Court upholds 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance

[bodecea]

I don't see 'the Enlightenment' in the vast majority of the writings and arguments of the Founders. I know Atheists and Agnostics are fond of characterizing most of the Founders as Deists; i.e. children of the Enlightenment, but that simply doesn't hold up under honest scrutiny. The Enlightenment, like all Humanist trends/thought, puts the power in the hands of humans to be directed by human logic and reason.

The Founders, while assigning unalienable rights to the individual, and while placing responsibility to act and consequences for acting wrongly on the individual, were also almost uniformly agreed that those rights were from the Creator and only by the power of that Creator will a religiously faithful and moral people be able to act rightly. In other words, the Constitution would work for no other.

That was quite different from humanist doctrines/the Enlightenment.

What the Enlightenment did accomplish was to break the prescribed molds and promoted freedom of thought and conviction free of consequences of threats of hell, excommunication, the Inquisition, etc.

And the Founders did incorporate that into their conviction to no longer allow the Church of England or any other religious entity have power to restrict the people's freedom of thought or any other freedoms against their will.

I agree with some of what you are saying but the while the founders did have a general consensus on morality, that consensus lay with competing authorities. Some believed it lay with religion, others considered the possibility of a secular moral authority.Their positions were complex and hardly unified. Because they did not agree on the foundations of morality they defined it in both religious and secular terms. I think that the fact that they entertained such thought indicates the influence of the Enlightenment.

I don't know if "most" of the Founders were Deists, but a significant number were, with more showing signs they may have been at least thinking in that direction.

I always found it interesting that they referred to "their Creator"...not God.

No, they seldom referred to God as 'the Creator'. They sometimes did so in official documents to reflect that we would not be a theocracy in America, but rather a place where people would be free to follow their own beliefs and convictions and where people would be allowed liberty by whatever name they called or referred to their God. The 'Enlightenment' ushered in a new interest in the classics and resurgence of the original 'enlightenment' in ancient Greek thought, and provided the trigger for the Reformation and a concept of humanism, and while it affected their overall culture, it was not where the Founders were at the time they created this great nation.

However much they included the necessity and importance of religious tolerance in the law of the land, you will find very few, if any, Deists in the group, They were pretty much of one accord that if America should ever abandon its Christian values and roots, the great experiment would then fail.

The First Charter of Virginia (granted by King James I, on April 10, 1606)
• We, greatly commending, and graciously accepting of, their Desires for the Furtherance of so noble a Work, which may, by the Providence of Almighty God, hereafter tend to the Glory of his Divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian Religion to such People, as yet live in Darkness and miserable Ignorance of the true Knowledge and Worship of God…

Not there for the writing of the Constitution.

William Bradford• wrote that they [the Pilgrims] were seeking:
2) “The great hope, and for the propagating and advancing the gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world

Not there for the writing of the Constitution.

John Adams and John Hancock:
"We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!" [April 18, 1775]

Neither there for the writing of the Constitution.

John Adams:“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.”

Not there for the writing of the Constitution.

Samuel Adams: “He who made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to all… Our forefathers opened the Bible to all.” [ "American Independence," August 1, 1776. Speech delivered at the State House in Philadelphia]

Not there for the writing of the Constitution.

John Quincy Adams:• “Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?"

Not there for the writing of the Constitution....and are you sure you want to add this one? Sounds like he is comparing the Fourth of July with a religion...on equal footing. Besides, didn't he also state in the Treaty of Tripoli that the U.S. was not founded on Christianity?

Elias Boudinot: “ Be religiously careful in our choice of all public officers . . . and judge of the tree by its fruits.”

Isn't his statement against the Constitution, Article VI which states "but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification of any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Benjamin Franklin: “ God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?

An avowed Deist.

Alexander Hamilton: “"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." [1787 after the Constitutional Convention]

One...and a bit of a Monarchist too.

Patrick Henry: “It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.” [May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses]

Refused to attend the Constitutional Convention. Said he "smelt a rat" and fought against the Constitution as a prominent Anti-Federalist.

John Jay: “ Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” Source: October 12, 1816.

Wasn't at Constitutional Convention and I guess he didn't read that pesky Article Vi either.

Thomas Jefferson: “The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”

Wasn't at Constitutional Convention and what about his Danbury letter about the wall between church and state?

