Should God's Law be the Law of the Land?

[t_polkow]

Many who believe in the absolute truth of the Christian faith seem to believe that God's Laws should be the law or basis of the law in the US.

What think you?

(My bold)

Which Christian faith is that?

"In 1776 our fathers endeavored to retire the gods from politics. They declared that "all
governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed." This was a
contradiction of the then political ideas of the world; it was, as many believed, an act of
pure blasphemy a renunciation of the Deity. ...It was a notice to all churches and priests
that thereafter mankind would govern and protect themselves. Politically it tore down every
altar and denied the authority of every "sacred book" and appealed from the Providence of
God to the Providence of man."
..........Robert Ingersoll

 

[t_polkow]

Many who believe in the absolute truth of the Christian faith seem to believe that God's Laws should be the law or basis of the law in the US.

What think you?

I see nothing wrong with the 10 Commandments.

and what and whose ten commandments would this be


http://www.positiveatheism.org/crt/whichcom.pdf:clap2:

 

[Foxfyre]

Many who believe in the absolute truth of the Christian faith seem to believe that God's Laws should be the law or basis of the law in the US.

What think you?

(My bold)

Which Christian faith is that?

"In 1776 our fathers endeavored to retire the gods from politics. They declared that "all
governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed." This was a
contradiction of the then political ideas of the world; it was, as many believed, an act of
pure blasphemy a renunciation of the Deity. ...It was a notice to all churches and priests
that thereafter mankind would govern and protect themselves. Politically it tore down every
altar and denied the authority of every "sacred book" and appealed from the Providence of
God to the Providence of man."
..........Robert Ingersoll

The Founders would have disagreed with Ingersoll. They separated the Church from the government so that neither the religious nor any others seeking personal liberty would be subject to either monarch or pope without his/her explicit consent.

At the same time they were, almost to a man, firmly convinced that the Constitution would work only for a religious and moral people and, because the people consented to it, they exercised their own religious faith openly and zealously..

The first national government of the United States, was convinced that the "public prosperity" of a society depended on the vitality of its religion. Nothing less than a "spirit of universal reformation among all ranks and degrees of our citizens," Congress declared to the American people, would "make us a holy, that so we may be a happy people."
Religion and the Congress of the Confederation - Religion and the Founding of the American Republic | Exhibitions - Library of Congress

There is a huge difference between disallowing religion to rule people without the consent of the people and disallowing religion. The Founders knew the difference and knew the USA would not survive as the nation they intended that it be without the blessings of God.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

It is my opinion that God's law IS the law of the land, and we break it at our peril. Our Founders however, almost all who were devoutly religious and believers in both Christianity and God's law, knew that manmade laws could not substitute for God's law and we create oppression whenever we presume to dictate to anybody what they may or may not do short of violating somebody's else's rights.

So our Founders deemed that the federal government should have no say whatsoever in religious law or any other matter that restricted the people's ability to form whatever sort of societies they wished to have and live their lives as they chose.

And they, almost to a man, were equally convinced that this did not in any way negate God's law as being supreme in the land.

A strong answer. So, can you briefly explain what is God's Law? And the Bible is too vague an answer. Specifically, what examples in the Bible are currently the Law of the Land, and what about those Biblical codes which are not i.e. much of Leviticus?

Nobody is capable of knowing God or His ways. But we can draw some assumptions, and my assumption is that God's law makes legal all that is not sin. And sin is defined as that which is harmful in any way to ourselves and/or other whether intended or not, whether out of knowledge or ignorance. The Bible was never intended to be a 'rule book' but rather can give us insights into the benefits of hearing and obeying God's voice and the consequences for ignoring it or failing to seek it.

A reasonable and admirable position, imho.

But, with that in mind, would behavior that does not do harm be illegal i.e. same sex marriage, because the Bible does not condone it?

 

[t_polkow]

Many who believe in the absolute truth of the Christian faith seem to believe that God's Laws should be the law or basis of the law in the US.

What think you?

I see nothing wrong with the 10 Commandments.

and what and whose ten commandments would this be


http://www.positiveatheism.org/crt/whichcom.pdf:clap2:

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

5. Honour thy father and thy mother

6. Thou shalt not kill.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

8. Thou shalt not steal.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

10. Thou shalt not covet.


The first four commandments have nothing to do with morals, ethics or anything of that nature. Those commandments have more to do with a jealous god; an egotistical god. Since commandments 1 through 4 don't really lay a foundation for good, moral standards, we'll throw those out. Now we have the Six Commandments.


