In a comment made on one of my friends blogs, an assertion was made that America was not founded as a christian nation. In it, the commentator made this statement: "No where does the Constitution mention "Separation of Church and State", but it also never mentions the word gun or guns, does that mean since it's not there that we will just allow you to literally pull up your sleeves and bare your arms for protection, but make guns illegal? Your logic would suggest this very principle.
Also he says this:
The Constitution also never mentions the word God, Bible, Protestant, Christian, Christianity, or Jesus, thus trying to justify that this nation was founded on Christianity is ridiculous.
I would point out one glaring mistake first: The wording is "the right to BEAR arms", not "BARE" arms. I don't think I have to define the difference here. So you think America was not founded as a christian nation, eh? Why don't we do some research and maybe we'll get an idea of what the founding fathers had in mind. Let's start with Ben Franklin, who was possibly the most non religious of all the founders.
Franklin said this:
" In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard and they were graciously answered... Have we now forgotten this powerful Friend? Or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this proof: that God governs the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I therefore beg leave to move that , henceforth, prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven and its blessing upon our deliberation be held in this assembly every morning before we proceed with business." Benjamin Franklin, June 28, 1787
How about Patrick Henry? Was he wrong?
" It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not to be religionist but by Christians, not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ." Patrick Henry
Maybe John Adams will support your case, Mr. Commentator:
"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were...The general principles of Christianity....I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature." John Adams to Thomas Jefferson
Oh, I guess not. Want more? I have more, but I don't want my post to be too long. If these quotes are not enough to convince you that we are a Christian nation(or were once), I have more. Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
Ok funny, you caught me making a grammatical error whilst quickly typing a response on someone else's blog.
Here is where you are wrong:
A. The last of the 1st four European settlements in the new world was founded on Religious principles; the first 3 were on commerce and greed. So even for Spanish and the first English settlers, this was never meant to be a nation of God.
B. As you said, our most important legal document says nothing about us being a Christian or religious nation, and in fact says that the government is not allowed to endorse any religion.
I would assume for most people God is a pretty big thing in their life and I would assume he is more important than their guns, their freedom of press, and their right to trial by jury. That being said, don't you think if our founding fathers, many of whom were Christians, intended for this to be a Christian nation they might have mentioned his name at least once in the Constitution?
C. Even if our founding fathers wanted this to be a Christian nation, which they didn't, they later ratified law that states exactly the opposite.
Article 6 clause 2 of the US Constitution reads as follows:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. "
Now here is an excerpt from a treaty that was ratified by the Senate and the 2nd President John Adams in 1797:
"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
So John Adams and the 1797 Congress are also on my side.
D. In God we trust didn't appear on US currency until the 1950s nor did "one nation under god" appear in our pledge of allegiance until the 50s.
E. Show me one law or amendment ratified by any member of Congress or any President at any point in History that states the US is a Christian Nation, or was founded upon Christianity.
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
“Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.”
Thomas Jefferson 1802
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in Response to a Virginia Bill calling for the financial governmental support of teachers of religion with tax money:
"...no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened 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 nowise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities." Thomas Jefferson, Religious Freedom Act
James Madison in response to the same Bill:
"Because the proposed establishment is a departure from the generous policy, which, offering an Asylum to the persecuted and oppressed of every Nation and Religion, promised a lustre to our country, and an accession to the number of its citizens. What a melancholy mark is the Bill of sudden degeneracy? Instead of holding forth an Asylum to the persecuted, it is itself a signal of persecution. It degrades from the equal rank of Citizens all those whose opinions in Religion do not bend to those of the Legislative authority. Distant as it may be in its present form from the Inquisition, it differs from it only in degree. The one is the first step, the other the last in the career of intolerance. The maganimous sufferer under this cruel scourge in foreign Regions, must view the Bill as a Beacon on our Coast, warning him to seek some other haven, where liberty and philanthrophy in their due extent, may offer a more certain respose from his Troubles.
America was founded as a non-religious nation, one in which one could worship or not worship how one felt.
Can open! Worms everywhere!
Even IF the U.S. of A. HAD been founded as a "Christian" nation, amigo Mark, it also was founded as a SLAVE-HOLDING nation. And now it's not.
It was founded as a cluster of tiny colonies clinging to the Atlantic seaboard. And now it's not.
It was founded as a creature of the Enlightenment. And, sadly, now, really, it's not.
And it was founded as a bunch of other things that it now is not.
But it thrives, nonetheless.
I noticed you use more quotes from Thomas Jefferson, 1 of at least 2 of the founding fathers who were reporedly Agnostic, than anyone else.
