_mccains_t.php

McCain Would Vote Against The Bush Tax Cuts All Over Again
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/301ccb6c-32b0-4ba7-8330-68d560f67dd8

McCains Stand On Detainees May Pose Risk For 2008 Bid
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/18/AR2006091801353.html

Democrats Contributed Heavily To McCain's Effort in District 11 Election
http://www.azconservative.org/McCain_Discord.htm

The Conservative Case Against Huckabee And McCain
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/019929f6-5799-479e-a86b-e2e2601330ab


McCain Walks Into Conservative Clothesline
http://www.baltimoregroupblog.com/2007/03/19/mccain-walks-into-conservative-clothes-line/

John McCain Is No Hero
http://www.usvetdsp.com/bengmcan.htm

U.S. Senator John McCain Is No War Hero
http://www.namvets.com/Reading/john_mccain_is_no_war_hero.htm

Flashback: The Real John McCain
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/43aba933-6972-4a36-a25f-a2973e69e4ee

Wife of POW Navy Pilot, Who Had Husband's Remains Sent Home By North Vietnamese in 1989, Was Lied to by U.S. Officials For Years About His Whereabouts And POW Status
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/31-oct-2005.html

Defending America by David Hackworth
http://www.hackworth.com/25jan00.html

IT'S TIME TO GIVE THE U.S. ARMY A GOOD SHAKE
http://www.hackworth.com/19nov01.html

Why Vietnam Vets Split on McCain
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_12_16/ai_61487324

Luck Of The Admiral's Son Not For "Grunts"
http://www.usvetdsp.com/smith_mc.htm

ARIZONA'S JOHN McCAIN: A Fraud, "Rhinestone Hero," and National Security Risk
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/mccain.html

MSNBC questions McCain's temper; Reporter says McCain vexes Senate colleagues
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/MSNBC_Does_McCains_temper_hurt_presidential_0707.html


Romney 08!


Do you know the Bill of Rights was based on the Ten Commandments?

Posted by: John D | January 14, 2008 3:02 PM

Wow! I mean, do I respond to this idiocy or ignore it? Simply dumber than previous statements by you that "impeachment is a conviction of sorts and "climate and weather are the same". The Ten Commandments is a Civic document? Gee I always thought it was a Sacred document.
It can't be both Johnny D. You either:
a) Don't know the Ten Commandments.
b) Don't know the Bill of Rights, or
c)Haven't thought about it for yourself and instead are repeating someone elses ridiculous platitudes.

I hope it's c...

Read both. Two of the commandments correspond to laws of any sort (don't murder, don't steal). If you expand it to deal with when you take an oath in court, you get one more (don't lie). If you further expand it (stretch it more likely) to service in the military, you get a fourth (don't cheat on your spouse).

The other 6 go directly against either the freedoms established in the bill of rights or our market system. I think you'll find (if you actually think about it) that the US's law system was based upon the principles of the enlightenment. Sorry to bring facts and perspective to the equation.


Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814


Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion”

1797 Treaty with Tripoli


LOL John D you are rich. Isn't the third Commandment, You shall have no other gods before Me? Pretty much the opposite of what the First Amendment says. For real, keep posting your nonsense it makes work less depressing.


Posted by: janet | January 14, 2008 3:19 PM

janet,

I love it when you smack down Lil Johnny D.

You rock, girl!!!


reality check

85% of the US is Christian?

Not according to Barna Research, which was in contradiction to the Gallup Survey.

"Although 80 to 85 percent of the adult population claim to be Christian and 64 percent
indicate they are members of a church, only 44 percent say they have attended church in
the past 7 days according to Gallup. Likewise, Barna concludes that 43 percent of
Americans attend church on a typical Sunday. Attendance is an indicator of religious
participation."

Beyond that, if you think that many of these "Christians" have the same values, you are out of your mind. Try learning a little bit about Christian religions and you'll learn a LOT about their differences.

For the rest of you supporting our "Christian" nation, given your crop of Republican candidates, let's look at one of the ten commandments. You know the one about adultery.

So we have Guliani - 3, McCain - 2, and Thompson - 2.

On the Democratic side we've got Obama, Clinton and Edwards who have all been married ONE time.

So which party best represents your "Christian" values?


Freedom from religion is a prerequisite to freedom of religion. You couldn't have one without the other.


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

John D,
The only reference to 'of religion' is about establishing one; cain't do it.