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. 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 a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

James Madison: “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

OK, let's go with this quote tho there is some question as to whether Madison really said that or not. IS our government based on the 10 Commandments? Well, how many are incorporated into our law system? Can you answer that one for us? Is it all 10? 9? 8? 7? 6? only 50%? How many? (And which of the 3 versions of the 10 commandments was Madison referring to?)

And we could go on and on and on with the quotations that almost all wrote into their speeches, letters, written treatises, etc. etc. etc.

Speeches, quotes, etc. by people mean nothing when it comes to LAW. It is what the Constitution says. Surely you can see that? OR are you just into far religious right talking points?

 

[Coyote]

I don't see 'the Enlightenment' in the vast majority of the writings and arguments of the Founders. I know Atheists and Agnostics are fond of characterizing most of the Founders as Deists; i.e. children of the Enlightenment, but that simply doesn't hold up under honest scrutiny. The Enlightenment, like all Humanist trends/thought, puts the power in the hands of humans to be directed by human logic and reason.

The Founders, while assigning unalienable rights to the individual, and while placing responsibility to act and consequences for acting wrongly on the individual, were also almost uniformly agreed that those rights were from the Creator and only by the power of that Creator will a religiously faithful and moral people be able to act rightly. In other words, the Constitution would work for no other.

That was quite different from humanist doctrines/the Enlightenment.

What the Enlightenment did accomplish was to break the prescribed molds and promoted freedom of thought and conviction free of consequences of threats of hell, excommunication, the Inquisition, etc.

And the Founders did incorporate that into their conviction to no longer allow the Church of England or any other religious entity have power to restrict the people's freedom of thought or any other freedoms against their will.

I agree with some of what you are saying but the while the founders did have a general consensus on morality, that consensus lay with competing authorities. Some believed it lay with religion, others considered the possibility of a secular moral authority.Their positions were complex and hardly unified. Because they did not agree on the foundations of morality they defined it in both religious and secular terms. I think that the fact that they entertained such thought indicates the influence of the Enlightenment.

I don't know if "most" of the Founders were Deists, but a significant number were, with more showing signs they may have been at least thinking in that direction.

I always found it interesting that they referred to "their Creator"...not God.

No, they seldom referred to God as 'the Creator'. They sometimes did so in official documents to reflect that we would not be a theocracy in America, but rather a place where people would be free to follow their own beliefs and convictions and where people would be allowed liberty by whatever name they called or referred to their God. The 'Enlightenment' ushered in a new interest in the classics and resurgence of the original 'enlightenment' in ancient Greek thought, and provided the trigger for the Reformation and a concept of humanism, and while it affected their overall culture, it was not where the Founders were at the time they created this great nation.

However much they included the necessity and importance of religious tolerance in the law of the land, you will find very few, if any, Deists in the group, They were pretty much of one accord that if America should ever abandon its Christian values and roots, the great experiment would then fail.

The First Charter of Virginia (granted by King James I, on April 10, 1606)
• We, greatly commending, and graciously accepting of, their Desires for the Furtherance of so noble a Work, which may, by the Providence of Almighty God, hereafter tend to the Glory of his Divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian Religion to such People, as yet live in Darkness and miserable Ignorance of the true Knowledge and Worship of God…

William Bradford• wrote that they [the Pilgrims] were seeking:
2) “The great hope, and for the propagating and advancing the gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world

John Adams and John Hancock:
"We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!" [April 18, 1775]

John Adams:“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.”

Samuel Adams: “He who made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to all… Our forefathers opened the Bible to all.” [ "American Independence," August 1, 1776. Speech delivered at the State House in Philadelphia]

John Quincy Adams:• “Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?"

Elias Boudinot: “ Be religiously careful in our choice of all public officers . . . and judge of the tree by its fruits.”

Benjamin Franklin: “ God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?

Alexander Hamilton: “"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." [1787 after the Constitutional Convention]

Patrick Henry: “It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.” [May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses]

John Jay: “ Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” Source: October 12, 1816.

Thomas Jefferson: “The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. 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 a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

James Madison: “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

And we could go on and on and on with the quotations that almost all wrote into their speeches, letters, written treatises, etc. etc. etc.

