[TheRealThing]

Christian reconstructionism notwithstanding, our Founders, at least a great many of them, and the most influential, did not exist in an intellectual vaccuum. They knew full well the movements sweeping Europe.

The words in the Constitution do not exist in a vaccuum either. Essential liberty and freedom of conscience are concepts that shine through.

You are in the "good company" of Christian reconstructionists, who, frankly, deny that this country, from the beginning, had ample example of the frailty of human nature, its faults and foibles and failures. From its misogyny, its prejudice, imprisonment of debtors, its "Trail of Tears," America has reason for humility and caution in the midst of triumphalist exceptionalism. This is a great nation, not a perfect one. Our Constitution, viewed at its highest common denominators, is a magnificent document. It illuminates our failures and lights a path of progess and freedom and equality. And that, friend, is no "retread" of what you are so often selling.

LOL, shining through now is it? Even though said phrase is a complete fabrication and nonexistent within any founding document? Nobody thinks the nation is a thing if not fraught with human missteps but of course, that has nothing at all to do with the conversation at hand does it? Said conversation went from double g saying homosexuality was wrong, to which you sprang forth in defense saying gay marriage doesn't persecute Christians. I asked what that had to do with anything and it was off to the races.

At that point there was a little back and forth between us with regard to the charge and charter of the Church to call out sin, you evidently think it should not, and then you called for a de facto compartmentalization of spiritual life from secular life. Then seeing your opportunity, you again injected essential liberty into a discussion of moral implications, over which the Church has purview I might add, and then accused me of being the one whose faith is shaped by political opinions.

A little more spiritual discussion and now you accuse me, and I suppose the whole of Christendom, with trying to change history using as it would logically follow, what you say are disingenuous alleges of Christian influence on the persons of Framers; Thereby polluting the true meaning of the constitution with tenets of the Christian faith. Anybody other than me see the problem here? One of us speaks up for God's influence on mankind as seen throughout history and in particular for this discussion's sake the Framers, and maintains therefore, that His unmistakable hand of influence can clearly be seen upon the US Constitution. While the other speaks against God's influence upon the Framers, quotes phrases that are clearly not in the founding documents and mitigates the severity of the sin of homosexuality.