The U.S. NOT founded upon Christianity

[froggy]

Thanks for owning it.

When God was in this nation it was a greater country than it is now, America is going downhill more and more everyday.

God was never in the Constitution, by design.

God was in this Govt by choice of the people, until Madalyn Murray O'Hair started the destruction of America ( by the way she want some ice water).

 

[Sky Dancer]

Skydancer the peaceful buddha has now declared herself my enemy!



And I practice an equal kind regard for friend, enemy and stranger. None of these roles is permanent. In this debate, we are opponents, enemies.










:

 

[Sky Dancer]

When God was in this nation it was a greater country than it is now, America is going downhill more and more everyday.

God was never in the Constitution, by design.

God was in this Govt by choice of the people, until Madalyn Murray O'Hair started the destruction of America ( by the way she want some ice water).

See, Madalyn Murray O'Hair is exactly the kind of American protected by the Constitution. She was an atheist.

If it was up to you she wouldn't have been free to speak her mind in America.

George HW Bush:

" No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

This is the danger of viewing America as a Christian nation.

 

[froggy]

God was never in the Constitution, by design.

God was in this Govt by choice of the people, until Madalyn Murray O'Hair started the destruction of America ( by the way she want some ice water).

See, Madalyn Murray O'Hair is exactly the kind of American protected by the Constitution. She was an atheist.

If it was up to you she wouldn't have been free to speak her mind in America.

She could have spoke her mind all she wanted no one is against free speech, it's her actions that caused Americas downfall.

 

[Sky Dancer]

God was in this Govt by choice of the people, until Madalyn Murray O'Hair started the destruction of America ( by the way she want some ice water).

See, Madalyn Murray O'Hair is exactly the kind of American protected by the Constitution. She was an atheist.

If it was up to you she wouldn't have been free to speak her mind in America.

She could have spoke her mind all she wanted no one is against free speech, it's her actions that caused Americas downfall.

That's only because you claim the US is a Christian nation. It's a secular nation with freedom of religion. That means we have lots of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Scientologists, atheists, wiccans, LDS, JW. etc etc etc. We are a plurality, not a Christian nation. Preach that in your churches and no one objects, but say it in public and some of us will say something. Free speech. We both have it. We live in a free country, not a Christian country. There is a movement in our country to make America a Christian theocracy. May they never succeed.

Why don't Christians welcome a separation of church and state? Render to Caesar and all. I thought it was a teaching of Jesus?

I disagree with you that the country has not had a 'downfall' becaused of one outspoken atheist. It's that kind of view that makes some Christians want to make the US a Christian theocracy so they can silence the atheists. HW Bush famously said atheists are not citizens or patriots.

Not on my watch.

 

[bodecea]

When God was in this nation it was a greater country than it is now, America is going downhill more and more everyday.

God was never in the Constitution, by design.

God was in this Govt by choice of the people, until Madalyn Murray O'Hair started the destruction of America ( by the way she want some ice water).

Interesting....by choice, eh? So FORCING kids to say a prayer in school was a choice?

 

[bodecea]

Thanks for owning it.

When God was in this nation it was a greater country than it is now, America is going downhill more and more everyday.

So, you are saying that god is not in this nation anymore? Who chased him/her away? And if he/she can be chased away....what does that say about his/her powers?

 

[Sky Dancer]

The most convincing evidence that our government did not ground itself upon Christianity comes from the very document that defines it-- the United States Constitution.

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."

Thomas Jefferson interpreted the 1st Amendment in his famous letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in January 1, 1802:

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."

Some Religious activists try to extricate the concept of separation between church and State by claiming that those words do not occur in the Constitution. Indeed they do not, but neither does it exactly say "freedom of religion," yet the First Amendment implies both.

As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom:

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

James Madison, perhaps the greatest supporter for separation of church and State, and whom many refer to as the father of the Constitution, also held similar views which he expressed in his letter to Edward Livingston, 10 July 1822:

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."

