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.
In 1797, the Treaty of Tripoli was passed unanimously by the U.S. Senate and signed by the President. Article eleven of the Treaty states that "The Government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion". This seems to differ quite a bit with many people saying today that the United States is founded on Judeo-Christian principles. Is it possible that time has eroded the original intent of our country's founders when it comes to the relationship of religion and government?
In 1797, the Treaty of Tripoli was passed unanimously by the U.S. Senate and signed by the President. Article eleven of the Treaty states that "The Government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion". This seems to differ quite a bit with many people saying today that the United States is founded on Judeo-Christian principles. Is it possible that time has eroded the original intent of our country's founders when it comes to the relationship of religion and government?
The United States is a democracy. It is not a Theocracy - like Islam.
The United States was founded upon the principals of protecting individual freedom. Our Founding Fathers clearly understood the fact that government cannot replace God's morality - and the nature of human beings...
If you really want to study it out it is obvious that the majority of the founding fathers understood the importance of Christian morality and the freedom of religion for all.
Alexander Hamilton
First U.S. Secretary of the Treasury
"In my opinion, the present constitution is the standard to which we are to cling.... Let an association be formed to be denominated 'The Christian Constitutional Society,' its object to be first: The support of the Christian religion. Second: The support of the United States."
April 16-21, 1802 letter to James Bayard
For more pro and con statements like this, you can visit this site
Founding Fathers Statements on Religion in Government - Under God ProCon.org (http://www.undergodprocon.org/pop/FoundersQuotes.htm - broken link)
With all of the problems our nation is facing today, it's unfortunate that people are more concerned about debating this point than in asking God for His wisdom, His mercy and His help!
BTW - Do you attend a church?
Last edited by World Citizen; 03-16-2008 at 09:49 AM..
Discussing the role of religion and government and religion and society is critical and important in these times. Differences in religious beliefs have led to much conflict in the world and in the United States, both in the past and the present. Some of the most heated discussions that led to our Constitution were about religion and its role in government. Our Founding Fathers were all over the map with their opinions on this. The early attempts by the pilgrims and Jamestown settlers to create a theocracy were failures. Fortunately the Founding Fathers recognized this and allowed for religious freedom. In some respects this was a compromise, although a brilliant one. Thomas Paine"s The Age of Reason is fairly illuminating regarding the discussions of that time on religion, God, and Jesus Christ.
In looking at today's politics, we as a country seem to have forgotten history or perhaps are just ignorant of it. Ignorance and reason are not friends.
The draw of the New World was for religious freedom, the right for individuals to seek God on their terms not by the Organized Theocracies of Europe.
The profound belief in God and Christ gave the pilgrims the courage to cross the Atlantic and leave everything they knew, in order to be and exist in Freedom.
It was not a venture to run from God, but to leave the oppressive Orthodoxy and the residual atrocities of the middle ages, inquisitions and tyranny of the evil works in the name of God.
The book you keep touting is not a good argument for your point.
"The Age of Reason" was published in 1794 around the time of the French Revolution and the British political reform movement. Paine later escaped to the United States to avoid arrest in Europe - because of our freedom.
In 1802, Thomas Jefferson stopped Paine from publishing Part III of his book in America. Sounds to me like Mr. Jefferson must have had some kind of a Christian conscience, huh???
BTW - I know that Mr. Jefferson is well known for his statement regarding the separation of church and state. (That statement comes from an address made in a church - about protecting religious freedom in our country)
In 1802, Thomas Jefferson stopped Paine from publishing Part III of his book in America. Sounds to me like Mr. Jefferson must have had some kind of a Christian conscience, huh???
BTW - I know that Mr. Jefferson is well known for his statement regarding the separation of church and state. (That statement comes from an address made in a church - about protecting religious freedom in our country)
He didn't stop Paine from publishing anything, he convinced him to refrain from publishing it out of fear for Paine's wellbeing, it even says so in the article you linked to. Why would you link to something that proves you wrong?
Jefferson is well known for many things other than his deistic, borderline atheistic views, such as being one of the most important founding fathers of our country. He staunchly believed in a secular America, as did most of the other founding fathers. They're probably turning in their graves because of all the Christians trying to claim them as their own.
The book you keep touting is not a good argument for your point.
"The Age of Reason" was published in 1794 around the time of the French Revolution and the British political reform movement. Paine later escaped to the United States to avoid arrest in Europe - because of our freedom.
In 1802, Thomas Jefferson stopped Paine from publishing Part III of his book in America. Sounds to me like Mr. Jefferson must have had some kind of a Christian conscience, huh???
BTW - I know that Mr. Jefferson is well known for his statement regarding the separation of church and state. (That statement comes from an address made in a church - about protecting religious freedom in our country)
My original post was not based on The Age of Reason. My post is based on extensive readings of the founding fathers and their religious beliefs and practices and that influence on the founding of our government. In fact, The Age of Reason was published three years before the Treaty of Tripoli which would make it difficult to use it as a reference for my first post.
As far as Mr. Jefferson having some kind of Christian conscience, I haven't gathered that he was a Christian from anything that I have read. That's not to say he didn't believe some things that Christians do(i.e., "Thou shalt not kill"). In fact, Mr. Jefferson didn't believe that Jesus was divine. Jefferson simply believed that a person be free to practice or not practice any religion one desired, without retribution from government.
I don't think the article proves any point except the history of the cited book, The Age of Reason.
But I do agree with you on one point...
I'm sure that the founding fathers are turning in their graves - but not for the reason you state.
Here it is, copy/pasted from that article:
Quote:
In the late 1790s, Paine fled from France to the United States, where he wrote Part III of The Age of Reason: An Examination of the Passages in the New Testament, Quoted from the Old and Called Prophecies Concerning Jesus Christ. Fearing unpleasant and even violent reprisals, Thomas Jefferson convinced him not to publish it in 1802; five years later Paine decided to publish despite the backlash he knew would ensue
This speech by Patrick Henry, to me is the foundation of this Country, without it, those in elected office at the time would not have moved to become the country that we became.
Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power.The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable * and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace * but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
godspeed,
freedom
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.
It is not a theocracy...
