[cheaploans]

From USA Today article by Oliver "Buzz" Thomas, October 15, 2007

Ask most Americans what the Constitution says about God, and their answers may surprise you.

"One nation under God?"

Nope, that's the Pledge of Allegiance.

"Oh, yeah, right, right. How about, 'Endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights'?"

Sorry, but that's the Declaration of Independence.

"Hmmmm."

Mostly what you'll get is a lot of blank stares. Trust me. I've tried it in nearly 50 states. Fully 55% of the country, according to a recent survey by the First Amendment Center, believes that the U.S. Constitution establishes us as a "Christian nation." Worse still, while nearly all Americans say freedom of religion is important, only 56% think it should apply to all religious groups. The truth is that the Constitution says nothing about God. Not one word. And, you can bet that some of the local clergy back in the 1780s howled about it. Newspapers, pamphlets and sermons decried the drafters' failure to acknowledge God.


One, and only one, reference

Even more interesting is what the Constitution has to say about religion. Although many of the nation's loudest religionists continue to assert that America is a Christian nation in some legal or constitutional sense, the language of the original Constitution itself suggests otherwise. The only reference to religion is tucked away in Article VI and reads: "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

America's so-called Godless Constitution, with its provisions separating church and state, has given us the strongest political and religious institutions on earth. Among developed nations, no one else believes and worships as much as we Americans. One can only marvel when today's pious pulpiteers clamor for federal dollars for their "faith-based initiatives" or complain that God has been kicked out of the public schools. Perhaps they were praying in school when they should have been studying their history. http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/...terstitialskip

[RCQDnMp5]

Oddly enough, I just finished reading a biography on Benjamin Franklin. That, combined with this post, has provided a good amount of stimulating thought. Thank you very much!

[Aafimoq]

Thank you Fred.

[jinnsamys]

I wonder what else the Constitution says and doesn't say. Should look for an online version.

[Indinehon]

I wonder what else the Constitution says and doesn't say. Should look for an online version.

Here is a link to the online constituion. http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html Maybe I will start to read it during my down time at work.....

[mussmicky]

I have a copy on my Palm. It has actually come in handy a few times when settling arguments. Surprisingly very few people carry a copy with them?

[oxinsnepe]

Believe it or not I used to be able to recite the whole thing in elementary school and I guess if you dont use it you lose it! Some History teacher though!

[SQiTmhuY]

Ha Ha just kidding

[Chubrehege]

Ask most Americans what the Constitution says about God, and their answers may surprise you.

"One nation under God?"

Nope, that's the Pledge of Allegiance. How many of us are old enough to remember the pledge before they inserted the "under God" part?

UncleMike

[adolfadsermens]

I wasn't around before they added 'under god' but I say it without it.

Here's the original, written in 1892,by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister:
'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.'

That is the one I use.

[8jIDXQ80]

I can no longer quote the constitution word for word, but I once could. But reading the entire document does let a person know that even the constitution was based very firmly on Christian beliefs. I believe, though, that our founding fathers were wise. They had just escaped from an enforced Christian state, where they were given no options on what they could and could not believe, so the constitution was very carefully written so that no legislator had/has any say in what we believe, don't believe, or do to practice our beliefs, as long as the practice doesn't violate any other portion of the constitution.

Unfortunately, our supreme court have taken it upon themselves to reinterpret the constitution to mean things that it absolutely doesn't say, like the whole garbage about the separation of church and state.

I'm still trying to figure out what screwball decided that the education of our children qualified as "State", too. It didn't used to...except in the communist USSR, but I guess that someone liked their ideals and decided to keep them for our own.

[OWDavid]

I wasn't around before they added 'under god' but I say it without it.

Here's the original, written in 1892,by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister:
'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.'

That is the one I use.

I personally throw in "God and Goddess."

[PharmaDrMan]

I had a friend who was in the Navy during the Vietnam era. He was on leave in San Francisco and someone handed him a bunch of flyers and asked him to hand them out.

It was a copy of the Bill of Rights.

He was in a business district. I forget exactly where.

Most of the people he handed it to didn't know what it was, even though it said "Bill of Rights" on the top.

Many called him a Communist, a degenerate, a hippy, and responded in a hateful way.

He was on shore leave and in civilian clothes, but well groomed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Bill_of_Rights

[Paul Bunyan]

I can no longer quote the constitution word for word, but I once could. But reading the entire document does let a person know that even the constitution was based very firmly on Christian beliefs.

This is actually a highly disputed issue. Many people believe a majority of the Founding Fathers were Deists, not Christian.