Today, if ever our government needed proof that the separation of church and State works to ensure the freedom of religion, one only need to look at the plethora of Churches, temples, and shrines that exist in the cities and towns throughout the United States. Only a secular government, divorced from religion could possibly allow such tolerant diversity.

The Declaration of Independence
Many Christians who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration as "proof." The reason appears obvious: the document mentions God. However, the God in the Declaration does not describe Christianity's God. It describes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." This nature's view of God agrees with deist philosophy but any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone.

Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli More significantly, the Declaration does not represent the law of the land as it came before the Constitution. The Declaration aimed at announcing their separation from Great Britain and listed the various grievances with the "thirteen united States of America." The grievances against Great Britain no longer hold, and we have more than thirteen states. Today, the Declaration represents an important historical document about rebellious intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our independent government. Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets, and judges may mention it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. Our presidents, judges and policemen must take an oath to uphold the Constitution, but never to the Declaration of Independence.

Of course the Declaration depicts a great political document, as it aimed at a future government upheld by citizens instead of a religious monarchy. It observed that all men "are created equal" meaning that we all come inborn with the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men." The Declaration says nothing about our rights secured by Christianity, nor does it imply anything about a Christian foundation.

Treaty of Tripoli
Unlike governments of the past, the American Fathers set up a government divorced from religion. The establishment of a secular government did not require a reflection to themselves about its origin; they knew this as an unspoken given. However, as the U.S. delved into international affairs, few foreign nations knew about the intentions of America. For this reason, an insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s explicitly reveals the secular nature of the United States to a foreign nation. Officially called the "Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary," most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states:

Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers
Copyright National Portait Gallery Smithsonian Institution/Art Resource NY "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 preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end of George Washington's last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Barlow, along with his associate, Captain Richard O'Brien, et al, translated and modified the Arabic version of the treaty into English. From this came the added Amendment 11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval in 1797. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate. The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797.

So here we have a clear admission by the United States that our government did not found itself upon Christianity. Unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all treaties do according to the Constitution (see Article VI, Sect. 2).

Although the Christian exclusionary wording in the Treaty of Tripoli only lasted for eight years and no longer has legal status, it clearly represented the feelings of our Founding Fathers at the beginning of the U.S. government.

Common Law
Signers of the Treaty of Tripoli According to the Constitution's 7th Amendment: "In suits at common law. . . the right of trial by jury shall be preserved; and no fact, tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law."

Here, many Christians believe that common law came from Christian foundations and therefore the Constitution derives from it. They use various quotes from Supreme Court Justices proclaiming that Christianity came as part of the laws of England, and therefore from its common law heritage.

But one of our principle Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, elaborated about the history of common law in his letter to Thomas Cooper on February 10, 1814:

"For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. . . This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.

". . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."

In the same letter, Jefferson examined how the error spread about Christianity and common law. Jefferson realized that a misinterpretation had occurred with a Latin term by Prisot, "*ancien scripture*," in reference to common law history. The term meant "ancient scripture" but people had incorrectly interpreted it to mean "Holy Scripture," thus spreading the myth that common law came from the Bible. Jefferson writes:

"And Blackstone repeats, in the words of Sir Matthew Hale, that 'Christianity is part of the laws of England,' citing Ventris and Strange ubi surpa. 4. Blackst. 59. Lord Mansfield qualifies it a little by saying that 'The essential principles of revealed religion are part of the common law." In the case of the Chamberlain of London v. Evans, 1767. But he cites no authority, and leaves us at our peril to find out what, in the opinion of the judge, and according to the measure of his foot or his faith, are those essential principles of revealed religion obligatory on us as a part of the common law."

Thus we find this string of authorities, when examined to the beginning, all hanging on the same hook, a perverted expression of Priscot's, or on one another, or nobody."

The Encyclopedia Britannica, also describes the Saxon origin and adds: "The nature of the new common law was at first much influenced by the principles of Roman law, but later it developed more and more along independent lines." Also prominent among the characteristics that derived out of common law include the institution of the jury, and the right to speedy trial.
Little-Known U.S. Document Proclaims America's Government is Secular - The Early America Review, Summer 1997

 

[froggy]

See, Madalyn Murray O'Hair is exactly the kind of American protected by the Constitution. She was an atheist.