It does say you are free to exercise your religion. It also does not say you have to practice one.

Sounds like freedom from religion to me.



"Thou shall put no other God before me!"

Sounds like the big gal is leaving the door open to to the existence of other Gods?!



Interesting factoid re. 85% of Americans are Xtians:

Dobson, Robertson, Falwell (DRIP), all the other minions and demigods of the far right wing 'movement' Christians, refer to all the other Christian sects as 'nominal Christians'.

Just as the Nazis decided who was Jewish and who wasn't, so these clerical fascists will decide whom is and isn't a Christian.


NACN, thank you for enlightening us. Thomas Jefferson also had a ancient copy of the Koran on which Keith Ellison swore his allegiance to the Constitution when he was elected the Representative from Minnesota. This swearing in just proves that religion is secondary to the obligation our officials have to our country and citizenry. This further points to our original founding father's wisdom that this is a Nation of Civil Laws, regardless of religion or ehtnicity.

John McCain needs to rethink his strategy using his so-called "Judeo-Christian principles to try to win votes. "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness," have no religious labels.


And maybe it's a good idea to go back to a history lesson. Recall that the Pilgrims were Christians who came here to escape from oppression not from Buddhists or Wiccans but indeed from other Christians.

Assuming we were to agree that this is a Judeo-Christian Nation, who would make the rules? The Catholics? The Seventh Day Adventists? The Fifth Episcopalian Main Street Auxiliary Branch?

No matter how narrowly you define it, people will have divisions over religion and will fight about it. The Founding Fathers, unlike McSleepy, were smart enough to recognize that the best way to preserve religious freedom was to keep government out of it entirely.


McCain is obviously correct in pointing out that America was founded by people with judeo-christian values.

So correct, in fact, that all the Lefty dingbats can do is scream their rehearsed vitriol.

I suggest they read the nation's founding document, the Declaration of Indepedence written by Thomas Jefferson. Note there the references to the "Creator" and "Divine Providence". Or the 1689 "Declaration of Rights". Or Jefferson's 1774 "Summary View of the Rights of British America", which mentions the rights "God and the laws" have given to all. Or the 1776 Pennsylvania legislature's instructions to Congress, which mention the Judeo-Christian God four times in the last paragraph. Or the declaration for independence of the town of Natick, which specifically charges the government of Britain with setting aside "Christian" ideals.

This is historical fact, the "Inconvenient Truth" which the demented Left refuses to acknowledge.


I don't know why McCain says he was baptist when he was episcopelian before. I'm a Lutheran and people always lump me in with any other protestant faith so maybe he's just been misquoted.

This is one of the things I disagree with McCain about (religion) but it's certainly not a big enough deal to make me not vote for him, since he is not now and never was a religious zealot by any means.

I think McCain sees the good in religion and, unfortunately, every republican has to pander to the religious right to a certain degree. I'd rather have a McCain in there who said he supports religious voters but not their "self-appointed leaders" like the late Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, than a Bush or Huckabee or a Romney who will bend over backward to give those guys a bully pulpit.

It's also worth noting that the democrats do this all the time in the black community and somehow get a pass from all the angry agnostics and anti-religion voters and posters out there. Wasn't it Obama who said he didn't want to see another white politician go to a black church and clap off-rhythm? If you want to see church and state working together hand in hand you should see Jesse Jackson in action.


OMG, this poster just cited the Clinton marriage as an example of a marriagne without adultery... I think "The Swamp" should close for the rest of the day to accomodate the riotous laughter:

let's look at one of the ten commandments. You know the one about adultery.

So we have Guliani - 3, McCain - 2, and Thompson - 2.

On the Democratic side we've got Obama, Clinton and Edwards who have all been married ONE time.
Posted by: dogjudge | January 14, 2008 4:15 PM


Isn't it easy to remain married when known philandering is just brushed under the rug due to both spouses mutual unhealthy greed for power?


He is taking a shot at Romney's Mormon beliefs. (as well as anyone else not considered Jewish or Christian).


"And maybe it's a good idea to go back to a history lesson. Recall that the Pilgrims were Christians who came here to escape from oppression not from Buddhists or Wiccans but indeed from other Christians."

Blinky,
Good point. Also, the Pills proceeded to repress and oppress all other forms of religion themselves.

They weren't about freedom of or from religion, just their own.

Really, keeping religion out of gvmt. is about the only improvement we made over the English system.


