Charlie Daniels Tells it Like it Is

Thank you for posting that.

Yes, thanks for posting that. I have been seeing some NRA commercials lately that are similar, but
that is the best! The NRA may not be perfect but without them we would probably be disarmed by now.
I am a member and support them with additional $$ from time to time. It's about all I can do that
matters, I live in R.I. which is a way abundant state where a conservative vote just doesn't matter.

"CDB speaks for me, In America" it was a promotional line for his album "In America" about 30 years ago. He has been an outspoken supporter of God and Country for years. I remember a couple of years ago I was
traveling between North Central Iowa and North East Wisconsin, about the time I crossed the Mississippi river the opening of a NASCAR race was on the Radio and Charlie Daniels did the pledge of allegiance. Mr
Daniels was quite adamant that this was "one nation under GOD'

I love that commercial.

I wish I could turn loose about 10 terrorist at a time on my farm so me and the buddies could hunt em!!

Gene

(quoted from post at 09:06:11 03/29/16)
I wish I could turn loose about 10 terrorist at a time on my farm so me and the buddies could hunt em!! Gene

Click to expand...

U S Navy's Catch and Release Program

[u:37ee392a8b]

(quoted from post at 07:42:03 03/29/16) "CDB speaks for me, In America" it was a promotional line for his album "In America" about 30 years ago. He has been an outspoken supporter of God and Country for years. I remember a couple of years ago I was
traveling between North Central Iowa and North East Wisconsin, about the time I crossed the Mississippi river the opening of a NASCAR race was on the Radio and Charlie Daniels did the pledge of allegiance. Mr
Daniels was quite adamant that this was "one nation under GOD'

Click to expand...

Yup, under God added to the pledge in [b:37ee392a8b]1954[/b:37ee392a8b][/u:37ee392a8b]. The history surrounding the Pledge of Allegiance is interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance

I'm a firm believer in separation of church and state and think that should be eliminated from the pledge. And before you jump, I am a Christian.

Rick

why? that is what we are founded on no sense in changing now... wait what about the gays and transsexuals we need to make them happy especially that brave one bruce , makes me wanna throw up!

I don't see what the pledge of allegiance has to do with the separation of church and state. I
cannot think of a scenario where anyone has been or, could be, punished or censured for reciting
the pledge or for not reciting it. I think the whole point of the added line is to reinforce the
ideals behind Americas founding as a Christian republic, as a nation, we need reminding worse than
ever these days to keep those who would like to overthrow our culture at bay and not meekly give
in.

(quoted from post at 11:10:50 03/29/16) I don't see what the pledge of allegiance has to do with the separation of church and state. I
cannot think of a scenario where anyone has been or, could be, punished or censured for reciting
the pledge or for not reciting it. I think the whole point of the added line is to reinforce the
ideals behind Americas founding as a Christian republic, as a nation, we need reminding worse than
ever these days to keep those who would like to overthrow our culture at bay and not meekly give
in.

Click to expand...

No, read the preamble to the Constitution, the Constitution and the Amendments. No place in there does it say we are a Christian nation. Wars against a religion have never been won. Look at the wars fought just between the Christians and the nnalert. One side or the other may seem to be winning but they very really win because the other side always comes back. This has happened sense the first Christian and nnalert swords crossed the very first time. The only way to win is to completely destroy the other side. That means killing every man, woman and child. Christians and non-Christians alike are fighting the radical nnalert as we sit here discussing this on this page. Under God was added to the pledge when the government was spending a lot of money on national defense. Follow the money. They wanted the American population to think of the Reds as being godless. That's the big reason it was added. The military used to hammer at us "God, Country and Family" in that order. IMO they had it wrong. They should have said Family, Country and God". That's because without family and country we wouldn't be worrying about god. We would be a third world nation with tribal states and a multitude of gods.

Rick

Of course the United States of America was founded as a Christian Nation on Christian principles, every founding father wrote of the
importance of our Christain heritage and ideals, they all knew that the nation could not sustain itself if those principals were forsaken, and look
how right they were, our nnalert president has proved that point all to well. Except for the Jews, the only other non Christains who are fighting
the radical Islamists are only doing so to enforce their own brand of nnalert, not because they have anything against the idea of the caliphate in
general.

(quoted from post at 13:30:10 03/29/16) Of course the United States of America was founded as a Christian Nation on Christian principles, every founding father wrote of the
importance of our Christain heritage and ideals, they all knew that the nation could not sustain itself if those principals were forsaken, and look
how right they were, our nnalert president has proved that point all to well. Except for the Jews, the only other non Christains who are fighting
the radical Islamists are only doing so to enforce their own brand of nnalert, not because they have anything against the idea of the caliphate in
general.

Click to expand...

HMMM, did you forget that not every service member in the US military is a Christian? The Russians have troops and aircraft over there too. Lot of them are neither Christian or nnalert.