My Ten Commandments

1. Thou shalt not kill.

2. Thou shalt not steal.

3. Thou shalt not abuse children.

4. Thou shalt not abuse your spouse.

5. Thou shalt not molest children.

6. Thou shalt not rape.

7. Thou shalt not destroy the property of someone else.

8. Be respectful of your fellow humans; bring no harm to them.

9. Take responsibility for your own actions.

10. Thou shalt not enslave another human.

 

[JakeStarkey]

What the Founders thought, however, today is immaterial. As Scalia has said, the justices have to work with the document. Today what Hamilton may have thought is interesting even instructive but certainly not binding in any sense whatsoever.

 

[Foxfyre]

A strong answer. So, can you briefly explain what is God's Law? And the Bible is too vague an answer. Specifically, what examples in the Bible are currently the Law of the Land, and what about those Biblical codes which are not i.e. much of Leviticus?

Nobody is capable of knowing God or His ways. But we can draw some assumptions, and my assumption is that God's law makes legal all that is not sin. And sin is defined as that which is harmful in any way to ourselves and/or other whether intended or not, whether out of knowledge or ignorance. The Bible was never intended to be a 'rule book' but rather can give us insights into the benefits of hearing and obeying God's voice and the consequences for ignoring it or failing to seek it.

A reasonable and admirable position, imho.

But, with that in mind, would behavior that does not do harm be illegal i.e. same sex marriage, because the Bible does not condone it?

Under our Constitution, the Bible has no legal jurisdiction, and even if it did, it does not address the issue of same sex marriage.

So in an effort to obey God's law as best as we can, we may conclude there is no harm in two people of the same sex loving each other and forming a permanent union, but to change the definition of traditional marriage would put children at even higher risk than they already are. You can't change the definition of something without making it different from what it is. If we look to the Bible for clues, it is pretty explicit that any who would harm those little ones is not obeying God's law and are in fact in serous danger of His wrath.

So, you balance the two things and it is fairly easy to come to the conclusion that the best thing for all is to keep traditional marriage intact as it is for the benefit of any children that may result from the union, but also accommodate the need of the same sex couple for extra protection and legal rights.

I think those who want the best solution will agree to that. I think those who have different motives won't.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No evidence to support the claim "to change the definition of traditional marriage would put children at even higher risk than they already are."

 

[Coloradomtnman]

No evidence to support the claim "to change the definition of traditional marriage would put children at even higher risk than they already are."

Higher risk of what?

I think the lines between what one believes and what is are being blurred by such baseless speculation.

I respect your religious beliefs, but don't force them on others unless you can back up your argument with empirical evidence and rational logic. Make your argument that way and not based on religion and you'll find a more open audience.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No evidence to support the claim "to change the definition of traditional marriage would put children at even higher risk than they already are."

Higher risk of what?

I think the lines between what one believes and what is are being blurred by such baseless speculation.

I respect your religious beliefs, but don't force them on others unless you can back up your argument with empirical evidence and rational logic. Make your argument that way and not based on religion and you'll find a more open audience.

That is an excellent response to Foxfyre's claims.

 

[t_polkow]

(My bold)

Which Christian faith is that?

"In 1776 our fathers endeavored to retire the gods from politics. They declared that "all
governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed." This was a
contradiction of the then political ideas of the world; it was, as many believed, an act of
pure blasphemy a renunciation of the Deity. ...It was a notice to all churches and priests
that thereafter mankind would govern and protect themselves. Politically it tore down every
altar and denied the authority of every "sacred book" and appealed from the Providence of
God to the Providence of man."
..........Robert Ingersoll

The Founders would have disagreed with Ingersoll. They separated the Church from the government so that neither the religious nor any others seeking personal liberty would be subject to either monarch or pope without his/her explicit consent.

At the same time they were, almost to a man, firmly convinced that the Constitution would work only for a religious and moral people and, because the people consented to it, they exercised their own religious faith openly and zealously..

The first national government of the United States, was convinced that the "public prosperity" of a society depended on the vitality of its religion. Nothing less than a "spirit of universal reformation among all ranks and degrees of our citizens," Congress declared to the American people, would "make us a holy, that so we may be a happy people."
Religion and the Congress of the Confederation - Religion and the Founding of the American Republic | Exhibitions - Library of Congress

There is a huge difference between disallowing religion to rule people without the consent of the people and disallowing religion. The Founders knew the difference and knew the USA would not survive as the nation they intended that it be without the blessings of God.

and most of the founding father were deists not christians, they didn't believe in the christer god or the bible.


