I'm convinced that Church and State should remain separate, and there should be no religious test for holding public office. I hold this to be true because I have researched the beliefs of our founding fathers, who were overwhelmingly Deist and Masonic. Thomas Jefferson wrote the rules for freedom of religion and freedom from religion, while Benjamin Franklin was a practicing Mason who visited other Masons in Europe.

What do you think?

I agree when religon gets involved with politics it causes nothing but strife. Just look at the middle east and you'll see what I am talking about.

It is a tough question to ponder for many reasons, but an interesting one never the less. Church and state should be seperate because of religious freedom. If the state oversees church or religious affairs then it becomes bias to religion. The concept of freedom is to the right to pursue life liberty and happiness and if that means one wants religion or not to acheive that then that is what it is all about. Yet Jefferson cites a "Creator" in the declaration of Independance and Franklin was the one who requested that Clergy preside over congressional meetings.

It is a moot arguement. The phrase or even the concept of "seperation of church and state" never appears in the constitution. It first appear in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist in 1802. It wasn't until the late 1940's that it became a political hotbutton.

As for my personal belief, no I do not believe a wall of seperation if required. Perhaps if governments a moral position first; we would all be better off, IMHO.

If a religious person can be a member of a government, then it really makes no difference that church and state are separated. Church and state have never REALLY been separated anywhere

It's in the Soviet constitution I think.

I think the leaders should be free to be religious but there should be no national religion.

We very much have separation of church and state in this country, and it should and in fact MUST remain that way. The Founding Fathers of the USA came to the shores of America from England where there was a State religion. The Church of England. You could be branded a heretic and thrown in jail or worse for not following the Church of England. This is what the forefathers intended on avoiding for the future of the USA. This is how our Calvinist, Quaker, Episcopal, Unitarian (Diest) founding fathers ended up in the USA. Many many of their fellow worshippers were imprisoned or hung back in England simply for what they believed. Any person of religion who thinks that we should abolish the separation of Church and State is absolutely nuts.

Now, there is another concept embroiled in this that is the "freedom of religion" HOWEVER, this does not mean freedom FROM religion. That is a much harder concept for some folks to grasp.

You are right: there isn't REALLY any freedom from religion, we are all brainwashed with it one way or the other

It shouldn't be aboloshed becuase it simply isn't there.
The Fed has no place making law on religion, for or against.
Far as it goes, no national religion coming from the central govt.

Our Founding Fathers on Christianity

Anyone who tells you that the Founding Fathers were trying to create a Christian nation is either a liar or parroting what other liars told him. This is what they really had to say about Christianity.

The Faith of our Founding Fathers
By Dean Worbis


http://www.ecis.com/~alizard/founding-fathers-xtianity.html

You're correct Fullywired.

The Founding Fathers weren't exactly the most pious people in the world. BUT, the vast majority of them were practicing some sort of religion, it's just what people did during that time period. They NEVER set out to create a Christian nation, no way. They set out to create a nation of liberty and equal rights and freedom of an oppressive government and opression from a governing church.

Don't be soft, girl, those people were just like most Europeans before and after them

Thanks for that link fullywired! It's satisfying to re-read the confirmation of my point of view from the original sources.

all kinds of stuff on that site

1. I haven't been a "girl" in 30 years.

2. Actually, I beg to differ, they weren't like all Europeans before and after them. They were extraordinary men (and women) with incredible vision in my opinion.

3. I'm rarely soft on anything... ask anyone around here.

I disagree, luv. So you are an old, then

Man, have I been doing some good drinkin today. I meant to say "so you are an old girl then".

I'm not brainwashed. I chose it on my own, and came to know God my own way. If you feel victim to religion, that doesn't mean that I'm brainwashed.

I said RELIGION, Blue, not hope or faith

My hearty thanks for the link.

Peace,

RadicalGnostic

The minutes recorded at the Philidelphia Constitutional convention of 1787 says otherwise. You should give it a read and get educated on American history!

