| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
22 Nov 2005 05:22:25 PM |
| Object: |
The Great Debate of Our Season |
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/12/great_debate.html
The Great Debate of Our Season
News: Introducing a Mother Jones special issue on the interplay of
conservative Christianity and the U.S. government.
By the Editors
Illustration: Thomas Fuchs
December/January 2006 Issue
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the
Christian Religion.”
THOSE WORDS, PENNED IN ARTICLE 11 of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, are as
succinct a statement as we have from the Founding Fathers on the role of
religion in our government. Their authorship is ascribed variously to
George Washington, under whom the treaty was negotiated, or to John Adams,
under whom it took effect, or sometimes to Joel Barlow, U.S. consul to
Algiers, friend of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine, and himself no
stranger to the religious ferment of the era, having served as a chaplain
in the Revolutionary Army. But the validity of the document transcends its
authorship for a simple reason: it was ratified. It was debated in the U.S.
Senate and signed into law by President Adams without a breath of
controversy or complaint concerning its secular language, and so stands
today as an official description of the founders’ intent.
And it wouldn’t stand a chance in the government of the country we’ve
become.
The idea of America was always informed by the ideals of its religious
citizens, expressed, often, in religious terms. But the genius of America
was the establishment, by those same individuals, of the world’s first
secular government. That government wasn’t at odds with religion—even the
separation of church and state might be construed as a policy extension of
Jesus’ admonition not to pray as the hypocrites do, in public. And many
religious factions (among them the 19th-century evangelicals) lobbied for
secular governance, to protect themselves from the tyranny of mainstream
denominations. Yet some among the faithful, uncomfortable with America from
the start, saw secularism as the nation’s fatal flaw, instead of its core
strength, and have fought to transform the United States into an expressly
Judeo-Christian nation.
Recently, the inheritors of this viewpoint are prevailing. The measure of
religion’s intrusion into our government and politics can be found whenever
the White House markets a Supreme Court candidate by flaunting her
religious convictions and church affiliation, whenever liberal Democrat
politicians ostentatiously genuflect to show they can be prayerful, too,
whenever a FEMA website directs the public to contribute its
hurricane-relief funds to a right-wing ministry. Kansas senator Sam
Brownback, gearing up to run for president on a faith-based, antiabortion
platform, calls the role of religion in government “the great debate of our
season.”
The religious right didn’t come by this prominence by accident, by casually
capturing (and capitalizing on) the desire of many Americans for a more
meaningful and spiritual life, nor even by the simple tactic of wrapping
itself in the purloined flag of the founders and in a misconstrued
Constitution. They organized, crafting a far-flung and intricate network of
political pulpits, media outlets, funding organs and think tanks, and
integrating it into the political machinery of the Republican right. The
religious right shares the conservatives’ will to power and also, more than
previously, a conviction that it is obligated by destiny to remake the
country in its image.
This issue of Mother Jones is dedicated to illuminating the interplay
between conservative Christianity and the U.S. government. We regard the
movement’s history, chart its arteries of funding and influence, and locate
its wellsprings of support and aspiration. And we also show how such
national issues as Intelligent Design and the death penalty are being
debated within the church. It’s been more than 200 years since the founders
established the separation of church and state. The assault on that
principle now under way promises to alter not only our form of government
but our concept of religion as well.
**************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the U.S. and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: The Great Debate of Our Season; Tripoli discussion fails 10th Amendment test. |
22 Nov 2005 06:45:37 PM |
|
|
alt.education removed.
buckeye-ELO@nospam.net wrote:
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/12/great_debate.html
The Great Debate of Our Season
News: Introducing a Mother Jones special issue on the interplay of
conservative Christianity and the U.S. government.
By the Editors
Illustration: Thomas Fuchs
December/January 2006 Issue
"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the
Christian Religion."
The above extract from the Treaty of Tripoli speaks the truth about the
United States! The problem is that neither separationists, atheists,
or Christians for that matter, understand that the "United States" is a
term for the federal government and not the State governments. This is
evidenced by the fact that the four amendments which deal with voting
rights (15th, 19th, 24th, 26th) distinguish the federal government from
the States by referring to the federal government as the United States
and the State governments as the States. This is also why I've been
posting the following extract from Jefferson which contrasts the duties
of the federal and State governments:
"Our citizens have wisely formed themselves into one nation as to
others and several States as among themselves. To the united nation
belong our external and mutual relations; to each State, severally, the
care of our persons, our property, our reputation and religious
freedom." --Thomas Jefferson: To Rhode Island Assembly, 1801. ME 10:262
Given the 1st A. essentially sterilized the federal government, the
United States, from having any power to legislate religion, the 10th
A., the amendment that anti-religious expression activist Justices now
ignore, automatically reserved the power to legislate religion to the
States. This is because the Founding Fathers wanted foreign countries
to recognize the United States, the federal government, sometimes
referred to by Jefferson as the Foreign Branch, as being religiously
neutral. The problem is that ignoring the 10th A. in Tripoli
discussions leads people to wrongly infer that the "United States" is a
reference to both federal and State governments - ouch!
"I believe the States can best govern our home concerns, and the
General Government our foreign ones." --Thomas Jefferson to William
Johnson, 1823. ME 15:450
THOSE WORDS, PENNED IN ARTICLE 11 of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, are as
succinct a statement as we have from the Founding Fathers on the role of
religion in our government.
Here we go! The use of the word "government" in the above sentence is
ignorantly being used in an anti-religious context as it completely
ignores the different responsibilities that the Founding Fathers had
decided on for the federal and State governments.
Their authorship is ascribed variously to
George Washington, under whom the treaty was negotiated, or to John Adams,
under whom it took effect, or sometimes to Joel Barlow, U.S. consul to
Algiers, friend of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine, and himself no
stranger to the religious ferment of the era, having served as a chaplain
in the Revolutionary Army. But the validity of the document transcends its
authorship for a simple reason: it was ratified. It was debated in the U.S.
Senate and signed into law by President Adams without a breath of
controversy or complaint concerning its secular language, and so stands
today as an official description of the founders' intent.
And it wouldn't stand a chance in the government of the country we've
become.
The idea of America was always informed by the ideals of its religious
<snipped for brevity>
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Kook Fred still arguing Civil War *****. |
23 Nov 2005 03:22:30 AM |
|
|
On 22 Nov 2005 10:45:37 -0800, "fred"
<clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The problem is that neither separationists, atheists,
or Christians for that matter, understand that the "United States" is a
term for the federal government and not the State governments.
"State government" is inferior to Federal government
That was settled by force of arms in the civil war and
ALL court cases since recognize that fact.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Kook Fred still arguing Civil War *****. |
23 Nov 2005 03:53:34 AM |
|
|
<Knickkkers@WhattaIdiot.com> wrote
"State government" is inferior to Federal government
That was settled by force of arms in the civil war and
ALL court cases since recognize that fact.
It was "settled" by the constitutional convention -- an
invention of Southerners -- more than 70 years before
the civil war.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Kook Fred still arguing Civil War *****. |
23 Nov 2005 05:29:31 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:53:34 -0500, "JTEM"
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
<Knickkkers@WhattaIdiot.com> wrote
"State government" is inferior to Federal government
That was settled by force of arms in the civil war and
ALL court cases since recognize that fact.
It was "settled" by the constitutional convention -- an
invention of Southerners -- more than 70 years before
the civil war.
Yeah, but the "newer" Southerners decided that states
had "sovereignty" and got their ***** kicked.
A century and a half later, they're stirring up again.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