And actually a couple of our founding fathers were not that enthusiastic about religion either. You can look that up if you wish. Another little known fact was that a lot of the settlers were fleeing prosecution, not persecution. These same people, who had broken the laws, came here and settled and some even fought to free this nation. Others came because the were indentured servants. Others came because of free land. Basically it was the Puritans who were the group who fled persecution. They basically settle what's now known as the New England area. Lot of misconceptions about the settlers too. A very small percentage actually fought for freedom. Many were loyal to the crown. Others just didn't get involved. If you look at it from the point of British law the insurgents (that what they were), who did in fact used dome terror tactics, were traitors and had they lost would have legally been hanged by the British. Yep, that's correct. Many were legally British subjects, subject to British law who rose up against their own government. We call them insurgents today. That's our founding fathers. Remember "give unto Caesar what is Caesar's". Out founding fathers either never read the Bible or they ignored that part! Now I'm not saying what they did didn't turn out well for us or that they didn't do what was right. Just that thee so called Christian gentlemen were not as devout as some want to believe. Just for giggles read about what good ole Ben Franklin was doing in France during the revolution. You just might be shocked!

Rick

The founding fathers knew how the monarchys in Europe had used religion to enslave peoples and did not found this country on any religious principle but freedom for all [unless of course you were a slave]. They also knew how government adherence to any one philosophy would destroy what they were striving to build. Jefferson was a man who had questionable religious beliefs and Franklin was a [freethinker]. And how many years has Charlie Daniels spent in the military?

I can't wait for Charlie's next public service announcement.

"When fiddles are outlawed, only outlaws will have fiddles!"

True, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good idea. Not as good as outlawing banjos, but it's a good start.

Charlie Daniels spent no time in military.

The country was founded on non religious principles.

You will never get anywhere with the facts.

Boy isn't that the truth anymore. I wish musicians would stick to music and stay out of politics (that goes for lefties too) and people would be more skeptical of what they were taught in history class. I always thought America was founded on the precipice of freedom from religious persecution and oppression so people practice or not practice as they saw fit.

I'd bet if Mr. Daniels was speaking on behalf of a pro-gun control agenda, the venom would be just gushing from this forum. Btw, I'm a gun owner and lifetime NRA member I just grow a bit tired of guys like Charlie Daniels and all the gratuitous flag waving. Both him and Hank Jr. should just stick to what they're best at- making country music.

You were right for correcting me. Can't help but think sometimes that everyone should take time and really study our history. We live in an age of immediate information, and facts are ignored for perceptions that please our way of thinking. But men in cowboy hats do not always own cows, and are not often scholared in historical fact either. I used to like CD but now he reminds me of Lindbaugh.

formenwhogrow- " I always thought America was founded on the precipice of freedom from religious persecution and oppression so people practice or not practice as they saw fit."

Thank You for saying that! I don't understand where other posters got their 'Founding Fathers' history from.

BTW, I'm a proud gun owner too.

(quoted from post at 20:18:31 03/29/16) You were right for correcting me. Can't help but think sometimes that everyone should take time and really study our history. We live in an age of immediate information, and facts are ignored for perceptions that please our way of thinking. But men in cowboy hats do not always own cows, and are not often scholared in historical fact either. I used to like CD but now he reminds me of Lindbaugh.

Click to expand...

CD like a lot of people most likely said that because he actually doesn't know. That doesn't bother me as much as people who unlike you don't bother to check info given to them that contradicts either what they want to believe or were taught in school.

There is a guy who wrote a book, "The Lies My Teacher Told Me" about the misconceptions and outright lies in our grade and high school history books. It's an interesting read. Plus with a computer and the internet right in front of you, you can fact check what he says. I don't fault anyone who knows history according to what they were taught. I fault people who don't even know that.

I stumbled across and interesting thing the other day. The first laws governing building codes.

The Earliest Known Building Codes

Hammurabi's Code of Laws

(1792-1750 BC)

By far the most remarkable of the Hammurabi records is his code of laws, the earliest-known example of a ruler proclaiming publicly to his people an entire body of laws.

Hammurabi’s Code of Laws were all-inclusive; a few of them regulated the building contractors of the time. Of the 282 codes, numbers 228 through 233 are those which represent the rules for construction.

228. If a builder has built a house for a man, and finished it, he shall pay him a fee of two shekels of silver, for each SAR built on.


•229. If a builder has built a house for a man, and has not made his work sound, and the house he built has fallen, and caused the death of its owner, that builder shall be put to death.


•230. If it is the owner's son that is killed, the builder's son shall be put to death.


•231. If it is the slave of the owner that is killed, the builder shall give slave for slave to the owner of the house.


•232. If he has caused the loss of goods, he shall render back whatever he has destroyed. Moreover, because he did not make sound the house he built, and it fell, at his own cost he shall rebuild the house that fell.


•233. If a builder has built a house for a man, and has not keyed his work, and the wall has fallen, that builder shall make that wall firm at his own expense.


WOW! 1700 or so years before the birth of Christ! Sure were not exactly what we see today but they still addressed it way back then.

Rick

David G- "The country was founded on non religious principles.

You will never get anywhere with the facts."

Your statement is very true.

I oftentimes catch myself asking "Why is it that some people refuse to accept the facts, even when you show them."

What is it in their mind/thought process that makes them unable to see that?

Got any ides???? (I don't and I have been pondering this question for years).


Thanks

>1700 or so years before the birth of Christ!

Rick, remember you're talking to folks who think dinosaurs still walked the earth then.

There is no place in the constitution that even mentions SEPARATION of church and state. Only that "congress shall make no law" regarding religion.

We are all free to practice (or not) whatever brand of religion we choose. One of the things deliberately written into the constitution was that there shall be no "state" religion. This was in direct response to the Church of England being the expected national religion back in England.

Separation of church and state is a product of modern times as well as the supreme court legislating from the bench. Although, there are times when I think we ought to consider banning extremists.