What’s the point of this cartoon? Yes, I’m aware that the Founders by and large were Christians, and I’m also aware that when they wrote the Constitution they built in separation of Church and State. But as Obama said, God (even if you believe in God) doesn’t do the job for us — we have to do it for ourselves.
As far as I’m concerned, there is no “Creator” but you don’t need to be superstitious to understand the point that was trying to be made. Jefferson (the wealthy, elite, adulterous, slave-owner who invoked God) was an articulate power-player in grabbing land from the English King — and later using government funds to buy land from the French..That’s a pretty shaky moral foundation to stand on in spite of the many truths that are self-evident.
And yet, an ignorant cartoon. Of what legal effect is the D of I in securing any right under the Constitution?
BTW, I don’t believe Tommy J can be classified as an adulterer. Martha Jefferson died long before any fornicating with Sally began. And to my knowledge, Sally Hemmings was not legally married to anyone.
Obama’s inauguration speech made it clear that in spite of his staged show with using Bibles, plural, Obama does not live by the literal understanding of the Bible as God’s infallible Word for Mankind. Obama’s faith is in the Marxist COLLECTIVE STATE and he said if we have the federal benefites of Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid and Obamacare, we are “free”…..a satanic lie…it makeAmericans SLAVES TO THE OMNIPOTENT STATE. -Obama believes we get our rights from Washington, D.C., not from the God of the Bible who is pro-Life, is pro-marriage for one man with one woman, and will hold each person responsible for abortion, for homosexual activities, and for using government to persecute Bible believers, trying to take away free speech from and demonizing anyone speaking or teaching Biblical standards. Under the Obama regime, allChristian political organizations are being attacked by the “gay community” that has been funded with millions of dollars to libel, smear, sue and terrorize Christians who print and speak on radio and tv. We face four years of Obama leading a “progrom” like in germany in the 1930s, targeting religious and political opponents to the transformation of the USA into the New Sodom Collective Marxist State.
My mom and dad were my “creators”, and this isn’t the Constitution, which wisely not only left “God” out of the equation, but mandated he NOT be a part of the government.
The Declaration of Independence was itself a collective action: We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.Benjamin Franklin at the signing of the Declaration of Independence
Ramirez shows less knowledge about what the Founding Fathers believed when they talked about the “Creator” than some 5th graders I know.None of the Founders were believers in the modern fundamentalist interpretation of Christianity. None of them wanted a government that was shackled by religious doctrine. Some were devout Christians, but a few were atheists. Most were deists, who believed in some sort of Creator, but rejected the idea of miracles & divine intervention. All of them were shrewd enough to realize that appealing to religious sentiment would reinforce their revolutionary cause. The Declaration was an eloquent propaganda piece, but it is not the law. Claiming the Creator endows us with rights makes it no more true than claiming the ability to fly. Man can build and airplane to fly, just as man can build a political system that embraces justice, equality & personal freedom.
Indeed I am not. It is much more reasonable to interpret the Constitution as a living document. I was merely questioning Wraithkin’s apparent observation that the Constitution should not be viewed as a “living document”.
More to my point is a question I have posited before.
The Heller case recognizes an individual right to own firearms. It does not prohibit reasonable regulation
What is the rationale for private ownership of automatic weapons with high volume clips?
Why should manufacture and sale of these items not be restricted?
Some suggest that regulation of automatic weapons or high volume clips is on its face unconstitutional.
Some suggest that the second amendment is intended to provide us with the means to resist our own government.
That level of paranoia is disturbing.
By practice and interpretation, all of our cherished freedoms have been deemed to have limits. Reasonably striking a balance is the job at hand. The second amendment is not magically exempt from reasonable limitation.
@lonecatthe founding fathers were not mostly christians, they were mostly diests. they believed if there was a god he created us and left, kinda like a one-night stand that results in a pregnancy.I read it as the inalienable rights were bestowed on us upon birth, that’s why it’s our birthright.what many fail to realize is that the constitution is a “living” document and was intended to be changed with the times.
There ain’t no such a thing as “God-given rights.” If there were, then everybody on the planet would have them. Rights are demanded, claimed and defended by PEOPLE.
Over on Varvel the other day swr accused me of creating a “Reducto Ad Absurbim”. You know you’ve been refuted when somebody accuses you of a reducto ad absurbim. Ouch.
stej_dot_com about 11 years ago
ARodney about 11 years ago
“We the people.” “…and promote the public welfare.” It’s right there, folks.
lonecat about 11 years ago
What’s the point of this cartoon? Yes, I’m aware that the Founders by and large were Christians, and I’m also aware that when they wrote the Constitution they built in separation of Church and State. But as Obama said, God (even if you believe in God) doesn’t do the job for us — we have to do it for ourselves.
Jason Allen about 11 years ago
Assuming you believe in a “Creator” as the Founding Fathers did. What exactly is the point of this cartoon?
