spout all the quotes you want but it won't change the fact that the US government is secular and will not yield to religious myth believers like yourself.
but hey ... go ahead and take a stand like Kim Davis ... we'll throw your ass in jail also. On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 1:08:29 PM UTC-6, KeithInTampa wrote: > > On March 6, 1789, President John Adams called for a national day of > fasting and prayer for the country could "*call to mind our numerous > offenses against the most high God, confess them before Him with the > sincerest penitence, implore his pardoning mercy, through the Great > Mediator and Redeemer, for our past transgression, and that through the > grace of His Holy Spirit, we may be disposed and enabled to yield a more > suitable obedience. . ."* > > A few other quotes which demonstrate Adams’ thoughts about Jesus are below. > > On April 18, 1775, a British soldier ordered him, John Hancock, and others > to “disperse in the name of George the Sovereign King of England. Adams > responded to him: > > *“We recognize no sovereign but God, and no king but Jesus!”* > > In an October 13, 1789 address to the military, he said: > > *"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human > passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or > gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale > goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and > religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."* > > In a letter to Thomas Jefferson dated June 28, 1813, Adams said: > > “*The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were > the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, > and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as > eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.*” –*John > Adams; June 28, 1813, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson.* > > *"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their > only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts > there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to > temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity > towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty > God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be." **Diary > and Autobiography of John Adams, Vol. III, p. 9* > > *=====* > > *"I now offer you the outline of the plan they have suggested. Let an > association be formed to be denominated 'The Christian Constitutional > Society,' its object to be first: The support of the Christian religion. > Second: The support of the United States."* > *Alexander Hamilton, 1802 To John Baynard* > > ===== > > *"God who gave us life gave us liberty. 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; That a revolution of the wheel of fortune, a change of situation, > is among possible events; that it may become probable by Supernatural > influence! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in > that event." **Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query > XVIII, p. 237.* > > *=====* > > "*While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and > soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of > religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our > highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.*" --*The > Writings of George Washington, pp. 342-3* > > *=====* > > *The plan of education proposed is anti-Christian, and therefore repugnant > to the law....The purest principles of morality are to be taught. Where are > they found? Whoever searches for them must go to the source from which a > Christian man derives his faith -- the Bible...There is an obligation to > teach what the Bible alone can teach, viz. a pure system of morality...* > > *Both in the Old and New Testaments [religious instruction's] importance > is recognized. In the Old it is said, 'Thou shalt diligently teach them to > thy children,' and the New, 'Suffer the little children to come unto me and > forbid them not...' No fault can be found with Girard for wishing a marble > college to bear his name forever, but it is not valuable unless it has a > fragrance of Christianity about it.* > > The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every respect there > shall be a separation of Church and State. Rather, it studiously defines > the manner, the specific ways, in which there shall be no concert or union > or dependency one on the other. *Vidal v. Girard's Executors*, 43 U.S. > 126,132 (1844). > > *Christianity...is not to be maliciously and openly reviled and blasphemed > against, to the annoyance of believers or the injury of the public...It is > unnecessary for us, however, to consider the establishment of a school or > college, for the propagation of...Deism, or any other form of infidelity.* > *Such a case is not to be presumed to exist in a Christian country...Why > may not laymen instruct in the general principles of Christianity as well > as ecclesiastics...* > > *And we cannot overlook the blessings, which such [lay] men by their > conduct, as well as their instructions, may, nay must, impart to their > youthful pupils. Why may not the Bible, and especially the New Testament, > without note or comment, be read and taught as a divine revelation in the > [school] -- its general precepts expounded, its evidences explained and its > glorious principles of morality inculcated?...* > > *Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so > perfectly as from the New Testament?* > > *It is also said, and truly, **that the Christian religion is a part of > the common law of Pennsylvania... **Id.* (Emphasis Added) *(By Justice > Storey) Vidal v. Girard's Executors, 43 U.S. 126,132-133 (1844). * > > > ====== > > > *That is the common sense of the matter. Otherwise the state and religion > would be aliens to each other -- hostile, suspicious, and even unfriendly. > **Zorach v. Clauson*, (1952) > > ========= > > > *“Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody > the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should > be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our > institutions are emphatically Christian.* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, > state or national, because this is a religious people. This is historically > true. From the discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a > single voice making this affirmation.The commission to Christopher > Columbus...[recited] that 'it is hoped that by God's assistance some of the > continents and islands in the ocean will be discovered...'The first > colonial grant made to Sir Walter Raleigh in 1584...and the grant > authorizing him to enact statutes for the government of the proposed colony > provided that they 'be not against the true Christian faith...'The first > charter of Virginia, granted by King James I in 1606...commenced the grant > in these words: '...in propagating of Christian religion to such people as > yet live in darkness...'Language of similar import may be found in the > subsequent charters of that colony...in 1609 and 1611; and the same is true > of the various charters granted to the other colonies. In language more or > less emphatic is the establishment of the Christian religion declared to be > one of the purposes of the grant. The celebrated compact made by the > Pilgrims in the Mayflower, 1620, recites: 'Having undertaken for the Glory > of God, and advancement of the Christian faith...a voyage to plant the > first colony in the northern parts of Virginia...'The Fundamental Orders of > Connecticut, under which a provisional government was instituted in > 1638-1639, commence with this declaration: 'And well knowing where a people > are gathered together, the Word of God requires that to maintain the peace > and union...there should be an orderly and decent government established > according to God...to maintain and preserve the liberty and purity of the > Gospel of our Lord Jesus which we now profess...of the said Gospel [which] > is now practiced amongst us.'In the Charter of Privileges granted by > William Penn to the province of Pennsylvania, in 1701, it is recited: > '...No people can be truly happy, though under the greatest enjoyment of > civil liberties, if abridged of...their religious profession and > worship...'Coming nearer