Have you read the Quotes in this article??? Are you saying Jefferson ,Adams and Paine didn't say those things??if you are ,you should take it up with the Washington post ,where the article was published


fullywired

“The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”
“Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”
"I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." -Thomas Jefferson. Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803

I can post quotes too. Not that I believe that our founding fathers were perfect upright Christians, but it is possible to change one's views as they go through life. Just because someone says something one day, doesn't mean they believe it forever.

That last statement may be debatable, but you're right. For the record, though... why isn't Freedom from Religion granted in America?

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@


It spite of Christian right attempts to rewrite history to make Jefferson into a Christian, little about his philosophy resembles that of Christianity. Although Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence wrote of the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God, there exists nothing in the Declaration about Christianity.

Although Jefferson believed in a Creator, his concept of it resembled that of the god of deism (the term "Nature's God" used by deists of the time). With his scientific bent, Jefferson sought to organize his thoughts on religion. He rejected the superstitions and mysticism of Christianity and even went so far as to edit the gospels, removing the miracles and mysticism of Jesus (see The Jefferson Bible) leaving only what he deemed the correct moral philosophy of Jesus.



This is an excerpt from a much longer article ,which can be read at http://www.nobeliefs.com/jefferson.htm (if any one wants to research further)




fullywired

No! What I am saying is that the quotes from that convention are indicative of the faith of the founding Father's. Franklin himself requested each meeting of Congress be opened with prayer. Henry made a point blank statement that this Country was founded on the principles of Christiantiy specifically. The Declaration of Independence cites a Creator who gave us the rights to pursue life, liberty and happiness... The liberty bell is inscribed with scripture from the Bible. Public officials were always sworn in by placing their hand on a Bible. People can say what they want, I guess I should be thankful that Sandy Berger has not yet stolen those transcripts yet, but I am sure that it is on his agenda.

The really important things to remember about the founding fathers, most especially Jefferson, Franklin, Washington and Paine, is that they were not espousing god in the same way that christians at the time were. Look where they came from, a state religion with a monarchy that said in no uncertain terms that the king ruled by divine right. The last thing the founding fathers wanted was a repeat of that given the opportunity to create a different nation. You also have to know that the founding fathers like another poster said believed in NATURAL LAW which still involved a creator but was vastly different that the idea we have of christianity today. The founding fathers I believe were much more influenced by John Locke than the bible.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/

His ideas can easily be found throughout the Constitution because the Framers knew that in order to have freedom one could not have a church run government. That kind of church government relatonship is what they had fled from. There has always been a separation of church and state for the simple reason the Constitution clearly states that Congress (and by Congress I believe they meant the government itself) shall make no establishing a religion (link below) which takes its framing from a bill presented by Jefferson to the Virginia Legislature. (link below)

http://www.religioustolerance.org/amend_1.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/virg_bil.htm

The founding fathers knew what they were doing. The only time it has become a political hot button is when the religion right tries to push it's agenda too far in trying to make this country a christian nation.

If you do not have 'freedom from religion', then you wouldn't have 'freedom of religion', right? Maybe it's a concept that is harder to grasp, because it's not specific. Why is the concept of no 'freedom from religion', highly defended? What does it mean 'freedom from religion'? Freedom from procetylizing?

Freedom from religion means that a person does not have to belong to any religion.

Peace,

RadicalGnostic

I would read what is on microfilm and can be accessed in the national archives. They will also send a photo copy for a fee. It is what history has recorded in their letters and speeches that count, not the atheist who really are the one who are attempting to re-write history which is an act of treason by the way!

I am not atheist, yet I don't believe the Fathers were Christians like modern evangelicals. They practiced magic, for goodness sake!

Peace,

RadicalGnostic

Thank you for answering.

So, to my point, telling someone that they have to have a religion, isn't it like telling someone what religion they have to be?

If that is the case, does not that go against the first of 'Freedom of Religion'?

As long as you follow a belief system, that's your religion. And that religion will always invade your political stance, always. Thank God for laws to keep people at bay. Nevertheless, politicians secure votes from religious groups because they are very organized and big and in U. S. of A., those mean money and power. So, in this country, it's what makes it a Christian one, and everyone 'dance' to its 'tune,' whether he or she likes it or not. And America is THE most powerful nation in the world, today. If all of a sudden the Christian alliance becomes rigid in its beliefs, watch out because no amount of laws could hold it back. And human-made laws are always meant to be broken, someday, somehow -- it's just a matter of time. The history of the world is the great example.