Chillbilly about 11 years ago
As far as I’m concerned, there is no “Creator” but you don’t need to be superstitious to understand the point that was trying to be made. Jefferson (the wealthy, elite, adulterous, slave-owner who invoked God) was an articulate power-player in grabbing land from the English King — and later using government funds to buy land from the French..That’s a pretty shaky moral foundation to stand on in spite of the many truths that are self-evident.
DavidGBA about 11 years ago
Our creator endowed us with the right to keep and bear arms? Where’d they get that. Oh, different doc!
charliekane about 11 years ago
The D of I. A great document of the ages!
And yet, an ignorant cartoon. Of what legal effect is the D of I in securing any right under the Constitution?
BTW, I don’t believe Tommy J can be classified as an adulterer. Martha Jefferson died long before any fornicating with Sally began. And to my knowledge, Sally Hemmings was not legally married to anyone.
disgustedtaxpayer about 11 years ago
Obama’s inauguration speech made it clear that in spite of his staged show with using Bibles, plural, Obama does not live by the literal understanding of the Bible as God’s infallible Word for Mankind. Obama’s faith is in the Marxist COLLECTIVE STATE and he said if we have the federal benefites of Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid and Obamacare, we are “free”…..a satanic lie…it makeAmericans SLAVES TO THE OMNIPOTENT STATE. -Obama believes we get our rights from Washington, D.C., not from the God of the Bible who is pro-Life, is pro-marriage for one man with one woman, and will hold each person responsible for abortion, for homosexual activities, and for using government to persecute Bible believers, trying to take away free speech from and demonizing anyone speaking or teaching Biblical standards. Under the Obama regime, allChristian political organizations are being attacked by the “gay community” that has been funded with millions of dollars to libel, smear, sue and terrorize Christians who print and speak on radio and tv. We face four years of Obama leading a “progrom” like in germany in the 1930s, targeting religious and political opponents to the transformation of the USA into the New Sodom Collective Marxist State.
Dtroutma about 11 years ago
My mom and dad were my “creators”, and this isn’t the Constitution, which wisely not only left “God” out of the equation, but mandated he NOT be a part of the government.
Newshound41 about 11 years ago
The Declaration of Independence was itself a collective action: We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.Benjamin Franklin at the signing of the Declaration of Independence
Uncle Joe Premium Member about 11 years ago
Ramirez shows less knowledge about what the Founding Fathers believed when they talked about the “Creator” than some 5th graders I know.None of the Founders were believers in the modern fundamentalist interpretation of Christianity. None of them wanted a government that was shackled by religious doctrine. Some were devout Christians, but a few were atheists. Most were deists, who believed in some sort of Creator, but rejected the idea of miracles & divine intervention. All of them were shrewd enough to realize that appealing to religious sentiment would reinforce their revolutionary cause. The Declaration was an eloquent propaganda piece, but it is not the law. Claiming the Creator endows us with rights makes it no more true than claiming the ability to fly. Man can build and airplane to fly, just as man can build a political system that embraces justice, equality & personal freedom.
lonecat about 11 years ago
DrC says, “Apparently, Ramirez thinks that God wrote your Constitution.” And he probably thinks the Founders wrote the Bible.
charliekane about 11 years ago
Indeed I am not. It is much more reasonable to interpret the Constitution as a living document. I was merely questioning Wraithkin’s apparent observation that the Constitution should not be viewed as a “living document”.
More to my point is a question I have posited before.
The Heller case recognizes an individual right to own firearms. It does not prohibit reasonable regulation
What is the rationale for private ownership of automatic weapons with high volume clips?
Why should manufacture and sale of these items not be restricted?
Some suggest that regulation of automatic weapons or high volume clips is on its face unconstitutional.
Some suggest that the second amendment is intended to provide us with the means to resist our own government.
That level of paranoia is disturbing.
By practice and interpretation, all of our cherished freedoms have been deemed to have limits. Reasonably striking a balance is the job at hand. The second amendment is not magically exempt from reasonable limitation.
lonecat about 11 years ago
That’s “rampant.” People, please, if you’re going to be insulting, at least try to spell properly.
dannysixpack about 11 years ago
@lonecatthe founding fathers were not mostly christians, they were mostly diests. they believed if there was a god he created us and left, kinda like a one-night stand that results in a pregnancy.I read it as the inalienable rights were bestowed on us upon birth, that’s why it’s our birthright.what many fail to realize is that the constitution is a “living” document and was intended to be changed with the times.
lonecat about 11 years ago
Hey, I was joking. I was making fun of Ramirez, not giving a history lesson.
SusanCraig about 11 years ago
the Founding Fathers weren’t Christians, they were Deists
susanwobb about 11 years ago
There ain’t no such a thing as “God-given rights.” If there were, then everybody on the planet would have them. Rights are demanded, claimed and defended by PEOPLE.
lonecat about 11 years ago
Over on Varvel the other day swr accused me of creating a “Reducto Ad Absurbim”. You know you’ve been refuted when somebody accuses you of a reducto ad absurbim. Ouch.
lonecat about 11 years ago
Hey, I don’t write the court decisions. If you’ve got a problem with the rules, take it to court.