# God Hates Freedom!?!? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 25, 2003, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760 "2003-07-25T00:00:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/1 "2003-07-25T00:00:40Z")
The following was posted by someone using the name **biniohas** to a newsgroup at alt.politics.usa.constitution. While I’m quite aware of the board’s policy against full quotes from copyrighted material, I’m unaware of any way to link to a newsgroup post, or I would do so. Instead, I’m quoting the full “essay” here. If a mod. is able to produce that link, please feel free to cut the essay to a couple of paragraphs and insert the link instead. > [@](#): > > “Congress shall make no laws.prohibiting the free exercise thereof (i.e., of religion).” Those words have been summed up by others as having reference to “freedom of religion”, but a more appropriate summary is “freedom to practice idolatry”. > > They mean that America’s lawmaking body is prevented from making laws prohibiting America’s inhabitants from freely embracing whatever religious beliefs, philosophical beliefs, ideologies, weltanschuungs or opinions they desire, and from freely exercising the same. > > When those words, however, are carefully examined in view of God’s moral law, which commands mankind to perform his supreme responsibility to love, honor, obey and worship only the true God, and to abstain from idolatry, we see that the first amendment actually insolently violates God’s moral law and brazenly gives America’s inhabitants the deceptive “right” and “freedom” to honor, obey and worship whatever false gods they desire. It prevents congress from making laws against the inhabitants practicing agnosticism, freethinking and atheism, from making laws against them honoring, obeying and worshipping satan and from making laws against them even blaspheming the true God. > > Alas reader, in America, it is illegal to commit many petty crimes, but it isn’t a crime to practice the far more heinous crime of idolatry, or to disobey, dishonor or even blaspheme your Maker. The first amendment gives you the license to do so, with the guarantee of full protection of the law. Surely it’s easy to perceive that the first amendment isn’t form God. > > It’s clear from these facts that Satan dictated the making of America and the founders of America were heathens and servants of Satan, who didn’t truly value mankind’s supreme responsibility to honor, obey and worship the true God above all else. They therefore regarded mankind’s most holy and exalted responsibility as if it didn’t exist, or debased it below the contemptible level of manmade idolatrous religions, philosophies and ideologies of the world, and made no distinction between worship of the true God and idolatry. (Compare this fact with how they nevertheless distinguished themselves above blacks, Indians > and the poor). > > It’s impossible for God’s true people to imagine the founders of America having been true men of God , while realizing they did not make a distinction between the clean and unclean - the holy and the unholy - not desiring America to be established upon laws which honor and glorify the one and only true God, and prohibiting everything which dishonors Him. Blind patriots, false preachers and nominal christians view the first amendment , however, as the wisdom of America’s founders. But those with eyes to see perceive clearly that it’s actually supreme evidence of their blindness, foolishness and unregeneracy. The founders of America do not truly merit honor for brazenly placing this God-dishonoring verboten upon congress, nor does anyone who insists that it should remain deserve the slightest notice. > > The inhabitants of a society should never be given idolatrous freedom. Such evil “rights” should never exist and be protected by the laws of the land. It’s the solemn responsibility of the lawmaking body of a society to make an unmistakable distinction between the holy and unholy, while discouraging the unholy. By so doing, the government performs its proper role of perpetuating the proper values a society should embrace, and lays the foundational principles that promotes the true good of every inhabitant of that society. The legislative body of a nation should embrace laws commanding the honor, obedience and > worship of the true God alone, while also outlawing the existence, > emergence and importation of idolatrous religions, customs, > ideologies, philosophies and opinions and sentiments which tend > towards the same. There should be a heavy penalty against anyone who performs anything that dishonors the true God. > > The first amendment has caused America to open widely its doors to every unclean spirit there is . Therefore a vast sea of varied > philosophies, ideologies, theories, manmade religions and idolatrous sentiments exist within its borders, among which truth is as if lost and considered by the government and the people to be on or below par with all of heathenism. The government allows for the accommodation of all forms of heathenism and makes no true distinction between true worship of the true God and idolatry, nor does it discourage idolatry. > > Because the first amendment gives the inhabitants of America the > so-called “right” to embrace and practice whatever idolatrous > religions or weltanschauungs they desire, it actually inspires the > creation of delusions and deceptions of every type. It’s an inducement to the godless to invent whatever deceptive persuasion or viewpoint they desire for the purpose of brazenly expressing and exploring their foolish “freedom” for