Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ybnormal · 10-15-2002, 06:37 AM

One is enough!

[ October 15, 2002: Message edited by: ybnormal ]</p>

ybnormal · 10-15-2002, 06:43 AM

I suspect that Pat Roberson had much to do with getting Barton some of the influential contacts he obviously has.

Possibly got him started... I haven't seen any funding evidence. Barton has been working closely with the Christian Coalition back to 94 at least. Robertson founded the National Legal Foundation in 1985 but claims to no longer be associated with it. Based in Chesapeake, Virginia, it's a law firm active in church-state cases.

Now it's called the National Legal Foundation & Minuteman Institute. Two of its three Board of Directors are Tom Jipping, former law clerk for Antonin Scalia, and Wallbuilders' David Barton. (don't miss the "Minuteman" addition to Robertson's Foundation, what with Barton giving presentations at various "militia groups.")

Maybe Barton was a law school drop out. Among other judicial essays I've seen, in 1996 he wrote, "Impeachment! Restraining an Overactive Judiciary." I found this summary at the Brennan Center For Justice at NYU School of Law.

Quote:

Barton draws on the writings of the Framers as well as other scholars to show that impeachment is a legitimate weapon against "activist" judges. Suitable candidates for impeachment include judges who overturn referendum results or other laws that are supported by the majority of the people and judges who modify jury decisions. Threats of impeachment do not endanger judicial independence, but instead give the public a means to combat judicial tyranny. He also supports impeachments when the chances of conviction are small, "because just the process of impeachment serves as a deterrent. A judge, even if he knows that he is facing nothing more than a congressional hearing on his conduct, will usually become much more restrained in order to avoid adding 'fuel to the fire' and thus giving more evidence to the critics calling for his removal."

However, he did/does do the college and high school circuit like we were in the "last" days.

Get your head outta those stale old documents for a minute and look around... I think the torch is being passed to a new breed of salesmen, and Barton is at the head of the class... I hope you know that for all practical purposes, this "quote" debate is long over, as far as Barton and the xians are concerned. He won BTW. I'm beginning to see words like "prestigious" and "expert" "Historian" preceding "Dr." David Barton. (Honorary Doctorate of Letters from Pensacola Christian College) Get me a bucket!

I keep trying to tell you guys that we ain't the target audience for these in-your-face revisionists. We don't matter. Folks keep calling Falwell and Robertson "nuts" while they kick us to the curb. Barton, nor his xian power mongers, nor the Republicans give a rats ass how many pseudo 'errors' people like you God haters find in his 'work'... he's da' man, he's on a mission from God and he can do no wrong! Like Pastor Wilkey said, "the historian has gained a ground swell of followers." This thread ain't big enough for everything "Dr." Barton is up to...

Anyway, I think this torch-passing thing is for real... I haven't gotten back to you on Norquist... sorry... but a similar torch is being passed to Norquist from Paul Weyrich, the old Father of the RR, Moral Majority and the Heritage Foundation. Weyrich screwed up and proclaimed that the Biblical America war was lost. Maybe Clinton's continued popularity Had he instead said, "We've only begun to fight", he'd be right on and still at the top.

Were you aware of this? I hadn't seen anyone mention anything but the mistaken quotes.

Quote:

MICHEAL A. NEWDOW,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
U.S. CONGRESS, et al.
Defendants-Appellee
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF WALLBUILDERS, INC.
In support of Defendants'-Appellees� Petition for
Rehearing and for En Banc Rehearing

Steven W. Fitschen
Counsel of Record for Amicus Curiae
The National Legal Foundation
2224 Virginia Beach Blvd., Suite 204
Virginia Beach, VA 23454
(757) 463-6133

And he's started another group called the Pro-Family Legislative Network.

Quote:

On average, more than 120,000 bills are introduced across the nation each legislative session. Pro-Family Legislative Network screens thousands of these bills to identify those related to pro-family issues. These bills are then collected, catalogued, and made available to pro-family legislators and leaders at their request.

And then there's Barton's The Dove Foundation It's mostly one of those pro-family scams where they sell you a film, then "edit out offensive language, sex and violence so you can enjoy the film..." Then of course, your improved film will receive "Dr." Barton's Dove Seal of approval.

