Is America a Christian Nation?: The Founders’ Intentions

Posted on February 4, 2011 by Keith A. Kelso in Articles

Is America a Christian nation? It’s a somewhat controversial question we often hear in American society and politics. During his election, Barack Obama was criticized for a pre-presidential speech in which he said America was not just a Christian nation, but also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, etc., etc. Ok, I get it. Multiculturalism is what all the cool kids are doing these days. I won’t expound upon my opinion on that particular point. But many still wonder what the correct answer to this question is.

To conservatives, an important part of this debate should be whether or not the founding fathers intended us to be a Christian nation. Some contend that our founders were all devout Christians and describe their intended form of government as a borderline theocracy. Others harp on the popularity of deism in the late eighteenth century, claiming that it was the majority theological opinion among the founders. Both of these positions cite some credible evidence, but willingly ignore some as well. So were the founders Christians? And did they intend the United States to be a Christian nation?

We certainly know that some of the founders were Christians; Roger Sherman, the only signer of the four major documents of America’s founding (the Articles of Association of 1774, the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution), was an active lay worker in his church and was spoken highly of by his pastor, Jonathan Edwards, Jr., son of the famed theologian. Gouverneur Morris, whose leadership of the Committee on Style gave him an important role in the wording of the Constitution, was an Episcopal who believed in a God who took an active role in the affairs of men. John Jay, a contributor to the Federalist Papers and the first chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, served as president of the American Bible Society after retiring from government and politics. These three are just a sampling of the Christians involved in every aspect of the founding of our nation.

However, we also know that some of the founders did not quite hold to the orthodox definition of Christianity. Benjamin Franklin’s deism is well documented; the aged statesman put his faith in human reason rather than Christ, believing he could achieve moral perfection on his own. Thomas Jefferson described himself as a Christian only in the sense that he adhered to the moral teachings of Christ. He rejected anything supernatural, including the deity of Jesus, and even called the Book of Revelation “the ravings of a Maniac.” And John Adams rejected the faith of his youth, turning instead to the Unitarian church.

So we certainly cannot say that the founders, as a whole, were devout Christians, but many of them certainly were. So did they envision a biblical foundation for the new nation? Many founders acknowledged the advantage that Christian morality brought to society. Adams cited the advantages of Christianity in that it “brings the great principle of the law of nature and nations . . . to the knowledge, belief and veneration of the whole people. Children, servants, women and men are all professors in the science of public morality. . . . The duties and rights of the man and the citizen are thus taught from early infancy.” Jefferson, who was devoted to the ethical teachings of classical philosophers, realized that republican government needed a stronger moral structure, which he realized could only be found in Christianity.

A generation after the founding era, Alexis de Tocqueville marveled at the role that Christianity played in American society and government: “in France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom pursuing courses diametrically opposed to each other: but in America I found that they were intimately united, and that they reigned in common over the same country.” “Religion,” he said, “must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of free institutions.”

So why, if Christian morality was so essential to republican government, was religion not enforced? Because, as James Madison said, “Religion flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of Government.” So while the founders clearly intended the United States to be a nation of religious morality, the basis of which was certainly the Christian Bible, they knew that the people could not be forced into being Christian, but rather must choose it for themselves.

CORE Beliefs – Hint: Washington DC Forgot Them All!

Posted on February 2, 2011 by Brian Reilly in Articles

The U.S. House of Representatives is working on a bill to replace the 2,000+ page health care law.

To say that there are good laws and bad laws that Congress has passed may be a little elementary. Those “bad” laws I’m referring to are often overreaching, unnecessary, unconstitutional, or dumb. Those “good” laws are Constitutional and equally applied at the federal, state, or local level.

There are several reasons why lawmakers propose legislation:

Necessity
Represent constituents
Appease voting block or lobby
Raise profile
Ideology
Draw attention to issue

On the flip side, there are people who don’t believe that laws should exist and embrace anarchy (See: Julian Assange of Wikileaks).

Mind you, no one will ever agree 100% on what should be law and what shouldn’t be law. We may agree that taxes are necessary, but a progressive tax system where 47% of Americans don’t pay any federal income tax meets the definition of crazy.

Invariably politicians and lawmakers are always busy creating (You guessed it!) new laws.

I say “politicians” and “lawmakers” without deference to their political brand. There can be liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats, but not many of the latter exist in reality these days. And of course there are Green Party, Libertarian, et al.

As a fan of American liberty, I did some thinking about what makes “good” law. And I came up with an easy acronym: CORE.

CORE stands for Constitutional, Optional, Relevant, Equal

Ask yourself this question: Is the new idea/proposal/bill/law you’re hearing about…

Constitutional?

Does this legislation follow the Constitution? The individual mandate found within the Health Care law was recently struck down in a Florida federal court for being unconstitutional.

Optional?

Is this legislation voluntary? Why is it not? If Social Security is such a great idea, why is it mandatory? Obviously not every piece of legislation can be “optional”, but more need to be.

Relevant?

Does this legislation contain any irrelevant material? Is there pork? Are we paying to study dinosaurs on Mars?

Equal?

Does this legislation treat everyone equally under the law or take from some to give to others? Who benefits most from this legislation?

Keep lawmakers accountable to our Constitution!

CORE Beliefs: Pass it on.

The American Dream of the Founding Fathers

Posted on February 2, 2011 by JtowneJeff in Opinion

Do you own a big house? Drive a fancy car? Have a great job? If you answered “yes” to any of these, you probably think that you are living the American Dream. But what about the dreams of Washington, Adams, Franklin, Jefferson, and the rest of the Founding Fathers? Did George Washington think that building Mt. Vernon was his crowning achievement? Did John Adams view his presidency as his claim to fame? Did Benjamin Franklin die a satisfied man because he flew a kite in a thunderstorm?

