The U.S. NOT founded upon Christianity

[AllieBaba]

I see you referenced Wiki after telling me to read a book...

So does Wiki come in book form now?

LOL! I love pseudo-intellectuals.

 

[Dr.Drock]

If all the founding fathers were christians I'd understand but they weren't, I wouldn't be able to say beyond a shadow of a doubt that people who aren't christian would label some of their principles as being christian in nature.

Again some of the founding fathers did what they did based on principles they'd deem as christian, others weren't and wouldn't deem them as christian. I dunno why that's offensive to some people to say that non-christians wouldn't label their principles as christian. Seems pretty basic to me.

Which of the founding fathers did not believe in God?

Still waiting on an answer Dr. Drock.

Dr. Drock

Didn't believe in God or weren't christians?

Let's keep the question relevant to the topic.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Which of the founding fathers did not believe in God?

Still waiting on an answer Dr. Drock.

Dr. Drock

Didn't believe in God or weren't christians?

Let's keep the question relevant to the topic.

The answer to my question would be none.

The truth is some were Deist, some were Calvanist but all read from the Holy Bible and oft times quoted from it. Now they had differing opinions on some scripture but it's no different than it is today between the variety of Christian faiths. Some Deist rejected the claim of Jesus' divinity but continued to hold him in high regard as a moral teacher one example Is Thomas Jefferson's Bible. And even though they were not typical Christians, they held to the same Christian principles.

 

[peach174]

The point is,that in order to remain a free nation and have civility in society,each and every citizen must
Think for yourself
Govern Yourself
Be responsible
Be accountable for your actions and word
take care of your neighbors
Have values and character
There will always be a minority who would never do this ,(criminals)
But these things must be taught to our young in order to have a civil society.
This is no longer being taught
Look at what is happening to our society.
Rioting in restaurants - people are no longer being responsible or accountable for their actions or words
Taking care of neighbors - is becoming like Hitlers regime where you turn your neighbors in (socialism) the only difference here is they are not being rounded up into camps and being killed - report to authority's that children do not have permits to sell lemonade or cookies this is just the top of many other types of turning your neighbor in to the authorities.
Have values and character - we have media ,news and internet publications that will not report true and accurate news.
Our 1st Amendment says the right of the people to assemble peacefully to petition the Government not riot in the streets and destroy things.
Without these teachings you must then have a government who takes over.
You have now lost your freedom when Government starts telling you what you can and cannot do.

Are these dictated thru our Constitution, laws, actions of our government? Are these things that are unique to our country?

Yes - what do you think it means in Amendment I for the right of the people to to petition the government peacefully, not riot, you get arrested for doing so.
What is unique about our country is that we have a government by the people, for the people. That God gave us unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
All though that is now become a government for the government, by the government, I believe that we the people will be able to correct it.

 

[Gadawg73]

"Independent"
Exactly
Independence from the religous stranglehold on government where they came from.

Exactly. They had SEEN what happens when countries were founded and run upon Christian tenets....(you see, the sticky wicket is WHOSE Christian tenets do you use?)...and they wisely decided to get away from that completely in the founding of our government. That doesn't mean they abandoned Christianity in their own lives....but they made our government Christian...religion...neutral. A very, very wise move.

You don't understand the language, do you?

They hadn't seen what happened when countries were founded upon Christian tenets. They had seen what happened when the state interfered with religion and worship.

Two different things.

Again, you don't seem to understand what "found" means.

"
To the end of his life, Jefferson was a firm believer in the natural rights of the individual. In his words, "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." One of the most significant expressions of that conviction was his authorship of Virginia's Statute for Religious Freedom, which he always considered one of his greatest accomplishments."
Spotlight Biography: Founding Fathers

"An Act for establishing religious Freedom.
Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free;
that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and therefore are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord, both of body and mind yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do,
that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time;
that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical;
that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the Ministry those temporary rewards, which, proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labours for the instruction of mankind;
that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry,
that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence, by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages, to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right,
that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that very Religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments those who will externally profess and conform to it;
that though indeed, these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way;
that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own;
that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order;
and finally, that Truth is great, and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them:
Be it enacted by General Assembly that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities. And though we well know that this Assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of Legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding Assemblies constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare that the rights hereby asserted, are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right. "

Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"They had seen what had happened when the state interfered with religion and worship"

You have it backwards once again Allie.
They had seen what happened WHEN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND RELIGION interfered with the governments.
So they FOUNDED this government and laws WITH NO CHRISTIAN OR RELIGOUS INTERFERENCE.
You know that is it. Why not just admit it. I believe you know 100% but are too stubborn to admit it.

