Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on October 23, 2008, 06:12:17 PM
-
What is the relationship? Are we a "Christian nation"? Were the Founding Fathers Christian? Religious at all? Do "religious" values form the foundation of the Constitution? Play any role?
-
The founding fathers, no matter how religious, were secularists.
-
What is the relationship? Are we a "Christian nation"? Were the Founding Fathers Christian? Religious at all? Do "religious" values form the foundation of the Constitution? Play any role?
No we are not a nation founded on christianity.
-
What I said in another thread a bit earlier:
---------------------------------
Excerpt from the First Amendment:
"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."
From a treaty with Tripoli, drafted by George Washington himself 1796 and signed by John Adams 1797:
"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 tranquillity, 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."
-
the funny part is that we are one of the most religious nations on earth.
-
the funny part is that we are one of the most religious nations on earth.
Yes, sadly.
-
-
Seems the video has been removed?
-
Yes, sadly.
I agree.
-
the funny part is that we are one of the most religious nations on earth.
Not anymore.
-
Not anymore.
Not the most. that goes to some ME nations.
-
-
Not the most. that goes to some ME nations.
The ME generation is thriving BIG TIME.
-
The ME generation is thriving BIG TIME.
ME = Middle East.
-
ME = Middle East.
haha :D
-
powerful video, sucks it is so hard to read.
-
BUMP
Anyone else wanna dispute that the founding fathers of america were secular and non-influenced by christian values?
-
Yes. Don't confuse the Founding Fathers' belief in church-state separation with non-belief in God. George Washington was a Christian. He believed in church-state separation, but he also had a prayer book. Ben Franklin believed in God. So did James Madison.
There is also the Declaration of Independence, which states in part:
"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."
These men believed in God.
-
From loco:
No, they did not run from this debate...and I will not run from it either.
AMERICA WAS FOUNDED UPON CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES
Treaty of Tripoli
by David Barton
The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, specifically article XI, is commonly misused in editorial columns, articles, as well as in other areas of the media, both Christian and secular. We have received numerous questions from people who have been misled by the claims that are being made, namely, that America was not founded as a Christian nation. Advocates of this idea use the Treaty of Tripoli as the foundation of their entire argument, and we believe you deserve to know the truth regarding this often misused document. The following is an excerpt from David Barton’s book Original Intent:
To determine whether the "Founding Fathers" were generally atheists, agnostics, and deists, one must first define those terms. An "atheist" is one who professes to believe that there is no God;1 an "agnostic" is one who professes that nothing can be known beyond what is visible and tangible;2 and a "deist" is one who believes in an impersonal God who is no longer involved with mankind. (In other words, a "deist" embraces the "clockmaker theory" 3 that there was a God who made the universe and wound it up like a clock; however, it now runs of its own volition; the clockmaker is gone and therefore does not respond to man.) Today the terms "atheist," "agnostic," and "deist" have been used together so often that their meanings have almost become synonymous. In fact, many dictionaries list these words as synonym.4
Those who advance the notion that this was the belief system of the Founders often publish information attempting to prove that the Founders were irreligious.5 One of the quotes they set forth is the following:
The government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion.GEORGE WASHINGTON
The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli is the source of Washington’s supposed statement. Is this statement accurate? Did this prominent Founder truly repudiate religion? An answer will be found by an examination of its source. That treaty, one of several with Tripoli, was negotiated during the "Barbary Powers Conflict," which began shortly after the Revolutionary War and continued through the Presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison.6 The Muslim Barbary Powers (Tunis, Morocco, Algiers, and Tripoli) were warring against what they claimed to be the "Christian" nations (England, France, Spain, Denmark, and the United States). In 1801, Tripoli even declared war against the United States,7 thus constituting America’s first official war as an established independent nation. Throughout this long conflict, the four Barbary Powers regularly attacked undefended American merchant ships. Not only were their cargoes easy prey but the Barbary Powers were also capturing and enslaving "Christian" seamen8 in retaliation for what had been done to them by the "Christians" of previous centuries (e.g., the Crusades and Ferdinand and Isabella’s expulsion of Muslims from Granada9). In an attempt to secure a release of captured seamen and a guarantee of unmolested shipping in the Mediterranean, President Washington dispatched envoys to negotiate treaties with the Barbary nations.10(Concurrently, he encouraged the construction of American naval warships11 to defend the shipping and confront the Barbary "pirates"—a plan not seriously pursued until President John Adams created a separate Department of the Navy in 1798.) The American envoys negotiated numerous treaties of "Peace and Amity" 12 with the Muslim Barbary nations to ensure "protection" of American commercial ships sailing in the Mediterranean.13 However, the terms of the treaty frequently were unfavorable to America, either requiring her to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars of "tribute" (i.e., official extortion) to each country to receive a "guarantee" of safety or to offer other "considerations" (e.g., providing a warship as a "gift" to Tripoli,14 a "gift" frigate to Algiers,15 paying $525,000 to ransom captured American seamen from Algiers,16 etc.). The 1797 treaty with Tripoli was one of the many treaties in which each country officially recognized the religion of the other in an attempt to prevent further escalation of a "Holy War" between Christians and Muslims.17 Consequently, Article XI of that treaty stated:
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 [hatred] against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] and as the said States [America] have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan 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.18
This article may be read in two manners. It may, as its critics do, be concluded after the clause "Christian religion"; or it may be read in its entirety and concluded when the punctuation so indicates. But even if shortened and cut abruptly ("the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion"), this is not an untrue statement since it is referring to the federal government. Recall that while the Founders themselves openly described America as a Christian nation, they did include a constitutional prohibition against a federal establishment; religion was a matter left solely to the individual States. Therefore, if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is not a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation. Reading the clause of the treaty in its entirety also fails to weaken this fact. Article XI simply distinguished America from those historical strains of European Christianity which held an inherent hatred of Muslims; it simply assured the Muslims that the United States was not a Christian nation like those of previous centuries (with whose practices the Muslims were very familiar) and thus would not undertake a religious holy war against them. This latter reading is, in fact, supported by the attitude prevalent among numerous American leaders. The Christianity practiced in America was described by John Jay as "wise and virtuous," 19 by John Quincy Adams as "civilized," 20 and by John Adams as "rational." 21 A clear distinction was drawn between American Christianity and that of Europe in earlier centuries. As Noah Webster explained:
The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it.22
Daniel Webster similarly explained that American Christianity was:
Christianity to which the sword and the fagot [burning stake or hot branding iron] are unknown—general tolerant Christianity is the law of the land!23
Those who attribute the Treaty of Tripoli quote to George Washington make two mistakes. The first is that no statement in it can be attributed to Washington (the treaty did not arrive in America until months after he left office); Washington never saw the treaty; it was not his work; no statement in it can be ascribed to him. The second mistake is to divorce a single clause of the treaty from the remainder which provides its context. It would also be absurd to suggest that President Adams (under whom the treaty was ratified in 1797) would have endorsed or assented to any provision which repudiated Christianity. In fact, while discussing the Barbary conflict with Jefferson, Adams declared:
The policy of Christendom has made cowards of all their sailors before the standard of Mahomet. It would be heroical and glorious in us to restore courage to ours. 24
Furthermore, it was Adams who declared:
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature. 25
Adams’ own words confirm that he rejected any notion that America was less than a Christian nation. Additionally, the writings of General William Eaton, a major figure in the Barbary Powers conflict, provide even more irrefutable testimony of how the conflict was viewed at that time. Eaton was first appointed by President John Adams as "Consul to Tunis," and President Thomas Jefferson later advanced him to the position of "U. S. Naval Agent to the Barbary States," authorizing him to lead a military expedition against Tripoli. Eaton’s official correspondence during his service confirms that the conflict was a Muslim war against a Christian America. For example, when writing to Secretary of State Timothy Pickering, Eaton apprised him of why the Muslims would be such dedicated foes:
Taught by revelation that war with the Christians will guarantee the salvation of their souls, and finding so great secular advantages in the observance of this religious duty [the secular advantage of keeping captured cargoes], their [the Muslims’] inducements to desperate fighting are very powerful.26 Eaton later complained that after Jefferson had approved his plan for military action, he sent him the obsolete warship "Hero." Eaton reported the impression of America made upon the Tunis Muslims when they saw the old warship and its few cannons:
[T]he weak, the crazy situation of the vessel and equipage [armaments] tended to confirm an opinion long since conceived and never fairly controverted among the Tunisians, that the Americans are a feeble sect of Christians.27
In a later letter to Pickering, Eaton reported how pleased one Barbary ruler had been when he received the extortion compensations from America which had been promised him in one of the treaties:
He said, "To speak truly and candidly . . . . we must acknowledge to you that we have never received articles of the kind of so excellent a quality from any Christian nation." 28
When John Marshall became the new Secretary of State, Eaton informed him:
It is a maxim of the Barbary States, that "The Christians who would be on good terms with them must fight well or pay well." 29 And when General Eaton finally commenced his military action against Tripoli, his personal journal noted:
April 8th. We find it almost impossible to inspire these wild bigots with confidence in us or to persuade them that, being Christians, we can be otherwise than enemies to Musselmen. We have a difficult undertaking!30 May 23rd. Hassien Bey, the commander in chief of the enemy’s forces, has offered by private insinuation for my head six thousand dollars and double the sum for me a prisoner; and $30 per head for Christians. Why don’t he come and take it?31
Shortly after the military excursion against Tripoli was successfully terminated, its account was written and published. Even the title of the book bears witness to the nature of the conflict:
The Life of the Late Gen. William Eaton . . . commander of the Christian and Other Forces . . . which Led to the Treaty of Peace Between The United States and The Regency of Tripoli32
The numerous documents surrounding the Barbary Powers Conflict confirm that historically it was always viewed as a conflict between Christian America and Muslim nations. Those documents completely disprove the notion that any founding President, especially Washington, ever declared that America was not a Christian nation or people. (Chapter 16 of Original Intent will provide numerous additional current examples of historical revisionism.)
