Freethought & Rationalism Archive

beekay · 04-02-2003, 09:15 AM

Quote:

To the editor: We as Americans need to remember and appreciate our heritage. The founders and colonists made enormous sacrifices, even the ultimate sacrifice, to write the greatest document for a free people. Americans have had to continue to make sacrifices to preserve our way of life. Freedom is not free. Unfortunately, we are still facing enemies of democracy in the terrorists, Saddam Hussein and North Korea. Our founding fathers had to not only declare independence from a tyrant but fight for that independence. Throughout their struggle with the king and his Redcoats, the founders sought divine help for their cause. The founders mentioned "God" and the "Judeo-Christian" principles in their writings. They never intended to divorce "God" from the American experiment. John Adams, our second president, put our country and principles ahead of partisan political interests. He wrote this just before he signed the "Declaration of Independence:"
"Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principIes upon which freedom can securely stand."
How can we expect the Almighty to bless our nation when atheists and humanists are gradually destroying our ancient landmarks. Daniel Webster made this statement in 1821:
"If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity."
Thank God for our founders and the Judeo-Christian heritage that made the United States of America the greatest nation on the face of the earth.
May it never die!

Anyone know if that John Adams quote is accurate? I am considering responding to this letter.

So, what ancient landmark have you destroyed lately?

lisarea · 04-02-2003, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by beekay
Anyone know if that John Adams quote is accurate? I am considering responding to this letter.

It seems to be accurate. My question, though, is that if religion is such a fundamental building block of the US, why is it that all these pious founders never thought to, say, CODIFY that?

I've always thought that the fact that so many of our founders were religious gave greater weight and significance to the fact that they chose to specifically prohibit establishing a state religion.

Quote:

So, what ancient landmark have you destroyed lately?

Sorry about Easter Island. That was just an April Fool's joke gone horribly awry.

Godless Dave · 04-02-2003, 10:20 AM

I'd focus on the accuracy of the statement that Saddam Hussein and North Korea are terrorists.

Toto · 04-02-2003, 10:42 AM

The Adams quote in context:

Letter to Zabdiel Adams
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 21, 1776

Quote:

Your letter, Sir, gave me great pleasure, and deserves my most hearty thanks.

I am fully with you in sentiment, that although the authority of the Congress, founded as it has been in reason, honor, and the love of liberty, has been sufficient to govern the colonies in a tolerable manner, for their defence and protection, yet that it is not prudent to continue very long in the same way; and that a permanent constitution should be formed, and foreign aid obtained.

. . .

I assure you, Sir, that your employment in investigating the moral causes of our miseries, and in pointing out the remedies, is devoutly to be wished. There is no station more respectable, nor any so pleasant and agreeable. Those who tread the public stage in characters the most extensively conspicuous, meet with so many embarrassments, perplexities, and disappointments, that they have often reason to wish for the peaceful retreats of the clergy. Who would not wish to exchange the angry contentions of the former for the peaceful contemplations of the closet?

�Where Contemplation prunes her ruffled wings,
And the free soul looks down to pity kings.�

Who would not exchange the discordant scenes of envy, pride, vanity, malice, revenge, for the sweet consolations of philosophy, the serene composure of the passions, the divine enjoyments of Christian charity and benevolence?

Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue; and if this cannot be inspired into our people in a greater measure than they have it now, they may change their rulers and the forms of government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty. They will only exchange tyrants and tyrannies. You cannot, therefore, be more pleasantly or usefully employed than in the way of your profession, pulling down the strong-holds of Satan. This is not cant, but the real sentiment of my heart. Remember me with much respect to your worthy family and to all friends.

Zabdiel Adams appears to have been John Adams cousin and an ordained minister. This is a private letter and not an official document, and should probably be read in the light of how you would talk to your cousin the minister if you wanted to maintain family harmony.

John Adams also signed the Treaty of Tripoli, which states that this country was not founded on the Christian religion. There are more quotes from him here:

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/adams.htm

Stephen Maturin · 04-02-2003, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by beekay
Anyone know if that John Adams quote is accurate?

This quote mining nonsense really honks me off. As Toto pointed out, the quote is accurate as far as it goes but radically incomplete. The author of that letter to the editor also fails to point out that Adams's views on religion would cause the average evangelical Christian's head to explode. Moreover, exactly how you get from "Adams expressed skepticism about the moral preparedness of 18th century colonists" to where the crazies want to go ("The founders wanted boatloads of public money spent promoting the view that every word in the Bible is literal truth") remains a mystery to me. But hey, such is the nature of quote mining; you can basically make up any idiotic conclusion you like and then cobble together a patchwork of quotations that clothe your conclusion with a made-up aura of plausibility.

Quote:

Originally posted by beekay
So, what ancient landmark have you destroyed lately?

