Agree or Disagree?

[BDBoop]

 

[Liability]

I agree in part. I think his treaty provision went too far when it said "in NO sense."

Given the First Amendment, I agree that it is not founded AS a Christian nation -- or as a Jewish Nation -- or as a Deist Nation -- or as a Muslim Nation -- etc. Freedom of Religion means that no one religion is dominant or favored.

On the other hand, there IS a sense in which the founding of the Republic was premised -- at least in part -- upon our Judeo-Christian roots.

 

[BDBoop]

I agree in part. I think his treaty provision went too far when it said "in NO sense."

Given the First Amendment, I agree that it is not founded AS a Christian nation -- or as a Jewish Nation -- or as a Deist Nation -- or as a Muslim Nation -- etc. Freedom of Religion means that no one religion is dominant or favored.

On the other hand, there IS a sense in which the founding of the Republic was premised -- at least in part -- upon our Judeo-Christian roots.

I can't wait to see how many people disagree with him. And why.

 

[The T]

Then the pronouncement as written in the Declaration, and then later codified in the Constitution means squat...

Keep digging BD Barf.

 

[Katzndogz]

It was not founded on the Christian religion, but that doesn't mean a default to no religion.

 

[BDBoop]

Be more specific, DrunkTard.

 

[BDBoop]

It was not founded on the Christian religion, but that doesn't mean a default to no religion.

Why doesn't it? Should we go on which branch has the most people? Which religion? Catholics?

What is the majority?

 

[BDBoop]

Love it! Standing at one for each right now. Better get out there and vote, fundies!

 

[Dick Tuck]

200 something years later, this would have sunk him:

“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.”–John Adams, letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816

 

[hjmick]

That particular clause in the treaty was meant to appease the Muslims with whom the treaty dealt. It was meant as an assurance to them that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced.

Now, I do agree that one of the primary concerns of the Founding Fathers was religious freedom, not the advancement of a state religion. I believe they felt that individuals, not the government, would define religious faith and practice in the United States.

So I guess my answer would be, based on your use of the Treaty of Tripoli to make the argument... I disagree.

But I also agree...

 

[BDBoop]

That particular clause in the treaty was meant to appease the Muslims with whom the treaty dealt. It was meant as an assurance to them that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced.

Now, I do agree that one of the primary concerns of the Founding Fathers was religious freedom, not the advancement of a state religion. I believe they felt that individuals, not the government, would define religious faith and practice in the United States.

So I guess my answer would be, based on your use of the Treaty of Tripoli to make the argument... I disagree.

But I also agree...

You deserve rep. You shall have it when I am topped off again.

 

[Katzndogz]

It was not founded on the Christian religion, but that doesn't mean a default to no religion.

Why doesn't it? Should we go on which branch has the most people? Which religion? Catholics?

What is the majority?

The founders did not found a nation of atheists. If they intended to do thatm they would have done so.

The Constitution was written for a moral and religious people. It is whollly inadequate to the government of any other.

John Adams.

We are talking about very thoughtful men. Had they intended the United States to be atheist, they would have undoubtably said so. Yet over and over the references are to God, Creator, Providence, and religion, not necessarily a Christian religion but one that shared Christian philosophy

 

[hortysir]

Our government is founded on separation from a government that had one particular religion determining it's decisions.
Why would such wise FFs model this government from that mold?

 

[Wry Catcher]

I agree in part. I think his treaty provision went too far when it said "in NO sense."

Given the First Amendment, I agree that it is not founded AS a Christian nation -- or as a Jewish Nation -- or as a Deist Nation -- or as a Muslim Nation -- etc. Freedom of Religion means that no one religion is dominant or favored.

On the other hand, there IS a sense in which the founding of the Republic was premised -- at least in part -- upon our Judeo-Christian roots.

What "sense" is that? I would hypothesize that the hoi polloi held a variety of beliefs though the founders - the intellectuals - were primarily Deists. Are there letters or other historical documents of the founders where Jesus Christ is discussed? The Torah? The Puritans were Christian and not unlike the Social Conservatives of today.

Of course the Puritans burned and drowned 'witches'; today's 'Puraitans' simply call them sluts and chose to deny them rights.

 

[Liability]

It was not founded on the Christian religion, but that doesn't mean a default to no religion.

Why doesn't it? Should we go on which branch has the most people? Which religion? Catholics?