But does he have a sense of humor?
"As with any ministry, we are in constant need of prayer. In fact, we are so committed to prayer that we have two of our paid staff dedicated solely to pray for Wallbuilders and our staff." -Wallbuilders fundraising letter from founder David Barton, June 26, 1998

fromtheright · 10-15-2002, 09:17 AM

Buffman,

I've not read much of Hamilton, except the Federalist. The only book on him I have is Brookhiser's, and the Library of America selection of his writings.

The first draft of Jefferson's Declaration of Independence---already edited by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston---was presented before Congress on June 28. 39 revisions were made on the text before it was adopted on the 4th of July, 1776.

This serves to reinforce my point. Jefferson obviously wasn't the sole author of the Declaration so that the views (and worldviews) of other Founders entered into the final product.

I would like you to consider that the foundation upon which Jefferson crafted the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence can be traced back to much of the philosophy contained in this next URL.

A book I would suggest is Gary Amos's Defending the Declaration. It would probably do me well to go back and read Pauline Maier's American Scripture , also, which is the best history I've read on the D of I.

BibleBelted · 10-15-2002, 10:21 AM

Buffman,

I'd like an email copy of your response also. I saw some ninny from Springfield, MO named Dee Wampler on The 700 Club last night (he made a big deal of how tight he is with John Ashcroft, btw).

Pat the Rat was helping him hump his book The Myth of Separation of Church and State and it sounded like he just plagiarized David Barton.

He and Robertson talked crap for at least ten minutes and never once mentioned the Bill of Rights or the establishment clause.

Buffman · 10-15-2002, 05:50 PM

fromtheright

This serves to reinforce my point. Jefferson obviously wasn't the sole author of the Declaration so that the views (and worldviews) of other Founders entered into the final product.

You might wish to consider some additional information concerning changes made to Jefferson's drafts. I believe that you will discover that the most significant change was the deletion of his anti-slavery words. The two URL's below provide some direct insight into those specific changes. You might also note that Jefferson placed the "Laws of Nature" before those of "Nature's God." (Was that the prevailing Christian worldview? Nowhere is Jesus, Christ or Christianity mentioned. Was this an oversight by all 56 signers? What we have after "Nature's" God are "Creator," "Supreme Judge, " and "divine Providence." All Deist expressions of a supernatural god who no longer interfered in the affairs of humankind or this 'natural' world.)

http://library.louisville.edu/ekstro.../usdeclar.html

http://www.patriotprintshoppe.com/history.html

(Extract)
Jefferson then made a clean or "fair" copy of the composition declaration, which became the foundation of the document, labeled by Jefferson as the "original Rough draught." Revised first by Adams, then by Franklin, and then by the full committee, a total of forty-seven alterations including the insertion of three complete paragraphs was made on the text before it was presented to Congress on June 28. After voting for independence on July 2, the Congress then continued to refine the document, making thirty-nine additional revisions to the committee draft before its final adoption on the morning of July 4. The "original Rough draught" embodies the multiplicity of corrections, additions and deletions that were made at each step. Although most of the alterations are in Jefferson's handwriting (Jefferson later indicated the changes he believed to have been made by Adams and Franklin), quite naturally he opposed many of the changes made to his document.
(End extract)

ybnormal · 10-15-2002, 06:49 PM

Revised first by Adams, then by Franklin, and then by the full committee...

...before its final adoption on the morning of July 4.

Quote:

The 700 Club with David Barton on the Foundations of American Freedom

(exerpt)
Pat Robertson: You always inspire us. The question is asked, was America founded as a Christian nation? We have said yes, yes, yes. But you have the proof.

David Barton: There is a lot of proof. Not the least of which is a great 4th of July speech that was given in 1737 by one of the guys who fought in the revolution, who became a president, John Quincy Adams. His question was why is it in America that the Fourth of July and Christmas are the most celebrated holidays? His answer was that at Christmas we celebrate what Jesus Christ did for the world his birth, and on the 4th of July we celebrate what Jesus Christ did for America, since we founded it as a Christian nation. So this is a guy who fought in it, and all these years later he is saying, we did this as a Christian nation. The Declaration of Independence formed all of the principles of Christianity into our form of government. They said that on a regular basis, and it was they who said it was a Christian nation.

Pat Robertson: He was the son of John Adams, who was very instrumental in the Declaration of Independence. It was Jefferson who penned it, but Adams was right there in all those debates and deliberations. He was probably the preeminent member of that deliberative body.