the purpose of giving deceptive justification to their particular idolatrous lifestyles and the evil deeds they desire to perform, for the purpose of publicly beclouding truth, leading the gullible from truth to their particular idolatrous persuasion, in order to gain a following, gain political influence for their particular ideology as a group, or to make riches and attain worldly fame. This is the reason why there’s such a great number of crackpots who call themselves leaders, preachers, experts and etc., and why there are so many different groups whose agendas are pure vanity, evil > and deception. > > Because of the vast array of heathenism, varying values are embraced by the inhabitants of the land. Practically everyone defines morality for themselves according to their own deceptive sense of right and wrong, or according to their value system. Although everyone differs in their beliefs, they are all right in their own eyes. Each of these differing value systems produce groupings among the inhabitants, which cause competition, disunity, disagreements, quarrels, hatred, fights, ongoing wars and schisms of all types. This discordance produces broken families, broken marriages, severed relationships between friends and associates - which produces much hurt, harm and even death. All of this in turn results in much litigation and needless petitioning of the government for redress of the grievances produced by the schism. But it is the government which allows the schisms to take place through the varied and foolish religions, philosophies, ideologies and etc., it allows the inhabitants to practice. Thus a foolish cycle of evil is produced by the first amendment. > > Since everyone have the so-called “right” to believe what they desire, everyone hotly resents being condemned by anyone else for their beliefs. In endeavor to live in harmony, a foolish spirit of > callousness or tolerance for one another’s foolish beliefs is practiced. Some people foolishly and hypocritically seek to refrain > from condemning others even when all common sense tells them they are wrong, saying, “You should not judge,” “They have the right to believe as they believe” and “I respect the other person’s opinion.” When people do condemn the other person’s foolish beliefs, it’s often done out of self-righteousness - for the purpose of exalting their own foolish philosophy, and not out of glory to God and His righteousness. > > The evil fruits of the first amendment are far more extensive than is realized. It’s the culprit that’s responsible for almost all the > outward manifestations of evil in America. Deliberate actions of evil are performed by the inhabitants because of the way they think -because of the idolatrous religions, philosophies or ideologies they embrace at the moment they perform their evil deeds. > > Since the first amendment prevents congress from making laws in > respect to the worship of the true God, God’s laws do not govern the sentiments and actions of the government. Therefore the government doesn’t take into account the basic fact of the total depravity of mankind. As a result, it doesn’t properly seek to curb the outward manifestations of depravity. In order to do that, it would have to officially make laws in respect to the honor, worship and obedience to God, and officially perpetuate the proper standard of belief, thought and behavior the inhabitants should embrace. Since it fails to do that, practically all the evil that takes place within its borders are the result of all the varied idolatrous beliefs it allows to exist. > > But despite the fact that evil manifests itself through all the varied > idolatrous belies, the government nevertheless foolishly makes laws that punish people who do things according to the particular beliefs it gives them the freedom to embrace. This is another foolish cycle of evil. How insane it is to allow the inhabitants to embrace whatever foolish ideology they desire and punish them for practicing certain portions thereof when they conflict with the idiotic ideology of democracy. > > There’s this foolish notion among the proponents of the first > amendment that despite the types of freedom which the first amendment allows, people should nevertheless practice their particular beliefs responsibly. On the surface, that notion might sound sensible; but a proper reflection thereupon proves it to be absurd. It should be understood that because of all the various beliefs the first amendment allows, all real responsibility is negated thereby. Responsibility always presupposes a single standard by which to do a thing. But in the midst of all the varied beliefs comes the single question: “By what philosophy, religion and etc., should people practice their varied beliefs responsibly?” Certainly the principles of democracy are not the proper standards since it is just another heathen ideology. The only way people can ever do anything truly responsibly is to turn > from their varied religions and ideologies and live by the single law of God. As long as the first amendment is in effect, it’s absurd to think of varying heathen beliefs being practiced responsibly, while the foolish beliefs themselves are already irresponsible and while the standard of democracy is also an irresponsible ideology. > > The first amendment manifests that the founding fathers sought to separate the government from what they termed “religion.” However, the word “religion” was a matter of semantics. They therefore manifested that they were ignorant of the true nature of government and the principles upon which a government must be established. There’s