So, what do I think about the separation of church and state? It's beyond me. I just go with the flow, where power lies, and my life is not that long in the scheme of things to even make a minute dent. This topic is so complex, you have no idea because "power" is the bottom line of this story. And our government is full of power-hungry creatures. In addition, no one person holds "power" in this country, not even several people. Again, it's very complex, just ask President George Walker Bush and Dick Cheney. Have you noticed how the presidents looked like when they entered the White House and after?

If the founding fathers were 'overwhelmingly masonic' it looks like they were religious then. What they mean by separation of church and state is keeping Christianity out of the government, while allowing other religions like masonry in.

Well, many of the founding fathers were indeed masons...but that doesn't mean they weren't Christian. In fact, masonic temples are widely associated with Christianity.

They sought the separation of church and state because of the exact reasons that the Pilgrims(Puritans) fled England. They did not like the ruling religious persecution. With their founding ideals of the freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly and protest, how can you have a national religion? You can't. If there wasn't Jerry Falwell, (and the others of his kind ) would have been elected president a long time ago...and the USA would have started the apocalypse about 30 years ago.

Indeed, WolfAvers314.

Peace,

RadicalGnostic

If I may put in my two cents...I think the point MissMels was trying to make, or how I took it, is that you will never have "freedom FROM religion" because religious people, of all kinds, will always be around you. Whether they believe in the Christian God or "insert other gods here" there is no way to get away from it.

The only reason the US is considered a Christian country is because that is what the majority claim they are. The government doesn't have to declare it.

In that sense, then it seems she is insisting that religion is a plague by saying "You will never have freedom from religion." It then becomes a prejudice about personal views. Because there are religious people that aren't oppressive with their beliefs. A generalization isn't fitting for this statement.

One point that I have tried to make repeatedly, yet always seem to get beat up for, is that our cultural background is primarily or predominantly a Christian one. People seem to refuse to accept it, but it's a fact. It does not mean that the US or any European countries are Christian, as much as it means that our rules, laws, habits, paradigms, are all affected by our Christian roots. This is why even a secular government that is a predominantly Islamic, Hindu, whatever population, will have a different "feel" or "flavor" to it's political system.

Here in the US, self proclaimed Christians constantly dabble or interfere in politics, and it's taken as normal, because this is a predominantly Christian land (of one sect or another). The same can be said for countries that are Islamic. Why this is so hard to accept or understand is beyond me.

Now where I understand your argument, it is exactly this reasoning that causes the problems in our government. Because the country is mostly Christian, politicians USE that to herd the sheep. Politicians say that since most of the country is Christian, it is okay to propose legislation that favors one religion...yet completely undermines another. Religion can be narrowly defined as 'a way of thought'. Any group with beliefs and causes can be protected under the 1st amendment. Issues like Gay Marriage, Abortion, Psychedelics (Rastafarian, Native Americans, that church of weed), etc don't have valid arguments for criminalization because the only people who are speaking out against them are the Neo-Religious Fundamentalists...and their followers are dumber than sheep. It is only the religious fuel that allows these topics to continue on as they do. The first amendment can be interpreted as 'everything except murder is legal.' You don't have to take part in abortion, gay marriage, or psychedelics....but those who want those options, (though the psychedelics must have a religious context if they are going to be legal), should be allowed to have access to them.

I am also very much aware, that the majority of our country(USA) is Christians. I never thought different. I do believe, that throughout the years, the other religions, and Atheism have grown. The bottom line is, we're still a country that values freedom and one of those freedoms is to believe what you want to believe. Not be persecuted like the Prostestants under Queen Mary the 1st of England's rule. I do believe we became a country to prove such tyrannies wrong. I agree as well, that there will be always those of Christian beliefs around us. Though, I really do not think that is what 'not being free from religion' means. I think RadicalGnostic had the correct meaning. To persecute Atheist for their lack of religion, is to persecute the Prostestants during Queen Mary's reign. I think we would be in the wrong as well, if we did force Atheist to have religion. If we do not have 'freedom from religion' as well as 'freedom of religion', then we are a country that is not really free, and we shouldn't boast as such.