If it was up to you she wouldn't have been free to speak her mind in America.

She could have spoke her mind all she wanted no one is against free speech, it's her actions that caused Americas downfall.

That's only because you claim the US is a Christian nation. It's a secular nation with freedom of religion. That means we have lots of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Scientologists, atheists, wiccans, LDS, JW. etc etc etc. We are a plurality, not a Christian nation. Preach that in your churches and no one objects, but say it in public and some of us will say something. Free speech. We both have it. We live in a free country, not a Christian country. There is a movement in our country to make America a Christian theocracy. May they never succeed.

Why don't Christians welcome a separation of church and state? Render to Caesar and all. I thought it was a teaching of Jesus?

I disagree with you that the country has not had a 'downfall' becaused of one outspoken atheist. It's that kind of view that makes some Christians want to make the US a Christian theocracy so they can silence the atheists. HW Bush famously said atheists are not citizens or patriots.

Not on my watch.

We used to be a Christian nation, it is shrinking as we speak due to a number of reason.

 

[froggy]

God was never in the Constitution, by design.

God was in this Govt by choice of the people, until Madalyn Murray O'Hair started the destruction of America ( by the way she want some ice water).

Interesting....by choice, eh? So FORCING kids to say a prayer in school was a choice?

Forcing them, I think (a moment of silence) doesn't force you to do nothing.

 

[froggy]

Thanks for owning it.

When God was in this nation it was a greater country than it is now, America is going downhill more and more everyday.

So, you are saying that god is not in this nation anymore? Who chased him/her away? And if he/she can be chased away....what does that say about his/her powers?

So you think God Will force himself on you.

 

[froggy]

The most convincing evidence that our government did not ground itself upon Christianity comes from the very document that defines it-- the United States Constitution.

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."

Thomas Jefferson interpreted the 1st Amendment in his famous letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in January 1, 1802:

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."

Some Religious activists try to extricate the concept of separation between church and State by claiming that those words do not occur in the Constitution. Indeed they do not, but neither does it exactly say "freedom of religion," yet the First Amendment implies both.

As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom:

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

James Madison, perhaps the greatest supporter for separation of church and State, and whom many refer to as the father of the Constitution, also held similar views which he expressed in his letter to Edward Livingston, 10 July 1822:

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."

Today, if ever our government needed proof that the separation of church and State works to ensure the freedom of religion, one only need to look at the plethora of Churches, temples, and shrines that exist in the cities and towns throughout the United States. Only a secular government, divorced from religion could possibly allow such tolerant diversity.

The Declaration of Independence
Many Christians who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration as "proof." The reason appears obvious: the document mentions God. However, the God in the Declaration does not describe Christianity's God. It describes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." This nature's view of God agrees with deist philosophy but any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone.

Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli More significantly, the Declaration does not represent the law of the land as it came before the Constitution. The Declaration aimed at announcing their separation from Great Britain and listed the various grievances with the "thirteen united States of America." The grievances against Great Britain no longer hold, and we have more than thirteen states. Today, the Declaration represents an important historical document about rebellious intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our independent government. Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets, and judges may mention it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. Our presidents, judges and policemen must take an oath to uphold the Constitution, but never to the Declaration of Independence.

Of course the Declaration depicts a great political document, as it aimed at a future government upheld by citizens instead of a religious monarchy. It observed that all men "are created equal" meaning that we all come inborn with the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men." The Declaration says nothing about our rights secured by Christianity, nor does it imply anything about a Christian foundation.

Treaty of Tripoli
Unlike governments of the past, the American Fathers set up a government divorced from religion. The establishment of a secular government did not require a reflection to themselves about its origin; they knew this as an unspoken given. However, as the U.S. delved into international affairs, few foreign nations knew about the intentions of America. For this reason, an insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s explicitly reveals the secular nature of the United States to a foreign nation. Officially called the "Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary," most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states:

Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers
Copyright National Portait Gallery Smithsonian Institution/Art Resource NY "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 preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end of George Washington's last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Barlow, along with his associate, Captain Richard O'Brien, et al, translated and modified the Arabic version of the treaty into English. From this came the added Amendment 11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval in 1797. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate. The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797.

