Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Something I find interesting is that most "restrict people under 18 for their own good and shield them from corrupting influences" legislation and "nanny state" legislation is pushed by Democrats. It was Frank Lautenberg who introduced the drinking age highway funds bill, it was Tipper Gore who founded the Parents' Music Resource Center, it was Joe Lieberman who tried to get video games censored, California is the state that had a video game censorship law until the SCOTUS struck it down, it's the Democrats who want a smoking age of 21, it was Al Gore and Obama who wanted a national school leaving age of 18, it was New York that introduced the first seat belt laws, etc.
You left some stuff out....
"The 26th Amendment: “Old Enough to Fight, Old Enough to Vote” During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt lowered the minimum age for the military draft age to 18, at a time when the minimum voting age (as determined by the individual states) had historically been 21"
I don't really think so. I doubt that even 1% of Americans could actually explain who the Puritans were. Culture during that general time was rather prudish, and to single out the Puritans for that much influence hundreds of years later is, in my view, an overly simplistic way to attach a quick answer to an underlying conservative basis for American behavior.
Singling out the Puritans - as opposed to the totality of east coast "church" culture...may be wrong. But it's not the "underlying" natural way, but rather that the small communities that America was made of insisted on towing the line. You didn't want to get put in the stocks or be part of a witch hunt and chased out of town.
However, there is a real reason why California ended up setting the tune for much of where America went. Of course, we could add the UK and Elvis and Blues/R&B (music) to that formula.
The "tune in, turn on, drop out" message came from...of all places...Harvard. But it flowered more in California because, in former time, there was a much larger perceived degree of freedom (FROM Religion and judgement of your town/neighbors) there. This continues somewhat to this day and is why our largest "arts" (hollywood), science (silicon valley) and the related economic engine(s).
Interestingly enough, the most catholic states in the USA today are some of the most progressive - in terms of Pot legalization and many other similar issues (I think MA. is most Catholic, RI 2nd).
Calvinism and it' related offshoots - even Baptist - do fit in very well with the "work and prudish" aspects of "conservative" cultures. Appalacia is "scotch-irish" Protestant, while former slaves (and sometimes their masters) were often Baptists. Sects of these religions were the only slight freedoms allowed for those enslaved...so naturally they would be big on control.
All of the above is historical - so although some may see it as "political" it is part and parcel of what forms our nation and worldview.
Oh, I forgot to mention Quakers as well as Jews. Here in Newport, RI both were a decent percentage of the population. Both valued hard work, modesty and "conservative" values. Both, however, would be called "liberal and progressive" in todays political parlance (anti-war, personal freedoms, etc.).
One needs to remember that the Puritans established their base in Plymouth and then Boston. They actually hung Quakers for spreading the faith. Those who desired more freedom went off and established RI or went to NYC area where most anything was accepted (Dutch influence).
Quakers, of course, founded PA - which at the time would be much more liberal than the Puritans.
It is probably the influence of Catholics and Jews as well as Quakers that created a more "liberal" New England and therefore the revolution and the times since. Meantime, the "old time" religions staked their claims in the south and inland and are there to this day.
Were the Puritans really as influential on American culture as people say they are? Are they really the reason that women can't be topless on American beaches? Are they really the reason that American workers don't get more vacation time?
It is probably naive to trace American cultural puritanism directly back to the Puritan religious sect. It would appear that the notoriously conservative bent of American Catholicism came from other sources, but fortunately for the aspiration of Irish immigrants it accommodated that of American Protestants. And the Irish-American hierarchy were happy to impose their cultural views to later R.C. immigrants.
The puritanical views of Protestants and Catholics in my small town in the 1950s were the same, and conflict between the two groups was based upon the fact that each believed the other to be seriously in error as regarded claim to be authentic Christians.
It is probably naive to trace American cultural puritanism directly back to the Puritan religious sect. It would appear that the notoriously conservative bent of American Catholicism came from other sources, but fortunately for the aspiration of Irish immigrants it accommodated that of American Protestants. And the Irish-American hierarchy were happy to impose their cultural views to later R.C. immigrants.
The puritanical views of Protestants and Catholics in my small town in the 1950s were the same, and conflict between the two groups was based upon the fact that each believed the other to be seriously in error as regarded claim to be authentic Christians.
Why do you think Catholics in MA, RI and even other areas became (in general) very liberal in later generations? Was it a matter of education? Or that they were the "working people" and therefore lined up with Unions and Workers/Human rights?
Even New England Protestants are known for not wearing their religion on their sleeves - Daddy Bush being a prime example. These type of people didn't even want to talk about religion.
To note how far back this went - Ben Franklin didn't believe in the divinity of Jesus. Either did Thomas Jefferson. No one even ASKED Ben until very late in life...and he answered in a letter.
Therefore, it's safe to say that our founders and leaders were not "god fearing" like the Puritans. By that time, Newtonian and other science had become the foundation of reason.