 

[Gadawg73]

Still waiting on an answer Dr. Drock.

Dr. Drock

Didn't believe in God or weren't christians?

Let's keep the question relevant to the topic.

The answer to my question would be none.

The truth is some were Deist, some were Calvanist but all read from the Holy Bible and oft times quoted from it. Now they had differing opinions on some scripture but it's no different than it is today between the variety of Christian faiths. Some Deist rejected the claim of Jesus' divinity but continued to hold him in high regard as a moral teacher one example Is Thomas Jefferson's Bible. And even though they were not typical Christians, they held to the same Christian principles.

When have every Christian from all of the numuerous denominations ever held to the same Christian principles ever in this country?
The core strength of Christianity USED TO BE it's diversity. Especially the Baptists, Quakers and Friends movements. My relatives helped with the underground rail road and were anti slavery since the 1600s. Modern day conservative evangelicals have attempted to ruin that history of American Christianity, especially politically.

 

[AllieBaba]

Exactly. They had SEEN what happens when countries were founded and run upon Christian tenets....(you see, the sticky wicket is WHOSE Christian tenets do you use?)...and they wisely decided to get away from that completely in the founding of our government. That doesn't mean they abandoned Christianity in their own lives....but they made our government Christian...religion...neutral. A very, very wise move.

You don't understand the language, do you?

They hadn't seen what happened when countries were founded upon Christian tenets. They had seen what happened when the state interfered with religion and worship.

Two different things.

Again, you don't seem to understand what "found" means.

"
To the end of his life, Jefferson was a firm believer in the natural rights of the individual. In his words, "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." One of the most significant expressions of that conviction was his authorship of Virginia's Statute for Religious Freedom, which he always considered one of his greatest accomplishments."
Spotlight Biography: Founding Fathers

"An Act for establishing religious Freedom.
Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free;
that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and therefore are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord, both of body and mind yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do,
that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time;
that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical;
that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the Ministry those temporary rewards, which, proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labours for the instruction of mankind;
that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry,
that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence, by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages, to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right,
that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that very Religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments those who will externally profess and conform to it;
that though indeed, these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way;
that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own;
that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order;
and finally, that Truth is great, and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them:
Be it enacted by General Assembly that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities. And though we well know that this Assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of Legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding Assemblies constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare that the rights hereby asserted, are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right. "

Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"They had seen what had happened when the state interfered with religion and worship"

You have it backwards once again Allie.
They had seen what happened WHEN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND RELIGION interfered with the governments.
So they FOUNDED this government and laws WITH NO CHRISTIAN OR RELIGOUS INTERFERENCE.
You know that is it. Why not just admit it. I believe you know 100% but are too stubborn to admit it.

Er..no, when the government interfered with people's right to worship as they please.

 

[AllieBaba]

Didn't believe in God or weren't christians?

Let's keep the question relevant to the topic.

The answer to my question would be none.

The truth is some were Deist, some were Calvanist but all read from the Holy Bible and oft times quoted from it. Now they had differing opinions on some scripture but it's no different than it is today between the variety of Christian faiths. Some Deist rejected the claim of Jesus' divinity but continued to hold him in high regard as a moral teacher one example Is Thomas Jefferson's Bible. And even though they were not typical Christians, they held to the same Christian principles.

When have every Christian from all of the numuerous denominations ever held to the same Christian principles ever in this country?
The core strength of Christianity USED TO BE it's diversity. Especially the Baptists, Quakers and Friends movements. My relatives helped with the underground rail road and were anti slavery since the 1600s. Modern day conservative evangelicals have attempted to ruin that history of American Christianity, especially politically.

Actually, liberals are attempting to do what oppressive gov'ts have done throughout the ages...persecute people based on their faith.

It has now extended to pretending that our ff were lying when they stated, repeatedly, over and over and over, that they were founding a country upon pure Christian principle.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Didn't believe in God or weren't christians?

Let's keep the question relevant to the topic.

The answer to my question would be none.