I am not going to attempt to amswer all the quotations you use because, frankly, I got bored after reading the first few. (really you should try to keep your comments more concise)
But I will respond to this particular quote:
As you said, our most important legal document says nothing about us being a Christian or religious nation, and in fact says that the government is not allowed to endorse any religion.
So I am to assume that the Declaration of Independence is not important? OK. I will, for the sake of argument. The first amendment does not say it does not endorse any religion. It says it prohubits the government from establishing a religion. To understand this one must first understand why they made this the first point in the first amendment. It was because King George III of England had established a governmental church to which he demanded that the colonists be a member. For this reason it was important that the founding fathers make sure that no one could misinterpret the constitution, but just as ER said, things change and now the language that was so clear to the colonists is muddy to us, even unto the Supreme Court. So you, my friend, are at least in good company.
"The moral principles and precepts contained in the Scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil Constitutions and laws....All the miseries and evil which men suffer from vice, crime, ambitions, injustice, oppression, slavery, and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible." Noah Webster
" God grant that in America true religion and civil liberty may be inseparable..... He is the best friend to American liberty, who is most sincere and active in promoting true and undefiled religion." John Witherspoon, signer of the Declaration of Independence and member of Continental Congress
Supreme Court Justice, Joseph Story (appointed by Pres. James Madison) called America a "Christian country" and slammed deism: " Christianity... is not to be maliciously and openly reviled and blasphemed against. It is unnecessary... for us ...to consider the establishment of a school or college for the propagation of Deism or any other form of infidelity. Such a case is not presumed to exist in a Christian country."
" That book , Sir, is the rock on which our republic stands." Andrew Jackson, 7th President of U.S.
" It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible." George Washington
" ...a book worth more than all other books that were ever printed." Patrick Henry, on the bible
" I have always said, and always say, that the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make us better citizens." Thomas Jefferson
" God gave us life and gave us liberty. Can the liberty of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that those liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and His justice cannot sleep forever." Thomas Jefferson, (the Jefferson Memorial)
The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government and the principles of Christianity." John Quincy Adams
" The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and his apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is the genuine Christianity, and to this ( Christianity) we owe our free Constitution of government." Noah Webster
" By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing and are equally entitled to protection in their liberty." the Supreme Court of Maryland, Runkle vs. Winemiller 1796
" whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly implore His protection and favor" U.S. Congress approving a national day of prayer and thanksgiving
" The Congress of the United States approves and recommends to the people, the Holy Bible...for use in schools" U.S. Congress 1782
There's more.
Thanks for sticking up for my point, Mark. You are much smarter than I am, and I am honored to have my blog featured in the text of your's.
I am sure that I will be mercilessly attacked for my latest post as well, so I will appreciate your thoughts...
I'll just reprint my post to one of toad's posts in your trucker-friend's blog (yes, I am lazy and no, I haven't read all the points made- apologies in advance).
but it would still be unnecessary, as is hanging up 10 commandments in any place other than a church and possibly a museum. And you have yet to tell me you would be fine with kids in public schools stopping 3 times a day to pray to Mecca or having the 5 pillars of Islam hanging in your courthouse.
The difference is, this nation WAS founded by Christian people. I am not religious. Yet I have no problem with the 10 Commandments. It's not harming me. It shouldn't harm you. In themselves, they are good tenets to live by, regardless of your faith. "Thou shalt not steal". How is that threatening to you?
The reason why having the five pillars of Islam wouldn't seem as ok, to me, is because Islam hasn't been planted in this country to make a significant contribution to the building of America. Over time, that can change, and parts of the Islamic faith might be integrated into American culture. But right now, we have 200 years of Judeo-Christian traditions that is being eradicated by the intolerance of the Left for our American heritage and identity which ARE deeply rooted with Christianity. It's insane that schools are afraid to put up Christmas trees, lest they offend someone. Fer Chrissakes, get a grip! My family is not Christian, and we never felt threatened or left out; we put up a tree every year, exchanged gifts, respected and appreciated the beauty of the religious aspects, and enjoyed it as our national holiday.
My bottomline understanding is that the Constitution is not about "freedom from religion"....it is "freedom of religion". In this nation, you are free to practice your religion in peace and the government doesn't endorse any one particular church.
Again those laws all existed thousands of years before Christianity. I realize the historical legal context of the 10 commandments but also see that they are pretty insignificant compared with other documents, especially since most of the principles in the 10 commandments were borrowed from Hammurabis Code of Laws.
Only 3 of the 10 Commandments have laws similar to any of the laws in our law books today.