David Barton: John Adams was really the key decision-maker behind the scenes. He's the guy who convinced everybody else that it should be George Washington as Commander in Chief instead of Charles Lee. He's the guy who convinced everybody else that Jefferson ought to be the chief writer of the Declaration. Adams persuaded everyone else, and Jefferson said Adams is the guy who best articulated the principles. And it is interesting, too, that on the day they approved the Declaration, John Adams said that the Fourth of July should be celebrated as a day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.

Pat Robertson: He said that?

David Barton: He said that. He said that it should be a religious holiday. The Fourth of July should be a time when we stop and say thank you God for what you have done in this nation.

The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. � 2002

Buffman · 10-15-2002, 11:46 PM

ybnormal

This is pathetic. So is anyone who believes anything that Barton says without verifying his every word.

Pat Robertson: You always inspire us. The question is asked, was America founded as a Christian nation? We have said yes, yes, yes. But you have the proof.

David Barton: There is a lot of proof. Not the least of which is a great 4th of July speech that was given in 1737 ...

xxxxx (Nice trick!) J.Q. Adams wasn't born until July 11, 1767. (John Adams, his father, was only two years old in 1737. Of course it could be a transcription error like those that can be established in so many other Christian documents.)

...by one of the guys who fought in the revolution,...

xxxxx (Another nice trick!) He [JQA] traveled to Europe with his father in 1777 and didn't return until 1785. I guess that means he was 10 years old or younger when he fought in the revolution. He did "observe" the activity at Bunker Hill...if you can believe the White House history.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/ja6.html

(Extract)
Born in Braintree, Massachusetts, in 1767, he watched the Battle of Bunker Hill from the top of Penn's Hill above the family farm.
(End extract)

...who became a president, John Quincy Adams. [Snip]... So this is a guy who fought in it, and all these years later he is saying, we did this as a Christian nation. The Declaration of Independence formed all of the principles of Christianity into our form of government. They said that on a regular basis, and it was they who said it was a Christian nation.

xxxxx Who, exactly, is this "they?"

Pat Robertson: He was the son of John Adams, who was very instrumental in the Declaration of Independence. It was Jefferson who penned it, but Adams was right there in all those debates and deliberations. He was probably the preeminent member of that deliberative body.

David Barton: John Adams was really the key decision-maker behind the scenes. He's the guy who convinced everybody else that it should be George Washington as Commander in Chief instead of Charles Lee. He's the guy who convinced everybody else that Jefferson ought to be the chief writer of the Declaration. Adams persuaded everyone else, and Jefferson said Adams is the guy who best articulated the principles. And it is interesting, too, that on the day they approved the Declaration, John Adams said that the Fourth of July should be celebrated as a day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.

Pat Robertson: He said that?

David Barton: He said that. He said that it should be a religious holiday. The Fourth of July should be a time when we stop and say thank you God for what you have done in this nation.

xxxxx Yup! This is what he "WROTE"... and to whom.

"John Adams to Abigail Adams
3 July 1776:
The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations, from one end of the continent to the other, from this time forward, forevermore. "

Pat Robertson: When we had a revolution to free ourselves from Great Britain there was a motto. What was that motto?

David Barton: The motto that was often used, it showed up in the Vermont Legislature, and it was, "No king but King Jesus." It was built actually on what Jefferson and Franklin had proposed as the national motto, which is, "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."

xxxxx (Yikes!)

http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm

(Snip) [Here's what this is all about]

Pat Robertson: David, you've studied all of this. Doesn't it break your heart to see what these courts are doing to strip our religious heritage?

David Barton: It is amazing because that kind of decision has far-reaching repercussions. But on the other side, it's an indictment of ourselves. We have judges that are there only because elected people put them there. We have 60 million evangelicals in America, and only 15 million voted last election. Forty-five million didn't vote, and 24 million aren't registered to vote. We lost our five Senators by a collective total of 100,000 votes in five states, and yet 45 million Christians didn't vote in those states in that election. So if we want to see judges change we have to turn out this November and elect god-fearing guys to the Senate and get this stuff changed and going in a different direction.

The rest of this the Robertson-Barton dialogue serves only one purpose... propaganda brainwashing/conditioning. It is frustrating and very scary to realize that this kind of outright, selective, rewrite of history is actually believed by so many Americans because they desperately need the reassurance that they aren't worshipping a false God/prophet. Yet here is one of the biggest Pied Piper liars to come along in decades filling the gullible with nonsense history in order to advance his personal power base, political influence and bank account.