Bruce-

Jefferson specifically chose to use the words "Creator" and "Divine Providence" so as NOT to specifically refer to the Judeo-Christian "God". Most non Judeo-Chrisitan religions believe in a "creator" and some concept of "divine providence".

Historical fact, not the rantings of the hysterical right.

But we all know how completely and utterly terrified the practice of non-christian beliefs makes you. I mean the thought of a woman in a hijab has you screaming that they are threat that must be run out of our communities. It's not surprising that you would be irrational on this topic.


Bruce:

See if this makes sense:

"The United States shall be a Christian Nation and all laws shall be based on Judeo-Christian principles."

Do you suppose the Framers could have written the Constitution to say that? Or maybe they didn't have a sufficient vocabulary to express that thought.

Or maybe they conciously decided that they did not want anything of the sort to be included in the Constitution.

Rationalize around this as you please, but don't ever pretend that you're a "strict constructionist."


"MCCAIN SPEAKS"

I HEAR THE VOICES NOW, I DO, I REALLY DO.

I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE, AND I KNOW WHAT YOU MUST BECOME.

JOIN WITH ME AND I WILL DELIVER YOU UNTO HIM.

WHO IS HIM, THE SECRETARY OF COURSE.

SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY, CHERTOF!

BORN AFTER 1964 WE WILL GET YOU IN A LINE FOR A NEW ID. EITHER ELECTRONIC OR FORENSIC DNA STRIPS ON THE BACK OF YOUR NECK OR THE INSIDE OF YOUR RIGHT FOREARM.

BECAUSE WE ARE A NATION OF......

OKAY, YET ANOTHER PROPHET SPEAKS.

HMMMM HOW MANY IS THAT SO FAR?


Jeff,

Nice try.

I was referring to Hillary, not Bill.

Either way the point is you can find all sorts of discrepancies in real life when you start using labels, such as Christian, as the determining factor for one's actions and beliefs.


Posted by: Jeff | January 14, 2008 5:05 PM

Typical sexist Republican.

A politician who cheats on his wife is OK.

A politician who's husband cheats on her is not.

Boys will be boys, huh?


So dogjudge, ignoring your spouse's adultery is okay, then? Just sweep it under the rug to make sure he stays president? Got it.

I wasn't speaking about Bill, either. I was speaking about both Clintons' unhealthy, power hungry marriage. I'm not the first person to believe that Hillary's run for the White House is a reward for standing by her husband after he humiliated her in front of the entire nation.


"We are Marshall!"

"We're going to give them the kind of education and training to re-enter the workforce."

To do what, pray tell. So many highly-trained, highly-skilled workers are finding it hard to compete with workers in India, etc. Is McCain's plan to train more people who will lose out?

Specifics, apparently, are pending his election.

Where have you gone, Richard Nixon?



Isn't it easy to remain married when known philandering is just brushed under the rug due to both spouses mutual unhealthy greed for power?

Posted by: Jeff | January 14, 2008 5:05 PM

Billy/Jeff,

Family Problems? you mean like these?

"According to Republican sources. McCain acknowledges that his adultery broke up his first marriage. His second wife Cindy, the daughter of a wealthy Budweiser beer distributor, was addicted to prescription narcotics and even stole hard drugs from a medical charity that she ran. McCain acknowledges that she didn't want him to run in 2000, and only agreed once he promised that she doesn't have to go to New Hampshire or Iowa".

http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm


*****

The only reference to 'of religion' is about establishing one; cain't do it.

It does say you are free to exercise your religion. It also does not say you have to practice one.

Sounds like freedom from religion to me.

Posted by: C.Morris | January 14, 2008 4:28 PM

No, C. Morris, you are wrong.

It’s right there in front of you. You even quoted it. It says, in relevant part:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”

The “thereof” refers to “religion” in the antecedent clause. In other words, the second clause – also known as “The Free Exercise Clause” says: Congress can’t pass a law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

According to the U.S. Supreme Court:

“The door of the Free Exercise Clause stands tightly closed against any governmental regulation of religious beliefs as such, . . . . Government may neither compel affirmation of a repugnant belief, . . . ; nor penalize or discriminate against individuals or groups because they hold religious views abhorrent to the authorities, . . . nor employ the taxing power to inhibit the dissemination of particular religious views, . . .” (Citations omitted).

(See Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U. S. 398, 402 (1963), and Hobbie v. Unemplt. Appeals Comm'n, 480 U.S. 136, 140-42 (1987) [Noting that burdens on religious freedom are subject to strict scrutiny, and must be justified by proof of a compelling state interest.].)

