Founders vs Framers

I read an article today that got me thinking again on this idea that the USA is a 'christian' nation. It's a common fallacy, even politicians (who one would hope have done some factual background reading) make it and I wonder, whether they are being disingenuous or truly belive what they are saying. In other words, are they lying for purpose or just ignorant of the facts.

Sometimes I give people more credit then they deserve and this is one time that I think people can truly be confused and not deliverately misleading. The first immagrants to this territory were seeking freedom for their protestant sects, that is a fact. Another fact is that those times, when immagration was largely religious in nature, took place 200+ years before the relvolution that formed the USA. By that time in our history most immagated for the promise of a better future and not religious reasons.

I believe this difference in the original founders of what would become a nation and those that actually fought, formed and framed the charter of that nation were two entirely different sets of people and over 200 years apart in time as we are 200+ years apart from the writing of the US constitution.

To quote the article, which I recommend for several reasons:

www.alternet.org...

In fact, in his victory speech delivered last week to his supporters, Brat demonstrated that he sits among the majority of Americans when it comes to political and cultural illiteracy.

“I wish to restore America to its Judeo-Christian roots,” declared Brat. "God acted through people on my behalf.”

An opportunist? Or truly that historicall illiterate?

Ignoring the self-delusion of the latter part of the above text, Brat now joins no less than 200 million Americans, according to a number of polls, who believe the U.S. Constitution and our laws are based on Judeo-Christian values. On any given Sunday you will hear Christian-right politicians claim absurdly that U.S. laws are based on the Bible. Spoiler alert: they’re dead wrong. The Constitution’s secular provisions came into being thanks to the Founding Fathers, who shared a deep suspicion of both organized religion and the supernatural. The Constitution was framed with a conscious omission of any mention of God and a prohibition of all religious tests for public office. Moreover, the First Amendment’s declaration that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” embodied the founders’ view that religion has no place in the political domain.

On a side note and in reference to the article sited above ("Americans Are Dangerously Politically Ignorant -- The Numbers Are Shocking
"), in another thread on ATS a poster posted that 'fascism' was a 'leftist' ideology, I then posted the definition of fascism from Oxford Dictionary, nominally the authority on the English Language and his reply "Yes even respected Universities can be wrong." Now, my question - a troll just being contrary to stir up trouble or a true believer. Or perhaps, a politician saying something he knows to be a misrepresentation in order to curry votes from the ingorant or truly ingorant himself.

The Constitution was framed with a conscious omission of any mention of God and a prohibition of all religious tests for public office. Moreover, the First Amendment’s declaration that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” embodied the founders’ view that religion has no place in the political domain.

Hold the phone!

The constitution was not 'secular'.

What it did was to make it to where no single religion was favored more than any other.

People have to choice to believe or not to.

And that is where it begins, and ends.

American values are based on that.

Hell miss the declaration of independence written by the same kind of guys ?

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Natures God.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

www.archives.gov...

The 'creator' is not government.

I believe this difference in the original founders of what would become a nation and those that actually fought, formed and framed the charter of that nation were two entirely different sets of people and over 200 years apart in time as we are 200+ years apart from the writing of the US constitution.

Most would agree that Washington certainly qualifies as someone who actually fought, formed and framed...

“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 to implore His protection and favor.” - George Washington

John Adams certainly qualifies.

The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity. - John Adams

There are countless other examples. It is foolish to deny the fact that the "framers" were mostly religious and mostly christian but of course they had the wisdom to separate church and state. Thank god for that!

Your source was authored by a self-proclaimed 'hater of God' and a FOREIGN ultra-liberal atheist. The fact that you are framing HIM as someone that the founding fathers would agree with borders on hilarity.

Good luck with your agenda.

CJ Werleman is an Australian born atheist author, columnist, and U.S political and social commentator. He is a critic of the Christian right and the influence of corporatist politics and social inequality.

originally posted by: neo96

The Constitution was framed with a conscious omission of any mention of God and a prohibition of all religious tests for public office. Moreover, the First Amendment’s declaration that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” embodied the founders’ view that religion has no place in the political domain.

Hold the phone!

The constitution was not 'secular'.


Hell miss the declaration of independence written by the same kind of guys ?

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Natures God.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

www.archives.gov...

The 'creator' is not government.

The Declaration of Independence and the Contituition are two entirely separate documents. The declaration of independence has nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution. It's basically a Declaration of War.

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance

I believe this difference in the original founders of what would become a nation and those that actually fought, formed and framed the charter of that nation were two entirely different sets of people and over 200 years apart in time as we are 200+ years apart from the writing of the US constitution.

Most would agree that Washington certainly qualifies as someone who actually fought, formed and framed...

“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 to implore His protection and favor.” - George Washington

John Adams certainly qualifies.

The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity. - John Adams

There are countless other examples. It is foolish to deny the fact that the "framers" were mostly religious and mostly christian but of course they had the wisdom to separate church and state. Thank god for that!

And those are their personal convictions. The point is that religious considerations of any type are not incoded in the Constitution of the US and it was deliberately written that way.

a reply to: FyreByrd

But the premise of the article is the author taking issue with Brat's statement "“I wish to restore America to its Judeo-Christian roots."

