alt.education

Peter Franks wrote:

>:|buckeye wrote:
>:|> Peter Franks wrote:
>:|>
>:|>> :|buckeye wrote:
>:|>> :|> * Jefferson's Declaration of Independence did not use the word
>:|>> :|> "Creator"
>:|>> :|> http://members.tripod.com/~candst/doitj.htm
>:|>> :|
>:|>> :|... but it did refer to "nature's god".
>:|>> :|
>:|>
>:|> Did you read the article or just looked at the title?
>:|>
>:|> Do you have any clue at all what his meaning of "nature's god" might be?
>:|>
>:|> It sure as hell wasn't the God of the Old and New Testament.
>:|>
>:|> The DOI isn't the foundation of American Law, nor is the Old Testament ,
>:|> New Testament, Ten sound bites (Commandments)
>:|
>:|Do you recall your original posting?
>:|
>:|We aren't talking about the foundation of "American Law", we are talking
>:|about the foundation of the country.

Game playing on your part, i.e. you have also asked about foundation of
law. I have replied to both, sometimes in the same reply.

guess you forgot that, huh?I

>:|
>:|The Declaration of Independence is one of the founding documents for
>:|this country.


False and you can say it is till the cows come home. Doing so will not make
it so.


I notice that you offer nothing other than "You say".

I offer again,


>:|
>:|It mentions "nature's god".


So what?


>:|All of this substantiates my original response to your post.

Really? BZZZZTTTTTTTTTTT! Nice try but no cigar.

REMEMBER THIS:
A CHALLENGE TO ANYONE

I challenge you or anyone else to show, with valid primary souce historical
documentation, valid secondary source documentation/commentary, cites etc
by respected scholars that THIS COUNTRY was ever founded as a CHRISTIAN
NATION. (That perhaps most of the citizens who were religious were
Christian does not qualify)

I doubt that you or anyone else would ever accept this challeged because it
is a myth and therefore can''t be shown to be true.

To the above you offered the following:


> Peter Franks wrote:
>> :|
>> :|Christian, no.
>> :|
>> :|Deity, yes. Source: Declaration of Independence
>> :|


To which I replied

> Diety nation? LOL
>
> Oooohhhhhhhh boy. The DOI didn't found anything.
>
> Your "source" is a non source.
> Better luck next time
############################################
Your flaws
(1) The challenge was to to show this country was founded as a CHRISTIAN
NATION.

You said it wasn't

Peter Franks wrote
>> :|Christian, no.

End of discussion.

However, you then make a complete fool of yourself again by further saying
saying

>> :|Deity, yes.

In the 13 and half years I have been involved in researching, studying,
gathering documents, posting online on the historical and legal topic of
Church & state in America from the 1750s to present I have never, ever
heard of anyone claim this was a Deity nation.

The phrase doesn't make sense.

Your answer doesn't meet the challenge, even more so since you stated this
was not a Christian Nation.

Your senseless attempt to inject yourself into a discussion you aren't
qualifed to be in only made you look silly.


More evidence this is not and never was a Christian Nation.

* Madison's Arguments Against Special Religious Sanction of American
Government
http://candst.tripod.com/madlib.htm

* Treaty of Tripoli, 1796: Little-Known U.S. Document Signed by
President Adams Proclaims America's Government Is Secular
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tripoli1.htm

Testimonies to the religious defect of the Constitution of the United
States By the Rev. D. M'Allister:

* Part I
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.constitution/msg/455aa7a64df87545?dmode=source

An excerpt that trashes your theory from ther above

[excerpt]
PRESIDENT TIMOTHY DWIGHT, 1812, 1813.
The next witness whom we cite is Dr. Dwight, the well-known
President, in former years, of Yale College. On July 23d, 1812, the public
fast-day in Connecticut, in view of the calamities of war, President
Dwight, of Yale College, preached a discourse, in two parts, in the college
chapel, In the second part, among reasons for grave apprehension, is the
following
"The second of these reasons is, the sinful character of our
nation. Notwithstanding the prevalence of religion which I have described,
the irreligion and the wickedness of our land are such as to furnish a most
painful and melancholy prospect to a serious mind. We formed our
Constitution without any acknowledgment of God, without any recognition of
his mercies to us as a people, of his government, or even of his existence.
The convention by which it was formed, never asked, even once, his
direction or his blessing upon their labors. Thus we commenced our national
existence, under the present system, without God. I wish I could say
that a disposition to render him the reverence due to his great name, and
the, gratitude demanded by his innumerable mercies, had been more public,
visible, uniform, and fervent." (Page 46.)
In a volume entitled, 11 President Dwight's Decisions of Questions
discussed by the Senior Class in Yale College, in 1813 and 1814," are, many
weighty remarks on the question, " Ought religious tests to be required of
civil officers?" This question was discussed December 22d, 1813. The
language of this testimony is as follows:

