America was founded as an enlightened multicultural Nation

[NotfooledbyW]

#101 reply to #98

You have zero examples of any deist culture in colonial America.

Out first four Presidents were rational theists not Christians. I thought you were in agreement with that. Rational Theism was rooted in the enlightenment philosophies of their time which included Deism.

What I’m saying is that rational theism and enlightenment principles in the minds of our founders produced the secular document called the Constitution. It was not a CHRISTIAN document in any way shape or form. It was not anti-Christian document either.

That is the valuable contribution from Deism that formed our founding culture.

That’s why it is improper to demand that we all must accept your erroneous notion that America was founded as a Christian Nation.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

#96 reply to #87

They believed that those rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God same as Christians.

Jefferson and many of the key founding fathers had little to no personal use for the duties and obligations of either one of the mainstream Christian churches, Protestant or Catholic.

How can you make such an absurd statement?

What are the duties and obligations to God if you are a Protestant Christian or Catholic?

Pleased be kind enough to tell me as a Christian what those essential duties and obligations are in your own words.

Church history throughout Europe was filled with bloodshed for centuries over duty and obligations to God and his Son as defined in the Holy Bible.

Jefferson cut the Bible up to rid it of political dung. His words not mine.

The rational theists who carried the most influence among all the founders made it their most important contribution to make sure Protestant Christian religious duties and obligations had no place in the national Constitution.

They went so far as to protect a minority of one’s right to disbelief in all your Christian duties and obligations. Because they themselves did not adhere to the duties and obligations of Christianity.

But you seem to be confused in that such a disbelief in duties and obligations of Christianity was not anti-Christian in the founders minds.

They sought to restrict the power that religious dogma had over the minds off its followers and that is what they accomplished by writing a secular Constitution and getting orthodox Christians to agree.

Deism and the Founding of the United States, Divining America, TeacherServe®, National Humanities Center​

“The natural religious language of the Declaration served as a neutral expression acceptable to all denominations rather than a deist creed precisely because a tradition of natural theology was shared by most Christians at the time. Deist phrases may thus have been a sort of theological lingua franca, and their use by the founders was ecumenical rather than anti-Christian. Such ecumenical striving sheds fresh light on the first amendment and the secular order it established. This secularism forbade the federal government from establishing a national church or interfering with church affairs in the states. However, it did not create a policy of official indifference, much less hostility toward organized religion. Congress hired chaplains, government buildings were used for divine services, and federal policies supported religion in general (ecumenically) as does our tax code to this day. The founding generation always assumed that religion would play a vital part in the political and moral life of the nation. Its ecumenical secularity insured that no particular faith would be excluded from that life, including disbelief itself.​

Yes including disbelief itself.

Disbelief is not fulfilling the duties and obligations of Christianity as far as I know.

I can make the statement that they believed rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God because it is true.

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3506&context=wlulr

Selected excerpts but read the whole thing....

"The philosophy of natural rights was championed by such Founding Fathers as Richard Bland, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, James Madison, George Mason, Robert Carter Nicholas, Peyton Randolph, George Washington, and George Wythe. Indeed, it would be amazing if any Revolutionary leader of the Commonwealth could be found who did not subscribe to the doctrines of natural law and right..."

"...In their most generalized expressions the Founding Fathers spoke of their natural rights to life and liberty, adding at times, property, and on other occasions, the pursuit of happiness. To some contemporaries the alternative use of property and the pursuit of happiness may seem strange, but to many of the Fathers property meant the right to develop one's properties, that is, his faculties. The particular natural rights on which there was the largest measure of agreement among the Virginians were (i) freedom of conscience, (2) freedom of communication, (3) the right to be free from arbitrary laws, (4) the rights of assembly and petition, (5) the property right, (6) the right of self-government, to which were frequently appended (a) the right of expatriation and (b) a right to change the form of government..."