Pointing out the historical roots of the 10 Commandments...doesn't that make the case even stronger, that non-Christians can respect the historical and cultural significance of the 10 Commandments, and not look upon them strictly as an endorsement of religion?
What's next? Uprooting all those crosses out of Arlington Cemetary, because a minority of people might feel offended and unwelcomed by the sight? Please...groups like the ACLU need to practice some tolerance and understanding.
Our Founding Fathers built this country upon principles and traditions established by Christianity. They escaped religious persecution. Now the Left are the ones doing the persecuting. To find offense in "In God We Trust" stamped upon our coins is just plain making a mountain out of a molehill. It harms NO ONE.
I have a shocker for you. The 10 commandments were not originally Christian. They were around about 2000 years before Christianity, But Christians are smart enough to know that living by the 10 commandments is the best way to be, and no one has yet to establish a more effective code of behaviour.
Ideally, because we do have freedom of religion in our country, guaranteed to us by the constitution, I do not have a problem with muslim kids praying to mecca 5 times a day in school. I do have a problem with muslim kids cutting off my kid's heads. I'm not saying that they would, I am just saying some muslim sects do advocate the murder of anyone not a muslim, and that is when their freedom of religion infringes on another of our rights, the right to Life.
One more Quote and I'll let this go. Chief Justice Earl Warren, one of the most liberal Justices to serve on the nations highest court, had an opinion on this subject as well:
" I believe no one can read the history of our country without realizing the Good Book and the good Spirit of the Savior have from the beginning been our guiding geniuses.... Whether we look to the First Charter of Virginia, or to the Charter of New England, or to the Charter of Massachusetts Bay, or to the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut. The same object is present; a Christian land governed be Christian principles. I believe the entire Bill of Rights came into being because of the knowledge our forefathers had of the Bible and their belief in it; freedom of belief, of expression, of assembly, of petition, the dignity of the individual, the sanctity of the home, equal justice of the law, and the reservation of powers to the people. I like to believe we are living today in the spirit of the Christian religion. I like also to believe that as long as we do so, no great harm can come to our country." Chief Justice Earl Warren, to Time magazine, 1954
Sounds a bit like proselytizing...which this thread is not about.
People happen to be Christians, so what, they also happened to all be white, and mostly English. But in neither case, is that all they were, they were Americans first, perhaps Christian second and White 3rd. Does this mean that since they were mostly white and English that we should hang up the principles of the KKK, or pictures of the Queen?
And no the first colonies were not Christian in nature, yes all the men at St Petersburg were Catholic and I am sure most of the men in Jamestown and Roanoke were Protestant but that is not why they were there. It's why the Pilgrims, who came later, were there but not other settlements.
I am almost positive Thomas Jefferson, especially later in life was not Agnostic, that doesn't mean he didn't see the dangers in mixing the government and religion together. Again, these people’s religions were about as significant as their race and ancestry, and they for the most part, kept that out of the constitution as well, and for a reason.
What someone was quoted as saying really has no relevance when comparing that to written law. As THE PRESS said, we were founded on slavery as well, even though it went against the Bill of Rights, The Declaration of Independence "all men are created equal".
Here's a quote from your beloved Patrick Henry, does this mean we now have to go get slaves because Henry wrote this at some point in his life?
“As much as I deplore slavery, I see that prudence forbids its abolition.” Patrick Henry
Let’s ask the author of the Bill of Rights what he thinks about religion and what the 1st amendment meant:
“Religion and government will both exist in greater purity; the less they are mixed together.” James Madison
“Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect.” James Madison
Or
"The Christian church has set up a religion of pomp and revenue in pretended imitation of a person (Jesus) who lived a life of poverty.” Thomas Paine
Definitely good points. But to just tackle one, at the moment:
What someone was quoted as saying really has no relevance when comparing that to written law. As THE PRESS said, we were founded on slavery as well, even though it went against the Bill of Rights, The Declaration of Independence "all men are created equal".
Let's say the Founding Fathers meant "separation of church and state" the way you see it; doesn't the above statement you made, work both ways? That we could easily say they had it wrong, and that there is no harm in elements of religion in our government?
Again, I see all this boo-hah as irrational fear of religion. It does not threaten me. I don't feel left out. The government is not proselytizing and endorsing a particular church. And we are a nation whose cultural roots stem from a Judeo-Christian heritage. Over time, that will expand to include other faiths and cultures in a signficant manner that Christians and Jews have contributed to our cultural traditions.
Yes the Government is endorsing a religion by doing the following:
Giving money to faith based (Christian-Protestant) organizations that refuse to hire someone of a different faith.
