Posted on 07/05/2011 5:25:52 AM PDT by Kaslin
Last week, I began to contrast America's Founding Fathers' understanding of God's role in our republic with that of those at NBC, who omitted the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance. I also began to contrast our founders' views with those of the group of New York atheists who are demanding that the city remove a street sign reading "Seven in Heaven Way," which was just dedicated to honor seven firefighters killed in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. (The atheists claim the sign is a violation of the separation of church and state.)
Thomas Jefferson is generally hailed as the chief of separation. But proof that Jefferson was not trying to rid government of religious (specifically Christian) influence comes from the fact that he endorsed using government buildings for church meetings; signed a treaty with the Kaskaskia Indians, which allotted federal money to support the building of a Catholic church and to pay the salaries of the church's priests; and repeatedly renewed legislation that gave land to the United Brethren to help their missionary activities among the Indians.
Some might be completely surprised to discover that just two days after Jefferson wrote his famous letter citing the "wall of separation between church and state," he attended church in the place where he always had as president, the U.S. Capitol. The very seat of our nation's government was used for sacred purposes. The Library of Congress' website notes, "It is no exaggeration to say that on Sundays in Washington during the administrations of Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809) and of James Madison (1809-1817) the state became the church."
Do they sound like individuals who were trying to create an impenetrable wall of separation between church and state? Do they sound like those who oppose a street sign with the word "heaven" on it or the Pledge of Allegiance with the words "under God"?
If all that the American Civil Liberties Union said about the First Amendment were true, Jefferson would flunk the group's religion/state separation test. Liberal groups such as the ACLU don't want Americans to know that for the founders, Judeo-Christian beliefs and practices and government administration and policy were not separated at all. Denominational tests for public office were prohibited, but the idea that Judeo-Christian ideas and practices had to be kept separate from government would have struck the founders as ridiculous because the very basis for their ideas was the fact that there were rights endowed upon all of us by our Creator.
The ACLU and like-minded atheist groups and liberal media outlets are not preserving First Amendment rights; they are perverting the meaning of the establishment clause (which was to prevent the creation of a national church like the Church of England) to deny the free exercise clause (which preserves our rights to worship as we want, privately and publicly). Both clauses were intended to safeguard religious liberty, not to circumscribe its practice. The Framers were seeking to guarantee a freedom of religion, not a freedom from religion.
As Judge Roy Moore of Alabama reminded his readers, "the issue was addressed 150 years ago when the Senate Judiciary Committee, while considering the congressional chaplaincy, said, '(The founders) had no fear or jealousy of religion itself, nor did they wish to see us an irreligious people; they did not intend to prohibit a just expression of religious devotion by the legislators of the nation, even in their public character as legislators; they did not intend to spread over all the public authorities and the whole public action of the nation the dead and revolting spectacle of atheistical apathy.'"
Yet groups such as the ACLU, much of mainstream media and those New York atheists are spreading that "revolting spectacle of atheistical apathy" across our land, and in doing so, they are not only changing our laws but also revising our history.
If those groups existed during the Revolutionary era, they undoubtedly would have fought with our founders about whether to include any God language in the Declaration of Independence. They also would have ensured the prohibition (not the practice) of any religious expression and speech in any public arena -- something our founders secured in the First Amendment.
How grateful we can be this Independence Day week that those antagonists were not there.
The truth is that atheism was virtually nonexistent in those Revolutionary days. As Ben Franklin's 1787 pamphlet for those in Europe thinking of relocating to America highlighted, "serious religion, under its various denominations, is not only tolerated, but respected and practiced. Atheism is unknown there; Infidelity rare and secret; so that persons may live to a great age in that country without having their piety shocked by meeting with either an Atheist or an Infidel. And the Divine Being seems to have manifested his approbation of the mutual forbearance and kindness with which the different sects treat each other; by the remarkable prosperity with which he has been pleased to favor the whole country."
This week, as with others, we all should celebrate not only our independence from Britain but also our dependence upon God.
I think Adamas said it best....”That’s their problem”...
this is a nice article, and i recall the little historical moments mentioned, but i need to find the citations that show this from whatever book or source....
what is the reaction of atheists when these types of points are brought up?
I can only imagine what the reaction of the atheist is/or would be to such confrontation. And that speculation would be that the atheist would respond as he/she/it responds to the Holy Bible. They would accept what they agree with—and claim the rest is myth -or irrelevant. As for the comment source by Chuck Norris again in speculation— I find such cited by Wm. J. Federer in America’s God and Country:Encyclopedia of quotations, Amerisearch 2000; Another source may be David Barton They Myth of Separation, and Original Intent; The Cumberland Law Review ,Summer 1999 Article by Judge Roy S.Moore as published in part by Hillsdale College in Imprimis Vol.28 #8 Aug.1999; ;Daniel L. Dreisbach -Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation between church and State,NYU press 2002; James Hutson ,Library of Congress display 1998 -Religion and the Founding of the American Republic. Now the Congressional reports of Committees for Jan.19,1853 US Senate Judiciary Committee report by Mr.Badger on chaplains and the establishment clause-— and corresponding US House Judiciary Committee Report by Mr. Meacham 27 March 1854 are public record.and affirm what Judge Moore, David Barton, and Wm. Federer each speak of as decided.
This is childish I realize, but what if the ACLU & atheists demonstrate in front of the Seven in Heaven sculpture and Chuck Norris shows up and karate kicks their sorry behinds clear into the East River?
One can dream.......
I am wondering if you mean the Seven in Heaven street sign in NYC, that was recently in the news, and some atheist wanted to have removed?
You’re right, the Seven in Heaven memorial was in another thread but the topic was the same - pushy arrogant anti-theists who demand their way or the highway.
The Chuck Norris scenario should be modified thus: he politely asks the antitheist demonstrators to leave - one time.
When they refuse and start screaming freedom of speech, then Mr. Norris starts exercising his freedom of circular kicks. If they’re stupid enough to hang around, then he does his signature barroom-clearing scene.
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.