Enlightenment philosophy (which itself was heavily inspired by Deist ideals) played a major role in creating the principle of separation of church and state, expressed in the religious freedom clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution. Founding Fathers who were especially noted for being influenced by such philosophy include Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Cornelius Harnett, Gouverneur Morris, and Hugh Williamson. Although these men were members of traditional Christian denominations (Hugh Williamson was a Presbyterian and the rest were Episcopalians), their political speeches show distinct Deistic influence. Other notable Founding Fathers may have been more directly Deist. These include Ethan Allen[31] and Thomas Paine (who published The Age of Reason, a treatise that helped to popularize Deism throughout America and Europe). Elihu Palmer (1764-1806) wrote the "Bible" of American Deism in his Principles of Nature (1801) and attempted to organize Deism by forming the "Deistical Society of New York." Benjamin Franklin wrote in his autobiography, "Some books against Deism fell into my hands; they were said to be the substance of sermons preached at Boyle's lectures. It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist .

Deists typically reject supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and tend to assert that God does not interfere with human life and the laws of the universe. What organized religions see as divine revelation and holy books, most Deists see as interpretations made by other humans, rather than as authoritative sources. For more information see, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deist

[xADMlNx]

This is actually a highly disputed issue. Many people believe a majority of the Founding Fathers were Deists, not Christian.



.



For more information see, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deist

Surely you don't actually believe anything published on Wiki, do you? Anyone can publish anything...so nothing can be taken as even approaching fact. There are plenty of sources that you can search for, though, that will show just how closely our original rules, constitution and Bill of Rights was based on biblical principles. Even many founding fathers thought of as diests were undoubtedly Christian, but didn't believe in the way the English Catholic church ran things.

I'd put about as much credence in anything that is published in wikipedia as I would in an American history book published in Iran by their government. They are very rapidly losing all credence in intellectual cycles. (This is spoken from a Wiki contributor and editor, neither of which I've done for awhile.)

In regard to the navy man, I admit I'm surprised. Having been a navy man in the 'nam era, I can say that it was rare for any of our sailors or officers to make the monumentally poor judgment call to hand out fliers, regardless of what they were about. Because of the way the public felt about ALL of our military personnel at the time, that was not only unwise, it was a good way to get a court marshal or even worse. Military personnel at that time were considered the very scum of the earth. But I can well understand people not understanding what the bill of rights is. Heck, that, the constitution, and declaration is no longer ever taught in school! Many people have never been exposed to these important documents that legal immigrants MUST learn in order to enter our country legally.

[KraskiNetu]

I believe it was Benjamin Franklin that cut all the miracles out of his bible. It may have been Jefferson.

[Kristoferson]

I remember being told of an experiment where they presented the Bill of Rights as if it were a petition measure, and tried to see if people would sign on as being in favor of those first ten amendments.

Apparently they met an astounding number of people who, for whatever motives, not only didn't recognize the Bill of Rights, were vehemently against having anything to do with such a petition and any socialist, or communist, or anarchist scum who would try to get it before the voters.

Truly appalling. (I believe it was supposed to have been during the mid-to-late 70s)

[WaydayNef]

I believe it was Benjamin Franklin that cut all the miracles out of his bible. It may have been Jefferson.

It is very possible. But basing the concept on the principles has nothing to do with miracles. In fact, trying to bring in miracles would be violating the actual intent of allowing people to believe what they will. Yet, it is the principles in the Bible that make it possible to even come up with that intent.

Let's face it, they all came from a place that was oppressive, where you either believed what they told you to believe, or you were jailed or worse. Our founding fathers didn't want the same thing to happen here. That was wise.

[eliniaguilefp7m]

I believe it was Benjamin Franklin that cut all the miracles out of his bible. It may have been Jefferson.

It was "The Jefferson Bible," subtitled "The life and morals of Jesus of Nazareth"

I recently got a copy (from Beacon Press, but there are other editions ass well), but it hasn't come to the top of my TO BE READ pile of books yet.

The story has it that he sat down and cut two bibles apart (so he would have the text from both sides of the pages available) and assembled the text which he could stomach as being consistent with the claims of Christ's teachings (I guess), pasting the cut-apart texts into this new volume, removing a great deal of textual fertilizer and ancient priestly tamperings.

Or at least, how it was told to me.

[feAilei1]

Surely you don't actually believe anything published on Wiki, do you? Anyone can publish anything...so nothing can be taken as even approaching fact.

Wikipedia is a massive collection of peer-reviewed articles. It's actually a brilliantly effective way to produce very high quality articles at very low cost.

Those with issues about the factual integrity of any article can participate in the revision process.

One-sided and clearly biased postings don't last very long on Wikipedia.

It's a wonderfully democratic process!