America was founded as a Christian Nation

[Dante]

"The evidence is unanswerable and irrefutable."

http://www.earlychristianamerica.com/index.html

:laugh:

[Noir]

Sorry bout that

1. I would outlaw islam in America.
2. Label it a terrorist sect.
3. Tear down the all their places of meetings.
4. Buy up everything they own, send them away.
5. Where ever they will be welcomed.
6. Nip it in the bud, is the best path to take.
7. *We Are A Christian Nation, Love It Or Leave It.*
8. *Don't Tread On Me*

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Sure. Why let a lil technicality like the constitution get in the way...

[Noir]

I think the issue is really put to bed with John Adams in the treaty of tripolli....

"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen..."

[Dante]

I think the issue is really put to bed with John Adams in the treaty of tripolli....

"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen..."

If it's on Facebook it must be true: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Morocco-was-the-first-nation-to-recognize-the-United-States-of-America/86881863586

[Pagan]

I think the issue is really put to bed with John Adams in the treaty of tripolli....

"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen..."

The religious zealots Parroting the Political Preachers won't accept the reality. The U.S. was founded as a secular government in order to preserve religious freedoms.

They just don't have a clue and would rather go back to the Dark Ages when Religion ruled, you know like the Taliban in Afghanistan.

[Dante]

The religious zealots Parroting the Political Preachers won't accept the reality. The U.S. was founded as a secular government in order to preserve religious freedoms.

They just don't have a clue and would rather go back to the Dark Ages when Religion ruled, you know like the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Many of the Parrots think the Pilgrims and Puritans founded the USA. :laugh:

Ignorance, a hallmark of the great masses.

""As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..." - President John Adams, Founding Father of the USA :salute:

[Noir]

Hmmmm, the threads being going for over 50 pages, no doubt it will not be allowed to die like this, can't wait to see how the next 'america was founded as a Christian nation' post goes when it's there in black and white that it wasn't.

*gets popcorn*

[Dante]

Hmmmm, the threads being going for over 50 pages, no doubt it will not be allowed to die like this, can't wait to see how the next 'america was founded as a Christian nation' post goes when it's there in black and white that it wasn't.

*gets popcorn*

If the Christian wing in America, the Political Pilgrims of the Puritan Right, want to say the North American Colonies had a culture that was judeo-christian in it's make-up, they'd have no argument.

Instead they attempt verbal and intellectual gymnastics in trying to link the founding of the United States of America to a cultural and religious foundation.

The founding of the USA was more likely based on philosophical theories and economic desires -- what the Christian book say is the world of Caesar, not God, than on any religious bullcrap.

:cool:
DAG

[actsnoblemartin]

I think we were founded as a christian nation, and its funny how the liberal atheists are less supporting of israel then the conservative christians

Ill take a conservative christian over a liberal atheist anyday

[Noir]

I think we were founded as a christian nation, and its funny how the liberal atheists are less supporting of israel then the conservative christians

Ill take a conservative christian over a liberal atheist anyday

And how would you 'take' founding father John Adams who stated in the treaty of tripolli...."As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen..."

[Pagan]

And how would you 'take' founding father John Adams who stated in the treaty of tripolli...."As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen..."

Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.
-- John Adams

[Dante]

I think we were founded as a christian nation, and its funny how the liberal atheists are less supporting of israel then the conservative christians

Ill take a conservative christian over a liberal atheist anyday

I'm one of the strongest supporters of Israel that I know. Stronger than many Jews as well as con Christians. I'm a non believer.

Many liberals (non atheists) are Jews who support Israel more than many cons I know.

[actsnoblemartin]

well thank you :salute:

on some issues the religious and i agree, and on some we dont

but i notice some to a lot support israel

and the radical left, the pelosi's of the world, dont seem to

which is not to say democrats dont

[Dante]

well thank you :salute:

on some issues the religious and i agree, and on some we dont

but i notice some to a lot support israel

and the radical left, the pelosi's of the world, dont seem to

which is not to say democrats dont

Pelosi supports Israel.

but that is beside the point I want to make. Unless you are an Israeli there was no need to thank me.

[actsnoblemartin]

I stand corrected.

and i am half israeli :)


Pelosi supports Israel.

but that is beside the point I want to make. Unless you are an Israeli there was no need to thank me.

[SassyLady]

And how would you 'take' founding father John Adams who stated in the treaty of tripolli...."As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen..."

See highlighted portions:



Declaration of Independence

Here is the complete text of the Declaration of Independence.
The original spelling and capitalization have been retained.

(Adopted by Congress on July 4, 1776)
The Unanimous Declaration
of the Thirteen United States of America

<TABLE style="MARGIN: 14px 0px 18px 18px; DISPLAY: block; FLOAT: right; CLEAR: right"><TBODY><TR><TD><SCRIPT type=text/javascript><!-- google_ad_client = "pub-2109659921488806"; google_ad_width = 300; google_ad_height = 250; google_ad_format = "300x250_as"; google_ad_type = "text_image"; //2007-02-27: 300X250ATF google_ad_channel = "5708698882"; google_color_border = "F6F0E8"; google_color_bg = "F6F0E8"; google_color_link = "990000"; google_color_text = "333333"; google_color_url = "666633"; //--> </SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"> </SCRIPT><SCRIPT>google_protectAndRun("ads_core.google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);</SCRIPT><INS style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; POSITION: relative; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 300px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline-table; HEIGHT: 250px; VISIBILITY: visible; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0px"><INS style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; POSITION: relative; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 300px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 250px; VISIBILITY: visible; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0px" id=google_ads_frame2_anchor></INS></INS></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.

The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of
officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.


New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
Source: The Pennsylvania Packet, July 8, 1776



http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/doi/text.html
<SCRIPT src="http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/test_domain.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/render_ads.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT>google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);</SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT src="http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/test_domain.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/render_ads.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT>google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);</SCRIPT><SCRIPT>google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);</SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT src="http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/test_domain.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/render_ads.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT>google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);</SCRIPT><IFRAME height=undefined marginHeight=0 src="http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?format=nanxnan&output=html&ea=0&flash=10.0.45.2&dt=1284206040805&shv=r20100830&jsv=r20100903&correlator=1284206040805&frm=1&adk=4200934904&ga_vid=659523060.1281005157&ga_sid=1284206041&ga_hid=496940429&ga_fc=1&u_tz=-420&u_his=45&u_java=1&u_h=640&u_w=1024&u_ah=611&u_aw=1024&u_cd=32&u_nplug=0&u_nmime=0&biw=1004&bih=470&ifk=2266534230&fu=4&ifi=1&dtd=47" frameBorder=0 width=undefined allowTransparency name=google_ads_frame marginWidth=0 scrolling=no></IFRAME><SCRIPT>google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);</SCRIPT><SCRIPT>google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);</SCRIPT>

[Noir]

Erm, MKP, what is highlighted supports what John Adams and I said.

Yes it refers to a 'creator' and 'natures 'god'' but those are quite clearly either deist or pantheist statements, not theist ones. There is no mention of any specific god or religion.

Anythig to say about John Adams' statement as a founding father that the nation was not founded on Christianity?

[red states rule]

Erm, MKP, what is highlighted supports what John Adams and I said.

Yes it refers to a 'creator' and 'natures 'god'' but those are quite clearly either deist or pantheist statements, not theist ones. There is no mention of any specific god or religion.

Anythig to say about John Adams' statement as a founding father that the nation was not founded on Christianity?

Noir, I have to hand it to you

You have more spin then a Maytag washer

[Noir]

Noir, I have to hand it to you

You have more spin then a Maytag washer

SPIN?
It's a direct quote from John Adams, what spin have I applied to it exactly?

And if I say, 'i believe in a creator' or 'i believe in natures god' does that make me a Christian theist, or a deist/pantheist?

[red states rule]

SPIN?
It's a direct quote from John Adams, what spin have I applied to it exactly?

And if I say, 'i believe in a creator' or 'i believe in natures god' does that make me a Christian theist, or a deist/pantheist?

Somehow I do not think the Founding Father would agree with you. Given your age, and living in a liberal country I am not surprised Noir

It is clear what America was founded on despite your continued denials

[SassyLady]

Erm, MKP, what is highlighted supports what John Adams and I said.

Yes it refers to a 'creator' and 'natures 'god'' but those are quite clearly either deist or pantheist statements, not theist ones. There is no mention of any specific god or religion.

Anythig to say about John Adams' statement as a founding father that the nation was not founded on Christianity?

Oh, those aren't principles of Christianity? Perhaps they wanted to encompass all religions.

So, you are saying that American was founded on a principle of a supreme creator, also referred to as nature's god, just not the god of Christianity?

Adams is just one of the founders and as I said elsewhere .... the "founding fathers" weren't the only ones influencing the foundation of this country.

What words would have to be in the Declaration for you to believe this nation was founded on Christian principles?

[Noir]

Somehow I do not think the Founding Father would agree with you. Given your age, and living in a liberal country I am not surprised Noir

It is clear what America was founded on despite your continued denials

Yup. So because I'm young and British even though I can Have quoted you the text you say that John Adams and I couldn't possibly be in agreement.
How I wish I was old and American. Then he would be able to agree with me /sark.

[red states rule]

Yup. So because I'm young and British even though I can Have quoted you the text you say that John Adams and I couldn't possibly be in agreement.
How I wish I was old and American. Then he would be able to agree with me /sark.

and you would be much better off if you were in America. You would feel right at home in such liberal cities like NYC or Boston

[Pagan]

Yup. So because I'm young and British even though I can Have quoted you the text you say that John Adams and I couldn't possibly be in agreement.
How I wish I was old and American. Then he would be able to agree with me /sark.

Don't mind those who continually refuse to acknowledge the truth and reality, even when it's glaring them in the face. They will continue to spin in an attempt to twist the truth to support their own opinions.

I've actually found it rather humorous though that those who Parrot the Political Preachers insisting the U.S. was founded on the Bible/Christianity use the Deceleration of Independence. When the author himself was a Deist and loathed organized religion. :lol:

"Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth." --- Thomas Jefferson, from "Notes on Virginia

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813

"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson, to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814

[Noir]

Oh, those aren't principles of Christianity? Perhaps they wanted to encompass all religions.

They are principles of all theist religions. That's the very point I'm trying to make, they are not specifically suited to any one religion or god.


So, you are saying that American was founded on a principle of a supreme creator, also referred to as nature's god, just not the god of Christianity?

Yes, exactly that.


Adams is just one of the founders and as I said elsewhere .... the "founding fathers" weren't the only ones influencing the foundation of this country.

So you think John Adams was wrong?


What words would have to be in the Declaration for you to believe this nation was founded on Christian principles?

Well references to Jesus, the bible, the NT, the Lord our God, the Crucifix, the holy trinity ect would all of been reasonable if the nation was founded on the Christian god, bur it wasn't so it isn't.

[Noir]

and you would be much better off if you were in America. You would feel right at home in such liberal cities like NYC or Boston

As a matter of fact I wouldn't, but hey, if you wana talk about that I'd be glad to, in another topic.

As for this one, you still haven't told me how I spun John Adams' words to make it sound like he said America wasn't founded as a Christian nation...

[Missileman]

Oh, those aren't principles of Christianity? Perhaps they wanted to encompass all religions.

So, you are saying that American was founded on a principle of a supreme creator, also referred to as nature's god, just not the god of Christianity?

Adams is just one of the founders and as I said elsewhere .... the "founding fathers" weren't the only ones influencing the foundation of this country.

What words would have to be in the Declaration for you to believe this nation was founded on Christian principles?

How about the words "Our Savior, Jesus Christ"?

And how about the fact that the freedom of religion that this country IS founded on being in direct conflict with Christianity's "prime directive" AKA the first commandment.

Can you name any uniquely Christian principles that are codified into the COTUS that supports your argument?

[Dante]

See highlighted portions:

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

...

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.


See bold portion:
"Living is easy with eyes closed - misunderstanding all you see." -Lennon

You misconstrue and your mistaken argument draws faulty conclusions from a poor understanding of the context.

[Dante]

and you would be much better off if you were in America. You would feel right at home in such liberal cities like NYC or Boston

A liberal and radical, a self built and highly successful, Boston lawyer named John Adams, pushed the Colonies into becoming America, often against the wishes of the well bred conservatives.

[Noir]

Have yet to get my reply (primarily from RSR who accused me of spin) so I have put the Adams quote in my sig to remind him every time he sees my sig about it, hopefully one day he will tell me how I spun Adams' words to make it look like he said America was not founded as a Christian nation.

[SassyLady]

Here is the preamble for California's Constitution.



CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
PREAMBLE

We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our
freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this
Constitution.


I wonder how many other states reference God in their constitution...couldn't be very many because this isn't a Christian nation....correct?

[Kathianne]

Lincoln has been credited with the second American Revolution, one that kept the Union together. At Gettysburg he made it very clear that all, regardless of race or other criteria should have a chance to make it in this country:


Gettysburg Address
"Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead who struggled here have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion--that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."

I would not say 'Christian' but would say founded for freedom of beliefs. I think one needs to put into perspective all the founding documents, the Constitution makes clear that there would be no state religions established. While early colonies did have religion requirements, I don't think any did by late 18th century.

[Noir]

Here is the preamble for California's Constitution.


I wonder how many other states reference God in their constitution...couldn't be very many because this isn't a Christian nation....correct?

Quite a few states have laws/wording that break the constitution. For example I think 5 or 6 have a law that requires a religoius test if someone wants to take office even though that's specifically ruled out by the constitution.

But are you going to put the preamble of the Califorinan Constition over the United States Constitution? Never mind the words from founder Adams (who you still haven't said was lying and yet don't seem to think his words mean much).

[SassyLady]

Quite a few states have laws/wording that break the constitution. For example I think 5 or 6 have a law that requires a religoius test if someone wants to take office even though that's specifically ruled out by the constitution.

But are you going to put the preamble of the Califorinan Constition over the United States Constitution? Never mind the words from founder Adams (who you still haven't said was lying and yet don't seem to think his words mean much).

Not putting the preamble of any state over the Constitution Noir....just giving more evidence that God was/is indeed part of what created America. And, regardless of what founder Adams said. As I've stated before, the founding fathers (whom you think were the only people involved in the formation of the US) were influenced by their religion....not the lack of it.

[Noir]

Not putting the preamble of any state over the Constitution Noir....just giving more evidence that God was/is indeed part of what created America. And, regardless of what founder Adams said. As I've stated before, the founding fathers (whom you think were the only people involved in the formation of the US) were influenced by their religion....not the lack of it.

Well many of the founders were deists, that seems in little doubt. And I also have no doubt that whatever faith they did have it will of played a role in their lives. However that does *not* mean Maerkxa was founded as a Christian nation. And I dare say if there was a quote from a founder saying "America was in every sense founded on the Christian religion" then it would be on ever page of this topic and undeniable, however no quite exists, because the exact opposite is true, and not only that, but there is a quote from Adans stating exactly that.

[SassyLady]

Well many of the founders were deists, that seems in little doubt. And I also have no doubt that whatever faith they did have it will of played a role in their lives. However that does *not* mean Maerkxa was founded as a Christian nation. And I dare say if there was a quote from a founder saying "America was in every sense founded on the Christian religion" then it would be on ever page of this topic and undeniable, however no quite exists, because the exact opposite is true, and not only that, but there is a quote from Adans stating exactly that.

Here are some quotes from some founding fathers ... all involved in the creation of the Constitution....and it sounds to me like they believed that without religion, the Bible, Christianity, etc., the Republic would fail. Do you think they might have created the Republic, in part, based on religion and faith?






John Adams


Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Second President of the United States



It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue.


(Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, 1854), Vol. IX, p. 401, to Zabdiel Adams on June 21, 1776.)<?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O:P> </O:P>
<O:P></O:P>

[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. 1854), Vol. IX, p. 229, October 11, 1798.)



Fisher Ames<O:P> </O:P>



Framer of the First Amendment<O:P> </O:P>

Our liberty depends on our education, our laws, and habits . . . it is founded on morals and religion, whose authority reigns in the heart, and on the influence all these produce on public opinion before that opinion governs rulers.
(Source: Fisher Ames, An Oration on the Sublime Virtues of General George Washington (Boston: Young & Minns, 1800), p. 23.)<O:P>


</O:P>

<O:P></O:P>


<O:P>Charles Carroll of Carrollton<O:P> </O:P>



Signer of the Declaration of Independence<O:P> </O:P>



<O:P></O:P>

Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime & pure, [and] which denounces against the wicked eternal misery, and [which] insured to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments.
(Source: Bernard C. Steiner, The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry (Cleveland: The Burrows Brothers, 1907), p. 475. In a letter from Charles Carroll to James McHenry of November 4, 1800.)<O:P> </O:P>
<O:P></O:P>


<O:P>Benjamin Franklin<O:P> </O:P>



Signer of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence<O:P> </O:P>



<O:P></O:P>


I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that "except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service.
(Source: James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, Max Farrand, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. I, pp. 450-452, June 28, 1787.)<O:P> </O:P>
<O:P></O:P>


<O:P>Benjamin Rush<O:P> </O:P>



Signer of the Declaration of Independence<O:P> </O:P>



<O:P></O:P>

The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.
(Source: Benjamin Rush, Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical (Philadelphia: Thomas and William Bradford, 1806), p. 8.)<O:P> </O:P>
<O:P></O:P>

We profess to be republicans, and yet we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government, that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by the means of the Bible. For this Divine Book, above all others, favors that equality among mankind, that respect for just laws, and those sober and frugal virtues, which constitute the soul of republicanism.
(Source: Benjamin Rush, Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical (Philadelphia: Printed by Thomas and William Bradford, 1806), pp. 93-94.)<O:P> </O:P>


By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral subjects. . . . It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published. . . . All systems of religion, morals, and government not founded upon it [the Bible] must perish, and how consoling the thought, it will not only survive the wreck of these systems but the world itself. "The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it." [Matthew 1:18]
(Source: Benjamin Rush, Letters of Benjamin Rush, L. H. Butterfield, editor (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1951), p. 936, to John Adams, January 23, 1807.)<O:P> </O:P>



George Washington<O:P> </O:P>



"Father of Our Country"<O:P> </O:P>
<O:P></O:P>



<O:P></O:P>

While just government protects all in their religious rights, true religion affords to government its surest support.
(Source: George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1932), Vol. XXX, p. 432 n., from his address to the Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church in North America, October 9, 1789.)<O:P> </O:P>

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?
(Source: George Washington, Address of George Washington, President of the United States . . . Preparatory to His Declination (Baltimore: George and Henry S. Keatinge), pp. 22-23. In his Farewell Address to the United States in 1796.)<O:P> </O:P>

[T]he [federal] government . . . can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, and oligarchy, an aristocracy, or any other despotic or oppressive form so long as there shall remain any virtue in the body of the people.
(Source: George Washington, [I]The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1939), Vol. XXIX, p. 410. In a letter to Marquis De Lafayette, February 7, 1788.)

</O:P></O:P></O:P><O:P><O:P><O:P>

So it boils down to semantics .... founded as a Christian nation or a nation founded on Christian principles. You choose to believe what you want and I will choose to believe what I want....based upon the writings of the founding fathers and not what was written in a treaty with an enemy.



</O:P></O:P></O:P>

[Noir]

Here are some quotes from some founding fathers ... all involved in the creation of the Constitution....and it sounds to me like they believed that without religion, the Bible, Christianity, etc., the Republic would fail. Do you think they might have created the Republic, in part, based on religion and faith?

The bible was a tool of control, as are all religions and their books. But that is nothing to do with if the nation was foundered as a Christian nation or not.


So it boils down to semantics .... founded as a Christian nation or a nation founded on Christian principles. You choose to believe what you want and I will choose to believe what I want....based upon the writings of the founding fathers and not what was written in a treaty with an enemy.



</O:P></O:P></O:P>

Lol, well given their is no mention of Chirstianity in the founding documents of the nation I struggle to see what you're relaying on exactly, and you're still discrediting Adams' words, knowing more about the foundation than a founder is a mist odd stance to take.

Annnnd it is in no way a matter of semantics, there is a massive difference. By way of an example, I was in a convo with a Christian friend not too long ago, and I mentioned how I had forgiven a friend after they did some quiet dirty deeds that they knew would put me in a difficult position, and he responded 'it's good that you forgave him, that was the Christian thing to do' now I bite my tounge (find it hard to believe as I'm sure some of you will but irl I do tend to keep my thoughts to myself unless specifically asked) did I really do a Christian thing, or was it a human thing? I know which I think it was.

In the same way, just because a society is founded on beliefs like 'murder is bad' does not relate it to any religion or it's principles.

[Pagan]

Here is the preamble for California's Constitution.


I wonder how many other states reference God in their constitution...couldn't be very many because this isn't a Christian nation....correct?

Muslims refer to god as almighty also, so it must be and Islamic Nation eh? :laugh:

[Pagan]

Here is the preamble for California's Constitution.


I wonder how many other states reference God in their constitution...couldn't be very many because this isn't a Christian nation....correct?

Besides California became the 31st state on September 9, 1850 and the last Founding Father who died was James Madison June 28, 1836. You know the principle author of and is the "Father" of the Constitution.

Also again the Treaty of Tripoli which states -

"The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"

Which was unanimously passed by who? Only the Founding Fathers

Also as stated earlier in this thread -


How about the words "Our Savior, Jesus Christ"?

And how about the fact that the freedom of religion that this country IS founded on being in direct conflict with Christianity's "prime directive" AKA the first commandment.

Can you name any uniquely Christian principles that are codified into the COTUS that supports your argument?

Why do you feel so threatened by a Secular Government that protects an individuals freedom of religion?

[revelarts]

:

I would not say 'Christian' but would say founded for freedom of beliefs. I think one needs to put into perspective all the founding documents, the Constitution makes clear that there would be no state religions established. While early colonies did have religion requirements, I don't think any did by late 18th century.


And the Beliefs that ,i think its safe to assume, most of the founders expected to be predominate into the long future would be some forms of Christianity.

Many went so far as to say that if Christian beliefs where not a part of the general culture that the constitution and would not be sufficient to govern the nation. the freedoms it provides are not fit for any other people was the assumption. I could find it but i believe it was William Penn and George who both made statement that said as much.

Franklin was a bit more elites in his POV of the issue but basically believed the same thing. i don't think anyone seriously call him good christian Man, Franklin had a bad reputation with the ladies in France while there and apparently ran about a bit when young in the U.S. as well but he said and wrote many pro "christian" things from time to time.

DEAR SIR,
I have read your manuscript with some attention. By the argument it contains against a particular Providence, though you allow a general Providence, you strike at the foundations of all religion. For without the belief of a Providence, that takes cognizance of, guards, and guides, and may favor particular persons, there is no motive to worship a Deity, to fear his displeasure, or to pray for his protection. I will not enter into any discussion of your principles, though you seem to desire it. At present I shall only give you my opinion, that, though your reasonings are subtile and may prevail with some readers, you will not succeed so as to change the general sentiments of mankind on that subject, and the consequence of printing this piece will be, a great deal of odium drawn upon yourself, mischief to you, and no benefit to others. He that spits against the wind, spits in his own face.

But, were you to succeed, do you imagine any good would be done by it? You yourself may find it easy to live a virtuous life, without the assistance afforded by religion; you having a clear perception of the advantages of virtue, and the disadvantages of vice, and possessing a strength of resolution sufficient to enable you to resist common temptations. But think how great a portion of mankind consists of weak and ignorant men and women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth of both sexes, who have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in the practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great point for its security. And perhaps you are indebted to her originally, that is, to your religious education, for the habits of virtue upon which you now justly value yourself. You might easily display your excellent talents of reasoning upon a less hazardous subject, and thereby obtain a rank with our most distinguished authors. For among us it is not necessary, as among the Hottentots, that a youth, to be raised into the company of men, should prove his manhood by beating his mother.

I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person; whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification by the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it. I intend this letter itself as a proof of my friendship, and therefore add no professions to it; but subscribe simply yours,

[revelarts]

More quotes
pulled from the WALLBUILDERS website.

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=63


John Adams
Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Second President of the United States

[I]t is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue.

(Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, 1854), Vol. IX, p. 401, to Zabdiel Adams on June 21, 1776.)

[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

(Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. 1854), Vol. IX, p. 229, October 11, 1798.)

The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If "Thou shalt not covet," and "Thou shalt not steal," were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.

(Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1851), Vol. VI, p. 9.)
------------------------------

John Quincy Adams
Sixth President of the United States

The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal as well as a moral and religious code; it contained many statutes . . . of universal application-laws essential to the existence of men in society, and most of which have been enacted by every nation which ever professed any code of laws.

(Source: John Quincy Adams, Letters of John Quincy Adams, to His Son, on the Bible and Its Teachings (Auburn: James M. Alden, 1850), p. 61.)

There are three points of doctrine the belief of which forms the foundation of all morality. The first is the existence of God; the second is the immortality of the human soul; and the third is a future state of rewards and punishments. Suppose it possible for a man to disbelieve either of these three articles of faith and that man will have no conscience, he will have no other law than that of the tiger or the shark. The laws of man may bind him in chains or may put him to death, but they never can make him wise, virtuous, or happy.

(Source: John Quincy Adams, Letters of John Quincy Adams to His Son on the Bible and Its Teachings (Auburn: James M. Alden, 1850), pp. 22-23.)
------------------------------

Samuel Adams
Signer of the Declaration of Independence

[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.

(Source: William V. Wells, The Life and Public Service of Samuel Adams (Boston: Little, Brown, & Co., 1865), Vol. I, p. 22, quoting from a political essay by Samuel Adams published in The Public Advertiser, 1749.)
------------------------------

Fisher Ames
Framer of the First Amendment

Our liberty depends on our education, our laws, and habits . . . it is founded on morals and religion, whose authority reigns in the heart, and on the influence all these produce on public opinion before that opinion governs rulers.

(Source: Fisher Ames, An Oration on the Sublime Virtues of General George Washington (Boston: Young & Minns, 1800), p. 23.)
------------------------------

Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Signer of the Declaration of Independence

Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime & pure, [and] which denounces against the wicked eternal misery, and [which] insured to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments.

(Source: Bernard C. Steiner, The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry (Cleveland: The Burrows Brothers, 1907), p. 475. In a letter from Charles Carroll to James McHenry of November 4, 1800.)
------------------------------

Oliver Ellsworth
Chief-Justice of the Supreme Court

[T]he primary objects of government are the peace, order, and prosperity of society. . . . To the promotion of these objects, particularly in a republican government, good morals are essential. Institutions for the promotion of good morals are therefore objects of legislative provision and support: and among these . . . religious institutions are eminently useful and important. . . . [T]he legislature, charged with the great interests of the community, may, and ought to countenance, aid and protect religious institutions—institutions wisely calculated to direct men to the performance of all the duties arising from their connection with each other, and to prevent or repress those evils which flow from unrestrained passion.

(Source: Connecticut Courant, June 7, 1802, p. 3, Oliver Ellsworth, to the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut)
------------------------------

Benjamin Franklin
Signer of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence

[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.

(Source: Benjamin Franklin, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, editor (Boston: Tappan, Whittemore and Mason, 1840), Vol. X, p. 297, April 17, 1787. )

I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that "except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.

I therefore beg leave to move that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service.

(Source: James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, Max Farrand, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. I, pp. 450-452, June 28, 1787.)

------------------------------


Thomas Jefferson
Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Third President of the United States

Give up money, give up fame, give up science, give the earth itself and all it contains rather than do an immoral act. And never suppose that in any possible situation, or under any circumstances, it is best for you to do a dishonorable thing, however slightly so it may appear to you. Whenever you are to do a thing, though it can never be known but to yourself, ask yourself how you would act were all the world looking at you, and act accordingly. Encourage all your virtuous dispositions, and exercise them whenever an opportunity arises, being assured that they will gain strength by exercise, as a limb of the body does, and that exercise will make them habitual. From the practice of the purest virtue, you may be assured you will derive the most sublime comforts in every moment of life, and in the moment of death.

(Source: Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, DC: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1903), Vol. 5, pp. 82-83, in a letter to his nephew Peter Carr on August 19, 1785.)

The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of mankind.

(Source: Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XV, p. 383.)

I concur with the author in considering the moral precepts of Jesus as more pure, correct, and sublime than those of ancient philosophers.

(Source: Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. X, pp. 376-377. In a letter to Edward Dowse on April 19, 1803.)
------------------------------

Richard Henry Lee
Signer of the Declaration of Independence

It is certainly true that a popular government cannot flourish without virtue in the people.

(Source: Richard Henry Lee, The Letters of Richard Henry Lee, James Curtis Ballagh, editor (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1914), Vol. II, p. 411. In a letter to Colonel Mortin Pickett on March 5, 1786.)
------------------------------

James McHenry
Signer of the Constitution

[P]ublic utility pleads most forcibly for the general distribution of the Holy Scriptures. The doctrine they preach, the obligations they impose, the punishment they threaten, the rewards they promise, the stamp and image of divinity they bear, which produces a conviction of their truths, can alone secure to society, order and peace, and to our courts of justice and constitutions of government, purity, stability and usefulness. In vain, without the Bible, we increase penal laws and draw entrenchments around our institutions. Bibles are strong entrenchments. Where they abound, men cannot pursue wicked courses, and at the same time enjoy quiet conscience.

(Source: Bernard C. Steiner, One Hundred and Ten Years of Bible Society Work in Maryland, 1810-1920 (Maryland Bible Society, 1921), p. 14.)
------------------------------

Jedediah Morse
Patriot and "Father of American Geography"

To the kindly influence of Christianity we owe that degree of civil freedom, and political and social happiness which mankind now enjoys. . . . Whenever the pillars of Christianity shall be overthrown, our present republican forms of government, and all blessings which flow from them, must fall with them.

(Source: Jedidiah Morse, A Sermon, Exhibiting the Present Dangers and Consequent Duties of the Citizens of the United States of America (Hartford: Hudson and Goodwin, 1799), p. 9.)

William Penn
Founder of Pennsylvania

[I]t is impossible that any people of government should ever prosper, where men render not unto God, that which is God's, as well as to Caesar, that which is Caesar's.

(Source: Fundamental Constitutions of Pennsylvania, 1682. Written by William Penn, founder of the colony of Pennsylvania.)
------------------------------

Pennsylvania Supreme Court
No free government now exists in the world, unless where Christianity is acknowledged, and is the religion of the country.

(Source: Pennsylvania Supreme Court, 1824. Updegraph v. Commonwealth; 11 Serg. & R. 393, 406 (Sup.Ct. Penn. 1824).)
------------------------------

Benjamin Rush
Signer of the Declaration of Independence

The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.

(Source: Benjamin Rush, Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical (Philadelphia: Thomas and William Bradford, 1806), p. 8.)

We profess to be republicans, and yet we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government, that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by the means of the Bible. For this Divine Book, above all others, favors that equality among mankind, that respect for just laws, and those sober and frugal virtues, which constitute the soul of republicanism.

(Source: Benjamin Rush, Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical (Philadelphia: Printed by Thomas and William Bradford, 1806), pp. 93-94.)

By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral subjects. . . . It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published. . . . All systems of religion, morals, and government not founded upon it [the Bible] must perish, and how consoling the thought, it will not only survive the wreck of these systems but the world itself. "The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it." [Matthew 1:18]

(Source: Benjamin Rush, Letters of Benjamin Rush, L. H. Butterfield, editor (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1951), p. 936, to John Adams, January 23, 1807.)

Remember that national crimes require national punishments, and without declaring what punishment awaits this evil, you may venture to assure them that it cannot pass with impunity, unless God shall cease to be just or merciful.

(Source: Benjamin Rush, An Address to the Inhabitants of the British Settlements in America Upon Slave-Keeping (Boston: John Boyles, 1773), p. 30.)
------------------------------

Joseph Story
Supreme Court Justice

Indeed, the right of a society or government to [participate] in matters of religion will hardly be contested by any persons who believe that piety, religion, and morality are intimately connected with the well being of the state and indispensable to the administrations of civil justice. The promulgation of the great doctrines of religion—the being, and attributes, and providence of one Almighty God; the responsibility to Him for all our actions, founded upon moral accountability; a future state of rewards and punishments; the cultivation of all the personal, social, and benevolent virtues—these never can be a matter of indifference in any well-ordered community. It is, indeed, difficult to conceive how any civilized society can well exist without them.

(Source: Joseph Story, A Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1847), p. 260, §442.)
------------------------------

George Washington
"Father of Our Country"

While just government protects all in their religious rights, true religion affords to government its surest support.

(Source: George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1932), Vol. XXX, p. 432 n., from his address to the Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church in North America, October 9, 1789.)

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

(Source: George Washington, Address of George Washington, President of the United States . . . Preparatory to His Declination (Baltimore: George and Henry S. Keatinge), pp. 22-23. In his Farewell Address to the United States in 1796.)

[T]he [federal] government . . . can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, and oligarchy, an aristocracy, or any other despotic or oppressive form so long as there shall remain any virtue in the body of the people.

(Source: George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1939), Vol. XXIX, p. 410. In a letter to Marquis De Lafayette, February 7, 1788.)



Daniel Webste
Early American Jurist and Senator

[I]f we and our posterity reject religious instruction and authority, violate the rules of eternal justice, trifle with the injunctions of morality, and recklessly destroy the political constitution which holds us together, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us that shall bury all our glory in profound obscurity.

(Source: Daniel Webster, The Writings and Speeches of Daniel Webster (Boston: Little, Brown, & Company, 1903), Vol. XIII, p. 492. From "The Dignity and Importance of History," February 23, 1852.)

Noah Webster
Founding Educator

The most perfect maxims and examples for regulating your social conduct and domestic economy, as well as the best rules of morality and religion, are to be found in the Bible. . . . The moral principles and precepts found in the scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws. These principles and precepts have truth, immutable truth, for their foundation. . . . All the evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible. . . . For instruction then in social, religious and civil duties resort to the scriptures for the best precepts.

(Source: Noah Webster, History of the United States, "Advice to the Young" (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), pp. 338-340, par. 51, 53, 56.)
------------------------------

James Wilson
Signer of the Constitution

Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.

(Source: James Wilson, The Works of the Honourable James Wilson (Philadelphia: Bronson and Chauncey, 1804), Vol. I, p. 106.)
------------------------------

Robert Winthrop
Former Speaker of the US House of Representatives

Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or by a power without them; either by the Word of God or by the strong arm of man; either by the Bible or by the bayonet.

(Source: Robert Winthrop, Addresses and Speeches on Various Occasions (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1852), p. 172 from his "Either by the Bible or the Bayonet.")

[Pagan]

More quotes
pulled from the WALLBUILDERS website.

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=63

Still can't get around this as Missleman pointed out -


How about the words "Our Savior, Jesus Christ"?

And how about the fact that the freedom of religion that this country IS founded on being in direct conflict with Christianity's "prime directive" AKA the first commandment.

Can you name any uniquely Christian principles that are codified into the COTUS that supports your argument?

[revelarts]

...And how about the fact that the freedom of religion that this country IS founded on being in direct conflict with Christianity's "prime directive" AKA the first commandment.

Can you name any uniquely Christian principles that are codified into the COTUS that supports your argument?....

So we agree then that the founders understood that this would be primarily a christian nation, by default. But not codified as such to allow for religious difference. OK.


Now to your question.
the ten commandment the 1st commandment
"...Thou shalt have no other gods before me..."

Ok it's takes a while to sum this up but the short answer is this.

God gave that commandment to the people of Israel. the people of Israel occupied a specific geographic area. In that area at that time that was not just a religious or spiritual command but the law of the land.
in the new testament Jesus gave the command to go into all the world and Preach the gospel making disciples. By 1 telling them. 2. by showing of miracles, and 3. by your loving and just actions.
All conversions are by persuasion not by coercion. "Whosoever WILL let him come". Those who do not believe are to be prayed for and there souls committed to God's hands. For judgment, not in this life but in the afterlife. The new testament and Jesus teach that God gave earthly rulers authority over "earthly" external sins like Murder, rape, and the like. But beliefs and thoughts God would judge. This line of thinking weaves it way up through the centuries through various christian writings and is put into practice by some colonist, Who are mostly Christian. and by other European christian sects from time to time in various aspects until finally a version of the idea is codified into the U.S. constitution.

Jesus
...And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Mark 8:34

...And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely...
Revelation 22:17

[Pagan]

Luke 19:27 (King James Version)

27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2019:27&version=KJV

[Pagan]

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

[revelarts]

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

A concession to include those not present. Most if not all there where Christians of some stripe.
A concession which they all understood came from God.
Who most there understood to be Jesus Christ.

the whole idea and foundation they understood to be rooted in God's grace to all men, even the "infidel".

[Pagan]

A concession to include those not present. Most if not all there where Christians of some stripe.
A concession which they all understood came from God.
Who most there understood to be Jesus Christ.

the whole idea and foundation they understood to be rooted in God's grace to all men, even the "infidel".

You know it's laughable those who continue to say the U.S. is founded on Christianity, this is so far from the truth. The truth is the U.S. was founded more on Masonary, which Masons are NOT Christians, they're Diests.

George Washington
http://www.dcpages.com/gallery/d/27381-2/DSC05082.jpg

Ceremony laying the cornerstone of the Capital

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/cornerstone.jpg

The great seal -

http://www.frumpgazette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/masonic-seal-dollar.jpg

The design of D.C. itself Masonic -

http://www.closertogod.net/main/images/thoughts/world/WhiteHouse.jpg
http://www.closertogod.net/main/images/thoughts/world/WhiteHousePyramids.jpg
http://www.closertogod.net/main/images/thoughts/world/WashingtonRabbit.jpghttp://www.closertogod.net/main/images/thoughts/world/WashingtonRabbitPhoto.jpg
http://www.closertogod.net/main/images/thoughts/world/WashingtonOwl.jpghttp://www.closertogod.net/main/images/thoughts/world/WashingtonOwlPhoto.jpg
http://www.closertogod.net/main/images/thoughts/world/johnsonswashington.jpg

[Pagan]

Face the reality, the U.S. was founded on "Masonic" Deistic principles, NOT Christian ..

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/xtratalk/dc-pentagram.gif
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/xtratalk/washDCmap.jpg

[chloe]

still kinda like a christian mysticism, I used to be a member of amorc:salute:

[Pagan]

still kinda like a christian mysticism, I used to be a member of amorc:salute:

Very far from "Christian" religion, Christianity isn't even in the same realm as Freemasonry. Well that is other than believing in a "Higher Being", that is about the only comparison there is.

Thomas Paine wrote about the origins of the Freemasons, here's a quote from his writting -

To come then at once to the point, Masonry (as I shall show from the customs, ceremonies, hieroglyphics, and chronology of Masonry) is derived and is the remains of the religion of the ancient Druids; who, like the Magi of Persia and the Priests of Heliopolis in Egypt, were Priests of the Sun. They paid worship to this great luminary, as the great visible agent of a great invisible first cause whom they styled " Time without limits."

[chloe]

Very far from "Christian" religion, Christianity isn't even in the same realm as Freemasonry. Well that is other than believing in a "Higher Being", that is about the only comparison there is.

ok

[revelarts]

Like a lot of of things in the U.S there at least 2 sides of the story.

Sadly Christianity wasn't the only Influence. However it always amazes me that people want to deny ANY Christian influence. But then pull out these esoteric masonic ideas and lore and claim they trump all of the scripture and clear direct quotes, Sermons and open historical track.
The record shows that Plymouth was founded by many very devote Christian people and Jamestown was founded more by people looking for money. You had people like William Penn who Christian ethic and legal base went into even his dealing with the native Americans And you had people like Ben Franklin who was a mason and part of the Hellfire club in Europe (among other occult things?) . The full story on a lot of that dark side of the ledger is not known because they kept a lot of that crap secret.
But look, just give some credit where credit is due on the LIGHT side of the ledger. Christians and the principals and teachings of Christianity are Foundational to this Country. It's a Fact. Warts and all.

[SassyLady]

Why do you feel so threatened by a Secular Government that protects an individuals freedom of religion?

What???

I am not arguing against freedom of religion....just whether the founding fathers based any of their thoughts about the formation of this nation on Christian principles.

Why are you threatened by the possibility that the founding fathers were Chrisitians?

[Pagan]

Like a lot of of things in the U.S there at least 2 sides of the story.

Sadly Christianity wasn't the only Influence. However it always amazes me that people want to deny ANY Christian influence. But then pull out these esoteric masonic ideas and lore and claim they trump all of the scripture and clear direct quotes, Sermons and open historical track.
Much like the fact that Plymouth was founded by many very devote Christian people and Jamestown was founded more by people looking for money. You had people like William Penn who Christian ethic went into even his dealing with the native Americans And you had people like Ben Franklin who was a mason and part of the Hellfire club in Europe (among other occult things?) . The full story on a lot of that side of the ledger is not known because they kept a lot of that crap secret.
But look, just give some credit where credit is due on the LIGHT side of the ledger. Christians and the principals and teachings of Christianity are Foundational to this Country. It's a Fact. Warts and all.

No it's not, there has yet been a single fact presented that this country was founding on Christianity. Facts are overwhelming proving the contrary, present these so called facts of Christianity if you've got them.

Reality, the U.S. is a secular country founded by Freemasons.

[SassyLady]

Muslims refer to god as almighty also, so it must be and Islamic Nation eh? :laugh:

Well, Muslims may refer to god as almighty also, but I'm not sure any of the founding fathers professed to be Muslim ..... :coffee:

[SassyLady]

Lol, well given their is no mention of Chirstianity in the founding documents of the nation I struggle to see what you're relaying on exactly, and you're still discrediting Adams' words, knowing more about the foundation than a founder is a mist odd stance to take.

Actually, Noir, I've read more of his writings than just the Treaty of Tripoli....which is where most atheists stop.



Annnnd it is in no way a matter of semantics, there is a massive difference. By way of an example, I was in a convo with a Christian friend not too long ago, and I mentioned how I had forgiven a friend after they did some quiet dirty deeds that they knew would put me in a difficult position, and he responded 'it's good that you forgave him, that was the Christian thing to do' now I bite my tounge (find it hard to believe as I'm sure some of you will but irl I do tend to keep my thoughts to myself unless specifically asked) did I really do a Christian thing, or was it a human thing? I know which I think it was.

Perhaps the human thing and the Christian thing are the same and you are overly sensitive to the word Christian?



In the same way, just because a society is founded on beliefs like 'murder is bad' does not relate it to any religion or it's principles.

Doesn't mean that it wasn't either. It's a 50/50 toss up now isn't it?

[revelarts]

Reality, the U.S. is a secular country founded by Freemasons.


And you've proven that by road maps and a few Mason symbols on the money?

[Pagan]

Well, Muslims may refer to god as almighty also, but I'm not sure any of the founding fathers professed to be Muslim ..... :coffee:

They were Deists

[Dante]

Have yet to get my reply (primarily from RSR who accused me of spin) so I have put the Adams quote in my sig to remind him every time he sees my sig about it, hopefully one day he will tell me how I spun Adams' words to make it look like he said America was not founded as a Christian nation.

misunderstanding all they read... :salute:

[Missileman]

So we agree then that the founders understood that this would be primarily a christian nation, by default.

I've written nothing of the sort and disagree.

[Pagan]

And you've proven that by road maps and a few Mason symbols on the money?

The cornerstone of the Capital? And I guess the design of our Capital with freeman symbolism and rituals proves we're founded on Christianity eh? :lol::lol:

[SassyLady]

Still can't get around this as Missleman pointed out -

Is there anything in the COTUS that is anti-religious?

[Dante]

Not putting the preamble of any state over the Constitution Noir....just giving more evidence that God was/is indeed part of what created America. And, regardless of what founder Adams said. As I've stated before, the founding fathers (whom you think were the only people involved in the formation of the US) were influenced by their religion....not the lack of it.

Were influenced by. When did anyone ever say the founding fathers were not influenced by their religious views?

There is NO more direct statement than what Adams said. You do know Adams wrote the Massachusetts State Constitution? Yep, he included mandatory taxes be paid for support of Churches. The Constitution was later amended.

It is common agreement that the US Constitution was modeled on the Massachusetts one. So the USA was modeled on what Adams wrote. The government before the US Constitution was dumped for what Adams says was a nation that was NOT founded as a Christian nation.

case closed.

[Pagan]

Is there anything in the COTUS that is anti-religious?

That's an incredibly stupid question

[SassyLady]

Were influenced by. When did anyone ever say the founding fathers were not influenced by their religious views?

There is NO more direct statement than what Adams said. You do know Adams wrote the Massachusetts State Constitution? Yep, he included mandatory taxes be paid for support of Churches. The Constitution was later amended.

It is common agreement that the US Constitution was modeled on the Massachusetts one. So the USA was modeled on what Adams wrote. The government before the US Constitution was dumped for what Adams says was a nation that was NOT founded as a Christian nation.

case closed.

It was a direct statement to Muslims, an appeasement statement. Why was it necessary to even state that in the treaty other than the attempt to get compliance in any way possible?

[Noir]

Actually, Noir, I've read more of his writings than just the Treaty of Tripoli....which is where most atheists stop.

And in any of those writing did he say, as clear as an unmudded lake 'this nation was founded on Christianity'?


Perhaps the human thing and the Christian thing are the same and you are overly sensitive to the word Christian?

That may well be the case in some acts, by then why should Christianity try and monopolize on it? Heck, I live a more *Christian life* than most Christians I know, but just because I live by rules that Christianity happen to agree with does not mean I am in any sense Christian, in as much the same way as me choosing to not eat Pork would make me Muslim or Hindu because I don't eat beef.


Doesn't mean that it wasn't either. It's a 50/50 toss up now isn't it?

Exactly, it doesn't mean there was and doesn't mean there wasn't, so you'd have to look elsewhere for answers, I'd say the Constitution and DOI are pretty good starts, but, there is nothing expressly Christian in either of them, as you pointed out earlier the DOI only references *natures god* or *a creator* nothing theistic (never mind Christian) about those.

[Noir]

It was a direct statement to Muslims, an appeasement statement. Why was it necessary to even state that in the treaty other than the attempt to get compliance in any way possible?

So again, you think the statement was a lie?

[Noir]

Is there anything in the COTUS that is anti-religious?

No. Ofcourse not.
Now, is there anything in the COTUS that favours one religion (Say Christianity) over another?

[SassyLady]

So again, you think the statement was a lie?

Nooooooo, of course not.....politicians never lie.

[Noir]

Nooooooo, of course not.....politicians never lie.

:laugh:
If we can play imagine for a minute.
Imagine John Adams never said that in the threaty of Tripoli, however, in another threaty to a Chirstian enemy he wrote a message saying 'The United States is in every sense founded as a Christian nation'
What would you say, if I then said 'well he was obviously lying, he's a politician'?

[Dante]

Here is the preamble for California's Constitution.


I wonder how many other states reference God in their constitution...couldn't be very many because this isn't a Christian nation....correct?
The first constitution(?) and the one the US Constitution was most based upon was the Massachusetts state Constitution. Which had much to say about religion and god. John Adams wrote it.

Yet Adams himself says the US was NOT founded as a Christian nation.

Your feeble understanding of things has you drawing correlations and building arguments out of whole cloth.

[Dante]

It was a direct statement to Muslims, an appeasement statement. Why was it necessary to even state that in the treaty other than the attempt to get compliance in any way possible?

Again, you draw correlations and make up arguments based on whole cloth.

good luck with that

[namvet]

Again, you draw correlations and make up arguments based on whole cloth.

good luck with that

and when was 'one nation under god added" or is that cloth to??

[Dante]

and when was 'one nation under god added" or is that cloth to??

added to what?

[namvet]

added to what?

since your made of cloth im finished with you

[Dante]

since your made of cloth im finished with you

so much for your ability or desire to raise the level of debate.

:cool:

[SassyLady]

The first constitution(?) and the one the US Constitution was most based upon was the Massachusetts state Constitution. Which had much to say about religion and god. John Adams wrote it.

Yet Adams himself says the US was NOT founded as a Christian nation.

Your feeble understanding of things has you drawing correlations and building arguments out of whole cloth.

Hey Dante ... are you trying to teach something? How's that working out for you?

[Noir]

Hey Dante ... are you trying to teach something? How's that working out for you?

Hey mkp, still think that the crystal clear message that America was not founded (in any sense) as a Christian nation, written by a founding father and passed through congress without quarrel, was just a lie, even though no statements exist that contradict that statement? How's that working out for ya?

[SassyLady]

Hey mkp, still think that the crystal clear message that America was not founded (in any sense) as a Christian nation, written by a founding father and passed through congress without quarrel, was just a lie, even though no statements exist that contradict that statement? How's that working out for ya?

Yes, I still believe politicans, even the founding fathers, would lie to get the broader agenda accomplished.

[Kathianne]

I think there's ample evidence in writings that the mention of God was deliberately left out of the Constitution. It becomes more evident with the First Amendment, the prohibition of a state religion.

Our we a Christian nation? I tend to say no, though the vast majority are and practice their religious convictions. By the very nature of no state religion, our cities, suburbs, even rural areas have many churches, synagogues, and shrines.

Much is made of the Constitution, unlike the Declaration being secular. It's very true and as I said before, deliberate. Likewise in the Declaration we find 'All men are created equal." In the Constitution we find the 3/5ths clause along with Article 1 Sec. 9: "The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person."

The Constitution was not a perfect document, indeed it states the purpose is 'towards a more perfect union,' acknowledging its shortcomings.

[Noir]

Yes, I still believe politicans, even the founding fathers, would lie to get the broader agenda accomplished.

Not only did they lie in the treaty, they also never ever told the truth before or after the treaty?

[SassyLady]

Not only did they lie in the treaty, they also never ever told the truth before or after the treaty?

Are you saying they never referenced Christianity as part of their thought process in breaking away from England or creating a new government?

[Kathianne]

Are you saying they never referenced Christianity as part of their thought process in breaking away from England or creating a new government?

Are you all referring to the Declaration of Independence or The Treaty of Paris?

[SassyLady]

Are you all referring to the Declaration of Independence or The Treaty of Paris?

I know that America was not founded to further one religion over another, however, I think it's insane to believe that it was not founded upon Christian principles.

[Noir]

Are you saying they never referenced Christianity as part of their thought process in breaking away from England or creating a new government?

I am saying there is no quote (that I now of) of a founding father saying America was founded as a Christian Nation or on the Christian religion. However, there is most certian statements that say the exact opposite.

[Kathianne]

I know that America was not founded to further one religion over another, however, I think it's insane to believe that it was not founded upon Christian principles.

The 'land' was settled by Christians predominately. The Constitution? Not really, those men were elite, they also didn't want the religious problems rife in Europe. I think they did the best they could, evidenced by the religiosity of our people, whatever they believe. We couldn't have the plethora of religions without that Constitution. Which was not a perfect document, certainly not as gracefully written or pure at the Declaration, but one was for justifying treason, the other to set up governance.

Now, I'm still trying to figure out the 'treaty.' :laugh: What document are you all referring to?

I'm off to O'Hare to pick up darling daughter. I'll look back in a few hours.

[Noir]

I know that America was not founded to further one religion over another, however, I think it's insane to believe that it was not founded upon Christian principles.

Wel given 'thou shall have no other gods but me' is kinda trashed with 'everyone has the freedom to believe in whatever religion they want' don't ya think?

Also what are these unique Christian Principles?

[Noir]

Now, I'm still trying to figure out the 'treaty.' :laugh: What document are you all referring to?

Tis the treaty of Tripoli, the quote from it is in my signature :3

[revelarts]

I am saying there is no quote (that I now of) of a founding father saying America was founded as a Christian Nation or on the Christian religion. However, there is most certain statements that say the exact opposite.

So, are you saying that Christianity had zero influence on the people, concepts or events that created the United states?

I think most here agree that the U.S. is not explicitly, or Constitutionally a "Christian Nation".
The point many ARE trying to make is that without the major christian influence in concepts and motivation that the U.S. constitution would not be the document what we have today. That is, if the U.S. ever became an nation at all.

Just as the anti slave trade and anti slavery movement in England were spear headed by Christians, because of christian teachings and motivation, but the laws outlawing the slave trade didn't expressly say that the slave trade will be abolished because it's ungodly, and God created all men as brothers. However no one that looks at that history honestly can say that, in the main, the anti slave trade act of 1807 was not born out of Christian beliefs and leadership. Even though the text of the act is completely secular.

[Kathianne]

Tis the treaty of Tripoli, the quote from it is in my signature :3

I'm seriously confused why you would bring up an obscure treaty, one that was later reneged on by Tripoli, causing the first US foreign military action in Jefferson's administration? Adam's appeasement, if indeed he was the one who agreed for the administration with the treaty, would find himself building the US Navy between the Barbary states, France, and England.

If for this one bit, Noir, you're just reaching. This is diplomatic speak for, "We can't fight a war, Hamilton and Jefferson are having their own. We'll get back to you in about 10 years":


ARTICLE 11.

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796t.asp

[Abbey Marie]

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians, not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here. - Patrick Henry

It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God & the Bible- George Washington

[Noir]

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians, not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here. - Patrick Henry

I don't know much about this Henry bloke, but looking his name up he seems to of been against the establishment clause and in favor of a state sponsored religion, Christianity. Hmmm....


It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God & the Bible- George Washington

Well Jefferson would disagree lol, given common law and Christianity had nothing yo do with eachother in Anglo-Saxon England, but also font need to in America.

However, all Washington was really saying here is that the bible and god are tools with which to govern. That is in no sense new, infact it's one of the few things religion is good at, controlling people.

[Noir]

So, are you saying that Christianity had zero influence on the people, concepts or events that created the United states?

I think most here agree that the U.S. is not explicitly, or Constitutionally a "Christian Nation".
The point many ARE trying to make is that without the major christian influence in concepts and motivation that the U.S. constitution would not be the document what we have today. That is, if the U.S. ever became an nation at all.

Just as the anti slave trade and anti slavery movement in England were spear headed by Christians, because of christian teachings and motivation, but the laws outlawing the slave trade didn't expressly say that the slave trade will be abolished because it's ungodly, and God created all men as brothers. However no one that looks at that history honestly can say that, in the main, the anti slave trade act of 1807 was not born out of Christian beliefs and leadership. Even though the text of the act is completely secular.

I'm not saying it had zero influence, I'm saying it was not founded on Christianity.

And if memory also serves for a long time it was Christians that where able to Justify the slave trade through there holy book. I guess if you back both horses your supporters will always look back at the one that's more favorable to their morals or conceptions, right?

[Noir]

I'm seriously confused why you would bring up an obscure treaty, one that was later reneged on by Tripoli, causing the first US foreign military action in Jefferson's administration? Adam's appeasement, if indeed he was the one who agreed for the administration with the treaty, would find himself building the US Navy between the Barbary states, France, and England.

If for this one bit, Noir, you're just reaching. This is diplomatic speak for, "We can't fight a war, Hamilton and Jefferson are having their own. We'll get back to you in about 10 years":http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796t.asp

It's not an obscure treaty, it was written by a founding father, passed by the house without quarrel, and states (when it does not need to) that America is in no sense founded on the Christian religion.

If you also think that everyone would go needlessly out of their way to lie then fair enough. But it looks pretty black and white to me.

[bullypulpit]

Gawd...! is this thread still running? Despite whatever Glenn Beck and his pet historian, David Barton, may say, Christianity was never enshrined as the national religion. James Madison in his "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments" made the most eloquent argument for the separation of church and state to ever grace a page.


Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? That the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?

Given the bloody history of religions meddling in government, and vice-versa, the Founders chose to NOT establish a national religion. It is, after all, what the first English settlers came to America for...Freedom from a state sanctioned religion...The Church of England.

[Noir]

Gawd...! is this thread still running? Despite whatever Glenn Beck and his pet historian, David Barton, may say, Christianity was never enshrined as the national religion. James Madison in his "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments" made the most eloquent argument for the separation of church and state to ever grace a page.

Given the bloody history of religions meddling in government, and vice-versa, the Founders chose to NOT establish a national religion. It is, after all, what the first English settlers came to America for...Freedom from a state sanctioned religion...The Church of England.

Exactly, infact Madisons comments where a direct challenge to Henry (quoted by Abbey at the top of this page) who did want Religious Assessments imposed!

[Kathianne]

It's not an obscure treaty, it was written by a founding father, passed by the house without quarrel, and states (when it does not need to) that America is in no sense founded on the Christian religion.

If you also think that everyone would go needlessly out of their way to lie then fair enough. But it looks pretty black and white to me.

No my dear, that is not what my point was. Indeed, that treaty which was rewritten again, during Adams own administration after a breach, which of course was undone again after the Marines landed at Tripoli, just is not within the course of studies here, at least for those not in international law.

Point actually was and is, why bring in the 'relevance of Treaty of Tripoli,' yet discard the Declaration and other far. more important documents brought up by others? Documents much more important towards the actual creation of a separate nation? Oh yea, your point is about secularism. That's your ticket.

Funny thing, somehow I'd thought you actually were understanding the difference between a declaration and government making.

[revelarts]

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l208/damunky/Fallacies/strawman.gif





Gawd...! is this thread still running? Despite whatever Glenn Beck and his pet historian, David Barton, may say, Christianity was never enshrined as the national religion. James Madison in his "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments" made the most eloquent argument for the separation of church and state to ever grace a page.

Given the bloody history of religions meddling in government, and vice-versa, the Founders chose to NOT establish a national religion. It is, after all, what the first English settlers came to America for...Freedom from a state sanctioned religion...The Church of England.
Exactly, infact Madisons comments where a direct challenge to Henry (quoted by Abbey at the top of this page) who did want Religious Assessments imposed!





OH, I see the sign now, OK, I see whats going on here.

[Pagan]

What's the U.S. founded on?


http://watch.pair.com/cornerstone.jpghttp://watch.pair.com/eye.jpg
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/pics/Mall_Overhead.jpghttp://www.freemasonrywatch.org/pics/wtau.gif

[PostmodernProphet]

And if memory also serves for a long time it was Christians that where able to Justify the slave trade through there holy book.

I suggest you do some research.....there were one or two Southern preachers who made the attempt.....balance that against the abolition movement which began in Christian churches, the Underground Railroad which was maintained by Christian churches and the Christians in the North who actively sought to end slavery......

[PostmodernProphet]

claimed view of the Mall
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/pics/Mall_Overhead.jpg

real view of the Mall
http://www.dcvote.org/trellis/character/maps/46.jpg

why do they look different?....the imaginary lines aren't there.....

[Pagan]

claimed view of the Mall

real view of the Mall

why do they look different?....the imaginary lines aren't there.....

Couldn't be the age of the maps could it? :lame2:

So how 'bout the cornerstone there Slick, any comment?

[revelarts]

AND it was also based on this..
http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/uploads/pilgrims.jpg
http://www.ushistory.org/us/7.asp
http://www.ushistory.org/us/7b.asp

http://images.encyclopedia.com/utility/image.aspx?id=2795807&imagetype=Hero

http://www.philadelphia-reflections.com/images/william-penn-indians.jpg
William Penn with Indians

http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/images/JonEdwards.jpg
johanthan edwards revival preaching in the U.S.

http://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/B001_PURITAN_AUGUSTUSSAINT_GAUDE.JPG


http://georgewashingtoninn.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/prayervalleyforge.jpg


http://www.kansastravel.org/05statecapitol3.JPG

http://1000words.fatcow.com/mynetbox/images/xtra/pray-colonial.jpg

The Bible's and Christianity's influence was profound and ubiquitous. Lets get honest around here. It's influence has diminished greatly of the past 200 hundred years but now many secularist want to expunge it from history or not even acknowledge it.
it pretty sad. Sorry folks but many of your most highly prized western ideals and legal forms are rooted in Christian thought and morals. That's just a fact and without God those morals float in mid air like magic.

I'll be back..

[Noir]

The Bible's and Christianity's influence was profound and ubiquitous. Lets get honest around here. It's influence has diminished greatly of the past 200 hundred years but now many secularist want to expunge it from history or not even acknowledge it.
it pretty sad. Sorry folks but many of your most highly prized western ideals and legal forms are rooted in Christian thought and morals. That's just a fact and without God those morals float in mid air like magic.

I'll be back..

I have little doubt ghat most peoe were Christian, and that chirsianity had a huge influence, however, America was not founded as a Christian nation, it just so happened most of the people in it where (and still are) Christian.

[Abbey Marie]

I have little doubt ghat most peoe were Christian, and that chirsianity had a huge influence, however, America was not founded as a Christian nation, it just so happened most of the people in it where (and still are) Christian.

I acknowledge your intended point, but I think we have a bit of semantics here. How do you really separate the two? We are not a nation founded with a state-sponsored religion. Quite the opposite, and I think we can all agree on that point.

But if you look at the founders and the signers, they were mostly Christian, and not just in name only. These were devout Christians, a good number of whom were even pastors. They had no problem expressing their faith in God, and including that expression in their public and political dealings.

The problem is that a vocal and well-funded minority has decided over the years to be offended by that public expression, and have sought endlessly to stifle it, in the (erroneous) name of separation of church and state. Even a cursory reading of American history informs us that this is not what our early leaders intended.

The tyranny of a state sponsored religion is a far cry from children singing a Christmas carol in a school concert, for one small example.
I think there is an easily-reached, logical middle ground on this issue, and I am amazed at how hard it is for people to grasp. While arguing that we are a Christian theocracy is wrong, trying to redact the truth about our founders' strong and public expression of faith is absurd.

[SassyLady]

I acknowledge your intended point, but I think we have a bit of semantics here. How do you really separate the two? We are not a nation founded with a state-sponsored religion. Quite the opposite, and I think we can all agree on that point.

But if you look at the founders and the signers, they were mostly Christian, and not just in name only. These were devout Christians, a good number of whom were even pastors. They had no problem expressing their faith in God, and including that expression in their public and political dealings.

The problem is that a vocal and well-funded minority has decided over the years to be offended by that public expression, and have sought endlessly to stifle it, in the (erroneous) name of separation of church and state. Even a cursory reading of American history informs us that this is not what our early leaders intended.

The tyranny of a state sponsored religion is a far cry from children singing a Christmas carol in a school concert, for one small example.
I think there is an easily-reached, logical middle ground on this issue, and I am amazed at how hard it is for people to grasp. While arguing that we are a Christian theocracy is wrong, trying to redact the truth about our founders' strong and public expression of faith is absurd.

Well said, Abbey!

:clap::clap::clap:

[PostmodernProphet]

Couldn't be the age of the maps could it? :lame2:

So how 'bout the cornerstone there Slick, any comment?

lol....that was a "reinactment" of placing the cornerstone conducted by a bunch of Masons.....I know Strom was old, but he wasn't present at the original event......

[Kathianne]

I acknowledge your intended point, but I think we have a bit of semantics here. How do you really separate the two? We are not a nation founded with a state-sponsored religion. Quite the opposite, and I think we can all agree on that point.

But if you look at the founders and the signers, they were mostly Christian, and not just in name only. These were devout Christians, a good number of whom were even pastors. They had no problem expressing their faith in God, and including that expression in their public and political dealings.

The problem is that a vocal and well-funded minority has decided over the years to be offended by that public expression, and have sought endlessly to stifle it, in the (erroneous) name of separation of church and state. Even a cursory reading of American history informs us that this is not what our early leaders intended.

The tyranny of a state sponsored religion is a far cry from children singing a Christmas carol in a school concert, for one small example.
I think there is an easily-reached, logical middle ground on this issue, and I am amazed at how hard it is for people to grasp. While arguing that we are a Christian theocracy is wrong, trying to redact the truth about our founders' strong and public expression of faith is absurd.

I agree with everything you say. No doubt that most involved in the passage of the Constitution were Christian, in both heart and mind. However, my point I don't know how many pages ago, was that when it came to the Constitution, they discussed and then chose to leave religion out of the document. Not because they didn't believe, but they recognized the diversity of the land, even then, and didn't want religion causing the Euro zone. Much like the issue of slavery, many if not most thought it wrong, yet they purposefully decided not to address, to get the Constitution done.

It's not perfect, wasn't meant to be. Was as perfect as they could make it at that Convention, at that time.

[bullypulpit]

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l208/damunky/Fallacies/strawman.gif






OH, I see the sign now, OK, I see whats going on here.

Strawman? Where?

[Noir]

I acknowledge your intended point, but I think we have a bit of semantics here. How do you really separate the two? We are not a nation founded with a state-sponsored religion. Quite the opposite, and I think we can all agree on that point.

They are quite easily separated, America was not founded as a Christian Nation, but rather as a secular on, that guaranteed the rights of the religious, meaning the people where free to be Christain, as most were, and not worry about state interference.


But if you look at the founders and the signers, they were mostly Christian, and not just in name only. These were devout Christians, a good number of whom were even pastors. They had no problem expressing their faith in God, and including that expression in their public and political dealings.

That doesn't mean America was founded as a Christian nation, it means that those who set it up were smart enough to realise that secularism protected their religion aswell as the state.


The problem is that a vocal and well-funded minority has decided over the years to be offended by that public expression, and have sought endlessly to stifle it, in the (erroneous) name of separation of church and state. Even a cursory reading of American history informs us that this is not what our early leaders intended.

Vocal and well funded? I don't think so, when have you ever heard of a politician going after the 'atheist vote'? I certainly haven't. But I have heard them go after the 'Jewish vote' even though the Jew are outnumbered many times over by atheists, odd that...but it's because atheists don't have the power or influence, yet, in America.


The tyranny of a state sponsored religion is a far cry from children singing a Christmas carol in a school concert, for one small example.
I think there is an easily-reached, logical middle ground on this issue, and I am amazed at how hard it is for people to grasp. While arguing that we are a Christian theocracy is wrong, trying to redact the truth about our founders' strong and public expression of faith is absurd.

Okay, you also won't mind song to Allah and Thor etc to be sung? Or is tyranny by majority at work in schools?

[logroller]

America was also founded upon the belief that "All men are created equal" Does that imply women aren't equal?
America was founded upon Divine Providence; this being a tenant of Christian doctrine doesn't imply alternative religious preferences were excluded. Au contaire, religious freedom was guaranteed by the First Amendment.
I don't usually take to the defense of the ACLU, but it's un-American to employ personal freedoms to dispell another's.

[Dante]

How many times is Christianity mentioned in the US Constitution or even the Declaration of Independence? How about in the Federalist Papers, a group of essays addressing the fears of anti-Federalists?

:cool:

[Dante]

... it's un-American to employ personal freedoms to dispell another's.

This is exactly what the Roman Catholic Archbishop of New York does in his fight against Gay Marriages:

'While one searches the Constitution in vain to find any “right” of two people of the same sex to marry, one immediately locates the right of people of faith not to have intrusive government interfere with the free exercise of religion as the first of the Bill of Rights.'

http://blog.archny.org/?p=1263&cpage=1

[logroller]

This is exactly what the Roman Catholic Archbishop of New York does in his fight against Gay Marriages:

'While one searches the Constitution in vain to find any “right” of two people of the same sex to marry, one immediately locates the right of people of faith not to have intrusive government interfere with the free exercise of religion as the first of the Bill of Rights.'

http://blog.archny.org/?p=1263&cpage=1

I couldn't agree more. Accepting marriage as a religious act, bound by the tenants therein, government should make no laws prohibiting the free exercise thereof. I must interdict, however, the free exercise clause is preceded by the establishment clause, indicating government shall make no law respecting such. Thus, accepting traditional marriage as being an exclusive religious practice, it is excluded from the guise of government interest as well and civil recognition of marriage is unconstitutional.

[DragonStryk72]

This is exactly what the Roman Catholic Archbishop of New York does in his fight against Gay Marriages:

'While one searches the Constitution in vain to find any “right” of two people of the same sex to marry, one immediately locates the right of people of faith not to have intrusive government interfere with the free exercise of religion as the first of the Bill of Rights.'

http://blog.archny.org/?p=1263&cpage=1

Also, he won't find any rights in the Constitution. Nope, it doesn't have any for you, or anyone else. The Constitution doesn't provide us with rights, because the Founders believed that we born with them. The Constitution simply provides checks on governmental power, to ensure that we are free to exercise our rights.

[J.T]

America was founded as a white nation

name one negroe founding father

name one mexican who signed the DOI

name any non-white who signed COTUS

America was founded by White men upon White culture and values

[fj1200]

America was founded by White men upon White culture and values

Then I guess that's why we have exactly the same structure as all the European countries that they originated from. Oh wait... :rolleyes:

[J.T]

Then I guess that's why we have exactly the same structure as all the European countries that they originated from. Oh wait... :rolleyes:

So we weren't founded on traditional, European, Christian values?

So much for the premise of the OP...

[fj1200]

So we weren't founded on traditional, European, Christian values?

So much for the premise of the OP...

I wasn't commenting on the OP, just you wanting to keep whitey down. ;)

You complained about whitey running things so everything that whitey runs must be the same, they're not.

[Prince Lemon]

I believe that America was built on Judeo-Christian values.Only in the 1960s the way of Godlessness began that gave ways to Marxist humanism and all the decays.

[chloe]

I believe that America was built on Judeo-Christian values.Only in the 1960s the way of Godlessness began that gave ways to Marxist humanism and all the decays.

Those DAMNED Hippies !!!;)

[ConHog]

I wasn't commenting on the OP, just you wanting to keep whitey down. ;)

You complained about whitey running things so everything that whitey runs must be the same, they're not.

Gee I'm shocked to see that JT trolled this thread

[Prince Lemon]

Those DAMNED Hippies !!!;)They were complete anarchists who worshiped drugs,flowers,pacifism,and all the debasements.Anti-war protests and much more.The legendary Beatles are their example.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

78.4% of adult Americans are listed as Christians.
Worldwide the estimated number of Christians is 2.1 billion and Islam comes in second at 1.5 billion.
Estimated number of Christian churches in USA is betwen 300,000 and 400,000...
Our founders intended freedom -OF- religion not freedom-FROM- religion.
The religion here during that time was overwhelmingly Christian.
IN GOD WE TRUST, should be a major clue that our founders never intended it to be freedom-FROM- religion!
Now in recent decades the leftist, marxists and socialists will support Islam against Christianity although they prefer no religion. Thats because they seek to use Islam to destroy Christianity thinking that they can then control Islam. What fools, the chimp thinking it can control the Lion!
Islam will use them like the fools they are and then destroy them without even blinking an eye.
As their appeasement is viewed in Islam as pure cowardice! Fact... -Tyr

[Missileman]

78.4% of adult Americans are listed as Christians.
Worldwide the estimated number of Christians is 2.1 billion and Islam comes in second at 1.5 billion.
Estimated number of Christian churches in USA is betwen 300,000 and 400,000...
Our founders intended freedom -OF- religion not freedom-FROM- religion.
The religion here during that time was overwhelmingly Christian.
IN GOD WE TRUST, should be a major clue that our founders never intended it to be freedom-FROM- religion!
Now in recent decades the leftist, marxists and socialists will support Islam against Christianity although they prefer no religion. Thats because they seek to use Islam to destroy Christianity thinking that they can then control Islam. What fools, the chimp thinking it can control the Lion!
Islam will use them like the fools they are and then destroy them without even blinking an eye.
As their appeasement is viewed in Islam as pure cowardice! Fact... -Tyr

Do a little research into when In God We Trust came into being and you'll see the FOUNDERS had nothing to do with it.

[Noir]

Heard a wonderful Carlin quote the ither day, in a rant about hypocrisys and double standards in the states, it went something like 'America was founded on good old double standards. Thats why its in our culture, america was founded by slave owners who wanted to be free!'

[red state]

Tyr,

We both know that you are not ignorant but so that there is no confusion as to which poster needs to read and learn I'd like to address the statement below:

"Do a little research into when In God We Trust came into being and you'll see the FOUNDERS had nothing to do with it."

You sir, seem to posses the same "higher than thou" mentality of the so-called leftist/elitist which only confirms that THEY professed themselves to be wise..." OK, we all know the rest so I'm not going to bring up a Biblical point here for this topic....although it does have something to do with the state that this Christian Nation is in.

Many of today's society lack education and confuse their education with what they actually received...indoctrination, which is why I'm doing my best to be civil but after the above display and attempt to make another poster look ignorant, simply because they have a firm grip on the REAL America and what she has stood for all these years, I felt the need to explain something to the more simple minded among us. Mr. Tyr knows darn well when that phrase appeared on our bills and coins and most other places of prominence. What he also knows is that there is a phrase in our earliest of documents that our founding fathers declared with purpose and importance. They knew full well that our independence depended upon it so they set the foundation that this great Christian Nation lives by to this very day. It is also the foundation that those of the left seek to destroy (our core). I suggest, SIR, that you read up on those very early documents and try not to read something else into them. You can start by trying to get around this phrase "...by our Creator." Our founding fathers knew that Christ provided freedom (gov takes away freedom). Gov. didn't give us the right to buy, carry and use firearms and it certainly doesn't mean that gov. needs to be protected FROM religion. Any yahoo knows why most people of many faiths came here and made such a journey....because someone across the big pond was mandating how they worshiped. Well, I'm sure this has fallen on deaf ears, thick head and a hard heart so I'll close with an address to my friend.

Good post Tyr...your are spot on in your analysis regarding the leftist using islam and ultimately being destroyed by this freedom-less religion of FORCE...why the word islam itself explains this perfectly. THEY used Hitler and thought he could be controlled and we seem to be repeating history. The current occupier in the White House is using the same tactics of division and blame.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Do a little research into when In God We Trust came into being and you'll see the FOUNDERS had nothing to do with it.

First, I am quite knowedgable in history my friend. THEY ACTUALLY TAUGHT HISTORY BACK WHEN I WAS IN SCHOOL OVER 40 YEARS AGO. We were taught the founding of this great nation and the Constitution as well. Guess what?
We were taught the reasons for and meaning of the Declaration of Independence too. Our founding document, greatest governing document ever written by man (Constitution) was predated by the Declaration as you may well know. Our Creator was the central point in their message to King George (POINTING TO A HIGHER AUTHORITY THEY DID RECOGNISE) and that reveals the importance that they placed in religion and God . For with these words of wisdom they set the tone for how they thought free men should live and why they refused to be enslaved by the authority of a human King.
"We hold these truths to be self evident , that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Sir, that pretty much sums up the reason for and the history of this great nation since its birth.

The founders risked their ALL to create a nation based upon those stated GOD-GIVEN rights.
They did indeed strive to also give religious freedom to others and mandated that that our government should not ever become a theocracy!
That does not make our nation not a Christian nation it surely makes our government not ONE!
FOR THE PEOPLE ARE FREE TO CHOOSE AND MY PREVIOUS POST HIGHLIGHTED A FEW FACTS THAT POINTED TO THAT CHOICE.
Now maybe your suggestion that I educate myself was indeed not intended as a slight but NOT KNOWING YOU I HAVE NO WAY TO BE SURE OF THAT.
In the future please bear in mind that I am not a fool nor am I an uneducated man.
Your kind attention to detail in this matter will be appropriately appreciated.--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Tyr,

We both know that you are not ignorant but so that there is no confusion as to which poster needs to read and learn I'd like to address the statement below:

"Do a little research into when In God We Trust came into being and you'll see the FOUNDERS had nothing to do with it."

You sir, seem to posses the same "higher than thou" mentality of the so-called leftist/elitist which only confirms that THEY professed themselves to be wise..." OK, we all know the rest so I'm not going to bring up a Biblical point here for this topic....although it does have something to do with the state that this Christian Nation is in.

Many of today's society lack education and confuse their education with what they actually received...indoctrination, which is why I'm doing my best to be civil but after the above display and attempt to make another poster look ignorant, simply because they have a firm grip on the REAL America and what she has stood for all these years, I felt the need to explain something to the more simple minded among us. Mr. Tyr knows darn well when that phrase appeared on our bills and coins and most other places of prominence. What he also knows is that there is a phrase in our earliest of documents that our founding fathers declared with purpose and importance. They knew full well that our independence depended upon it so they set the foundation that this great Christian Nation lives by to this very day. It is also the foundation that those of the left seek to destroy (our core). I suggest, SIR, that you read up on those very early documents and try not to read something else into them. You can start by trying to get around this phrase "...by our Creator." Our founding fathers knew that Christ provided freedom (gov takes away freedom). Gov. didn't give us the right to buy, carry and use firearms and it certainly doesn't mean that gov. needs to be protected FROM religion. Any yahoo knows why most people of many faiths came here and made such a journey....because someone across the big pond was mandating how they worshiped. Well, I'm sure this has fallen on deaf ears, thick head and a hard heart so I'll close with an address to my friend.

Good post Tyr...your are spot on in your analysis regarding the leftist using islam and ultimately being destroyed by this freedom-less religion of FORCE...why the word islam itself explains this perfectly. THEY used Hitler and thought he could be controlled and we seem to be repeating history. The current occupier in the White House is using the same tactics of division and blame.

THANKS AMIGO.
I hope my reply to that member explains better my previous post. Also hope that we both benefited from the exchange. My reply admittedly was passionate about the greatness of this nation and its founding and I hope will not be taken as an aggressive post meant to offend as it was not my intent. However this is a Christian nation despite obama's lie that it is not ..
In short , fffff-that lying scum obama ...:salute:--Tyr

[Noir]

For with these words of wisdom they set the tone for how they thought free men should live and why they refused to be enslaved by the authority of a human King.
"We hold these truths to be self evident , that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Sir, that pretty much sums up the reason for and the history of this great nation since its birth.

The founders risked their ALL to create a nation based upon those stated GOD-GIVEN rights.
They did indeed strive to also give religious freedom to others and mandated that that our government should not ever become a theocracy!
That does not make our nation not a Christian nation it surely makes our government not ONE!
FOR THE PEOPLE ARE FREE TO CHOOSE AND MY PREVIOUS POST HIGHLIGHTED A FEW FACTS THAT POINTED TO THAT CHOICE.
Now maybe your suggestion that I educate myself was indeed not intended as a slight but NOT KNOWING YOU I HAVE NO WAY TO BE SURE OF THAT.
In the future please bear in mind that I am not a fool nor am I an uneducated man.
Your kind attention to detail in this matter will be appropriately appreciated.--Tyr

Interesting, that must of been why they were so quick to free black slaves fromt their human masters, and grant them their GOD-GIVEN rights.
Question - What worth is a god given right, when you need other humans to give it to you?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Interesting, that must of been why they were so quick to free black slaves fromt their human masters, and grant them their GOD-GIVEN rights.
Question - What worth is a god given right, when you need other humans to give it to you?

Slavery has always been wrong and history shows its always been around. I'll not defend it in any time period regardless of the race of the victims. The fact that it took almost 80 more years after the Constitution was ratified and a Civil War to bring about its demise is indeed tragic. Yet the birth of our nation and the ratification of the Constitution had to be accomplished first. One step at a time my friend.. A subject for another thread perhaps.. -Tyr

[Noir]

Slavery has always been wrong and history shows its always been around. I'll not defend it in any time period regardless of the race of the victims. The fact that it took almost 80 more years after the Constitution was ratified and a Civil War to bring about its demise is indeed tragic. Yet the birth of our nation and the ratification of the Constitution had to be accomplished first. One step at a time my friend.. A subject for another thread perhaps.. -Tyr

If you want to bring up statements like "The founders risked their ALL to create a nation based upon those stated GOD-GIVEN rights." you have to accept and explain why slaves were part of the deal. If the founding fathers had wanted to do anything about slavery they could have, they didn't. Appartenly being a slave to a king is a breech of GOD GIVEN rights, being a slave to some rich guy wasn't.

[Kathianne]

If you want to bring up statements like "The founders risked their ALL to create a nation based upon those stated GOD-GIVEN rights." you have to accept and explain why slaves were part of the deal. If the founding fathers had wanted to do anything about slavery they could have, they didn't. Appartenly being a slave to a king is a breech of GOD GIVEN rights, being a slave to some rich guy wasn't.

You're ignorant of history. They wouldn't have been able to have formed a government without the 3/5 compromise. That was the best they could do. Even then, it was touch & go, the anti-federalists were concentrated in the South.

It sort of reminds me of women getting the franchise, which had also been around since before ratification. Along with prohibition. ;)

Both of these were tabled over and over again, for abolition of slavery. It took the Civil War, Reconstruction, and WWI to get the amendments for women's vote and prohibition passed. Of course, prohibition caused more problem than it solved. :laugh2: Which is why it was revoked.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

If you want to bring up statements like "The founders risked their ALL to create a nation based upon those stated GOD-GIVEN rights." you have to accept and explain why slaves were part of the deal. If the founding fathers had wanted to do anything about slavery they could have, they didn't. Appartenly being a slave to a king is a breech of GOD GIVEN rights, being a slave to some rich guy wasn't.

The great need to have -ALL- the former colonies join and agree to the ratification of the Constitution did indeed require tabling the slavery issue. Now the fact that you with hindsight think it so terrible a decision doesnt really mean much since we did birth a nation and did eventually stop all slavery. The price we paid for that delay was its exspansion and the high costs of the Civil War. By costs I mean loss of life from both sides! Be my guest, start a thread on Slavery ,its Evils and why America stinks for not abolishing it sooner. I'll post there. This old dog has been known to hunt more than just rabbits my friend..:cheers2:--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You're ignorant of history. They wouldn't have been able to have formed a government without the 3/5 compromise. That was the best they could do. Even then, it was touch & go, the anti-federalists were concentrated in the South.

It sort of reminds me of women getting the franchise, which had also been around since before ratification. Along with prohibition. ;)

Both of these were tabled over and over again, for abolition of slavery. It took the Civil War, Reconstruction, and WWI to get the amendments for women's vote and prohibition passed. Of course, prohibition caused more problem than it solved. :laugh2: Which is why it was revoked.

Sorry missed your post first go round..
Exactly. It was touch and go to finally get to ratification. The birth of the nation was far more important to accomplish first!! Later there would be time to attempt to solve such issues. If one wants to bake an apple pie first step is to get the apples! As my grandfather used to say often, "dont put the cart before the horse"..-Tyr

[ConHog]

THANKS AMIGO.
I hope my reply to that member explains better my previous post. Also hope that we both benefited from the exchange. My reply admittedly was passionate about the greatness of this nation and its founding and I hope will not be taken as an aggressive post meant to offend as it was not my intent. However this is a Christian nation despite obama's lie that it is not ..
In short , fffff-that lying scum obama ...:salute:--Tyr

no it isn't. Absolutely we were founded BY Christians, mostly, and absolutely Christianity has influenced our nation from the very beginning; but we are NOT a Christian nation.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

no it isn't. Absolutely we were founded BY Christians, mostly, and absolutely Christianity has influenced our nation from the very beginning; but we are NOT a Christian nation.

Actually we are for all practical purposes. For three fourths our adult population hails as Christian.
Christianity is by far the dominant religion in our culture. A nation is more its people than it is its government. With that in mind we are a Christian nation. I admit that MANY of the CHRISTIANS need to do better in their faith but that is a church matter not a national one.--Tyr

[ConHog]

Actually we are for all practical purposes. For three fourths our adult population hails as Christian.
Christianity is by far the dominant religion in our culture. A nation is more its people than it is its government. With that in mind we are a Christian nation. I admit that MANY of the CHRISTIANS need to do better in their faith but that is a church matter not a national one.--Tyr

I hear what you're saying, but when a person says a country is a Christian nation, Muslim nation whatever , they are referring to the government itself.

Yes, predominantly our populatin is Christian, but our government is about as far from a Christian government as one could get.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I hear what you're saying, but when a person says a country is a Christian nation, Muslim nation whatever , they are referring to the government itself.

Yes, predominantly our populatin is Christian, but our government is about as far from a Christian government as one could get.

We agree... :beer:--:cool:

Geeezz, for a second there I thought that we were going to be mortal religious enemies! :laugh:--Tyr

[ConHog]

We agree... :beer:--:cool:

Geeezz, for a second there I thought that we were going to be mortal religious enemies! :laugh:--Tyr


I only have time for one mortal enemy on this board and OCA has that job full time.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I only have time for one mortal enemy on this board and OCA has that job full time.

Good because it wasnt an invite amigo.
You strike me as being much like me when I was a young man--full of piss and vinegar!
Not that there is anything wrong with that mind you but if ones wanting honey from tha ladies
piss and vinegar ain't the way to go.
I learned that at about 19 ..
The only azz worth kissing is on a fine sexy lady thats willing to be very nice in return!--:laugh:
You may already know that but for the education of other young uninformed guys that may be here I thought it worth spitting out there. As this old dog has been around the block a few hunded times..;)--Tyr

[ConHog]

Good because it wasnt an invite amigo.
You strike me as being much like me when I was a young man--full of piss and vinegar!
Not that there is anything wrong with that mind you but if ones wanting honey from tha ladies
piss and vinegar ain't the way to go.
I learned that at about 19 ..
The only azz worth kissing is on a fine sexy lady thats willing to be very nice in return!--:laugh:
You may already know that but for the education of other young uninformed guys that may be here I thought it worth spitting out there. As this old dog has been around the block a few hunded times..;)--Tyr

I'm 41 and married to a fine 27 year old. :D

[Missileman]

Tyr,

We both know that you are not ignorant but so that there is no confusion as to which poster needs to read and learn I'd like to address the statement below:

"Do a little research into when In God We Trust came into being and you'll see the FOUNDERS had nothing to do with it."

You sir, seem to posses the same "higher than thou" mentality of the so-called leftist/elitist which only confirms that THEY professed themselves to be wise..." OK, we all know the rest so I'm not going to bring up a Biblical point here for this topic....although it does have something to do with the state that this Christian Nation is in.

Many of today's society lack education and confuse their education with what they actually received...indoctrination, which is why I'm doing my best to be civil but after the above display and attempt to make another poster look ignorant, simply because they have a firm grip on the REAL America and what she has stood for all these years, I felt the need to explain something to the more simple minded among us. Mr. Tyr knows darn well when that phrase appeared on our bills and coins and most other places of prominence. What he also knows is that there is a phrase in our earliest of documents that our founding fathers declared with purpose and importance. They knew full well that our independence depended upon it so they set the foundation that this great Christian Nation lives by to this very day. It is also the foundation that those of the left seek to destroy (our core). I suggest, SIR, that you read up on those very early documents and try not to read something else into them. You can start by trying to get around this phrase "...by our Creator." Our founding fathers knew that Christ provided freedom (gov takes away freedom). Gov. didn't give us the right to buy, carry and use firearms and it certainly doesn't mean that gov. needs to be protected FROM religion. Any yahoo knows why most people of many faiths came here and made such a journey....because someone across the big pond was mandating how they worshiped. Well, I'm sure this has fallen on deaf ears, thick head and a hard heart so I'll close with an address to my friend.

Good post Tyr...your are spot on in your analysis regarding the leftist using islam and ultimately being destroyed by this freedom-less religion of FORCE...why the word islam itself explains this perfectly. THEY used Hitler and thought he could be controlled and we seem to be repeating history. The current occupier in the White House is using the same tactics of division and blame.

Tyr wrote:

IN GOD WE TRUST, should be a major clue that our founders never intended it to be freedom-FROM- religion!


Since the FOUNDERS weren't the ones who came up with the phrase, why would anyone claim it proves the intent of the FOUNDERS? Better yet, why would anyone defend such a claim?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Tyr wrote:


Since the FOUNDERS weren't the ones who came up with the phrase, why would anyone claim it proves the intent of the FOUNDERS? Better yet, why would anyone defend such a claim?

Amigo you'll never get up early enough to slay me.
My comment had nothing to do with saying the motto -In God We Trust- came from the Founders.
Rather I have and will again point out that the signers of the Declaration of Independence did EXPLICITLY
SAY directly to King George that the "Our Creator" gave us those Rights ! With that declaration they pointed Directly To God and declared God to be the Higher Authority which THEY recognised! If thats not the spirit of -In God We Trust-- nothing is! The spirit came before the motto...From that spirit the motto was termed..
I have always defended and always will.--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'm 41 and married to a fine 27 year old. :D

Bro' I got ya there too. I'm 58 married to a 31 year old very beautiful filipina lady. Been married to her for 7 years now..
She was 24 and I was 51 when we married ... Appears I was right about you being full of piss and vinegar and right that you remind me of a younger me..
Which is by no means an insult rather just the opposite..

[ConHog]

Amigo you'll never get up early enough to slay me.
My comment had nothing to do with saying the motto -In God We Trust- came from the Founders.
Rather I have and will again point out that the signers of the Declaration of Independence did EXPLICITLY
SAY directly to King George that the "Our Creator" gave us those Rights ! With that declaration they pointed Directly To God and declared God to be the Higher Authority which THEY recognised! If thats not the spirit of -In God We Trust-- nothing is! The spirit came before the motto...From that spirit the motto was termed..
I have always defended and always will.--Tyr

Our Creator did not explicitly refer to the Christian God; you have to acknowledge that is true. Contrast that with "In God We Trust" which SPECIFICALLY referred to the Christian God.

[Missileman]

First, I am quite knowedgable in history my friend. THEY ACTUALLY TAUGHT HISTORY BACK WHEN I WAS IN SCHOOL OVER 40 YEARS AGO. We were taught the founding of this great nation and the Constitution as well. Guess what?
We were taught the reasons for and meaning of the Declaration of Independence too. Our founding document, greatest governing document ever written by man (Constitution) was predated by the Declaration as you may well know. Our Creator was the central point in their message to King George (POINTING TO A HIGHER AUTHORITY THEY DID RECOGNISE) and that reveals the importance that they placed in religion and God . For with these words of wisdom they set the tone for how they thought free men should live and why they refused to be enslaved by the authority of a human King.
"We hold these truths to be self evident , that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Sir, that pretty much sums up the reason for and the history of this great nation since its birth.

The founders risked their ALL to create a nation based upon those stated GOD-GIVEN rights.
They did indeed strive to also give religious freedom to others and mandated that that our government should not ever become a theocracy!
That does not make our nation not a Christian nation it surely makes our government not ONE!
FOR THE PEOPLE ARE FREE TO CHOOSE AND MY PREVIOUS POST HIGHLIGHTED A FEW FACTS THAT POINTED TO THAT CHOICE.
Now maybe your suggestion that I educate myself was indeed not intended as a slight but NOT KNOWING YOU I HAVE NO WAY TO BE SURE OF THAT.
In the future please bear in mind that I am not a fool nor am I an uneducated man.
Your kind attention to detail in this matter will be appropriately appreciated.--Tyr

If you'd have said that "by our Creator" was proof that the Founders didn't believe in freedom from religion, you'd have still been wrong, but at least historically relevant.

As for what they created, I submit that they intentionally created a secular government with the intent of allowing every individual to live according to their own conscience. I offer as evidence the LACK of any reference to God or Christ in the Constitution.

[ConHog]

If you'd have said that "by our Creator" was proof that the Founders didn't believe in freedom from religion, you'd have still been wrong, but at least historically relevant.

As for what they created, I submit that they intentionally created a secular government with the intent of allowing every individual to live according to their own conscience. I offer as evidence the LACK of any reference to God or Christ in the Constitution.

I SORT of disagree with you MM. I think they certainly DID found this nation as a a Godly nation but they didn't intend for us to be a theocracy and that is why we see God mentioned in other government documents , but not the COTUS.

[Missileman]

I think they certainly DID found this nation as a a Godly nation

Please post some specific examples of the provisions of our government that accomplish this.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

If you'd have said that "by our Creator" was proof that the Founders didn't believe in freedom from religion, you'd have still been wrong, but at least historically relevant.

As for what they created, I submit that they intentionally created a secular government with the intent of allowing every individual to live according to their own conscience. I offer as evidence the LACK of any reference to God or Christ in the Constitution.

Actually they put forth freedom of choice, that is freedom religion. Of course it was not their intention to mandate even Christian faith therby referencing the Christian God for that would be counter to their express wishes of freedom to choose. Freedom to choose means the right to choose no god, a god or even any god but not the right to have the government promote any one select religion or God. Choice dictated the lack of God references in the CONSTITUTION but it also insured the right of the people to so chose and with that went the influence that choice would make it how they chose thier elected officials and how the nation would be governed. The founders were not ignorant of cause and effect. With that in mind the intent was freedom (of) religion and not freedom (from) religion. For freedom (from) religion can only be attained one way and that is by outlawing its very existence! Thier culture already had Christianity as its primary religion and they wanted to insure its right to exist without giving it the right to rule government or eventually create a theocracy. They were indeed very brilliant men..-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Our Creator did not explicitly refer to the Christian God; you have to acknowledge that is true. Contrast that with "In God We Trust" which SPECIFICALLY referred to the Christian God.

Actually it did refer to the Christian God. Witness that oaths of office from the start were sworn on the Christian bible not the Talmud, Koran or any other religious book representing any other faith.... Swearing in using other religious books is a fairly recent methodology.. For hundreds of years testimony in court required swearing in on the Christian bible .. History refutes your premise amigo..--Tyr

[ConHog]

Please post some specific examples of the provisions of our government that accomplish this.

Umm let's start with . what has EVERY session of Congress opened with since the First Continental Congress? Oh , that's right a prayer to God.

[gabosaurus]

America was founded on the basis of many other tenets and actions as well.
I honor the founding of America each July 4th by tossing a box of tea mix off the Santa Monica Pier.

[Missileman]

Umm let's start with . what has EVERY session of Congress opened with since the First Continental Congress? Oh , that's right a prayer to God.

That's NOT a provision of government and while you might be able to claim it's intended to result in a Godly Congress, it does nothing to found a Godly nation.

[Missileman]

Actually they put forth freedom of choice, that is freedom religion. Of course it was not their intention to mandate even Christian faith therby referencing the Christian God for that would be counter to their express wishes of freedom to choose. Freedom to choose means the right to choose no god, a god or even any god but not the right to have the government promote any one select religion or God. Choice dictated the lack of God references in the CONSTITUTION but it also insured the right of the people to so chose and with that went the influence that choice would make it how they chose thier elected officials and how the nation would be governed. The founders were not ignorant of cause and effect. With that in mind the intent was freedom (of) religion and not freedom (from) religion. For freedom (from) religion can only be attained one way and that is by outlawing its very existence! Thier culture already had Christianity as its primary religion and they wanted to insure its right to exist without giving it the right to rule government or eventually create a theocracy. They were indeed very brilliant men..-Tyr

Freedom from religion may mean different things to different people. It certainly doesn't mean the eradication of all things religious to me. In very simple terms, freedom from religion means not having something religious foisted on me through the power of government and I believe the 1st Amendment says the exact same thing in slightly different words.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Freedom from religion may mean different things to different people. It certainly doesn't mean the eradication of all things religious to me. In very simple terms, freedom from religion means not having something religious foisted on me through the power of government and I believe the 1st Amendment says the exact same thing in slightly different words.

Freedom OF religion gives you your right to ignore religion. Freedom FROM religion would require restricting others exercising thier rights to thier religion. Its a delicate balance but in recent years the Federal government has step out into the realm of restriction, restrictions aimed mostly at one religion-Christianity. Notice how the government doesnt attempt that same thing where Islam is concerned? I have..
You are free to not have any religion and the government certainly doesnt force Christianity on you.
You are safe there but watch out for Islam because it demands such force be applied and when it gets strong enough here it will do just that. --Tyr

[Missileman]

Freedom FROM religion would require restricting others exercising thier rights to thier religion. --Tyr

That's your notion of freedom from religion, not mine. Further, it's simply not true. As I've already stated the 1st clearly states my freedom from religion. You'll find it impossible to come up with any scenario where my freedom from religion impedes anyone elses freedom of religion.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's your notion of freedom from religion, not mine. Further, it's simply not true. As I've already stated the 1st clearly states my freedom from religion. You'll find it impossible to come up with any scenario where my freedom from religion impedes anyone elses freedom of religion.

It does if your freedom from religion demands that they not openly/freely express thier religious faith.
It does if you demand that they not openly require thier candidate for public have high moral standards
in line with the morality of thier faith. True that the government can not pick and promote a religion but members
of a religion are free to make any demand that they like on candidates for public office
This is where much of the opposition to those of Christian faith attempts to strike the hardest..
Christian morality influencing our government is not unConstitutional if its not a theocracy.
Our founders fully understood cause and effect. Because we were a majority Christian nation such influence was sure to occur.The founders just wanted to make sure it didnt set up a theocracy..Allow all religions and not ever support one over another was their plan..Myself, I believe if they had foresaw the threat of Islam they would have made at least one exception..-Tyr

[Missileman]

It does if your freedom from religion demands that they not openly/freely express thier religious faith.
It does if you demand that they not openly require thier candidate for public have high moral standards
in line with the morality of thier faith. True that the government can not pick and promote a religion but members
of a religion are free to make any demand that they like on candidates for public office
This is where much of the opposition to those of Christian faith attempts to strike the hardest..
Christian morality influencing our government is not unConstitutional if its not a theocracy.
Our founders fully understood cause and effect. Because we were a majority Christian nation such influence was sure to occur.The founders just wanted to make sure it didnt set up a theocracy..Allow all religions and not ever support one over another was their plan..Myself, I believe if they had foresaw the threat of Islam they would have made at least one exception..-Tyr

What's it gonna take to get you to stop assigning YOUR standards to MY freedom from religion? Why do you insist on expanding MY freedom from religion to include things that I've already stated aren't associated with MY freedom from religion? MY limited freedom from religion isn't capable of impeding anyones free expression of their religious faith.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

What's it gonna take to get you to stop assigning YOUR standards to MY freedom from religion? Why do you insist on expanding MY freedom from religion to include things that I've already stated aren't associated with MY freedom from religion? MY limited freedom from religion isn't capable of impeding anyones free expression of their religious faith.

I didnt expand anything . Go back and read the word --IF- in both those sentences my friend.
That word makes ALL the difference in the world -IF- you pay attention to its meaning..
I've already stated that you have your freedom from religion and it was a voluntary choice that you made insured by our Constitution.
We good to go then..:beer: -Tyr

[ConHog]

What's it gonna take to get you to stop assigning YOUR standards to MY freedom from religion? Why do you insist on expanding MY freedom from religion to include things that I've already stated aren't associated with MY freedom from religion? MY limited freedom from religion isn't capable of impeding anyones free expression of their religious faith.

WHY do you keep insisting that you have the right to freedom FROM religion? You have NO such right. You have a right to freedom OF religion. So certainly that means if you choose to ascribe to no religion you have that right; what you do NOT have is the right to not see MY religion.

The ONLY way you could have freedom FROM religion would be to take away my freedom OF religion and since OF is in the Constitution whereas FROM is not, you're shit out of luck.

[red state]

...AND, APPARENTLY, BRAINS. Or, perhaps that's where they got the term "$#!T 4 Brains".


*Under the first Amendment of the United States Constitution, it states that a person cannot "prohibit the free exercise of religion." Hence, a person cannot infringe on a person's right to practice their own preference of religion.


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


NOTE: The Constitution NEVER said anything about the freedom [FROM] speech. Each and every time the word (OF) was used...not (FROM).


Liberals always TWIST or DISTORT things to meet their own personal needs. It doesn't work...not any more and this was a big reason THEY stopped teaching true, patriotic facts and history within our public schools.


One must have STANDARDS in order to have high standards (if desired) and this is why THEY seek to destroy standards all together...because they have none. One must stand for something or THEY will fall for ANYTHING.

[ConHog]

...AND, APPARENTLY, BRAINS. Or, perhaps that's where they got the term "$#!T 4 Brains".


*Under the first Amendment of the United States Constitution, it states that a person cannot "prohibit the free exercise of religion." Hence, a person cannot infringe on a person's right to practice their own preference of religion.


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


NOTE: The Constitution NEVER said anything about the freedom [FROM] speech. Each and every time the word (OF) was used...not (FROM).


Liberals always TWIST or DISTORT things to meet their own personal needs. It doesn't work...not any more and this was a big reason THEY stopped teaching true, patriotic facts and history within our public schools.


One must have STANDARDS in order to have high standards (if desired) and this is why THEY seek to destroy standards all together...because they have none. One must stand for something or THEY will fall for ANYTHING.


AHEM, actually sir you're WRONG. The COTUS does not protect you from having your first amendment rights abridged by ANYONE other than the government. IOW if I want to hang a sign up in my business saying "no discussing Allah here" that is NOT a violation of the First.

Conversely when the government tells its employees that they can't have a nativity scene on government property that would seem to be a violation, but the courts haven't seen it that way.

[gabosaurus]

The Constitution protects everyone's choice of religion, unless the religion is not in favor at the time. Catholics were persecuted for a while. Then it was Jewish people. Now it is Muslims.

[Missileman]

WHY do you keep insisting that you have the right to freedom FROM religion? You have NO such right. You have a right to freedom OF religion. So certainly that means if you choose to ascribe to no religion you have that right; what you do NOT have is the right to not see MY religion.

The ONLY way you could have freedom FROM religion would be to take away my freedom OF religion and since OF is in the Constitution whereas FROM is not, you're shit out of luck.

I have the freedom FROM religion as I've already stated it, AND the 1st states the same thing.

Also, I've already explained that my freedom from religion, as I've defined it, isn't capable of infringing on anyone's freedom of religion.

[ConHog]

I have the freedom FROM religion as I've already stated it, AND the 1st states the same thing.

Also, I've already explained that my freedom from religion, as I've defined it, isn't capable of infringing on anyone's freedom of religion.

you're 100% WRONG. And this isn't even a debate MM. The COTUS is a literal document and the words contained in it have meanings. Freedom FROM religion is not in the document at all. You quite simply do not have that right.

And further , what Congress may or may not do has NO bearing on whether you must put up with being exposed to religion anyway.

That's akin to saying that since we have a guaranteed freedom of speech Jim MUST let you post whatever you want on this board. That isn't the case at all though, is it?

[Missileman]

you're 100% WRONG. And this isn't even a debate MM. The COTUS is a literal document and the words contained in it have meanings. Freedom FROM religion is not in the document at all. You quite simply do not have that right.

And further , what Congress may or may not do has NO bearing on whether you must put up with being exposed to religion anyway.

That's akin to saying that since we have a guaranteed freedom of speech Jim MUST let you post whatever you want on this board. That isn't the case at all though, is it?

If you're going to get LITERAL, show me a copy of the COTUS that has the words "freedom of religion" in the 1st Amendment.

Now, go back and READ what i've said is my freedom FROM religion, then READ "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and argue some more(for no apparent reason) that what I've written and what's in the 1st aren't exactly the same thing.

[ConHog]

If you're going to get LITERAL, show me a copy of the COTUS that has the words "freedom of religion" in the 1st Amendment.

Now, go back and READ what i've said is my freedom FROM religion, then READ "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and argue some more(for no apparent reason) that what I've written and what's in the 1st aren't exactly the same thing.

A LITERAL translation is "freedom of religion" and has been accepted for nigh on two hundred years .

Now , I grant I may be misreading what YOU mean by freedom FROM religion; but you can't deny that there are MANY out there who believe that they have the right to never have to look at , or hear about anything religious at all. Meaning if 20 Christians who work at the City Hall hang up a picture of a nativity scene during Christmas they haul ass down and sue the city for violating their rights.

In my estimation those people should be euthanized for stupidity for the greater good of humanity, so I do apologize if I misinterpreted your meaning. If on the other hand you agree with THEM, please report for euthanizing at your earliest convenience. :laugh:

[Roo]

If you're going to get LITERAL, show me a copy of the COTUS that has the words "freedom of religion" in the 1st Amendment.

Now, go back and READ what i've said is my freedom FROM religion, then READ "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and argue some more(for no apparent reason) that what I've written and what's in the 1st aren't exactly the same thing.

This is what happens when one has no historical education.

[gabosaurus]

In the U.S., "freedom of religion" has always meant "you are free to observe any religion that is approved by the majority." Jews and Catholics have been persecuted in the past. Now it is Muslims.

[Missileman]

This is what happens when one has no historical education.

What's that exactly? Posting under a cartoon handle with a cartoon avatar with the intelligence level of a cartoon?

[gabosaurus]

What's that exactly? Posting under a cartoon handle with a cartoon avatar with the intelligence level of a cartoon?

**loves it** :clap:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

What's that exactly? Posting under a cartoon handle with a cartoon avatar with the intelligence level of a cartoon?

A sockpuppet, perhaps a possibility, eh????
If so , guess who it could be? Just an observation and a gut feeling .--;)-Tyr

[ConHog]

A sockpuppet, perhaps a possibility, eh????
If so , guess who it could be? Just an observation and a gut feeling .--;)-Tyr

Been here less than a month already accusing people of being socks?

[Roo]

What's that exactly? Posting under a cartoon handle with a cartoon avatar with the intelligence level of a cartoon?

Ohhhh loookie.....MM is upset :(

If you had a modicum of education you wouldn't type what you type.

The Founders came out out of a Gov run Religion....I would hope that you learned SOMETHING from school....

[Roo]

A sockpuppet, perhaps a possibility, eh????
If so , guess who it could be? Just an observation and a gut feeling .--;)-Tyr

Too funny.....your "gut" isn't reliable ;)

[Missileman]

Ohhhh loookie.....MM is upset :(

If you had a modicum of education you wouldn't type what you type.

The Founders came out out of a Gov run Religion....I would hope that you learned SOMETHING from school....

First, your blanket assessments of what I've typed are meaningless. Post something specific that I've written, that you believe is in error, and then explain why you think it is.

Secondly, I am aware of the Church of England and that several colonies had "official" religions. Nothing I've posted should have led you to conclude otherwise.

[Larrymc]

Oh, fuck you.

This country was founded by a bunch of Deists and renegade Christians who had seen first-hand what dogmatic Christian dogma can do to wreck people's lives and they definitely were against identifying this country with any one religion.

You might argue that this is a Christian nation because most people are nominally Christian, but there is no official religion.

And most of the people who are nominally Christian couldn't give a rat's ass about going to church or practicing Christianity.

they came here for religious freedom from a Government establish religion that your dare not stray from, because after King James had the Bible mass produce people began to be able to read it for them selves and realized exactly who Jesus was, that's why they came. and they never wanted Government to enter fear with religion again, so separation of Church and state was established, these people who also established swearing in on the Bible, used it for the first school book, posted the Ten Commandments in every court room, ect ect certainly weren't trying to keep religion out of Government

[Larrymc]

If you're going to get LITERAL, show me a copy of the COTUS that has the words "freedom of religion" in the 1st Amendment.

Now, go back and READ what i've said is my freedom FROM religion, then READ "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and argue some more(for no apparent reason) that what I've written and what's in the 1st aren't exactly the same thing.what kind of idiot do you have to be to think statement gives freedom from religion, it only says Government can't establish a religion

[Kathianne]

There were no deists that were original. They were 2-4 generation here, some were founders and/or framers of the government, but not original.

[Missileman]

what kind of idiot do you have to be to think statement gives freedom from religion, it only says Government can't establish a religion

Hey, asshole! You should learn how to read before accusing someone else of being an idiot.

[aboutime]

what kind of idiot do you have to be to think statement gives freedom from religion, it only says Government can't establish a religion


Larrymc. In all honesty. In response to your question above. It sounds like you have answered your own question quite well.

[Missileman]

Larrymc. In all honesty. In response to your question above. It sounds like you have answered your own question quite well.

Says the boob with more useless periods than a convent. You can join Larry at the "English as a second language" classes.

[aboutime]

Says the boob with more useless periods than a convent. You can join Larry at the "English as a second language" classes.


For whatever reason you believe somebody spilled your Wheaties Missileman. I do appreciate it when you are so willing to talk about yourself like that above. That 'useless periods' was very appropriately spoken about yourself. Thank you. I may use it someday if I need to explain how big that CHIP on your shoulder is.

[Larrymc]

Larrymc. In all honesty. In response to your question above. It sounds like you have answered your own question quite well.i assume by your response that your saying you fit the bill??

[Larrymc]

Says the boob with more useless periods than a convent. You can join Larry at the "English as a second language" classes.
i just got here and already found one

[aboutime]

Poor, poor Missileman. You can't help it. We know it. Too bad.

[gabosaurus]

Says the boob with more useless periods than a convent. You can join Larry at the "English as a second language" classes.

Sorry to tell you this Missileman, but arguing with stupid people is like yelling at a cat. They will smile, ignore you and then do the same thing again 10 minutes later.

[aboutime]

Sorry to tell you this Missileman, but arguing with stupid people is like yelling at a cat. They will smile, ignore you and then do the same thing again 10 minutes later.


Listen to gabby Missileman. She just described how she acts like a cat that smiles, ignores you, then comes back here again, 10 minutes later.

By the way. Missileman. Whatever I said, or did to piss you off so much. Musta been on one of those days you have, every month.

[Larrymc]

BS. The US was founded as a secular nation by Christians. If you notice, they included judicial, legislative and executive branches of the government. I've never heard of any "theological" branch. You're wrong.not true, they established swearing in on the Bible, use for the first school Book, posted the Ten Commandments in every court room, beginning each session with prayer, ect ect, in fact they included religion in many Government arenas, but they never wanted it the other way so they established separation of Church and State, like it or not its true.

[Larrymc]

Doesn't change the fact that the US government is secular and always has been.Not True

[AndrewJHarris]

Yeah, because you're a regular angel in this department :rolleyes:

If you can't win a fair debate you throw mud, is that it? REGARDLESS on his actions elsewhere, He's Right! Period! You can disagree with him as is your right, but character assassination is uncalled for as well. you might as well be _bama

[AndrewJHarris]

What's that exactly? Posting under a cartoon handle with a cartoon avatar with the intelligence level of a cartoon?

MM is lookin' alot like Misleader & Puppet _bama. if you can't refrain from attacking the person instead of the Issue, then you have no place on this site. Trying to discredit someone based on who they are opposed to the ideas they support is unfounded.

in short MM, Attack the issue someone brings up or Go home.

From what he said, it holds water for me! What kind of Historical Education have you had? what kind of books or articles on the subject have you read? who were their authors? Where did they go to school at? How much of ANY of these questions can you answer? If you can't cite your "facts" then don't get made when someone who has done their homework comes along and tells you what is what. :read:

[Missileman]

Freedom from religion may mean different things to different people. It certainly doesn't mean the eradication of all things religious to me. In very simple terms, freedom from religion means not having something religious foisted on me through the power of government and I believe the 1st Amendment says the exact same thing in slightly different words.


MM is lookin' alot like Misleader & Puppet _bama. if you can't refrain from attacking the person instead of the Issue, then you have no place on this site. Trying to discredit someone based on who they are opposed to the ideas they support is unfounded.

in short MM, Attack the issue someone brings up or Go home.

From what he said, it holds water for me! What kind of Historical Education have you had? what kind of books or articles on the subject have you read? who were their authors? Where did they go to school at? How much of ANY of these questions can you answer? If you can't cite your "facts" then don't get made when someone who has done their homework comes along and tells you what is what. :read:

How about this instead...I'll pretend you didn't just chastise me for a personal attack that was in response to a personal attack and you can make YOUR case about why what I wrote in my quoted post is inaccurate or illogical.

P.S. If you decide not to accept that invitation, might I cheerfully suggest that you follow your own advice in the bolded part above or are you simply a run-of-the-mill hypocrite?

[NightTrain]

I'll take 'Necro' for a thousand, Alex.

[NightTrain]

In the U.S., "freedom of religion" has always meant "you are free to observe any religion that is approved by the majority." Jews and Catholics have been persecuted in the past. Now it is Muslims.


Nice trolling. Of course you know that muslims are as free to engage in their religion as any other here.

But continue with your stupidity.

I insist.

[Larrymc]

Not a single mention of Jesus, or Christ. I think Hagbard is right about that Deist business, moreover those who demand this Christian Nation business never manage to overcome the ratification of the Bill of Rights which clearly sets the notion that the government of this nation is not contingent upon, or subject to, any ecclesiastic doctrine what-so-ever.

I will however concede that trusting in God is more appealing to me that trusting the Federal Reserve. i don't the Founders intended to leave God out of anything, but they believe in freedom of religion,( that is to worship God in the way of your choosing, ) because they used religion in many public arenas especially Government, God and Christ was a given, they couldn't imagine that in this country, because of what they came from anyone would ever try to take God out, of the system,

[aboutime]

i don't the Founders intended to leave God out of anything, but they believe in freedom of religion,( that is to worship God in the way of your choosing, ) because they used religion in many public arenas especially Government, God and Christ was a given, they couldn't imagine that in this country, because of what they came from anyone would ever try to take God out, of the system,


Everyone. How about listening to the most important Founder giving his Farewell Address to the People. George Washington.

Pay attention, listen to how he refers to Freedom of Religion.


http://youtu.be/v4rE9IkieUg

IT WILL SOUND VERY FAMILIAR.....OBAMA, ARE YOU LISTENING?

[Larrymc]

Everyone. How about listening to the most important Founder giving his Farewell Address to the People. George Washington.

Pay attention, listen to how he refers to Freedom of Religion.


http://youtu.be/v4rE9IkieUg

IT WILL SOUND VERY FAMILIAR.....OBAMA, ARE YOU LISTENING?that's why it upsets me to here some fool, say our founders, intended to keep religion out of Government, if you look at the way the Government was set up, with Bible, and Prayer a central part of it, how can anyone conclude that they intended to keep religion and Government separated

[aboutime]

that's why it upsets me to here some fool, say our founders, intended to keep religion out of Government, if you look at the way the Government was set up, with Bible, and Prayer a central part of it, how can anyone conclude that they intended to keep religion and Government separated


Larrymc. Three words answer your last question. Selfishness, Ignorance, and Power! That's how they conclude such things.

[Larrymc]

Larrymc. Three words answer your last question. Selfishness, Ignorance, and Power! That's how they conclude such things.with selfishness being the main driver

[AndrewJHarris]

How about this instead...I'll pretend you didn't just chastise me for a personal attack that was in response to a personal attack and you can make YOUR case about why what I wrote in my quoted post is inaccurate or illogical.

P.S. If you decide not to accept that invitation, might I cheerfully suggest that you follow your own advice in the bolded part above or are you simply a run-of-the-mill hypocrite?

If you truly cared about this issue in a respectable manner, you would have left the personal attack off. From what I piece together, when ever i see someone lashing out like that, its because they have something similar they're trying to cover up. Attacking the behavior and the person are 2 different things. I was attacking your behavior in the bolded part, then went on to draw my own conclusions. Again, I do my best not to be Hypocrite (a religious term when i first heard it), and I work harder than most to correct my defaults. Even if you are personally attacked, (if that is what you perceived) it doesn't give you some invented higher ground to attack in like wise. To do so is petty and childish. Not to be confused with being Child-Like. Because again those are also 2 different things.

[AndrewJHarris]

Nice trolling. Of course you know that muslims are as free to engage in their religion as any other here.

But continue with your stupidity.

I insist.

How much do you know of this "religion"? The more I learn of it, the less I am inclined to believe it is a religion that inspires its followers to play along and be friendly with other religions like Christianity, Judaism, and Buddhism do. What kind of behavior does Islam encourage? Is that what you expect from Your children? Islam feels more like a large terrorist group that when able is quite ugly behaviorally. I don't think the founding fathers would have approved of the kind of actions that come from Islamists now of days. Moderate Islamists from what I hear are only waiting until they have a upper hand before they strike. Read their Qur'an, it says what i had just said; if you can't win wait until you can strike and win. Just because your free to smoke doesn't mean you should. I'd equate the same to Islam.

[Larrymc]

Nice trolling. Of course you know that muslims are as free to engage in their religion as any other here.

But continue with your stupidity.

I insist. how peaceful do you think they will be when one of there Extreme Groups raises up in the US, they know better than any of us the consequences

[Kathianne]

How much do you know of this "religion"? The more I learn of it, the less I am inclined to believe it is a religion that inspires its followers to play along and be friendly with other religions like Christianity, Judaism, and Buddhism do. What kind of behavior does Islam encourage? Is that what you expect from Your children? Islam feels more like a large terrorist group that when able is quite ugly behaviorally. I don't think the founding fathers would have approved of the kind of actions that come from Islamists now of days. Moderate Islamists from what I hear are only waiting until they have a upper hand before they strike. Read their Qur'an, it says what i had just said; if you can't win wait until you can strike and win. Just because your free to smoke doesn't mean you should. I'd equate the same to Islam.

and that's one of the features of our constitution, it doesn't take your into account your reading of other religions. They have the right, just as you do, to practice their religion freely, within the confines of the laws.

[Larrymc]

and that's one of the features of our constitution, it doesn't take your into account your reading of other religions. They have the right, just as you do, to practice their religion freely, within the confines of the laws.actually i think our freedom of religion, refers to worshiping the God of the Bible in the way of your choosing, something else people twist to suite

[Kathianne]

actually i think our freedom of religion, refers to worshiping the God of the Bible in the way of your choosing, something else people twist to suite

Actually your interpretation is wrong. The framers were an eclectic mix, while primarily Christian, they recognized the rights of others, including deists, Jews, and yes, Moslems as they spelt it back then.

[Larrymc]

Actually your interpretation is wrong. The framers were an eclectic mix, while primarily Christian, they recognized the rights of others, including deists, Jews, and yes, Moslems as they spelt it back then.i disagree freedom its self covered those issues, but they were concerned about Government establishing a religion ( telling them how they should worship God ) which is what they came from,

[Kathianne]

i disagree freedom its self covered those issues, but they were concerned about Government establishing a religion ( telling them how they should worship God ) which is what they came from,

Huh? Can you elaborate? Truly, this is a fog.

[aboutime]

Actually your interpretation is wrong. The framers were an eclectic mix, while primarily Christian, they recognized the rights of others, including deists, Jews, and yes, Moslems as they spelt it back then.


Kathianne. How can you tell someone Their interpretation is wrong? Everybody see's things differently than you do. Because you say they are interpreted wrong is...YOUR OPINION. Just as Larry has offered his opinion....or Interpretation, and as I do, with everyone else.

I appreciate, and respect you for offering your knowledge here. But you must know. As an educator. You do NOT have the right, nor the expertise to tell ANYONE what their Interpretation is, or isn't on any topic.

That is why they put ERASERS on pencils. People often make mistakes, or change their minds. But YOU do not have that power. No matter who you are, or how much education you have.

[Kathianne]

Kathianne. How can you tell someone Their interpretation is wrong? Everybody see's things differently than you do. Because you say they are interpreted wrong is...YOUR OPINION. Just as Larry has offered his opinion....or Interpretation, and as I do, with everyone else.

I appreciate, and respect you for offering your knowledge here. But you must know. As an educator. You do NOT have the right, nor the expertise to tell ANYONE what their Interpretation is, or isn't on any topic.

That is why they put ERASERS on pencils. People often make mistakes, or change their minds. But YOU do not have that power. No matter who you are, or how much education you have.

Yeah, I do, as do yourself. It's wrong.

[aboutime]

Yeah, I do, as do yourself. It's wrong.


I agree Kathianne. IT IS WRONG!

[Larrymc]

Huh? Can you elaborate? Truly, this is a fog.Freedom of the other groups is covered buy our basic freedom so long as it don't break any of our laws, but the Christians who came here were new Christians, they were not allowed to worship Christ as the only way to heaven, which they figured out once they were able to read the Bible for them selves, King James knew it but the religion was so powerful that it wouldn't be popular even for a King to try and change the religion, so he had the Bible mass produced, before that all they had was what they were told, your right not all agreed, on everything that's why we have different denominations and they wanted to make sure that everyone could always worship God in the way of there choosing. so we have freedom of religion, there's no specific freedom from religion, just Freedom

[Kathianne]

I agree Kathianne. IT IS WRONG!

Ok.

[Kathianne]

i disagree freedom its self covered those issues, but they were concerned about Government establishing a religion ( telling them how they should worship God ) which is what they came from,

Well they weren't concerned with Deists overwhelming or Jews or Moslems, or Pagans. So they were concerned with which sect overtaking the nascent country? Could it be? As a Christian myself, seriously worried we're going to be in a minority before long, can't escape the obvious in 1700's.

[Missileman]

If you truly cared about this issue in a respectable manner, you would have left the personal attack off. From what I piece together, when ever i see someone lashing out like that, its because they have something similar they're trying to cover up. Attacking the behavior and the person are 2 different things. I was attacking your behavior in the bolded part, then went on to draw my own conclusions. Again, I do my best not to be Hypocrite (a religious term when i first heard it), and I work harder than most to correct my defaults. Even if you are personally attacked, (if that is what you perceived) it doesn't give you some invented higher ground to attack in like wise. To do so is petty and childish. Not to be confused with being Child-Like. Because again those are also 2 different things.

He was behaving like a moron, and you're behaving like a jackass. So get off your high horse and answer my question to you, or STFU.

P.S. I can see how this attacking behavior thing is so much better than attacking the person. Thanks!

[Larrymc]

Well they weren't concerned with Deists overwhelming or Jews or Moslems, or Pagans. So they were concerned with which sect overtaking the nascent country? Could it be? As a Christian myself, seriously worried we're going to be in a minority before long, can't escape the obvious in 1700's. yes if they established Christianity, the others would be kept down, in a letter to a church that wanted to establish there Denomination in there village, Town (what ever it was at the time) though it is impossible to Govern without religion, no one church ( Denomination ) can ever reign Supreme, Thomas Jefferson. i to am concerned about our falling numbers, though the Bible tells us this will happen, i had hoped that my grand kids wouldn't have to deal with it, i am a little surprised by our conversation earlier, when you seem to be defining Homosexuality, unless your a liberal or a Democrat then it would of course make sense

[Missileman]

Freedom of the other groups is covered buy our basic freedom so long as it don't break any of our laws, but the Christians who came here were new Christians, they were not allowed to worship Christ as the only way to heaven, which they figured out once they were able to read the Bible for them selves, King James knew it but the religion was so powerful that it wouldn't be popular even for a King to try and change the religion, so he had the Bible mass produced, before that all they had was what they were told, your right not all agreed, on everything that's why we have different denominations and they wanted to make sure that everyone could always worship God in the way of there choosing. so we have freedom of religion, there's no specific freedom from religion, just Freedom

"Most Stupid Post of the Year" candidate...maybe even of the decade.

[Larrymc]

"Most Stupid Post of the Year" candidate...maybe even of the decade.really and what do you know about it?? why don't you spew a little more of your ignorance, i seen quit a bit already

[Missileman]

really and what do you know about it?? why don't you spew a little more of your ignorance, i seen quit a bit already

I KNOW that the First Amendment ISN'T the Freedom of Christianity.

[Larrymc]

I KNOW that the First Amendment ISN'T the Freedom of Christianity. true, and that has to do with what???

[Kathianne]

Kathianne. How can you tell someone Their interpretation is wrong? Everybody see's things differently than you do. Because you say they are interpreted wrong is...YOUR OPINION. Just as Larry has offered his opinion....or Interpretation, and as I do, with everyone else.

I appreciate, and respect you for offering your knowledge here. But you must know. As an educator. You do NOT have the right, nor the expertise to tell ANYONE what their Interpretation is, or isn't on any topic.

That is why they put ERASERS on pencils. People often make mistakes, or change their minds. But YOU do not have that power. No matter who you are, or how much education you have.

You're correct to a point. When Larry tells others what is to be allowed or not, he's not doing any different. That you may agree more with his pov, than mine, shouldn't mean not to admonish him for the same.

[aboutime]

You're correct to a point. When Larry tells others what is to be allowed or not, he's not doing any different. That you may agree more with his pov, than mine, shouldn't mean not to admonish him for the same.


Kathianne. Did someone die, and leave you here as the one designated to admonish other members you seem to look down upon?

You, as a fellow member of this forum. DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to admonish, belittle, or tell anyone you have decided how they are to INTERPRET anything. That's all I was trying to say.

Whatever happened to reason, and tolerance? If I, or anyone else has a differing opinion, take, or interpretation of things in life. WHO are you to tell any of us WE ARE WRONG..because YOU SAY SO? Seems to me. I have been corrected, and admonished for doing the very same thing you now are doing.
Double standard?

Remember the First Amendment applies...even to those who say things you don't like.

[Larrymc]

You're correct to a point. When Larry tells others what is to be allowed or not, he's not doing any different. That you may agree more with his pov, than mine, shouldn't mean not to admonish him for the same.i posted a statement that i fell is true, then FJ insisted i give my opinion so i did, same with you i gave my opinion and questioned yours but you haven't answered me

[Kathianne]

Kathianne. Did someone die, and leave you here as the one designated to admonish other members you seem to look down upon?

You, as a fellow member of this forum. DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to admonish, belittle, or tell anyone you have decided how they are to INTERPRET anything. That's all I was trying to say.

Whatever happened to reason, and tolerance? If I, or anyone else has a differing opinion, take, or interpretation of things in life. WHO are you to tell any of us WE ARE WRONG..because YOU SAY SO? Seems to me. I have been corrected, and admonished for doing the very same thing you now are doing.
Double standard?

Remember the First Amendment applies...even to those who say things you don't like.

Hey, I am perfectly able and allowed to respond how I see fit. I try not to be nasty about it. If you don't like my posts, skim past them or put me on ignore. I've no problem with non-response.

[aboutime]

Hey, I am perfectly able and allowed to respond how I see fit. I try not to be nasty about it. If you don't like my posts, skim past them or put me on ignore. I've no problem with non-response.


Thanks Kathianne. Now I will go back to your post directed at me, and remember. Nothing you said should have been taken seriously. If you preach one thing to me, then turn around and do exactly that. Not something I admire in double standards, or hypocrisy.

[Kathianne]

Thanks Kathianne. Now I will go back to your post directed at me, and remember. Nothing you said should have been taken seriously. If you preach one thing to me, then turn around and do exactly that. Not something I admire in double standards, or hypocrisy.

Whatever.

[aboutime]

Whatever.


Kathianne. WHY THE LIBERAL Attitude?

[Robert A Whit]

ReligionLambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Protestantism), and two were Roman Catholics (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church) (D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Church_of_England) (or Episcopalian (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Episcopal_Church_in_the_United_States_of_America), after the American Revolutionary War (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War) was won), eight were Presbyterians (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Presbyterianism), seven were Congregationalists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Congregational_church), two were Lutherans (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Lutheranism), two were Dutch Reformed (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Dutch_Reformed_Church), and two were Methodists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Methodism).
A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Anti-clericalism) Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson[18] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-18)[19] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-19)[20] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-20) (who created the so-called "Jefferson Bible (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Jefferson_Bible)") and Benjamin Franklin.[21] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-21) Others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Deism), or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.[22] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-22)
Historian Gregg L. Frazer argues that the leading Founders (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Theistic_rationalism)".[23] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-23)

[Larrymc]

Religion

Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Protestantism), and two were Roman Catholics (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church) (D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Church_of_England) (or Episcopalian (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Episcopal_Church_in_the_United_States_of_America), after the American Revolutionary War (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War) was won), eight were Presbyterians (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Presbyterianism), seven were Congregationalists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Congregational_church), two were Lutherans (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Lutheranism), two were Dutch Reformed (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Dutch_Reformed_Church), and two were Methodists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Methodism).
A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Anti-clericalism) Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson[18] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-18)[19] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-19)[20] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-20) (who created the so-called "Jefferson Bible (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Jefferson_Bible)") and Benjamin Franklin.[21] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-21) Others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Deism), or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.[22] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-22)
Historian Gregg L. Frazer argues that the leading Founders (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Theistic_rationalism)".[23] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-23)thank you for the info, i think this shows why we have specific Freedom of Religion

[logroller]

actually i think our freedom of religion, refers to worshiping the God of the Bible in the way of your choosing, something else people twist to suite
God and the Bible are specific to Christianity... Christianity is a religion. America was founded under the auspices of no specific religion being American. Its you that's twisting things to suit. Case in point:

thank you for the info, i think this shows why we have specific Freedom of Religion
Wtf is specific freedom of religion? Doesn't even make sense. Freedom is being without confinement, ie without socified bounds. Our founders wrote the constitution, and purposefully didn't specify any religion; it outright forbade the government from establishing any religion. They could have said "freedom to practice religion according the Bible and God..." ; but they didn't. They could have, but do not. Any guess as to why?

[Kathianne]

IMO both Larry and Log are wrong.

The Constitution DOES forbid an establishment of religion. It also by the same swipe forbids the elimination of religious expression. That is what the courts keep getting hung up on. Thus the Commandments in courts and other stuff.

Truth is the framers were way smarter than the rest of us.

[logroller]

Religion

Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Protestantism), and two were Roman Catholics (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church) (D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Church_of_England) (or Episcopalian (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Episcopal_Church_in_the_United_States_of_America), after the American Revolutionary War (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War) was won), eight were Presbyterians (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Presbyterianism), seven were Congregationalists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Congregational_church), two were Lutherans (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Lutheranism), two were Dutch Reformed (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Dutch_Reformed_Church), and two were Methodists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Methodism).
A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Anti-clericalism) Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson[18] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-18)[19] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-19)[20] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-20) (who created the so-called "Jefferson Bible (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Jefferson_Bible)") and Benjamin Franklin.[21] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-21) Others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Deism), or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.[22] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-22)
Historian Gregg L. Frazer argues that the leading Founders (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Theistic_rationalism)".[23] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-23)
America being founded by Christians =\= America founded as a Christian nation
for example, the founder of debatepolicy.com is a conservative, but...ah shit..bad example.
see: Amendment I for more.

[Larrymc]

God and the Bible are specific to Christianity... Christianity is a religion. America was founded under the auspices of no specific religion being American. Its you that's twisting things to suit. Case in point:

Wtf is specific freedom of religion? Doesn't even make sense. Freedom is being without confinement, ie without socified bounds. Our founders wrote the constitution, and purposefully didn't specify any religion; it outright forbade the government from establishing any religion. They could have said "freedom to practice religion according the Bible and God..." ; but they didn't. They could have, but do not. Any guess as to why? id say there weren't as many idiots like you that they thought they had to spell it out, God and religion was a give, but they didn't want any one Denomination to ever rule

[Kathianne]

id say there weren't as many idiots like you that they thought they had to spell it out, God and religion was a give, but they didn't want any one Denomination to ever rule

Not denomination, they didn't want a belief system to dominate, including Christianity. That doesn't preclude a majority then or now, just an understanding that in a country this large, no one anything entrenched was a good idea.

As I said, they were smarter than us.

[Larrymc]

Not denomination, they didn't want a belief system to dominate, including Christianity. That doesn't preclude a majority then or now, just an understanding that in a country this large, no one anything entrenched was a good idea.

As I said, they were smarter than us.i really don't know how you can come to that conclusion, is this not the same people that made the Bible, the first School book, that thought it was so Sacred that even Criminals wouldn't lie after swearing in on it, felt that the Ten Commandments was so impotent to society, they post it in court rooms, every branch of Government was to start there sessions with prayer, and i guess you deny the Moral decay of the Country hasn't exploded, sense removing these things Hmmmm you said you were a Christian, this seems like common sense, Especially for a Christian??