NOTES:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/011601a.html

(Extract)
To suggest that America's Founding Fathers envisioned a society built on the premise that �We have no king but Jesus� is challenged by many scholars.
According to historians of the revolutionary era, many of the Founding Fathers staunchly opposed any sectarian creed as the basis for the new country, as is reflected in the First Amendment and in the public statements and writings of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Tom Paine and others.
�Their prevailing faith was deism, a belief that God presided over the universe and had a providential interest in mankind,� wrote historian Thomas Fleming. �But He was not a personal God in the vivid way Jesus is presented in the Gospels.� [See American Dispatches, Feb. 2000, or TomPaine.com's archives.]
(End extract) And some accurate history.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/di...y/bar1796t.htm

What most Christians do not seem to know about the "Treaty with Tripoli" is that President Adams, after a reading to, and unanimous approval by, the U.S. Senate, signed it and added a personal statement to it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Saturday June 10, 1797

President John Adams signed the treaty into law on this date and issued the following proclamation:

"Now be it known, That I John Adams, President of the United States of America, having seen and considered the said Treaty do, by and with the advice consent of the Senate, accept, ratify, and confirm the same, and every clause and article thereof. And to the End that the said Treaty may be observed and performed with good Faith on the part of the United States, I have ordered the premises to be made public; And I do hereby enjoin and require all persons bearing office civil or military within the United States, and all others citizens or inhabitants thereof, faithfully to observe and fulfil the said Treaty and every clause and article thereof."

The full treaty and the proclamation (above) was printed in at least two Philadelphia newspapers of the day and at least one New York Newspaper of the day.

("Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States," edited by Hunter Miller, vol. 2, 1776-1818. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1931, p. 383)

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Buffman ]

joedad · 10-16-2002, 10:37 AM

Buffman, you're unbelievable. If you have a mailing list, please add me to it.

Someone ought to take on Barton in the manner that NOVA took on von Danniken after Chariots of the Gods.

Come to think of it Buffman and FTR, why not get him here for a formal debate.

I'd love to hear him say, as von Danniken did, paraphrasing, 'I only wrote the book, I'm not responsible for what's in it.'

The US is most definitely not a christian nation, although I would agree that there were some christians who had a substantial influence upon its makeup. I say that in the same manner as saying that we are most definitely not a white nation either, even though whites contributed substantially to its formation as well.

And I would also state that neither are we a secular nation, although secularism and secularists contributed substantially to it as well. There are just too many threads passing through this nation's tapestry to say that it is any one thing, except perhaps most obviously, an anti-monarchy.

I think that attempts to label in any extreme are simply inaccurate, and play into some kind of mythical perfectionist mindset.

joe

Toto · 10-16-2002, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Buffman:
David Barton: The motto that was often used, it showed up in the Vermont Legislature, and it was, "No king but King Jesus." It was built actually on what Jefferson and Franklin had proposed as the national motto, which is, "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."

Not King Jesus again. We went through this with Ashcroft.

Slate's Explainer explains: Was "No King but Jesus" a Revolutionary War Slogan?

Quote:

While people in the colonies used the expression ["No King but Jesus"], it was not a central rallying cry, nor is it implied in the Declaration of Independence. Members of radical sects first used the phrase in a revolutionary context in England in the mid-17th century during the British Civil War. Groups such as the Diggers and the Levellers believed that after the execution of Charles I, a biblical monarchy was nigh and that Jesus would be the king. (Note to the future attorney general: The Diggers advocated the abolition of private property, and the Levellers were for the separation of church and state.) The phrase was particularly incendiary because it attacked the authority of both king and clergy. In the American colonies, there are some historical references to it being said by Presbyterians who were agitating against the authority of the British king and harkening back to the earlier revolution.

From a letter from Sean Wilentz in RRE:

Quote:

John Ashcroft's critics are divided over whether his address to Bob Jones University in May 1999 might jeopardize his confirmation as attorney general.

Historians, however, will find much to criticize in the transcript of Mr. Ashcroft's brief remarks, recently released by the Bush-Cheney transition team. Mr. Ashcroft has already drawn fire from Civil War historians for an interview he gave in 199tk to Southern Partisan magazine, in which he defended Jefferson Davis and the Confederacy. The Bob Jones transcript shows that Mr. Ashcroft holds erroneous and equally dubious views about the American Revolution, with troubling implications about his understanding of the separation of church and state.