"...The Virginia Founding Fathers were in substantial agreement that the ultimate source of our natural rights was our Creator. Men "are endowed by their Creator" with inherent and inalienable rights, said Thomas Jefferson in the memorable language of the Declaration of Independence.14 Earlier Jefferson had written in his Summary View that "the God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time."' 5 We have natural rights of the intellect, he indicated, "because Almighty God hath created the mind free . .. "16 Speaking of the natural right of expatriation, Jefferson said in the Summary View: "The evidence of this natural right, like that of our right to life, liberty, the use of our faculties, the pursuit of happiness, is not left to the feeble and sophistical investigations of reason, but is impressed on the sense of every man. We do not claim these under the charters of kings or legislators, but under the King of kings."' 7 In his Notes on Virginia, Jefferson wrote: "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?"18 Speaking there of our natural rights, he concluded: "We are answerable for them to our God."' 9..."

"...Later in life Jefferson wrote that we must follow "those moral rules which the Author of our being has implanted in man as the law of his nature to govern him in his associated, as well as individual character."21 That the natural rights of man came from God, in Jefferson's belief, was beyond doubt. His fellow Virginians were ready to join in asserting that our rights came from "the great Author of nature, '22 which assertion was simply sharing in such a view held by practically all of our Revolutionary leaders. Typically, John Adams wrote in his Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, "I say RIGHTS, for such they have, undoubtedly, antecedent to all earthly government,-Rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws-Rights, derived from the great Legislator of the universe."23..."

"...Thomas Jefferson and many of his contemporaries understood that the natural rights of man depended upon teleological considerations. So viewed, and accepting the premise that man's goal is being with his Creator for eternity, man has the duty to abide by His will and directions, because they are necessary to satisfy man's duties. Jefferson wrote that "the true office is to declare and enforce our natural rights and duties."24 The existence of natural duties and the relationship of rights to duties were quite apparent to Jefferson, and anyone who has studied the man should realize that the only natural duties Jefferson acknowledged were not to temporal kings, but to the Creator. James Madison was even more explicit that the source of rights exists in man's duty to his Creator. Writing of the unalienable right of religion in his Memorial and Remonstrance, he stated that the right is unalienable "because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homeage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to Him. His duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, who enters into any subordinate Association, must always do it with a reservation of his duty to the general authority; much more must every man who becomes a member of any particular Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign." 25 Another leading Virginian, George Mason, was equally clear in asserting that the obligation of man to his Maker was the source of natural rights. In 1772 he wrote: "Now all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right and justice, are, in our laws, and must be in the nature of things, considered as void. The laws of nature are the laws of God: A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to him from whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions which contradict His laws, we are in conscience bound to disobey. Such have been the adjudications of our courts of justice." 26 The imperative necessity of understanding ends and duties in order to delineate natural rights was appreciated not only by Messrs. Jefferson, Madison, and Mason, but also by Virginians generally in our formative period. The members of the Virginia convention that ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we owe to our Creator," that "all men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience." 27..."

All that and not one point that converts Jefferson or any of the others from being a rational theist and believer in natural law to a Christian which means obedience to Christian religious theology. For example a belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ.

There is no case establishing that Jefferson and the others founded a Christian Nation.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

#103 reply to #97

I can make the statement that they believed rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God because it is true.

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3506&context=wlulr

So you misspoke earlier when you said rational theists / Deists believe their duties and obligations to God are the same as Christians.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

#104 reply to #97.

The members of the Virginia convention that ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we owe to our Creator," that "all men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience." 27...

You are right, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that everyone in the United States has the right according to the dictates of their conscience to practice his or her own religion, or no religion at all.

Therefore in the Christian dominated culture in which the Constitution was written, every citizen was established to be free to practice Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism or most importantly no religion at all.

That is why there is no way you should ever say that America was founded as a Christian Nation unless you choose to ignore the Constitution of the United States of America.

How about America was founded as a freedom of conscience nation.

 

[BreezeWood]

#86 reply to #55

. I say that America was founded as a Christian nation because the evidence for this is overwhelming.

So far your evidence has been;

Tocqueville: your main witness was a French aristocrat who was not born until after the Constitution was written. A witness on America religion who said, “I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion -- for who can search the human heart? “”

Gregg L. Frazer; Your post #67 historian who “argues that the leading Founders (John Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism"“

Your Post #3 Where you admit that only half the states had state established religions which were based upon Christianity. Therefore denying any possibility that the states making up the ‘nation’ in 1790 couid in any way be defined honestly as a Christian nation.

C'mon man, my evidence is everything about the culture of colonial times, from the founding statements of the universities to the textbook that was used to educate their children to the overwhelming number of Christians who signed the founding documents to the churches that mobilized the masses to fight the British.

