Follow-up to Bryan...

[Roy Pitchford]

Only if you've bought into the Tea Party/Glenn Beck/Michelle Bachman mythology and sanitization of our founding fathers. The false understanding of the true nature, beliefs, and ultimate behavior of our founding fathers has been completely distorted out of context and without any historical accuracy by those groups.

Their beliefs of the founding fathers are about as accurate as when they say that America was founded as a Christian nation. It just shows their ignorance of history and the true beliefs of the founding fathers.

The founding fathers are important, but they are not gods, nor are they necessarily any more righteous or smarter than many political and social thinkers of today. They made mistakes, had terrible views on some issues (slavery for example), and most certainly didn't agree on everything.

Bryan has some interesting contentions...
First, that the Tea Party/Glenn Beck/Michele Bachmann have a false understanding of the history of the Founding Fathers.
Second, we were not founded as a Christian nation.
Third, the Founding Fathers had "terrible views on some issues (slavery, for example)."

Issue 1, regarding other people's understandings of history, would be very difficult to perform any kind of analysis of. First, because I can't possibly presume to know what is in the minds of all these people and second, because there would be too much history to cover.

Issue 3 is also difficult because Bryan is rather vague. Which Founding Fathers? Does he want to claim that all of them were pro-slavery? I will try to to tackle this.

So, our first topic is the contention that we were not founded as a Christian nation.

Before we dig into whether we are one or not, what is a "Christian nation?"
Is it one where all its citizens are required to be Christian?
Maybe just the leadership is all Christian?

Supreme Court Justice David Brewer wrote in his 1905 book, The United States: A Christian Nation, that the United States was "of all the nations in the world ... most justly called a Christian nation" because Christianity "has so largely shaped and molded it."
Justice Joseph Story, appointed by James Madison said, "One of the beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is that Christianity is a part of the Common Law. ... There never has been a period in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying at its foundations. ... I verily believe Christianity necessary to the support of civil society." and "In [our] republic, there would seem to be a peculiar propriety in viewing the Christian religion as the great basis on which it must rest for its support and permanence." (The Life and Letters of Joseph Story, 1851)

Many of our Presidents have openly declared the United States to be a Christian nation.
Harry Truman put it simply, "This is a Christian Nation." (letter to Pope Pius XII, August 28, 1947) while Theodore Roosevelt was willing to put it a little more eloquently when saying, "[T]he teachings of the [Christian] Bible are so interwoven and entwined with our whole civic and social life that it would be literally...impossible for us to figure to ourselves what that life would be if these teachings were removed." (Theodore Roosevelt, The Man As I Knew Him, 1919) John Adams said, "The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were...the general principles of Christianity." (The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, 1856)

Even Thomas Jefferson, regardless of his own religious views (most refer to him as a Deist), spoke to the validity of America as a Christian nation. He helped establish the practice of weekly church services in the Capitol building on Sundays. He also attended these weekly services and when asked why, he replied, "No nation has ever existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man and I, as Chief Magistrate of this nation, am bound to give it the sanction of my example." (from a handwritten letter currently in the Library of Congress, "Washington Parish, Washington City" by Reverend Ethan Allen.)

-------------------

Now, I shall attempt to tackle the more difficult assertion. For emphasis, I will say again that the initial statement was rather vague.
Since slavery was specifically mentioned, that is what I shall look over.

Let me get an issue out of the way:
Yes, many Founders were slave owners. This did not necessarily mean they (all or in part) supported slavery.
George Washington signed the first law which abolished slavery. The 1787 Northwest Ordinance abolished slavery in the areas of the country which would end up being Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan. He wrote to a friend, "I never mean ... to possess another slave by purchase; it being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted, by which slavery in this Country may be abolished by slow, sure and imperceptible degrees."

Slavery was a highly divisive issue and one that could have ripped the U.S. apart before the Constitution was created. Many claim that the US Constitution is a pro-slavery document, reading it to say that all non-free, non-Indians are 3/5 of a person.
This is inaccurate.
The actual wording is, "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
What it is saying is that for the purposes of representation in the House, states would require 50,000 slaves, rather than 30,000, to earn an additional House seat.

In the writing of the Constitution, the Southern states wanted to count slaves as whole persons. It was the North who felt they should not be counted because of their legal status (at the time) as property. If the South had won out, their resulting representative power in the House would have ensured no end to slavery on the Federal level. The Founders knew they could not outright abolish slavery on the Federal level and maintain the continuity of the 13-state union, but they were able to sow the seeds of its removal for the future.

