If we legislate laws in U.S. based on the Bible . . .

[Imran Siddiqui]

It was more directed at the offhand way you dismissed the magnitude of Jefferson's achievement in getting god/s & religion out of State sponsorship.

Because it has no bearing on King. Basically WHO CARES?

In any case, to disagree with part of someone's public expression of their motivation is not to denigrate them. Sorry, but you're simply mistaken in suggesting I've denigrated him in any way.

Of course it is. You really don't see how asserting someone's motivation is kind of silly may service to lower the person in one's respect?

King was motivated in his campaigns for civil rights and against poverty by his Christian faith, his reading of 'Das Kapital', Mahatma Gandhi's writings and struggle against the British Raj and a whole host of other writers and philosophers.

All filtered through his Christian faith and all returning to his view of who God is.

Why are you so scared to assert that King was a Christian and justified his actions through his Christianity? It's akin to gay panic (faith panic?) and quite pathetic.

[molly bloom]

Of course it is. You really don't see how asserting someone's motivation is kind of silly may service to lower the person in one's respect?

No, it isn't.

I respect and admire Martin Luther King- both for his analysis of the social situation in the United States and the methods he chose to combat with the wrongs he saw..

Could you point out too where I said that his motivation was 'silly' ? Not only have you invented some denigration, you're now inventing things I haven't even said.

Why are you so scared to assert that King was a Christian and justified his actions through his Christianity?

I'm not. Simply claiming he was a Christian leaves out Gandhi and Marx (for instance) and the social analysis offered by his reading of 'Das Kapital' and the method of approach to the civil rights' struggle that Gandhi offered.

It's akin to gay panic (faith panic?) and quite pathetic

You're really scraping the barrel here:

A Catholic priest is part of a campaign fighting for Queensland to abolish what is called the "gay panic" defence.

Father Paul Kelly, from Maryborough, wants the Queensland Government to do away with the legal loophole that allows an alleged homosexual advance to be used as a partial murder defence.

Queensland, New South Wales, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory all retain the so-called law of provocation.

Father Kelly was inspired to start the petition after a man was bashed to death next to his church in Gympie in 2008.

Wayne Ruks was killed by two men who later said Mr Ruks had made an unwanted sexual advance.

"He had been beaten to death," Father Kelly told PM.

"We had the security footage that showed that this beating had happened within the grounds of the church, right next to the side door in the car park.

"The reason given for the bashing was that the man had allegedly made a homosexual advance to one of the assailants and that they lost all sense of proportion and beat him.

"He later died of his injuries and had been left lying there all night."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-11/petition-calls-for-end-to-gay-panic-defence/3767446

I thought you'd become a bit of a god bothering bore- but really, this is low.

[Felch]

Are you really this dense, or is it a put on ?

Certainly the thoughts and experiences that went into his communications were an accomplishment. He is still one of the great intellects of American politics- but then given the competition he had in the 19th and 20th Centuries, that's hardly surprising...

Jefferson's private correspondence were not any sort of meaningful accomplishment.

He had no role in the drafting of the Constitution. His thoughts and experiences were shared by many of his contemporaries. He certainly didn't "accomplish" the separation of Church and State.

[molly bloom]

Jefferson's private correspondence were not any sort of meaningful accomplishment.

How much of it have you read, if any ? Just curious.

His correspondence, as a record of his evolving political and philosophical beliefs, is an accomplishment.

He had no role in the drafting of the Constitution.

Something I already knew. So ?

His thoughts and experiences were shared by many of his contemporaries.

Such as ?

He certainly didn't "accomplish" the separation of Church and State.

Where did I say he alone did ? He was responsible for being the author of the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom. He was justly proud of this because as he said to Madison:

"...it is honorable for us to have produced the first legislature who had the courage to declare that the reason of man may be trusted with the formation of his own opinions"

[Felch]

His correspondence, as a record of his evolving political and philosophical beliefs, is an accomplishment.