You claim multiculturalism but you have offered zero evidence of any actual culture.

It seems your only evidence of multiculturalism is that a few of the founding fathers were deists. So what? They believed in natural law same as the Christians. They believed that our rights were granted for no other reason than we are God's creatures same as Christians. They believed that those rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God same as Christians.

You have no evidence of a deist culture at all. Zero. Nada. Bubkis.

.

You claim multiculturalism but you have offered zero evidence of any actual culture ... It seems your only evidence of multiculturalism is that a few of the founding fathers were deists..

your proof is that of a degenerate and frivolous attempt to place your religion before that of the founding of this country for which the first line of its bill of rights stipulates a separation of church and state - the proof you refuse to recognize is simply that of a whining bigot.


e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

America’s ‘Melting Pot’ Immigrant Culture Made the Country Great, | National Review

The United States has always cherished its “melting pot” ethos of e pluribus unum — of blending diverse peoples into one through assimilation, integration, and intermarriage.

America is history’s exception. It began as a republic founded by European migrants. Like the homogenous citizens of most other nations, they were likely on a trajectory to incorporate racial sameness as the mark of citizenship. But the ultimate logic of America’s unique Constitution was different. So the United States steadily evolved to define Americans by their shared values, not by their superficial appearance. Eventually, anyone who was willing to give up his prior identity and assume a new American persona became American.

there is nothing for bing but bing for himself. the sad truth of their state of affairs.

Again... the establishment clause in the first amendment was written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

.

to place your religion before that of the founding of this country for which the first line of its bill of rights stipulates a separation of church and state -

Again... the establishment clause in the first amendment was written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

your quote is not referenced in what is written as the first line of the bill of rights for the first amendment to the u s constitution - your self appeasing interpretation no matter its source is erroneous to the given fact of the article itself. and is the law of the land.

- and with the 14th amendment sealed for all governments inside the united states the founding intent.


America was founded as an enlightened multicultural Nation

e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

you can ignore the thread title and believe it has something to do with your region but in fact the "melting pot" of america being the genesis of the country's motto is itself a refutation of your attempt to infuse religion where it does not belong.

 

[ding]

#86 reply to #55

. I say that America was founded as a Christian nation because the evidence for this is overwhelming.

So far your evidence has been;

Tocqueville: your main witness was a French aristocrat who was not born until after the Constitution was written. A witness on America religion who said, “I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion -- for who can search the human heart? “”

Gregg L. Frazer; Your post #67 historian who “argues that the leading Founders (John Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism"“

Your Post #3 Where you admit that only half the states had state established religions which were based upon Christianity. Therefore denying any possibility that the states making up the ‘nation’ in 1790 couid in any way be defined honestly as a Christian nation.

C'mon man, my evidence is everything about the culture of colonial times, from the founding statements of the universities to the textbook that was used to educate their children to the overwhelming number of Christians who signed the founding documents to the churches that mobilized the masses to fight the British.

You claim multiculturalism but you have offered zero evidence of any actual culture.

It seems your only evidence of multiculturalism is that a few of the founding fathers were deists. So what? They believed in natural law same as the Christians. They believed that our rights were granted for no other reason than we are God's creatures same as Christians. They believed that those rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God same as Christians.

You have no evidence of a deist culture at all. Zero. Nada. Bubkis.

.

You claim multiculturalism but you have offered zero evidence of any actual culture ... It seems your only evidence of multiculturalism is that a few of the founding fathers were deists..

your proof is that of a degenerate and frivolous attempt to place your religion before that of the founding of this country for which the first line of its bill of rights stipulates a separation of church and state - the proof you refuse to recognize is simply that of a whining bigot.


e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

America’s ‘Melting Pot’ Immigrant Culture Made the Country Great, | National Review

The United States has always cherished its “melting pot” ethos of e pluribus unum — of blending diverse peoples into one through assimilation, integration, and intermarriage.

America is history’s exception. It began as a republic founded by European migrants. Like the homogenous citizens of most other nations, they were likely on a trajectory to incorporate racial sameness as the mark of citizenship. But the ultimate logic of America’s unique Constitution was different. So the United States steadily evolved to define Americans by their shared values, not by their superficial appearance. Eventually, anyone who was willing to give up his prior identity and assume a new American persona became American.

there is nothing for bing but bing for himself. the sad truth of their state of affairs.