Founders Ben Franklin and Benjamin Rush founded an early anti-slavery society in Pennsylvania. John Jay was the President of one in New York. Richard Bassett, James Madison, James Monroe, Bushrod Washington, Charles Carroll, William Few, John Marshall, Richard Stockton, Zephaniah Swift and many others were all members of similar groups. Through their leadership, and that of others, slavery was abolished in 8 of the 13 original states within 15 years of the Constitution's ratification (the final 5 would remain that way until the conclusion of the Civil War).

What did some of them actually say, though?

"The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. ... And with what execration [curse] should the statesman be loaded, who permitting one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other. ... 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? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever."
Thomas Jefferson
Notes on the State of Virginia, 1794

"That men should pray and fight for their own freedom and yet keep others in slavery is certainly acting a very inconsistent, as well as unjust and perhaps impious, part."
John Jay
The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, 1891
From a letter to Reverend Dr. Richard Price, September 27, 1785

"Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity. ... It is rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical denial of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is an usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who has solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men."
Benjamin Rush
Minutes of the Proceedings of a Convention of Delegates from the Abolition Societies Established in Different Parts of the United States Assembled at Philadelphia, 1794

"Justice and humanity require it [the end of slavery]--Christianity commands it. Let every benevolent ... pray for the glorious period when the last slave who fights for freedom shall be restored to the possession of that inestimable right."
Noah Webster
Effect of Slavery on Morals and Industry, 1793

"Christianity, by introducing into Europe the truest principles of humanity, universal benevolence, and brotherly love, had happily abolished civil slavery. Let us who profess the same religion practice its precepts ... by agreeing to this duty."
Richard Henry Lee
Memoir of the Life of Richard Henry Lee, and His Correspondence With the Most Distinguished Men in America and Europe, Illustrative of Their Characters, and of the American Revolution, 1825
speech to the Virginia House of Burgesses

"I hope we shall at last, and if it so please God I hope it may be during my life time, see this cursed thing [slavery] taken out. ... For my part, whether in a public station or a private capacity, I shall always be prompt to contribute my assistance towards effecting so desirable an event."
William Livingston
The Papers of William Livingston, 1988
Written to James Pemberton, October 20, 1788

"[I]t ought to be considered that national crimes can only be and frequently are punished in this world by national punishments; and that the continuance of the slave-trade, and thus giving it a national sanction and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure and vengeance of Him who is equally Lord of all and who views with equal eye the poor African slave and his American master."
Luther Martin
The Genuine Information Delivered to the Legislature of the State of Maryland Relative to the Proceedings of the General Convention Lately Held at Philadelphia, 1788

"As much as I value a union of all the States, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade [slavery]."
Joseph Reed
Elliot's Debates, 1836
To George Mason, June 15, 1788

"Honored will that State be in the annals of history which shall first abolish this violation of the rights of mankind."
Joseph Reed
Lives of the Governors of Pennsylvania, 1874

"Slavery, or an absolute and unlimited power in the master over the life and fortune of the slave, is unauthorized by the common law. . . . The reasons which we sometimes see assigned for the origin and the continuance of slavery appear, when examined to the bottom, to be built upon a false foundation. In the enjoyment of their persons and of their property, the common law protects all."
James Wilson
The Works of the Honorable James Wilson, 1804
lecture, "The Natural Rights of Individuals"

"[W]hy keep alive the question of slavery? It is admitted by all to be a great evil."
Charles Carroll
Life and Correspondence of Charles Carroll of Carrollton, 1898
Letter to Robert Goodloe Harper, April 23, 1820

"As Congress is now to legislate for our extensive territory lately acquired, I pray to Heaven that they may build up the system of the government on the broad, strong, and sound principles of freedom. Curse not the inhabitants of those regions, and of the United States in general, with a permission to introduce bondage [slavery]."
John Dickinson
The Life and Times of John Dickinson, 1834
from the Second Session of the first Congress, March 22, 1790

"[I]t is certainly unlawful to make inroads upon others ... and take away their liberty by no better means than superior power."
John Witherspoon
The Works of John Witherspoon, 1815
from Lectures on Moral Philosophy

So, don't take it from me, take it from them.

[Bret Callentine]

sure, that's what they SAID, and that's what they DID, but only liberals can truly interprit what they actually MEANT. I'm sure much of what you quoted was actually code language.

