Original post can be found here.
——–
Aacantha posted :
I agree with both of your posts except for the statements about God.
As you already know, while the original European settlers came here because they were persecuted, many others came here because they were hungry, others came here because they were criminals; others were forced to come here; others came here because they wanted the equivalent to wealth in those days – entitlements and land. It wasn’t all about the belief of god.
I’m not inclined to base the next 1000 years on what a small group of white men, many of them who were slave holders, wanted for America. I really don’t think that they were thinking about me or my family.
In addition, I’m not required to base my life or the lives of my relatives on what dead men wanted (I think I got that from Ralph Waldo Emerson).
Some of us think that God is a myth. Some of us think that frighten men created gods to explain earthquakes and thunder and that men who later became known as “priests” exploited this fear to steal from the peasants and peons.
My position is that God, along with Apollo, Ganesha, Ra or Re, have the burden of proof to prove that they exist. Until they do, everything is on the table.
I certainly don’t think that I should pledge an allegiance based on a God that does not exist or swear to a God on a Bible that was written by superstitious men from the Middle East.
God was added to money and the pledge during the Red Scare to fight communism.
First, I make no claim as to why every single person came to this side of the world. Like I mention, everyone came “for one or another reason.” Some criminals volunteered to come to America. The Spaniards, being Catholic, came to populate the new lands Spain had “conquered.” The Scotts and the Irish came seeking better luck, especially after landlords in northern Scotland turned their backs on the clans. [Most of great “American” inventions have come from those of Scottish descent; what would we have done without them!] And the Mexicans!, the Mexicans were here before any “white” man made it to the West. Every came here for different reasons, but most had one thing in common: they all believed in a God.
On the point as of to whether the forefathers were thinking about any of us when they founded the United States, clearly they could have never imagined the country we now live in. But it doesn’t matter who they were thinking about, because they chose to create a nation that allowed for all their differences, and there were many such differences. Furthermore, their ideas came from hundreds of years of civilization, and government: Roman, Scottish, British, Greek.
On “what dead men wanted,” I must mention the fact that not all the dead men that have upheld the beliefs the Constitution holds died 200 years ago; some died just yesterday. We don’t want to offend anyone by saying God, or Christmas, or Hanukkah, or even wearing reflections of our heritage, like the Confederate flag or covered hair; but we do insult the memory of those who died so that we could say what we want, when we want – through any form of expression, so that we may live our lives the way we think best.
On another note, anything akin to “priests” are no more than religious leaders, whether legitimate or not. Man, since the beginning, has sought for guidance, and some have it in them to provide it. Power corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, no? What people choose to believe, and who they chose to follow, is up to each and every one. That’s why the world is filled with interesting people.
Oh, and the Middle East has nothing to do with this. Since when the books of the Bible, many of which have never been seen by the populace, were written most of the world was unexplored, and thus the writings should – at the least – not be judged as any different as those found on the Egyptian Pyramids, or the Chinese temples, or caves.
As to the currency encryptions, my point is that we, today, tell the world that having a God is okay; but we don’t dare mention him in public within our own borders. Ninety-five percent of Americans consider themselves Christians; yet as many of us don’t want to upset the others by mentioning this fact. The other five percent, regardless of what they believe or not, enjoy the same rights and privileges as the full 95%. So, if we can’t make allusions as to our religion because of the other 5% – most of which belief in God because they are Jewish or Muslim, and thus have to sacrifice our First Amendments rights, then why should day get to keep theirs. “Liberty and justice for all” doesn’t say “all those who believe in a God” or “all those who do not believe in a God”; it just says “for all.”
The point of my discussion is that we, as a people, are becoming dangerously segregated into factions – the same kind the forefathers tried to assuage when they founded this country. Factions are good, but too many factions may be the end of us all.
——-
For more information on the Scotts, I suggest How the Scots Invented the Modern World. Read it skeptically, then do your own research from there. I must say it has very nicely documented research.
Hello:
This is all from my faulty memory.
Hmmm.
As far as I remember, the country got beat up after the civil war and they were in no mood to interfere in other wars.