Again... the establishment clause in the first amendment was written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

.

to place your religion before that of the founding of this country for which the first line of its bill of rights stipulates a separation of church and state -

Again... the establishment clause in the first amendment was written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

your quote is not referenced in what is written as the first line of the bill of rights for the first amendment to the u s constitution - your self appeasing interpretation no matter its source is erroneous to the given fact of the article itself. and is the law of the land.

- and with the 14th amendment sealed for all governments inside the united states the founding intent.


America was founded as an enlightened multicultural Nation

e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

you can ignore the thread title and believe it has something to do with your region but in fact the "melting pot" of america being the genesis of the country's motto is itself a refutation of your attempt to infuse religion where it does not belong.

Again, half of the states had established religions which required an oath to hold positions of public office. The establishment clause of the 1st amendment did not apply to states. It applied to the federal government and prevented the federal government from interfering with state established religions. We know this be Hamilton’s first draft applied the establishment clause to the states and was rejected by the senate.

the 14th amendment did not and could not modify any other amendment because that violates the constitution. There is a process required by the constitution to repeal or change amendments. The court has no power to change or remove amendments.

furthermore we know the framers of the 14th never intended for that amendment to apply to the 1st amendment because the very same people who passed the 14th rejected the Blaine amendment which tried to include states in the establishment clause of the 1st amendment and were defeated in the senate.

lastly the only way to alter or remove an amendment must follow the process outlined in the constitution.

 

[ding]

#104 reply to #97.

The members of the Virginia convention that ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we owe to our Creator," that "all men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience." 27...

You are right, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that everyone in the United States has the right according to the dictates of their conscience to practice his or her own religion, or no religion at all.

Therefore in the Christian dominated culture in which the Constitution was written, every citizen was established to be free to practice Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism or most importantly no religion at all.

That is why there is no way you should ever say that America was founded as a Christian Nation unless you choose to ignore the Constitution of the United States of America.

How about America was founded as a freedom of conscience nation.

Christian dominated culture says it all.

that is this country’s heritage.

 

[ding]

#103 reply to #97

I can make the statement that they believed rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God because it is true.

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3506&context=wlulr

So you misspoke earlier when you said rational theists / Deists believe their duties and obligations to God are the same as Christians.

No, that’s you misstating what I wrote.

try quoting me accurately. There is actually a quote feature in the software which makes it easy to do.

 

[ding]

#96 reply to #87

They believed that those rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God same as Christians.

Jefferson and many of the key founding fathers had little to no personal use for the duties and obligations of either one of the mainstream Christian churches, Protestant or Catholic.

How can you make such an absurd statement?

What are the duties and obligations to God if you are a Protestant Christian or Catholic?

Pleased be kind enough to tell me as a Christian what those essential duties and obligations are in your own words.

Church history throughout Europe was filled with bloodshed for centuries over duty and obligations to God and his Son as defined in the Holy Bible.

Jefferson cut the Bible up to rid it of political dung. His words not mine.

The rational theists who carried the most influence among all the founders made it their most important contribution to make sure Protestant Christian religious duties and obligations had no place in the national Constitution.

They went so far as to protect a minority of one’s right to disbelief in all your Christian duties and obligations. Because they themselves did not adhere to the duties and obligations of Christianity.

But you seem to be confused in that such a disbelief in duties and obligations of Christianity was not anti-Christian in the founders minds.

They sought to restrict the power that religious dogma had over the minds off its followers and that is what they accomplished by writing a secular Constitution and getting orthodox Christians to agree.

Deism and the Founding of the United States, Divining America, TeacherServe®, National Humanities Center​

“The natural religious language of the Declaration served as a neutral expression acceptable to all denominations rather than a deist creed precisely because a tradition of natural theology was shared by most Christians at the time. Deist phrases may thus have been a sort of theological lingua franca, and their use by the founders was ecumenical rather than anti-Christian. Such ecumenical striving sheds fresh light on the first amendment and the secular order it established. This secularism forbade the federal government from establishing a national church or interfering with church affairs in the states. However, it did not create a policy of official indifference, much less hostility toward organized religion. Congress hired chaplains, government buildings were used for divine services, and federal policies supported religion in general (ecumenically) as does our tax code to this day. The founding generation always assumed that religion would play a vital part in the political and moral life of the nation. Its ecumenical secularity insured that no particular faith would be excluded from that life, including disbelief itself.​

Yes including disbelief itself.