Endnotes
1. American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd College Edition, s.v. "atheism."
2. Id., s.v. "agnostic."
3. Id., s.v. "deism"; see also American College Dictionary (1947), s.v. "deism."
4. Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language (1964), see synonym for "deist"; Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary(1963), see synonym for "atheism"; The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia(1895), Vol. I, see synonym for "atheist"; Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary of the English Language (1966), see synonyms for "skeptic."
5. Society of Separationists, "Did you know that these great American thinkers all rejected Christianity?" (Austin, TX: American Atheist Center); see also Los Angeles Times, August 3, 1995, p. B-9, "America’s Unchristian Beginnings," Steven Morris.
6.Naval Documents Related to the United States Wars with the Barbary Powers, Claude A. Swanson, editor (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1939), Vol. I, p. V.
7. Glen Tucker,Dawn Like Thunder: The Barbary Wars and the Birth of the U. S. Navy (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1963), p. 127.
8. A General View of the Rise, Progress, and Brilliant Achievements of the American Navy, Down to the Present Time(Brooklyn, 1828), pp. 70-71.
9. Tucker, p. 50.
10. President Washington selected Col. David Humphreys in 1793 as sole commissioner of Algerian affairs to negotiate treaties with Algeria, Tripoli and Tunis. He also appointed Joseph Donaldson, Jr., as Consul to Tunis and Tripoli. In February of 1796, Humphreys delegated power to Donaldson and/or Joel Barlow to form treaties. James Simpson, U. S. Consul to Gibraltar, was dispatched to renew the treaty with Morocco in 1795. On October 8, 1796, Barlow commissioned Richard O’Brien to negotiate the treaty of peace with Tripoli. See, for example, Ray W. Irwin, The Diplomatic Relations of the United States with the Barbary Powers (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1931), p. 84.
11. J. Fenimore Cooper,The History of the Navy of the United States of America (Philadelphia: Thomas, Cowperthwait & Co., 1847), pp. 123-124; see also A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents: 1789-1897, James D. Richardson, editor (Washington, D. C.: Published by Authority of Congress, 1899), Vol. I, pp. 201-202, from Washington’s Eighth Annual Address of December 7, 1796.
12. See, for example, the treaty with Morocco: ratified by the United States on July 18, 1787. Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of America: 1776-1949, Charles I. Bevans, editor (Washington, D. C.: Department of State, 1968-1976), Vol. IX, pp. 1278-1285; Algiers: concluded September 5, 1795; ratified by the U. S. Senate March 2, 1796; see also, "Treaty of Peace and Amity" concluded June 30 and July 6, 1815; proclaimed December 26, 1815, Treaties and Conventions Concluded Between the United States of America and Other Powers Since July 4, 1776 (Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1889), pp. 1-15; Tripoli: concluded November 4, 1796; ratified June 10, 1797; see also, "Treaty of Peace and Amity" concluded June 4, 1805; ratification advised by the U. S. Senate April 12, 1806. Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers: 1776-1909, William M. Malloy, editor (Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1910), Vol. II, pp. 1785-1793; Tunis: concluded August 1797; ratification advised by the Senate, with amendments, March 6, 1798; alterations concluded March 26, 1799; ratification again advised by the Senate December 24, 1799. Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers: 1776-1909, William M. Malloy, editor (Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1910), Vol. II, pp. 1794-1799.
13. Gardner W. Allen, Our Navy and the Barbary Corsairs (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1905), pp. 33, 45, 56, 60.
14. Allen, p. 66.
15. Allen, p. 57.
16. Allen, p. 56.
17. (See general bibliographic information from footnote 17 for each of these references)Morocco: see Articles 10, 11, 17, and 24; Algiers: See Treaty of 1795, Article 17, and Treaty of 1815, Article 17; Tripoli: See Treaty of 1796, Article 11, and Treaty of 1805, Article 14; Tunis: See forward to Treaty.
18. Acts Passed at the First Session of the Fifth Congress of the United States of America (Philadelphia: William Ross, 1797), pp. 43-44.
19. John Jay, Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry Johnston, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1893), Vol. IV, p. 491, Address to the Annual Meeting of the American Bible Society, May 8, 1823.
20. John Quincy Adams,An Oration Delivered Before the Inhabitants of the Town of Newburyport at Their Request on the Sixty-First Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence (Newburyport: Charles Whipple, 1837), p. 17.
21. John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1856), Vol. IX, p. 121, in a speech to both houses of Congress, November 23, 1797.
22 Noah Webster, History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), p. 339.
23. Daniel Webster, Mr. Webster’s Speech in Defence of the Christian Ministry and In favor of the Religious Instruction of the Young. Delivered in the Supreme Court of the United States, February 10, 1844, in the Case of Stephen Girard’s Will (Washington: Gales and Seaton, 1844), p. 52.
24. John Adams, Works, Vol. VIII, p. 407, to Thomas Jefferson on July 3, 1786.
25. John Adams, Works, Vol. X, pp. 45-46, to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813.
26. Charles Prentiss, The Life of the Late Gen. William Eaton: Several Years an Officer in the United States’ Army Consul at the Regency of Tunis on the Coast of Barbary, and Commander of the Christian and Other Forces that Marched from Egypt Through the Desert of Barca, in 1805, and Conquered the City of Derne, Which Led to the Treaty of Peace Between the United States and the Regency of Tripoli (Brookfield: Merriam & Company, 1813), pp. 92-93, from General Eaton to Timothy Pickering, June 15, 1799.
27. Prentiss, p. 146, from General Eaton to Mr. Smith, June 27, 1800.
28. Prentiss, p. 150, from General Eaton to Timothy Pickering on July 4, 1800.
29. Prentiss, p. 185, from General Eaton to General John Marshall, September 2, 1800.
30. Prentiss, p. 325, from Eaton’s journal, April 8, 1805.
31. Prentiss, p. 334, from Eaton’s journal, May 23, 1805.
32. Prentiss.
-
Yes. Don't confuse the Founding Fathers' belief in church-state separation with non-belief in God. George Washington was a Christian. He believed in church-state separation, but he also had a prayer book. Ben Franklin believed in God. So did James Madison.
There is also the Declaration of Independence, which states in part:
"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."
These men believed in God.
No one did.
The religion of the founding fathers has absolutely dick to do with what they wrote when creating the Constitution. We agree that they wanted to keep church and state separate. Great.
But whether they believed in God or not is irrelevant and is not what the discussion was about.
If you believe that the morals and values of the Foundation of the U.S (namely the Constitution) comes from that of the christianity, it is up to you to prove it. Saying that the Founding Fathers had personal beliefs in this and that doesn't cut it. As I've said before and yet again, most of them were Deists and Freemasons which further hollows your argument.
-
fucking Loco ::)
-
The absolutely humongous article Loco copied and pasted makes your eyes hurt.
-
What is the relationship? Are we a "Christian nation"? Were the Founding Fathers Christian? Religious at all? Do "religious" values form the foundation of the Constitution? Play any role?
only if you own slaves and sexually molest them, similar to Thomas Jefferson. ;)
NT
-
The absolutely humongous article Loco copied and pasted makes your eyes hurt.
These assclowns like BB will cling to it like gospel and ignore whatever else you put in front of them... I see no point, it's the same thing over and over with these fucking douchbags... Selective vision.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHG6izh5P1E
-
fucking Loco ::)
God bless you, Hugo! ;D
-
The absolutely humongous article Loco copied and pasted makes your eyes hurt.
You copied and pasted about the Treaty of Tripoli first. How about reading my post and addressing it?
-
Yes and no double B.
Problem is our forefathers were religious zealots who left England because the society was too permissive. You really can't expect us to roll back the clock and have a Puritian nation.
They obviously decided on no state religion for a reason. We have laws because people are stupid and don't know where to draw lines.
-
only if you own slaves and sexually molest them, similar to Thomas Jefferson. ;)
NT
The Founders Believed Slavery Was Fundamentally Wrong.