Thus, the First Amendment protects against government sanction religion AND freedom from government interference with religion. The latter can be best described as freedom of religion.


Hey Bruce, are you sure that the Pensylvania Legislature was refering to the "Judeo-Christian" God? (By the way, are those the same instructions that told the delegates to vote against Independence?)

In September 1776, that very same body passed a Sate constituion that stated:

"II. That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences and understanding: And that no man ought or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry, contrary to, or against, his own free will and consent: Nor can any man, who acknowledges the being of a God, be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account of his religious sentiments or peculiar mode of religious worship: And that no authority can or ought to be vested in, or assumed by any power whatever, that shall in any case interfere with, or in any manner controul, the right of conscience in the free exercise of religious worship."

"the being of a God" not any specific God.

The Pennsylvania Legislature made it very clear: This is NOT a "Judeo-christian" nation.


"Bruce:

See if this makes sense:"

blinkin,

Bruce has left the room. His work here is done.


Rick Pearson:

Is there some reason you didn't like my first post?


John W,

Did you black out?

I specifically stated you have the right to practice religion or not.

"thereof |ðe(ə)rˈəv|
adverb formal
of the thing just mentioned; of that : the member state or a part thereof."

You just can't use the government to impose your beliefs, nor force your beliefs on anyone.


McCain also defended his support of the Iraq surge and said its architect, Gen. David Petraeus, should have been named Time magazine's "man of the year" instead of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I looked into his eyes and saw three letters—a 'K,' a 'G' and a 'B,'" McCain said, referring to the Russian spy agency.

McCain also appeared to take a shot at the Bush White House foreign policy, which rival Huckabee has accused of being "arrogant." The Arizona senator said that if he is elected, he would "start traveling around the world and I'd be very humble."


So by being humble does that mean he'll chase Putin and Huckabee to "THE GATES OF HELL!"

I'm way less worried about McCains religious comments than those of dimwits like John D & Bruce. I mean wow. Them boy's need some book learnin!!!


Logic,
You are gettin the job done here.


A nation of Judeo-Christian values? Maybe in 1776. In 2008, we have these "Christians" who pay lip service to the teachings of Christ while supporting a war that we started and applauding the torture of prisoners.


* * * * *

Posted by: C.Morris | January 14, 2008 7:11 PM

You specifically stated:

"The only reference to 'of religion' is about establishing one; cain't do it."

Slipping in that little bit about "It does say you are free to exercise your religion" didn't state the whole case, especially when you then summed up by claiming:

"Sounds like freedom from religion to me."

That was speaking out of both sides of your mouth. You gave little weight to the fact the First Amendment not only says that one has the right to practice one's religion, but also that one has the right to practice one's religion without government interference. That's far and away a big difference from what you said and what I said.

I haven't blacked out. You were distorting the picture by your lip service to the practice of religion while still calling the Constitutional guarantee one of freedom from religion. The distorted picture you offered needed clarification.


The Pennsylvania Legislature made it very clear: This is NOT a "Judeo-christian" nation.

Posted by: Luke | January 14, 2008 6:27 PM

Luke:

You are truly mistaken in your approach to this issue - for the same reason that a blinkin, jethro, & NACN are mistaken.

I realize this might be difficult for some who believe that society and government ought to be co-extensive and coterminous, but:

The word “Nation” is not a reference to “government” - at all.

That’s right; it isn’t. The English word “Nation” means: A community of people who share a common language, culture, historical experience, and/or religion. In other words, “Nation” refers to the actual people, instead of their political institutions.

Thus, your reference to the laws of Pennsylvania – and its founding governmental documents – are perfectly irrelevant to the character of the People, as are a blinkin’s and jethro’s reference to the Constitution, as are NACN – citation to Thomas’ Jefferson’s dubious statement regarding the common law and the language of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli which disavowed that “the government of the United States” was “founded on the Christian Religion.” The secular nature of a government says nothing about the character of the “Nation” – insofar as the latter is a reference to the People and not their government(s).

Once this error is addressed, it becomes abundantly clear that John McCain correctly stated that ours is a Judeo-Christian nation. The people who founded the colonies from whence our country emerged were, by and large, members of Christian sects or Jews. Furthermore, as dogjudge points out, even today 85 percent of the people in this country claim to be Christians, and 64 percent indicate they are members of a church (per the Barna Group study). 85 percent is a super-majority and entitled to great weight when in describing the whole Nation.

