Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Americas


Thanks Tree72Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:10 AM   #131
Ohhhh no
 
Daws77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: California
Posts: 7,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
It is even more fantastic when liberal has no clue what the context or source of their copy and paste jobs are or what they mean.
jimmyb just had to say something meaningless.
Daws77 is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:11 AM   #132
Commie Exposer
 
Jimmyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 38,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nwolfe35 View Post
Will jimmyb explain how the plain language of the religious test clause doesn't mean what it says?

Of course he will, that's why no one takes him seriously.
I have explained it many times and I will again. The no religious test clause means that no one has to take an oath to a particular Protestant religion to hold a federal office so that certain Protestant sects are not precluded from holding federal office. The clause means what the men who created it said it means, especially one of the authors of the no religious test clause, Oliver Ellsworth:

A religious test is an act to be done, or profession to be made, relating to religion (such as partaking of the sacrament according to certain rites and forms, or declaring one's belief of certain doctrines,) for the purpose of determining whether his religious opinions are such, that he is admissable to a publick office. A test in favour of any one denomination of Christians would be to the last degree absurd in the United States. If it were in favour of either congregationalists, presbyterians, episcopalions, baptists, or quakers, it would incapacitate more than three-fourths of the American citizens for any publick office; and thus degrade them from the rank of freemen. There need no argument to prove that the majority of our citizens would never submit to this indignity.
It was a direct rebuke of the Test Act of 1673:
That all and every person or persons, as well peers as commoners, that shall bear any office or offices civil or military. THE BAPTIST QUARTERLY or shall be of the household, or in the service or employment of his Majesty, or of his Royal Highness the Duke of York shall take the several Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, and the respective officers aforesaid shall also receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the usage of the Church of England. And be it further enacted that at the same time when the persons concerned in this act shall take the aforesaid Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, they shall likewise make and subscribe this declaration following. . . ."I, A.B. do declare, That I do believe that there is not any transubstantiation in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, or in the elements of Bread and Wine, at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever.

If you have some alternative history, produce it. You will not because it does not exist and that is why you are a joke when it comes to American history and the Constitution.
Jimmyb is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:11 AM   #133
Ohhhh no
 
Daws77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: California
Posts: 7,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
Hold the presses. Will nwolfe finally, actually make an argument by telling everyone what a religious test is and where it came from, or just continue to prove he is a bitter atheist whose entire worldview is based on lies that he cannot substantiate?
why make an argument for something that's not done and is anti constitutional?
that's your job.
Daws77 is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:14 AM   #134
Ohhhh no
 
Daws77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: California
Posts: 7,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
I have explained it many times and I will again. The no religious test clause means that no one has to take an oath to a particular Protestant religion to hold a federal office so that certain Protestant sects are not precluded from holding federal office. The clause means what the men who created it said it means, especially one of the authors of the no religious test clause, Oliver Ellsworth:

A religious test is an act to be done, or profession to be made, relating to religion (such as partaking of the sacrament according to certain rites and forms, or declaring one's belief of certain doctrines,) for the purpose of determining whether his religious opinions are such, that he is admissable to a publick office. A test in favour of any one denomination of Christians would be to the last degree absurd in the United States. If it were in favour of either congregationalists, presbyterians, episcopalions, baptists, or quakers, it would incapacitate more than three-fourths of the American citizens for any publick office; and thus degrade them from the rank of freemen. There need no argument to prove that the majority of our citizens would never submit to this indignity.
It was a direct rebuke of the Test Act of 1673:
That all and every person or persons, as well peers as commoners, that shall bear any office or offices civil or military. THE BAPTIST QUARTERLY or shall be of the household, or in the service or employment of his Majesty, or of his Royal Highness the Duke of York shall take the several Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, and the respective officers aforesaid shall also receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the usage of the Church of England. And be it further enacted that at the same time when the persons concerned in this act shall take the aforesaid Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, they shall likewise make and subscribe this declaration following. . . ."I, A.B. do declare, That I do believe that there is not any transubstantiation in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, or in the elements of Bread and Wine, at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever.

If you have some alternative history, produce it. You will not because it does not exist and that is why you are a joke when it comes to American history and the Constitution.
since the US didn't exist in 1673 it's meaningless.
fail.
Thanks from Hollywood
Daws77 is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:23 AM   #135
Commie Exposer
 
Jimmyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 38,074
What level of ignorance does it take to connect purpose of the no religious tests clause and the Test Act to when the US was formed?
Jimmyb is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:29 AM   #136
Ohhhh no
 
Daws77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: California
Posts: 7,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
What level of ignorance does it take to connect purpose of the no religious tests clause and the Test Act to when the US was formed?


Thanks from Hollywood
Daws77 is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:33 AM   #137
Ohhhh no
 
Daws77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: California
Posts: 7,488
Daws77 is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:41 AM   #138
Commie Exposer
 
Jimmyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 38,074
Nothing like a mess of out of context quotes and fake quote from atheist websites regarding American history to manifest raw ignorance.
Jimmyb is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:44 AM   #139
Ohhhh no
 
Daws77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: California
Posts: 7,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
Nothing like a mess of out of context quotes and fake quote from atheist websites regarding American history to manifest raw ignorance.
jimmyb has failed the am I obsessed test.
Daws77 is offline  
Old March 20th, 2017, 10:44 AM   #140
Senior Member
 
Hollywood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Memphis, Tn.
Posts: 15,906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
Nothing like a mess of out of context quotes and fake quote from atheist websites regarding American history to manifest raw ignorance.
Hollywood is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Americas

Tags
church, madison, state



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Church and State? and what they want US to believe! intangible child Americas 0 January 22nd, 2016 11:26 AM
Church and State ? azchurchmouse Americas 222 December 26th, 2013 08:11 AM
Seperation of Church and State Nwolfe35 Political Talk 26 March 11th, 2013 06:46 PM
The State Ruling The Church Tony Perkins Christianity 98 February 2nd, 2012 10:00 PM
Church, State, Constitution hillhopper Opinion Polls 42 July 26th, 2009 04:01 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.