The overwhelming majority of early Americans and most of America's leaders did not own slaves. Some did own slaves, which were often inherited (like George Washington at age eleven), but many of these people set them free after independence. Most Founders believed that slavery was wrong and that it should be abolished. William Livingston, signer of the Constitution and Governor of New Jersey, wrote to an anti-slavery society in New York (John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and President of the Continental Congress, was President of this society):
I would most ardently wish to become a member of it [the anti-slavery society] and . . . I can safely promise them that neither my tongue, nor my pen, nor purse shall be wanting to promote the abolition of what to me appears so inconsistent with humanity and Christianity. . . . May the great and the equal Father of the human race, who has expressly declared His abhorrence of oppression, and that He is no respecter of persons, succeed a design so laudably calculated to undo the heavy burdens, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke. 11
John Quincy Adams, who worked tirelessly for years to end slavery, spoke of the anti-slavery views of the southern Founders, including Jefferson who owned slaves:
The inconsistency of the institution of domestic slavery with the principles of the Declaration of Independence was seen and lamented by all the southern patriots of the Revolution; by no one with deeper and more unalterable conviction than by the author of the Declaration himself. No charge of insincerity or hypocrisy can be fairly laid to their charge. Never from their lips was heard one syllable of attempt to justify the institution of slavery. They universally considered it as a reproach fastened upon them by the unnatural step-mother country and they saw that before the principles of the Declaration of Independence, slavery, in common with every other mode of oppression, was destined sooner or later to be banished from the earth. Such was the undoubting conviction of Jefferson to his dying day. In the Memoir of His Life, written at the age of seventy-seven, he gave to his countrymen the solemn and emphatic warning that the day was not distant when they must hear and adopt the general emancipation of their slaves. “Nothing is more certainly written,” said he, “in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free.” 12
The Founding Fathers believed that blacks had the same God-given inalienable rights as any other peoples. James Otis of Massachusetts said in 1764 that “The colonists are by the law of nature freeborn, as indeed all men are, white or black.” 13
There had always been free blacks in America who owned property, voted, and had the same rights as other citizens. 14 Most of the men who gave us the Declaration and the Constitution wanted to see slavery abolished. For example, George Washington wrote in a letter to Robert Morris:
I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery]. 15
Charles Carroll, Signer of Declaration from Maryland, wrote:
Why keep alive the question of slavery? It is admitted by all to be a great evil. 16
Benjamin Rush, Signer from Pennsylvania, stated:
Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity. . . . It is rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical denial of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is an usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who has solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men. 17
Father of American education, and contributor to the ideas in the Constitution, Noah Webster wrote:
Justice and humanity require it [the end of slavery] — Christianity commands it. Let every benevolent . . . pray for the glorious period when the last slave who fights for freedom shall be restored to the possession of that inestimable right. 18
Quotes from John Adams reveal his strong anti-slavery views:
Every measure of prudence, therefore, ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States. . . . I have, through my whole life, held the practice of slavery in . . . abhorrence. 19
My opinion against it [slavery] has always been known. . . . [N]ever in my life did I own a slave. 20
When Benjamin Franklin served as President of the Pennsylvania Society of Promoting the Abolition of Slavery he declared: “Slavery is . . . an atrocious debasement of human nature.” 21
Thomas Jefferson's original draft of the Declaration included a strong denunciation of slavery, declaring the king's perpetuation of the slave trade and his vetoing of colonial anti-slavery measures as one reason the colonists were declaring their independence:
He [King George III] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere. . . . Determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce. 22
Prior to independence, anti-slavery measures by the colonists were thwarted by the British government. Franklin wrote in 1773:
A disposition to abolish slavery prevails in North America, that many of Pennsylvanians have set their slaves at liberty, and that even the Virginia Assembly have petitioned the King for permission to make a law for preventing the importation of more into that colony. This request, however, will probably not be granted as their former laws of that kind have always been repealed.. 23
The Founders took action against slavery.
The founders did not just believe slavery was an evil that needed to be abolished, and they did not just speak against it, but they acted on their beliefs. During the Revolutionary War black slaves who fought won their freedom in every state except South Carolina and Georgia. 24
Many of the founders started and served in anti-slavery societies. Franklin and Rush founded the first such society in America in 1774. John Jay was president of a similar society in New York. Other Founding Fathers serving in anti-slavery societies included: William Livingston (Constitution signer), James Madison, Richard Bassett, James Monroe, Bushrod Washington, Charles Carroll, William Few, John Marshall, Richard Stockton, Zephaniah Swift, and many more. 25
As the Founders worked to free themselves from enslavement to Britain, based upon laws of God and nature, they also spoke against slavery and took steps to stop it. Abolition grew as principled resistance to the tyranny of England grew, since both were based upon the same ideas. This worked itself out on a personal as well as policy level, as seen in the following incident in the life of William Whipple, signer of the Declaration of Independence from New Hampshire. Dwight writes:
When General Whipple set out to join the army, he took with him for his waiting servant, a colored man named Prince, one whom he had imported from Africa many years before. He was a slave whom his master highly valued. As he advanced on his journey, he said to Prince, “If we should be called into an engagement with the enemy, I expect you will behave like a man of courage, and fight like a brave soldier for your country.” Prince feelingly replied, “Sir, I have no inducement to fight, I have no country while I am a slave. If I had my freedom, I would endeavor to defend it to the last drop of my blood.” This reply of Prince produced the effect on his master's heart which Prince desired. The general declared him free on the spot. 26
The Founders opposed slavery based upon the principle of the equality of all men. Throughout history many slaves have revolted but it was believed (even by those enslaved) that some people had the right to enslave others. The American slave protests were the first in history based on principles of God-endowed liberty for all. It was not the secularists who spoke out against slavery but the ministers and Christian statesmen.
Before independence, some states had tried to restrict slavery in different ways (e.g. Virginia had voted to end the slave trade in 1773), but the English government had not allowed it. Following independence and victory in the war, the rule of the mother country was removed, leaving freedom for each state to deal with the slavery problem. Within about 20 years of the 1783 Treaty of Peace with Britain, the northern states abolished slavery: Pennsylvania and Massachusetts in 1780; Connecticut and Rhode Island in 1784; New Hampshire in 1792; Vermont in 1793; New York in 1799; and New Jersey in 1804.
The Northwest Ordinance (1787, 1789), which governed the admission of new states into the union from the then northwest territories, forbid slavery. Thus, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa all prohibited slavery. This first federal act dealing with slavery was authored by Rufus King (signer of the Constitution) and signed into law by President George Washington.
Although no Southern state abolished slavery, there was much anti-slavery sentiment. Many anti-slavery societies were started, especially in the upper South. Many Southern states considered proposals abolishing slavery, for example, the Virginia legislature in 1778 and 1796. When none passed, many, like Washington, set their slaves free, making provision for their well being. Following independence, “Virginia changed her laws to make it easier for individuals to emancipate slaves,” 27 though over time the laws became more restrictive in Virginia.
While most states were moving toward freedom for slaves, the deep South (Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina) was largely pro-slavery. Yet, even so, the Southern courts before around 1840 generally took the position that slavery violated the natural rights of blacks. For example, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled in 1818:
Slavery is condemned by reason and the laws of nature. It exists and can only exist, through municipal regulations, and in matters of doubt,...courts must lean in favorem vitae et libertatis [in favor of life and liberty]. 28
The same court ruled in 1820 that the slave “is still a human being, and possesses all those rights, of which he is not deprived by the positive provisions of the law.” 29
Free blacks were citizens and voted in most Northern states and Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. In Baltimore prior to 1800, more blacks voted than whites; but in 1801 and 1809, Maryland began to restrict black voting and in 1835 North Carolina prohibited it. Other states made similar restrictions, but a number of Northern states allowed blacks to vote and hold office. In Massachusetts this right was given nearly a decade before the American Revolution and was never taken away, either before or after the Civil War.
References:
11. William Livingston, The Papers of William Livingston, Carl E. Prince, editor (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1988), Vol. V, p. 255, to the New York Manumission Society on June 26, 1786. In "The Founding Fathers and Slavery" by David Barton, unpublished paper, p. 5.
12. John Quincy Adams, An Oration Delivered Before the Inhabitants of the Town of Newburyport, at Their Request, on the Sixty-First Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1837 (Newburyport: Charles Whipple, 1837), p. 50.
13. Rights of the Colonies, in Bernard Bailyn, ed., Pamphlets of the American Revolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965), p. 439. In "Was the American Founding Unjust? The Case of Slavery," by Thomas G. West, Principles, a quarterly review of The Claremont Institute, Spring/Summer 1992, p. 1.
14. Hart, p. 53.
15. Letter to Robert Morris, April 12, 1786, in George Washington: A Collection, ed. W.B. Allen (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1988), p. 319.
16. Kate Mason Rowland, Life and Correspondence of Charles Carroll of Carrollton (New York & London: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1898), Vol. II, p. 321, to Robert Goodloe Harper, April 23, 1820. In Barton, p. 3.
17. Benjamin Rush, Minutes of the Proceedings of a Convention of Delegates from the Abolition Societies Established in Different Parts of the United States Assembled at Philadelphia (Philadelphia: Zachariah Poulson, 1794), p. 24.. In Barton, p. 4.
18. Noah Webster, Effect of Slavery on Morals and Industry (Hartford: Hudson and Goodwin, 1793), p. 48. In Barton, p. 4.
19. Adams to Robert J. Evans, June 8, 1819, in Adrienne Koch and William Peden, eds., Selected Writings of John and John Quincy Adams (New York: Knopf, 1946), p. 209. In West, p. 2.
20. John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, ed. (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1854), Vol. IX, pp. 92-93, to George Churchman and Jacob Lindley on January 24, 1801. In Barton, p. 3.
21. "An Address to the Public from the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery" (1789), in Franklin, Writings (New York: Library of America, 1987), p. 1154. In West, p. 2.
22. The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Adrienne Koch and William Peden, eds. (New York: Random House, 1944), p. 25.
23. Benjamin Franklin, The Works of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, ed. (Boston: Tappan, Whittemore, and Mason, 1839), Vol. VIII, p. 42, to the Rev. Dean Woodward on April 10, 1773.
24. Benjamin Quarles, The Negro and the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1961), chaps. 4-6. In West, p. 2.
