Excerp: America is not a Christian Nation - Page 7

My apologies for the length of this response. Christianity was not lost in the founding of this country, but as stated by our Founding Documents, the governing of this country was meant to be secular in nature. This can clearly be seen in the preponderance of documents and personal correspondences that support this fact, and the strong defense of religion in general from the government is also guaranteed. What many seem to forget is that, although the governing body itself and the policies it would enact would be secular, the people that made up the governing body would be as religious as their conscious would dictate. By showing support for one particular religion, the government opens the doors for the persons who follow that religion, to commit acts of repression, oppression, and active persecution. This can be witnessed almost daily, one has but to peruse the popular and alternant news agencies. The case I mentioned in 1993, with the wonton vandalizing of my home, and the complete lack of support from the authorities and clergy is but one small, and personal, example. The wisdom of our Fore Fathers, in their foresight of just such a possibility of majority tyranny, cannot be gainsaid.

As to the government 'imposing one religion', please keep in mind that our legislators do not always act in concert with the wishes of the majority, and have thrown the Constitution to the wind multiple times. Special Interest Groups, such as the one led by Rev. Watkins in history, and the Christian Coalition today, can apply considerable pressures, all that is required is to locate a sympathetic ear, or someone who can easily be intimidated, and these Groups can get anything they want passed. Career Politicians will simply not slit their own political throats, and chance loosing their livelihood.

As to Biblical Law, the anti-sodomy laws are a perfect example. Logical or not, there is simply no scientific evidence, or statistics, that supports the immorality of the gay community, except within Biblical Law. In pre-European America, the 1st Nations people considered the Berdache to be very powerful in Spirit, and held honored positions among the tribe, and many times took on Shamanic roles. Such blue laws, as those that closed businesses on Sundays, though largely ignored today, are another example. There are many more, but I am in fact attempting to keep the length of this reply short.

What are I and other Americans 'concerned about'? Besides what is mentioned above, there is in place a self-stated agenda by the Fundamental and Extremist segment of Christianity, manifested in such organizations as The Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition, to take control of this country to further their plans of 'Christian Reconstruction'. No one, even those one might term 'Christian Lite', would be safe from their agendas. At the moment, they claim they support equal rights for everyone, expect certain groups of people (an oxymoron in itself), and history has shown just what these types of people think about 'equal rights' when they are in power. Those two organizations listed above are only the tip of the iceberg. Showing preference for one religion allows these groups to act largely with impunity, without checks and balances, and urges those otherwise borderline citizens, or those who simply are not aware of any opposing views, to support them. The agenda of the Fundamentals and Extremists is simple power, and the eradication of anyone who does not agree with their principles to consolidate that materialistic and political power. For a disturbing read, pick up 'The Institutes of Biblical Law' by Rousas John Rushdoony, the guru, or perhaps more correctly, the ayatollah, of 'Christian Reconstruction', the person most influential to Robertson and his fellow 'clergymen'.

"What many seem to forget is that, although the governing body itself and the policies it would enact would be secular, the people that made up the governing body would be as religious as their conscious would dictate."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--

This is true, but since the term God appears to be the only thing that upsets you, along with the assumption that it allows "christians" to act with impunity, you also know that the same laws apply to christians, as do the rest of our population.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--

"all that is required is to locate a sympathetic ear, or someone who can easily be intimidated"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--

Another assumption. Our government has a history of being exeptionally open and sympathetic to all forms of living. While providing a great deal of generosity in compromise. There are many examples you've used to plead your case, but there are just as many against it. I do not agree with the Christian Coalition, i dont believe a government should uphold one religion over another. Once again, i state that the term.. "God". does not specify ANY specific religion..only religion itself.

What i dont understand, is why this term and its usage in our government only recently became a problem? Was it because of those who dont believe in "God"? Those so strictly secular, just as our "founding fathers" were? Those who feel that religion is an infringement on their rights?(or the upholding of). That our government is being DOMinAted by "Christian Reconstruction"?