The truth is some were Deist, some were Calvanist but all read from the Holy Bible and oft times quoted from it. Now they had differing opinions on some scripture but it's no different than it is today between the variety of Christian faiths. Some Deist rejected the claim of Jesus' divinity but continued to hold him in high regard as a moral teacher one example Is Thomas Jefferson's Bible. And even though they were not typical Christians, they held to the same Christian principles.

When have every Christian from all of the numuerous denominations ever held to the same Christian principles ever in this country?
The core strength of Christianity USED TO BE it's diversity. Especially the Baptists, Quakers and Friends movements. My relatives helped with the underground rail road and were anti slavery since the 1600s. Modern day conservative evangelicals have attempted to ruin that history of American Christianity, especially politically.

They all share the same basic principles. But they do have different intepretations of scripture as I've already stated.

Slavery? Another red herring.

 

[bodecea]

The answer to my question would be none.

The truth is some were Deist, some were Calvanist but all read from the Holy Bible and oft times quoted from it. Now they had differing opinions on some scripture but it's no different than it is today between the variety of Christian faiths. Some Deist rejected the claim of Jesus' divinity but continued to hold him in high regard as a moral teacher one example Is Thomas Jefferson's Bible. And even though they were not typical Christians, they held to the same Christian principles.

When have every Christian from all of the numuerous denominations ever held to the same Christian principles ever in this country?
The core strength of Christianity USED TO BE it's diversity. Especially the Baptists, Quakers and Friends movements. My relatives helped with the underground rail road and were anti slavery since the 1600s. Modern day conservative evangelicals have attempted to ruin that history of American Christianity, especially politically.

They all share the same basic principles. But they do have different intepretations of scripture as I've already stated.

Slavery? Another red herring.

Tell that to the slaves.

 

[AllieBaba]

That was patently stupid.

 

[Gadawg73]

You don't understand the language, do you?

They hadn't seen what happened when countries were founded upon Christian tenets. They had seen what happened when the state interfered with religion and worship.

Two different things.

Again, you don't seem to understand what "found" means.

"
To the end of his life, Jefferson was a firm believer in the natural rights of the individual. In his words, "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." One of the most significant expressions of that conviction was his authorship of Virginia's Statute for Religious Freedom, which he always considered one of his greatest accomplishments."
Spotlight Biography: Founding Fathers

"An Act for establishing religious Freedom.
Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free;
that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and therefore are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord, both of body and mind yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do,
that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time;
that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical;
that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the Ministry those temporary rewards, which, proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labours for the instruction of mankind;
that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry,
that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence, by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages, to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right,
that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that very Religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments those who will externally profess and conform to it;
that though indeed, these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way;
that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own;
that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order;
and finally, that Truth is great, and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them:
Be it enacted by General Assembly that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities. And though we well know that this Assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of Legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding Assemblies constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare that the rights hereby asserted, are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right. "

Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"They had seen what had happened when the state interfered with religion and worship"

You have it backwards once again Allie.
They had seen what happened WHEN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND RELIGION interfered with the governments.
So they FOUNDED this government and laws WITH NO CHRISTIAN OR RELIGOUS INTERFERENCE.
You know that is it. Why not just admit it. I believe you know 100% but are too stubborn to admit it.

Er..no, when the government interfered with people's right to worship as they please.

Are you claiming with a straight face Allie that every European government at the time this nation was founded was not run and influenced by the Christian church?
And this nation was not founded on the Law and not religous influence?
Allie, you do know that the "government that interfered with people's right to worship as they please" WAS THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH!
Allie, the Church of England WAS THE AUTHORITY THAT INTERFERED WITH PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO WORSHI[P AS THEY PLEASE.
All European governments at the time this nation was founded were run by the church.
We were the first not to allow that.
Weren't the Founders smart? They founded this nation with no interference from the church.

 

[AllieBaba]

No, I'm telling you straight up that is what the founding fathers were motivated. THEY TOLD US SO.

Are you telling me you know what they were REALLY motivated by, and are you saying they were liars?

This is willful ignorance. The facts are there, we have it in their own hands. In multiple records, from their own hands. This isn't just a thought that entered in and out, this is the PRIMARY motivation they had when creating the US...to apply Christian values and create a country that values and protects liberty.