no way that a government can exist and function to any degree apart from that government being established upon some type of philosophy or ideology, which amounts to religion of some sort. Since government should function apart from corruption, it would have to do so properly > according to the righteous laws of God. If it doesn’t, it will do so > according to the laws of another god - namely Satan - regardless of the philosophy or ideology upon which it is established. Therefore, in the truest sense, government cannot be separated from religion whether it honors God or not. > > Instead of the founding fathers establishing the government upon God’s righteous laws, they chose rather to corrupt government by establishing it upon the heathen religion called democracy, while simultaneously deceptively semantically declassifying democracy as not being a religion. Since those who believed in democracy prevailed over all the other beliefs, democracy became the religion upon which America was established. > > In a previous paragraph, we stated that the inhabitants of a society should not be allowed to worship anyone or anything other than the true God - that the legislative body of a nation should embrace laws commanding obedience, honor and worship of the true God, while also outlawing the existence, emergence and importation of all other religions, philosophies, ideologies, opinions and sentiments which tend towards the same. > > There will be strong objections to the righteous principles we have herein introduced. Most people will say, “You cannot force your religion upon everyone else. You cannot expect everyone to embrace the same religion you embrace!” I would wholeheartedly agree with that assertion if it is a manmade religion or ideology I desire America to embrace. But the responsibility to honor, worship, obey and glorify the true God is mankind’s supreme responsibility commanded by his Creator. Mankind has no obligation whatsoever to manmade religions, ideologies, philosophies and etc. The inhabitants of America have no God-given responsibility to the idolatrous religion of democracy. If it wasn’t for this nation’s responsibility to God alone, such an argument would be valid. > > Those who would put up such an objection should be willing to > recognize and acknowledge that a manmade philosophy, ideology or religion is already being subtly or deceptively forced upon everyone in America in the form of the religion called democracy - a manmade idolatrous religion which gives no honor to the true God, but gives honor to itself or to the created and the creature. On the one hand, the founding fathers stated that congress should make no laws in respect to religion, while on the other hand, they made laws in respect to the manmade religion of democracy. Since it was impossible for them to establish this nation apart from some type of ideology, it would have been best to have established it upon laws respecting that which is right - in respect to mankind’s responsibility to his Maker, and outlawed all else. > > Another objection we will encounter from proponents of the first > amendment is, they will say “Even though the first amendment allows for a heterogeneous society, it also allow those who want to worship the true God to do so. You are not being prevented from practicing your religion and expressing the same.” > > But those who would make such an assertion do not really understand what it means to honor, worship and obey the true God under a heathen government and in a heterogeneous society. True worship and obedience to God puts saints in direct conflict with a heathen government and with all of the idolatrous religions and ideologies. The principles of democracy and manmade beliefs are the direct antithesis to the principles of the kingdom of God. If there are certain righteous practices of the saint which the heathen government thinks should not be practiced, the government is going to seek to prevent those > practices by seeking to bring the saints into obedience to the heathen laws of democracy. Therefore, because the saint lives in a heathen and heterogeneous society, he is going to suffer as a result of his worship and obedience to God. > > One final fact we wish to point out is that the first amendment bars all saints or anyone who would desire to serve in congress for the sole purpose of introducing a proposal of legislation in respect to the inhabitants of America honoring, glorifying, worshipping and obeying the true God, and who would make it illegal to dishonor Him in any way. It prevents anyone from serving in congress who would seek to do away with the first amendment and who would seek to establish America upon the moral laws of God - who would seek to make America a completely monotheistic and homogeneous society. Thus we see that no true saint has ever or can ever serve in the American legislature. The first amendment is a satanic mandate which bars saints and which holds America under satan’s evil bond. > > The patriots of America have more love, honor and respect for the > deranged way the founders of America fashioned the constitution than they have common sense. They would rather hold on to the first amendment and other crazy aspects of the constitution than to embrace the moral laws of God as the fundamental principles governing America. > > It shouldn’t be difficult for the leaders, the so-called educated and > the so-called experts of America to perceive the simple fact that an homogeneous society is better than a heterogeneous or pluralistic society. A society whose government imposes all of the moral laws of God upon its inhabitants is better than a society that allows heathenism. Righteous unity in a society is crucial to peace and harmony in a society. Okay, this nut makes even the Christian Reconstructionists look tame by comparison – at least their intent is to establish a theocracy by legal means! And I guarantee you that even the overwhelming majority of those who hold to one absolute morality would shrink from this guy’s solution of enforcing it by banning the right of anyone to believe other than he does. But this discourse is so thoroughgoing a tractate on the enforcement of morality that it speaks volumes to me on the need to protect freedoms. What’s your take on it? ---