We're becoming more socially and politically unacceptable. I believe there were/are just as many gay rights activists who imposed modification of our governments standards or politcal views, as there are/were christians or any other fundamentalists and special interest groups. Where is the injustice when religion isnt upheld over any other? When religion is neither a direct or indirect influence on the choices of our government? Diversity is accepted, but laws are made to abide by. Homosexuality is a psychological perference. It is physical molestation, consisting of improper and unecessary sexual action. We do not interfere with this. When it then becomes state mandated for two people of the same sex to wed, it becomes more than a personal issue. I dont doubt that gay marriage will soon be permitted, because we have a morally and politically strong government, which enforces these qualities over all religion. And by allowing these personal beliefs to be expressed openly,(homosexuality, religion,etc..) granting it doesnt interfere directly with societies' ability to express its own personal beliefs, then our government has practiced secular law to the max. But by implying that the terms "Under God", and "In God we trust" are direct threats on societies freedom of expression, then you are mistaken. The upholding of biblical law(over all else). does not exist. It is upheld just as any morally sound or personal belief. Our athiests and secularists...pleading/demanding to have this symbolism or representation of an assumed specified religion to be removed..is nonsense. Even if it was intended to "represent" christianity, it is not held as "the" standard of living. It is only incorporated to show the diversity of our country, or representation of a lifestyle thats gotten us where we are today.

Yes,christianty has contributed to our nation and its founding.
It was established on Judeo-Christian principles by none other than...Christians.

The quakers, puritans, methodists, presbyterians, catholics..all escaping religious persecution with a desire to follow ones "own" interpretation of "The word of God".

An array of religiously based people incorporating the right of freedom and interpretation of beliefs... into the "New World".





"That right that is contained in essential parts of the Constitution of the United States and is considered by most to be the essence of our national being."

-Mary Pitt

Ekimup, it is very refreshing, and welcomed, to have an intelligent debate.

Concerning the rights of gays, we will have to agree to disagree. Our morals, though so similar in many ways, do differ slightly.

As to religious references, may I ask you why the apparent reluctance to remove these references? God quite simply refers to the Xian God; it certainly cannot refer to Allah, the Wiccan Goddess, any of the plethora of Hindu Gods and Goddesses, or even the 1st Nations Creator for examples. What the denominations of our Founders followed is moot, what they intended is most important.

Concerning the seemingly recent 'rise' to the fore, of alternant and non-religion practitioners. We have simply grown in numbers, to the point where it is reasonably safe to come out of the 'broom closet' so to speak. Religiously motivated murder and physical violence (outside of the schoolyard) is exceedingly rare today in the US, to the point of none for the former. Atheism especially was already on the rise, but the communist phobias of the 1950's set all non-Christians back. Mysticism and the 'occult' (a word to describe non-Christian religious practices at that time) saw a rise in popularity in the mid 19th Century. Many still group all non-Christians together, incorrectly terming all of us 'Devil Worshipers' or merely heretics.

Concerning the Christian Coalition, or as some term, the American Taliban. They are an after product of the Cold War 'Commu-phobia', building upon the foundations of earlier Fundamental organizations, present to some extent since the early 19th Century. As they have grown in political power, by pressuring key politicians, or placing their own in political positions, the danger of them completing their manifesto comes closer to completion. Isaac Bonewits perhaps explains this current danger most succinctly on his web page at http://www.neopagan.net/ReligiousReich.html.

The news reports the 'imminent death' of the Pope. I offer my deepest and heartfelt condolences; he is a great man. I pray the next Pope exhibits as much wisdom and compassion.

http://reluctant-messenger.com/aquarian_gospel.htm

This might be a little off subj - The Aquarian gospel was written by Levi, an army chaplain from the civil war.

1 - you can believe that he made it all up - if so, then they were far more advanced back then with their understanding of religion then we are today - or

2 - Its the real deal.

You might want to check it out.

"What the denominations of our Founders followed is moot,"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

this is an interesting comment. Is it only moot because secular belief was not the initial belief of our founding fathers? I do believe you presented secular belief as evidence that our forefathers did not believe in chrisitanity, and that this nation was not founded on christianity or derived from its principles...which would be wrong.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

"what they intended is most important.'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

this is true^.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

"Many still group all non-Christians together, incorrectly terming all of us 'Devil Worshipers' or merely heretics."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

people do foolish things, such as generalizing...

Apparently, these people your refering to arent very open minded, and do not support the belief of our founding fathers.

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

"As they have grown(Christian Coalition) in political power, by pressuring key politicians, or placing their own in political positions, the danger of them completing their manifesto comes closer to completion."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

The Christian Coalition is a dangerous thing, this is why i dont support it. I think we're aimed at the wrong things. We cant target the use of the word "God" in our government, simply because this is all we have in defense against the Christian Coalition. You cant twist the truth, which is that these words do not sway our governments choices in any way. By removing them, we change nothing but the presentation of the pledge and our currency. The phrases only offend those who do not understand our rights. Those who will take offense to even the smallest reference of an implied religion.(christianity to be exact). Because it is a constant struggle to keep religious influence out of our lives, but this does not mean that it cant stay out of our rights.