Not a one, officer, I swear! Well, come to think of it, that tree stump I helped my friend dig out of his backyard last weekend was kinda old.

Beekay, if you decide to respond in writing, please - pretty please with sugar on top - point out that when the founders sought divine help for their cause, what they got was the French.

lisarea · 04-02-2003, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen Maturin
This quote [...] is accurate [...] The author of that letter to the editor [...] expressed skepticism about [...] where the crazies want to go. [T]he Bible is literal truth

beekay · 04-02-2003, 12:52 PM

I agree that quote mining is essentially useless. I try not to do it myself when trying to make a point. Words can be twisted too easily, especially over time. The person being quoted is no longer around to defend the original meaning and intent.

I am considering writing a future article about how being a bigot towards atheists is socially acceptable. That one sentence in the above letter about atheists destroying things is so typical and really ticks me off.

My editor had once run a letter that essentially retold the old atheist meeting a bear in the woods joke. There was no other point to the letter other than to tell the joke (which the editor knew was aimed by the writer directly at me personally).

I can take a joke. But I can't help but wonder if that joke had been about Jews or blacks, if it would have been published. I suspect not. So, why was it OK to publish one about atheists? No one bats an eye at that.

Sucks to be in the minority ...

Stephen Maturin · 04-02-2003, 03:35 PM

Damn, Lisa, you've got some serious skills! You have a big future in the Liar for Jesus(TM) trade, if, of course, you don't mind flushing your integrity down the toilet and your skin can handle the requisite 10-15 hot showers per day.

trillian · 04-02-2003, 05:07 PM

Another good source of writings/quotes is Thomas Jefferson who believed in total religious freedom, even for atheists:

N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom (1779), quoted from Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: Writings (1984), p. 347

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781-82 (capitalization of the word god is retained per original; see Positive Atheism's Historical Section)

Incidently, he wrote the "Declaration of Independence" that John Adams signed.

Other good quotes here:
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/.../jefferson.htm

also, dont know a link but there were discussions before the final Constitution about the "God" language in it. It was debated and deleted.

Grad Student Humanist · 04-03-2003, 12:03 PM

Why does anyone bother to either refute or get into prolonged debates regarding the religious beliefs (or lack of them) professed by the Founders?

The answer that should be given whenever some fundie brings up the Founder's religious values is this:

"The Founders' views on religion, race relations, the role of women in society, science, sodomy, etc. have no bearing on the way this country functions or governs itself in the 21st century."

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

04-02-2003, 10:20 AM	#3
Godless Dave Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast? Posts: 10,762	I'd focus on the accuracy of the statement that Saddam Hussein and North Korea are terrorists.

04-02-2003, 12:52 PM	#7
beekay Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Western North Carolina Posts: 121	I agree that quote mining is essentially useless. I try not to do it myself when trying to make a point. Words can be twisted too easily, especially over time. The person being quoted is no longer around to defend the original meaning and intent. I am considering writing a future article about how being a bigot towards atheists is socially acceptable. That one sentence in the above letter about atheists destroying things is so typical and really ticks me off. My editor had once run a letter that essentially retold the old atheist meeting a bear in the woods joke. There was no other point to the letter other than to tell the joke (which the editor knew was aimed by the writer directly at me personally). I can take a joke. But I can't help but wonder if that joke had been about Jews or blacks, if it would have been published. I suspect not. So, why was it OK to publish one about atheists? No one bats an eye at that. Sucks to be in the minority ...

04-02-2003, 03:35 PM	#8
Stephen Maturin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Broomfield, Colorado, USA Posts: 1,295	Damn, Lisa, you've got some serious skills! You have a big future in the Liar for Jesus(TM) trade, if, of course, you don't mind flushing your integrity down the toilet and your skin can handle the requisite 10-15 hot showers per day.

04-02-2003, 05:07 PM	#9
trillian Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: OC Posts: 1,620	Another good source of writings/quotes is Thomas Jefferson who believed in total religious freedom, even for atheists: N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. -- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom (1779), quoted from Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: Writings (1984), p. 347 The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781-82 (capitalization of the word god is retained per original; see Positive Atheism's Historical Section) Incidently, he wrote the "Declaration of Independence" that John Adams signed. Other good quotes here: http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/.../jefferson.htm also, dont know a link but there were discussions before the final Constitution about the "God" language in it. It was debated and deleted.

04-03-2003, 12:03 PM	#10
Grad Student Humanist Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Melrose, MA Posts: 961	Why does anyone bother to either refute or get into prolonged debates regarding the religious beliefs (or lack of them) professed by the Founders? The answer that should be given whenever some fundie brings up the Founder's religious values is this: "The Founders' views on religion, race relations, the role of women in society, science, sodomy, etc. have no bearing on the way this country functions or governs itself in the 21st century."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.