In regard to Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Church, I suggest that, instead of disagreeing with what you think his intentions were, you read more about him and the other Founders (yes, all of them). Here are a few more Jefferson quotes:
"[N]o power over the freedom of religion . . . [is] delegated to the United States by the Constitution." Kentucky Resolution, 1798
"In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general [federal] government." Second Inaugural Address, 1805
"[O]ur excellent Constitution . . . has not placed our religious rights under the power of any public functionary." Letter to the Methodist Episcopal Church, 1808
"I consider the government of the United States as interdicted [prohibited] by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions . . . or exercises." Letter to Samuel Millar, 1808
"[T]he clause of the Constitution which, while it secured the freedom of the press, covered also the freedom of religion, had given to the clergy a very favorite hope of obtaining an establishment of a particular form of Christianity through the United States; and as every sect believes its own form the true one, every one perhaps hoped for his own, but especially the Episcopalians and Congregationalists. The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes and they believe that any portion of power confided to me will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly."Letter to Bejamin Rush, 1800 [8]
Furthermore, if the 1st Amendment is intended to keep religion out of government (i.e., freedom from religion as opposed to freedom of religion:
- Why do the Congressional Records from June 7 to September 25, 1789, the months of discussions and debates of the ninety Founding Fathers who framed the First Amendment never mention the phrase "separation of church and state." It seems logical that if this had been the intent for the First Amendment – as is so frequently asserted - then at least one of those ninety who framed the Amendment would have mentioned that phrase; none did. Incidentally, Jefferson was not one of the 90 framers of the 1st Amendment.
- Why did the Constitutional Congress appoint chaplains for each house of Congress?
- Why did the Constitutional Congress, and every Congress since, open with prayer?
- Why did Ben Franklin, during a particularly contentious debate, recommended that they stop and pray before proceeding?
- Why was the Capitol used for church services before it was occupied by Congress?
- Why did both houses of Congress approve the use of the Capitol for church services ... in 1800?
- Why are there so many references to Chritianity (quotes, pictures, and even the Ten Commandments) throughout government buildings in D.C.?
- Why does the Declaration of Independence reference the "Creator" as the source of our unalienable rights?
- Why did Congress authorize and fund the printing of Bibles in 1782?
I could go on and on, but the point is that, yes, there are a few references which, when taken out of context, indicate that we should be free from religion, but there are orders of magnitude more that show the intent that we have freedom of religion, as the 1st Amendment says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . . ."
- Why do the Congressional Records from June 7 to September 25, 1789, the months of discussions and debates of the ninety Founding Fathers who framed the First Amendment never mention the phrase “separation of church and state.” It seems logical that if this had been the intent for the First Amendment – as is so frequently asserted - then at least one of those ninety who framed the Amendment would have mentioned that phrase; none did. Incidentally, Jefferson was not one of the 90 framers of the 1st Amendment.
Perhaps because they felt the wording was easily understandable.
- Why did the Constitutional Congress appoint chaplains for each house of Congress?
Let me again point out this quote;
Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the U S forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them, and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does this not involve the principle of a national establishment...?
— James Madison, “Essay on Monopolies” unpublished until 1946
So James Madison did not believe that a congressional chaplain was constitutional by a strict interpretation of the 1st Amendment. However, he voted for it anyways. When you have a population where 90%+ is some type of protestant Christianity then there will be nobody to complain and bring a case to the supreme court.
- Why did the Constitutional Congress, and every Congress since, open with prayer?
See above.
- Why did Ben Franklin, during a particularly contentious debate, recommended that they stop and pray before proceeding?
He did propose this. However only 3 or 4 other people at the convention thought it was a good idea and it was never implemented.
- Why was the Capitol used for church services before it was occupied by Congress?
It was a public building and I would think that anyone who wanted to use it would be allowed to.
- Why did both houses of Congress approve the use of the Capitol for church services ... in 1800?
See above
- Why are there so many references to Christianity (quotes, pictures, and even the Ten Commandments) throughout government buildings in D.C.?
I am not sure what you are referring to here. I have been to D.C. and have not seen references to Christianity throughout government buildings. Perhaps you are referring to the supreme court building and the sculpture called “Justice the Guardian of Liberty” by Herman A. McNeil. Here is the description of that sculpture from the Smithsonian website:
Relief figures on the pediment illustrate the contributions of Eastern and Mediterranean civilizations to the development of the law. In the center is a seated figure of Moses, with the tablets of Hebraic law held in each hand. To the left is a standing figure of Confucius, the great lawgiver of China; on the other side is a standing figure of Solon, master codifier of Greek law. On the left of the central grouping there is a kneeling man holding a child with his proper right hand and the Roman symbol of authority, fasces, over his proper left shoulder. He symbolizes the means of enforcing the law. On the right of the central grouping there is a kneeling woman also holding a child and fasces. She symbolizes the tempering justice with mercy. Soldiers carrying shields flank these two figures. The soldier on the left represents the settlement of disputes between states through enlightened judgment while the soldier on the right represents the protection of maritime and other rights by the Supreme Court. The soldiers are flanked by reclining figures. On the left, a reclining woman represents the study and pondering of judgment, and right, a reclining man illustrates the high character of the Supreme Court. In the corner of the left side of the pediment is a hare and in the corner of the right side is a tortoise. They symbolize the slow but sure course of Justice.
- Why does the Declaration of Independence reference the “Creator” as the source of our unalienable rights?
The founding fathers were heavily influenced by the enlightenment ideas of the time. This was a common phrase used by enlightenment thinkers and deist of the time who did not believe in a personal god. It was also a term that Christians of the time would accept.
- Why did Congress authorize and fund the printing of Bibles in 1782?
I am not aware of this action by congress. Could you please give me a source so that I can look into it further.
Don’t get me wrong. I think the liberals are completely wrong when they say that this county was not founded on judeo-christian ideals. I also think that religious conservatives are wrong when they say it was only founded on judeo-christian ideals. From my study of this country the most accurate statement would be that this country was founded on Greco-roman, English common law, judeo-christian, and enlightenment ideals in more or less the same proportions.
Now I have some questions for you. If the founding fathers wanted protestant Christianity to be the official religion why did they not say so in the constitution or the bill of rights? Why did they specifically saw that there would be no religious test for public office?
Why in the treaty of Tripoli, which was ratified by the senate and signed by John Adams, state;
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 law, religion or tranquility of Musselmen; and as the states never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mohometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinion shall ever produce an interruption of harmony existing between the two countries.
The Journal of the Senate, including The Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate, John Adams Administration, 1797-1801, Volume 1: Fifth Congress, First Session; March-July, 1797. Edited by Martin P. Claussen. Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, Inc., 1977.
This treaty was read in the senate and passed without one dissenting vote. It was then published in three major newspapers of the day and there was no public outcry by anyone.
Now I have no idea how the supreme court in the early days of our republic would have decided if a school prayer case had come before them. However the supreme court has been fairly consistent on this issue. On a side note I have enjoyed this intellectual debate with you.