Our government has done a good job thus far...hopefully it'll continue.







btw. heres an interesting article since we're all posting "good-read"



"Politics without God-Reflections on Europe and America"

very good argument. Valid points. Beautiful...must read.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/1309519/posts

I want to ask the Anti~God ppl...what part of this says our nation was built on secular foundations and Anti~God??

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men......."

Again, you Fundies miss the point entirely. Yes, our Founders were MOSTLY Christian, and included Deists, Humanists, and Atheists. What they intended was a Secular Government; the preponderance of documental evidence proves this. Although I know they are long posts, I have posted several quotes from official documents and personal correspondences from our Founders. It was their intention to keep people like YOU from achieving total power in this country. It is simple fact that if Fundies take over the country, Equality and Liberty will disappear. The Declaration of Independence is simply a Document of Intention, directed to the Christian monarch of England, and has absolutely nothing to do with the laws of this land whatsoever.

Again, how is the removal of Christian references and support in the government an attack on Christianity?

It isnt pagan...an attack.

But references do not impose christianty. References do not oppose secular beliefs, it documents..and proudly represents the beliefs of our founding fathers.

..once again pagan, how are references a threat to a secular government?

We can go back and forth all day. But references are only offensive to those who take them the wrong way. God forbid(i mean this figuratively) that we remove reference to truth in our government.

Christianity is a very long lived and powerful religion. Even if it is "just religion", it was the core belief of the founders of this great country. (this i know, this is irrelevant. there is no need for us to print references of God on our coinage ...maybe even the pledge.)


But we have strong belief in freedom of expression as long as we abide by the laws set by this government. Laws designed keeping the best interests of this country in mind.

We are a moral nation. If you read that article, you would see that morale is not maintained by secular belief and policies.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---
"Politics Without God" excerpt. ( note that the terms "Europe and "European" are only used as reference in comparison to the U.S. )


"a-theos,"- people who had abandoned the gods of Rome and who were thus a threat to public life and public order"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---

the word "athiest." is derived from this term.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---

"Christianity cannot be acknowledged as a source of European democracy because the only public space safe for pluralism, tolerance, civility, and democracy is a public space that is thoroughly a-theos."

"Christians can likely give a more compelling account of their commitment to democratic values than their fellow Europeans who are a-theos -- who believe that "neutrality toward worldviews" must characterize democratic Europe. A postmodern or neo-Kantian "neutrality toward worldviews" cannot be truly tolerant; it can only be indifferent."

"Absent convictions, there is no tolerance; there is only indifference. Absent some compelling notion of the truth that requires us to be tolerant of those who have a different understanding of the truth, there is only skepticism and relativism. And skepticism and relativism are very weak foundations on which to build and sustain a pluralistic democracy, for neither skepticism nor relativism, by their own logic, can "give an account" of why we should be tolerant and civil."

"In contrast to this thin account of tolerance -- we should be tolerant because it works better -- there is the argument for tolerance given by Pope John Paul II in his 1989 encyclical letter on Christian mission, "Redemptoris Missio" [The Mission of the Redeemer]. There the Pope taught that "The Church proposes; she imposes nothing." The Catholic Church respects the "other" as an "other" who is also a seeker of truth and goodness; the Church only asks that the believer and the "other" enter into a dialogue that leads to mutual enrichment rather than to a deeper skepticism about the possibility of grasping the truth of things."


-George Weigel
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--


This is a very good article, do read if you havent yet...

Just to alleviate any confusion, does anyone think I seek the removal of religion from the country? Or those only atheists should be allowed in government?

To elaborate, it is my opinion, shared by many, that the Xian references and support allows a foothold to those Fundamentalists who wish to 'take over', or even strongly influence, their ideals, doctrines, and Biblical Law upon this country.

The government would of course still be made up of religious people, of all beliefs, as it is now, and when it was created. Morality, in its many forms, will still be present and forwarded, as it was during the creation of this outstanding country.

Ek, where is the original of that article please.

Th, here it is




http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/1309519/posts

quote:

---

How did this happen? Poland survived -- better, Poland prevailed -- because of culture: a culture formed by a distinctive language, by a unique literature, and by an intense Catholic faith (which, an its noblest and deepest expressions, was ecumenical and tolerant, not xenophobic, as so many stereotypes have it). Poles know in their bones that culture is what drives history over the long haul

---

quote:

---

Father de Lubac was fascinated by the history of ideas, which he knew to be fraught with "real world" consequences. Thus, during the early 1940s, he turned his attention to some of the most influential intellectual figures in pre-20th century European culture. The result was a book, "The Drama of Atheistic Humanism" ["Le Drame de l'humanisme athée"], which argued that the civilizational crisis in which Europe found itself during World War II was the product of a deliberate rejection of the God of the Bible in the name of authentic human liberation.