So here we have a clear admission by the United States that our government did not found itself upon Christianity. Unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all treaties do according to the Constitution (see Article VI, Sect. 2).

Although the Christian exclusionary wording in the Treaty of Tripoli only lasted for eight years and no longer has legal status, it clearly represented the feelings of our Founding Fathers at the beginning of the U.S. government.

Common Law
Signers of the Treaty of Tripoli According to the Constitution's 7th Amendment: "In suits at common law. . . the right of trial by jury shall be preserved; and no fact, tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law."

Here, many Christians believe that common law came from Christian foundations and therefore the Constitution derives from it. They use various quotes from Supreme Court Justices proclaiming that Christianity came as part of the laws of England, and therefore from its common law heritage.

But one of our principle Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, elaborated about the history of common law in his letter to Thomas Cooper on February 10, 1814:

"For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. . . This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.

". . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."

In the same letter, Jefferson examined how the error spread about Christianity and common law. Jefferson realized that a misinterpretation had occurred with a Latin term by Prisot, "*ancien scripture*," in reference to common law history. The term meant "ancient scripture" but people had incorrectly interpreted it to mean "Holy Scripture," thus spreading the myth that common law came from the Bible. Jefferson writes:

"And Blackstone repeats, in the words of Sir Matthew Hale, that 'Christianity is part of the laws of England,' citing Ventris and Strange ubi surpa. 4. Blackst. 59. Lord Mansfield qualifies it a little by saying that 'The essential principles of revealed religion are part of the common law." In the case of the Chamberlain of London v. Evans, 1767. But he cites no authority, and leaves us at our peril to find out what, in the opinion of the judge, and according to the measure of his foot or his faith, are those essential principles of revealed religion obligatory on us as a part of the common law."

Thus we find this string of authorities, when examined to the beginning, all hanging on the same hook, a perverted expression of Priscot's, or on one another, or nobody."

The Encyclopedia Britannica, also describes the Saxon origin and adds: "The nature of the new common law was at first much influenced by the principles of Roman law, but later it developed more and more along independent lines." Also prominent among the characteristics that derived out of common law include the institution of the jury, and the right to speedy trial.
Little-Known U.S. Document Proclaims America's Government is Secular - The Early America Review, Summer 1997

The framers left it out because of the bad name Christianity got from the actions of Roman Catholic in England.

 

[bodecea]

God was in this Govt by choice of the people, until Madalyn Murray O'Hair started the destruction of America ( by the way she want some ice water).

See, Madalyn Murray O'Hair is exactly the kind of American protected by the Constitution. She was an atheist.

If it was up to you she wouldn't have been free to speak her mind in America.

She could have spoke her mind all she wanted no one is against free speech, it's her actions that caused Americas downfall.

What action of hers caused America's downfall?

 

[pinqy]

The framers left it out because of the bad name Christianity got from the actions of Roman Catholic in England.

Since the Catholic Church had been effectively banned in England since before the first English colonies were even settled in America, and the Test Acts which required denunciation of the Catholic Church were in full effect in England at the time of the writing of the Constitution, your claim seems a little strange. Or do you just not know your history?

 

[Christopher]

The most convincing evidence that our government did not ground itself upon Christianity comes from the very document that defines it-- the United States Constitution.