BTW – dogjudge – a person doesn’t have to go to church to be a Christian. Nowhere in either the Old or New Testament does it say that one is debarred from the ranks of believers if one doesn’t attend church every week. The adherence of upwards of 85 percent of the people to their faith in some form still means we are not yet a post-Christian nation, and that we still share the same basic cultural ideals.

Now if only this post gets past the unknown and often strange criteria of the Swamp censors. I wonder . . .


John W,

I think we have both,,, of and from.

Otherwise, where do I report on Sunday??


I think we have both,,, of and from.

Otherwise, where do I report on Sunday??

Posted by: C.Morris | January 14, 2008 8:30 PM

We do have both. But you didn't make that clear. There's a diference between a social convention and one with government protection. You left the protection part off the "of."

As for next Sunday, you can go watch the Bears in the Super Bowl (that is, if you have videotape of their last trip there).


John W,

OK..


John W-

Why don't you attack Bruce's original reference to the Pebnsylvania legislature's views? Was he not equally as misguided in using that as justification? He brought them into the dicussion, not me. Your arguement is really with Bruce, I merely showed that his historical basis for his statement was wildly wrong.

As to this being a Christian "nation", is it also a "white" nation since the majority iof citizens are white? Is it a "female" nation since the majority of citizens are female?


a person doesn’t have to go to church to be a Christian
Posted by: John W. | January 14, 2008 8:06 PM

Problem is...apparently you don't actually have to act like one either. Just say you are.


How about the Fred Phelps' group. You know, the ones that hate gays so they protest the troops funerals. Good Christians?
They'll tell ya till the cows come home..they are. I know you will tell me that God will decide who is and who isn't...but who does that here..on earth?


Let me straighten you all out.

The U.S. was founded on Judeo-Christian VALUES and PRINCIPLES, not on the religions themselves. That is the point. Of course there is a separation of church and state. Those on the left should not deny the history of the foundation of this country and the belief in God that deeply influenced those involved. Those on the right should recognize that no one religion should be endorsed or favored by the government. Again, the faith in God held by the founders of this country should be recognized in its context of history (which is why "In God we Trust" should remain on the coinage) and the role it played and does play in our culture, tradition, etc.

I have no problem with what McCain said here. However, I would prefer Romney as President though because he is more capable and intelligent. He is also more calm and under control.


You shall have no other Gods but me.
You shall not make for yourself any idol, nor bow down to it or worship it.
You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God.
You shall remember and keep the Sabbath day holy.
Respect your father and mother.
You must not kill.
You must not commit adultery.
You must not steal.
You must not give false evidence against your neighbour.
You must not be envious of your neighbour's goods. You shall not be envious of his house nor his wife, nor anything that belongs to your neighbour.

Amazing how most, if not all of these commandments conservative trample over everyday.


* * * * *

Posted by: Luke | January 14, 2008 9:39 PM

Why didn't I go after Bruce's views? Okay, I will.

Bruce:

A Christian nation does not mean that we have a Christian government. A "Nation" consists of the people, and not their government. It means that the "people" are largely part of the Judeo-Christian culture and belief system.

Better? Now, if he Bruce ever reads this he should know that I meant it in earnest. Hopefully, he will get the point.

Now, with regard to why I responded to you: Don't feel like the Lone Ranger. A lot of people here, including all those I mentioned (and then some) have indulged the erroneous idea that the founding ideas of our government define our "Nation." They seem to forget that the people and their progeny who make up this Nation were living on this continent for 150 years before the Constitution was ever written, and that Judeo-Christian traditions and beliefs ordered their lives, societies and governments long before the U.S. ever existed. It happens all the time here in the Swamp. You just happened to have responded with that brand of fire to Bruce’s error of the same type.

Don't get the idea that I'm attacking you. Attacking people isn't a valuable pastime. Challenging ideas is. I was merely taking issue with what I saw as a wrong idea.

Now with regard to your last questions. You ask whether it is also a white or female nation because those factors line up with the majority. I wouldn't say so. Those factors don't significantly define the culture, or how people view themselves or their relation to others and the rest of the world. The Judeo-Christian tradition, however, still does define these things to a very great degree. It has provided everything from the seven day week, to a day (or days) of rest on the weekend, to the way most people still structure their interpersonal relations and social units (e,g, families), the way our laws mediate relationships and duties among people, the strong faith and hope we, as a people, still have in transcendental ideas like the ultimate triumph of equity and justice, and the largely accepted social and moral codes that transcend any governmentally imposed behavior. I could give specific examples, but I suspect I would lose your patience long before I ran out of ideas.

