CarolinaGuitarman That is evidence for the goodness of Constitutional government based on individual rights. Christian states (Ones with a predominantly Christian population) had existed for over a thousand years before the formation of the USA. The percentage of them one would consider free states is exceedingly low. By your logic then, the conclusion would be that Christian states produce tyranny as most states with predominantly Christian populations have been unfree.
Thank you, CarolinaGuitarman, for making this vital point, I am in strong accord with you on this one. While I have an unshakeable belief in our constitutional guarantees of freedom of worship (including the freedom from worship), and come from a very strong Christian background (I'm still something of a recovering Born Again), I have grown very, very dubious about the political agenda of some American Christians.
[1] In the first place, as you note, for something like 1200 years, the dominant political power in Europe was the Church; much of this era is rightly characterised as the Dark Ages. The Protestant Reformation, while seeking to address some of the corruption that had arisen within the Church, also led to the theocratic nightmare of Calvin's Geneva and a few centuries of devastating wars of religion. The modern agenda of some Christians--to re-introduce Church authority into national political institutions--ignores the fact that Christendom has already been there (with disasterous results), and that other established religions (Islam the most obvious example) that do wield a political role (such as the Taliban in Afghanistan) have also resulted in appalling regimes. I think the lesson is pretty unambiguous: secular power in the hands of anyone who also claims divine authority is a fast path to the most dreadful tyranny.
And I hold it is demonstrable that our Founding Fathers, to whom the wretched carnage of the European religious wars (among competing Christian sects) of the 17th century were still vivid, were hugely concerned to build a 'wall of separation' between Church and State precisely to protect the new republic from such theocratic tyranny. This is not at all a matter of trying to second guess the religious beliefs of the Founders (they varied enormously: John Adams was devout to the point of reluctance to travel on the Sabbath, while Jefferson appears very close to being a Freethinker), but it is a pointless exercise to selective 'quote mine' to establish religious views of any of them, it's all beside the point. The point is, they framed a Constitution designed to protect the new republic from, inter alia, religious tyranny. That, I believe, is the intent behind the motto novo ordo seclorum ('In God We Trust' didn't come in until the crisis of the Civil War, and 'under God' was slipped into the flag salute during the McCarthy era).
And it is my own belief (to which I welcome challenges) that conservative politcal principles are both sound and worthy on rational grounds and simply do not need any further appeal to divine or other authority to be true. For example, I hold that abortion is repugnant, for it gives rise both to dreadful personal tragedies and also severe social ills--the statistics alone on this one make the case. My belief here strictly informs for whom I can vote, and if you have a petition to sign on this one or are engaged in other legitimate forms of political activity on this issue, please send me an invitation to help, I'd be glad to. But if you ask me to help you bomb a medical clinic in the name of 'God's higher law'--sorry, but I'm calling the cops to bust you.
Now, I have been jumped on and beaten up on my point here--that rational grounds are sufficient for conservative principles--by religious-minded folks who appear to misunderstand this as affirming something along the lines of 'rational principles are sufficient for securing personal salvation,' or something. I am NOT asserting this! That is a religious question to which each individual must find his own answer. Please keep the matter separate (as the framers of the Constitution went to such pains to keep separate) from political issues!
Well said.