There is plenty of evidence that Christianity had significant influence on the founding of America, including the creating of the Constitution. You seem to still be ignoring Christianity's contribution to America's founding.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Origins-American-Constitutionalism-Donald-Lutz/dp/0807115061/ref=pd_sim_b_1]Amazon.com: The Origins of American Constitutionalism (9780807115060): Donald S. Lutz: Books[/ame]

In The Origins of American Constitutionalism, Donald S. Lutz challenges the prevailing notion that the United States Constitution was either essentially inherited from the British or simply invented by the Federalists in the summer of 1787. His political theory of constitutionalism acknowledges the contributions of the British and the Federalists. Lutz also asserts, however, that the U.S. Constitution derives in form and content from a tradition of American colonial charters and documents of political foundation that began a century and a half prior to 1787. Lutz builds his argument around a close textual analysis of such documents as the Mayflower Compact, the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, the Rhode Island Charter of 1663, the first state constitutions, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation. He shows that American constitutionalism developed to a considerable degree from radical Protestant interpretations of the Judeo-Christian tradition that were first secularized into political compacts and then incorporated into constitutions and bills of rights. Over time, appropriations that enriched this tradition included aspects of English common law and English Whig theory. Lutz also looks at the influence of Montesquieu, Locke, Blackstone, and Hume. In addition, he details the importance of Americans' experiences and history to the political theory that produced the Constitution. By placing the Constitution within this broader constitutional system, Lutz demonstrates that the document is the culmination of a long process and must be understood within this context. His argument also offers a fresh view of current controversies over the Framers' intentions, the place of religion in American politics, and citizens' continuing role in the development of the constitutional tradition.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-Constitution-Faith-Founding-Fathers/dp/0801052319]Amazon.com: Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers (9780801052316): John Eidsmoe: Books[/ame]

John Eidsmoe rights the faulty historical record and correctly brings us back to the roots that made America great . . . clearly demonstrates that our constitutional liberties are a direct result of our founders' moral and religious convictions which were based on a belief in a God who created heaven and earth as well as on the fixed and unchanging absolutes of God's Word. Robert Skolrood, National Legal Foundation Legally accurate yet easy to understand . . . presents the truth about our founding fathers and their strong Christian roots that is missing from most textbooks and reference books written during the last fifty years. Every student of American history, ministers, and public speakers should read this book. . . . Tim LaHaye, Family Life Seminars Combines an interesting presentation with fine scholarship and a critical m message . . . should be read by anyone interested in the Constitution or Christianity. Wendell Bird, constitutional attorney Knowledge of our Christian heritage is an important weapon in the current fight for religious freedom in America. Eidsmoe has given us an entire arsenal of new and important evidence substantiating the Christian roots of our government. Mike Farris, Home School Legal Defense Association Balanced and lucid . . . clearly documents the pervasive Christian influence on the lives and thought of those who wrote our Constitution. I recommend it highly as a corrective to the almost totally secular portrayal of the Constitution found in so many textbooks today. Paul Vitz, author John Eidsmoe holds five degrees in law, theology, and political science. He currently serves as professor of constitutional law and related subjects at the Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, Faulkner University, Montgomery, Alabama, where he received the Outstanding Professor Award in 1993. A constitutional attorney and lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserve, he has also taught church history and other subjects in various seminaries and has produced a twelve-part video series titled The Institute on the Constitution. His other books include The Christian Legal Advisor, God and Caesar, and Columbus and Cortez.

__________________

 

[bodecea]

God was in this Govt by choice of the people, until Madalyn Murray O'Hair started the destruction of America ( by the way she want some ice water).

Interesting....by choice, eh? So FORCING kids to say a prayer in school was a choice?

Forcing them, I think (a moment of silence) doesn't force you to do nothing.

You are obviously too young to remember that back then, there was no moment of silence....we had to say a prayer...out loud...a christian prayer.

As for a moment of silence in a PUBLIC school....why?

 

[bodecea]

When God was in this nation it was a greater country than it is now, America is going downhill more and more everyday.

So, you are saying that god is not in this nation anymore? Who chased him/her away? And if he/she can be chased away....what does that say about his/her powers?

So you think God Will force himself on you.

You want to force god on us, don't you? Maybe god/goddess is trying to tell YOU something.

 

[pinqy]

The most convincing evidence that our government did not ground itself upon Christianity comes from the very document that defines it-- the United States Constitution.