**Author:** ![iampunha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/74df32/32.png) [@iampunha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iampunha)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/2 "2003-07-25T00:14:01Z")
1. This person has listened to one too many “They’re trying to take God out of our country!” rabid hyenas carefully disguised as televangelists. 2. This fellow really needs an in-depth look at the history behind Church-driven/operated states, with a particular look at the middle ages and Christianity in Europe and the zealous Islam states in the MENA area. 3. This person further needs to be actually shown what the text in question means and, more importantly, how. 4. It would be interesting in seeing a rebuttal of this character’s assertions (“argument” or “point” assumes that those terms are valid). ---
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/3 "2003-07-25T00:22:20Z")
It seems that there is no point of debate with this chap. We disagree (read: I think he’s stark raving effing mad) and that’s gonna be that. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/4 "2003-07-25T00:27:11Z")
My take is that he’s absolutely, 100% correct. Which is why I’m not religious. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/5 "2003-07-25T00:32:36Z")
> [@](#): > > 1. This person has listened to one too many “They’re trying to take God out of our country!” rabid hyenas carefully disguised as televangelists. Actually, while he is certainly from the same side of the border of rationality, he lives in a wholly different country. Their cry is usually “freedom _of_ religion does not demand freedom _from_ religion.” He is clearly crying “God demands there be no freedom _of_ religion.” Maybe if we put them all in one room they would annihilate? . . Millum? Is that you? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Ilsa\_Lund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a6a055/32.png) [@Ilsa\_Lund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ilsa_Lund)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/6 "2003-07-25T00:40:31Z")
Sure its not a \*Whoosh!!! \* I hope so, for our sake1:eek: ---
**Author:** ![Ilsa\_Lund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a6a055/32.png) [@Ilsa\_Lund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ilsa_Lund)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/7 "2003-07-25T00:42:29Z")
Ugghh, add a “?” and a “!” ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/8 "2003-07-25T00:50:25Z")
Well, to be fair to him, his view isn’t historically a unique one. A lot of people have criticized the idea of religious freedom. In 1864, for example, in his Encyclical _Quanta Curia_, Pope Pius IX condemned the ideas that: > [@](#): > > “the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones.” and > [@](#): > > “liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way.” And, there is a certain logic in a religious person being opposed to religious liberty. If you believe that your religion is correct, and other religions are false, then religious liberty can be dangerous, because it increases the possibilty that people will believe false things. ---
**Author:** ![Already\_in\_Use](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a9adbd/32.png) [@Already\_in\_Use](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Already_in_Use)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/9 "2003-07-25T00:53:12Z")
I have always liked what Roger Williams, founder of Rhode Island and pioneer of religious freedom, once said: “Forced religion stinks in God’s nostrils.” And, although I’m not Christian, it’s obvious to me that this cretin misses a basic point of Christianity: that man has the free will to decide to embrace or reject Christ. How would forcing people to act outwardly Christian make them truly Christian in spirit? Choice is the crux of the biscuit (although, admittedly, there is the whole predestination/predetermination branch of Christianity, which I’m conveniently ignoring for fear of the philosophical and semantic debate which may follow… ;)). ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/10 "2003-07-25T01:21:02Z")
If you really think about it only three of the Ten Commandments (Don’t steal. don’t kill, don’t bear false witness) are actually enforcable as crimes under the Constitution. In addition to practicing idolotry and taking God’s name in vain, we are also allowed to commit adultery, to covet, to dishonor Mom and Dad and to ignore the sabbath. This guy guy has at least five or six more essays in him. ---
**Author:** ![look\_ninjas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b2d939/32.png) [@look\_ninjas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/look_ninjas)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/11 "2003-07-25T02:46:56Z")
I’m still trying to digest the idea that the Founding Fathers worked for Satan. Also, I’m strongly resisting the urge to make the sign of the devil and shout “Satan Roools!!!” Oops. ---