Sadly, the “American Dream” has been morphed and distorted over the past several decades, to a point that the Fathers wouldn’t even recognize it. That nice job you have with the corner office and personal secretary? And the nice car you drive around in and the big house that you call home? They do not define whether a person is living the American Dream or not. Rather, they are the potential results of it. The original American Dream, the dream of the founding fathers, is far greater than all of these things.

This great country of ours was built not on the ability to attain notoriety or worldly possessions, but on principles. And those principles could then in turn lead to possessions and notoriety. In his essay “The American Dream”, found in the 1973 issue of the The Freeman, John E. Nestler observed, “Whereas the American Dream was once equated with certain principles of freedom, it is now equated with things. The American Dream has undergone a metamorphosis from principles to materialism…. When people are concerned more with the attainment of things than with the maintenance of principles, it is a sign of moral decay. And it is through such decay that loss of freedom occurs.”

We need to be reminded, as a nation, that the Founding Fathers gave up material wealth and substance for something that was far, far greater to them. In their minds, liberty – and all of the possible risks associated with liberty – was far more desirable than material things and prosperity, especially if that prosperity came with collectivism or despotism. They felt so strongly about this in fact, that they were willing to give up their wealth to ensure liberty and freedom for themselves and future generations. Material gain and public fame are only a fruit of freedom, not its root.

Liberty, above all things, was the dream that the Founding Fathers had for their new country. But it was more than a dream to them. Solomon once said, “Where there is no vision, the people perish.” To the founders, this was a vision. Behind everything that motivated them was their belief in equality and unalienable rights. From the Declaration of Independence, where they clearly declared: “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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. They believed that those rights came from their Heavenly God, and that the King and his government had encroached on those rights to the point that rebellion was the only option left for them. Samuel Adams declared at the signing of the Declaration, “We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in Heaven and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let His kingdom come.”

But we all know about this. It has been ingrained into us since elementary school. “We live in America: home of the free. We have freedom and liberty because we live in America.” But our freedom and liberty are slipping away. Tom Rose described it this way in his book, God, Gold and Civil Government: “Liberty is like a three-legged stool. It has three aspects, or legs: the Spiritual, the Economic, and the Political. Each leg must be carefully preserved. If one leg is shortened or cut off, the stability provided by the other two will be hampered or lost, and the ideal of Liberty will come tumbling down.” Today, only one of those legs remains strong: the Political. America is quickly losing sight of the spiritual aspect on which she was founded. And in recent years, our economic strength has atrophied.

If we as a nation are to persevere in our liberty and maintain our freedom, we must hold fast to the vision of the Founding Fathers. The vision that all men are created equal, that we have rights which can never be taken from us, and that America is the place where these beliefs are celebrated and embraced. Then, and only then, will we be living the American Dream.

What Would Our Founding Fathers Think of Repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”?

Posted on December 20, 2010 by Brooks Bayne in Articles

Saturday’s passage of the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” flies in the face of what our Founding Fathers thought about homosexuality in the military and homosexuality in general.

First, how did George Washington, our country’s first Commander in Chief, view how a man should conduct himself in the military?

“The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country” – George Washington, General Order, 9 July 1776

Here Washington wants everyman to act in a manner becoming a Christian soldier. We all know Christianity teaches against partaking in homosexual acts, so no “equality” (equality in this context is a misnomer of today, since the 14^th Amendment, passed after the Civil War, mandates equal protection and not “equal rights” as is incorrectly cited by most modern leftists) for the gays from old George.

The modern military is against such behavior, because of instances like the following that have occurred (on Washington’s watch) when gays are in close quarters with other men:

“At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778) Lieutt. Frederick Gotthold Enslin of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false Accounts, found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and do sentence him to be dismiss’d the service with Infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return; The Drummers and Fifers to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose.” – George Washington, March 14, 1778, General Orders

Here’s a full Lieutenant who tried to cornhole another soldier, and he’s booted out of the military. But look at how Washington chose to boot him. The homosexual Lt. had to leave camp while the entire military band played, to signify his disgrace and to serve as a warning to others. Typically, the whole camp would watch the disgraced being drummed out.

Some of you reading this are thinking, “Washington was too religious. Surely, Jefferson didn’t feel this way.” And you’d be wrong. Jefferson proposed a law requiring:

“Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration…” – Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Proportioning Crimes and Punishments 1778 Papers 2:492–504

Granted, at the time, the common punishment for gay buttseks was death. So, Jefferson can be seen as a radical for requiring castration in death’s stead, although he obviously didn’t condone homosexuality.

One wonders how many would engage in homosexuality if they had to suffer consequences beyond their current consequence of considerably shorter lifespans than their heterosexual counterparts.

As I’ve said before, the military should change its policy from “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to “Don’t Tell, We Didn’t Ask”.

The Founders on Liberty

Posted on December 16, 2010 by Brian Reilly in Photo

“The Founders” of the United States often spoke about liberty. Here are some quotes from them. Not an all encompassing list by any means, but relevant and interesting. Their arguments for liberty are as powerful today as they were then. I wish more of our leaders today had the grace, thoughtful philosophy, and eloquence of those who founded our nation. Also take a look at James Monroe. He looks a lot like Ed O’Neill. (Click on the slideshow below)

What if the Founding Fathers used Microsoft Office?

Posted on December 8, 2010 by Brooks Bayne in Video

Normally, I don’t give companies a free plug, but this video from Microsoft made me smile. Imagine if the Founding Fathers had used the latest version of Office to create the Declaration of Independence. No doubt this video was inspired by the clever If Historical Events Had Facebook Statuses.