Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Batman · 07-09-2002, 08:50 AM

The Declaration of Independence was the document that announced our intention to separate from England and the reasons for it. It in no way sets up any form of government. We could have become a monarchy if we so wished. Also, the use of creator and nature's god in no way implies Christianity or even any kind of Abrahamic god. Christianity is the belief that Jesus was the son of god and the D of I says nothing about Jesus.
The Constitution is the supreme law of our nation and can be overruled by NO OTHER law. There is no mention of any god in the Constitution and this is not accidental. Both Jefferson and Madison, the founders credited with being the architechs of the Constitution, wrote about the need for the separation of church and state.
No money created by the federal government contained any reference to god untill 1864.
The national moto was "E Pluibus Unum" untill 1957 (?).
The oath of office contained no mention of god but a president was free to add it on his own.
The religious beliefs or lack thereof of our founding fathers are unimportant! They kept these beliefs separate from the constitution and federal laws.
Many Christians state that many (sometimes 52 of 55) founders were Christians but never provide any documentation of this claim. Probably because they have none. If anyone sees anyone cite specific numbers of founding Christians YOU MUST challenge them on this and ask for documentation. If they are not challenged they will continue to claim this as the truth and many others will believe them. I believe that most people who make these claims are innocently repeating what they have read or heard thinking it's the truth. If we allow this to continue the actual facts will not be heard. For a patriot ignorance is never bliss!

Berenger Sauniere · 07-09-2002, 11:17 AM

If Congress were to establish Christianity as the Federal/National/State religion, then the United States would be a Christian nation. I was under the impression that Congress does not have that power, therefore the United States is not a Christian nation. Fortunately, the First Amendment is the greatest nail that keeps the Bastard Christ nailed to his much deserved Cross.

tragic_pizza · 07-09-2002, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Berenger Sauniere:
Fortunately, the First Amendment is the greatest nail that keeps the Bastard Christ nailed to his much deserved Cross.

Someone has issues...

Berenger Sauniere · 07-09-2002, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:


Someone has issues...

Only if someone were to take my allegorical meanderings literally.

Stephen Maturin · 07-10-2002, 04:40 AM

Good stuff, Daggah, but I can't but wonder if attempts at burden allocation really do much good here. First of all, assuming your argument is sound (valid form + true premises), then the game's over, right? We've proven what we wanted to prove. At that point the burden of proof doesn't matter anymore.

Further, when you say "burden of proof" are you talking about the burden of production, the burden of persuasion or both? I doubt that fundies would have any problem with taking on the burden of production. They usually do that on their own in C-S separation debates. This invariably leads to round after round of quote vomiting, a dicey and ultimately futile endeavor for both sides.

Burden of persuasion is pretty much meaningless here. This idea presupposes a neutral factfinder who decides which side wins. The burden of persuasion is essentially a tiebreaker. If the factfinder determines that the evidence is qualitatively balanced, then the side with the burden of persuasion loses. You'd be hard pressed to find anything resembling a neutral factfinder when it comes to this Christian nation business. Ultimately, both components of the "burden of proof" have little if any value outside a courtroom.

I've always believed that the first step in these debates is pinning down the fundy on precisely what he means by "Christian nation." It's amazing how often they use the non-synonymous words "nation" and "government" interchangeably.

If the fundy says that by "Christian nation" he means that most of the 18th Century American colonists and/or most of the founding fathers were Christians, there are a couple of ways to respond. For example, you can say, "Prove it." That just leads to more pointless quote mining. I think a better response is, "So what?"

Shadowy Man and Jamie_L hit the nail right on the head. Whether or not most of the framers/founders/colonials were Christian is wholly irrelevant. It's not what they were that matters but what they did. That's where the text of the Constitution and the historic records regarding the drafting and ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights come into play. If you want to play Stump the Fundy, ask him to tell you which specific provision of the Constitution authorizes Congress to spend public money to advance his particular version of the truth.

Buffman · 07-10-2002, 01:12 PM

I, also, have been attempting to give this more thought. I like to play Devil's Advocate with myself in order to better understand, if possible, the arguments of the radical right Christians. What facts are on their side?