Disbelief is not fulfilling the duties and obligations of Christianity as far as I know.

I can make the statement that they believed rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God because it is true.

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3506&context=wlulr

Selected excerpts but read the whole thing....

"The philosophy of natural rights was championed by such Founding Fathers as Richard Bland, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, James Madison, George Mason, Robert Carter Nicholas, Peyton Randolph, George Washington, and George Wythe. Indeed, it would be amazing if any Revolutionary leader of the Commonwealth could be found who did not subscribe to the doctrines of natural law and right..."

"...In their most generalized expressions the Founding Fathers spoke of their natural rights to life and liberty, adding at times, property, and on other occasions, the pursuit of happiness. To some contemporaries the alternative use of property and the pursuit of happiness may seem strange, but to many of the Fathers property meant the right to develop one's properties, that is, his faculties. The particular natural rights on which there was the largest measure of agreement among the Virginians were (i) freedom of conscience, (2) freedom of communication, (3) the right to be free from arbitrary laws, (4) the rights of assembly and petition, (5) the property right, (6) the right of self-government, to which were frequently appended (a) the right of expatriation and (b) a right to change the form of government..."

"...The Virginia Founding Fathers were in substantial agreement that the ultimate source of our natural rights was our Creator. Men "are endowed by their Creator" with inherent and inalienable rights, said Thomas Jefferson in the memorable language of the Declaration of Independence.14 Earlier Jefferson had written in his Summary View that "the God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time."' 5 We have natural rights of the intellect, he indicated, "because Almighty God hath created the mind free . .. "16 Speaking of the natural right of expatriation, Jefferson said in the Summary View: "The evidence of this natural right, like that of our right to life, liberty, the use of our faculties, the pursuit of happiness, is not left to the feeble and sophistical investigations of reason, but is impressed on the sense of every man. We do not claim these under the charters of kings or legislators, but under the King of kings."' 7 In his Notes on Virginia, Jefferson wrote: "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?"18 Speaking there of our natural rights, he concluded: "We are answerable for them to our God."' 9..."

"...Later in life Jefferson wrote that we must follow "those moral rules which the Author of our being has implanted in man as the law of his nature to govern him in his associated, as well as individual character."21 That the natural rights of man came from God, in Jefferson's belief, was beyond doubt. His fellow Virginians were ready to join in asserting that our rights came from "the great Author of nature, '22 which assertion was simply sharing in such a view held by practically all of our Revolutionary leaders. Typically, John Adams wrote in his Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, "I say RIGHTS, for such they have, undoubtedly, antecedent to all earthly government,-Rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws-Rights, derived from the great Legislator of the universe."23..."

"...Thomas Jefferson and many of his contemporaries understood that the natural rights of man depended upon teleological considerations. So viewed, and accepting the premise that man's goal is being with his Creator for eternity, man has the duty to abide by His will and directions, because they are necessary to satisfy man's duties. Jefferson wrote that "the true office is to declare and enforce our natural rights and duties."24 The existence of natural duties and the relationship of rights to duties were quite apparent to Jefferson, and anyone who has studied the man should realize that the only natural duties Jefferson acknowledged were not to temporal kings, but to the Creator. James Madison was even more explicit that the source of rights exists in man's duty to his Creator. Writing of the unalienable right of religion in his Memorial and Remonstrance, he stated that the right is unalienable "because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homeage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to Him. His duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, who enters into any subordinate Association, must always do it with a reservation of his duty to the general authority; much more must every man who becomes a member of any particular Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign." 25 Another leading Virginian, George Mason, was equally clear in asserting that the obligation of man to his Maker was the source of natural rights. In 1772 he wrote: "Now all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right and justice, are, in our laws, and must be in the nature of things, considered as void. The laws of nature are the laws of God: A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to him from whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions which contradict His laws, we are in conscience bound to disobey. Such have been the adjudications of our courts of justice." 26 The imperative necessity of understanding ends and duties in order to delineate natural rights was appreciated not only by Messrs. Jefferson, Madison, and Mason, but also by Virginians generally in our formative period. The members of the Virginia convention that ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we owe to our Creator," that "all men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience." 27..."