 

[bodecea]

Exactly. They had SEEN what happens when countries were founded and run upon Christian tenets....(you see, the sticky wicket is WHOSE Christian tenets do you use?)...and they wisely decided to get away from that completely in the founding of our government. That doesn't mean they abandoned Christianity in their own lives....but they made our government Christian...religion...neutral. A very, very wise move.

You don't understand the language, do you?

They hadn't seen what happened when countries were founded upon Christian tenets. They had seen what happened when the state interfered with religion and worship.

Two different things.

Again, you don't seem to understand what "found" means.

"
To the end of his life, Jefferson was a firm believer in the natural rights of the individual. In his words, "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." One of the most significant expressions of that conviction was his authorship of Virginia's Statute for Religious Freedom, which he always considered one of his greatest accomplishments."
Spotlight Biography: Founding Fathers

"An Act for establishing religious Freedom.
Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free;
that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and therefore are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord, both of body and mind yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do,
that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time;
that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical;
that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the Ministry those temporary rewards, which, proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labours for the instruction of mankind;
that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry,
that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence, by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages, to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right,
that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that very Religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments those who will externally profess and conform to it;
that though indeed, these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way;
that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own;
that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order;
and finally, that Truth is great, and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them:
Be it enacted by General Assembly that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities. And though we well know that this Assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of Legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding Assemblies constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare that the rights hereby asserted, are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right. "

Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"They had seen what had happened when the state interfered with religion and worship"

You have it backwards once again Allie.
They had seen what happened WHEN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND RELIGION interfered with the governments.
So they FOUNDED this government and laws WITH NO CHRISTIAN OR RELIGOUS INTERFERENCE.
You know that is it. Why not just admit it. I believe you know 100% but are too stubborn to admit it.

Allie does not have it backwards. Look to England, our Mother Country, and what the State (Henry VIII, then Mary, then Elizabeth, then James, then Charles, then Oliver Cromwell, then Charles II, then James II...finally the Glorious Revolution) did to the people and their religion.

Our Founders saw that mess quite clearly and wanted no part of it.

The Government was created with NO Christian interference....but that is a two edged sword.....it was also clearly created so that religion had no government interference. It was indeed a WALL between the two. You cannot have Christian principles founding a country if there is a wall. Christian principles include spreading the Faith, sharing the Word.....not seeing that in our government, are we?


Note: Even tho I have defended Allie's point, I still expect my daily neg rep. It's a few hours late already...getting worried.

 

[Spoonman]

ok, the original settlers came to this country so they could practice their religion freely. of course religion had a lot to do with the laws and regulations that were to guid this country.

 

[bodecea]

ok, the original settlers came to this country so they could practice their religion freely. of course religion had a lot to do with the laws and regulations that were to guid this country.

Some did...not all....not even the majority. And those that did often did so in order to set up their own religious tyranny.

 

[AllieBaba]

Whether or not that's true, it has nothing to do with the principles upon which our country was founded and established.

"

The history of America is an awesome drama. Our nation is no accident. For hundreds of years, the dream of liberty was carried across European history to be birthed on these shores, and biblical truth, biblical thinking, played a pivotal role in the birthing of America.
But was America founded on Christian principles? Just read the first words of the Declaration of Independence:
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.
From the beginning, America's founders accepted the reality that basic rights were inseparable from human beings and they recognized that those inalienable rights were not given by government nor acquired by force, but that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are the gifts of the Creator.
In 1844, the Court said, "Christianity is part of our common law."
In 1892, the Supreme Court said this: "No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national because this is a religious people. This is historically true."
In 1930, the U.S. Supreme Court said this: "We are a Christian people, according to our motto."
In 1952, the U.S. Supreme Court said, "We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. The question isn't - Was America founded on Christian principles? The question is - what world view has given birth to and sustained America? The answer to that question is simple: Christianity. "
Rediscovering American History - The American Policy Roundtable

 

[AllieBaba]

"

