Interesting...... I had the exact same feeling watching Obama accept the Democrat nomination.

I hope we survive him.

i can explain why this scares me because of my interest in history. What is your fear based on?

I wish history did not repeat itself, but it does, because we never learn from it. When religion and government ride in the same cart, it is usually over a cliff. But if one is so caught up in the fervor of mythology, nothing anyone else can do can help you see that.

like the ignorance of atheism? or are we only allowed to demean those of faith?

Jeff in Houston

I find the entire display of Beck's gathering to be chilling, like the feeling of something evil being let lose on a society already confused by political fog. I hope we survive this.

I think you're giving him too much credit. He's a good snake oil salesman but his ratings did drop. Apparently some people are starting to realize he's a fake.

I've seen 4 year olds fake a cry too.

Demean people of faith? No. There are a few left that represent the old fashioned Chritian ideals I kne when i was growing up. Its this new brand of hate filled faith that we cannot afford. We will rip ourselves apart over something that makes about as much sense as the Easter Bunny.

So what are you progressives progressing too? A total Atheist society? Where only progressive thoughts are allowed? Where only progressive laws are passed? Where only progressive living will be tolerated?

Who are you progressives to tell anyone else how they should live and worship? All I know is that all the constant beat of racism at every turn has only numbed me to the term!! And when did religion become a race?

Nice racist name "sambo" (adding "li'white" doesnt make it less so).

Perhaps if you knew what liberals believed in it would help. Definition (of liberalism), courtesy of Merriam-Webster.

Lib.er.al -:One who believes in a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (as those involving race, gender, or class)

What, precisely, do you take issue with ?

The meaning of words, especially in political terms, practically change with every generation.

John Locke believed that individuals had a fundamental right to life and liberty. Isn't that what Glen Beck states. Rights are fundamental and not given to us by government.

What instills that fundamental right?

Somebody please tell me who created men equal.

My belief is that God did.

The political definition of liberalism has not changed, Illinios. Merriam-Webster lists the first known use of the word in 1819. Nice try though.

In fact, most of that defintion is found in Locke's writings, the majority of which he did in the late 1600's-early 1700's. So your argument about "the meaning of words" in this instance does not apply.

Funny that even Locke did not think slaves were created equal. Did God not include "all men."? Beck seems to leave some people out of the equation as well, (if you pay attention to what he is actually saying with his rhetoric).

Your kidding right?! You believe that all people who describe others or themselves as liberal are reading the Merriam-Webster dictionary reading? I suppose that all the people who are gay are, according to Merriam-Webster and all those who read it enthusiastically, "happily excited" or perhaps "keenly alive and exuberhant" and quite possibly being in "high spirits".

Perhaps the meaning has not changed for us. But alas it has changed for most of the population.

Perception of the word is how most use it, especially the media, bloggers and writers. Perception of the word is how most accept it. Perception, in todays society, sadly, becomes truth.

Nice try though.

If Locke is the "original liberal" than his word has been carried well by liberals today. As their thought process continually gives proof that their beliefs are paramount. i.e I don't like guns, guns are bad for society, I don't like God, God is bad for our society. Only their opinion is sufficient, for us minion have no concept or mental impression as to what is good for us. Only the elitist liberals can guide us true enlightenment.

Hogwash I say to Mr. McCollum.

Thank You for the honest debate Mr. McCollum. Wise words in today's society are fresh words. You've made me think. I hope I returned the favor. I would love to continue this discussion and debate, but time has me prisoned. This evening is my FFL draft, one of my very few escapes along with fishing, cooking, and running. Good Day Sir,thank you again and perhaps we will spar again. ; )

God Bless.

Mitch M...........Funny we have the same initials. Mine are Polish...Yours? Sottish, Irish, English somewhere from that wretched place where they believe that boiled meats are a good meal. Good day Sir.

Illinois...

Your kidding right?! You believe that all people who describe others or themselves as liberal are reading the Merriam-Webster dictionary reading? I suppose that all the people who are gay are, according to Merriam-Webster and all those who read it enthusiastically, "happily excited" or perhaps "keenly alive and exuberhant" and quite possibly being in "high spirits".