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

This, Father de Lubac argued, was something new. This was not the atheism of skeptical individuals. This was atheistic humanism -- atheism with a developed ideology and a program for remaking the world. As a historian of ideas, de Lubac knew that bad ideas can have lethal consequences. At the heart of the darkness inside the great mid-20th century tyrannies [of] communism, fascism, Nazism, Father de Lubac discerned the lethal effects of the marriage between modern technology and the ideas borne by atheistic humanism.

He summed up the results of this misbegotten union in these terms: "It is not true, as is sometimes said, that man cannot organize the world without God. What is true is that, without God, he can only organize it against man." That is what the tyrannies of the mid-20th century had proven -- ultramundane humanism is inevitably inhuman humanism. And inhuman humanism cannot neither sustain nor defend the democratic project. It can only undermine it or attack it. ...

---

Totally agree....loved the site...ekimup.

Thanks Ek. I do have some questions and reservations concerning this gentleman. He gives no sources for his information and 'statistics', such as this 'radicalizing' of Islamics. Also, I noticed that he fails to mention that the culture that created Notre Dame was responsible for many atrocities, and the loss of personal liberties and equality throughout the known world for a rather long time in history. The author appears to be making the case that 'without God, civilization will fail and fall', am I correct?

That simply could not happen here, if our government was returned to its secular roots. Simply because our government would still consist of religious persons, the social morals in place today, that are not prejudiced or biased towards minority populations, would still be there. There simply is no logical, unbiased explanation banning Gay marriage. Polygamy, also banned due to Biblical Law, is another example. Why shouldn't Polygamy be allowed? Pure Polygamy (as opposed to one man seeking a harem) would work wonderfully in my opinion, and I support the removal of those Laws based on biblical ideals.

The vehement conflicts that occur in political and legal arenas today can be, perhaps overly, simplified. Christians do not wish to see their clear majority lost, and the political power they enjoy in contemporary politics, along with the controlling factor of imposing their views and (in our opinion) overly strict moral values on the general population. We, on the other hand, know that we cannot gain our complete freedom to worship our separate ways, and to enjoy life free from repression and oppressions committed by our neighbors, unless we fight tooth and nail for it. A person places an alter to the Virgin Mary on his lawn, no one objects, but have someone place a Goddess Symbol or a pentacle on their property, and their children will by ostracized and beaten in the school yard, threatening letters and phone calls will begin, and vandalism will take place.

The escalation of 'hostile' debate and court actions are in direct relation to the stubbornness of the Fundamental Christians in retaining their 'clear majority' political advantage. This conflict also results in over reactions, such as school districts banning Halloween celebrations in the absence of any complaints, to name one of many examples. We are not innocent either, some non-Christians and Liberals have certainly become overly sensitive, a perfect example is the removal of the Declaration of Independence from school halls in some areas of the country. Although it does not have any bearing on National Law, it is still an important historical document of our Grand Nation.

Returning our Motto and Pledge to their original forms would signal to the religious minority that change has begun, and certainly inform the 'American Taliban' that their efforts are wasted. Perhaps with this religious minority 'victory' achieved, a better atmosphere of cooperation and mutual respect will be created. What happens at Federal level will eventually filter down to the masses.

"Don't let anyone
claim to be a true American. Don't let them claim the tribute of
American patriotism if they ever attempt to remove religion from
politics." George Washington's farewell address
--------------------------------------------------------

First chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Jay, wrote:

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty ... of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." (1816)
--------------------------------------------------------

William Penn

"Those who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants."

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

Justice David Brewer said this:

"This is a religious people. This is historically true. From the discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a single voice making this affirmation ... We find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth ... These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation. (1892)

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

Even liberal Supreme Court chief justice, Earl Warren, wrote in 1954:

"I believe no one can read the history of our country without realizing that the Good Book and the spirit of the Savior have from the beginning been our guiding geniuses ... Whether we look to the first Charter of Virginia ... or to the Charter of New England ... or to the Charter of Massachusetts Bay ... or to the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut ... the same objective is present ... a Christian land governed by Christian principles. I believe the entire Bill of Rights came into being because of the knowledge our forefathers had of the Bible and their belief in it: freedom of belief, of expression, of assembly, of petition, the dignity of the individual, the sanctity of the home, equal justice under law, and the reservation of powers to the people ... I like to believe we are living today in the spirit of the Christian religion. I like also to believe that as long as we do so, no great harm can come to our country."