25. Barton, p. 5.
26. N. Dwight, The Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence (New York: A.S. Barnes & Burr, 1860), p. 11.
27. West, p. 4.
28. Harry v. Decker & Hopkins (1818), in West, p. 4.
29. Mississippi v. Jones (1820), in West, p. 4.
-
You're right loco.. Here's a quote from Jefferson regarding slavery:
Sir,--I have received the favor of your letter of August 17th, and with it the volume you were so kind to send me on the "Literature of Negroes". Be assured that no person living wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a complete refutation of the doubts I have myself entertained and expressed on the grade of understanding allotted to them by nature, and to find that in this respect they are on a par with ourselves. My doubts were the result of personal observation on the limited sphere of my own State, where the opportunity for the development of their genius were not favorable and those of exercising it still less so. I expressed them therefore with great hesitation; but whatever be their degree of talent it is no measure of their rights. Because Sir Isaac Newton was superior to others in understanding, he was not therefore lord of the person or property of others. On this subject they are gaining daily in the opinions of nations, and hopeful advances are making toward their re-establishment on an equal footing with the other colors of the human family. I pray you therefore to accept my thanks for the many instances you have enabled me to observe of respectable intelligence in that race of men, which cannot fail to have effect in hastening the day of their relief; and to be assured of the sentiments of high and just esteem and consideration which I tender to yourself with all sincerity.
^ Letter of February 25, 1809 from Thomas Jefferson to French author Monsieur Gregoire, from The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (H. A. Worthington, ed.), Volume V, p. 429. Citation and quote from Morris Kominsky, The Hoaxers, pp. 110-111.
-
Jefferson probably figured they couldn't survive without the slaves.
What's people's excuse now? :)
-
No one did.
The religion of the founding fathers has absolutely dick to do with what they wrote when creating the Constitution. We agree that they wanted to keep church and state separate. Great.
But whether they believed in God or not is irrelevant and is not what the discussion was about.
If you believe that the morals and values of the Foundation of the U.S (namely the Constitution) comes from that of the christianity, it is up to you to prove it. Saying that the Founding Fathers had personal beliefs in this and that doesn't cut it. As I've said before and yet again, most of them were Deists and Freemasons which further hollows your argument.
If the "religion of the founding fathers" is irrelevant, then why did you say the Founding Fathers were secular? They were not. How do you explain George Washington's prayer book? Why would he have a prayer book if he was "secular"?
-
These assclowns like BB will cling to it like gospel and ignore whatever else you put in front of them... I see no point, it's the same thing over and over with these fucking douchbags... Selective vision.
Translation: you didn't read it. Probably wouldn't understand it if you did read it. :)
-
God bless you, Hugo! ;D
I have to learn how to do that. :)
-
Yes and no double B.
Problem is our forefathers were religious zealots who left England because the society was too permissive. You really can't expect us to roll back the clock and have a Puritian nation.
They obviously decided on no state religion for a reason. We have laws because people are stupid and don't know where to draw lines.
I agree in part. The original settlers fled religious persecution in Europe and set up the same type of intolerable situation in the colonies. That's what the Constitution was designed to fix. But I think it's pretty clear the Founders were Christian or at a minimum believed in God. You see that all over the place in their rhetoric.
My questions were not necessarily conclusions.
-
-
-
Hey, nobody wants a theocracy and neither did the Founding Fathers. That's not what we are saying here. We're just saying that the Founding Fathers were Christians and that the nation was founded on Judeo-Christian principles.
George Washington
Circular letter of farewell to the Army, 8 June 1783:
I now make it my earnest prayer, that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in his holy protection, that he would incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field, and finally, that he would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all, to do Justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility and pacific temper of mind, which were the Characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy Nation.
First Inaugural Address, 30 April 1789:
No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.
First Inaugural Address, 30 April 1789:
The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.
Letter to General Assembly of Presbyterian Churches, May 1789:
While all men within our territories are protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of their consciences; it is rationally expected from them in return, that they will be emulous of evincing the sanctity of their professions by the innocence of their lives, and the beneficence of their actions: for no man, who is profligate in his morals, or a bad member of the civil community, can possibly be a true Christian, or a credit to his own religious society.
Farewell Address, 1796:
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 Men and Citizens.… And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.… Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
-
John Adams
Letter to Zabdiel Adams, 21 June 1776:
Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but 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, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure, than they have it now, they may change their Rulers and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty.
Letter to Abigail Adams, 3 July 1776:
The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epocha in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward for evermore.
Diary, 26 July 1796:
The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity, and humanity.
Letter to Jefferson, 1813:
The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount contain my religion.
Address to the Military, 11 October 1798:
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.
-
If the "religion of the founding fathers" is irrelevant, then why did you say the Founding Fathers were secular? They were not. How do you explain George Washington's prayer book? Why would have a prayer book if he was "secular"?
Oh gosh.
Don't mistake secular for atheism or anti theism. The foundation of the country is indeed secular even though the founders were religious.
What's so hard to grasp here?
-
You copied and pasted about the Treaty of Tripoli first. How about reading my post and addressing it?
I did read and address your post in the other thread.
When I copied and pasted the Tripoli thingy, it was ONE sentence long. Takes you about 10 seconds to read. Your article takes about 10-15 minutes to swiftly read through. There's no comparison.
-
Loco, FFS, I'm not debating you if you keep copying and pasting like that. You probably couldn't care less, but still.
-
Oh gosh.
Don't mistake secular for atheism or anti theism. The foundation of the country is indeed secular even though the founders were religious.
What's so hard to grasp here?
You were not talking about the foundation of the country. You were talking about the founders when you said that they were secular. You were wrong about them. Secular people do not practice religion at all and religion is not a significant part of their life. Now you are changing your story.
-
Loco, FFS, I'm not debating you if you keep copying and pasting like that. You probably couldn't care less, but still.
I had to read it. If you want to debate me, then you have to read it too, and address it. Reading won't kill you, and who knows, you might even learn something.
-
I did read and address your post in the other thread.
When I copied and pasted the Tripoli thingy, it was ONE sentence long. Takes you about 10 seconds to read. Your article takes about 10-15 minutes to swiftly read through. There's no comparison.
That's too easy, copying and pasting a small part of the whole thing, only the part that on the surface supports your idea, taken out of context.
-
I had to read it. If you want to debate me, then you have to read it too, and address it. Reading won't kill you, and who knows, you might even learn something.
How come most of the people on this board except you and coach can write original posts with solid arguments in them without copying and pasting like maniac?
-
That's too easy, copying and pasting a small part of the whole thing, only the part that on the surface supports your idea, taken out of context.
HA! What exactly is taken out of context here? They all voted for that treaty which clearly states that America is not founded upon the christian religion.
YOU are the one that's getting away too easy. You copy and paste gigantic articles from authors of questionable bias that contains nothing but quotes and strange reasons why america wouldn't be secular at first. I still see NO proof how the founders own personal religious values played any role in the creation of the Constitution.
Seems like you are implying that the Founders would've lacked the common sense to write the Constitution without christianity which I think is absolute bullshit.
-
How come most of the people on this board except you and coach can write original posts with solid arguments in them without copying and pasting like maniac?
Let Coach and most people on this board do it their way, and let me do it my way. I had to read it, and you have to read it too if you want to debate me.
Unlike others on these boards, I actually read this stuff before I post it. Some of it I had known for years and just had to find where to copy and paste it from so that I won't have to type so much.
Some people just google stuff, post it without reading it, but when I read it, I find that what they posted actually refutes their own position. So then I used what they posted against them on the debate. They would have known this had they actually read it before posting it.
My own ideas mean nothing if I don't have the references and sources to substantiate it and back it up. That's what I'm doing here.
-
HA! What exactly is taken out of context here? They all voted for that treaty which clearly states that America is not founded upon the christian religion.
YOU are the one that's getting away too easy. You copy and paste gigantic articles from authors of questionable bias that contains nothing but quotes and strange reasons why america wouldn't be secular at first. I still see NO proof how the founders own personal religious values played any role in the creation of the Constitution.
Seems like you are implying that the Founders would've lacked the common sense to write the Constitution without christianity which I think is absolute bullshit.
Proof that you did not read it. It explains the reason and the context. Check my many references and see if I just made it up.
-
You were not talking about the foundation of the country. You were talking about the founders when you said that they were secular. You were wrong about them. Secular people do not practice religion at all and religion is not a significant part of their life. Now you are changing your story.
Yes we were indeed discussing the >foundation of america<, not the founders themselves of whom which most were deists and Freemasons. lol.
The values and morals of the christian faith are what America was built upon.
This was the statement that originally sparked the discussion. Please tell me where in the new testament it says that church and gov must be kept separate. Then prove the link between that and the constitution.
-
Yes we were indeed discussing the >foundation of america<, not the founders themselves of whom which most were deists and Freemasons. lol.
This was the statement that originally sparked the discussion. Please tell me where in the new testament it says that church and gov must be kept separate. Then prove the link between that and the constitution.
Yes, we are discussing the founding of the nation, and the founding fathers too. You made a statement about the founding fathers which is false.
-
Yes, we are discussing the founding of the nation, and the founding fathers too. You made a statement about the founding fathers which is false.
Not sure which statement you are referring to? Please quote me so we are on the same page here.
AGAIN, you insist that the foundation was built upon christian values and morals which also was the starting point for the whole discussion. So the founders in your opinion must have drawn their inspiration from scripture ala the bible.