No. I would think that people who are "gay" (assuming you mean homosexual here) would select the appropriate definition, in this case "4a-homosexual" would likely be the most appropriate.

Perhaps the meaning has not changed for us. But alas it has changed for most of the population.

Perception of the word is how most use it, especially the media, bloggers and writers. Perception of the word is how most accept it. Perception, in todays society, sadly, becomes truth.

The meaning of the word has not changed. How ignorant people use it perhaps has, but we should not allow ourselves to fall to the lowest common denominator. Perception of the word "liberal" at FauxNews would seemingly be synonmous to "socialist" or "communist" (or to Father Beck, even "nazi"). Using a word improperly, even loudly and with great frequency, does not change what it actually means.

If Locke is the "original liberal" than his word has been carried well by liberals today. As their thought process continually gives proof that their beliefs are paramount. i.e I don't like guns, guns are bad for society, I don't like God, God is bad for our society. Only their opinion is sufficient, for us minion have no concept or mental impression as to what is good for us. Only the elitist liberals can guide us true enlightenment.

Well, let's look at this. Tell me what good guns have done for society? I grant you that in colonial times, in the 18th and 19th centuries, when people still hunted for food and to make a living. In "modern times" what good have they done? Do you really think it was the intention of the founders that every citizen have the right to weapons they couldnt concieve of when the Second Amendment was written? Do you think they would agree that the average citizen is entitled to a fully automatic AK-47 and 30 round banana clip?

God's role in society can be a profoundly good thing, (monastics in the dark ages argueably saved western civilization) or a profoundly bad thing, (crusades, inquistions -catholic and protestant versions-, witch trials, etc). Unfortunately, it is up to those who worship Him to determine His influence on society.

I welcome debate with anyone. We all have the rights to our opinions and to speak our minds, right up until it impinges on another persons right to do the same.

The pleasure has been mine. Ta.

To those who feel our country is not influenced on Christian beliefs - all I have to say is "though shall not kill", "though shall not steal"....these are all religious moral laws that (thank God) we must follow as part of our countries legal system....Aside from this I still believe we should all be allowed to follow whatever religious beliefs we choose..well as long as these religious beliefs do not entail sacrificing people on altars....

"though shall not kill" - unless you are the American govt bent on the next Crusade.

"though shall not steal" - unless you are a corporate sponsor to a campaigning legislator who will do your bidding.

Religion belongs in your home, not in my govt.

What about the other Commandments then? Keep the Sabbath Holy, meaning, don't change it from Saturday to Sunday. Why just those two? Maybe because they're common ideals that have been around since antiquity? Did people before Moses think killing and stealing were just dandy? No.

Your Government?

Regardless of the crimes that are committed. Laws are set in place. The fact that you state that our American Government is on a "crusade" to murder, and does not consider it wrong, proves to us that you believe the laws of God supersede the laws of government. If your government tells you that they want to murder, than they must be right. Your fundamental thinking tells you it is wrong.

Where did you get that fundamental thought of murder being wrong, if you claim your government believes murder is right.

Think about it.

There is nothing in the Constitution that has a hint of Christianity to it. It is an enlightenment document; a product of the enlightenment, not Judeo-Christian values.

In 1797 President Adams signed a Senate ratified Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11 it states, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS NOT IN ANY SENSE FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

Just Google the treaty and you can see it yourself from the US Book of Treaties at the Library of Congress

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/TreatyofTripoli.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/06/10/happy-treaty-of-tripoli-day/&usg=__DFrRQPAG6O_a6DK0u9U52GxgYvc=&h=1080&w=750&sz=70&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=EErChmV2GCGumM:&tbnh=143&tbnw=90&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtreaty%2Bof%2Btripoli%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26biw%3D1002%26bih%3D546%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=119&vpy=42&dur=2016&hovh=270&hovw=187&tx=101&ty=129&ei=2gF7TK2wOY-Vswaqo4iyDQ&oei=2gF7TK2wOY-Vswaqo4iyDQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0

So the pirates of Barbary and Tripoli were wreaking havoc with U.S. shipping and the United States ratified a treaty that included the words stated above. True so far. However, when one reads the history, one discovers that this was an early example of appeasement of (are you ready) warring Muslims. This sentence was an attempt to alleviate their fears that this nation would engage in a religious war. The treaty only lasted 4 years, and all subsequent treaties (there were several) did NOT include the statement about Christianity. I hope all readers will CHECK THE FACTS, just as I did.