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

Supreme Court justices were certainly not the only political figures who wrote such things either. George Washington wrote a prayer addressed to "O most glorious God, in Jesus Christ" and ended it like this:

"... Let me live according to those holy rules which Thou hast this day prescribed in Thy holy word ... Direct me to the true object, Jesus Christ the way, the truth and the life. Bless, O Lord, all the people of this land."

Washington also said:

"Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

"It is impossible to rightly govern . . . without God & the Bible."

"You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all the religion of Jesus Christ." to a group of Indian chiefs.

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

Roger Sherman:

". . . all civil rights and the right to hold office were to be extended to persons of any Christian denomination."

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

John Adams wrote:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with passions unbridled by morality and religion."

"Religion & virtue are the only foundations, not only of republicanism and of all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all the combinations of human society."

"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."

Thomas Jefferson, the man "blamed" for the wall of separation between church and state said:

"I have always said, and will always say, that the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make us better citizens."

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that His justice cannot sleep forever."

"No power over the freedom of religion . . .[is] delegated to the United States by the Constitution."

"Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus."

"I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence; and believing he never claimed any other." Letter to Benjamin Rush, April 21, 1803


James Madison:

"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not on the power of government...[but] upon the capacity of each and every one of us to govern ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."

"Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe."

John Quincy Adams:

"The greatest glory of the American Revolution was this: It connected in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity."

"No book in the world deserves to be so unceasingly studied, and so profoundly meditated upon as the Bible."

"Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the Foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?"

Abraham Lincoln:

"Unless the great God who assisted [President Washington], shall be with me and aid me, I must fail. But if the same omniscient mind, and Almighty arm, that directed and protected him, shall guide and support me, I shall not fail ... Let us pray that the God of our fathers may not forsake us now."

Grover Cleveland:

"All must admit that the reception of the teachings of Christ results in the purest patriotism, in the most scrupulous fidelity to public trust, and in the best type of citizenship."

Teddy Roosevelt:

"In this actual world, a churchless community, a community where men have abandoned and scoffed at, or ignored their religious needs, is a community on the rapid down-grade."

Woodrow Wilson:

"America was born a Christian nation. America was born to exemplify that devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the revelations of the Holy Scripture."

Calvin Coolidge, speaking of the founding fathers:

"They were intent upon establishing a Christian commonwealth in accordance with the principle of self-government. They were an inspired body of men. It has been said that God sifted the nations that He might send choice grain into the wilderness ... Who can fail to see it in the hand of Destiny? Who can doubt that it has been guided by a Divine Providence?"

Benjamin Franklin

"Whoever will introduce into public affairs the principles of Christianity will change the face of the world."

Mr. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, one of the framers of the Constitution, published his diary in which he said: "Dr. Benjamin Franklin, a venerable figure weighted down by years and wisdom, leaned one hand op his staff, the other on the table and said: "There is a greater menace to these United States of America than the strictly Roman . . . This greater menace, gentlemen, is the Jew!"

John F. Kennedy:

"The rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God."

Gerald Ford, quoted a speech made by Dwight Eisenhower in 1955:

"Without God there could be no American form of government, nor an American way of life. Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first--the most basic--expression of Americanism. Thus, the founding fathers of America saw it, and thus with God's help, it will continue to be."

The Supreme Court ruling in the case of McDaniel vs. Patyark back in 1978 should make clear that Christians still have the same rights as everyone else whether we are or were a Christian nation or not:

"The Establishment Clause does not license government to treat religion, and those who teach or practice it, simply by virtue of their status as such, as subversive of American ideals and therefore subject to unique disabilities ... In short, government may not as a goal promote "safe-thinking" with respect to religion and fence out from political participation those, such as ministers, whom it regards as over-involved in religion. Religionists no less than members of any other group enjoy the full measure of protection afforded speech, association, and political activity generally. The Establishment Clause, properly understood, is a shield against any attempt by government to inhibit religion ... it may not be used as a sword to justify repression of religion or its adherents from any aspect of public life."

Noah Webster

"No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people."

Gov. Morris

"Religion is the only solid basis for good morals; therefore education should teach the precepts of religion, & the duties of man toward God."
-----------------------------------------------------------