I am very skeptical of quotes without context, particularly when they include "..." to indicate missing parts. I can do a simple search of quotes of the founders and come up with a selection indicating the opposite:
Founding Father Quotes on Religion

I suspect their views were complex - more so than many give them credit for.

You say: The 'Enlightenment' ushered in a new interest in the classics and resurgence of the original 'enlightenment' in ancient Greek thought, and provided the trigger for the Reformation and a concept of humanism, and while it affected their overall culture, it was not where the Founders were at the time they created this great nation.

I would disagree with you there, because they looked at the ancient Greeks and Romans as some of a number of sources that led to the system of government they finally put together (Polybius for example). The primary concept of the Declaration of Independence is based on the John Locke's philosophy that outlined man’s fundamental rights to life, liberty and property.

 

[Foxfyre]

Speeches, quotes, etc. by people mean nothing when it comes to LAW. It is what the Constitution says. Surely you can see that? OR are you just into far religious right talking points?

You will find every name I listed also listed among the "Founders" of this nation. The very freedoms that they, to a man, agreed came from God, were incorporated into the law of the land that became our U.S. Constitution. Those freedoms allow you to say that the Founders' convictions had nothing to do with the Law or why the Constitution was written as it was.

But if you say that, you will be wrong no matter how much you try to discredit the Founders or the intent of the Constitution.

 

[Coyote]

Speeches, quotes, etc. by people mean nothing when it comes to LAW. It is what the Constitution says. Surely you can see that? OR are you just into far religious right talking points?

You will find every name I listed also listed among the "Founders" of this nation. The very freedoms that they, to a man, agreed came from God, were incorporated into the law of the land that became our U.S. Constitution. Those freedoms allow you to say that the Founders' convictions had nothing to do with the Law or why the Constitution was written as it was.

But if you say that, you will be wrong no matter how much you try to discredit the Founders or the intent of the Constitution.

Pointing out that they were not all in agreement with regards to God - and they weren't, or that some were Deists or humanists is not "discrediting" them - why would you say that?

 

[Foxfyre]

Speeches, quotes, etc. by people mean nothing when it comes to LAW. It is what the Constitution says. Surely you can see that? OR are you just into far religious right talking points?

You will find every name I listed also listed among the "Founders" of this nation. The very freedoms that they, to a man, agreed came from God, were incorporated into the law of the land that became our U.S. Constitution. Those freedoms allow you to say that the Founders' convictions had nothing to do with the Law or why the Constitution was written as it was.

But if you say that, you will be wrong no matter how much you try to discredit the Founders or the intent of the Constitution.

Pointing out that they were not all in agreement with regards to God - and they weren't, or that some were Deists or humanists is not "discrediting" them - why would you say that?

No they were not all in agreement about God, but they were almost to a man in agreement that our unalienable rights come from God. And they were almost to a man in agreement that only a people who understand that would be able to defend and protect a Constitution based on that principle.

My object in the quotations I posted--and I could have posted a lot more--was to illustrate that they were not Deists. A Deist accepts the concept of a Creator God, but does not believe that Creator God then has much hands on involvement in its Creation. Certainly it would not be a Deist concept that such a distant God would have given humankind unalienable rights that are not to be violated.

You seem to have been taught that the Founders were mostly Deists, but in my opinion you are wrong about that.

Bodecea seems to want to believe that most were not even Founders and/or the letters and debates and concepts that they argued out among themselves had no part in our Constitution. She would be wrong about that too.

 

[Coyote]

You will find every name I listed also listed among the "Founders" of this nation. The very freedoms that they, to a man, agreed came from God, were incorporated into the law of the land that became our U.S. Constitution. Those freedoms allow you to say that the Founders' convictions had nothing to do with the Law or why the Constitution was written as it was.

But if you say that, you will be wrong no matter how much you try to discredit the Founders or the intent of the Constitution.

Pointing out that they were not all in agreement with regards to God - and they weren't, or that some were Deists or humanists is not "discrediting" them - why would you say that?

No they were not all in agreement about God, but they were almost to a man in agreement that our unalienable rights come from God. And they were almost to a man in agreement that only a people who understand that would be able to defend and protect a Constitution based on that principle.