First, no one other than a person professing a faith in God/a Supreme Being/a Creator/a Divine Providence/etc. could hold public office in this country until the ratification of the Constitution. That pretty well establishes the sect, if not the specific denomination, of those men who signed the DoI. Christian! (Fact)

The majority were Christians who claimed a belief in the NT Christ. (Fact) They all believed in a supernatural God.(Fact) Yes, three or more may not have accepted the miracles and divinity of Jesus Christ. (Fact, but exact numbers not accurately known) The same is true for those men who crafted the Constitution. (Fact) All of them believed in a supernatural, single, God. (Fact) Yes, three or more may have been Deists, but that's still a God/religious belief.(Fact) Fortunately, those Deists were brilliant and extremely able men who were determined to prevent the, all too normal, internecine slaughter that had historically accompanied the conflicts between faith believers when they coupled their religious zealotry with the power of the government.(Conjectured fact) They did not remove God from government. (Fact. They simply ignored him.) They barred government from establishing any specific organized religion or interfering with the individual expression of "religious" conscience. (Fact) They made no provision for the non-god believers that I can see. (Conjecture) The court did that by extending the coverage of law from the group to the individual. (Conjecture)

We are the ones laying claim that "under God" really means "under Jesus Christ," and thus government is establishing a religious faith belief in contravention of the 1st Amendment. (Opinion) I sincerely doubt that you will hear one single, thoughtful, Christian make the claim that God means Jesus Christ...even though every one of them may be thinking it...and a few who actually claim that Jesus "is" God...and we all know it, as do they.(Opinion) Thus, it isn't that we have any doubt about "under God" meaning "under Christianity." (My opinion) The question then becomes whether or not our government has the constitutional right to legislate a supernatural God into existence regardless of whose God it may be? (Open question depending on the legal definition of the word "God.")

When anyone claims that our Founding Fathers did not believe that it was from God that all human rights came, I believe that they are merely exercising some wishful thinking based on modern knowledge. (Opinion) These men believed that God created the universe and us right along with it.(Fact) They knew nothing of DNA, RNA, or evolution.(Fact) If God created us, then he created the "same" inherent rights in "all" of us. (Conjecture) Luckily for us, enlightened Americans came to believe, deeply, that individual liberty was a God given right.(Conjecture-Opinion) That is not a biblical principle.(Fact) It is pure Americana. (Likely fact depending on Greek nation states of antiquity.)

Read that DoI Preamble closely.(Request) It makes no claims for Christianity because few, if any, can actually be found in that faith belief system that could be used to trump the Divine Right, Defender of the Faith , title and power given to King George. I believe this to be fact.) However, God always trumps Kings. (Fact only if there is a supernatural God...or all participants believe there is one.)

Exactly to which "laws" of nature and of nature's God did Jefferson refer? (I am not sure) Exactly what "truths" were self-evident? (I am not sure that any factually exist.) That all men were created equal? (Says whom? They were never equal in the entire history of humankind until they were suddenly needed to be considered equal with the King in order to justify the remainder of the arguments. Seems like a fact)

Specifically, what are these "unalienable rights" with which this nature's God endowed us? (Arguably, none) That "among" these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? (No proof that this is a fact. Opinion.) Are these, then, the only specific unalienable rights? (Who says? Jefferson? Nope! God says...according to the Revolutionaries. All theists have the advantage of that position.) Whether we believe it is right or wrong is irrelevant since neither side can prove or disprove their contentions based on verifiable evidence; although the theists are obligated to present support for their claim first.)

And now to the method of how "we" guarantee and protect these rights here on earth and not in any make believe afterworld.

To "secure" these rights, "governments" are instituted among "men" (not under, by, or for Gods), "deriving" their "just powers" from the consent "of the governed;..." (No supernatural God attribution.)(Constitutional Fact)