I think to claim we are a Christian nation, then technically it should be written down somewhere. I know, there are those 'unwritten' rules and statements, but how far do we go to say that will govern us, or we just take it with a grain of salt? Those 'unwritten' lines of thinking will get us in trouble somewhere down the line.

As a fellow Atheist I don't understand where all this comes from. No matter what country you live in there will be people that believe in some sort of God and there is no way to get around it..."no freedom from religion". That doesn't mean you have to have religion 'or else'! If you look for things to get pissy about there is no doubt you're going to find it.

I'm not talking about anyone that has responded to this thread, but I've seen more, what I would call Atheist fanatics on this site, than I've ever seen of Christian or Muslim fanatics...anywhere.

Our Godless Constitution
by BROOKE ALLEN

[from the February 21, 2005 issue]

It is hard to believe that George Bush has ever read the works of George Orwell, but he seems, somehow, to have grasped a few Orwellian precepts. The lesson the President has learned best--and certainly the one that has been the most useful to him--is the axiom that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administration's current favorites is the whopper about America having been founded on Christian principles. Our nation was founded not on Christian principles but on Enlightenment ones. God only entered the picture as a very minor player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent.

Our Constitution makes no mention whatever of God. The omission was too obvious to have been anything but deliberate, in spite of Alexander Hamilton's flippant responses when asked about it: According to one account, he said that the new nation was not in need of "foreign aid"; according to another, he simply said "we forgot." But as Hamilton's biographer Ron Chernow points out, Hamilton never forgot anything important.

In the eighty-five essays that make up The Federalist, God is mentioned only twice (both times by Madison, who uses the word, as Gore Vidal has remarked, in the "only Heaven knows" sense). In the Declaration of Independence, He gets two brief nods: a reference to "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God," and the famous line about men being "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights." More blatant official references to a deity date from long after the founding period: "In God We Trust" did not appear on our coinage until the Civil War, and "under God" was introduced into the Pledge of Allegiance during the McCarthy hysteria in 1954 [see Elisabeth Sifton, "The Battle Over the Pledge," April 5, 2004].

In 1797 our government concluded a "Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, or Barbary," now known simply as the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 of the treaty contains these words:


As the Government of the United States...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.

This document was endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and President John Adams. It was then sent to the Senate for ratification; the vote was unanimous. It is worth pointing out that although this was the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it was only the third unanimous vote in the Senate's history. There is no record of debate or dissent. The text of the treaty was printed in full in the Philadelphia Gazette and in two New York papers, but there were no screams of outrage, as one might expect today.

The Founding Fathers were not religious men, and they fought hard to erect, in Thomas Jefferson's words, "a wall of separation between church and state." John Adams opined that if they were not restrained by legal measures, Puritans--the fundamentalists of their day--would "whip and crop, and pillory and roast." The historical epoch had afforded these men ample opportunity to observe the corruption to which established priesthoods were liable, as well as "the impious presumption of legislators and rulers," as Jefferson wrote, "civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time."

If we define a Christian as a person who believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ, then it is safe to say that some of the key Founding Fathers were not Christians at all. Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine were deists--that is, they believed in one Supreme Being but rejected revelation and all the supernatural elements of the Christian Church; the word of the Creator, they believed, could best be read in Nature. John Adams was a professed liberal Unitarian, but he, too, in his private correspondence seems more deist than Christian.

George Washington and James Madison also leaned toward deism, although neither took much interest in religious matters. Madison believed that "religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprize." He spoke of the "almost fifteen centuries" during which Christianity had been on trial: "What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution." If Washington mentioned the Almighty in a public address, as he occasionally did, he was careful to refer to Him not as "God" but with some nondenominational moniker like "Great Author" or "Almighty Being." It is interesting to note that the Father of our Country spoke no words of a religious nature on his deathbed, although fully aware that he was dying, and did not ask for a man of God to be present; his last act was to take his own pulse, the consummate gesture of a creature of the age of scientific rationalism.

