The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
So… You Don’t Believe in an “early Christian America??
earlychristianamerica.com — I am always amazed at the references to "a different history" to what any writer states he or she has been taught concerning the impact of the Christian faith on early America. Of course people do not know that history … that’s the purpose of "government censorship".
lodibug3- 33 diggs
- digg it
- lodibug3, on 07/22/2008, -0/+10Government Censorship...
- cashman57, on 07/22/2008, -0/+9During our revolution the British soldiers used the pews from protestant churches for firewood and the churches for stables for their horses.
You won't read about that in government textbooks.
It is the reason freedom of religion made it to the top of the bill of rights. - KSew, on 07/22/2008, -0/+6"I am always amazed at those who make the claim that "they don’t recognize the history referenced herein about the Christian influence involved in an "early Christian America" - BUT, ALWAYS manage to "remember" those "naughty Christian" events ( such as the Salem Witchcraft Trials), which, of course, they must’ve read elsewhere than in the books used in their classrooms which taught them "that other history" they’ve referenced in the blog entries prior to this."
It goes to show that your preferences steer your beliefs and thinking
Katherine- lodibug3, on 07/22/2008, -0/+2Dear Katherine
It would appear that we've indeed pre-empted the only thing you knew about the Christian history of America (Salem). You apparently had nothing else to add, not knowing the history. Thank you for making my point.
Incidentally, one of the first lessons I always taught my students in Logic classes over the last three decades was to identify the presuppositions in a person's argumentation (what you chose to call "preferences").
Why? Because no one is "neutral" (including you, surprisingly). Everyone is guided by their presuppositional world view assumptions. Even in the subject matter they choose to address, let alone the manner in which they do so, ALL of us are non-neutral. There is no neutrality possible, not even in the subjects we "select" to comment upon.
That said, there is a great distance between "neutrality" and being "fair and impartial". People CAN be impartial. Are you, Katherine? Impartial, that is... Because you certainly are not neutral. Putting it your way... "It goes to show that your preferences steer your beliefs and thinking." But, is it only "preferences" - or - is it "presuppositions"? Which is it... or both?
- lodibug3, on 07/22/2008, -0/+2Dear Katherine
- scroogereport, on 07/22/2008, -0/+8Important stuff!!! Thanks for posting, digging, and shouting!
- Jesus2007, on 07/22/2008, -0/+7Very important information; Thank you!
- MarkEarhart, on 07/23/2008, -1/+7Government censorship does indeed hurt us all. It rips at the very heart of American liberty in violating the first amendment, and that isn't just in what is actively banned or excluded. Much of the time it is in what is substituted. Our entire culture and way of life is based on what television networks, publishing companies, news sources, and educational systems substitute and what they exclude. All have been working together for many years now to gradually dumb us down and prepare us to give up our liberties.
- Hangly, on 07/23/2008, -0/+4I hate to be the "that guy" but calling the US a "Christian nation" seems a tiny bit disingenuous to me. Would it not be better to say "heavily influenced" by Christian thought?
And not by all Christian thought either, but Protestantism in particular. We weren't anxious to import ideas like the divine right of kings, naturally. Catholic influence in the US is minimal.
Also calling the US "Christian" somewhat downplays the classical roots of our society , culture, legal system, etc. which I believe are at least as significant.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is