Yes, I agree with that but they did not reference a specific God - the idea that those rights came from a Creator or God was because no human agency could remove them - no government or king or human religious authority. They did not mean that a people had to be religious or Christian to defend the constitution.

My object in the quotations I posted--and I could have posted a lot more--was to illustrate that they were not Deists. A Deist accepts the concept of a Creator God, but does not believe that Creator God then has much hands on involvement in its Creation. Certainly it would not be a Deist concept that such a distant God would have given humankind unalienable rights that are not to be violated.

But quotations alone don't show anything if you don't have the surrounding context and I have found quotations (also without context) that contradict yours. So which is true?

There is nothing at all in the Bible that implies those rights, in fact obedience to God and to secular authority is emphasized over and over. There is nothing in the description of Deism to indicate that along with creating the universe, and the natural laws - that God would not also include inherent rights as part of those natural laws. That doesn't require a diety that micromanages.

Deism: a religious and

philosophical belief that a supreme being created the universe, and that this (and religious truth in general) can be determined using reason and observation of the natural world alone, without the need for either faith or organized religion. Deists tend to, but do not necessarily, reject the notion that God intervenes in human affairs, for example through miracles and revelations....

Deists typically reject most supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and tend to assert that God (or "The Supreme Architect") has a plan for the universe that is not altered either by God intervening in the affairs of human life or by suspending the natural laws of the universe. What organized religions see as divine revelation and holy books, most deists see as interpretations made by other humans, rather than as authoritative sources​

.

You seem to have been taught that the Founders were mostly Deists, but in my opinion you are wrong about that.

We each have our different opinions

Bodecea seems to want to believe that most were not even Founders and/or the letters and debates and concepts that they argued out among themselves had no part in our Constitution. She would be wrong about that too.

I'm not sure what you are saying....

 

[saveliberty]

In the 1770's, the Founders weren't confused on which God they meant.

 

[Foxfyre]

In the 1770's, the Founders weren't confused on which God they meant.

No, they weren't. And no Deist would proclaim Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior which most of the Founders did and no Deist would consider the Bible a holy book which most of the Founders did.

 

[bodecea]

Speeches, quotes, etc. by people mean nothing when it comes to LAW. It is what the Constitution says. Surely you can see that? OR are you just into far religious right talking points?

You will find every name I listed also listed among the "Founders" of this nation. The very freedoms that they, to a man, agreed came from God, were incorporated into the law of the land that became our U.S. Constitution. Those freedoms allow you to say that the Founders' convictions had nothing to do with the Law or why the Constitution was written as it was.

But if you say that, you will be wrong no matter how much you try to discredit the Founders or the intent of the Constitution.

Founders...so what. It is the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land that counts. Many of our Founders were slave holders too. Do you want to hold that up as a founding principle we should continue to follow too? Using your logic...if you were consistant, you would answer "yes" to that.

 

[bodecea]

You will find every name I listed also listed among the "Founders" of this nation. The very freedoms that they, to a man, agreed came from God, were incorporated into the law of the land that became our U.S. Constitution. Those freedoms allow you to say that the Founders' convictions had nothing to do with the Law or why the Constitution was written as it was.

But if you say that, you will be wrong no matter how much you try to discredit the Founders or the intent of the Constitution.

Pointing out that they were not all in agreement with regards to God - and they weren't, or that some were Deists or humanists is not "discrediting" them - why would you say that?

No they were not all in agreement about God, but they were almost to a man in agreement that our unalienable rights come from God. And they were almost to a man in agreement that only a people who understand that would be able to defend and protect a Constitution based on that principle.

My object in the quotations I posted--and I could have posted a lot more--was to illustrate that they were not Deists. A Deist accepts the concept of a Creator God, but does not believe that Creator God then has much hands on involvement in its Creation. Certainly it would not be a Deist concept that such a distant God would have given humankind unalienable rights that are not to be violated.

You seem to have been taught that the Founders were mostly Deists, but in my opinion you are wrong about that.

Bodecea seems to want to believe that most were not even Founders and/or the letters and debates and concepts that they argued out among themselves had no part in our Constitution. She would be wrong about that too.

They said "Nature" and "Creator" and you seem to be all about misrepresenting people and what they have said...you are even doing it to me...but unfortunately for you, others can see what I wrote also and it's not quite so easy for you to misrepresent me successfully.