...and where did you "check your facts" Katy?

Did your research also tell you that the original treaty, with the words "THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS NOT IN ANY SENSE FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." passed the US Senate unanimously. The treaty was also published in the newspapers of Philadelphia and two New York papers and there was never any public dissent.

Michael- what you state prefectly supports what Kathy says above. It passed unanimously because of fear. It was only for 4 years (presumably until the pirating slowed down or was more under control) and then on it was never stated that way again. 4 years is a relatively short time and anything written/done during those 4 years can easily be erased and restracted...At least that's what we're hoping come November!

Also, realize that newspapers back then were very different, they weren't posted online where anyone could comment on them immediately. Most people never even received a copy of the newspaper, and if they did, it was often weeks or months after it was printed.

Where did you do your research to determine that there was "never any public dissent"? I completely disagree with a very large portion of what is written down but I rarely ever write to the specific newspaper, tv show, etc that would show "public dissent". Have you been reading the latest history books? (you know, the ones that were rewritten to make all white christian people look like they are evil?)

November. I will answer each statement.

Michael- what you state prefectly supports what Kathy says above. It passed unanimously because of fear. It was only for 4 years (presumably until the pirating slowed down or was more under control) and then on it was never stated that way again. 4 years is a relatively short time and anything written/done during those 4 years can easily be erased and restracted...At least that's what we're hoping come November!

We do know, for a fact, that there is no record of debate or dissent in the Senate before it was ratified by a majority. It is interesting to note that although this was the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it was only the third unanimous vote in the Senate's history. This is also a fact. You want to attribute this to fear, on what do you base that?

That subsequent treaties did not include that statement do not somehow "prove" we are a "Christian nation."Is it your contention that we were not a "Christian nation" only for the four years of the treaty? Do you really think the United States was so weak?

Also, realize that newspapers back then were very different, they weren't posted online where anyone could comment on them immediately. Most people never even received a copy of the newspaper, and if they did, it was often weeks or months after it was printed

It doesnt matter, the fact is there was no protest. There is no newspaper report, historical documentation, which lists a single mention of public dissent over this treaty. The text was published in full in the Philadelphia Gazette and two New York papers (I do not know which ones). No outrage.

Where did you do your research to determine that there was "never any public dissent"? I completely disagree with a very large portion of what is written down but I rarely ever write to the specific newspaper, tv show, etc that would show "public dissent". Have you been reading the latest history books? (you know, the ones that were rewritten to make all white christian people look like they are evil?)

Interesting you want me to prove my research but ask none of yourself or those who you agree with.

You are right. Thank you for putting the point so well. Why do so many bloggers miss the point? America DOES have separation of church and state. We do NOT have a "national religion" (as so many other countries do). Why are so many people so afraid? No one pushes their beliefs on me, and I don't push mine on them. We are guaranteed the freedom to worship, or not worship, as we see fit. Thank you, to our founding fathers, for establishing our nation in this manner.

We don't have a national religion . . . . yet.

We are in a sad place that, in the year 2010, we are still embracing shammen that control the masses with fear and ignorance. I would hope, some day, we base our lives on human reason, not fantasy.

Jeff- your comment prefectly describes the fear and ignorance which the current Administration has used to pull the wool over the eyes of the sadly ignorant people of this country. The "shammen" you are referring to (and I am assuming you mean "shaman" since shammen is not a word) perfectly describes our current President and his little friends Pelosi and Reid.

Fortunately for the freedom lovers in this country, the majority of people are beginning to wake up from the really bad kool-aid they drank these past few years and are realizing what is really going on.

