Posted on 12/10/2004 3:38:41 PM PST by Ed Current
read later. looks like interesting stuff.
I was going to say Lord help us...but I think he is already.
FMCDH(BITS)
The Constitution and the ideas on which it rests was influenced in large part by the Christian idea of 'Original Sin'. That we are imperfect/corrupt/sinful. A well-known phrase reflects this: "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." I don't recall who said this. It's the basic idea that matters. Whereas many held the position that people are basically good and any evil that results is an aberration. Governments founded on this latter principle have not done too well.
"done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,"
Granted, it is not part of the regulatory language, but it is the operative paragraph which confirms that those who signed witnessed the drafting and passage of the Constitution. Also granted that "year of our Lord" was a common formulation on legal documents in the founders' time. Nevertheless, if they wanted to ban all religiously based references, they could have eliminated the phrase.
A 'mein gott' ping.
I believe it was Lord Acton who said 'Absolute Poewer corrupts absolutely'. But I don't deny the Christian basis. I just deny the Ten Commandments as being any sort of meaningful legal precedent. The two that are law (The prohobitions against killing and stealing) actually predate The Ten Commandments going back to the code of Hummarabi which many legal scholars say is one of the three primary influences on the Constitution along with the Magna Carta and English Common Law.
No doubt the Framers were all deeply influenced by growing up in a land where virtually everyone is Christian. But you'd never know it from reading the Constitution. Other than the date at the end, there's no mention of religion, except to prevent religious tests for holding office. As we often point out in the science threads, the bible isn't a science book. Similarly, the Constitution isn't a theological work.
The Federalist Papers (mostly by Madison & Hamilton) are universally regarded as the most authoritative source for the intent of the Framers. You can search the Federalist Papers on line (I have done this), but you'll find not one mention of the words "bible," "scripture," or "Jesus." The word "Christian" appears once, in a reference to an historical period. "Lord" appears 5 times, but always in reference to aristocracy or the House of Lords. "God" appears 3 times, respectively refering to demi- gods, pagan gods, and nature's god.
Don't take my word for it. Here's a searchable copy: The Federalist Papers.
Moral Absolutes Ping.
A long read, but it looks well worth it.
(Currently have been very busy with volunteer work and other stuff, so I can't freep as many hours as I would like...)
Will comment later after I read it maybe. Looks like it's right up my alley.
Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.
"I would disagree in saying that the French Enlightenment (Volatire, Diderot...) was the birthplace of Secularism not Darwin. And they did have a primary influence on the writing of the Constitution."
The French Enlightment may have had some influence but not nearly so much as Locke and co from England.
The French Revolution with its massacres and drowning priests in sunk barges by the thousands had more obvious influence from the Voltaire crew.
You hit the nail on the head.
The use of the phrase "in the year of our Lord" in the US Constitution replaced the conventional "in the year of our reign" use by kings in royal decrees. For example, see the Magna Carta, which repeatedly refers to the year of the reign of King John and is executed thus: "Given by our hand in the meadow that is called Runnymede, between Windsor and Staines, on the fifteenth day of June in the seventeenth year of our reign." ( (i.e. 1215)
". I just deny the Ten Commandments as being any sort of meaningful legal precedent."
Would you say that Hammurabi's Code is of no effect as well? That it bore no relevance in impact to the US Constitution?
How about the Magna Carta?
Thank you for this post, I was looking to see if it was here before I typed it.
I'd agree with you ... The Enlightenment dismissed the relevance of God. Darwin just created a "rational" origin for the existence of life on this planet that made it all seem scientific.
Lord Acton.
The preamble does include the words "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity," seemingly referential to the Declaration of Independence "endowed by our Creator with ... Liberty." There is also the argument of whence the source of "Blessings" if not God. Even if it were argued that "liberty" is a "natural right" independent of a God - the term "blessing" would not be appropriate to that interpretation. Ergo, the presence of God is implicit in the 'raison d'etre' of the Constitution.
I agree. I don't think our Founding Fathers anticipated the cultural war we'd be fighting today, though. They'd have fought it another way, of that I'm certain. We need to start thinking not as they would, but as effectively as they would. This world is just as much on the edge as theirs was.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.