So I quote my question:
Please tell me where in the new testament it says that church and gov must be kept separate. Then prove the link between that and the constitution.
-
Btw, I've struggled my self through some of those articles again.
Most of the quotes refer to the liberty and independence of the american people, attributing it to the christian morals.... What? Irrelevant.
Edit: Most of your quotes stems from the Declaration of Independence. Most of it was written by Thomas Jefferson, a strict deist! And it holds zero legal power.
Still can't seem to find any proof that the constitution the founding fathers wrote had drawn any inspiration from the christian teachings.
-
Weren't the "Founding fathers" the same group of masons who said only rich people could vote, the same group of people who wrote nice books about individuality, freedom and the evils of slavery yet somehow missed the bringing the theory-into-practice part (for more than 200 years mind you!) and laid the moral foundation for one of the biggest massacres in later centuries: The "disappearance" of the American Indians.
Oh, before I forget, the Constitution, writen around that time, states that African Americans are 3/5 of a person.
Are you guys talking about the same "righteous" group of "people"?.
-
Weren't the "Founding fathers" the same group of masons who said only rich people could vote, the same group of people who wrote nice books about individuality, freedom and the evils of slavery yet somehow missed the bringing the theory-into-practice part (for more than 200 years mind you!) and laid the moral foundation for one of the biggest massacres in later centuries: The "disappearance" of the American Indians.
Oh, before I forget, the Constitution, writen around that time, states that African Americans are 3/5 of a person.
Interesting information, but really how does that prove that the Constitution was funded upon christian values? Where in the Constitution does it say that?
-
Now I've reread some more of that infamous humongous article you posted Loco.
I dare say that this is the main thesis or main argument if you will, in the article:
"Therefore, if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is not a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation."
The author is just running around in circles and not bringing anything new to the table. The argument was never if the U.S was a christian nation or not, but whether it was FOUNDED as one, drawing moral lesson from the bible.
-
Interesting information, but really how does that prove that the Constitution was funded upon christian values? Where in the Constitution does it say that?
No, I'm not saying it does, in fact it's quite the opposite. I believe American intellectualism, at the time, was heavily influenced by French philosophy and thought, people like Voltaire and Rousseau, whose set of political ideas were indeed secular although, as with most of Europe, influenced (somewhat) by Christian beliefs, like it or not. The only difference is that these new ideas brought forth by all these philosophers were indeed put to practice in France, but not here in the States, where the Constitution was a façade to masquerade the fact that the (American) revolution DID NOT have a mass base, but it was only the idea of a group of masons.
Now, as to how influenced our Constitution is on Christian values... well, I'd say a lot, like all Constitutions written at the time. I mean, you won't see it in specific phrases or in multitude of passages, but in concepts, ideas, etc. That which you think is revolutionary can have a religious base, like the "all men are created equal" line, that has Christian thought written all over it, even thought it's not followed by "in the eyes of the Lord".
-
No, I'm not saying it does, in fact it's quite the opposite. I believe American intellectualism, at the time, was heavily influenced by French philosophy and thought, people like Voltaire and Rousseau, whose set of political ideas were indeed secular although, as with most of Europe, influenced (somewhat) by Christian beliefs, like it or not. The only difference is that these new ideas brought forth by all these philosophers were indeed put to practice in France, but not here in the States, where the Constitution was a façade to masquerade the fact that the (American) revolution DID NOT have a mass base, but it was only the idea of a group of masons.
Now, as to how influenced our Constitution is on Christian values... well, I'd say a lot, like all Constitutions written at the time. I mean, you won't see it in specific phrases or in multitude of passages, but in concepts, ideas, etc. That which you think is revolutionary can have a religious base, like the "all men are created equal" line, that has Christian thought written all over it, even thought it's not followed by "in the eyes of the Lord".
You are making the assumption that without christianity they would lack the values and morals to write the constitution? Remember most of them were deists and freemasons and using the bible as a source of inspiration when conjuring the constitution would seem pretty alien to them.
I see what you're saying but to attribute the healthy morals and principals in the constitution almost solely to christianity is giving it too much credit.
-
You are making the assumption that without christianity they would lack the values and morals to write the constitution? Remember most of them were deists and freemasons and using the bible as a source of inspiration when conjuring the constitution would seem pretty alien to them.
No, no, I'm saying that the very forward-looking ideas about the individual and the role of institutions that the FF based their though on are heavily influenced by Christian though. You have to understand that Christian "philosophy" has been around 2,000 years, and churchmen have ALWAYS been amongst the intellectual elite in every country.
Like I said, phrases like "all men are created equal" is a very "Christian" line, the only difference being that in Christian though it is usually followed by "in the eyes of the lord". A lot of what we think is "secular" is nothing more than recycled Christian thought. I must admit that I am an atheist and I am in no way speaking from a pro-Christian stance.
I see what you're saying but to attribute the healthy morals and principals in the constitution almost solely to christianity is giving it too much credit.
Not the healthy morals, I'd say part of the basis of our morals was stolen from Christian beliefs. I mean, this is nothing new, and it certainly wasn't new back in the XVIII century. Those who wrote it might want you to think that it was morally innovative, but the truth is that the Greeks were talking about the individual 400-500 years BC. These basic principles of philosophy eventually somehow morphed into what then became Christianity and eventually spread all over Europe, morphing even further and acquiring the local belief base. Needless to say it eventually made it into America, which was founded on a somewhat radicalized version of Christianity but, because of religious persecution in England, valued the "freedom" to do as you like (like pray, marry or plow the land) over most things. It was this freedom "seed" that eventually blossomed in the US Constitution. But make no mistake, all of this has an origin, nothing new, been discussed for many years.
You know this already, so I apologize for rambling on and on.
-
Not the healthy morals, I'd say part of the basis of our morals was stolen from Christian beliefs. I mean, this is nothing new, and it certainly wasn't new back in the XVIII century. Those who wrote it might want you to think that it was morally innovative, but the truth is that the Greeks were talking about the individual 400-500 years BC. These basic principles of philosophy eventually somehow morphed into what then became Christianity and eventually spread all over Europe, morphing even further and acquiring the local belief base. Needless to say it eventually made it into America, which was founded on a somewhat radicalized version of Christianity but, because of religious persecution in England, valued the "freedom" to do as you like (like pray, marry or plow the land) over most things. It was this freedom "seed" that eventually blossomed in the US Constitution. But make no mistake, all of this has an origin, nothing new, been discussed for many years.
Wouldn't it be a healthy generalization to say that all the morals we consider good and just comes from the humans themselves and the social interaction between them, not from religion? That the good cherrypicked religious values stems from society, not other way around?
This is a bit of a stretch and I realize it myself and you bring up many good points. Way more effective than Loco will ever be.
What bugs me most is the attempts christians make to claim that their Bible is the inventor of good morals. An outright lie.
But fact still remains, nowhere does the Constitution favor the god of the desert and his supposed son, jesus and his teachings. It is above all, a secular document.
-
Oh gosh.
Don't mistake secular for atheism or anti theism. The foundation of the country is indeed secular even though the founders were religious.
What's so hard to grasp here?
I was addressing your first post in this thread:
The founding fathers, no matter how religious, were secularists.
What did you mean by this? That they were not Christian? Not religious at all?
Also, what is your explanation for George Washington's prayer book?
-
You were not talking about the foundation of the country. You were talking about the founders when you said that they were secular. You were wrong about them. Secular people do not practice religion at all and religion is not a significant part of their life. Now you are changing your story.
I agree.
-
If that is so, how do explain slavery or the decimation of the Native American population? I mean, we certainly knew we were doing something wrong, as individuals.
I mean, it's well documented that morals, values and beliefs were "outsourced" to the Church for many, many centuries. It has permeated into our every action. To say that it did not somehow percolate into the Constitution, not from a religious point of view mind you, is not correct.
I agree with you that good and bad morals, values, beliefs are indeed a personal (individual) thing though.
I'm pretty sure people would still commit horrendous acts even as atheists. Some people suck no matter what. Wouldn't surprise me though if they justified slavery with holy scripture. But that's something I never studied so don't take my word for it. lol
You make good points there and I don't deny them. Maybe the discussion derailed a bit.
But I still hold firm at the opinion that the U.S was not founded as a christian nation and I'm sure the founding fathers of whom which most were deists and freemasons, would disagree with Loco.
-
I was addressing your first post in this thread:
What did you mean by this? That they were not Christian? Not religious at all?
Also, what is your explanation for George Washington's prayer book?
I meant that they practiced secularism in their jobs as rulers and founders. Quote from wikipedia on secularism:
Secularism is generally the assertion that governmental practices or institutions should exist separately from religion or religious beliefs...
Lets play the quote game that some of you like so much:
George Washington
Much of the myth of Washington's alleged Christianity came from Mason Weems influential book, "Life of Washington." The story of the cherry tree comes from this book and it has no historical basis. Weems, a Christian minister portrayed Washington as a devout Christian, yet Washington's own diaries show that he rarely attended Church.
Washington revealed almost nothing to indicate his spiritual frame of mind, hardly a mark of a devout Christian. In his thousands of letters, the name of Jesus Christ never appears. He rarely spoke about his religion, but his Freemasonry experience points to a belief in deism. Washington's initiation occurred at the Fredericksburg Lodge on 4 November 1752, later becoming a Master mason in 1799, and remained a freemason until he died.
To the United Baptist Churches in Virginia in May, 1789, Washington said that every man "ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience."
After Washington's death, Dr. Abercrombie, a friend of his, replied to a Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him about Washington's religion replied, "Sir, Washington was a Deist."
So much for being a christian huh?
John Adams
Adams, a Unitarian, flatly denied the doctrine of eternal damnation. In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, he wrote:
"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"
In his letter to Samuel Miller, 8 July 1820, Adams admitted his unbelief of Protestant Calvinism: "I must acknowledge that I cannot class myself under that denomination."
In his, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" [1787-1788], John Adams wrote:
"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.
". . . 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."
Want me to go on?
-
Jake's $0.02:
The founders were very religious and puritanical to boot!!
In the same vein they understood human nature and their own weakness. Ultimately, this is the reason why they needed the Constitution and no state religion.
It only takes reading a few posts here to realize that most people are stupid. Stupid might not be the technical term, but it's some special kind of arrogance. People generally cannot help externalizing their values and wanting to impose them upon others.
The Puritans realized their own intolerance would eventually run unchecked with a state religion. Also, no state religion rendered them unaccountable, as Christians, for the treatment of Indians, slaves, Muslims, Jews or anyone else for that matter.
This way people are allowed to 'believe' as Christians without any obligation to act in a christian manner. :)
-
Here is the 411:
*America was originally settled specifically for religious purposes. People wanted to come here so that they could freely practice their religions.
*The United States government was founded by Christians for the most part, but many of the more prominent founding fathers were "Deists" and did not have nice things to say about Christianity or the Bible.
*The Declaration of independence mentions God, but it doesn't specify religion, and it only uses "God" vaguely in the context of inalienable rights of man.
*There are many texts and many quotes from the time of the founding of the U.S. which show that the founding fathers did not establish the United States as a Christian nation in any sense of the word and also that they were secularists who opposed religious influence of any kind on the workings of the U.S. Government.
*While many of the founding fathers opposed slavery (these were often the same ones critical of Christianity), Some founding fathers owned slaves themselves.
*The rights included in the declaration of independence and the constitution are rights which exist across religious boundaries and cultural boundaries.
The ONLY sense that the U.S. is a "Christian nation" is that most U.S. people are Christians of some sort. That's it.
-
The founders were very religious and puritanical to boot!!
In the same vein they understood human nature and their own weakness. Ultimately, this is the reason why they needed the Constitution and no state religion.
It only takes reading a few posts here to realize that most people are stupid. Stupid might not be the technical term, but it's some special kind of arrogance. People generally cannot help externalizing their values and wanting to impose them upon others.
The Puritans realized their own intolerance would eventually run unchecked with a state religion and prevent others from practicing freely.
Also, no state religion renders them unaccountable, as Christians, for the treatment of Indians, slaves, Muslims, Jews or anyone else for that matter. This way people are allowed to 'believe' as Christians without any responsibility or obligation to act in a christian manner. :)
-
I still have yet to see anyone bring forth any evidence that the Constitution was brought about with christian values from the bible.
-
I meant that they practiced secularism in their jobs as rulers and founders. Quote from wikipedia on secularism:
Secularism is generally the assertion that governmental practices or institutions should exist separately from religion or religious beliefs...
Lets play the quote game that some of you like so much:
George Washington
Much of the myth of Washington's alleged Christianity came from Mason Weems influential book, "Life of Washington." The story of the cherry tree comes from this book and it has no historical basis. Weems, a Christian minister portrayed Washington as a devout Christian, yet Washington's own diaries show that he rarely attended Church.
Washington revealed almost nothing to indicate his spiritual frame of mind, hardly a mark of a devout Christian. In his thousands of letters, the name of Jesus Christ never appears. He rarely spoke about his religion, but his Freemasonry experience points to a belief in deism. Washington's initiation occurred at the Fredericksburg Lodge on 4 November 1752, later becoming a Master mason in 1799, and remained a freemason until he died.
To the United Baptist Churches in Virginia in May, 1789, Washington said that every man "ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience."
After Washington's death, Dr. Abercrombie, a friend of his, replied to a Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him about Washington's religion replied, "Sir, Washington was a Deist."
So much for being a christian huh?
John Adams
Adams, a Unitarian, flatly denied the doctrine of eternal damnation. In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, he wrote:
"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"
In his letter to Samuel Miller, 8 July 1820, Adams admitted his unbelief of Protestant Calvinism: "I must acknowledge that I cannot class myself under that denomination."
In his, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" [1787-1788], John Adams wrote:
"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.
". . . 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."
Want me to go on?
Yes do go on. But first, let me highlight your selective use of the definition you pulled from wiki. The rest of the paragraph reads:
"Alternatively, it is a principle of promoting secular ideas or values in either public or private settings over religious ways of thought."
There is also this definition of secularist: "One who is worldly rather than spiritual." www.theism.net/authors/zjordan/docs_files/saint_files/terms.htm
But back to George Washington. I read your quotes, but they don't explain why George Washington had a prayer book. Why do you think he had a prayer book?
And what about the Washington excerpts loco posted? What is your take on this particular one:
Farewell Address, 1796:
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 Men and Citizens.… And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.… Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
He very clearly says religion and morality are the foundations of political prosperity. He also that morality and religion are inseparable.
-
I still have yet to see anyone bring forth any evidence that the Constitution was brought about with christian values from the bible.
Most of the things in the constitution aren't in the bible.
-
Jake's $0.02:
The founders were very religious and puritanical to boot!!
In the same vein they understood human nature and their own weakness. Ultimately, this is the reason why they needed the Constitution and no state religion.
It only takes reading a few posts here to realize that most people are stupid. Stupid might not be the technical term, but it's some special kind of arrogance. People generally cannot help externalizing their values and wanting to impose them upon others.
The Puritans realized their own intolerance would eventually run unchecked with a state religion. Also, no state religion rendered them unaccountable, as Christians, for the treatment of Indians, slaves, Muslims, Jews or anyone else for that matter.
This way people are allowed to 'believe' as Christians without any obligation to act in a christian manner. :)
The law is all about us imposing our values on society.
-
The law is all about us imposing our values on society.
But can they be credited for being christian values?
-
The law is all about us imposing our values on society.
It's entirely possible you don't understand what the law is supposed to protect.
-
But can they be credited for being christian values?
Some yes, some no. But the point is the voters always make value judgments at the polls.
What often happens in political discussions is some people think religious based or religious influenced issues shouldn't even make it to the ballot.
-
It's entirely possible you don't understand what the law is supposed to protect.
It's entirely possible you don't understand how the legislative process works.
-
I'm pretty sure people would still commit horrendous acts even as atheists. Some people suck no matter what. Wouldn't surprise me though if they justified slavery with holy scripture. But that's something I never studied so don't take my word for it. lol
You make good points there and I don't deny them. Maybe the discussion derailed a bit.
But I still hold firm at the opinion that the U.S was not founded as a christian nation and I'm sure the founding fathers of whom which most were deists and freemasons, would disagree with Loco.
lovemonkey,
I am not saying that the United States ever was, is or should be a "Christian Nation" or a theocracy.
All I'm saying is that the Founding Fathers were Christians and that they founded the United States of America upon Judeo-Christian principles.
No, I'm not saying it does, in fact it's quite the opposite. I believe American intellectualism, at the time, was heavily influenced by French philosophy and thought, people like Voltaire and Rousseau, whose set of political ideas were indeed secular although, as with most of Europe, influenced (somewhat) by Christian beliefs, like it or not. The only difference is that these new ideas brought forth by all these philosophers were indeed put to practice in France, but not here in the States, where the Constitution was a façade to masquerade the fact that the (American) revolution DID NOT have a mass base, but it was only the idea of a group of masons.
Now, as to how influenced our Constitution is on Christian values... well, I'd say a lot, like all Constitutions written at the time. I mean, you won't see it in specific phrases or in multitude of passages, but in concepts, ideas, etc. That which you think is revolutionary can have a religious base, like the "all men are created equal" line, that has Christian thought written all over it, even thought it's not followed by "in the eyes of the Lord".
What I am saying is not exactly what Slapper is saying, but very close to it.
-
Yes do go on. But first, let me highlight your selective use of the definition you pulled from wiki. The rest of the paragraph reads:
"Alternatively, it is a principle of promoting secular ideas or values in either public or private settings over religious ways of thought."
There is also this definition of secularist: "One who is worldly rather than spiritual." www.theism.net/authors/zjordan/docs_files/saint_files/terms.htm
But back to George Washington. I read your quotes, but they don't explain why George Washington had a prayer book. Why do you think he had a prayer book?
And what about the Washington excerpts loco posted? What is your take on this particular one:
Farewell Address, 1796:
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 Men and Citizens.… And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.… Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
He very clearly says religion and morality are the foundations of political prosperity. He also that morality and religion are inseparable.
How nice of you to skip John Adams completely. ::)
On the secular issue, I thought I made my statement pretty clear?
I meant that they practiced secularism in their jobs as rulers and founders.