Mr. Ashcroft began his Bob Jones speech by citing what he claimed was "a slogan of the American Revolution", supposedly directed by the patriots at George III's emissaries -- that "we have no King butJesus". He repeated that view under questioning by Arlen Specter before the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 17.

Which is all very interesting but highly misleading. The line Mr. Ashcroft quoted is best known as the slogan of a radical religious sect of the 17th century English Revolution, the Fifth Monarchy Men. The Fifth Monarchists took their name from the biblical prophecy in the Book of Daniel that four successive monarchies would precede the coming of an eternal kingdom. Like other millenarians of the time, they believed that, following the execution of Charles I in 1649, the Fifth Monarchy was nigh, and that its King would be Jesus.

"The Fifth Monarchists", writes B. S. Capp, the leading scholarly authority on the group, "were a political and religious sect expecting the immanent Kingdom of Christ on Earth, a theocratic regime in which the saints would establish a godly discipline over the unregenerate masses and prepare for the Second Coming".

Crushed by the royalist restoration in 1660, the Fifth Monarchy Men faded into oblivion. Their beliefs survived in the radical plebeian English underground, and popped up here and there in the colonies. But their battlecry -- "No King but King Jesus" -- was hardly "a slogan of the American Revolution", along the lines of "no taxation without representation", or "give me liberty or give me death". No major patriot leader took the Fifth Monarchist line. In his Bob Jones address, Mr. Ashcroft confused his centuries, his slogans -- and his revolutions.

. . .

No one, anymore, expects our public officials to be well-versed in history (although maybe we should). But for a prospective attorney general to endorse the motto of an old English theocratic sect -- to proclaim it, mistakenly, as a motto of our Revolution and, indeed, of our nation -- is troubling. And it is no less troubling for that same man to suggest that Jefferson's Declaration conveyed some deep Christian message.

In America, we have no king. Period. That is what the Revolution achieved -- not the vaunting of Jesus Christ. In his speech at Bob Jones University, Mr. Ashcroft asserted the opposite view. Senators considering Mr. Ashcroft's nomination as attorney-general should ask him to explain himself.

Sean Wilentz is the Dayton-Stockton Professor of History at Princeton University.

Buffman · 10-16-2002, 02:09 PM

joedad

Thanks for the accolade. I do not have a mailing list. I have no desire to debate David Barton. I have no use for him beyond pointing a finger at him and saying, "Mark 10:19. Do not bear false witness, Defraud not."

Toto

And yet, there he sits as "our" Attorney General, covering up the bare-breasted statues of Justice...and "our" Constitution. Just imagine the horror of an all Republican Congress having an opportunity to approve Ashcroft's nomination to the Supreme Court to replace a retiring Rehnquist. (Shudder!)

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

10-15-2002, 06:37 AM	#41
ybnormal Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 430	One is enough! [ October 15, 2002: Message edited by: ybnormal ]</p>

10-15-2002, 09:17 AM	#43
fromtheright Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 633	Buffman, I've not read much of Hamilton, except the Federalist. The only book on him I have is Brookhiser's, and the Library of America selection of his writings. The first draft of Jefferson's Declaration of Independence---already edited by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston---was presented before Congress on June 28. 39 revisions were made on the text before it was adopted on the 4th of July, 1776. This serves to reinforce my point. Jefferson obviously wasn't the sole author of the Declaration so that the views (and worldviews) of other Founders entered into the final product. I would like you to consider that the foundation upon which Jefferson crafted the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence can be traced back to much of the philosophy contained in this next URL. A book I would suggest is Gary Amos's Defending the Declaration. It would probably do me well to go back and read Pauline Maier's American Scripture , also, which is the best history I've read on the D of I.

10-15-2002, 10:21 AM	#44
BibleBelted Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Oklahoma, USA Posts: 891	Buffman, I'd like an email copy of your response also. I saw some ninny from Springfield, MO named Dee Wampler on The 700 Club last night (he made a big deal of how tight he is with John Ashcroft, btw). Pat the Rat was helping him hump his book The Myth of Separation of Church and State and it sounded like he just plagiarized David Barton. He and Robertson talked crap for at least ten minutes and never once mentioned the Bill of Rights or the establishment clause.