All that and not one point that converts Jefferson or any of the others from being a rational theist and believer in natural law to a Christian which means obedience to Christian religious theology. For example a belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ.

There is no case establishing that Jefferson and the others founded a Christian Nation.

What is it that you think Christian nation means exactly?

because I believe we are talking about two different things.

 

[ding]

#101 reply to #98

You have zero examples of any deist culture in colonial America.

Out first four Presidents were rational theists not Christians. I thought you were in agreement with that. Rational Theism was rooted in the enlightenment philosophies of their time which included Deism.

What I’m saying is that rational theism and enlightenment principles in the minds of our founders produced the secular document called the Constitution. It was not a CHRISTIAN document in any way shape or form. It was not anti-Christian document either.

That is the valuable contribution from Deism that formed our founding culture.

That’s why it is improper to demand that we all must accept your erroneous notion that America was founded as a Christian Nation.

Still not an example of multiculturalism within the society.

I believe by your standards you must believe that Saudi Arabia is a multicultural society, right?

Or China is a multicultural society too, right?

 

[ding]

So... it seems that the statement that the founding fathers believed our rights are contingent upon our obligations and duties to God is unchallenged.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

112# reply to #107

Christian dominated culture says it all.

that is this country’s heritage.

I have no problem if you feel the need to run around shouting about a Christian heritage because you inherited that tradition. It’s a tradition that now goes back 20 centuries. But when you go around screaming that AMERICA
WAS FOUNDED AS A CHRISTIAN NATION you leave reality behind. I inherited something much different than Christian Dogma from the founding. The First Amendment guaranteed that right to me. Even if I am the only one ever to use it.

 

[BreezeWood]

#86 reply to #55 So far your evidence has been;

Tocqueville: your main witness was a French aristocrat who was not born until after the Constitution was written. A witness on America religion who said, “I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion -- for who can search the human heart? “”

Gregg L. Frazer; Your post #67 historian who “argues that the leading Founders (John Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism"“

Your Post #3 Where you admit that only half the states had state established religions which were based upon Christianity. Therefore denying any possibility that the states making up the ‘nation’ in 1790 couid in any way be defined honestly as a Christian nation.

C'mon man, my evidence is everything about the culture of colonial times, from the founding statements of the universities to the textbook that was used to educate their children to the overwhelming number of Christians who signed the founding documents to the churches that mobilized the masses to fight the British.

You claim multiculturalism but you have offered zero evidence of any actual culture.

It seems your only evidence of multiculturalism is that a few of the founding fathers were deists. So what? They believed in natural law same as the Christians. They believed that our rights were granted for no other reason than we are God's creatures same as Christians. They believed that those rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God same as Christians.

You have no evidence of a deist culture at all. Zero. Nada. Bubkis.

.

You claim multiculturalism but you have offered zero evidence of any actual culture ... It seems your only evidence of multiculturalism is that a few of the founding fathers were deists..

your proof is that of a degenerate and frivolous attempt to place your religion before that of the founding of this country for which the first line of its bill of rights stipulates a separation of church and state - the proof you refuse to recognize is simply that of a whining bigot.


e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

America’s ‘Melting Pot’ Immigrant Culture Made the Country Great, | National Review

The United States has always cherished its “melting pot” ethos of e pluribus unum — of blending diverse peoples into one through assimilation, integration, and intermarriage.

America is history’s exception. It began as a republic founded by European migrants. Like the homogenous citizens of most other nations, they were likely on a trajectory to incorporate racial sameness as the mark of citizenship. But the ultimate logic of America’s unique Constitution was different. So the United States steadily evolved to define Americans by their shared values, not by their superficial appearance. Eventually, anyone who was willing to give up his prior identity and assume a new American persona became American.

there is nothing for bing but bing for himself. the sad truth of their state of affairs.