Brat is absolutely correct that the US has Judeo-Christian roots. Brat made no mention of the constitution or any other specific documents.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the first immigrants to The American Colonies where not " seeking freedom for their protestant sects"
The first immigrants in 1606 where owners and employee's of The London Company & Plymouth Company ( later know as The Virginia Company)
Their purpose was to establish trade with Britain, in tobacco and other commodities.
Those who immigrated because of religion didn't arrive until 1620, fourteen years after the first settlement at Jamestown.

a reply to: FyreByrd

This is debated frequently on a bunch of different forums.

Some say the founders were from the age of enlightenment, choosing science over "God" but that they used religious laws as the basis for the laws of the land etc.

But I think most can agree that the founders of this nation believed in freedom first and foremost.

They truly wanted the United States to be a model for the rest of the world, embracing Libertarian values where people could truly do what they wanted so long as they were not infringing on someone else's rights.

They did not want the State telling people what to do: whether you were worshiping a rock, speaking Swahili or dressing like a clown.

So I'm not sure what Brat means when he talks about "returning" to "Judeo-Christian" values. Feel free to practice whatever you want but if his intent is for the United States to become a nation with a State sanctioned religion, he doesnt understand the meaning of freedom or why this country was founded.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

This is why I find most Republicans almost as scary as Democrats.

They all want to dictate our lives, its just that their agendas are different.

a reply to: FyreByrd

from source;

The Constitution was framed with a conscious omission of any mention of God and a prohibition of all religious tests for public office. Moreover, the First Amendment’s declaration that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” embodied the founders’ view that religion has no place in the political domain.

Always a dilemma with the "God" thing in the U.S. Constitution.

Many States have references as well as other nations. Much to the chagrins of many "Progressive" countries and U.S. states.

Tough nut to crack. Cognitive Dissonance has no boundaries.

Invocationes dei have a long tradition in European legal history outside national constitutions. In ancient times and the Middle Ages, gods or God were normally invoked in contracts to guarantee the agreements made,[3] and formulas such as "In the name of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit" were used at the beginning of legal documents to emphasize the fairness and justness of the created norms.[4] Treaties between Christian nations customarily began with an invocation of God up until the late nineteenth century.[5]

When written constitutions became the norm for modern states in the nineteenth century, several European states carried this tradition over to their founding documents and retained it since, while others – notably laicist France and states influenced by it – did not do so, so as to preserve the state's religious neutrality.[6] European countries whose constitutions do not make reference to God include Norway (1814), Luxembourg (1868/1972), Iceland(1944/68), Italy (1947), Portugal (1976) and Spain (1978);[2] some of those who do are listed below. In the United States, the federal constitution makes no reference to God, but the constitutions of the states of California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Colorado, Washington, Nevada, Iowa, Texas, and Massachusetts, and the U.S. territory Puerto Rico, do. They generally use an invocatio of "God the Almighty" or the "Supreme Ruler of the Universe".


Constitutional references to God

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
a reply to: FyreByrd

But the premise of the article is the author taking issue with Brat's statement "“I wish to restore America to its Judeo-Christian roots."

Brat is absolutely correct that the US has Judeo-Christian roots. Brat made no mention of the constitution or any other specific documents.

No the roots of the actual country are not religiously based - and the framers wrote the constitution as a secular document to found a secular government regardless of their personal convictions.

So, Brat's statement is a misrepresentation of the actual facts surround the founding of the country.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: FyreByrd

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the first immigrants to The American Colonies where not " seeking freedom for their protestant sects"
The first immigrants in 1606 where owners and employee's of The London Company & Plymouth Company ( later know as The Virginia Company)
Their purpose was to establish trade with Britain, in tobacco and other commodities.
Those who immigrated because of religion didn't arrive until 1620, fourteen years after the first settlement at Jamestown.

I stand corrected - thank you. I didn't know that fact.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

www.archives.gov...

Some 'secularists'.

Or is it that some people today don't even know what the word means.

As that other document shows the people of that time did hold religious views.

What they didn't want is a repeat of the events that forced the Pilgrims here.

As we can thank those Piligirms who had that kind of faith.

Fact is we owe our very existence to the people like them.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: FyreByrd

Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

www.archives.gov...

Some 'secularists'.

Or is it that some people today don't even know what the word means.

Apparently you don't know what Secular means: I'll help:

secular
Line breaks: secu|lar
Pronunciation: /ˈsɛkjʊlə /
ADJECTIVE

1Not connected with religious or spiritual matters:
secular buildings
secular attitudes to death
Contrasted with sacred.

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

And the First Amendment says nothing at all about the US being a christian country. It is a secular country - not a theocracy. I'll help again:

theocracy
Line breaks: the|oc¦racy
Pronunciation: /θɪˈɒkrəsi /
NOUN (plural theocracies)

1A system of government in which priests rule in the name of God or a god:
his ambition is to lead a worldwide theocracy

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

a reply to: FyreByrd

And yet from presidents to congressman are sworn in with a bible.

Interesting fact for a 'secular' country.

Then there is that whole 'In God We Trust' on our money.