I think I know what his sentiment is but don;t think it is expressed very well. This sounds like the state comes first and then it creates individuals. I assert that individuals come first and then create the state/society to assist themselves and others to have a better existence together. If there were but one individual on the planet he would not need a State.

This quote is appealing but standing alone it is bombastic and anarchistic. The idea of organized society, government is that we are in something together. Folks within that society have some obligation. Thus if one wants to truly be left alone he must leave the society of his fellow citizens, and give up the "benefits" of socializing with such a society. If one is plugged into the water, electricity, sewer, cable , transportation system, education system is it fair to shout out to the world "leave me alone".

I think you are missing something Mr. Archer. There may be many reasons why radical Islamists hate us (beyond the propensity to always hate the guy on top of the hill) but I suggest that their is something dreadfully wrong with the minds of folk who blow themselves up along with hundreds of their fellows. And something wrong with the theology behind it. To my knowledge the government of every Islamic country except Iran and Syria is at peace and on good terms with the USA

Listen y'all. Europeans came here because Europe was screwed up. Like 300 years of fighting over religious issues. The original colonists were a devout lot and in general believed in the idea of God. Remember this was all before Darwin and all of that stuff. Deists did not consider themselves to be non-Christian. If you go to Christ Chruch in Philly and sit in pew 28 you will be sitting in Washington's pew. Jefferson wrote a translation of the new testament and he stated his admiration for Jesus. The difference is that the colonial north american society was at it's highest levels Christian. They generally went to chruch regularly. But the puritan/congreationalists from Mass. and the Anglican/Episcopalians from Virginia and the Baptists and Methodists from Georgia, Quakers from Penna. etecetera did not see eye to eye on everything. They knew that to get along they had to establish a religiously neutral government. So the government they wisely established would be free of a particular church influence. That was not to say that the men in the offices established by the new constitution had to be secularists only that they had to rule fairly and wisely and non-denominationally. When you speak of the USA you must separate the society from its government. My European friends see America and Americans as the most relgious nation they know yet our government officially is not. I suggest that Islam is going through what Europe went through 500 years ago. Interestingly enough virtually every European nation has adopted the American political experience of freedom of relgion

THE EVOLUTION OF AMERICAN RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL THOUGHT: Ahlstrom in "The Religious History of the American People" says this and I paraphrase. "When the Baptists came to Massachusetts they campaigned to stop the Puritan Theocracy from hanging avowed atheists. Then they started telling the Puritans that people in Northern Europe decided in the 1400's that they no longer needed the Pope. Then they started telling the Puritans that they now no longer needed the Archbishop of Canterbury. This was in the 1730's. These Baptists were espousing freedom of conscience and independence. Independence from Rome and from Canterbury (the Church of England). Ahlstrom partly relieing on John Adams' (Adams stated the American Revoulution started during the religious Great Awakening of 1730) recollections says it was a short leap from 1730 thought processes to 1776 when many of the colonists decided: "You know what we don't need the King either." Add the Quaker experience in Philadelphia and the Rhode Island experience in tolerance and there is no way that one can say these colonies did not unite under the influence of religion in politics or that relgious history did not affect political history. The Tripoli Treaty was simply saying that under the American ideal of society mens conscience in matters of religion is free and tolerated and respected. That is why America was so unique. The conflict with radical Islam is that they do not tolerate or respect freedom of religion or conscience Paul is correct.

Not founded on Christian principles but founded by men who generally held some respect for divinity or representatives of people who held some respect for divinity. For a thorough understanding of the interaction of religion and the creation of the United States of America read "Religious History of the American People" by Sydney Ahlstrom, Princeton University.

Galileo was a crininal according to the Pope. Sir Thomas More was a criminal according to Henry VIII. The Salem Witches were criminals also. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Democracy is the only answer.

Mike you beg the question as to what State have you ever heard of that was run on the voluntary contributions of noble labor? We have 50 in this country. None to my knowledge is run with voluntary contributions.