Again... the establishment clause in the first amendment was written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

.

to place your religion before that of the founding of this country for which the first line of its bill of rights stipulates a separation of church and state -

Again... the establishment clause in the first amendment was written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

your quote is not referenced in what is written as the first line of the bill of rights for the first amendment to the u s constitution - your self appeasing interpretation no matter its source is erroneous to the given fact of the article itself. and is the law of the land.

- and with the 14th amendment sealed for all governments inside the united states the founding intent.


America was founded as an enlightened multicultural Nation

e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

you can ignore the thread title and believe it has something to do with your region but in fact the "melting pot" of america being the genesis of the country's motto is itself a refutation of your attempt to infuse religion where it does not belong.

Again, half of the states had established religions which required an oath to hold positions of public office. The establishment clause of the 1st amendment did not apply to states. It applied to the federal government and prevented the federal government from interfering with state established religions. We know this be Hamilton’s first draft applied the establishment clause to the states and was rejected by the senate.

the 14th amendment did not and could not modify any other amendment because that violates the constitution. There is a process required by the constitution to repeal or change amendments. The court has no power to change or remove amendments.

furthermore we know the framers of the 14th never intended for that amendment to apply to the 1st amendment because the very same people who passed the 14th rejected the Blaine amendment which tried to include states in the establishment clause of the 1st amendment and were defeated in the senate.

lastly the only way to alter or remove an amendment must follow the process outlined in the constitution.

.

the 14th amendment did not and could not modify any other amendment because that violates the constitution.

you are running scared bing, the very purpose of the 14th amendment is to remove stste borders from the constitution ... cry all you want it is the law of the land.

It applied to the federal government and prevented the federal government from interfering with state established religions

no, that is not correct, the first line of the bill of rights does exactly what it states to prevent and separate the establishment of religion sponsored by the government and the 14th amendment makes it aplicable to all gov'ts of the united states.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

America was founded as an enlightened multicultural Nation

e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

you can ignore the thread title and believe it has something to do with your region but in fact the "melting pot" of america being the genesis of the country's motto is itself a refutation of your attempt to infuse religion where it does not belong.

e pluribus unum - the melding of multiculture into one - the founding of america.


christianity is a vial religion of distraught sinners - bing is a good example, ignoring the truth for their own ulterior and meritorious motives. the infusion of their religion onto society through govn't - the very opposite of the accomplishments written into the u s constitution.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Still not an example of multiculturalism within the society.

Your ‘because I say so’ argument isn’t worth much if worth anything at all.

i brought up Charles Pinckney. A very fine Christian example of multiculturalism at its finest. I have the utmost respect for Christian founders/framers who respected multiculturalism and the need for a secular Constitution.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

#115 reply to #111.

So... it seems that the statement that the founding fathers believed our rights are contingent upon our obligations and duties to God is unchallenged.

No. It’s been challenged that all the founding Fathers did not believe in the Christian God of the Bible’s duties and obligations. You’ve run from the ‘Christian’ part of that conversation.

 

[ding]

C'mon man, my evidence is everything about the culture of colonial times, from the founding statements of the universities to the textbook that was used to educate their children to the overwhelming number of Christians who signed the founding documents to the churches that mobilized the masses to fight the British.

You claim multiculturalism but you have offered zero evidence of any actual culture.

It seems your only evidence of multiculturalism is that a few of the founding fathers were deists. So what? They believed in natural law same as the Christians. They believed that our rights were granted for no other reason than we are God's creatures same as Christians. They believed that those rights are only granted to us as long as we meet our duties and obligations to God same as Christians.

You have no evidence of a deist culture at all. Zero. Nada. Bubkis.

.

You claim multiculturalism but you have offered zero evidence of any actual culture ... It seems your only evidence of multiculturalism is that a few of the founding fathers were deists..

your proof is that of a degenerate and frivolous attempt to place your religion before that of the founding of this country for which the first line of its bill of rights stipulates a separation of church and state - the proof you refuse to recognize is simply that of a whining bigot.


e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

America’s ‘Melting Pot’ Immigrant Culture Made the Country Great, | National Review

The United States has always cherished its “melting pot” ethos of e pluribus unum — of blending diverse peoples into one through assimilation, integration, and intermarriage.