Moreover, with 85 percent of the people still identifying themselves as Christians, the Judeo-Christian tradition still plays more of a significant role in the way people think than any other ideology or collection of other ideologies put together. All people of all sexes and races take part in it or are affected by it to some degree, either voluntarily or involuntarily.

Now, mind you, this is changing. There are concerted efforts afoot to deconstruct the society built upon the Judeo-Christian traditions and beliefs, and to substitute for it a new social order based on secular (and even pagan) ideals. These efforts have been going on for quite a long time throughout the western world, but they have met with more resistance here in America than elsewhere. Some countries in Europe – and France in particular – could actually be considered post-Christian. We aren’t there yet.

Thank God!


Problem is...apparently you don't actually have to act like one either. Just say you are.

Posted by: bill r. | January 14, 2008 9:54 PM

Bill,

If hypocrisy were a deadly disease in any quantity, the human race would have long since disappeared from the face of the earth due to its numerous inconsistencies. Who, also, hasn’t failed to live up to their own expectations for themselves on some occasion?

So, why are you all of a sudden pointing the finger at Christians? – and why do you think there aren’t any Christians who genuinely and conscientiously struggle to live by their professed ideals and beliefs? I think you are wrong to judge that many people, as a class, based on your limited experiences with them.


How about the Fred Phelps' group.

* * * * *

Posted by: bill r. | January 14, 2008 10:07 PM

Did you see my reply to Shirley Phelps-Roper when she posted to the Swamp? You can find it here:

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/12/court_allows_group_to_picket_s.html#comments

I might also add that numerous Christian leaders, individual churches and their pastors have spoken out against Fred Phelps and his "Church." Thus, it would not be fair to portray Phelps and Company as typical or representative of Christians today.


* * * * *

Amazing how most, if not all of these commandments conservative trample over everyday.

Posted by: RomanB | January 14, 2008 11:15 PM

Roman:

Help me out here. Are you suggesting that non-conservatives are any better at keeping the 10 Commandments than conservatives? If not, then why have you explicitly singled out conservatives for criticism? If so, and you believe non-conservatives are better at compliance with the 10 Commandments, I would very much like to know the data upon which you base this claim – especially the parts about envy (or “coveting” in the older English versions). [This could be interesting.]


McCain is being interviewed on Fox & Friends. He has mentioned Judeo-Christian AT LEAST four times and the segment isn't over yet.


I think you are wrong to judge that many people, as a class, based on your limited experiences with them.


Posted by: John W. | January 15, 2008 2:33 AM

What makes you think my experience with them is limited? Because I don't agree with them? I might also ask...Who would be most judgemental?

Thus, it would not be fair to portray Phelps and Company as typical or representative of Christians today.

Posted by: John W. | January 15, 2008 2:42 AM

There lies the problem John. Who here on earth is to judge who is a "good" Christian? Obviously the title Christian isn't necessarily a label of a good and moral life. What of those who live a moral life yet are not believers? Aren't Christians taught that the non-believers will rot in hell? Who are the judgemental ones?


Conservatives are the ones who think they are entitled to ram the 10 Commandments down our throats, while they are the worst when it comes to actually abiding by it.

Even on Rush's radio program yesterday. The biggest, greatest, influence in the world? Captialism. Not religion, God, faith, etc..

Conservatives play lip service to those of faith, while they are ruled by nothing less then the seven deadly sins.


McCain is being interviewed on Fox & Friends. He has mentioned Judeo-Christian AT LEAST four times and the segment isn't over yet.

Posted by: lynne351 | January 15, 2008 7:41 AM

Can you say pander bear!!!


"It has provided everything from the seven day week, to a day (or days) of rest on the weekend, to the way most people still structure their interpersonal relations and social units (e,g, families), the way our laws mediate relationships and duties among people, the strong faith and hope we, as a people, still have in transcendental ideas like the ultimate triumph of equity and justice, and the largely accepted social and moral codes that transcend any governmentally imposed behavior."