The primary leaders of the so-called founding fathers of our nation were not Bible-believing Christians; they were deists. Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial intelligentsia at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a supreme deity who created the universe to operate solely by natural laws. The supreme God of the Deists removed himself entirely from the universe after creating it. They believed that he assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible.

These beliefs were forcefully articulated by Thomas Paine in Age of Reason, a book that so outraged his contemporaries that he died rejected and despised by the nation that had once revered him as "the father of the American Revolution." To this day, many mistakenly consider him an atheist, even though he was an out spoken defender of the Deistic view of God. Other important founding fathers who espoused Deism were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and James Monroe.

Fundamentalist Christians are currently working overtime to convince the American public that the founding fathers intended to establish this country on "biblical principles," but history simply does not support their view. The men mentioned above and others who were instrumental in the founding of our nation were in no sense Bible-believing Christians. Thomas Jefferson, in fact, was fiercely anti-cleric. In a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, Jefferson said, "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes" (George Seldes, The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371). In a letter to Mrs. Harrison Smith, he wrote, "It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. By the same test the world must judge me. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest" (August 6, 1816).


Jefferson:

"The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."


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


John Adams

"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it
happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and
Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
..........To F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816


"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!"
..........To Thomas Jefferson


"What havoc has been made of books through every century of the Christian era? Where
are fifty gospels, condemned as spurious by the bull of Pope Gelasius? Where are the
forty wagon-loads of Hebrew manuscripts burned in France, by order of another pope,
because suspected of heresy? Remember the 'index expurgatorius', the inquisition, the
stake, the axe, the halter and the guillotine."
..........To John Taylor


James Madison


"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity
and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has
the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less,
in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both,
superstition, bigotry and persecution."
..........."A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785


Thomas Paine

"I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the
Bible)."


"It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God against the evils of
the Bible."

Ben Fraklin


I think vital religion has always suffered when orthodoxy is more regarded than virtue.
The scriptures assure me that at the last day we shall not be examined on what we thought
but what we did."
..........Letter to his father, 1738


"I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite Father, expects or requires no
worship or praise from us, but that He is even infinitely above it."
.........."Articles of Belief and Acts of Religion", Nov. 20, 1728


"I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good works ... I mean real good works ...
not holy-day keeping, sermon-hearing ... or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and
compliments despised by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity."
..........Works, Vol. VII, p. 75


Deism Defined, Welcome to Deism, Deist Glossary and Frequently Asked Questions

 

[JakeStarkey]

Actually most of the founders were weak or stronger Christians, not deists. The deists and infidels you can actually prove by their writings would be Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, and Allen, only. All of others had a variety of Christian beliefs and denominations.

Stay within the evidence, please.

 

[hoosier88]

Actually most of the founders were weak or stronger Christians, not deists. The deists and infidels you can actually prove by their writings would be Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, and Allen, only. All of others had a variety of Christian beliefs and denominations.

Stay within the evidence, please.

(My bold)

"and infidels"? That is not an American usage, I'm pleased to say. Where is this usage coming from?

& yah, it's a commonplace that many of the Founding Fathers were Deists.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Actually most of the founders were weak or stronger Christians, not deists. The deists and infidels you can actually prove by their writings would be Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, and Allen, only. All of others had a variety of Christian beliefs and denominations.

Stay within the evidence, please.

(My bold)

"and infidels"? That is not an American usage, I'm pleased to say. Where is this usage coming from?

& yah, it's a commonplace that many of the Founding Fathers were Deists.

Yah, it's commonplace they were mostly Christian of one stripe or another. It's how they generally described themselves.

Your thesis, you gotta defend it better, far better, than what you have so far.

 

[Flopper]

Many who believe in the absolute truth of the Christian faith seem to believe that God's Laws should be the law or basis of the law in the US.

What think you?

Like the "Islamic Republic of Iran". Same rotten idea, with the same rotten results.

 

[Agit8r]

Many who believe in the absolute truth of the Christian faith seem to believe that God's Laws should be the law or basis of the law in the US.

What think you?

Our laws are based upon the Common Law, in which Civil and Ecclesiastical laws were separate ...to say nothing of the Constitutional prohibition on such a notion.

 

[t_polkow]

"In 1776 our fathers endeavored to retire the gods from politics. They declared that "all
governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed." This was a
contradiction of the then political ideas of the world; it was, as many believed, an act of
pure blasphemy a renunciation of the Deity. ...It was a notice to all churches and priests
that thereafter mankind would govern and protect themselves. Politically it tore down every
altar and denied the authority of every "sacred book" and appealed from the Providence of
God to the Providence of man."
..........Robert Ingersoll

The Founders would have disagreed with Ingersoll. They separated the Church from the government so that neither the religious nor any others seeking personal liberty would be subject to either monarch or pope without his/her explicit consent.