What are the "sadly ignorant" missing November ?

Dave. While some of the founders were Christian, most were Deists. I suggest you re-read your examples and take note that while "God" is frequently mentioned, "Christ" is not.

It is another fallacy that the "separation between church and state was originally to protect the church from the government; not the other way around." No. It is very clearly written. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." We are never to have a state religion, Christian or otherwise. This alone prevents us from being a "Christian Nation."

Just look at the news! Look at the nations overwhelmed with religous extremists. I see Amertican Christianity heading down the same path as the Taliban. I am old enough to remember when being called a Christian was nto an insult. They were kind, caring, loving people that I respected and honored. I fear this new Christianity of hate, bigotry, and lust for power, all in the name of your Lord or whatever.

I am an athiest, but I remember a time when I respected Christians as noble people I just did not happen to agree with. What the faith has become is nothing less than dangerous.

It's sad, Jeff, that you live in such a place where Christians are so terrible.

Where I live (the Midwest)- I am surrounded mostly by religious people (mostly Christians and Muslims but also other religions)- I also know some atheists. The vast majority of the people I know are good, honest, loving, kind, tolerant people. They try to do what is right and fair and honest, whether it is due to belief in a God of their religion or as an atheist- a self-imposed duty to be a moral person. That's not to say that there aren't some real self-serving jerks out there- they are everywhere- religious or atheist.

You are confusing the few bad people or leaders in a religion with the people of the faith themselves. Don't do that- it doesn't do justice to anyone, least of all you.

You have a very good point November. Every time I see one of these fake Christians, I should turn off the television, and quietly go do some volunteer work or something, for the people that do not matter anymore because they do not fit the mold of what some narrow-minded bigot has declared as "Uhmurikun". I can think of nothing that would inflame these animals more than caring for people who are different.

I think that's an awsome attitude to have Jeff! I have a hard time sometimes trying not to be judgmental and just do as you say- ignore them and go on and do something good in the world...

I know I am not perfect as a Christian- but I am certainly not fake. I try to do what is morally/ethically right (sometimes unsuccessfully as I am, afterall, only human), and do not use religion as something to hide behind to purposefully do evil.

On the other hand I struggle with my own inconsistencies- killing is bad- which means abortion is bad, yet I find myself being glad when a "bad" person is executed. I know this is inconsistent, and not what is taught in the Catholic faith, yet how can I reconcile the life of a rapist/murderer with an innocent baby? One of my biggest struggles....

....I hope you are able to ignore the bad and focus on doing good...at the very least it should help yourself by feeling as if you are helping someone. Take care!

I agree with you whole-heartedly. I am agnostic. I choose to not follow any one religion. I find them ALL to be repressive. So if my government chooses one, would that make me a treasonous heretic punishable under the law?

Seeing a cross on a hill or using our money doesn't bother me in the least. Nor does saying GOD in the pledge of allegiance.

Instead of our government deciding for all of us to be a Christian nation, maybe they should listen to the people. So many of us are screaming at the top of our lungs against what they are doing, or not doing, and no one is listening.

Fundamentalists of any faith are dangerous. So are some people who seem to think they have to "keep their powder dry," because their government is against them.

It was our own Founding Fathers that made that recommendation. That if/when tyranny returns to the United States that it would be up to the people to reassert control over government, again.

Tyranny was never part of the United States so it cannot "return" to tyranny. We have likewise never had to endure a "tyrant", (well there was...Bush and Darth Cheney) other than possibly King George and one can make the argument that at the time we were not a nation yet.

Those same founders wrote the Constitution, which support the federal government despite what many of these so called "patriots" like to think.

I keep hearing this "the middle east does it this way." So? Do you want to live that way? What is your point?

hahahaha
Hey kid. Remember when?

When photoblog used to be fun? When we came here to have a laugh and look a cool photos? When we knew who everyone was (virtually speaking). sigh. Those were the days.

Those were the days.

What you don't see in this photo is the guy dressed up like Julius Ceasar, ducking behing one of those columns. Or could it be Zaphod Beeblebrox? It certainly isn't George Washington.

