[nolidad]

Here is one concise link showing America was founded upon Christianity.

America's Christian Foundation

As well as another:

WallBuilders - Issues and Articles - The Founding Fathers on Jesus, Christianity and the Bible

and another (actually ad for a book)

America's Christian History: The Untold Story

more to come as needed.

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by nolidad

I agree no wit is- but 200 years ago SCOTUS would not have thrown it out- for one simple fact it didn't compel anyonme topray or to pray iin anay specific manner of sect.

well thank God we as a nation have become more open minded and tolerant.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Wrong but don't let histpory stand in yor way.

This is, as usual, useless. You are asserting that the first ammendment isn't in the constitution, and accusing me with no specifics of ignoring history.

The US government officially declared that it was in no way founded on Christianity. Your counter is opinion books others should "read to become educated".

The court has ruled. Repeatedly. Congress has ruled, and the president signed. Your claim is personal knowledge regarding the meaning of the government above and beyond that of every branch of the government. It's rediculious.

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

This is, as usual, useless. You are asserting that the first ammendment isn't in the constitution, and accusing me with no specifics of ignoring history.

The US government officially declared that it was in no way founded on Christianity. Your counter is opinion books others should "read to become educated".

The court has ruled. Repeatedly. Congress has ruled, and the president signed. Your claim is personal knowledge regarding the meaning of the government above and beyond that of every branch of the government. It's rediculious.

Blah blah blah-- the modern courts have ruled buyt as late as the latre 1800''s SCOTUS declared this was a Christina nation. Th ewriting of the founders and most signers of both e th edeclaration and teh Constitution all said this nation was dedicated to teh glory of God and that God was responsible in some way for seeing this nation founded. So read the links, if you want more qoutiong th efounders as to teh Christian nature of America I will gladly post many many more. The treaty of Tripoli with its misundstood phrase does not trump teh thousands of actions, copmmetns both before and after the treaty from showing th is nation was believed to be a nation built to the glopry of th eGod of the Bible.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

the modern courts have ruled buyt as late as the latre 1800''s SCOTUS declared this was a Christina nation.

LOL So the entire government was wrong in 1776, and in 1797, and SCOTUS was wrong in 1883, and in 2010, but you'll appeal to SCOTUS in some other case?

Either SCOTUS is authoratative or it is not. Either Congress is authoratative or it is not. Either the constitution is authoratative or it is not.

Congress - "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" - Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 and signed by President John Adams on June 10, 1797.

SCOTUS - Jefferson's involvement with the amendment and concluded that his interpretation was "almost an authoritative declaration" of its meaning. - Reynolds v. U.S. (1879)

So, as we can see, the Constitution prohibits congress from passing laws respecting the establishment of religion... like this one.

Your "founded on", "meant to be for", "based on" and most everything else: in addition to being wrong, is entirely unrelated to what the Constitution allows and demands. You've offered nothing to support an interpretation of the first ammendment that allows congress to pass a law requireing the president to advocate prayer.

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

LOL So the entire government was wrong in 1776, and in 1797, and SCOTUS was wrong in 1883, and in 2010, but you'll appeal to SCOTUS in some other case?

Either SCOTUS is authoratative or it is not. Either Congress is authoratative or it is not. Either the constitution is authoratative or it is not.

Congress - "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" - Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 and signed by President John Adams on June 10, 1797.

SCOTUS - Jefferson's involvement with the amendment and concluded that his interpretation was "almost an authoritative declaration" of its meaning. - Reynolds v. U.S. (1879)

So, as we can see, the Constitution prohibits congress from passing laws respecting the establishment of religion... like this one.

Your "founded on", "meant to be for", "based on" and most everything else: in addition to being wrong, is entirely unrelated to what the Constitution allows and demands. You've offered nothing to support an interpretation of the first ammendment that allows congress to pass a law requireing the president to advocate prayer.