At the same time they were, almost to a man, firmly convinced that the Constitution would work only for a religious and moral people and, because the people consented to it, they exercised their own religious faith openly and zealously..

The first national government of the United States, was convinced that the "public prosperity" of a society depended on the vitality of its religion. Nothing less than a "spirit of universal reformation among all ranks and degrees of our citizens," Congress declared to the American people, would "make us a holy, that so we may be a happy people."
Religion and the Congress of the Confederation - Religion and the Founding of the American Republic | Exhibitions - Library of Congress

There is a huge difference between disallowing religion to rule people without the consent of the people and disallowing religion. The Founders knew the difference and knew the USA would not survive as the nation they intended that it be without the blessings of God.

and most of the founding father were deists not christians, they didn't believe in the christer god or the bible.


The primary leaders of the so-called founding fathers of our nation were not Bible-believing Christians; they were deists. Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial intelligentsia at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a supreme deity who created the universe to operate solely by natural laws. The supreme God of the Deists removed himself entirely from the universe after creating it. They believed that he assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible.

These beliefs were forcefully articulated by Thomas Paine in Age of Reason, a book that so outraged his contemporaries that he died rejected and despised by the nation that had once revered him as "the father of the American Revolution." To this day, many mistakenly consider him an atheist, even though he was an out spoken defender of the Deistic view of God. Other important founding fathers who espoused Deism were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and James Monroe.

Fundamentalist Christians are currently working overtime to convince the American public that the founding fathers intended to establish this country on "biblical principles," but history simply does not support their view. The men mentioned above and others who were instrumental in the founding of our nation were in no sense Bible-believing Christians. Thomas Jefferson, in fact, was fiercely anti-cleric. In a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, Jefferson said, "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes" (George Seldes, The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371). In a letter to Mrs. Harrison Smith, he wrote, "It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. By the same test the world must judge me. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest" (August 6, 1816).


Jefferson:

"The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."


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


John Adams

"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it
happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and
Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
..........To F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816


"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!"
..........To Thomas Jefferson


"What havoc has been made of books through every century of the Christian era? Where
are fifty gospels, condemned as spurious by the bull of Pope Gelasius? Where are the
forty wagon-loads of Hebrew manuscripts burned in France, by order of another pope,
because suspected of heresy? Remember the 'index expurgatorius', the inquisition, the
stake, the axe, the halter and the guillotine."
..........To John Taylor


James Madison


"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity
and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has
the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less,
in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both,
superstition, bigotry and persecution."
..........."A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785


Thomas Paine

"I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the
Bible)."


"It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God against the evils of
the Bible."

Ben Fraklin


I think vital religion has always suffered when orthodoxy is more regarded than virtue.
The scriptures assure me that at the last day we shall not be examined on what we thought
but what we did."
..........Letter to his father, 1738


"I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite Father, expects or requires no
worship or praise from us, but that He is even infinitely above it."
.........."Articles of Belief and Acts of Religion", Nov. 20, 1728


"I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good works ... I mean real good works ...
not holy-day keeping, sermon-hearing ... or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and
compliments despised by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity."
..........Works, Vol. VII, p. 75


Deism Defined, Welcome to Deism, Deist Glossary and Frequently Asked Questions

People like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Benjamin Franklin were avid readers of the great philosophers of the European Enlightenment. They treasured the ideas found in the works of such thinkers as Descartes, Voltaire, Bacon and Locke.

One of the cornerstone ideas of the Enlightenment was to give every idea and assumption the test of reason. When they applied reason to religion they found it necessary to strip it of revelation and they ended up with Deism. Deism is belief in God based on reason and nature. The differing alleged revelations of the various revealed religions are conspicuously absent from Deism. It is a natural religion as opposed to a revealed religion such as Christianity, Judaism, or Islam.

Deism first started to evolve when Edward Herbert of England wrote a book called Of Truth in 1624. His book took the position that belief in God can be based on reason, not just revelation.

In 1696 the Irish philosopher John Toland wrote Christianity Not Mysterious. This book claimed that both God and God's revelations were accessible to human reason and that the so called Christian mysteries are nothing but the manipulations of the clergy.

These two works broke the taboo of questioning Christian dogma, which was very courageous at the time, for this was the time of the Inquisition. People who questioned Biblical dogma could meet the same fate as Giordano Bruno who was convicted of being a heretic because he stated that the earth is not the center of the universe. For exercising his God-given reason Bruno paid the heavy price the superstition of revealed religion demanded - he was burned alive. In addition, these books took the additional positive step of injecting the use of reason in religious matters. Latter Deists were to completely reject any idea of revelation and base their ideas of God simply on the application of their reason on the creation. The order of nature to them was evidence of design. The design they detected in nature lead them to believe there is a Designer of nature, which is God.