to the present time, the Declaration of > Independence recognizes the presence of the Divine in human affairs in > these words:'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...appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the > rectitude of our intentions...And for the support of this Declaration, with > firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to > each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.'We find > everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth...because of a general > recognition of this truth [that we are a Christian nation], the question > has seldom been presented to the courts...There is no dissonance in these > declarations. There is a universal language pervading them all, having one > meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These > are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons: they are > organic utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people.While because > of a general recognition of this truth the question has seldom been > presented to the courts, yet we find that in Updegraph v. the Commonwealth, > it was decided that, Christianity, general Christianity, is, and always has > been, a part of the common law...not Christianity with an established > church...but Christianity with liberty of conscience to all men.And in The > People v. Ruggles, Chancellor Kent, the great commentator on American law, > speaking as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New York, said: 'The > people of this State, in common with the people of this country, profess > the general doctrines of Christianity, as the rule of their faith and > practice...We are a Christian people, and the morality of the country is > deeply engrafted upon Christianity, and not upon the doctrines or worship > of those impostors [other religions].'And in the famous case of Vidal v. > Girard's Executors, this court observed: 'It is also said, and truly, that > the Christian religion is a part of the common law...'If we pass beyond > these matters to a view of American life as expressed by its laws, its > business, its customs and its society, we find everywhere a clear > recognition of the same truth. Among other matters note the following: The > form of oath universally prevailing, concluding with an appeal to the > Almighty; the custom of opening sessions of all deliberative bodies and > most conventions with prayer; the prefatory words of all will, 'In the name > of God, amen', the laws respecting the observance of the Sabbath, with the > general cessation of all secular business, and the closing of courts, > legislatures, and other similar public assemblies on that day; the churches > and church organizations which abound in every city, town and hamlet; the > multitude of charitable organizations existing everywhere under Christian > auspices; the gigantic missionary associations, with general support, and > aiming to establish Christian missions in every quarter of the globe.These, > and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial > declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian > nation...we find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth.The > happiness of a people and the good order and preservation of civil > government essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality.Religion, > morality, and knowledge [are] necessary to good government, the > preservation of liberty, and the happiness of mankind.” **Church of > the Holy Trinity v. United States,* (1892) > > > *Issued by President George Washington, at the request of Congress, on > October 3, 1789* > > *By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.* > > *Whereas 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; and—Whereas both Houses of Congress > have, by their joint committee, requested me “to 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 and signal favors of > Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to > establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:”* > > *Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of > November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service > of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the > good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in > rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and > protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a > nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favor, able > interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late > war; for the great degree of tranquillity, union, and plenty which we have > since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been > enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and > happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted; for the > civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we > have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all > the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.* > > *And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and > supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to > pardon our national and other trangressions; to enable us all, whether in > public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties > properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to > all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and > constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to > protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown > kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and > concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, > and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally, to grant > unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to > be best.* > > *Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in > the year of our Lord 1789.* > George Washington > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:50 PM, plainolamerican <plainol...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > No amount of revisionist history is going to change what we are as a Nation > --- > back at you. > > Benjamin Franklin > > Although Franklin received religious training, his nature forced him to > rebel against the irrational tenets of his parents Christianity. His > Autobiography revels his skepticism, “My parents had given me betimes > religions impressions, and I received from my infancy a pious education in > the principles of Calvinism. But scarcely was I arrived at fifteen years of > age, when, after having doubted in turn of different tenets, according as I > found them combated in the different books that I read, I began to doubt of > Revelation itself. > > “. . . Some books against Deism fell into my hands. . . It happened that > they wrought an effect on my 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 through > Deist.” > > In an essay on “Toleration,” Franklin wrote: > > “If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in > Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been > persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians > thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one > another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution > in the Romish church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. These found it > wrong in the Bishops, but fell into the same practice themselves both here > [England] and in New England.” > > Dr. Priestley, an intimate friend of Franklin, wrote of him: > > “It is much to be lamented that a man of Franklin’s general good character > and great influence should have been an unbeliever in Christianity, and > also have done as much as he did to make others unbelievers” (Priestley’s > Autobiography) > > Thomas Paine > > This freethinker and author of several books, influenced more early > Americans than any other writer. Although he held Deist beliefs, he wrote > in his famous The Age of Reason: > > “I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the > Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Protestant church, nor by any > church that I know of. My own mind is my church. “ > > “Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more > derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to > reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called > Christianity. “ > The U.S. Constitution > > The most convincing evidence that our government did not ground itself > upon Christianity comes from the very document that defines it– the United > States Constitution. > > If indeed our Framers had aimed to found a Christian republic, it would > seem highly unlikely that they would have forgotten to leave out their > Christian intentions in the Supreme law of the land. In fact, nowhere in > the Constitution do we have a single mention of Christianity, God, Jesus, > or any Supreme Being. There occurs only two references to religion and they > both use exclusionary wording. The 1st Amendment’s says, “Congress shall > make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . .” and in Article > VI, Section 3, “. . . no religious test shall ever be required as a > qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” > > Thomas Jefferson interpreted the 1st Amendment in his famous letter to the > Danbury Baptist Association in January 1, 1802: > > “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American > people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting > an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ > thus building a wall of separation between church and State.” > > Some Religious activists try to extricate the concept of separation > between church and State by claiming that those words do not occur in the > Constitution. Indeed they do not, but neither does it exactly say “freedom > of religion,” yet the First Amendment implies both. > > As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Autobiography, in reference to the > Virginia Act for Religious Freedom: > > “Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan > of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting > “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus > Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the > great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle > of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, > the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.” > > James Madison, perhaps the greatest supporter for separation of church and > State, and whom many refer to as the father of the Constitution, also held > similar views which he expressed in his letter to Edward Livingston, 10 > July 1822: > > “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past > one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater > purity, the less they are mixed together.” > > Today, if ever our government needed proof that the separation of church > and State works to ensure the freedom of religion, one only need to look at > the plethora of Churches, temples, and shrines that exist in the cities and > towns throughout the United States. Only a secular government, divorced > from religion could possibly allow such tolerant diversity. > The Declaration of Independence > > Many Christians who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually > present the Declaration as “proof.” The reason appears obvious: the > document mentions God. However, the God in the Declaration does not > describe Christianity’s God. It describes “the Laws of Nature and of > Nature’s God.” This nature’s view of God agrees with deist philosophy but > any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail > for this reason alone. > [image: Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli] > <http://www.earlyamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/titleXI.jpg> > > Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli > > Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli > > More significantly, the Declaration does not represent the law of the land > as it came before the Constitution. The Declaration aimed at announcing > their separation from Great Britain and listed the various grievances with > the “thirteen united States of America.” The grievances against Great > Britain no longer hold, and we have more than thirteen states. Today, the > Declaration represents an important historical document about rebellious > intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our > independent government. Although the Declaration may have influential > power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets, and judges may mention > it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. Our presidents, > judges and policemen must take an oath to uphold the Constitution, but > never to the Declaration of Independence. > > Of course the Declaration depicts a great political document, as it aimed > at a future government upheld by citizens instead of a religious monarchy. > It observed that all men “are created equal” meaning that we all come > inborn with the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. > That “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” The > Declaration says nothing about our rights secured by Christianity, nor does > it imply anything about a Christian foundation. > Treaty of Tripoli > > Unlike governments of the past, the American Fathers set up a government > divorced from religion. The establishment of a secular government did not > require a reflection to themselves about its origin; they knew this as an > unspoken given. However, as the U.S. delved into international affairs, few > foreign nations knew about the intentions of America. For this reason, an > insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s > explicitly reveals the secular nature of the United States to a foreign > nation. Officially called the “Treaty of peace and friendship between the > United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary,” > most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states: > [image: Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers] > <http://www.earlyamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/barlow.jpg> > > Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers > > Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers > Copyright National Portait Gallery Smithsonian Institution/Art Resource NY > > “As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense > founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of > enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as > the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against > any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising > from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony > existing between the two countries.” > > The preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end > of George Washington’s last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American > diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the > treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain > in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, > and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy > for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Barlow, along > with his associate, Captain Richard O’Brien, et al, translated and modified > the Arabic version of the treaty into English. From this came the added > Amendment 11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval > in 1797. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John > Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the > Senate. The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially > ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All > during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised > the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its > publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797. > > So here we have a clear admission by the United States that our government > did not found itself upon Christianity. Unlike the Declaration of > Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all treaties do according > to the Constitution (see Article VI, Sect. 2). > > Although the Christian exclusionary wording in the Treaty of Tripoli only > lasted for eight years and no longer has legal status, it clearly > represented the feelings of our Founding Fathers at the beginning of the > U.S. government. > Common Law > <http://www.earlyamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/treatyback.jpg> > > ... -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