Adding the word "God" on our currency and in our Pledge. They aren't endorsing Hinduism or Atheism, that is for sure.
Making laws based on Christian principles; I have to again point out the restriction of Alcohol sales on Sundays and the withdrawal of funding to organizations that perform abortions, or even pass out condoms.
Setting decency standards in broadcasting based on religious principles but allowing Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell to say any hateful lies they want.
Putting religious dogma of only one religion up in public areas and saying “just don’t look at it".
Does this mean we can put pictures of nude lesbians making out on all of our courthouses and just tell everyone not to look at it if it offends them?
You know? It occurs to me that the false notion that The USA was not founded as a Christian Nation is a relatively nouveau concept, perpetrated by those who would change the intent of the founding documents to justify the propogaton of their own morals, or lack of morals. The assertion that This was, indeed a Christian nation is a correct one, whether you want to believe it or not. One can search for, and find, quotes ad infinitum to back up their own specific arguments.
Bubby and I are old enough to remember a time when there was no doubt and no argument about the intentions of the framers of our constitution. We didn't need to find documents and quotes to prove otherwise. We just knew. Remember, the one document that is generally regarded as the most important of them all, contains the words "We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights" The word "Creator" does not refer to Confusious or Nitzche.
Yes the Government is endorsing a religion by doing the following:
No...my point is they are not endorsing a single church. Nowhere does it say "separation of church and state" in the Constitution; it is an irrational fear to think that "God" is a naughty word if the government stamps it on a coin. I find it comforting.
Giving money to faith based (Christian-Protestant) organizations that refuse to hire someone of a different faith.
I think you have a misunderstanding of faith-based initiatives. Religious organizations of ALL faiths are able to apply and compete for federal money to help the needy. If organizations are already in place to help the needy, such as faith-based organizations, then why not give them more funds to help them do so? This isn't the same thing as giving money to a church. These organizations may be affiliated with a church, but they are not funding their religion. The money goes to helping the hungry, the illiterate, drug-addicted, in an efficient manner, because the overhead for tackling these problems and the volunteers to work on them already exist. Taxpayers are saved from paying a new layer of bureaucracy. It is a practical way to attack social problems without overspending. As long as the money goes to job training, there's nothing wrong with giving a church organization that does job training federal money. Jewish and Muslim groups, by the way, were just as happy to receive this federal help. And most of the new applicants have been inner-city groups, anyway. People are saved by individuals, more than they are by government.
Adding the word "God" on our currency and in our Pledge. They aren't endorsing Hinduism or Atheism, that is for sure.
I would say people should have bigger things to worry about than "God" on our currency. If enough Hindus become the majority, let them legislate the change. I certainly don't endorse fanatical atheism cramming their beliefs down my society and being offended by every little thing.
Setting decency standards in broadcasting based on religious principles but allowing Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell to say any hateful lies they want.
Decency standards is no a strictly "religious" monopoly. "Tolerance" does not mean that society has to put up with crap and be fearful of calling crap what it is- CRAP! Because if we do, it would make us "intolerant" or "non-understanding". Do you think current laws which encroach upon the rights of pedophiles should be revoked, because of "decency standards"? Do you think those laws are in place, because it is a strictly "religious" commodity?
Putting religious dogma of only one religion up in public areas and saying “just don’t look at it".
Does this mean we can put pictures of nude lesbians making out on all of our courthouses and just tell everyone not to look at it if it offends them?
It's really not a fair analogy. Apples and oranges. Try again.
I live in Los Angeles County. 3 out of 5 supervisors voted to change the County Seal which had a tiny cross off to the side, simply because the ACLU busybodies threatened to sue. That cross represents history, as much as the Christian faith, through Catholic missionaries. Meanwhile, smack-dab in the center of the Seal is the pagan goddess Pomona. Go figure.
RE: Mark
Kind of like when you just knew black people had a place in society, right under white people?
RE: Nantucket
So you don't see a problem with faith based organizations receiving federal money and being able to fire people who are:
Jews, Catholics, Not Catholics, Gay, Agnostic, had an abortion, Atheists etc?
So does that mean the federal government can give money to the NAACP who help people and that the NAACP can refuse to hire white people?
Also, its not apples and oranges to say that someone doesn't have to look at lesbian statues. The argument that was presented to me was if you don't like it don't look at it; the same applies to censorship and pornography, but very few conservatives would side with me on that one. And you say it's inappropriate to hang lesbian statues in courthouses but quite frankly I think it would be a welcomed change, I find it appropriate and I am a tax paying American too, and since we have already decided to make courthouses and public areas museums, why not a couple of lesbian sculptures to go along with the "historical" 10 Commandments, that way everyone is represented.
