You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Santorum: Separation Of Church And State 'Makes Me Want To Throw Up'
- Thread starter Free Thinker
- Start date
Quote from Wallet:
I'm not going to get into this debate, people can look for themselves...... every quote, link you give I can point elsewhere that contradicts in overwhelming evidence.
The idea that America's Founding Fathers were "Christian" and Deeply Religious individuals isn't something "new" or that there's some type of agenda to pull a fast one on the American people..... it's been the long held view and what has been taught in schools for centuries, until very recent. No the revisionism comes from an atheistic attempt to separate this country from it's original roots, to eradicate all mention or intention of God from the annals of American history.
You have to look no father that what's written above in our US House and Senate chambers " IN GOD WE TRUST" or the fact that all Senate sessions for the past 200+ years are opened with prayer.
From their (US Senates) own website, " Throughout the years, the United States Senate has honored the historic separation of Church and State, but not the separation of God and State."
Your attempts are feeble at best, take it somewhere else.
christians have long had a habit of lying about peoples beliefs soon after their deaths. i saw that even after chris hitchens, one of the worlds most vocal atheists, died some were claiming that he professed belief on his deathbed. same old same old among the deluded. anyway what did the founding fathers really believe:
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
One of the many attacks on our country from the Religious Right is the claim that our country is a Christian Nation...not just that the majority of people are Christians, but that the country itself was founded by Christians, for Christians. However, a little research into American history will show that this statement is a lie. Those people who spread this lie are known as Christian Revisionists. They are attempting to rewrite history, in much the same way as holocaust deniers are. The men responsible for building the foundation of the United States were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were Deists who did not believe the bible was true. They were Freethinkers who relied on their reason, not their faith.
If the U.S. was founded on the Christian religion, the Constitution would clearly say so--but it does not. Nowhere does the Constitution say: "The United States is a Christian Nation", or anything even close to that. In fact, the words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, Creator, Divine, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution-- not even once. Nowhere in the Constitution is religion mentioned, except in exclusionary terms. When the Founders wrote the nation's Constitution, they specified that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." (Article 6, section 3) This provision was radical in its day-- giving equal citizenship to believers and non-believers alike. They wanted to ensure that no religion could make the claim of being the official, national religion, such as England had.
Quote from Free Thinker:
christians have long had a habit of lying about peoples beliefs soon after their deaths. i saw that even after chris hitchens, one of the worlds most vocal atheists, died some were claiming that he professed belief on his deathbed. same old same old among the deluded. anyway what did the founding fathers really believe:
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
One of the many attacks on our country from the Religious Right is the claim that our country is a Christian Nation...not just that the majority of people are Christians, but that the country itself was founded by Christians, for Christians. However, a little research into American history will show that this statement is a lie. Those people who spread this lie are known as Christian Revisionists. They are attempting to rewrite history, in much the same way as holocaust deniers are. The men responsible for building the foundation of the United States were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were Deists who did not believe the bible was true. They were Freethinkers who relied on their reason, not their faith.
If the U.S. was founded on the Christian religion, the Constitution would clearly say so--but it does not. Nowhere does the Constitution say: "The United States is a Christian Nation", or anything even close to that. In fact, the words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, Creator, Divine, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution-- not even once. Nowhere in the Constitution is religion mentioned, except in exclusionary terms. When the Founders wrote the nation's Constitution, they specified that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." (Article 6, section 3) This provision was radical in its day-- giving equal citizenship to believers and non-believers alike. They wanted to ensure that no religion could make the claim of being the official, national religion, such as England had.
The Constitution is a blue print for the day to day workings of the Government, it's not intended to be a statement of belief, but still given it's nature they still included reference to God. If you want to find the reason for writing the Constitution or the reasons why they wanted to separate from England and form their own government look at the Deceleration of Independence, in that tell me you don't find any mention of God.