 

[Coyote]

Speeches, quotes, etc. by people mean nothing when it comes to LAW. It is what the Constitution says. Surely you can see that? OR are you just into far religious right talking points?

You will find every name I listed also listed among the "Founders" of this nation. The very freedoms that they, to a man, agreed came from God, were incorporated into the law of the land that became our U.S. Constitution. Those freedoms allow you to say that the Founders' convictions had nothing to do with the Law or why the Constitution was written as it was.

But if you say that, you will be wrong no matter how much you try to discredit the Founders or the intent of the Constitution.

Founders...so what. It is the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land that counts. Many of our Founders were slave holders too. Do you want to hold that up as a founding principle we should continue to follow too? Using your logic...if you were consistant, you would answer "yes" to that.

I don't think you can take the Constitution in isolation as the "Supreme Law" - in order to understand what went into it, you have to read the Federalist Papers and other sources. It was incredibly complex, divisive, and quite argumentative at times. A lot of thought went into it and I don't think it can be properly appreciated or understood in absence of that.

 

[Coyote]

In the 1770's, the Founders weren't confused on which God they meant.

No, they weren't. And no Deist would proclaim Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior which most of the Founders did and no Deist would consider the Bible a holy book which most of the Founders did.

....and many of them specifically repudiated Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible, as evidenced by the quotes. A lot of contradictions there and no supporting context.

 

[bodecea]

In the 1770's, the Founders weren't confused on which God they meant.

In the 1770s it was still against the law in some places of America to NOT go to church on sunday.

 

[bodecea]

You will find every name I listed also listed among the "Founders" of this nation. The very freedoms that they, to a man, agreed came from God, were incorporated into the law of the land that became our U.S. Constitution. Those freedoms allow you to say that the Founders' convictions had nothing to do with the Law or why the Constitution was written as it was.

But if you say that, you will be wrong no matter how much you try to discredit the Founders or the intent of the Constitution.

Founders...so what. It is the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land that counts. Many of our Founders were slave holders too. Do you want to hold that up as a founding principle we should continue to follow too? Using your logic...if you were consistant, you would answer "yes" to that.

I don't think you can take the Constitution in isolation as the "Supreme Law" - in order to understand what went into it, you have to read the Federalist Papers and other sources. It was incredibly complex, divisive, and quite argumentative at times. A lot of thought went into it and I don't think it can be properly appreciated or understood in absence of that.

I can buy that...now, show me where god is in the Federalist Papers.

 

[Coyote]

Founders...so what. It is the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land that counts. Many of our Founders were slave holders too. Do you want to hold that up as a founding principle we should continue to follow too? Using your logic...if you were consistant, you would answer "yes" to that.

I don't think you can take the Constitution in isolation as the "Supreme Law" - in order to understand what went into it, you have to read the Federalist Papers and other sources. It was incredibly complex, divisive, and quite argumentative at times. A lot of thought went into it and I don't think it can be properly appreciated or understood in absence of that.

I can buy that...now, show me where god is in the Federalist Papers.

I'm not making that argument

But - there is some unity in the concept of a Creator - because that is where those rights spring from, not a human agency - thus no human agency can take them away.

 

[Foxfyre]

TO: COYOTE:

To save time I didn't include the full context for the quotations I used, but I should have said that. In my opinion, every single one will hold up within the full context as well as it does outside of it. I don't think you can find many quotations to rebut them that would hold up within their full context. I will concede that there may be one or two out there, but I can't think of what they would be.

Even the definition of Deism that you posted does not rebut my opinion that very few, if any, of the Founders were Deists. I believe that is propaganda and a rewrite of history introduced by Atheists some years ago and the intent was to discredit the religious history and heritage that influenced the content of the Constitution. Our Founders were mostly devoutly religious, intensely aware of a God in their lives, and secure in their salvation in Jesus.

Did they intend this to be a Christian nation? I believe they absolutely did even as the doors would be open to a wide assortment of Christian disciplines and non-Christians alike or people of no religion. They were determined that there be no theocracy, but they believed that it would be people of faith, primarily the Christians, who would understand the Constitution and would defend the individual liberties it offered. And they believed that if those Christian defenders of the Constitution should become a minority, the Republic and those liberties would not be sustained.