Well it wasn't wronmg in 1776 when it founded teh nation- they had it dedicated to th eLord- they just didn't mandate it for all citizens. That was teh difference between America and Europe where intolerance for teh non state religions in country was allowed.

The qoutes are form a series of articles by Michael Medved.

From the mouth of Jefferson himself:

A

patriot must be a religious man.” Thomas Jefferson, who disagreed with Adams on so many points of policy, clearly concurred with him on this essential principle. “God who gave us life gave us liberty,” he wrote in 1781. “And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God?” Jefferson’s friend and colleague, James Madison (acclaimed as “The Father of the Constitution”) declared that “religion is the basis and Foundation of Government,” and later (1825, after retiring from the Presidency) wrote that “the belief in a God All Powerful, wise and good…. is essential to the moral order of the World and the happiness of men.”

From a president of the Continental Congress:

Far from insisting on a “secular nation,” the founders clearly believed that any reduction in the public’s fervent and near universal Christian commitment would bring disastrous results to the experiment in self-government they had sacrificed so much to launch. Elias Boudinot of New Jersey, who served as President of the Continental Congress in the last stages of the Revolution (1782-83 wrote: “Our country should be preserved from the dreadful evil of becoming enemies of the religion of the Gospel, which I have no doubt, but would be the introduction of the dissolution of government and the bonds of civil society.”

From 2 SCOTUS Justices:

John Marshall, the father of American Jurisprudence and for 34 epochal years (1801-35) the Chief Justice of the United States, wrote: “The American population is entirely Christian, and with us Christianity and Religion are identified. It would be strange indeed, if with such a people, our institutions did not presuppose Christianity, and did not often refer to it, and exhibit relations with it.” His colleague on the court (1796-1811), Justice Samuel Chase, delivered an opinion (Runkel v. Winemill) in 1799 declaring: “Religion is of general and public concern, and on its support depend, in great measure, the peace and good order of government, the safety and happiness of the people. 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 religious liberty.”

From teh congress that passed teh first amendment::

In fact, the same Congress that approved the First Amendment gave a clear indication of the way they understood its language when, less than 24 hours after adopting the fateful wording, they passed the following Resolution: “Resolved, that a joint committee of both Houses be directed to wait upon the President of the United States, to request that he would recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging, with grateful hearts, the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceable to establish a Constitution of government for their safety and happiness.” It never occurred to this first Congress in 1789 that their call for a government sponsored day of “thanksgiving and prayer” would conflict with the prohibition they had just adopted prohibiting “an establishment of religion.” Not until the infamous Everson decision of 1947 did the Supreme Court create the doctrine of a “wall of separation between church and state,” quoting (out of context) from an 1802 letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association.

Jefferson recommended Govt funds to missionaries:

President Jefferson created the image of the wall in order to reassure the Baptists that government would never interfere with their religious life, but he never suggested that religion would have no role in government. In 1803, in fact, Jefferson recommended to Congress the approval of a treaty that provided government funds to support a Catholic priest in ministering to the Kaskaskia Indians.

Of Jefferson:

Three times he signed extensions of another measure described as “An Act regulating the grants of land appropriated for Military services and for the Society of the United Brethren for propagating the Gospel among the Heathen.” Jefferson also participated every week in Christian church services in the Capitol Building in Washington DC

Jerry you are just wrong- and in regards as to making teh SCOTUS and congress authoratative or not- even you have agreed when laws and decisions have been overturned by subsequent cogresses or SCOTUS. They have authority- but they are not authoratatrive as you imply.

Case dismissed- the jury finds that the founders knew we were a Christina nation.

[slap_j]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Well it wasn't wronmg in 1776 when it founded teh nation- they had it dedicated to th eLord- they just didn't mandate it for all citizens. That was teh difference between America and Europe where intolerance for teh non state religions in country was allowed.