It's hard to explain how strong the hold is but I think you can tell the difference when you go to foreign countries that did not have the strict "Puritan" influence that we have in the US. In the US, one doesn't have to have any notion of who they were or what their practices or values were to be stymied by the residual Puritan effect. People are commonly judged in a casual and sometimes stifling manner by others and may not realize why...they should look to the undercurrent of Puritanism. It has nothing to do with religion but like religion it impacts behavior and values. I think that the influence is slowly diminishing (or gone) in some segments of the population or culture and that might feed into some of the notions of a culture war.
I think most of what Americans believe about Puritans came from childish Thanksgiving stories and having to read "The Scarlet Letter" in school. When I first read it, I believed the Scarlet Letter was a historical document written in Puritan times. Actually, it was written about 200 years later, published in 1850, and it probably reflects those "modern" ethics as much as historic ones.
I think most of what Americans believe about Puritans came from childish Thanksgiving stories and having to read "The Scarlet Letter" in school. When I first read it, I believed the Scarlet Letter was a historical document written in Puritan times. Actually, it was written about 200 years later, published in 1850, and it probably reflects those "modern" ethics as much as historic ones.
The Puritans, after the caught King Phillip (Indian Chief) had him drawn and quartered and then put his head on a pike and mounted it (after a parade) outside Plimouth Plantation
I guess some may not consider that as typical of Puritans either.
"Church ordered Philip's body to pulled up to higher ground to begin the act of his mutilation. His body was beheaded and dismembered. Quartered, Church picked four nearby trees and ordered four pieces of Philip's body to be tied to them for the birds to pluck. His hand was given to Alderman as a trophy of the kill. Philip's hand was very unique. It had been disfigured when a pistol misfired years before. Alderman took the maimed hand happily and later would place it in a jar preserved with rum. Alderman would take the jar to taverns where he would allow the owners to display it in exchange for free drinks.
Philip's head was spiked and proudly carried through the streets of Plymouth "
Puritans were not so pure....real history probably puts the Scarlet Letter to shame.
The Puritans, after the caught King Phillip (Indian Chief) had him drawn and quartered and then put his head on a pike and mounted it (after a parade) outside Plimouth Plantation
I guess some may not consider that as typical of Puritans either.
"Church ordered Philip's body to pulled up to higher ground to begin the act of his mutilation. His body was beheaded and dismembered. Quartered, Church picked four nearby trees and ordered four pieces of Philip's body to be tied to them for the birds to pluck. His hand was given to Alderman as a trophy of the kill. Philip's hand was very unique. It had been disfigured when a pistol misfired years before. Alderman took the maimed hand happily and later would place it in a jar preserved with rum. Alderman would take the jar to taverns where he would allow the owners to display it in exchange for free drinks.
Philip's head was spiked and proudly carried through the streets of Plymouth "
Puritans were not so pure....real history probably puts the Scarlet Letter to shame.
Yes..they were quite violent to their enemies...including Quakers. Their colony was a true theocracy--and those that did not toe a very strict line were pilloried, whipped, maimed, exiled and, sometimes, killed.
They were a vestige of the English Civil War--and brought the brutality of Cromwell to America. The real freethinkers stayed in London or Amsterdam. One of the persistent myths about the Puritans is that they were fleeing religious intolerance. They were the intolerant ones...which is why Amsterdam..the most tolerant city in Europe..tossed them out.
The concept of religious freedom was anathema to them.
Yes..they were quite violent to their enemies...including Quakers. Their colony was a true theocracy--and those that did not toe a very strict line were pilloried, whipped, maimed, exiled and, sometimes, killed.
They were a vestige of the English Civil War--and brought the brutality of Cromwell to America. The real freethinkers stayed in London or Amsterdam. One of the persistent myths about the Puritans is that they were fleeing religious intolerance. They were the intolerant ones...which is why Amsterdam..the most tolerant city in Europe..tossed them out.
The concept of religious freedom was anathema to them.
This is why NYC flourished - it was freedom FROM religion.
I live in New England (W. Ma and RI) and see no trace of the Puritans. Now...it is true that "Yankees" can be thrifty, don't generally like to show off and can seem stand-offish to some (because they live and let live). But the live and let live quality is what I like best.
In all my dealings in New England I don't think I have heard the word "Church" or "Jesus" or "faith" mentioned once....and that's in over a decade. Pretty amazing....considering that my experiences in other places were/are far different.
So heading back to the original question - a quick look at debates and politics today show that much of the nation that we consider "religious" (Bible Belt, etc.) didn't stem from New Englanders. That is, there was never an exodus of people and churches from here to there. More likely the home-spun churches of the south developed their own "moral codes" which included white supremacy and slavery as well as the violent tendencies (anti-government, family and other feuds, etc.) of the Scotch-Irish.
Texas is another story altogether - we could probably separate a lot of the southwest where some catholic influence came from missions and mexicans (original converted by the Spanish, etc.).
Although I am no student of theology, I would summarize that the Puritans did not heavily influence the present day much...outside of some Calvinists in New England and similar sects. Religion, as a whole, has influenced America and - together with Brit influences - is probably responsible for our lack of topless beaches.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