It remains to be seen whether they were right.

 

[saveliberty]

Judeo-Christian influence on the Founding Fathers:

1620

". . . Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the first colony in the northern Parts of Virginia; Do by these Presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick . . . "--The Mayflower Compact, Nov. 11, 1620, reprinted in Documents of American History, ed. Henry Steele Commager, ninth edition (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973), pp. 15-16.

1770

"The people are Protestants; and of that kind which is the most adverse to all implicit submission of mind and opinion. . . . This is a persuasion not only favorable to Liberty, but built upon it. . . . All Protestantism, even the most cold and passive, is a sort of dissent. But the religion most prevalent in our northern colonies is a refinement on the principle of resistance; it is the dissidence of dissent, and the protestantism of the Protestant religion."--Edmund Burke, an Englishman, in a speech to Parliament in 1770, cited in Tim LaHaye, Faith of Our Founding Fathers (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1987) p. 67.

1773

"[A]lways keep the Ministry obliquely in View whatever your profession be. This will lead you to cultivate an acquaintance occasionally with the most sublime of all Sciences and will qualify you for a change of public character if you should hereafter desire it. I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of Religion or against temporal Enjoyments even the most rational and manly than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare their unsatisfactoriness by becoming fervent Advocates in the cause of Christ, and I wish you may give in your Evidence in this way."--James Madison, in a letter Sept. 25, 1773 to William Bradford, reprinted in The Papers of James Madison, eds. William T. Hutchinson and William M.E. Rachal (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962), vol. 1, p. 96.

1775

"We shall not fight alone. God presides over the destinies of nations, and will raise up friends for us. The battle is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave . . . Is life so dear, or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"--Patrick Henry, in a speech March 23, 1775.

1787

"Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."--Article III of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.

1788

"I believe that there is one only living and true God, existing in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the same in substance equal in power and glory. That the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are a revelation from God, and a complete rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him."--Roger Sherman, who signed the Declaration of Independence and attended the Constitutional Convention, provided suggestions for a creed for his church. This excerpt of his creed, written in his own handwriting, was cited in FFF, p. 136.

"Let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion."--George Washington, ca. 1789, in Maxims of Washington, ed. John F. Schroeder (Mt. Vernon: Mt. Vernon Ladies Association, 1942), p. 106.

"Religion, or the duty we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and, therefore, that all men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience, unpunished and unrestrained by the magistrate, unless under color of religion any man disturb the peace, the happiness, or safety of society, and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other."--James Madison, ca. 1789, cited in Gaillard Hunt, James Madison and Religious Liberty (Washington: American Historical Association, Government Printing Office, 1902), p. 166.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

In the 1770's, the Founders weren't confused on which God they meant.

No, they weren't. And no Deist would proclaim Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior which most of the Founders did and no Deist would consider the Bible a holy book which most of the Founders did.

Nor would a man who truly believed that all men are created equal own slaves and refuse to free his own children.

The FF were men. They were not gods. They were oft wrong. They knew they could be wrong, that's why the system was designed to be changeable.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I don't think you can take the Constitution in isolation as the "Supreme Law"

Fail. It is the supreme law of the land. That's not taking it as anything, that's recognizing what it is by law. The FP, just like the Anti-Federalist, has no legal weight.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I don't think you can take the Constitution in isolation as the "Supreme Law" - in order to understand what went into it, you have to read the Federalist Papers and other sources. It was incredibly complex, divisive, and quite argumentative at times. A lot of thought went into it and I don't think it can be properly appreciated or understood in absence of that.

I can buy that...now, show me where god is in the Federalist Papers.

I'm not making that argument

But - there is some unity in the concept of a Creator - because that is where those rights spring from, not a human agency - thus no human agency can take them away.

It's called and Appeal to Authority. Locke was unable to demonstrate the existence of his 'natural rights' and not competent to argue that man should and must base a just society on the premise that all men have fundamental rights because that is the only way to create the desired society of peace and prosperity. He resorted, then, to simply doing like the Church and claiming the authority of an invisible skydaddy who would burn anyone who objected. In this regard, he was no different that the kings who claimed God as the source of their authority and the correctness of the systems which kept them in power.