[logroller]

id say there weren't as many idiots like you that they thought they had to spell it out, God and religion was a give, but they didn't want any one Denomination to ever rule "was a give" ???
It's ironic that spelling something out and you calling me an idiot come in the same sentence. But nonetheless, I'm sure they knew the difference between a denomination and a religion-- yet "spelled out", rather explicitly: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

[Robert A Whit]

America being founded by Christians =\= America founded as a Christian nation
for example, the founder of debatepolicy.com is a conservative, but...ah shit..bad example.
see: Amendment I for more.

Not sure why some act offended to learn that they actually were christians.

[logroller]

i really don't know how you can come to that conclusion, is this not the same people that made the Bible, the first School book, that thought it was so Sacred that even Criminals wouldn't lie after swearing in on it, felt that the Ten Commandments was so impotent to society, they post it in court rooms, every branch of Government was to start there sessions with prayer, and i guess you deny the Moral decay of the Country hasn't exploded, sense removing these things Hmmmm you said you were a Christian, this seems like common sense, Especially for a Christian??
The founding fathers made the Bible? The first school book? Impotent? :rofl: freedom of religion - It's not that difficult a concept.

[logroller]

Not sure why some act offended to learn that they actually were christians.
No offense taken. This is a debate site, and the topic is America being founded as a Christian nation. Why did you present evidence if not to support a premise?

[Larrymc]

"was a give" ???
It's ironic that spelling something out and you calling me an idiot come in the same sentence. But nonetheless, I'm sure they knew the difference between a denomination and a religion-- yet "spelled out", rather explicitly: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."it is ironic that i miss spelled a word at that point, but doesn't change the statement, now try to use some common sense, your quote is correct, but dose not, change the fact that they use religion through out Government,

[Kathianne]

America being founded by Christians =\= America founded as a Christian nation
for example, the founder of debatepolicy.com is a conservative, but...ah shit..bad example.
see: Amendment I for more.

That the vast majority of the founders and the framers were Christians, does not = America being a 'Christian Nation.' In fact, it's in the first amendment that it's not.

Now if you wish to say that America has so far been a nation with predominantly practicing Christians? That would be correct. That for most of its history, America has been a country made up of people who take religion seriously? Correct.

[aboutime]

"was a give" ???
It's ironic that spelling something out and you calling me an idiot come in the same sentence. But nonetheless, I'm sure they knew the difference between a denomination and a religion-- yet "spelled out", rather explicitly: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."


Logroller. But, there is ONE HUGE DIFFERENCE you failed to point out with your wise-ass, smart remarks.

And that is. Most of us already knew YOU ARE AN IDIOT. Not ironic at all that ONE IDIOT would find a need to label someone else that way to hide your own, lousy, frustrations.

And, before you also call me the same. I know it. Otherwise, why would I be familiar with you, and you being an idiot?

[Robert A Whit]

No offense taken. This is a debate site, and the topic is America being founded as a Christian nation. Why did you present evidence if not to support a premise?


Great. That means you were not who was spoken of then. Yes it is such a site. Yes I presented evidence. Why? Because it was evidence.

[Robert A Whit]

That the vast majority of the founders and the framers were Christians, does not = America being a 'Christian Nation.' In fact, it's in the first amendment that it's not.

Now if you wish to say that America has so far always been a nation with predominantly practicing Christians? That would be correct. That for most of its history, America has been a country made up of people who take religion seriously? Correct.

I don't know why that poster said that to me. I agree with Kath but also if you notice that the law is in the Bill of rights, clearly the Bill of rights is an act to protect the people from the government.

Thus the Government must not decide to enforce some religion above any other nor may it interfere with our religious acts that conform to law. Meaning you may not legally sacrifice a human during the practice of religion and things of other nature that are illegal, yet other than such things, the Feds must remain clear of the business of religion. We seem to get confused at times thinking that religion may not play a role in government yet nothing said in the constitution means that is the case. Nothing at all.

[Larrymc]

I don't know why that poster said that to me. I agree with Kath but also if you notice that the law is in the Bill of rights, clearly the Bill of rights is an act to protect the people from the government.

Thus the Government must not decide to enforce some religion above any other nor may it interfere with our religious acts that conform to law. Meaning you may not legally sacrifice a human during the practice of religion and things of other nature that are illegal, yet other than such things, the Feds must remain clear of the business of religion. We seem to get confused at times thinking that religion may not play a role in government yet nothing said in the constitution means that is the case. Nothing at all. maybe i have been going at it the right way, but i have been trying to say that my self?

[bingster]

Well if the founding of America WASN'T rooted in Christianity, then where did all this come from?




IN GOD WE TRUST
HISTORY OF THE MOTTO OF THE USA


Introduction.

In our times, the concept of freedom of speech joined with scientific rationalism has brought our forefathers’ allegiance to a higher power, usually titled as God, under fire. Repeated litigation demanding the eradication of the word God, and references to a higher power, from all government activities has caused early and cherished American traditions to be banned. The goal of the godless dissenters is to turn this democracy into a secular government that ignores its traditional faith roots.

It is little known that the removal of references to God would cause the rejection and removal of our national anthem, “The Star Spangled Banner.” The last stanza of Key’s poem, now the national anthem of the United States is:

“And this be our motto: ‘In God is our trust.’”

And the Star Spangled Banner in triumph shall wave

O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.’


How this came to be:

Some world changing events happened to Francis (“Frank”) Scott Key in September of 1814 during a trip to Baltimore. Traveling under a white flag, Key met with both an enemy general and admiral, recovered a war prisoner, became a war prisoner, watched a historical bombardment, lost a night’s sleep, and wrote our national anthem. Along with all that, he created the best known, and most succinct statement of blind faith ever known.

The anthem he wrote was, of course, “The Star Spangled Banner.” In its fourth stanza, Key closed with the words, “And this is our motto - ‘In God is our Trust!’” That line was both his statement of faith and a prophecy. Shortened in 1864 to “In God We Trust,” to fit a newly designed two-cent piece, it quickly earned its popular place as America’s unofficial motto. In 1955, Congress ordered it placed on all United States’ currency.

This motto of the most powerful nation in world history now rides piggyback on the most coveted currency on earth. Every day millions of people of every nation and religion read our faith confession. It is known everywhere.

While the currency is coveted, the faith underlying its value is often neglected, and sometimes even scorned. Being such common tender, “In God We Trust” has become a jaded cliché to many who carry it in their pockets and purses. Its message is least understood by criminals of every shade and place who obtain it by lawless means.

The simple and implied blind faith of the motto deserves our review and reaffirmation. At the same time, it is inspiring to revisit the man and events that forever established Key’s place in American history.

On June 18, 1812, the upstart United States declared war on England, then one of the world’s most powerful nations. Being then involved in a war with France, England was unable to respond with immediate vigor. In efforts to blockade each other, both England and France had been interfering with American shipping. Neither respected American sovereignty, but the English were the more abusive. American crews were captured and forced to crew on British ships. Congress declared war on England in order to preserve “Free Trade and Sailors’ Rights”.

In 1814, after neutralizing Napoleons navy England dedicated enough troops and ships to discipline its former colony. A large English force arrived in Chesapeake Bay on August nineteenth, and by the evening of the twenty-fourth, they had attacked, captured and torched the capital.

Their attack was sudden, unexpected and mostly unopposed. So rapid was their advance, that President Madison left the White House without his wife, Dolly, and hastily fled across the Potomac River. Later when Dolly had to run, she saved Start’s portrait of George Washington by breaking it from its frame, and taking it with her. Glow from the flames from the burning city, including both the White House and the capital, could be seen in Baltimore, forty miles away. Providential rains, coming at dawn on the twenty-fifth, dampened the fires and saved the city. The following day, more fires were started but once again thunderstorms saved America’s capital.

Their dirty deeds now finished, the English left town. Withdrawing to their ships, the British soldiers took along a prisoner, the elderly and revered physician, William Beanes. According to some reports, Beanes was arrested for making uncomplimentary remarks to a few over-sensitive invaders. History has not recorded what Dr. Beanes potent comments were which so offended the soldiers. Whatever he said or did, by those actions he was destined to be a key player in the historical epoch that would soon unfold.

The people of Baltimore began preparing for the attack they knew was coming. Baltimore’s protective Fort McHenry was readied for battle by its commander, Major George Armistead.

In the fort’s store, there was a giant forty-two foot flag, destined to be remembered forever. In 1813, with Hancockian flourish, Armistead asked for a flag so large, “the British would have no trouble seeing it from a distance.” Flag maker Mary Young Pickersgill was hired to design and make it.

The resulting banner had fifteen stars two feet across from point to point. Spaced in five rows of three, they proudly and brightly stood out on the flag’s royal blue field. The stripes were eight red and seven white, each two feet wide. The flag parts were cut from four hundred yards of wool bunting by Mary and her thirteen-year old daughter, Caroline. Finally sized at thirty by forty-two feet, the flag was much too large to be assembled in the bedroom where it was designed and cut. The local Claggett Brewery’s malt house floor was borrowed for laying out the parts and sewing them together. Completed in August 1813, the flag cost $405.90.

History’s great moments usually come out of mundane events, so it was no great historic call that brought Francis Scott Key into the forefront of this American historical drama. He was asked to go on a mission to free Dr. Beanes, and dutifully he went.

Key, a man of faith and an Episcopalian by persuasion, had practiced law in Washington since 1805. The well-known attorney had presented several cases before the Supreme Court. A veteran of the current war, he had served at the battle of Bladensburg, Kentucky.

Hearing of Dr. Beane’s capture, the locals feared for his life. Believing that the brutal British would string their favorite physician from a yardarm by his neck, they sought Key’s help. He accepted their call, and enlisted the aid of Colonel John Skinner, an experienced American agent for prisoner exchange.

Having gained President Madison’s approval, Key and Skinner borrowed a sloop in Baltimore. Under a white flag of truce, they sailed toward the British fleet to find its flagship, Tonnant. On the seventh of September, they found the Tonnant and were allowed to board by British Commanders Admiral Alexander Cochrane and General Robert Ross.

After Cochrane and Ross heard Key’s petition for Beanes’ release, they refused to free him. Key and Skinner then presented letters from wounded English soldiers still being held as American prisoners. In the letters, Dr. Beanes and their American captors were praised for the fair treatment English captives received. With a change of heart, Ross and Cochrane agreed to free Beanes. However, release was delayed pending the progressing British attack on Fort McHenry.

Because they had seen and heard too much about English battle plans and preparations, Key, Skinner and Beanes were confined to their boat under guard. Placed behind the enemy fleet, some eight miles below Fort McHenry, they watched the twenty-five hour bombardment.

Fort McHenry’s guns were deadly at close range. American cannon sank twenty-two English vessels that tested Yankee aim. For the final assault, English ships lay outside the fort’s range. On the morning of September 13th, promptly at seven, their bombardment began. The fort responded by flying the great flag and holding fire.

During the next twenty-five hours, English ships fired over 1,500 shells at the fort, stopping the cannonading at dusk. Quiet prevailed until one o’clock the following morning. Shelling then began again with renewed intensity. Rain streamed through the dark sky to magnify the lights and colors flashing from British cannons, rockets, and bombs.

Ordinance of the era included erratic rockets fired from special small boats. Cannons lobbed two hundred pound fused bombshells. Throughout the night, rockets followed by red, wavering trails glared in the rain. Unreliable fuses caused many bombshells to explode in midair. It was a spectacular show.

The three American prisoners anxiously endured a sleepless night. Continual shelling was a sign the fort had not surrendered. Several hours before daybreak, the bombardment stopped. The foreboding quiet implied a fearful message. Imagining that the fort had fallen, Key, Skinner, and Beanes waited for daylight to look for the flag. Unknown to them, the British had abandoned their attack, and ordered a retreat, because of diminishing ammunition supplies.

As the dawn broke, Francis Scott Key looked to the fort for the one sign that would tell the battle’s outcome. It was there. The giant flag was still there. Fort McHenry stood defiant and undefeated. Inspired by relief and joy, Key took paper from his pocket and began writing the poem that would become “The Star Spangled Banner”. He closed It with his statement of faith, “this be our motto; ‘in God is our trust!’”

Key’s poem was published in the Baltimore Patriot’s September 20, 1814 issue. There it was suggested the poem could be sung to the tune of an English song, “Anacrean in Heaven”. Publicly performed to great acclaim in October of that year, its popularity was insured forever. Both the Army and the Navy adopted the song as their unofficial national anthem. Official acceptance of Key’s poem as America’s national anthem was completed by Congress on March 3, 1931.

The great motto and statement of faith, “In God We Trust” was a little slower gaining public attention. During the dark days of the civil War, both North and South hoped for God’s mercy and protection. Each side wanted to believe their cause was in God’s will. Trusting in God was important to the people in those times. Honoring God was thought to be the source and requirement for national strength and success.

The Union cause fared poorly during 1861. On the thirteenth of November of that year, a minister of the gospel from Pennsylvania wrote of his concerns to the government. In a letter to Salmon P. Chase, then Secretary of the Treasury, The Rev. Mr. M. R. Watkinson wrote, “One fact touching our currency has hitherto been seriously overlooked. I mean the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins”.

Chase agreed. That same week, in a letter dated November twentieth, he wrote to Mint Director, James Pollack: “No nation can be strong except in the strength of God, or safe except in His defense. The trust of our people in God should be declared on our national coins. You will cause a device to be prepared without unnecessary delay with a motto expressing in the fewest...words possible this national recognition.”

By December, Pollack offered Chase designs for three new coins along with two suggested mottoes. These were “Our country; our God” and “God, our Trust”. Chase approved but offered suggestions to amend the statements.

He replied, “I approve your mottoes, only suggesting that on that with the Washington obverse the motto should begin with ‘Our’, so as to read: ‘Our God and our country’. And on that with the shield, it should be changed so as to read, ‘In God we trust’”.

On April 22, 1864, Congress passed an act authorizing “In God We Trust” to be struck on a new bronze two-cent piece. The following year, on the third of March, Congress passed an act permitting the motto to be used on any other coins having enough space for it. Finally, in 1955, Congress ordered it put on all United States’ currency.

In our times, “The Star Spangled Banner” is honored as the expression of our nation’s heritage and confidence in its destiny. Standing with hands over hearts, and often with tears in their eyes, Americans sing it often with reverence and joy.

The motto causes a different reaction. It is received in silence, contemplated in private, and most often ignored. Rarely read in public, it is only occasionally mentioned by those who are seldom out of its presence. But what does it mean? What does it mean to trust God? How can a group of people with diverse religious beliefs affirm as a nation that we trust God both individually and collectively? What did Key mean when he wrote it?

Are we using the motto on our currency as a magic talisman, agreeing with Salmon P. Chase, “No nation can be strong except in the strength of God, or safe except in His defense?” Does the motto express a personal faith that we believe is somehow collectively held by all Americans?

A recent Gallop poll showed that ninety-six percent of us believe in God or a Universal Spirit. No data is available revealing what percent actually do trust in God. Almost ninety percent say religion is important in their lives. In some way, this ninety percent do trust in God. Fearing ridicule, few make public faith expressions. Most Americans seem to have a quiet kind of limited trust from their personal and private faith. “In God we trust” remains a proper American national motto, even though trust is too often a last resort, and not an “around the clock” life style.

Even when the motto is generally accepted, it seems as if agreement on the definition of trust is not. Trust has almost as many definitions as there are people. That is because faith, the root of trust, is poorly understood and thought to be only a last resort, ill advised for modern reasoning people. Faith as radical, blind trust is rarely encouraged either in church or in school. Usually faith is seen as a creedal or an intellectual statement and not as a relationship with God. Few know that faith is total trust in God with a life lived in a “let go and let God” attitude.

Blind and radical trust in God requires a complete handing over of self to Him without regard or concern about how He will direct your life or what He will supply. It is based on trust that God loves you more than you love yourself, and is wiser than you ever will be. With His combination of power, love and wisdom, He will do more for us than we can do on our own.

A problem with this is that before we meet God, we cannot imagine He can or will direct life’s events in our favor. We think, before meeting God “face—to—face,” that we are on our own, and can only survive by our wits and self-concern.

Once we realize God is always watching over us, we can seriously consider giving Him our life to rule. Seeing His providence at work, now we can give God the credit and glory for all our good fortunes. The more God is trusted, the more freely He works His daily providence (miracles) in the life of a believer. By giving God the credit for leading us, for ordering our footsteps and giving good gifts, we stop giving credit to false gods. Popular false gods of our times are Luck, Fate, Talent, Money, Intellect, Knowledge, Appearance, and Power.

To those who have not applied the national motto, trusting God in faith seems to be foolishness, superstition, and weakness. Faith, for those who have made the step of blind trust, is the best life choice - a life lived in God’s hands. This new way of living changes cursings into blessings that are energized by continual thanksgiving.

In God we trust!


http://www.christian-community.org/library/ingodwetrust.html


I think you miss what others have said repeatedly so let me summarize.

Nobody is disputing that the majority of this country is Christian, and so were our founders.

Most people don't have a problem with "In God We Trust" because all religions have a form of "God" and most people who aren't religious don't really care one way or the other.

The 1st amendment quite explicitly forbids we designate a national religion.

Basically, we're not a Christian country. We're a melting pot of all religions of the world.

We were founded with the concept of escaping religious persecution.

The terrorists want to label us a Christian country. It really helps to ramp up the recruiting. It's been found in Osama Bin Laden's papers that he was pissed that Obama re-focused our national efforts against Al Qaeda as opposed to what Osama could describe as a war against Islam.

[Binky]

Git yer ass out west here then. What the fuck is a cowboy like you doin' fartin' around back east there with all the sons a bitchin' city slickers and flat landers anyway?


Wow, it seems as tho' you are ready for a fight over someones opinion. You must be tensed up every day just itching to get in one. Yikes.... Chilll out. Relax. Go masterbate. Take some pressure off yourself.

[Kathianne]

I think you miss what others have said repeatedly so let me summarize.

Nobody is disputing that the majority of this country is Christian, and so were our founders.

Most people don't have a problem with "In God We Trust" because all religions have a form of "God" and most people who aren't religious don't really care one way or the other.

The 1st amendment quite explicitly forbids we designate a national religion.

Basically, we're not a Christian country. We're a melting pot of all religions of the world.

We were founded with the concept of escaping religious persecution.

The terrorists want to label us a Christian country. It really helps to ramp up the recruiting. It's been found in Osama Bin Laden's papers that he was pissed that Obama re-focused our national efforts against Al Qaeda as opposed to what Osama could describe as a war against Islam.

and you dug this up, why? He's been banned for years.

[logroller]

and you dug this up, why? He's been banned for years.
To learn me something, all this time I've always thought the motto was E Pluribus Unum.