Therefore, even though Jefferson, et al, may have started off claiming that our rights were given to us by nature and a nature's God, he very quickly recognized that a Deist God wasn't going to come back and guarantee (secure) them for us.(Opinion-Fact?) We would have to secure those rights, whatever they "all" were, for ourselves. (Reality Fact) Thus began the truly greatest revolution. (Opinion) A revolution in political thought and government.(Fact) It was the Constitution Convention that developed the "human" vision into the reality of a physical process.(Fact) The very first of its kind in the history of the world.(Fact) The separation of Church and State was unheard of before this time.(Fact) It was the most revolutionary idea in the entire document.(Opinion) It was its crowning glory and gift to the world. (Opinion) It is one of the primary reasons why I was willing to sacrifice my life to defend the Constitution.(Fact) That's mighty powerful motivation. (Opinion) The ability to live in a land of just laws, not just someone else's supernatural God edicts.(Opinion) Of liberty and freedom, not fiction and superstition.(Opinion) And now we have some folks willing to sacrifice some of their liberty and freedom for a supposed security under a make-believe supernatural God? (Opinion-Seeming fact) Tell it to those in the airplanes and WTC towers. (Sarcasm) What security did they buy by pledging allegiance "under God?" (Heavy sarcasm)

All critiques and criticisms extremely welcome as long as they assist in framing the Church-State issue in its context and intent so this post doesn't get shipped off to another forum...even if it probably should be.

ex-preacher · 07-10-2002, 01:38 PM

Even if we assume that all the founders were Christians, that does not mean the US is a "Christian" nation.

Many (and in some cases, all) of the founders were:

slaveholders (Does that make the US a "Slaveholding Nation" today?)
male
white
believers in bleeding as a great cure
believers in horoscopes
wealthy

What is a "Christian nation" anyway?

I also find it odd that I've heard the preachers that claim the US is a Christian nation, also claim that God has turned his back on us because we are no longer a truly Christian nation. So are we or aren't we???

PopeInTheWoods · 07-10-2002, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by shadowy_man:
An analogy might be this: If a rock band has all devout Christian members, is the music they create by necessity "Christian Rock"?

Hmmmm, ask U2.

Orestes · 07-10-2002, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Hmmmm, ask U2.

My Mom tried to forbid me from listening to U2 after hearing some of the lyrics to Still Havent Found What I'm Looking For. Especially the lines:

Quote:

I have spoke with the tongue of angels
I have held the hand of a devil
It was warm in the night, I was cold as a stone
But I still haven't found what I'm looking for

Her reasoning was that he was saying he was too good for god. Fundamentalists are so silly

.

Darwin's Finch · 07-10-2002, 03:44 PM

Perhaps you should tell your mom about Bono's tireless efforts to secure Third-world debt relief and increased funding to ease Africa's AIDS epidemic. I doubt she knows any True Christians (TM) who have done nearly so much for the very people Jesus presumably would have been drawn to.

[ July 10, 2002: Message edited by: Darwin's Finch ]

07-10-2002, 03:44 PM	#20
Darwin's Finch Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Gardnerville, NV Posts: 666	Perhaps you should tell your mom about Bono's tireless efforts to secure Third-world debt relief and increased funding to ease Africa's AIDS epidemic. I doubt she knows any True Christians (TM) who have done nearly so much for the very people Jesus presumably would have been drawn to. [ July 10, 2002: Message edited by: Darwin's Finch ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-09-2002, 08:50 AM	#11
Batman Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Nortwestern Connecticut Posts: 35	The Declaration of Independence was the document that announced our intention to separate from England and the reasons for it. It in no way sets up any form of government. We could have become a monarchy if we so wished. Also, the use of creator and nature's god in no way implies Christianity or even any kind of Abrahamic god. Christianity is the belief that Jesus was the son of god and the D of I says nothing about Jesus. The Constitution is the supreme law of our nation and can be overruled by NO OTHER law. There is no mention of any god in the Constitution and this is not accidental. Both Jefferson and Madison, the founders credited with being the architechs of the Constitution, wrote about the need for the separation of church and state. No money created by the federal government contained any reference to god untill 1864. The national moto was "E Pluibus Unum" untill 1957 (?). The oath of office contained no mention of god but a president was free to add it on his own. The religious beliefs or lack thereof of our founding fathers are unimportant! They kept these beliefs separate from the constitution and federal laws. Many Christians state that many (sometimes 52 of 55) founders were Christians but never provide any documentation of this claim. Probably because they have none. If anyone sees anyone cite specific numbers of founding Christians YOU MUST challenge them on this and ask for documentation. If they are not challenged they will continue to claim this as the truth and many others will believe them. I believe that most people who make these claims are innocently repeating what they have read or heard thinking it's the truth. If we allow this to continue the actual facts will not be heard. For a patriot ignorance is never bliss!