If you don't mind I'm gonna copy and paste something I found on google on this prayer book you mentioned:
"Among the historians to question the prayer book's authenticity was Rupert Hughes. In his 1926 book "George Washington: The Human Being and the Hero," the first volume of his three volume biography of Washington, Hughes presented side by side images of the handwriting from the prayer book and examples from authentic Washington documents from the period in which the prayer book was allegedly written. It doesn't take a handwriting expert to see that they weren't written by the same person. But, the handwriting samples used by Rupert Hughes for his comparison were from 1748 (age sixteen) and 1757 (age twenty-five), allowing his critics to assert that there was a possibility that Washington's handwriting at age twenty differed from these samples, and might still match the prayer book. A number of other historians, however, including Worthington C. Ford, the editor of the second major collection of Washington's writings, also determined that the book was not in Washington's handwriting. A more recent handwriting comparison can be found in the 2005 book "The Ways of Providence: Religion & George Washington," by Frank E. Grizzard, Jr. of the University of Virginia. Grizzard uses a sample of Washington's handwriting at exactly age twenty, which, of course, is no closer to that in the prayer book than the slightly earlier and later samples used by Hughes."
Considering Washington's otherwise pretty deistic lifestyle I don't find it too surprising that this alleged book could be a fraud. It's up for speculation.
-
lovemonkey,
I am not saying that the United States ever was, is or should be a "Christian Nation" or a theocracy.
All I'm saying is that the Founding Fathers were Christians and that they founded the United States of America upon Judeo-Christian principles.
What I am saying is not exactly what Slapper is saying, but very close to it.
Again, most of the founders were deists and freemasons and many of them had some pretty nasty things to say about the Bible and the christian teachings. Why would they favor a christian point of view? Not to mention their quotes on the matter after the constitution had been written. EDIT: Not to mention the Treaty of Tripoli! The ENTIRE SENATE voted against your opinion.
You are just basically just speculating.
-
Not talking about Schoolhouse Rock, LOL!
In the bigger picture, our laws are supposed to preserve as much individual freedom as possible. Most people are too stupid to get where their own personal freedoms begin and end.. that's why we need laws. :)
-
lovemonkey,
All I'm saying is that the Founding Fathers were Christians
I think you will find this website pretty entertaining or horrendous, up to you:
http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html
-
Again, most of the founders were deists and freemasons and many of them had some pretty nasty things to say about the Bible and the christian teachings. Why would they favor a christian point of view? Not to mention their quotes on the matter after the constitution had been written. EDIT: Not to mention the Treaty of Tripoli! The ENTIRE SENATE voted against your opinion.
You are just basically just speculating.
No, I'm not speculating. Like it or not, the Founding Fathers were Christians and they founded the United States of America upon Judeo-Christian principles. It's history and it's a fact.
Your claims are nothing but...well, secularist wishful thinking.
John Adams
Diary, 26 July 1796:
The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity, and humanity.
Letter to Jefferson, 1813:
The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount contain my religion.
Address to the Military, 11 October 1798:
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.
-
No, I'm not speculating. Like it or not, the Founding Fathers were Christians and they founded the United States of America upon Judeo-Christian principles. It's history and it's a fact.
Your claims are nothing but...well, secularist wishful thinking.
John Adams
Diary, 26 July 1796:
The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity, and humanity.
Letter to Jefferson, 1813:
The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount contain my religion.
Address to the Military, 11 October 1798:
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.
Where to begin?
NO, as I've said most of the founders were DEISTS and FREEMASONS. Not christians. Please refer to this website on this issue http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html (http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html) Stop claiming that they founded the Constitution on judeo-christian principles, you just keep repeating it with no evidence.
On John Adams if you don't mind me copy and pasting:
"In his, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" [1787-1788], John Adams wrote:
"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses. "
The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity, and humanity.
Doesn't say a tiny bit about whether the Constitution was founded upon Judeo-christian principles. Notice how I bring up quotes that actually says something about the foundation of america while you bring forth irrelevant ones. Perhaps there is a reason why you keep avoiding the Constitution? Yeah, because it's secular!
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people
You are sillier than I thought. The whole point of the Constitution was to keep church and gov separate and allow freedom of religion, it does NOT translate into your assumption that the foundation was founded on christian values.
Please, I would be interested to see some quotes from the founding fathers that actually says that they founded the nation upon judeo-christian principles.
-
Again, since you made no intent of stop using quotes, I'll abuse it myself. ;D
"If indeed our Framers had aimed to found a Christian republic, it would seem highly unlikely that they would have forgotten to leave out their Christian intentions in the Supreme law of the land. In fact, nowhere in the Constitution do we have a single mention of Christianity, God, Jesus, or any Supreme Being. There occurs only two references to religion and they both use exclusionary wording. The 1st Amendment's says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . ." and in Article VI, Section 3, ". . . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
-
How nice of you to skip John Adams completely. ::)
On the secular issue, I thought I made my statement pretty clear?
If you don't mind I'm gonna copy and paste something I found on google on this prayer book you mentioned:
"Among the historians to question the prayer book's authenticity was Rupert Hughes. In his 1926 book "George Washington: The Human Being and the Hero," the first volume of his three volume biography of Washington, Hughes presented side by side images of the handwriting from the prayer book and examples from authentic Washington documents from the period in which the prayer book was allegedly written. It doesn't take a handwriting expert to see that they weren't written by the same person. But, the handwriting samples used by Rupert Hughes for his comparison were from 1748 (age sixteen) and 1757 (age twenty-five), allowing his critics to assert that there was a possibility that Washington's handwriting at age twenty differed from these samples, and might still match the prayer book. A number of other historians, however, including Worthington C. Ford, the editor of the second major collection of Washington's writings, also determined that the book was not in Washington's handwriting. A more recent handwriting comparison can be found in the 2005 book "The Ways of Providence: Religion & George Washington," by Frank E. Grizzard, Jr. of the University of Virginia. Grizzard uses a sample of Washington's handwriting at exactly age twenty, which, of course, is no closer to that in the prayer book than the slightly earlier and later samples used by Hughes."
Considering Washington's otherwise pretty deistic lifestyle I don't find it too surprising that this alleged book could be a fraud. It's up for speculation.
So you find some blurb on Google that claims George Washington never had a prayer book and refuse to give an opinion on that basis? What a copout.
You also did not address this excerpt from Washington:
Farewell Address, 1796:
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 Men and Citizens.… And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.… Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
What is your interpretation of his comments?
-
Freedom of religion guarantees freedom from religion. :)
-
So you find some blurb on Google that claims George Washington never had a prayer book and refuse to give an opinion on that basis? What a copout.
You also did not address this excerpt from Washington:
Farewell Address, 1796:
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 Men and Citizens.… And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.… Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
What is your interpretation of his comments?
We all pull most of our quotes and "facts" from google, so don't sit there and pretend like you are the only one with a personal library, shuffling through books before every post of yours.
Alright fair enough, you want an opinion on that book. If we would assume that the prayer book is legit and truly belonged to G. Washington. it is still from his youth and quite frankly contradicts his otherwise deistic lifestyle. He very rarely attended church and many of his closest companions said he was a deist. Besides the book, can you find any evidence that proves that George Washington was indeed a believing christian when creating the foundation of america?
On that farewell adress quote of yours, I've already said that most of the founding fathers were either deists or freemasons. NOT devout christians. So it is perfectly logical for them to believe in a god and not be christians. In that quote, where do you see him make any reference to the christian teachings?
And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion..
For George Washington to say anything other than this, he would basically have to be an atheist which he clearly was not. Many religious people, christians or not, believe in their supreme being to guide them through life morally like the little sheep they are. Forgive me for saying this, but I'm starting to assume you're one of them Bum.
-
Freedom of religion guarantees freedom from religion. :)
The First Amendment also guarantees the free exercise of religion.
-
The First Amendment also guarantees the free exercise of religion.
They were obviously being prudent and didn't trust themselves. Sadly, they never could have guessed people could get more intolerant of other beliefs than puritans. :)
-
We all pull most of our quotes and "facts" from google, so don't sit there and pretend like you are the only one with a personal library, shuffling through books before every post of yours.
Alright fair enough, you want an opinion on that book. If we would assume that the prayer book is legit and truly belonged to G. Washington. it is still from his youth and quite frankly contradicts his otherwise deistic lifestyle. He very rarely attended church and many of his closest companions said he was a deist. Besides the book, can you find any evidence that proves that George Washington was indeed a believing christian when creating the foundation of america?
On that farewell adress quote of yours, I've already said that most of the founding fathers were either deists or freemasons. NOT devout christians. So it is perfectly logical for them to believe in a god and not be christians. In that quote, where do you see him make any reference to the christian teachings?
For George Washington to say anything other than this, he would basically have to be an atheist which he clearly was not. Many religious people, christians or not, believe in their supreme being to guide them through life morally like the little sheep they are. Forgive me for saying this, but I'm starting to assume you're one of them Bum.
Although I use Google quite a bit, I haven't been relying on Google for this discussion. You haven't seen my library. :)
So George Washington was simply a lost little boy when he wrote in his prayer book . . . at age 20?
Attending church on a regular basis does not = Christian or non-Christian.
Outside of his prayer book, which is pretty compelling evidence of his Christianity, the numerous passages cited by loco are also powerful evidence of Washington's Christianity. But you're concluding is that in between his prayer book (which you say is from his youth) and his farewell address, both of which provide evidence of his religious convictions, he was somehow a purely secular. I'm sure that's possible, but it's highly unlikely.
Dude do you honestly think I give a rip whether you think I'm a "sheep"? What the heck does that have to do with this discussion? If you want to discuss the topic thread then do that. What you’ve shown is the common inability to discuss the issues without attacking the person.
-
They were obviously being prudent and didn't trust themselves. Sadly, they never could have guessed people could get more intolerant of other beliefs than puritans. :)
The lack of trust and the need for consistency and predictability are the primary reasons we have laws to begin with. One of the reasons we have the Free Exercise Clause is to prevent censorship of religious views.