However, the Monroe Doctrine which was never really enforced because the USA had no real military power, asserted that the USA had the final authority over issues in the Western Hemisphere.
It was never enforced until Roosevelt used it in South America (Panama Canal, I think). Roosevelt knew that the USA needed a faster route between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans for financial and military reasons.
I also think that Roosevelt got involved in 1898 over Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico, in order to control the resources of those countries (sugar/tobacco.) In Puerto Rico, many corporations wanted cheap Puerto Rican labor. (I remember reading letters from businesses wanting to know whether Puerto Ricans would give employers a hard time or whether Puerto Ricans were passive).
I honestly don’t remember why the USA did not want to get involved in WW I except that the Europeans were always fighting with each other and the USA was interested in making money. Although Wilson ran against the war, I do remember that Wilson was secretly getting ready for WWI.
I don’t know much about how much the USA meddled in the Middle East and Africa, although I know that they did. The Shah of Iran, the Talbin, Sadaam were all “our guys” at one time or another.
I do know that the USA interfered greatly with Cuba, Nicaragua, Peru, Panama Canal and a score of other places in South America in the 1900’s for financial reasons.
The CIA causing riots, The School of the Americas, United Fruit Company, Death Squads, oil companies, and Allende of Chile all because the USA did not like socialism and communism.
Speaking about Somoza, Harry Truman is supposed to have said, “He’s a bastard, but he’s our bastard.”
A lot of innocent people were murdered.
And I think that we’re in this war to control Middle East oil because if it was just about ethics and morality, we should be in North Korea and Africa.
I sort of remember something about our technical advancement being an issue but I forgot the details.
That’s my perception of history. If South America, the Middle East, and Africa are screwed-up, we did some of the damage.
The bottom line is that I think that our willingness to jump in is based on capitalism, not for freedom or democracy. And that the USA (rightly or wrongly) protects big business over individual rights of foreign people or American citizens.
>>>> Now that I think about it, Rise to Globalism by Ambrose and Brinkley, and From Wealth to Power give a good sense or an actual explanation on why the US has gone from isolationist at the turn of the 20th century to “meddling” after WWII.
It seems obvious to me that the advent of technologically advanced weapons (including planes), the US’s financial position at the end of WWII, and its protective connection with Europe as a result of the Cold War, are the major indicator of its willingness to “jump in.” However, there is a bigger political issues; unfortunately, it seems to be more of a domestic than international problem.
Hey!
About your first paragraph:
Yes, I agree, thanks to the Roman Catholic Church, most of them believed in God.
However, what I was trying to say was that many did not come here FOR God.
The Spanish came here for God AND wealth. The Irish were just plain starving to death and just happened to be Catholics.
The rest of Western Europe, Catholics and Protestants, were just fighting with each other and I supposed that they wanted land for their particular faith but mainly, the poor were just getting poorer.
It wasn’t just about God. God was incidental. They still would have shown up here and stayed if we were a secular country.
God just gave them the justification to enslave the natives.
By the way, my great, great grandmother was apparently Irish. I think that she came here during the Potato Famine but that might just be my romantic link to history.
Second paragraph:
I know that they were big on Greek and Roman history, i.e., the architecture, paintings, and statues.
Other than Scottish philosophers Adam Smith and David Hume, I don’t remember what they cultivated from Scotland.
Holy cow, I’m like on number 2 and your on number 12. You are a fast typist.
Okay, I got the link. Get some rest. Good night.
Third paragraph: Dead White Men
I’m slightly confused as to what you are saying.
As I understand you, you assert that since the USA was founded on God, we should have “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.
My position is: Oh no, I’m not obligated to live by the rules of a few dead white men who had slaves. These are people who would have never let me in the building to discuss the issue.
While they did make the USA the greatest country in the world, I’m not beholden to them to follow their decisions now.
Don’t get me wrong, Franklin, Paine, Adams, and Jefferson are my heroes but the fact remains that they lived in an ethnocentric world. They had other considerations and the fact that slavery survived 80 years after the Constitution and that racism was officially condoned up into the 1960’s tells me they did not consider minorities well enough.
I borrowed the concept that I’m not beholden to dead men from someone. I’ll try and find the quote tomorrow.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.