What is the majority?

The founders did not found a nation of atheists. If they intended to do thatm they would have done so.

The Constitution was written for a moral and religious people. It is whollly inadequate to the government of any other.

John Adams.

We are talking about very thoughtful men. Had they intended the United States to be atheist, they would have undoubtably said so. Yet over and over the references are to God, Creator, Providence, and religion, not necessarily a Christian religion but one that shared Christian philosophy

Nice.

I dug up a fuller version of the Adams quote from (of all places) Wiki:

While our country remains untainted with the principles and manners which are now producing desolation in so many parts of the world; while she continues sincere, and incapable of insidious and impious policy, we shall have the strongest reason to rejoice in the local destination assigned us by Providence. But should the people of America once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another, and towards foreign nations, which assumes the language of justice and moderation, while it is practising iniquity and extravagance, and displays in the most captivating manner the charming pictures of candour, frankness, and sincerity, while it is rioting in rapine and insolence, this country will be the most miserable habitation in the world. Because we have no government, armed with power, capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Oaths in this country are as yet universally considered as sacred obligations. That which you have taken, and so solemnly repeated on that venerable ground, is an ample pledge of your sincerity and devotion to your country and its government.

Letter to the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts, 11 October 1798, in Revolutionary Services and Civil Life of General William Hull (New York, 1848), pp 265-6.

-- John Adams - Wikiquote

The "quote" in the OP is a derivation of a phrase in the Treaty which was later SIGNED by Adams. But it is not really a quote of Adams' words. And it is, in any case, plainly at odds with the quote which IS his in that letter to the First Brigade ....

 

[Liability]

I agree in part. I think his treaty provision went too far when it said "in NO sense."

Given the First Amendment, I agree that it is not founded AS a Christian nation -- or as a Jewish Nation -- or as a Deist Nation -- or as a Muslim Nation -- etc. Freedom of Religion means that no one religion is dominant or favored.

On the other hand, there IS a sense in which the founding of the Republic was premised -- at least in part -- upon our Judeo-Christian roots.

What "sense" is that? I would hypothesize that the hoi polloi held a variety of beliefs though the founders - the intellectuals - were primarily Deists. Are there letters or other historical documents of the founders where Jesus Christ is discussed? The Torah? The Puritans were Christian and not unlike the Social Conservatives of today.

Of course the Puritans burned and drowned 'witches'; today's 'Puraitans' simply call them sluts and chose to deny them rights.

The sense in which it is silly to claim that the very principles of religious freedom which were to PROTECT the ability of a religious people to practice religion somehow had nothing to do with our Founding.

I am also not sure you really know what a Deist is.

 

[blackhawk]

The government was not founded on any one religion that is why we have separation of church and state the nation was founded on christian principles in my opinion.

 

[Sherry]

Our government was not founded on any religion, but allowed for the freedom to openly worship and incorporate God into daily living as people chose.

 

[Katzndogz]

That particular clause in the treaty was meant to appease the Muslims with whom the treaty dealt. It was meant as an assurance to them that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced.

Now, I do agree that one of the primary concerns of the Founding Fathers was religious freedom, not the advancement of a state religion. I believe they felt that individuals, not the government, would define religious faith and practice in the United States.

So I guess my answer would be, based on your use of the Treaty of Tripoli to make the argument... I disagree.

But I also agree...

Muslims! Where! We did not have a treaty with muslims when the nation was founded. We didn't have that until the Treaty of Tripoli when Thomas Jefferson beat the crap out of the muslim pirates.

It was primarly because the overriding concern at the time was that the King was the head of the Church. Failing to believe that the King was God on Earth was not ony heresy but treason as well. We're moving toward that direction now with obama as head of some sort of secular state religion where he is the spiritual leader of the entire nation and cannot be criticized.

 

[peach174]

President Jefferson was against organized religion.
He approved of Jesus moral philosophy.
Our founders based our form of Government for the people having morals.
What are morals?
The ten commandments

If you don't believe in God that part can be ignored.
The rest are morals.
work for 6 days, rest for at least on 1 day
Do not cheat on anyone, wife or business partners
Do not lie
Tell the truth
Honor your parents
Do not steal
Don't be jealous of neighbors or anyone else.
Don't murder

Without these basic principles that has held us together as a nation our constitution does not work.
Nor does our businesses, our newspapers, media or our politicians.