You set a pretty low bar for accomplishments. But I guess you're free to do so. I supposed potty training is an accomplishment too, isn't it?

[molly bloom]

You set a pretty low bar for accomplishments.

So creating and developing a political system and philosophy to oppose that of the British Empire is not much of an accomplishment.
Well if you think so....

I supposed potty training is an accomplishment too, isn't it?

If you haven't yourself reached that stage, yes. As is saying anything significant in your posts...

[Felch]

So creating and developing a political system and philosophy to oppose that of the British Empire is not much of an accomplishment.

He didn't create or develop a political system or philosophy. For the third time: Thomas Jefferson wasn't involved in writing the Constitution. He was in France at the time. His philosophical "achievement" was cribbed straight from John Locke.

[Hauldren Collider]

Well, he was also the third President of the United States, completed the Louisiana Purchase, invented a number of things, and actually did develop the notion of a landowner's democracy. You're completely wrong about everything being cribbed from John Locke.

[Felch]

The Declaration of Independence was cribbed from Locke. I don't regard the dumbwaiter as a philosophical accomplishment.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Could you point out too where I said that his motivation was 'silly' ? Not only have you invented some denigration, you're now inventing things I haven't even said.

Your immediate reaction was faith panic. By lifting up Jefferson and his history of church state seperationism instead of dealing with King's primary motivator, which was his faith.

I'm not. Simply claiming he was a Christian leaves out Gandhi and Marx (for instance) and the social analysis offered by his reading of 'Das Kapital' and the method of approach to the civil rights' struggle that Gandhi offered.

I don't think anyone was trying to diminish the influence of Gandhi or even Das Capital to King, but if God is offered as a motivation, well it just has to be whitewashed. Especially if it is the primary filter.

You're really scraping the barrel here

You rather I call you an anti-faith bigot (can you run away even faster from someone's faith?) and leave it at that?

[giblets]

You're a paranoid Christian having an "atheist panic" who can't accept that not everyone reveres "faith" as a wellspring of love and charity

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't have to downplay someone's atheism or try to move the conversationally goalposts when it comes up .

(not to say that there aren't more than a few Christians who do have an atheist panic)

[molly bloom]

He didn't create or develop a political system or philosophy.

Oh, but he did.

Thomas Jefferson wasn't involved in writing the Constitution.

Again, I haven't claimed he was at the Constitutional Convention.

He was in France at the time.

I already knew this.

He was, however, in correspondence with Madison and several other of his Virginian proteges.

Perhaps if you'd taken the time to read any of his correspondence you'd have seen his direct influence on people who were at the Constitutional Convention. Jefferson knew what was occurring there, and in a letter of 24 October 1787, Madison gave him a lengthy account of the Convention's deliberations and a wide ranging overview of what the critical constitutional matters were.

His philosophical "achievement" was cribbed straight from John Locke.

'Cribbed' ?

He was inspired by Locke and by David Hume (amongst others), and he made no secret of it. He was also inspired by Republican philosophers and theorists from Ancient Rome and Greece. It's not like he made a secret of it, or was found cheating in a politics examination.

Jefferson:

" Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing... the harmonizing sentiments of the day whether expressed in letters, printed essays or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, et cetera. "

Letter to Richard Henry Lee, 8 May 1825

[molly bloom]

Your immediate reaction was faith panic.

Don't be (uncharacteristically) stupid. You're simply making something up for which there is no proof- rather like the offensive 'gay panic' defence.

I note you still haven't instanced specifically where I denigrated King or his motivation. Insinuation and innuendo aren't evidence.

You rather I call you an anti-faith bigot

You can call me what you like- within reason. However, I object to my mental processes on the subject of belief in the supernatural being compared with those of people who cook up an excuse for beating, torturing and killing gay men. What gay man wouldn't ?

I'm not an 'anti-faith' bigot, I simply object to an individual's belief in a god or gods being dragged into the public arena- and American politics as they are at the moment is one good reason why.

[Kidlicious]

I hope "anti-faith bigot" sticks. Good call.