The absence of the words "Christianity, Bible, et al" in the Constitution doesn't mean they are not implied or those ideas and beliefs were not held by it's originators. If you have a group of 100 men whose backgrounds are Protestant in nature, you don't have to guess at their intent when they reference "GOD".
Your link is atheistic in nature, written by atheists for atheists and very shallow and narrow in it's view when compared to actual history....... free in though and blinded to truth.
done with this
Quote from Wallet:
The absence of the words "Christianity, Bible, et al" in the Constitution doesn't mean they are not implied or those ideas and beliefs were not held by it's originators. If you have a group of 100 men whose backgrounds are Protestant in nature, you don't have to guess at their intent when they reference "GOD".
you are correct. we dont have to guess. we can get a feel for what they believed from their writings. almost none would be considered a christian today. here are a few of their views on the subject:
In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Horatio Spofford, 1814; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike Thomas Jefferson--and Thomas Paine, for that matter--Washington never even got around to recording his belief that Christ was a great ethical teacher. His reticence on the subject was truly remarkable. Washington frequently alluded to Providence in his private correspondence. But the name of Christ, in any correspondence whatsoever, does not appear anywhere in his many letters to friends and associates throughout his life. (Paul F. Boller, George Washington & Religion, Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, pp. 74-75.)
if to believe in the divinity and resurrection of Christ and his atonement for the sins of man and to participate in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper are requisites for the Christian faith, then Washington, on the evidence which we have examined, can hardly be considered a Christian, except in the most nominal sense. (Paul F. Boller, George Washington & Religion, Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, p. 90.)
Washington's religious belief was that of the enlightenment: deism. He practically never used the word "God," preferring the more impersonal word "Providence." How little he visualized Providence in personal form is shown by the fact that he interchangeably applied to that force all three possible pronouns: he, she, and it. (James Thomas Flexner, George Washington: Anguish and Farewell [1793-1799], Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1972, p. 490.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Let the human mind loose. It must be loose. It will be loose. Superstition and Dogmatism cannot confine it. (John Adams, letter to John Quincy Adams, November 13, 1816. From Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 88.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Benjamin] As to Jesus ... I have ... some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble." (Alice J. Hall, "Philosopher of Dissent: Benj. Franklin," National Geographic, Vol. 148, No. 1, July, 1975, p. 94.)
Though himself surely a freethinker, Franklin cautioned other freethinkers to be careful about dismissing institutional religion too lightly or too quickly. "Think how great a proportion of Mankind," he warned in 1757, "consists of weak and ignorant Men and Women, and of inexperienc'd Youth of both Sexes, who have need of the Motives of Religion to restrain them from Vice, to support their Virtue, and retain them in the Practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great Point for its Security." (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 61.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish [Muslim], appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit. I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine. But it is necessary to the happiness of man that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. He takes up the profession of a priest for the sake of gain, and in order to qualify himself for that trade he begins with a perjury. Can we conceive anything more destructive to morality than this? (Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, 1794-1795. From Paul Blanshard, ed., Classics of Free Thought, Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1977, pp. 134-135.)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprize [sic], every expanded prospect. (James Madison, in a letter to William Bradford, April 1, 1774, as quoted by Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 37.)
Quote from Free Thinker:
Rick Santorum on Sunday took on separation of church and state.
"I don't believe in an America where the separation of church and state are absolute," he told 'This Week' host George Stephanopoulos. "The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/26/santorum-church-and-state_n_1302246.html
Shut up Rick, separation is not only good it is great!
Who gave the guy the right to talk on behalf of christians? He should prove he is a christian and independent. Here is a test for him: Why does he not call for a public trial to investigate the murder of Jesus Christ?