In Peter Byrne's book NATURAL RELIGION AND THE NATURE OF RELIGION - THE LEGACY OF DEISM, it's stated the paramount difference between Deism/natural religion and revealed religion is, ". . . a distinction between a supposed set of divine truths specially communicated by God in history and a real system of truths available to all by the use of the unaided reason." This cornerstone of Deism was welcomed by people like Jefferson and Washington because it brought ideas of God current with modern science and knowledge.

The Enlightenment philosophers saw no need for the revelations, rituals, and dogmas of Christianity and the other revealed religions. And neither did key figures in American history.

American Documents

Many sincere people believe that America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. Even the powerful US Senator and candidate for US President, John McCain said, "The Constitution of the United States established the United States of America as a Christian nation." He says this even though the Constitution does not! In fact, nowhere in the Constitution is the word "God" ever even mentioned!

The Declaration of Independence mentions God but ONLY in Deistic terms! Nowhere in the Declaration is Jesus, Moses or the Bible ever mentioned. If America was founded as a Christian nation this would not be the case.

One important US document that not many people are aware of is the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary. Article XI of this treaty which was started in the administration of George Washington and which was ratified in the administration of John Adams reads, "As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion . . ." as can be seen by the image of it below. This makes it very clear that America was not founded as a Christian nation or on Judeo-Christian principles!

 

[hortysir]

Many who believe in the absolute truth of the Christian faith seem to believe that God's Laws should be the law or basis of the law in the US.

What think you?

The Bible plainly tells me to follow man's laws unless/until it contradicts His.

So, no/

This melting pot we call The USA was designed to be tolerant of all religions and not have an "official state religion"

 

[LittleNipper]

I see nothing wrong with the 10 Commandments.

and what and whose ten commandments would this be


http://www.positiveatheism.org/crt/whichcom.pdf:clap2:

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

5. Honour thy father and thy mother

6. Thou shalt not kill.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

8. Thou shalt not steal.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

10. Thou shalt not covet.


The first four commandments have nothing to do with morals, ethics or anything of that nature. Those commandments have more to do with a jealous god; an egotistical god. Since commandments 1 through 4 don't really lay a foundation for good, moral standards, we'll throw those out. Now we have the Six Commandments.


My Ten Commandments

1. Thou shalt not kill.

2. Thou shalt not steal.

3. Thou shalt not abuse children.

4. Thou shalt not abuse your spouse.

5. Thou shalt not molest children.

6. Thou shalt not rape.

7. Thou shalt not destroy the property of someone else.

8. Be respectful of your fellow humans; bring no harm to them.

9. Take responsibility for your own actions.

10. Thou shalt not enslave another human.

1. Love the spiritual and not the material.

2. Do not play God, you will not impress God or anyone else.

3. Do not curse --- you'll only display ignorance.

4. Give life a break at least once a week, then everyone can get it together.

5. Honour parenthood.

6. Do not murder.

7. Do not commit adultery.

8. Don't take what belongs to someone else.

9. Always express the truth.

10. Don't lust after things you do not have.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is my opinion that God's law IS the law of the land, and we break it at our peril. Our Founders however, almost all who were devoutly religious and believers in both Christianity and God's law, knew that manmade laws could not substitute for God's law and we create oppression whenever we presume to dictate to anybody what they may or may not do short of violating somebody's else's rights.

So our Founders deemed that the federal government should have no say whatsoever in religious law or any other matter that restricted the people's ability to form whatever sort of societies they wished to have and live their lives as they chose.

And they, almost to a man, were equally convinced that this did not in any way negate God's law as being supreme in the land.

Fortunately the Framers anticipated the likes of the above, and amended the Constitution accordingly.

Many experienced such religious zealotry firsthand, and sought with the First Amendment to ensure that the bane of religion not jeopardize the liberty of citizens:

The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining [p16] or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups, and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect "a wall of separation between church and State."

Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing

The Constitution therefore prohibits conjoining church and state, it requires that government legislation be motivated solely by a secular purpose, that government may neither advance nor restrict religion, and that government involvement in religion must not manifest an excessive entanglement. See: Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971).

Whatever the religious propensities of the Framers, whey were wise enough to know their beliefs bore no relevance with regard to the Republic, and that the people should remain free from the tyranny that is often the consequence of religion.