[sharon kinsella]

Wouldn't most people consider the Founding Fathers to be the signers of the Declaration in addition to the constitution. Quote me where it says in either one of those documents that we are Christian? It may say under god, but my understanding has always been that we have freedom of religion. That does not say Christian sect. There are many religions including Judaism, Wiccan, Pagan, Islam, Unitarian etc. and Christian. It's just on sect no matter what supreme court justices say. It's in the documents.

[Gary Rice]

To paraphrase old Ben Franklin, we have a republic, if we can keep it.

We certainly began this country primarily as a nation of Christians. Our laws, folkways, and traditions certainly came from the Judeo-Christian ethical tradition, and I would guess that the vast majority of the founding fathers were Christian.

That understood, it's my understanding that the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution still made it quite clear to all Americans that government and organized religion were to be regarded, under the law, as being two separate entities:

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

Then, as now, it was common knowledge that competing sectarian political and religious beliefs had caused a great deal of turmoil in the world. For this reason, almost right from the start, the founding fathers wanted to insure that all Americans had a right to their own political and religious viewpoints, and that their government would not impose sectarian religious convictions on the people.

I used the word "almost" above because one must remember that the American experiment was precisely that. There was first, an Articles of Confederation written into law, and then, when the Articles were found to be too weak, the Constitution was then drafted. Even at that point, the Constitution would not be ratified until the Bill of Rights was added to it, due to many Americans' wishes that many of the peoples' rights be spelled out in the document.

First among those amendments, (and the very first words of that First Amendment) concerned freedom of religion.

So, were we virtually a nation of Christians? Yes, but...were we INTENDED to become a "Christian nation"? That is another question entirely. I do think that MAY HAVE BEEN the ultimate hope of many, if not most, of some of the conservative founders of our country, but I do believe that they also wished that people would attain Christianity through being exposed to the great benefits that faith offered, rather than through any government compulsion, as was the case in some other countries.

Conservatives sometimes bemoan Thomas Jefferson's feeling that there needed to be a "wall of separation between church and state" but quite frankly, again and again, the courts have ruled in that direction over the years.

On a practical level, one can see where even a (hypothetically) government-sponsored Christian prayer could run into difficulties, even among Christians.

Take, for example, The Lord's Prayer:

Were there to be a theoretical Christian public assemblage reciting that prayer, there would be immediate and embarrassed stumbling as some Christians used "debts and debtors" while others used "trespasses". Catholics would stop at "deliver us from evil" while Protestants would continue "for Thine is the Kingdom..." Catholics would cross themselves one way, while the Orthodox would cross themselves the other way, while many Protestants would simply stand there amazed and perhaps a bit confused!

Hopefully, that helps to explain why we are the type of country that we are. Each of us are free to pursue the faith traditions that we believe to be sacred, while a secular government keeps its nose out of our faith business.

At least, that's my opinion about this long-debated discussion...

Back to the banjo.

[Will Brown]

I think in discovering what documents mean, you have to look at more than just the words on paper. You must also consider what the writers knew and what they believed.

In the context of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, you have to understand that we had just thrown off the yoke of British tyranny, but the writers had lived until then under British law, and were certainly familiar with British history. Britain had (and still has) an official church, and that church had often been heavily involved in governing, and at times had been the defacto government.

It seems to me that the proscription in the Constitution was meant to prevent the type of official religion that existed in Britain.

At that time, however, Christianity was the dominant religion in the country, so in that sense it is probably accurate to say that we were a nation of Christians. Much that reflects that status has continued. Our legislative bodies have chaplains (I don't know if they have all been Christian, but they have all been religious). The military employs chaplains (of varying denominations, reflecting the changes in our society). Our money reflects monotheism. We should all remember the blue laws designed to protect the sabbath from commercialism. Many of our liquor laws are plainly set to try to keep us sober on the sabbath. Recall the excitement when a congressman decided to be sworn in on the Koran. Our courtrooms are discomfited when a potential juror declines to swear an oath. And we break out the chains when members of a religious sect practice polygamy. What would we do if someone started practicing a religion that demanded human sacrifice? Would sacrificing a goat be ok?

Religion is very important to some people. I say if they aren't harming anyone, let them practice their religion. Some people are not religious, and if they aren't harming anyone, let them alone. Unfortunately there are a number of fervent disbelievers who apparently feel the need to proselytize. They are like sand in the gears of a civil society, compelled to aggravate, and willfully blind to the harm they do.

[ryan costa]

I don't see how any issues besides whether to call ourselves a Christian Nation have anything to do with the issue of whether to call ourselves a Christian Nation.
taxes. wars. public works. social security. gays(they have a high batting average in the Catholic Church). nuclear proliferation. booze. drugs.