"This country is founded in a covenant with God...." That statement certainly assumes many facts not in evidence. Here are but 3 basic assumptions: 1. That the God we have may have formed a covenant with is necessarily the right God to form a covenant with, where is our proof that we made the right decision? 2. That we are actually in a covenant with God, where is our proof of that? 3. That we are actually acting according to God's will, where is the proof of that? Why is it that while we in fact base our constitution on the separation of Church and State, yet hacks like Coulter argue that we should evaluate right and wrong on HER religious bias? Coulter is 100% self righteous. Self righteous people work from the proposition that their beliefs are right for not only themselves, but right for all people.
You see that which does not exist. Read the quote from Winthrop in context with the timeline and the politics at the time. Yes, there is separation of Church and State, that's a separation of power, not spirit. For example, that's why it still says "In God we trust" on the money. Coulter is simply reflecting the values that this country was founded on, values that still exist.
ART, Ann Coulter is a commentator. She is entitled to a point of view. The same goes for Krugman. He has a point of view and cites or makes up evidence as he sees fit to support it. Both no doubt are biased, but we expect that from a commentator. So really, when you say she is "biased", you are engaging in....gasp... an ad hominem attack.
it's funny to see you criticize Ann Coulter. Molly Ivins and Paul Krugman are just as bad. Don't you get it man. All these people are extremists. Stop posting articles by extremists to get your point of view across, it does not help your argument. For a guy as logical as you claim to be, I can't believe you don't see this. Absolutely amazes me.
First of all, you surely are not equating the founding of a nation on religious freedom and belief in God with sexism and racism and then hoping we "evolve" from that? As far as the racism, again, the times of the day. Like I tell some bigots, "Goddamn those slave traders, why couldn't they get their supply from Scandinavia?" In any event, that was the norm of human culture at the time handed down from eons before, based on the necessities of survival. And if you ask the Jews, the world still has some "evolving" to do.
Coulter is a hack for her party, just like Carville is. She is "biased" by her religious views as they relate to affairs of state. You support this? Why is it necessary at all to bring God into the disucssion of affairs of state? As long as freedom of religion is supported by the state, why do we need to go beyond that to begin to declare what is the right religion, or non religion for the citizens to be practicing? As much as some people want to make this a war between Christianity (the version that many Americans subscribe to) and other religions, on non religions, that is the wrong way to go. We must keep this on the level of what brings people together, not what divides them. All people want food, shelter, clothing, etc., even though they may be Christian, Atheist, Jew, Hindu, Muslim, etc. THIS SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION!!! I certainly support the rights of people to believe whatever they want. However, when they bring their religious beliefs into the political process, I have a problem. See. the bottom line with bringing religious belief into the process is that invariably you reach a point at which people will no longer be able to have discussions about what is right or wrong, as they KNOW what is right or wrong on the basis of their religious beliefs. We are being attacked by religious extremists, the Muslim fanatics, yet we find Coulter and others who are religious extremists of the Christian religion saying what is RIGHT, not on the basis of common sense, but on the basis of her religious views. Remove all discussion of God from the political arena is my wish. Leave religion to the people to practice as they see fit, not to proclaim what God should be, what faith should be, as it relates to public policy.
I support religious freedom, freedom for women, freedom for minorities. I don't support a state religion, i.e. Coulter's version of Christianity.
Coulter is a hack for her party, just like Carville is. Molly Ivens and Paul Krugman are hacks for their party too. You support this?