Quote from Free Thinker:
you are correct. we dont have to guess. we can get a feel for what they believed from their writings. almost none would be considered a christian today. here are a few of their views on the subject:
In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Horatio Spofford, 1814; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike Thomas Jefferson--and Thomas Paine, for that matter--Washington never even got around to recording his belief that Christ was a great ethical teacher. His reticence on the subject was truly remarkable. Washington frequently alluded to Providence in his private correspondence. But the name of Christ, in any correspondence whatsoever, does not appear anywhere in his many letters to friends and associates throughout his life. (Paul F. Boller, George Washington & Religion, Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, pp. 74-75.)
if to believe in the divinity and resurrection of Christ and his atonement for the sins of man and to participate in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper are requisites for the Christian faith, then Washington, on the evidence which we have examined, can hardly be considered a Christian, except in the most nominal sense. (Paul F. Boller, George Washington & Religion, Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, p. 90.)
Washington's religious belief was that of the enlightenment: deism. He practically never used the word "God," preferring the more impersonal word "Providence." How little he visualized Providence in personal form is shown by the fact that he interchangeably applied to that force all three possible pronouns: he, she, and it. (James Thomas Flexner, George Washington: Anguish and Farewell [1793-1799], Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1972, p. 490.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Let the human mind loose. It must be loose. It will be loose. Superstition and Dogmatism cannot confine it. (John Adams, letter to John Quincy Adams, November 13, 1816. From Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 88.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Benjamin] As to Jesus ... I have ... some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble." (Alice J. Hall, "Philosopher of Dissent: Benj. Franklin," National Geographic, Vol. 148, No. 1, July, 1975, p. 94.)
Though himself surely a freethinker, Franklin cautioned other freethinkers to be careful about dismissing institutional religion too lightly or too quickly. "Think how great a proportion of Mankind," he warned in 1757, "consists of weak and ignorant Men and Women, and of inexperienc'd Youth of both Sexes, who have need of the Motives of Religion to restrain them from Vice, to support their Virtue, and retain them in the Practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great Point for its Security." (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 61.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish [Muslim], appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit. I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine. But it is necessary to the happiness of man that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. He takes up the profession of a priest for the sake of gain, and in order to qualify himself for that trade he begins with a perjury. Can we conceive anything more destructive to morality than this? (Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, 1794-1795. From Paul Blanshard, ed., Classics of Free Thought, Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1977, pp. 134-135.)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprize [sic], every expanded prospect. (James Madison, in a letter to William Bradford, April 1, 1774, as quoted by Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 37.)
Yawn...... Why would a Deist who believes that the "Supreme Architect of the Universe" who doesn't involve itself in worldly affairs... pray for Divine interaction, protection or direction or presume that the Deist's Divine Being is interested in human affairs? in essence asking the Divine to be against it's very Nature. Your own definition is in opposition to their actions.
I don't have enough time to list the countless links and quotes that contradict your earlier posts...............
in a time before science deism was an intellectually honest position on gods.Quote from Wallet:
Yawn...... Why would a Deist who believes that the "Supreme Architect of the Universe" who doesn't involve itself in worldly affairs... pray for Divine interaction, protection or direction or presume that the Deist's Divine Being is interested in human affairs? in essence asking the Divine to be against it's very Nature. Your own definition is in opposition to their actions.
I don't have enough time to list the countless links and quotes that contradict your earlier posts...............
even though they did not believe in the bible or the christian god they had no explaination for the world. hence deism, the belief that something started it all even though there was no evidence that it exists now. we know better now. science has answered most of the "god did it "questions.
are you done yet or do you plan to continue defending the delusion? i have lots of time. i just wish you guys would come up with some new arguments.
Quote from Free Thinker:
in a time before science deism was an intellectually honest position on gods.
even though they did not believe in the bible or the christian god they had no explaination for the world. hence deism, the belief that something started it all even though there was no evidence that it exists now.
Yes and they (deists) also discounted prophecy and miracles, also holding the belief that this unknown, unnamed divine entity did not alter the universe by intervening in it. The universe was created by god and left to it's own demise.
Hence if the founding fathers were true deists they wouldn't have assumed divine providence or prayed to their god for guidance, assumed divine endowment of rights, or anything as the very act would not be in it's divine nature.