6
"It is highly discreditable to us that we do not acknowledge God in
our Constitution. Now, it is remarkable that the grossest nations and
individuals, in their public acts and in their declarations, manifestoes,
proclamations, etc., always recognize the superintendency of a Supreme
Being. Even Napoleon does it. We, however, have neglected to do it. God
says, ' They who despise me shall be lightly esteemed and we have rendered
ourselves liable, as a nation, to his displeasure. The corruption which is
now rapidly extending in this country gives reason for apprehension that we
are soon to suffer the punishment to which we have exposed
ourselves.-Dwight's Decisions, pp. 111, 112.
[end excerpt]




* Part II
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.constitution/msg/751699b8c4bf88e4?dmode=source

* Part III
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.constitution/msg/3ad78ebcc4d79ff6?dmode=source

* Part IV
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.constitution/msg/42a28b0b5bc87895?dmode=source

* Part V
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.constitution/msg/9259cac2793f0f41?dmode=source


Christian Statesman Tracts No. 6, Answers to Objections to the Religious
Amendment of the United States Constitution. By the Rev. D. M'Allister.

* Section II, Part I
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.education/msg/2ed67ba52c3d89f7

* Section II, Part II
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.education/msg/673328f3e98a3c08

* Section II, Part III
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.education/msg/420fc4f3a8821774

* Section II, Part IV
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.education/msg/b508d61a89973b85

The following excerpt from Section II, Part IV totally shoots down youe
silly "Diety Nation" invention:

[excerpt]
Since the foregoing pages were stereotyped the First Objection has
been brought
to our notice in another form by an eminent citizen of New England. He says
"The Declaration of Independence is really the full Preamble of the
Constitution. It sets forth sentiments and principles ; the Constitution
follows it with rules and regulations.That document, at the outset,
declares it to be a self-evident truth that all men are created equal and
endowed by their Creator with all their rights; and closes with an appeal °
to the Supreme Judge of the World.'"
We are fully sensible of the value of these expressions in the
Declaration. They prove that the nation then owned her allegiance to God.
They vindicate her right, now strenuously denied, to acknowledge God in
public documents. They show that what we propose is consistent with the
spirit and example of our fathers, in the noblest passages of our history.
But we must clearly distinguish between these two documents. The
Declaration is not part of the written Constitution. Its value is
historical rather than legal. It is a deed of the nation which has passed
into history ; the Constitution, as. a law, is an ever-present act of the
nation's will. The argument which is drawn from the silence of the
Constitution concerning God and Religious against all Christian features of
our government as contrary to °` our political covenant," not covered by
the bond, cannot be adequately met by an appeal to the Declaration of 1776.
[end excerpt]

American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm

along with the following sub articles found in the above article:

Post-Civil War attempts to incorporate religious language into the
Constitution

* First major attempts to amend the Constitution 1863 - 1880
* The NRA (National Reform Association) and the Christian
Amendment
o The Proposed Christian Amendment
* In God We Trust
* The Dangers of Combining Politics And Religion
* Sunday (Sabbath) arguments and Clashes (1810-1835)
o Genealogy of Sunday Laws
o The Sunday Mail argument (1810-1830)
o Sundays Excepted
o "Sunday Excepted" & "Year of Our lord" (1830-1833)
* Joseph Story: A look at the writings of the man whom some
have styled the "father of religious accommodationism."
o Introduction
o Is Christianity part of English Common Law
o Is this a Christian nation?
o Joseph Story's ongoing war with Thomas Jefferson
o Joseph Story's Commentaries of the Constitution
o Two Views: James Madison's and Joseph Story's
* The Jasper Adams Saga
o Jasper Adams Sermon: Relation of Christianity to Civil
Government, First Edition
o Rebuttal to Jasper Adams Sermon
o Jasper Adams Sermon: Second Edition
o Letters to the Reverend Jasper Adams
* Chronology of Religious Measures Introduced in Congress
between 1888 - 1910
* Religious Measures in Congress 1888 - 1949
* Church of the Holy Trinity v U.S
o Church of the Holy Trinity v U.S., 143 U.S. 266.
o The "Christian Nation" Decision and Rebuttal.
o The Supreme Court has Declared that the United States
is a Christian Nation.
o Holy Trinity and the Christian Nation Dicta.
o Getting to Know Supreme Court Justice David J. Brewer.

The Constitution of the USA
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

Now run along. Go back to playing with the only person who seems at all
willing to indulige you, that being Josh.

***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:

The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm

American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm

The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html

[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]

HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/

***************************************************************
. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote

"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"

That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.

It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.

*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************