Only Deep Think knows for sure.

I miss the old photoblog.

As my Korean friends would say...Katachogi!

I'll bet he'd be really angry about that. I don't imagine he'd appreciate words being put in his mouth under any circumstances.
I googled the quote. No one knows who really said it, but it wasn't George Washington.

Correct, it probably is false due to the fact that it wasn't recorded.

Please look at George Washington's proclamation of Thanksgiving being observed to acknowledge thanks AND prayer to Almighty God, regardless of your religion, denomination or whoever you are.

I imagine he wouldn't be that upset, he was definitely and disciplinarian and did believe in a creator. He may even have agreed with it if he heard it. But that is only my opinion and a debate for another day.

Illinois.

Washington was likely a deist. He was certainly not a Christian. He was also a Freemason. So yes lets look at Washington's proclamation.

He mentions "God", "great and glorious Being", "the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be", "the great Lord and Ruler of Nations", all terms more closely found in Freemasonry than scripture.

Note the lack of reference to "Jesus", "Christ", etc. No mention of "Christianity" at all.

The point is the quote on the back of the shirt references the bible. The bible is a the Christian book of worship. Washington was not Christian, no matter how much Beck and Palin want to try to make him be.

The Bible contains the Old Testament, I never mentioned that Washington was a Christian. Tough he did cast his hand upon one at his inauguration.

Masons believe in a supreme being, whether Christian or Muslim or whatever your belief. Do you know any Masons, ever been to a lodge. There is always a book of sacred law in the lodge, the volume to live by. In Washington's lodge, one that most likely believed in a supreme being, it would have been the King James translation of the bible. There is no sacred volume that is strictly Masonic, in other words no "Masonic Bible.

Free Masonary uses the Old Testament, Scripture, the Koran or whatever that lodge or member defines as his sacred volume referring to it's supreme being.

The Bible contains the Old Testament, I never mentioned that Washington was a Christian. Tough he did cast his hand upon one at his inauguration.

Yes, this is true. I point out however if you exclusively quote from the Old Testament you are far more Jewish than Christian. As I was not at his inaguration I will take you at your word. Most of our swearing in rituals are done on holy books. Nothing wrong with that, but it does not make one Christian.

I will also take your word about Freemasonry as my personal research has deemed it suspect in my eyes. We can call that Catholic bias of course, but there it is.

Yes. Your statements are beginning to coincide with mine. We are not talking Christian, nor Judaism. BUT. Our laws parallel those of the old testament. Agree or not, the foundation of a Supreme Being exists. And as we know from history and writings they were given to Moses. And those Ten Commandments with the first one honoring our Godg, not Buddha, not Christ, not Mohammed, not Martin Luther, not John Smith, not Ron L. Hubbard, not the Beatles, but God. Carry your interpretation as you will, it is regardless to the fact of a Supreme Being. When we believe that a man or government can deliver us our rights, we've become slaves. This is what " Father Beck" ( and why is that sarcasm to be used in what I believe is good debate, don't you), stresses. His rally backed him up. Priests, Rabbis, Ministers, Imams! All joined hands for his message.

Mr. Illinois.

It would appear the original concept of our debate, the seperation of church and state, has slid past in the minutia of the details.

I have no difficulty agreeing with you on the concept of a "God." I disagree that our laws paraellel the Old Testament, as they are common sense laws found in every culture eastern and western. I think it is safe to say the ancient empires of the orient had similiar commandments. Even the Native American cultures has similar laws. These are universal truths (Dont murder, Dont steal, Respect each other).

Father Beck was preaching to the faithful of "his" god (and by "his" I do not mean Mormon), not some generalized Judeo-Christian "god" or even the God you and I seem to be speaking of. The god Father Beck and Sister Sara speak of is this conserva-bot, gun toting, muslim hating, only these verses apply here "god." It is the religion where somehow Jesus was a conservative.

Well meaning people can be duped. That rally and this thread are ample evidence of that.

Dobie.

That is fine if you want to follow the Church of Glen Beck. No one is stopping you.