-
Although I use Google quite a bit, I haven't been relying on Google for this discussion. You haven't seen my library. :)
So George Washington was simply a lost little boy when he wrote in his prayer book . . . at age 20?
Attending church on a regular basis does not = Christian or non-Christian.
Outside of his prayer book, which is pretty compelling evidence of his Christianity, the numerous passages cited by loco are also powerful evidence of Washington's Christianity. But you're concluding is that in between his prayer book (which you say is from his youth) and his farewell address, both of which provide evidence of his religious convictions, he was somehow a purely secular. I'm sure that's possible, but it's highly unlikely.
Dude do you honestly think I give a rip whether you think I'm a "sheep"? What the heck does that have to do with this discussion? If you want to discuss the topic thread then do that. What you’ve shown is the common inability to discuss the issues without attacking the person.
Well, are you not a sheep? You rely on historically incorrect holy scripture to dictate your life as many other hundreds of millions people do. That assumes you're a true christian if such a thing even exists, that is. It was a long shot to question your bias on this. Unnecessary? Yeah problaby. ;)
I'll take your advice and refrain from personal attacks from here now on.
Never said he was a lost little boy. I would consider the age of 20 as "young" yes. I've done some further research on this prayer book and it seems like the book doesn't even have George's own name on it and it was discovered WAY after his death and no real historian will endorse it as being authentic. It really doesn't fit the criteria for "compelling evidence" now does it? If you would like to keep pushing this book as an argument for your thesis I think you need to defend it's validity.
Loco's quotes of Washington still make's no reference to christianity, strange huh? The quotes fit very well with the deistic beliefs of George Washington and not as theist christian. Where does Washington mention the Bible or Jesus as his source of goodwill?
This whole "secularists" thing has gotten a bit out of hand. I never claimed they were atheists or anti-theists as you would like to imply but there's no doubt they were far away from theistic christianity. As I've said before, they were deists and freemasons and it enabled their secular approach when writing down the Constitution. Therefore secularists as founders but as persons? No.
I try to address most of the arguments you bring up and I would like to see the favor returned from you. :)
-
-
Freemasonry explicitly and openly states that it is neither a religion nor a substitute for one. "There is no separate Masonic God", nor a separate proper name for a deity in any branch of Freemasonry.
Regular Freemasonry requires that its candidates believe in a Supreme Being, but the interpretation of the term is subject to the conscience of the candidate. This means that men from a wide range of faiths, including (but not limited to) Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism, etc. can and have become Masons.
-
Well, are you not a sheep? You rely on historically incorrect holy scripture to dictate your life as many other hundreds of millions people do. That assumes you're a true christian if such a thing even exists, that is. It was a long shot to question your bias on this. Unnecessary? Yeah problaby. ;)
I'll take your advice and refrain from personal attacks from here now on.
Never said he was a lost little boy. I would consider the age of 20 as "young" yes. I've done some further research on this prayer book and it seems like the book doesn't even have George's own name on it and it was discovered WAY after his death and no real historian will endorse it as being authentic. It really doesn't fit the criteria for "compelling evidence" now does it? If you would like to keep pushing this book as an argument for your thesis I think you need to defend it's validity.
Loco's quotes of Washington still make's no reference to christianity, strange huh? The quotes fit very well with the deistic beliefs of George Washington and not as theist christian. Where does Washington mention the Bible or Jesus as his source of goodwill?
This whole "secularists" thing has gotten a bit out of hand. I never claimed they were atheists or anti-theists as you would like to imply but there's no doubt they were far away from theistic christianity. As I've said before, they were deists and freemasons and it enabled their secular approach when writing down the Constitution. Therefore secularists as founders but as persons? No.
I try to address most of the arguments you bring up and I would like to see the favor returned from you. :)
My Christianity isn't the subject of the thread.
Regarding George Washington's Christianity, let's look at the quotes loco provided:
Circular letter of farewell to the Army, 8 June 1783:
I now make it my earnest prayer, that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in his holy protection, that he would incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field, and finally, that he would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all, to do Justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility and pacific temper of mind, which were the Characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy Nation.
This is a prayer for his soldiers and fellow citizens and he calls God "the Divine Author of our blessed Religion." He also says we can never be a happy nation without a "humble imitation" of our Divine Author. Sounds like a Christian man to me.
First Inaugural Address, 30 April 1789:
No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.
Here he says the "invisible hand" directs the affairs of our country. Again sounds like a man of faith.
First Inaugural Address, 30 April 1789:
The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.
Here he clearly says our country cannot disregard "eternal rules of order and right." I interpret that to mean "God's law."
Letter to General Assembly of Presbyterian Churches, May 1789:
While all men within our territories are protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of their consciences; it is rationally expected from them in return, that they will be emulous of evincing the sanctity of their professions by the innocence of their lives, and the beneficence of their actions: for no man, who is profligate in his morals, or a bad member of the civil community, can possibly be a true Christian, or a credit to his own religious society.
Here he specifically references a person being a "true Christian." That pretty much speaks for itself.
Farewell Address, 1796:
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 Men and Citizens.… And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.… Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
Here he says religion and morality support political prosperity. Given his prior discussions of God, religion, and Christianity, it's safe to assume he is talking about Christianity in this address.
-
Freemasonry explicitly and openly states that it is neither a religion nor a substitute for one. "There is no separate Masonic God", nor a separate proper name for a deity in any branch of Freemasonry.
Regular Freemasonry requires that its candidates believe in a Supreme Being, but the interpretation of the term is subject to the conscience of the candidate. This means that men from a wide range of faiths, including (but not limited to) Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism, etc. can and have become Masons.
You just made my argument even better. If you support Beach's side you are not exactly helping him out. Freemasonry is just a variation of Deists.
-
My Christianity isn't the subject of the thread.
Regarding George Washington's Christianity, let's look at the quotes loco provided:
Circular letter of farewell to the Army, 8 June 1783:
I now make it my earnest prayer, that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in his holy protection, that he would incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field, and finally, that he would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all, to do Justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility and pacific temper of mind, which were the Characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy Nation.
This is a prayer for his soldiers and fellow citizens and he calls God "the Divine Author of our blessed Religion." He also says we can never be a happy nation without a "humble imitation" of our Divine Author. Sounds like a Christian man to me.
First Inaugural Address, 30 April 1789:
No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.
Here he says the "invisible hand" directs the affairs of our country. Again sounds like a man of faith.
First Inaugural Address, 30 April 1789:
The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.
Here he clearly says our country cannot disregard "eternal rules of order and right." I interpret that to mean "God's law."
Letter to General Assembly of Presbyterian Churches, May 1789:
While all men within our territories are protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of their consciences; it is rationally expected from them in return, that they will be emulous of evincing the sanctity of their professions by the innocence of their lives, and the beneficence of their actions: for no man, who is profligate in his morals, or a bad member of the civil community, can possibly be a true Christian, or a credit to his own religious society.
Here he specifically references a person being a "true Christian." That pretty much speaks for itself.
Farewell Address, 1796:
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 Men and Citizens.… And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.… Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
Here he says religion and morality support political prosperity. Given his prior discussions of God, religion, and Christianity, it's safe to assume he is talking about Christianity in this address.
This is pretty weak, come on.
If I would reference someone as christian would that also make me one? No. George is just stating that the teachings of christianity is just and moral. I would have to disagree with him on that but that is another topic.
Again, where does George describe himself as being a believing/theistic christian?
If he truly was you MUST be able to find better quotes than that.
You seem to have a hard time grasping this whole Deist thing. It is perfectly normal for a deist to say the things Washington does in your quotes.
Now my revenge for the shameless quote spewing ;D
"George Washington, the first president of the United States, never declared himself a Christian according to contemporary reports or in any of his voluminous correspondence. Washington Championed the cause of freedom from religious intolerance and compulsion. When John Murray (a universalist who denied the existence of hell) was invited to become an army chaplain, the other chaplains petitioned Washington for his dismissal. Instead, Washington gave him the appointment. On his deathbed, Washington uttered no words of a religious nature and did not call for a clergyman to be in attendance. "
"Washington revealed almost nothing to indicate his spiritual frame of mind, hardly a mark of a devout Christian. In his thousands of letters, the name of Jesus Christ never appears. He rarely spoke about his religion, but his Freemasonry experience points to a belief in deism. Washington's initiation occurred at the Fredericksburg Lodge on 4 November 1752, later becoming a Master mason in 1799, and remained a freemason until he died.
To the United Baptist Churches in Virginia in May, 1789, Washington said that every man "ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience."
After Washington's death, Dr. Abercrombie, a friend of his, replied to a Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him about Washington's religion replied, "Sir, Washington was a Deist." "
-
NO, as I've said most of the founders were DEISTS and FREEMASONS. Not christians.
Do you even know what a freemason is? John Jay was a founding father, a freemason and a devout Christian.
http://www.earlyamericanhistory.net/freemasonry.htm
John Jay(December 12, 1745 – May 17, 1829) was an American politician, statesman, revolutionary, diplomat, and jurist. Considered one of the "founding fathers" of the United States,
one of the framers of the Constitution, was appointed by George Washington in 1789 to be the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (and later served two terms as governor of New York).
http://www.supremecourthistory.org/02_history/subs_timeline/images_chiefs/001.html
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers. It is to be regretted, but so I believe the fact to be, that except the Bible there is not a true history in the world" - John Jay