America is history’s exception. It began as a republic founded by European migrants. Like the homogenous citizens of most other nations, they were likely on a trajectory to incorporate racial sameness as the mark of citizenship. But the ultimate logic of America’s unique Constitution was different. So the United States steadily evolved to define Americans by their shared values, not by their superficial appearance. Eventually, anyone who was willing to give up his prior identity and assume a new American persona became American.

there is nothing for bing but bing for himself. the sad truth of their state of affairs.

Again... the establishment clause in the first amendment was written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

.

to place your religion before that of the founding of this country for which the first line of its bill of rights stipulates a separation of church and state -

Again... the establishment clause in the first amendment was written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

your quote is not referenced in what is written as the first line of the bill of rights for the first amendment to the u s constitution - your self appeasing interpretation no matter its source is erroneous to the given fact of the article itself. and is the law of the land.

- and with the 14th amendment sealed for all governments inside the united states the founding intent.


America was founded as an enlightened multicultural Nation

e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

you can ignore the thread title and believe it has something to do with your region but in fact the "melting pot" of america being the genesis of the country's motto is itself a refutation of your attempt to infuse religion where it does not belong.

Again, half of the states had established religions which required an oath to hold positions of public office. The establishment clause of the 1st amendment did not apply to states. It applied to the federal government and prevented the federal government from interfering with state established religions. We know this be Hamilton’s first draft applied the establishment clause to the states and was rejected by the senate.

the 14th amendment did not and could not modify any other amendment because that violates the constitution. There is a process required by the constitution to repeal or change amendments. The court has no power to change or remove amendments.

furthermore we know the framers of the 14th never intended for that amendment to apply to the 1st amendment because the very same people who passed the 14th rejected the Blaine amendment which tried to include states in the establishment clause of the 1st amendment and were defeated in the senate.

lastly the only way to alter or remove an amendment must follow the process outlined in the constitution.

.

the 14th amendment did not and could not modify any other amendment because that violates the constitution.

you are running scared bing, the very purpose of the 14th amendment is to remove stste borders from the constitution ... cry all you want it is the law of the land.

It applied to the federal government and prevented the federal government from interfering with state established religions

no, that is not correct, the first line of the bill of rights does exactly what it states to prevent and separate the establishment of religion sponsored by the government and the 14th amendment makes it aplicable to all gov'ts of the united states.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

America was founded as an enlightened multicultural Nation

e pluribus unum - the motto of the united states

you can ignore the thread title and believe it has something to do with your region but in fact the "melting pot" of america being the genesis of the country's motto is itself a refutation of your attempt to infuse religion where it does not belong.

e pluribus unum - the melding of multiculture into one - the founding of america.


christianity is a vial religion of distraught sinners - bing is a good example, ignoring the truth for their own ulterior and meritorious motives. the infusion of their religion onto society through govn't - the very opposite of the accomplishments written into the u s constitution.

Clearly you have no clue why the 14th amendment was needed if you believe that.

 

[ding]

no, that is not correct, the first line of the bill of rights does exactly what it states to prevent and separate the establishment of religion sponsored by the government and the 14th amendment makes it aplicable to all gov'ts of the united states.

Wrong, learn some history.

 

[ding]

christianity is a vial religion of distraught sinners - bing is a good example, ignoring the truth for their own ulterior and meritorious motives. the infusion of their religion onto society through govn't - the very opposite of the accomplishments written into the u s constitution.

de Toquerville observed differently.

 

[ding]

112# reply to #107

Christian dominated culture says it all.

that is this country’s heritage.

I have no problem if you feel the need to run around shouting about a Christian heritage because you inherited that tradition. It’s a tradition that now goes back 20 centuries. But when you go around screaming that AMERICA
WAS FOUNDED AS A CHRISTIAN NATION you leave reality behind. I inherited something much different than Christian Dogma from the founding. The First Amendment guaranteed that right to me. Even if I am the only one ever to use it.

A people without a heritage are easily persuaded. Do you know who wrote that?

 

[ding]

Still not an example of multiculturalism within the society.

Your ‘because I say so’ argument isn’t worth much if worth anything at all.

i brought up Charles Pinckney. A very fine Christian example of multiculturalism at its finest. I have the utmost respect for Christian founders/framers who respected multiculturalism and the need for a secular Constitution.

We respect people, not multiculturalism. We respect people’s rights to practice their faith and traditions and to celebrate their heritages.

unlike your running buddy that you keep agreeing with.