All I am saying Robert is that concepts exist. They fire our imagination and motivate us. They don't exist in the same way that a rock exists. They are of a different type of existence. I suggest to you that the human brain and imagination spends more time with this spirit, concept, sentiment world than it does in what we may try to call the real world. Maybe this is why Jesus said "Man cannot live by bread alone (matierialism)". You are on to something also Robert with "kindness and compassion" and again I am sorry to refer to Jesus again but it seems he said it all before. He criticzed the religious people of his time for failing to be kind and compassionate just as you are criticizing the religious people of today for the same thing. I suggest both you and Jesus are and were correct. Have you ever heard of "School Spirit". Go to a local High School football game and then try to tell me that the kids don't have school spirit. All I am saying is God spirit is of a similar essence. Just as you cannot deny the school spirit or sentiment I think in fairness you cannot deny the "God spirit". You may not be caught up in the school spirit personally just as you may not be caught up in the "God spirit" but you cannot say that one or the other does not exist. Can you? In may not exist for you but does for others? The differerence between religion and ethics is most easily explained by the story of Abraham and Isaac. It was ethically wrong for him to kill his son but he was going to do it anyway because religion, God said he must. God does not have to be ethical. God by definition can be and do anything he wants to. In the end God changed his unethical mind and spared Isaac.

Since even the Bible tells us that God is a spirit (read concept, sentiment) you can not claim that "He" does not exist. You cannot deny the existence of concepts, or sentiment. Therefore you cannot be an atheist. You may say that you are a non-sentimental person or you may say that you believe in material things only and not in concepts. I suggest that with this understanding of spirit, concept, sentiment you will realize that the world is more this way than it is material. Freedom, liberty, and the Spirit of '76 are concepts but I believe they are just as true or more true than material things.

Just like the ancient state of Israel founded on a "Higher Authority", could not be subservient to the "immoral" Romans so our constitutionally inscribed "Inalienable Rights" keeps the sanctity of the individual inviolable in our society. As well as the famous words "endowed by our Creator". That the founders all had moral flaws, I do not doubt it for an instant. I also believe that the freedom of conscience inherit in these constitutional expressions protect us from the religions of man. The religion expressed in the constitution is of a much higher and more mystical quality than what our right wing so called " Christian Right" espouses, in my opinion. It even leaves room for the liberal point of view.

We have not made much progress at "informing their discretion". How else can you explain the multitude who believe that 2500 world scientists and hundreds of governments are all part of a left wing commie plot because of their warning about the global warming issue. There are so many among us that politcize every thing first and then back into their "informed" opinions from their political perspectives. You know the idiots in the church kicked Galileo out. In order to get along with them he lied about scientifc truth as he knew it to be. In order not to be called a commie by my right wing friends I have to give up on the common sense we see all around us. These politicized folk will never allow their "discretion to be informed"

Depends on one's definition of democracy. The American definition includes protection of minorities and minorities opinion and free speech. Speech is not just free for the rich or the majority but for all of us. Some folks claim a there is a difference between a democracy and a republic. That is a specious argument. The word REpublic means return to the people, or back to the people. The prefix RE means return or redo as in retry, try again etcetera so repubic has a more pure democracy ring to it than does the word democracy itself. Ours is a representative democracy. In a literal republic it would mean to return to the people with all questions of public policy.

Income tax is just as voluntary as when a police officer asks you to come along peacefully or whether or not he should use force. It is amazing that intelligent people think income tax is voluntary. It is voluntary just like stopping for a stop sign is voluntary. Children may think that stopping at a stop sign is foolish when no one is there to see you. As adults we usually learn the wisdom of the Stop Sign. The Tax Return is designed to be completed by adults under the penalty of perjury. It is required by law just like the stop sign. Unfortunatley in our society of imperfect people some times we have to penalize those who fail to stop or on the other hand fail to file and to pay.

I am of a liberal mind quite often and I agree with Reagan on this quote. So when you criticize the government and its' employees who are your neighbors look around and especially look into the mirror. Ultimately the government is you! Can anyone tell me of a time when people liked their "government". It is a human foilble that no one wants to be governed. What we need is a governable people. People who don't pollute, don't kill, steal, and don't hire illegal aliens etcetera. Until we get that I suggest we all support our government (local, state, federal) to take care of these matters for us and with our assistance.

Reagan who was not my favorite but he said it all in his quote. We the people are the government. So when folks talk about and criticize the "government" look around and particularly look into the mirror.