**Author:** ![SkipMagic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skipmagic/32/20706_2.png) [@SkipMagic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SkipMagic)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/12 "2003-07-25T02:57:15Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic_ > **This guy guy has at least five or six more essays in him.** Good guess. He actually has 13 more. Or, really, whomever the true author was–I don’t know who actually posted this. Eh, the whole thing was stolen (I’m assuming) from [this page](http://tencommandments.org/idolatry.html). According to the site’s copyright, Robert T. Lee owns the silly thing–and I think he can keep it. After all, with a group name like the “Society for the Practical Establishment and Perpetuation of the Ten Commandments” one knows its followers are nuts. Of particular interest to me is another essay on the site with the name of [“America is a thoroughly corrupt tree”](http://tencommandments.org/corrupt.html). Not because I’ve actually read the essay, mind you, but because I like the name. It reminds me of what Memo said in Malamud’s _The Natural_: “I’m a twisted tree.” Silly trees. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/13 "2003-07-25T03:28:54Z")
I would love to see the Minnesota Multi-phasic (?) profile on the author. I don’t think I’ve ever seen any position quite like it. Of course, the next question is _Will the members of this society go to heaven?_ 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/14 "2003-07-25T03:35:07Z")
Sounds like another usenet wacko, **Poly**. Tell him to move to the Vatican if he has a problem. Hehehe!!! ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/15 "2003-07-25T03:52:26Z")
Geez, this guy could be Osama´s drinking buddy… 😛 Better to keep an eye on him in case he decides to go postal. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/16 "2003-07-25T04:35:06Z")
As a colleague of this fellow put it: God hates America. (I’ve never understood why He doesn’t hate Canada and Northern/Western Europe a whole lot more, under the criteria in question, but I suppose that’s a topic for another day.) ---
**Author:** ![iampunha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/74df32/32.png) [@iampunha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iampunha)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/17 "2003-07-25T04:45:56Z")
In line (sort of, I think)with that, **matt** , I was wondering if this was the latest effort of the guy who evidently didn’t think (warning: vile) [this](http://www.godhatesfags.com) or (again, vile) [this](http://www.goshatesamerica.com) were enough in his Hate Crusade. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/18 "2003-07-25T04:53:13Z")
Yeah, but at least with Phelps, we KNOW he’s crazy. I mean, even Jerry fucking Falwell thinks that Fred is over the top. ---
**Author:** ![Drastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Drastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drastic)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/19 "2003-07-25T05:51:29Z")
> [@](#): > > What’s your take on it? 1: Quiet, heartfelt gratitude to all the people before and current with me who have worked so hard to make sure I had the good fortune to be born into an increasingly secular society. 2: Sympathy for the level of cognitive dissonance I magine you have to occasionally feel by (nominally) sharing a religion with so many fucking kooks, pharisees, and assholes. ---
**Author:** ![Khan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3ab097/32.png) [@Khan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khan)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2003, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760/20 "2003-07-25T06:51:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\*On the one hand, the founding fathers stated that congress should make no laws in respect to religion, while on the other hand, they made laws in respect to the manmade religion of democracy. Since it was impossible for them to establish this nation apart from some type of ideology, it would have been best to have established it upon laws respecting that which is right - in respect to mankind’s responsibility to his Maker, and outlawed all else. \*\* So he seems to be saying that they were trying to make a nation that does not enforce an ideology. Since that is an ideology as well, they were trying the impossible and thus would be better off snuffing it and creating some kind of Taliban meets Landover Baptist meets the Twilight Zone… [i[thing\*. If you can’t beat 'em, join 'em, I guess, is his message here. But would it be a stretch to say, then, that according to that reasoning, doing something “by yourself,” say, like building a house is impossible too? I mean, you have to use tools, right? You have to get those tools, though. That means someone else made the tools, which you used to build the house. So you DIDN’T do it all by yourself. What if you made your own tools? There are still processed materials from which they were made. Then there was still the matter of making raw materials which, I guess, was God’s doing. So, if I interpret his logic correctly, to do something “all by oneself” or from scratch, is impossible too. I guess the solution to THAT problem would be then to pray to god to plop down a trailer. Is my interpretation consistent with what that dogmatic diverticular dweller said? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-freedom/190760.md?page=2)