There is plenty of evidence that Christianity had significant influence on the founding of America, including the creating of the Constitution. You seem to still be ignoring Christianity's contribution to America's founding.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Origins-American-Constitutionalism-Donald-Lutz/dp/0807115061/ref=pd_sim_b_1]Amazon.com: The Origins of American Constitutionalism (9780807115060): Donald S. Lutz: Books[/ame]

In The Origins of American Constitutionalism, Donald S. Lutz challenges the prevailing notion that the United States Constitution was either essentially inherited from the British or simply invented by the Federalists in the summer of 1787. His political theory of constitutionalism acknowledges the contributions of the British and the Federalists. Lutz also asserts, however, that the U.S. Constitution derives in form and content from a tradition of American colonial charters and documents of political foundation that began a century and a half prior to 1787. Lutz builds his argument around a close textual analysis of such documents as the Mayflower Compact, the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, the Rhode Island Charter of 1663, the first state constitutions, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation. He shows that American constitutionalism developed to a considerable degree from radical Protestant interpretations of the Judeo-Christian tradition that were first secularized into political compacts and then incorporated into constitutions and bills of rights. Over time, appropriations that enriched this tradition included aspects of English common law and English Whig theory. Lutz also looks at the influence of Montesquieu, Locke, Blackstone, and Hume. In addition, he details the importance of Americans' experiences and history to the political theory that produced the Constitution. By placing the Constitution within this broader constitutional system, Lutz demonstrates that the document is the culmination of a long process and must be understood within this context. His argument also offers a fresh view of current controversies over the Framers' intentions, the place of religion in American politics, and citizens' continuing role in the development of the constitutional tradition.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-Constitution-Faith-Founding-Fathers/dp/0801052319]Amazon.com: Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers (9780801052316): John Eidsmoe: Books[/ame]

John Eidsmoe rights the faulty historical record and correctly brings us back to the roots that made America great . . . clearly demonstrates that our constitutional liberties are a direct result of our founders' moral and religious convictions which were based on a belief in a God who created heaven and earth as well as on the fixed and unchanging absolutes of God's Word. Robert Skolrood, National Legal Foundation Legally accurate yet easy to understand . . . presents the truth about our founding fathers and their strong Christian roots that is missing from most textbooks and reference books written during the last fifty years. Every student of American history, ministers, and public speakers should read this book. . . . Tim LaHaye, Family Life Seminars Combines an interesting presentation with fine scholarship and a critical m message . . . should be read by anyone interested in the Constitution or Christianity. Wendell Bird, constitutional attorney Knowledge of our Christian heritage is an important weapon in the current fight for religious freedom in America. Eidsmoe has given us an entire arsenal of new and important evidence substantiating the Christian roots of our government. Mike Farris, Home School Legal Defense Association Balanced and lucid . . . clearly documents the pervasive Christian influence on the lives and thought of those who wrote our Constitution. I recommend it highly as a corrective to the almost totally secular portrayal of the Constitution found in so many textbooks today. Paul Vitz, author John Eidsmoe holds five degrees in law, theology, and political science. He currently serves as professor of constitutional law and related subjects at the Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, Faulkner University, Montgomery, Alabama, where he received the Outstanding Professor Award in 1993. A constitutional attorney and lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserve, he has also taught church history and other subjects in various seminaries and has produced a twelve-part video series titled The Institute on the Constitution. His other books include The Christian Legal Advisor, God and Caesar, and Columbus and Cortez.

__________________

And yet, even though most State Constitutions prominantly mentioned God, and had religious tests for office, the Federal Constitution deliberately did not.

 

[Sky Dancer]

So, you are saying that god is not in this nation anymore? Who chased him/her away? And if he/she can be chased away....what does that say about his/her powers?

So you think God Will force himself on you.

You want to force god on us, don't you? Maybe god/goddess is trying to tell YOU something.

Bingo.

 

[Sky Dancer]

See, Madalyn Murray O'Hair is exactly the kind of American protected by the Constitution. She was an atheist.

If it was up to you she wouldn't have been free to speak her mind in America.

She could have spoke her mind all she wanted no one is against free speech, it's her actions that caused Americas downfall.

What action of hers caused America's downfall?

She dared to speak out. She didn't know her place.