Actually if you look more deeply at the backgoroung of many of those ideas they are hardly limited to the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Take the 7 day week for example. The Babylonians followed a seven day week, as did the Hindus and Chinese independant of the Judeo-Christian tradition. It's origin likely comes from dividing the lunar month into 4 equal parts, and the Judeo-Christian creation story of seven days is a reflection of that larger cultural development.

And certainly we can all agree that the concept of "family" is not limited to the Judeo-Christian tradition.

I do take your larger point on the difference between culture and government. However that does not lessen my displeasure with the decision Senator McCain seems to have made to make the dismissal of minority viewpoints and contributions to our culture a part of his campaign.


Roman, you really need to stop getting your information about Limbaugh's show from Loony Left websites.

I previously was attacked for stating that the Bill of Rights was based on the Ten Commandments. Sorry, folks, but true. The inspriation for the Bill of Rights, that there are 10 Bill of Rights, directly is due to the Ten Commandments. No matter how you secularists try to distort history, but the fact remains the founding leaders of this country based the laws and development of this nation squarely on the shoulders of Judeo-Christian beliefs. What they did not want was a government establishing a religion like the Church of England. They wanted to freely express their religious beliefs, ideals and practices without government intervention. But the fact remains, whether it was the Pilgrims, the colonists at Jamestown, the signers of the Declaration of Independence and creators of the U.S. Constitution, Judeo-Christian principles and beliefs were their core.
To bill r., about Fred Phelps.Fred Phelps has been criticized by Christians throughout this country. He and his band of idiots do not practice Christianity, they distort and defile Christianity anytime they open their mouths or get a thought.

And then we have Roman B and his distorted view of reality. But, then, what new?
One by one, let's review his own brand of idiocy:
You shall have no other Gods but me. (please explain what other god, conservatives have)
You shall not make for yourself any idol, nor bow down to it or worship it. (again, who?)
You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God. (again, who? Anyway, have I said things like goddamn? yes, I have. Am I wrong? yes, I am.)
You shall remember and keep the Sabbath day holy. (I and many Christians do try to do just that, but it isn't easy in this world we live in)
Respect your father and mother. (again, who?)
You must not kill.
You must not commit adultery.
You must not steal.
You must not give false evidence against your neighbour.
You must not be envious of your neighbour's goods. You shall not be envious of his house nor his wife, nor anything that belongs to your neighbour.

Amazing how most, if not all of these commandments conservative trample over everyday.

Trample every day? Roman, as people we all sin each and every day, Christian or nonChristian. Some have murdered, some have stolen, some have had affairs, some covet. We ask for forgiveness on all of our sins. Many try to do the right thing day in and day out, Christian and nonChristian. Man sinned from the beginning and still does to this day. It does not mean that we shouldn't strive to not sin, nor ask for forgiveness. As far as judging, while God is the ultimate judge, He does allow for man to make judgement on matters such as crimes.
As far as who is a good Christian and who is not. I don't get into that. I do not believe one Christian religion is better than another or more Christian than another. Some do, unfortunately. It's been my belief and practice of being a Christian first and whatever denomination second.


Luke:

First, that the same traditions developed in alternate or parallel cultures doesn’t explain how we got them or kept them. WE either got them or retained them, in the familiar forms we now experience, because of the Judeo-Christian tradition.

For instance, there have been attempts to change the number of days in the week. The French tried to implement a 10 day week (because they like everything decimal, you know). It was part of a deliberate attempt to un-Christianize France. And, of course, it didn’t work because the French were, at the time, still too steeped in their religious traditions to abandon the seven day week. And, yes, families are common social units in every culture. However, enforced monogamy as the core of a family unit has been with us for the better part of two millennia (and will be with us for a little while longer). This is due largely to Christian distaste for polygamy, polyandry and divorce (which is now, essentially, a form of serial polygamy in this country).

Second, I don’t think its fair to say that John McCain dismissed minority viewpoints. He merely acknowledged that most people in this country still adhere to Judeo-Christian beliefs and traditions. Here, where diversity is more than tolerated, it isn’t reasonable to suggest his subtext was to exclude anyone or relegate them to second class citizenship if they don’t share the same belief system.


He merely acknowledged that most people in this country still adhere to Judeo-Christian beliefs and traditions. Here, where diversity is more than tolerated, it isn’t reasonable to suggest his subtext was to exclude anyone or relegate them to second class citizenship if they don’t share the same belief system.

