James A. Garfield Quote

Sillik, believing socialism to be a moral or correct existence translates the tenets of religion into a religion itself. Because socialism can NOT follow a linear truth, those professing such religion must alter definitions continually to continue a lie (as do you). Your personal claim is to be the unique messiah of socialism - making you a god by definition (a theocratic leader; even high priest / god). Sillik, your statement: “If you are ever to bring me to the court room like you say and ask me to bring a god to the witness stand, I will have to admit I simply don't have one”; is a lie - by definition, you are there, in your full god status.

Religion is: a sacrosanct object of conscience (an ethic(s), a moral(s), a value (system) or an orientation of correctness / enlightenment) believed sufficiently conventional as to enable an attributable action(s). Religion’s initiating elements of conscience, through fruition of action, encompasses self-obligated pursuits, imperative practices and devoted interests outside law of nature’s absolutes. When such enabling fundamentals are drawn upon or referenced as authority, an issue of correctness, power, reason or logic to exert specific actions (ordinances, rules, statutes, a mandated action, etc.), a formal religion is established. A ‘god’, ‘causation’ or other ‘relegated source’ of such enabling elements may or may not be instrumental (or even useful) in defining religion.

Religion is: “real piety in practice, consisting in the performance of all known duties to ⋯ our fellow men.” (Bouviers Law Dictionary) Webster's New World Dictionary - Fourth College Edition uses a slightly different vantage on Bouvier’s “fellow men” by stating, Religion is: “a) any specific system of belief and worship, often involving a code of ethics and a philosophy [the Christian religion, the Buddhist religion, etc.] b) any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, etc. resembling, suggestive of, or likened to such a system [humanism as a religion] ⋯ any object of conscientious regard and pursuit”. Buddhism and Humanism do not claim authority of correctness from an extra-corporeal domain; - they are religions with with no such gods (much like socialism)

The concept of a god is but an indicating element, category, or tenant that may or may not be useful in revealing or identifying religion. For example; A concept of, or the word ‘God’ never developed in the Hebrew covenant society (there being only a sacred relationship between Father and child - ‘el’ being a powerful executor: i.e. a mayor, a governor, a demon, a person of strength such as Sampson, etc.) and was only adapted by forces and influences outside the covenant experience (such as by Egypt’s influence - an early attempt to communicate with captors; much like slaves with their socialist overlords). As such, Jesus, by carnal understandings and use, is a God to Christians while not being a god to other belief systems or religions, even though the Christ’s teachings are honored as good and His secular laws are recognized as a founding jurisprudence (gravity, science, physics, fiscal law, life, liberty and property / “the laws of nature and of nature’s God”).

Because the Christian God is inter-dimensional and eternal (science proving there being multi-dimensions), your socialist court has no authority or ability to call on such entity’s presence. Such socialist court claims sufficient authority and ability to call all temporal entities to bear. In that court, would you as a socialist call your socialist god to the stand? Your childish attempt at legal procedure and/or logic holds no validity or sense in the real world. It is obvious by your rejection of science, truth and all things substantive that you are an empty vessel incapable of progressing beyond a baby’s delusions. Not understanding the terms of this quote (freedom, justice, education, etc.) you are inadequate in addressing such.