Likewise if people wish to wear shirts which attribute a quote to George Washington that he never said, that is fine. Personally, I would not like to wear my ignorance for all to see, but ok.

The question is about seperation of church and state, not Ayatollah Beck and Sister Sarah's come to Jesus meeting.

Illinois.

So to follow your line of thinking, Islam stands on the shoulders of both Christianity and Judaism. Do you agree?

If Beck wants to respect other people perhaps he should start by retracting and apologizing some of the things he has said on both his radio program and his televison show. Lead by example so to speak. Otherwise he is just another hypocrite using religion to line his pockets. We know how Jesus feels about hypocrites.

What's really interesting is how do you feel about Mormon's?

I pray to God, I am Roman Catholic. It's hard to believe that John Smith spoke with angels, but than again it was hard to believe that St. Joan of Arc also spoke to angels. Even Mark Twain believed that and you know how he felt about religion. Yes Islam does stand on the shoulders of Christianity and Judasim. What is your point? The founding fathers were deists (as you stated) and were farther detached from Islam than Christians. No religion is perfect as is any government. I have plenty complaints about both Roman Catholic Church and the Government of the United States. But I find them both inspiring to me, more so than destructing me.

I don't believe anybody wants a Theocracy in this country, but I do believe that most of the population enjoys the fact we are civil. We have had our problems, but have been a great asset to our world and all countries. We consistently find excuses to blame ourselves for atrocities that happen in war. If we were to not fight the good fight, what atrocities may have happened. It bothers me that the US has been admonished and ostracized for slavery when the fact of the ma?ter is that slavery has existed for millennia in human history. Why are we the only culprit.

The fact of this blog is that Glen Beck pushes this fact: Men are created equal, they are endowed by their creator to have certain unalienable rights, such as Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness being among them.

I believe his fear is that our Government becomes our God and that more and more of the people of this good country rely on government than themselves. Our fore fathers stated that all governments are instituted by man and are almost certain to fail.

It's is hard to argue against personal responsibility.

Illinois.

He argues against social justice and that is a major principal of Chrisitanity.

Personal responsibility is fine. Calling the 99%ers "unamerican"? What is that? Standing against health care reform, Wall Street reform ? For reasons demonstrably proven false? Why?

He makes millions and millions of dollars, he claims to want to bring the nation back to God, where is his Christian charity? Where is his caring for the poor, sick and imprisoned? Did he just skip over Matthew 5 and Matthew 25?

He argues against Social Justice imposed by the government. If you are forced to give charity, you are not charitable. If you are forced to help at the food shelter, you are no longer a volunteer.

Love thy neighbor, love thy enemy, this is the major principal of Christianity.

Mr. Beck is no charlatan, he may get preachy, he is entertainment and he makes millions. Do we know what he does with his millions? He seems to be a humbled man to me.

And Mr. McCollum, it is the "Salt of the Earth" that hears Mr. Becks message.

These people that hear him, in my opinion have been charitable, have been meek, and have for years now been looked upon as a bunch of "Jesus loving Crazies". The tides are turning and this country is not only beginning to believe in God again, but they will state it and be proud of it.

Amen to that.

He argues against Social Justice imposed by the government. If you are forced to give charity, you are not charitable. If you are forced to help at the food shelter, you are no longer a volunteer.

Wrong.

He attacks social justice taught in churches. From his radio show. ""Look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church website. If you find it, run as fast as you can." and ""I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church website. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words." (The Glenn Beck Program, 3/2/10)

That has nothing to do with "the government forcing the citizens into charitable giving." Nothing the Obama administration is remotely like that. It is ridiculous on it's face.

Love thy neighbor, love thy enemy, this is the major principal of Christianity

"Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself." - Matthew 22:36-39 (NAB)

That is the first and second commandments of Christianity, Illinois. Note the second carefully. I also refer you to the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5 and the parable of the goats and sheep in Matthew 25. Here is the essence of what it means to be "Christian." I do not hear Glen Beck preaching this!