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=...221&s=allen

Yes, I have seen them too. As a military wife, I have known both fanatic Atheist and religious, and I have seen honest and compassionate Atheist and religious. And I think you're right, the fanatic will see what they want to see. I agree with you on that.

I also hope that you are right though, I would rather think that freedom of religion does not mean 'have religion or else'. I sincerely hope that is not what it is.

morality and religion aren't the same thing. and what about atheists and agnostics. are they
automatically considered immoral?
morality is a choice about how to live your life not who to kneel to.
matter of fact, religions have committed some of the most immoral acts and usually when
they were working within government.
a separation is required because with religion there is always a temptation to claim
infallibility(via god like the pope and other religious figures have falsely done-read "holy blood, holy grail" or any unbiased history of religion book) and acting upon faith. this is dangerous in government (or any power structure). it does away with accountability which is key, especially within a democracy.

may seem like I'm being picky but atrocity has happened when people ignore this fact.
just look at the middle east now or the inquisition etc.

Yeah right! Like I said before the micro-film quotes and speeches of these men are intact. Thankfully! Benjamin franklin was the one who requested each session of Congress to be opened with Christain clergy prayer. What is next? Will Sandy Berger try to have the Liberty Bell engraved with monkeys???

It drives me crazy that Christian's love to quote Patrick Henry as saying:

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians ... not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ."

Problem is, it can't be verified... it's not found in any of his writings, or anyone elses. It's highly highly suspect that he ever said or wrote this at all. If he did, it would have probably been a real issue with this own faith as a member of the RSOF.

As far as freedom of and freedom from religion... this means that we don't get to make laws that specifically address what religion you belong to. A fairly poor example might be that if you can't prevent muslims from purchasing and building a mosque next door to your house (provided they aren't breaking any secular land usage laws). Atheists have the right to chase you down at a street fair and give you their literature, Christians have the right to peacefully hold rallies regardless of what they believe. As someone who opposes the views of another you can't be free from their actions so long as they aren't breaking any secular public safety laws or other secular laws.

"One of the embarrassing problems for the early nineteenth-century champions of the Christian faith was that not one of the first six Presidents of the United States was an orthodox Christian."--The Encyclopedia Britannica (1968, p. 420)

*Letter to the Los Angeles Times from Pastor R. T. Zuelch:

As Pastor Richard T. Zuelch pointed out in his letter to the Los Angeles Times on August 14, 1995: "Gordon S. Wood, in his 1992 book, "The Radicalism of the American Revolution," states that, by the 1790's only about 10% of the American population regularly attended religious services - to quote just one statistic. Not exactly an indication of a wholehearted national commitment to Christianity!

It is a matter of simple historical fact that the United States was not founded as, nor was it ever intended to be, a Christian nation. That there were strong, long-lasting Christian influences involved in the nation's earliest history, due to the Puritan settlements and those of other religious persons escaping European persecution, cannot be denied. But that is a long way from saying that colonial leaders, by the time of the outbreak of the Revolution, were intending to form a nation founded on specifically Christian principles and doctrine.

We Christians do ourselves no favor by bending history to suit our prejudices or to accommodate wishful thinking. Rather than continue to cling to a "Moral Majority"-style fantasy that says America is a Christian nation that needs to be "taken back" from secular unbelief (we can't "take back" what we never had), it would be much healthier for us Christians to face reality, holding to what Jesus himself said in the Gospels: that Christians should never be surprised at the hostility with which the gospel would be greeted by the world, because most people would fail to believe in him, thereby strongly implying that, in every age and country, Christianity would always be a minority faith.” (Rev. Richard T. Zuelch, Letter to the Editor, Los Angeles Times, August 1995)

Below is the Treaty with Tripoli, being most poignant. George Washington was president when the treaty was signed at Tripoli (1797), but by the time it reached the Senate for ratification, John Adams was president:

"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 Mohammedan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever interrupt the harmony existing between the two countries."

America's Real Religion
http://www.sunnetworks.net/~ggarman/

Sean