Posted by: John W. | January 15, 2008 11:55 AM

No, he said this is a Judeo-Christian Nation, not mostly a Judeo-Christian nation. By it's very nature, and especially in the context he used it, that statement negates the importance of non Judeo-Christian people and concepts in this nation.

McCain has also said "I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles, personally, I prefer someone who has a grounding in my faith." in regards to the Presidency.

He clearly prefers Christians to Non-christians in the realm of service to the nation and the contributions they can make our country.

I'm simply not OK with that.


McCains mention of a judeo-christian nation was to further his belief in amnesty. Period.


Huh. And I always though the model was the Roman Republic. I also seem to recall that the proposed Bill of Rights had 12 amendments, but only ten were ratified. I wonder what the other two commandments were?


* * * * *

Posted by: bill r. | January 15, 2008 8:41 AM

1. What makes me think your experience with Christians is limited? That’s simple. My experience with Christians is 180 degrees out from yours. Thus, we are either looking at two different groups, or we are looking at the same group through different lenses. Either way, the fact that you don’t experience them the same way I do, of necessity, means your experience is limited.

2. You ask: Who is to judge who is a “good” Christian? That question is not as insurmountable as you make it sound. The New Testament records numerous instances when Jesus said that those who are his will show for it in the lives they lead; and those who aren’t, won’t. The writings of his Apostles also stress that pursuit of spiritual living will produce godly behavior (e.g. love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, etc.). Numerous other passages also warn that those who live after worldly pleasures (i.e. the “flesh”), and those who hate and/or cause dissention and strife, are not of God.

Were these distinctions not laid out on the pages of the Bible, I would never have had grounds to reply to Shirley Phelps-Roper the way I did (which, by now, I am sure you have read). No group that features such wanton hatred, the way the Phelps clan does, could ever have a colorable claim to Christianity. There are too many places in the Bible that say so, and Christians accept the Bible as authoritative.

Then again, the ultimate answer to your question depends on what you mean by “to judge.” If, by it, you mean “to condemn,” then no one ought to judge. If, on the other hand, you mean by it “to discern” then one can discern a spiritual Christian from a “back-slidden” or nominal one based on the aforementioned distinctions. One should remember, however, that Christians fail these standards from time to time because there’s a lot of stuff out there to make their spiritual “walk” through life a struggle. The statement that sums it up best is: “Christians aren’t perfect . . . just forgiven.” So, it is important to remember that occasional episodes of aberrant behavior don’t count very much.

3. I have seen you claim before that Christians are bigots or judgmental because they teach that non-believers will suffer judgment and damnation. This is not so.

Christians view judgment and eternal damnation as the product of God’s perfect justice – which they do not claim to fully understand. It is not some comforting, vengeful or self-righteous sentiment. To the contrary, Christians don’t want people to suffer judgment and damnation. One of their primary duties is to spread the gospel and make disciples so people will avoid judgment and damnation. Jesus, himself, said that he came into the world not to judge it, but to save it. His death and resurrection were and are, in themselves, the means by which man could obtain this salvation. In short, Christianity is all about saving people from their sins and resulting judgment and “damnation” and, in the process, helping them lead a life pleasing to God. Thus, the doctrines of which you complain do not make Christians bigoted or judgmental as you seem to believe.


Luke:

I realize we will never come to more than a friendly disagreement on the subject, but I do not equate "preference" with exclusion. For instance, "preference" for one group over another in implementing affirmative action has never resulted in exclusion of the non-preferred group. Thus, to prefer one group over another is not to immediately exclude that which is not preferred.

Nor is it unnatural for a person to “prefer” that which he knows and with which he is comfortable. I would find it unusual if he didn’t. I think if someone challenged him on it, McCain would disavow any notion that he intended to slight those who don’t partake of the Judeo-Christian tradition. He’s a bit more of a populist than you might think.


It's pretty funny (read: ignorant) that McCain would decide this is a "Judeo-Christian" nation while campaigning in the state with the largest Muslim population in the country. Moron.


Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "b" in the field below:

Latest polls

Galleries

DNC

Democratic Convention

Obama's week

Parade of hats

Celebrities

campaign

Campaign trail

Electoral vote map

map

Test your scenarios

Unauthorized tour

Obama

Obama's Chicago

News, but funnier

Cartoon

Walt Handelsman

Cartoon

The Lowe- Down

Cartoon

Editorial cartoons

Quizzes

McCain

Know the presidents?

McCain

Your McCain IQ

Obama

Your Obama IQ

Bush

Bush twins

Test assumptions