There is an important distinction between nation and state that you're failing to make. Nation refers to the people. State refers to a governing entity. As a state we're a constitutional republic. Not a Christian theocracy. As a people or nation we're nominally Christian but highly secularized. Perhaps in the past we were a Christian nation. But we've never been a Christian state.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Well it wasn't wronmg in 1776 when it founded teh nation- they had it dedicated to th eLord- they just didn't mandate it for all citizens. That was teh difference between America and Europe where intolerance for teh non state religions in country was allowed.

The qoutes are form a series of articles by Michael Medved.

From the mouth of Jefferson himself:

I'm going to go ahead and follow that rabbit trail a little, because Jefferson is interesting to quote here:

"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors. "

So Jefferson thought that Christianity was mythology. He believe in Jesus as a man with an idea: but none of the theology. That you are rewriting Jefferson so much as to make him an advocate of basing a nation on a religion he didn't subscribe to is pretty telling.

Now show me your proof that "law respecting the establishment of religion" is not met by the 1950's prayer day law.

Beyond that: you seem to be quoting "two SCOTUS justices" and "some guy who was on the congress" and ignoring the rulings of SCOTUS itself, and things officially ratified by congress (like the Treaty of Tripoli). It's cherry-picking at best.

Also, it seems focused on aruging something I keep pointing out is off-topic. This is not "is America founded on Chrsitianity", and SCOTUS did not overturn the prayer-day law based on how America was founded.

The law was overturned as a violation of the first ammendment... a legal position consistant whth hundreds of years of jurisprudence.

Jerry you are just wrong- and in regards as to making teh SCOTUS and congress authoratative or not- even you have agreed when laws and decisions have been overturned by subsequent cogresses or SCOTUS. They have authority- but they are not authoratatrive as you imply.

Oh? Then who, in your opinion, is authoritative on the meaning of the first ammendment?

[nolidad]

The law was overturned as a violation of the first ammendment... a legal position consistant whth hundreds of years of jurisprudence.

So you didn't read the link that I posted showing SCOTUS in an 1879- ruling declared we were a Christina natrion? Why am I not surprised.

As to your Jefferson qoute- cite the reference please? It runs completely counter to many of Jeffersons qoutes suppoortiung religion and having a great respect for Jesus.

Now show me your proof that "law respecting the establishment of religion" is not met by the 1950's prayer day law.

Can't prove a negative. This does not establish a religion, does not entangle the governemtn with any religion, does not compel anyone to pray or not pray, does not promote any religion over any other. So you tell me how it would violate teh 1950's law.

Oh? Then who, in your opinion, is authoritative on the meaning of the first ammendment?

The first amendment itself. Differing SCOTUS' over time have ruled differently based on their judicial bias. you know that I know that so please SCOTUS rules differetnly depending on the tilt of the court..

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by slap_j

There is an important distinction between nation and state that you're failing to make. Nation refers to the people. State refers to a governing entity. As a state we're a constitutional republic. Not a Christian theocracy. As a people or nation we're nominally Christian but highly secularized. Perhaps in the past we were a Christian nation. But we've never been a Christian state.

Well in the fact that Christinaity was mandated like in European countires ( at least a particular sect of it), and that our leaders had to undergo a religious test, I agree, Christinaity was not required. But given the fact it had free liberty within the govt. as proven by the govt. actions (i.e. paid chaplains, govt. sponsorship of Christian missions,church services in the capital, public proclamations of prayer and repentence et. etc. etc.).

Even Jefferson who was a deist- gave great respect for Christina values and said they were necessary for good governance. When he wrote the "seperation of church and state" phrase to the Danbury Baptists- he was referring to Rogers speech in that a wall shoud be built to protect teh church from the state not the other way around. That is what Jefferson was refferring ot and agreed upon- religion should influence teh state not the other way around. As is proven by the writinbgs of the founders.

I totally agree we are not a Christina theocracy.
I totally agree we have become a highly secular country
I totally agree many people are Christian in name only.
I also agree that people back then were nominally Christian.
I agree we have morphed into a nation that our founders would barely recognize.