10-15-2002, 05:50 PM	#45
Buffman Beloved Deceased Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: central Florida Posts: 3,546	fromtheright This serves to reinforce my point. Jefferson obviously wasn't the sole author of the Declaration so that the views (and worldviews) of other Founders entered into the final product. You might wish to consider some additional information concerning changes made to Jefferson's drafts. I believe that you will discover that the most significant change was the deletion of his anti-slavery words. The two URL's below provide some direct insight into those specific changes. You might also note that Jefferson placed the "Laws of Nature" before those of "Nature's God." (Was that the prevailing Christian worldview? Nowhere is Jesus, Christ or Christianity mentioned. Was this an oversight by all 56 signers? What we have after "Nature's" God are "Creator," "Supreme Judge, " and "divine Providence." All Deist expressions of a supernatural god who no longer interfered in the affairs of humankind or this 'natural' world.) http://library.louisville.edu/ekstro.../usdeclar.html http://www.patriotprintshoppe.com/history.html (Extract) Jefferson then made a clean or "fair" copy of the composition declaration, which became the foundation of the document, labeled by Jefferson as the "original Rough draught." Revised first by Adams, then by Franklin, and then by the full committee, a total of forty-seven alterations including the insertion of three complete paragraphs was made on the text before it was presented to Congress on June 28. After voting for independence on July 2, the Congress then continued to refine the document, making thirty-nine additional revisions to the committee draft before its final adoption on the morning of July 4. The "original Rough draught" embodies the multiplicity of corrections, additions and deletions that were made at each step. Although most of the alterations are in Jefferson's handwriting (Jefferson later indicated the changes he believed to have been made by Adams and Franklin), quite naturally he opposed many of the changes made to his document. (End extract)