07-09-2002, 11:17 AM	#12
Berenger Sauniere Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: et in Arcadia ego... Posts: 406	If Congress were to establish Christianity as the Federal/National/State religion, then the United States would be a Christian nation. I was under the impression that Congress does not have that power, therefore the United States is not a Christian nation. Fortunately, the First Amendment is the greatest nail that keeps the Bastard Christ nailed to his much deserved Cross.

07-10-2002, 04:40 AM	#15
Stephen Maturin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Broomfield, Colorado, USA Posts: 1,295	Good stuff, Daggah, but I can't but wonder if attempts at burden allocation really do much good here. First of all, assuming your argument is sound (valid form + true premises), then the game's over, right? We've proven what we wanted to prove. At that point the burden of proof doesn't matter anymore. Further, when you say "burden of proof" are you talking about the burden of production, the burden of persuasion or both? I doubt that fundies would have any problem with taking on the burden of production. They usually do that on their own in C-S separation debates. This invariably leads to round after round of quote vomiting, a dicey and ultimately futile endeavor for both sides. Burden of persuasion is pretty much meaningless here. This idea presupposes a neutral factfinder who decides which side wins. The burden of persuasion is essentially a tiebreaker. If the factfinder determines that the evidence is qualitatively balanced, then the side with the burden of persuasion loses. You'd be hard pressed to find anything resembling a neutral factfinder when it comes to this Christian nation business. Ultimately, both components of the "burden of proof" have little if any value outside a courtroom. I've always believed that the first step in these debates is pinning down the fundy on precisely what he means by "Christian nation." It's amazing how often they use the non-synonymous words "nation" and "government" interchangeably. If the fundy says that by "Christian nation" he means that most of the 18th Century American colonists and/or most of the founding fathers were Christians, there are a couple of ways to respond. For example, you can say, "Prove it." That just leads to more pointless quote mining. I think a better response is, "So what?" Shadowy Man and Jamie_L hit the nail right on the head. Whether or not most of the framers/founders/colonials were Christian is wholly irrelevant. It's not what they were that matters but what they did. That's where the text of the Constitution and the historic records regarding the drafting and ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights come into play. If you want to play Stump the Fundy, ask him to tell you which specific provision of the Constitution authorizes Congress to spend public money to advance his particular version of the truth.