[Ridley's Own]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Even Jefferson who was a deist- gave great respect for Christina values and said they were necessary for good governance. When he wrote the "seperation of church and state" phrase to the Danbury Baptists- he was referring to Rogers speech in that a wall shoud be built to protect teh church from the state not the other way around. That is what Jefferson was refferring ot and agreed upon- religion should influence teh state not the other way around. As is proven by the writinbgs of the founders.

There is a difference between Christianity or religion generally being an underlying princple behind the theory of our government (what you might call the undergirding of American political theory) and Christianity codified and set aside with protected status. The first, I think, is not debatable. The second is exactly what the 1st amendment protects and enshrines. That no religion gets a leg up, and that no religious practice is prevented from being exercised. The problem is that you're not making the distinction.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

So you didn't read the link that I posted showing SCOTUS in an 1879- ruling declared we were a Christina natrion? Why am I not surprised.

No, because you didn't put one up.

Perhaps you are confused with the SCOTUS opinion I put up saying that Jefferson's "wall of seperation" was a spot-on description of the first ammendment: which is why it outlaws the prayer-day law.

As to your Jefferson qoute- cite the reference please? It runs completely counter to many of Jeffersons qoutes suppoortiung religion and having a great respect for Jesus.

No. It doesn't conflict at all with a respect for Jesus; and if you can't reconcile that you obviously have no understanding of Jefferson's position. You can put the quote into Google if you want a million cites (exact quotes are easy to look up)... but I'm not running down that rabbit trail any farther, as it's part of your attempt to distract from the topic.

Can't prove a negative. This does not establish a religion, does not entangle the governemtn with any religion, does not compel anyone to pray or not pray, does not promote any religion over any other. So you tell me how it would violate teh 1950's law.

You mean how the law violates the constitution?

Because it's a law enacted by congress which establishes a religious activity.

That would violate a rule prohibiting congress from enacting any law respecting the establishment of religion

It can't get more plain-text than that.

The first amendment itself. Differing SCOTUS' over time have ruled differently based on their judicial bias. you know that I know that so please SCOTUS rules differetnly depending on the tilt of the court..

So when did SCOTUS uphold this law?

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by Ridley's Own

There is a difference between Christianity or religion generally being an underlying princple behind the theory of our government (what you might call the undergirding of American political theory) and Christianity codified and set aside with protected status. The first, I think, is not debatable. The second is exactly what the 1st amendment protects and enshrines. That no religion gets a leg up, and that no religious practice is prevented from being exercised. The problem is that you're not making the distinction.

The problem is I know the distinction. Christinaity was not codified- because the founders recognized that Christinaity was a hodge podge of sects. To codify it would have been nigh imnpossible. I am not arguing against he fact that they did not mandate Christinaity for th enation- I have been saying they recognized Christinaity as superuior to all and openly encourage dit in all it s sects- while at teh same time granting full freedom from persecution non Christina religions. As the Bible declared Israel was to do in many lands.- Just they were not to have anything to do with them.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

The problem is I know the distinction. Christinaity was not codified- because the founders recognized that Christinaity was a hodge podge of sects. To codify it would have been nigh imnpossible.

Please establish this claim regarding what at least the majority of ratifiers of the constitution were thinking.

I am not arguing against he fact that they did not mandate Christinaity for th enation- I have been saying they recognized Christinaity as superuior to all and openly encourage dit in all it s sects- while at teh same time granting full freedom from persecution non Christina religions. As the Bible declared Israel was to do in many lands.- Just they were not to have anything to do with them.

and I have them saying that one day Christianity will be properly regarded as mythology.

More to the point, I have this peice of paper; signed off on by more than 1000 representitives, that says that they wanted no laws respecting the establishment of religion to be passed by the federal government (and a later edit: radified by congress, the president, and at least 2/3rds of the states saying the same was true for the local governments).

[adamwagg]

I've deleted a previous post (and a post that quoted it in response) due to another unacceptable personal attack. Keep things polite and make arguments not insults.