10-15-2002, 11:46 PM	#47
Buffman Beloved Deceased Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: central Florida Posts: 3,546	ybnormal This is pathetic. So is anyone who believes anything that Barton says without verifying his every word. Pat Robertson: You always inspire us. The question is asked, was America founded as a Christian nation? We have said yes, yes, yes. But you have the proof. David Barton: There is a lot of proof. Not the least of which is a great 4th of July speech that was given in 1737 ... xxxxx (Nice trick!) J.Q. Adams wasn't born until July 11, 1767. (John Adams, his father, was only two years old in 1737. Of course it could be a transcription error like those that can be established in so many other Christian documents.) ...by one of the guys who fought in the revolution,... xxxxx (Another nice trick!) He [JQA] traveled to Europe with his father in 1777 and didn't return until 1785. I guess that means he was 10 years old or younger when he fought in the revolution. He did "observe" the activity at Bunker Hill...if you can believe the White House history. http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/ja6.html (Extract) Born in Braintree, Massachusetts, in 1767, he watched the Battle of Bunker Hill from the top of Penn's Hill above the family farm. (End extract) ...who became a president, John Quincy Adams. [Snip]... So this is a guy who fought in it, and all these years later he is saying, we did this as a Christian nation. The Declaration of Independence formed all of the principles of Christianity into our form of government. They said that on a regular basis, and it was they who said it was a Christian nation. xxxxx Who, exactly, is this "they?" Pat Robertson: He was the son of John Adams, who was very instrumental in the Declaration of Independence. It was Jefferson who penned it, but Adams was right there in all those debates and deliberations. He was probably the preeminent member of that deliberative body. David Barton: John Adams was really the key decision-maker behind the scenes. He's the guy who convinced everybody else that it should be George Washington as Commander in Chief instead of Charles Lee. He's the guy who convinced everybody else that Jefferson ought to be the chief writer of the Declaration. Adams persuaded everyone else, and Jefferson said Adams is the guy who best articulated the principles. And it is interesting, too, that on the day they approved the Declaration, John Adams said that the Fourth of July should be celebrated as a day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. Pat Robertson: He said that? David Barton: He said that. He said that it should be a religious holiday. The Fourth of July should be a time when we stop and say thank you God for what you have done in this nation. xxxxx Yup! This is what he "WROTE"... and to whom. "John Adams to Abigail Adams 3 July 1776: The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations, from one end of the continent to the other, from this time forward, forevermore. " Pat Robertson: When we had a revolution to free ourselves from Great Britain there was a motto. What was that motto? David Barton: The motto that was often used, it showed up in the Vermont Legislature, and it was, "No king but King Jesus." It was built actually on what Jefferson and Franklin had proposed as the national motto, which is, "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." xxxxx (Yikes!) http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm (Snip) [Here's what this is all about] Pat Robertson: David, you've studied all of this. Doesn't it break your heart to see what these courts are doing to strip our religious heritage? David Barton: It is amazing because that kind of decision has far-reaching repercussions. But on the other side, it's an indictment of ourselves. We have judges that are there only because elected people put them there. We have 60 million evangelicals in America, and only 15 million voted last election. Forty-five million didn't vote, and 24 million aren't registered to vote. We lost our five Senators by a collective total of 100,000 votes in five states, and yet 45 million Christians didn't vote in those states in that election. So if we want to see judges change we have to turn out this November and elect god-fearing guys to the Senate and get this stuff changed and going in a different direction. The rest of this the Robertson-Barton dialogue serves only one purpose... propaganda brainwashing/conditioning. It is frustrating and very scary to realize that this kind of outright, selective, rewrite of history is actually believed by so many Americans because they desperately need the reassurance that they aren't worshipping a false God/prophet. Yet here is one of the biggest Pied Piper liars to come along in decades filling the gullible with nonsense history in order to advance his personal power base, political influence and bank account. NOTES: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/011601a.html (Extract) To suggest that America's Founding Fathers envisioned a society built on the premise that �We have no king but Jesus� is challenged by many scholars. According to historians of the revolutionary era, many of the Founding Fathers staunchly opposed any sectarian creed as the basis for the new country, as is reflected in the First Amendment and in the public statements and writings of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Tom Paine and others. �Their prevailing faith was deism, a belief that God presided over the universe and had a providential interest in mankind,� wrote historian Thomas Fleming. �But He was not a personal God in the vivid way Jesus is presented in the Gospels.� [See American Dispatches, Feb. 2000, or TomPaine.com's archives.] (End extract) And some accurate history. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/di...y/bar1796t.htm What most Christians do not seem to know about the "Treaty with Tripoli" is that President Adams, after a reading to, and unanimous approval by, the U.S. Senate, signed it and added a personal statement to it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Saturday June 10, 1797 President John Adams signed the treaty into law on this date and issued the following proclamation: "Now be it known, That I John Adams, President of the United States of America, having seen and considered the said Treaty do, by and with the advice consent of the Senate, accept, ratify, and confirm the same, and every clause and article thereof. And to the End that the said Treaty may be observed and performed with good Faith on the part of the United States, I have ordered the premises to be made public; And I do hereby enjoin and require all persons bearing office civil or military within the United States, and all others citizens or inhabitants thereof, faithfully to observe and fulfil the said Treaty and every clause and article thereof." The full treaty and the proclamation (above) was printed in at least two Philadelphia newspapers of the day and at least one New York Newspaper of the day. ("Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States," edited by Hunter Miller, vol. 2, 1776-1818. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1931, p. 383) [ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Buffman ]

10-16-2002, 10:37 AM	#48
joedad Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: PA USA Posts: 5,039	Buffman, you're unbelievable. If you have a mailing list, please add me to it. Someone ought to take on Barton in the manner that NOVA took on von Danniken after Chariots of the Gods. Come to think of it Buffman and FTR, why not get him here for a formal debate. I'd love to hear him say, as von Danniken did, paraphrasing, 'I only wrote the book, I'm not responsible for what's in it.' The US is most definitely not a christian nation, although I would agree that there were some christians who had a substantial influence upon its makeup. I say that in the same manner as saying that we are most definitely not a white nation either, even though whites contributed substantially to its formation as well. And I would also state that neither are we a secular nation, although secularism and secularists contributed substantially to it as well. There are just too many threads passing through this nation's tapestry to say that it is any one thing, except perhaps most obviously, an anti-monarchy. I think that attempts to label in any extreme are simply inaccurate, and play into some kind of mythical perfectionist mindset. joe

10-16-2002, 02:09 PM	#50
Buffman Beloved Deceased Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: central Florida Posts: 3,546	joedad Thanks for the accolade. I do not have a mailing list. I have no desire to debate David Barton. I have no use for him beyond pointing a finger at him and saying, "Mark 10:19. Do not bear false witness, Defraud not." Toto And yet, there he sits as "our" Attorney General, covering up the bare-breasted statues of Justice...and "our" Constitution. Just imagine the horror of an all Republican Congress having an opportunity to approve Ashcroft's nomination to the Supreme Court to replace a retiring Rehnquist. (Shudder!)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.