Mr. Beck is no charlatan, he may get preachy, he is entertainment and he makes millions. Do we know what he does with his millions? He seems to be a humbled man to me.

Funny, that is the word I would use to descibe him to a 't'! He used a charitable organization to pay for his rally, which had little to do with "honoring the troops." In fact, I did several searches and cannot find any charitable organizations which Beck has made any significant contribution to or preference of.

These people that hear him, in my opinion have been charitable, have been meek, and have for years now been looked upon as a bunch of "Jesus loving Crazies". The tides are turning and this country is not only beginning to believe in God again, but they will state it and be proud of it.

Amen to that.

Only as long as we all believe in their God, Mr.Illinois. Otherwise, we are just one more group of "them" to be scapegoated. Once the herd up the Muslims and the homosexuals, Mr. Illinois how long before they remember that Catholics follow a forigen leader (the Pope) and all those predjuices and reasons the Catholics cant be trusted come back ? How long ?

Wrong.

Jesus said to His disciples, “Take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father. When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

“When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

“When you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites. They neglect their appearance, so that they may appear to others to be fasting. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, so that you may not appear to be fasting, except to your Father who is hidden. And your Father who sees what is hidden will repay you.”
As the hypocrites do

Don't you get it...Social justice will never exist. God is in every man. You don't want God on your side. You want to be on God's side.

The relationship is one on one. You and your Creator.

Mr. Illinois.

In what context was the verse you have given us? It is very easy to take things out of context and bend them so they seem to say what we wish them to say, instead how the speaker, in this case Christ, intended.

In this instance you are quoting a verse about the hypocracy of the Pharisees. He did not want his apostles to be the same. He wanted them to be sincere in their worship.

Father Beck's little gathering was the epitome of those "who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them..."

Don't you get it...Social justice will never exist. God is in every man. You don't want God on your side. You want to be on God's side.

Mr. Illinois, if this is true, then nothing in Matthew 5 and Matthew 25 is true. It cannot be both ways. Christ has told us what we are to do and how we should behave if we are true followers of His. I do not see this from Father Beck. I do not see if from Sister Sara. I do not see it from the majority of those who attended this rally or identify themselves as "tea partiers."

Government = control. God has never forced anyone to follow God's ways. It is your choice, as our founders believed. Religious leaders have twisted many beliefs. I pray to God not church. I have faith in God, not government.

Once again, a comment written in debate of one's belief begins with condescending words. Typical. As I previously stated. It's tough to show respect. Many prove it everyday as simple humans.

When you pray to your God (that imaginary being in the sky), surely you pick a denomination to 'speak' to him, a house of God or a religious house of worship. True worshipers choose to pray without the denominational aspect.

Religion seems to be the gift of Satan himself. With all peoples choosing to worship God, and die for their God, Satan wins every time.

Humans have a conscience and question what is good and what is evil. Surely there are thoughts that will draw the populations either way. How do we determine what is right and wrong. And after we answer that question, we must ask ourselves where the foundation for our belief of right and wrong first originated. Really, ask, who or what has determined our boundaries as a human race. Who has deemed what is acceptable?

There is good in the world and evil in the world. Both are driven by powers beyond us.

They are infinite in space and time.

Godless mongrels

Beck works for Fox News. Sarah Palin works for Fox News. Fox News donated $1 Million to the GOP. How was Beck's rally not political?

America's...

Most of the founder's were not Christian, they were deists or frankly, agnostic. Once again I see I need to repost what the first amendment actually says

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

This is as clear as can be. The United States shall have NO STATE RELIGION. We are a SECULAR COUNTRY. You can worship as you please (as long as you do not infringe on the rights of your neighbor to do the same). WE ARE NOT A "CHRISTIAN NATION" any more than we are a Jewish nation or a Buddist nation.

Beck's little get together did little to honor the troops and his inane (and historically inaccurate) rambling speech did little to truly honor God. It was all rhetoric and no substance. Same with Palin's speech.

Amen....whop guy....that's a joke by the way. Religion is an evil mechanism of separation and control. webeliever....I agree that religion should be personal and kept to oneself, get it away from government.