BUSh Declares Our RIGHTs come from GOD!

by plmkrzy 66 Replies latest jw friends

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    Xander writes: "The founding fahers of this country wanted separation of church and state."

    I don't argue with that. But the founding fathers were not advocating the removal of the church nor the state. Moreover, how does the word God constitute a church?

    Francis Bellamy wrote the pledge in 1892. The original words were "I pledge allegiance to my flag..." These words were changed in 1924 by the National Flag Conference to "I pledge allegiance to the flag..." Likewise, in 1954 there was another modification, the insertion of "under God." I do not object to either change.

  • Xander
    Xander
    There is a difference between Jesus the man and the religion of Christianity

    I guess I take exception to this. I do not believe there is such a difference. I will grant you, I think Jefferson might have. Hence, he wrote his own 'gospel' that removed any of the miracles, etc. from the 'bible canon' gospels. In essence, removed the christianity from christ, and I think he was okay with the resulting figure.

    I guess I don't understand your point, then? The founding fathers were not christians, and indeed, opposed the religion of christianity. They did not include any references to god or religion in the constitution.

    So, why not leave any references to god or religion out of the pledge of allegiance?

    Moreover, how does the word God constitute a church

    Sorry I was not clear, but that was not the definition of 'church' I was using - I was not referring to a single, organized, institution, and neither were the founding fathers when they wanted a chasm between religion and the government.

    Allow me to rephrase. "The founding fathers of this country wanted seperation of religion and state."

    Surely you must agree that the alteration to the pledge of allegiance to make the pledgee acknowledge a single deity guiding the country is a tad religious, no?

    of the at a loss for words class

    Plum...dunno what to say. People continue to have their priorities confused. I honestly don't think there is much hope for the human race anymore.

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    Xander,

    On separation of religion and state.

    The founding fathers wanted to protect religion from federal-government interference, not diminish its influence in our public life.

    While I don't deny that some of the fathers were Deists, neither should anyone deny that some were church-going believers. They included Presbyterian Hugh Williamson of N.C.; Roman Catholic Daniel Carroll of Md.; Quakers John Dickinson of Del. and Thomas Mifflin of Pa.

    Ben Franklin asserted, "The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth--that God governs in the affairs of men." George Washington, in his Farewell Address wrote that "reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

    The providence of God was openly and officially acknowledged. Some states had religious requirements to hold office.

    The term "establishment of religion" had a definite, agreed-upon meaning: an official church, vested with privileges denied other churches and suported by the public treasury. Such was the Church of England in Great Britain--and churches in nine of the 13 Colonies at the outset of the American Revolution.

    Because of growing pressure, however, pressure mounted within the Colonies to disestablish these churches. In 1785, James Madison co-sponsored a bill in Va. to disestablish the Protestant Episcopal Church and prohibit taxes from being used to support any church. He did not act out of animosity to religion, but mainly at the request of other denominations who felt unfairly treated. Nor did he intend to erect a "wall of separation" between church and state: on the same day, he introduced a bill "for appointing days of public fasting and thanksgiving!"

    Religious belief was officially sanctioned. Days of prayer and appeals for divine assistance were common. The Continental Congress appointed a chaplain and provided for an opening prayer as one of its first items of business.

    When the Continental Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance, governing territories beyond the Ohio River, one of its goals was the promotion of religion. One lot in each parcel of land in the territories was to be "given perpetually for the purposes of religion." And in 1780, in the midst of Revolutionary conflict, the Congress also took steps to print an American Bible, as the supply from England had been cut off.

    As to the First Amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" the meaning is quite clear. Congress was forbidden to legislate for or against church establishments. It could neither set up a national church, nor interfere with the established churches in the states.

    Official support for religion persisted well after adoption of the First Amendment. The day after the House approved the First Amendment's establishment clause, Sept. 25, 1789, it called for a day of national prayer and thanksgiving--the precursor to our present national holiday.

    Congress itself has engaged in officially sponsored, tax-supported prayer, complete with paid official chaplains, from the outset.

    President Washington said: "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."

    The conclusion is obvious: no wall of separation between religious affirmation and civil government was every intended by the First Amendment.

    UNDER GOD!

  • tdogg
    tdogg

    Besides, if we take those words out of the pledge, God might not support our nation when we go kill other people who don't acknowledge Him in their pledge.

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    tdogg,

    Who is advocating killing atheists (in this country) or anywhere? I, for one, am not. I'm opposed to that idea. But I'm for keeping "under God." Please don't project a scheme of your own making.

  • tdogg
    tdogg

    I didn't say anything about athiests sir. There are plenty of people who don't say pledges with "God" in it. And he does not like those people. That is why it is okay to kill them. I only suggest that if we dont acknowledge him in our chants he may not favor our troops. Or maybe our economy will falter, or we may have some bad earthquakes or something.

  • IslandWoman
    IslandWoman

    Xander,

    I have enjoyed this thread very much, it appears though that we have reached an impass.

    Madison, the principle framer of the Constitution said this in reference to the subject of freedom of religion:

    "The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext infringed."

    The United States is a country of laws and tradition. Traditionally most Americans have recognized the existence of God, and most of the men who founded this country also expressed a belief in God. They also recognized the need to allow men and women the free exercise of how they were to express that belief.

    The words, "nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext infringed," are beautiful indeed! Jehovah's Witnesses have that right, they do have to salute the flag because of religious conscience. Atheists do not have to say "Under God", because of conscience.

    For every anti-religion quote you can find among the writings of the Founding Fathers you can probably find just as many quotes affirming their belief and reliance on God. Separation of Church and State was intended to prevent the establishment of government approved religion not the doing away with the recognition of a divine deity. Still the free exercise of religious freedom is granted to all according to their conscience.

    The day will not come when the U.S. Government gets rid of the mention of God in all its dealings.

    Again, thanks for continuing this discussion. It's been good to get my head out of the JW world for a little while.

    Take Care,

    IW

  • Xander
    Xander
    The founding fathers wanted to protect religion from federal-government interference, not diminish its influence in our public life.

    I disagree strongly, and I think if you read some of the quotes I've already provided by many of them you'd come to the same conclusion. Yes, SOME of them were religious.

    Others, like, for example, Jefferson, were QUITE OPPOSED to organized religion.

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

    I can't see how you can misunderstand this so. If the pledge of allegiance is required to be recited to become a US citizen (for immigrants, it is) and that pledge requires the speaker to acknowledge a single, all-powerful deity under whom the country rests, is this not 'establishing a religion'?

    Maybe not an entire church with doctrines, rules, and meeting times. But, read the above passage. THAT IS NOT REQUIRED. 'Establishment of religion', That's it. Congress shall make no law creating the requirement of religious beliefs. PERIOD.

    we may have some bad earthquakes or something

    Or, perhaps, our crops will fail. Or our children will be born cripples. Or the rains won't come to our lands this year in abundance.

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    tdogg,

    If we don't kill atheists in this country who refuse to include those words in our pledge, why would we want to kill people elsewhere who do not use those same words in their pledges?

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    Xander,

    On Jefferson:

    The term "wall of separation" comes from a letter Jefferson wrote to Baptist officials in Danbury, Conn. In it, he affirmed his view that establishing or disestablishing a church was not a question for the federal government." Even if he didn't like organized religion, he was not suggesting getting rid of same. In his second inaugural address, Jefferson stated that in matters of religion, he had "left them, as the Constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of State or Church authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies."

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit