Fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions in this country. Whether you believe in Jesus Christ and are a Christian or not is not really my concern, but to spread lies that Christianity had nothing to do with our founding fathers and that its teachings did not influence their thinking is absurd. Here is a link to the library of Congress regarding the continental congress and religion.... IV. Religion and the Congress of the Confederation, 1774-89
Does the Constitution Embody Christian Thought and Morality? Contrary to the claims of many accommodationists, virtually nothing in the Constitution references Christian thought and morality. The only explicit mention of religion is the article VI declaration that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." Otherwise, the Constitution is wholly concerned with the secular issues of defining federal power, and distributing that power among the various branches of government. Quite against the practice of state constitutions, the federal Constitution does not quote or refer to the Bible, does not set up any religion above another, does not refer to God, and does not raise or rule upon religious questions. It is a remarkably secular document for its day and age. Our e-mail correspondents have occasionally argued that that the structure of our federal government is derived from the Bible; this claim rests on little more than wishful thinking. The most important features of our federal government include (1) a separation of powers among three branches of government, (2) a bicameral legislature, (3) different modes of representation in each chamber of the legislature, (4) a limited executive, (5) and independent judiciary, and (6) a complex system of checks and balances. No model of government found in the Bible corresponds to this outline. Ancient Israel was governed first by Judges and then by Kings; in neither system was there separation of powers (i.e., the executive acted as both lawmaker and judge), nor was there any clear distinction between secular and religious law. Nowhere in the Old Testament do we find anything like a bicameral legislature, or an independent judiciary. Conversely, the New Testament does not contain a model of government; it simply does not function as a political document in the same way as, eg., the Q'uran does in Islam. Some accommodationists claim that founders derived the principle of separation of powers from Isaiah 33:22, "For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our King; he will save us." Apart from the fact that there is no evidence that this verse was ever referred to by the founders in this context, this argument fails on it's own assumptions: the Constitution sets up an elected executive, not a King, and the tenor of the verse is anti separation-of-powers; it says that all three branches are properly united in one person, the LORD. That the founders would read this verse and derive from it a mandate for divided powers is neither logical nor plausible. Nor is there any relationship between the Constitution and the 10 Commandments. The Constitution fairly repudiates the first two commandments (i.e., it leaves us free to worship other Gods than the LORD, and to make graven images), and is silent on commandments three through ten. Laws against blasphemy, Sabbath breaking, dishonoring parents, murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, and coveting are left entirely to the states. The secular ethos of the Constitution extends even to the taking of the oath of office. Quite against the practices of the states, the oath of office described in Article II section 2 of the Constitution is completely secular; it is described as an "oath or affirmation," contains no religious references, and need not be taken on the Bible. The practice of saying "so help me God" is not required by the Constitution; it is a voluntary practice initiated by later presidents. The absence of Christian thought and morality in the Constitution is a powerful evidence that the founders did not intend to create a Christian nation. Indeed, a popular early criticism of the Constitution is that it allowed non-Christians to serve in federal offices, and did nothing to promote Christianity (see Isaac Kramnick and R. Laurence Moore, The Godless Constitution, ch. 2). If the founders wanted to favor Christianity or Judeo- Christian morality, they failed utterly in that task. This should make us suspect that the Constitution was never intended to set up Christianity as a preferred religion in the first place.
Stop being so paranoid. Nobody is conspiring to erase all traces of Christianity from our nation's history. You, however, are trying to revise that history to suit your own worldview. Not cool.
First, don't even imply that you know my beliefs. Second, don't call me a spreader of lies. Third, don't appeal to controversial exhibits in the Library of Congress to justify your point, particularly when the exhibit designers had similar biases. Fourth, thanks for taking that fake Churchill quote out of your sig.
First - never implied any such thing, but I would like to ask why are you so scared to admitting that the founders had Christian values? Second - you are spreading lies when you say that Christianity had nothing to do with the founders Third - the library of congress has as much validity as any of your references and has the documentation to back up the claims Nobodies paranoid but this whole separation of church and state nonsense and the outright lie about Christianity not being part of this countries moral fabric is getting a bit tiresome. And for the record go look at some of the nonsensical lawsuits brought on by the ACLU; you can make an arguement that there are people trying to erase Christianity from our history.
*sigh* No-one is saying that christianity is not part of this country’s moral fabric, just that the bible (or christian theology) was a basis for or influenced the constitution.
Sure you did. And by the way, I have said repeatedly that the Founders were influenced by Christianity. I do not think they founded the country based solely on those values. Well, I never said that. You think that because I have argued that the founding principles came from the Age of Reason and not the bible... which for some reason, you so fervently want to believe. (You are also continually moving the goal posts here.) No. Info written to go with an exhibit that clearly has a bias does not carry the same weight as primary documents. An exhibit creator working in the Library of Congress during the year 1998 is not the same as Adams or Jefferson putting their own words on paper. It is not the same thing as a treaty signed by President Adams. In short, the equivalence you are attempting to draw is ridiculous. You could make that argument, but you'd be wrong. What they are trying to do is to live up to the ideas expressed by our founders as they created a government of men for men. You have confused and conflated your religion with nationalism. Your faith should not be dependent on what the Founders said or didn't say. They were merely men trying to create a country that would last. While they gave us much to be thankful for, they were not prophets, they were not chosen by God, and they were certainly not angels... they were men and very much men of their time.