07-10-2002, 01:12 PM	#16
Buffman Beloved Deceased Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: central Florida Posts: 3,546	I, also, have been attempting to give this more thought. I like to play Devil's Advocate with myself in order to better understand, if possible, the arguments of the radical right Christians. What facts are on their side? First, no one other than a person professing a faith in God/a Supreme Being/a Creator/a Divine Providence/etc. could hold public office in this country until the ratification of the Constitution. That pretty well establishes the sect, if not the specific denomination, of those men who signed the DoI. Christian! (Fact) The majority were Christians who claimed a belief in the NT Christ. (Fact) They all believed in a supernatural God.(Fact) Yes, three or more may not have accepted the miracles and divinity of Jesus Christ. (Fact, but exact numbers not accurately known) The same is true for those men who crafted the Constitution. (Fact) All of them believed in a supernatural, single, God. (Fact) Yes, three or more may have been Deists, but that's still a God/religious belief.(Fact) Fortunately, those Deists were brilliant and extremely able men who were determined to prevent the, all too normal, internecine slaughter that had historically accompanied the conflicts between faith believers when they coupled their religious zealotry with the power of the government.(Conjectured fact) They did not remove God from government. (Fact. They simply ignored him.) They barred government from establishing any specific organized religion or interfering with the individual expression of "religious" conscience. (Fact) They made no provision for the non-god believers that I can see. (Conjecture) The court did that by extending the coverage of law from the group to the individual. (Conjecture) We are the ones laying claim that "under God" really means "under Jesus Christ," and thus government is establishing a religious faith belief in contravention of the 1st Amendment. (Opinion) I sincerely doubt that you will hear one single, thoughtful, Christian make the claim that God means Jesus Christ...even though every one of them may be thinking it...and a few who actually claim that Jesus "is" God...and we all know it, as do they.(Opinion) Thus, it isn't that we have any doubt about "under God" meaning "under Christianity." (My opinion) The question then becomes whether or not our government has the constitutional right to legislate a supernatural God into existence regardless of whose God it may be? (Open question depending on the legal definition of the word "God.") When anyone claims that our Founding Fathers did not believe that it was from God that all human rights came, I believe that they are merely exercising some wishful thinking based on modern knowledge. (Opinion) These men believed that God created the universe and us right along with it.(Fact) They knew nothing of DNA, RNA, or evolution.(Fact) If God created us, then he created the "same" inherent rights in "all" of us. (Conjecture) Luckily for us, enlightened Americans came to believe, deeply, that individual liberty was a God given right.(Conjecture-Opinion) That is not a biblical principle.(Fact) It is pure Americana. (Likely fact depending on Greek nation states of antiquity.) Read that DoI Preamble closely.(Request) It makes no claims for Christianity because few, if any, can actually be found in that faith belief system that could be used to trump the Divine Right, Defender of the Faith , title and power given to King George. I believe this to be fact.) However, God always trumps Kings. (Fact only if there is a supernatural God...or all participants believe there is one.) Exactly to which "laws" of nature and of nature's God did Jefferson refer? (I am not sure) Exactly what "truths" were self-evident? (I am not sure that any factually exist.) That all men were created equal? (Says whom? They were never equal in the entire history of humankind until they were suddenly needed to be considered equal with the King in order to justify the remainder of the arguments. Seems like a fact) Specifically, what are these "unalienable rights" with which this nature's God endowed us? (Arguably, none) That "among" these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? (No proof that this is a fact. Opinion.) Are these, then, the only specific unalienable rights? (Who says? Jefferson? Nope! God says...according to the Revolutionaries. All theists have the advantage of that position.) Whether we believe it is right or wrong is irrelevant since neither side can prove or disprove their contentions based on verifiable evidence; although the theists are obligated to present support for their claim first.) And now to the method of how "we" guarantee and protect these rights here on earth and not in any make believe afterworld. To "secure" these rights, "governments" are instituted among "men" (not under, by, or for Gods), "deriving" their "just powers" from the consent "of the governed;..." (No supernatural God attribution.)(Constitutional Fact) Therefore, even though Jefferson, et al, may have started off claiming that our rights were given to us by nature and a nature's God, he very quickly recognized that a Deist God wasn't going to come back and guarantee (secure) them for us.(Opinion-Fact?) We would have to secure those rights, whatever they "all" were, for ourselves. (Reality Fact) Thus began the truly greatest revolution. (Opinion) A revolution in political thought and government.(Fact) It was the Constitution Convention that developed the "human" vision into the reality of a physical process.(Fact) The very first of its kind in the history of the world.(Fact) The separation of Church and State was unheard of before this time.(Fact) It was the most revolutionary idea in the entire document.(Opinion) It was its crowning glory and gift to the world. (Opinion) It is one of the primary reasons why I was willing to sacrifice my life to defend the Constitution.(Fact) That's mighty powerful motivation. (Opinion) The ability to live in a land of just laws, not just someone else's supernatural God edicts.(Opinion) Of liberty and freedom, not fiction and superstition.(Opinion) And now we have some folks willing to sacrifice some of their liberty and freedom for a supposed security under a make-believe supernatural God? (Opinion-Seeming fact) Tell it to those in the airplanes and WTC towers. (Sarcasm) What security did they buy by pledging allegiance "under God?" (Heavy sarcasm) All critiques and criticisms extremely welcome as long as they assist in framing the Church-State issue in its context and intent so this post doesn't get shipped off to another forum...even if it probably should be.

07-10-2002, 01:38 PM	#17
ex-preacher Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: University of Arkansas Posts: 1,033	Even if we assume that all the founders were Christians, that does not mean the US is a "Christian" nation. Many (and in some cases, all) of the founders were: slaveholders (Does that make the US a "Slaveholding Nation" today?) male white believers in bleeding as a great cure believers in horoscopes wealthy What is a "Christian nation" anyway? I also find it odd that I've heard the preachers that claim the US is a Christian nation, also claim that God has turned his back on us because we are no longer a truly Christian nation. So are we or aren't we???

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.