And I would side with you on the LA case for 2 reasons:
1 There is another religious symbol that symbolizes something not of a religious nature
2 If Los Angeles was founded as a Catholic Mission, I can see a cross being used as a symbol of that.
No one has presented me any evidence that the US is a Christian nation, or found it written in one legal document that affects law, other than the circumstantial evidence that a lot more Christians lived here than any other religion, besides the Native American and former slave populations.
Toad, you say: RE: Mark
Kind of like when you just knew black people had a place in society, right under white people?
Excuse me, but when exactly did I ever say anything remotely like that? You have ceased to be entertaining and have now moved into the realm of obnoxiousness.
I am sorry you have sunk so low now. I had thought we could stay civil to each other but you have reacted in a typical liberal knee jerk fashion. from now on your comments will be ignored.
You said that our grandfathers "just accepted that we were the United States of Jesus" and therefore that makes it right and ok. Well I say that our "grandfathers" had more than just a few things wrong. They also thought black people should go to their own schools, not bitch about white water fountains, women shouldn't work, men should be waited on by their wives, cigarettes cured cancer, alcohol makes you a better driver and that anyone with an earring was gay.
So you don't see a problem with faith based organizations receiving federal money and being able to fire people who are:
Jews, Catholics, Not Catholics, Gay, Agnostic, had an abortion, Atheists etc?
Why are you obsessed with this "firing/hiring" bent? the organizations I am referring to have volunteers who are doing charity work and social work to help the needy. Since they are already established to help the needy, it makes sense to save us taxpayer money by not setting up more bureaucracy but rather let these organizations apply for federal funding, which is to be used to help people, not proselytize.
And no, I don't think it's the government's business to legislate who people can hire. If the Boy Scouts of America don't want to include girls into their organization, so what? If they decided they don't want gays in leadership positions, so? If they didn't want Swedes to join, big frickin' deal. It's their organization, let 'em run it the way they want.
So does that mean the federal government can give money to the NAACP who help people and that the NAACP can refuse to hire white people?
Sure. It's already happened: http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/neworleans/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1119684444256180.xml
That was last weekend. The National Association of Black Social Workers turned away a white social worker.
Also, its not apples and oranges to say that someone doesn't have to look at lesbian statues. The argument that was presented to me was if you don't like it don't look at it; the same applies to censorship and pornography, but very few conservatives would side with me on that one. And you say it's inappropriate to hang lesbian statues in courthouses but quite frankly I think it would be a welcomed change, I find it appropriate and I am a tax paying American too, and since we have already decided to make courthouses and public areas museums, why not a couple of lesbian sculptures to go along with the "historical" 10 Commandments, that way everyone is represented.
Reread my post, because I already answered this. What you're asking for is an "anything goes" society and all things are equal, and morality is relative. If you can't tell the difference between apples and oranges, I can't help you.
No one has presented me any evidence that the US is a Christian nation, or found it written in one legal document that affects law, other than the circumstantial evidence that a lot more Christians lived here than any other religion, besides the Native American and former slave populations.
I've not read through all the posts, but this IS a Christian nation. How do you suppose all those countless religious monuments and references got on those federal buildings in the first place?!
Article. VII.
The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.
done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
Whether the government endorses a specific religion (which it doesn't) or not, our history, culture, and traditions have been built largely by a Christian majority. If over 90% of the population is Christian, then we are STILL a Christian nation. And I'll say it again: I am not religious.
Atheists have been fanatical with the idea of wiping out all references to religion in government; yet throughout our nation's history, religion has been a foundational cornerstone of our nation. It is Christian values that has given this country much of its moral compass.
No where in the COTUS does is say that we must keep a sep. of church and state (it does, however, appear in the Soviet Constitution). It simply says that Congress cannot establish an official religion, make law so as to govern a specific religion, or restrict the ability of one to practice his/her religion.
There is a tradition in this country of attempting to keep the state out of church politics, but that doesn't come into existence as a rallying cry post-WWII.
Furthermore, the activists on the left that have a problem with religious establishment, so they attempt to remove God from any mention in public display.
Perhaps if we did arm the bears then they would settle this argument for us. What say you all? Non denominational bears baring arms to fight for the constitution and Karl Rove & Howard Dean's right to be asses?
Anon, It certainly would be preferable to have something or someone fighting our battles for us, but alas, we bear this cross alone, as a nation.
"Bear this cross alone..." Ha-ha I love puns.
Post a Comment