[SIZE=-1]Recently, many authors have debated whether or not the United States of America was founded as a Christian nation. I wish to provide a few historical quotes from our Founding Era that lend credence to the supposition that we indeed were founded as a Christian nation.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Granted, God is not mentioned in the Constitution, but He is mentioned in every major document leading up to the final wording of the Constitution. For example, Connecticut is still known as the "Constitution State" because its colonial constitution was used as a model for the United States Constitution. Its first words were: "For as much as it has pleased the almighty God by the wise disposition of His Divine Providence…"[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Most of the fifty-five Founding Fathers who worked on the Constitution were members of orthodox Christian churches and many were even evangelical Christians. The first official act in the First Continental Congress was to open in Christian prayer, which ended in these words: "...the merits of Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Savior. Amen". Sounds Christian to me.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Ben Franklin, at the Constitutional Convention, said: "...God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]John Adams stated so eloquently during this period of time that; "The general principles on which the fathers achieved Independence were ... the general principles of Christianity ... I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that the general principles of Christianity are as etemal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Later, John Quincy Adams answered the question as to why, next to Christmas, was the Fourth of July this most joyous and venerated day in the United States. He answered: "...Isit 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?" Sounds like the founding of a Christian nation to me. John Quincy Adams went on to say that the biggest victory won in the American Revolution was that Christian principles and civil government would be tied together In what he called an "indissoluble" bond. The Founding Fathers understood that religion was inextricably part of our nation and government. The practice of the Christian religion in our government was not only welcomed but encouraged.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]The intent of the First Amendment was well understood during the founding of our country. The First Amendment was not to keep religion out of government. It was to keep Government from establishing a 'National Denomination" (like the Church of England). As early as 1799 a court declared: "By our form of government the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed on the same equal footing." Even in the letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Baptists of Danbury Connecticut (from which we derive the term "separation of Church and State") he made it quite clear that the wall of separation was to insure that Government would never interfere with religious activities because religious freedom came from God, not from Government.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Even George Washington who certainly knew the intent of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, since he presided over their formation, said in his "Farewell Address": "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars." Sure doesn't sound like Washington was trying to separate religion and politics.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, and one of the three men most responsible for the writing of the Constitution declared:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is their duty-as well as privilege and interest- of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." Still sounds like the Founding Fathers knew this was a Christian nation.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]This view, that we were a Christian nation, was hold for almost 150 years until the Everson v. Board of Education ruling in 1947. Before that momentous ruling, even the Supreme Court knew that we were a Christian nation. In 1892 the Court stated:[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]"No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national, because this is a religious people...This is a Christian nation." There it is again! From the Supreme Court of the United States. This court went on to cite 87 precedents (prior actions, words, and rulings) to conclude that this was a "Christian nation".[/SIZE]
Was the USA Founded as a Christian Nation?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

When have every Christian from all of the numuerous denominations ever held to the same Christian principles ever in this country?
The core strength of Christianity USED TO BE it's diversity. Especially the Baptists, Quakers and Friends movements. My relatives helped with the underground rail road and were anti slavery since the 1600s. Modern day conservative evangelicals have attempted to ruin that history of American Christianity, especially politically.

They all share the same basic principles. But they do have different intepretations of scripture as I've already stated.

Slavery? Another red herring.

Tell that to the slaves.

What slaves?

 

[Foxfyre]

ok, the original settlers came to this country so they could practice their religion freely. of course religion had a lot to do with the laws and regulations that were to guid this country.

Everybody seems to want to fight and can't see that most are arguing the same points, just stating them differently.

The original settlers did not have entirely pure motives. They wanted to be able to establish THEIR religion here without persecution from the Church of England and they did establish their own little theocracy being no more tolerant of other beliefs than was the Monarchy they left.

The Founders wanted no monarchy and no theocracy. They envisioned a nation in which the people would have their rights recognized, protected, and defended and then be free to govern themselves free of tyranny of dictator, monarch, feudal lord, totalitarianism, or authoritarian church. Our Constitution was brilliant in accomplishing that.

But if people are to be free, they must be free to have the sort of society they wish short of violating the unalienable rights of others. Therefore the Puritan and other little theocracies that existed at the time were allowed to exist because the people wanted them. That was the kind of society they wanted. And once the people came to realize that the theocracy was not the kind of society they wanted, they were just as free to dissolve them. Which they did within a single generation.

The Constitution, that gave such religious freedom to the Puritans, prohibited the Puritans from insisting that the Quakers or Roman Catholics or Calvinists in other colonies adopt Puritan rules and convictions.

It has been interesting to watch a people allowed to govern themselves to produce the most free, most innovative, most inventive, most productive, most prosperous nation the world had ever known.

We are now piece by piece chipping away at the foundations of that Constitutional principle to our detriment. I think too few Americans even understand it any more. And to me that is tragic.