With respect to the founding of our nation and the moral support for our form of Government, the real issue is whether it is an unalienable right. The problem is we are attempting to define unalienable rights without establishing the basis for those rights.
Jefferson ascribed the basis of those rights to be "nature and nature's God." The exact concept Jefferson had of G-d is not what one would call "Christian" but he did seem to believe that there was a moral order of the universe aking to the physical order of the universe. Therefore there was a moral authority in appealing to that moral order sufficient to assert our right to declare Independence from Great Britain and form our own government.
There's a lot of room for discussion in this, including whether our government is at all moral given that it has strayed far from Jefferson's purpose of "protecting those rights." But the root point for discussion is, what is the basis of unalienable rights. If we don't answer that, then our children will be reading an article about how a judge ruled quoting Leviticus 18:23 is hate speech.
Shalom.
>>>
There's a lot of room for discussion in this, including whether our government is at all moral given that it has strayed far from Jefferson's purpose of "protecting those rights." But the root point for discussion is, what is the basis of unalienable rights.<<<Thomas Jefferson on Sodomy Sect. XIV. Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy* with a man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least. Peterson, Merrill D. "Crimes and Punishments" Thomas Jefferson: Writings Public Papers (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc. 1984) pp. 355, 356.
Is Same-Sex Marriage Good for the Nation?
WallBuilders | Resources | The Founding Fathers and Deism The reader, as do many others, claimed that Jefferson omitted all miraculous events of Jesus from his "Bible." Rarely do those who make this claim let Jefferson speak for himself. Jefferson own words explain that his intent for that book was not for it to be a "Bible," but rather for it to be a primer for the Indians on the teachings of Christ (which is why Jefferson titled that work, "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth"). What Jefferson did was to take the "red letter" portions of the New Testament and publish these teachings in order to introduce the Indians to Christian morality. And as President of the United States, Jefferson signed a treaty with the Kaskaskia tribe wherein he provided-at the government's expense-Christian missionaries to the Indians. In fact, Jefferson himself declared, "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." While many might question this claim, the fact remains that Jefferson called himself a Christian, not a deist.
The reason that such critics never mention any other Founders is evident. For example, consider what must be explained away if the following signers of the Constitution were to be mentioned: Charles Pinckney and John Langdon-founders of the American Bible Society; James McHenry-founder of the Baltimore Bible Society; Rufus King-helped found a Bible society for Anglicans; Abraham Baldwin-a chaplain in the Revolution and considered the youngest theologian in America; Roger Sherman, William Samuel Johnson, John Dickinson, and Jacob Broom-also theological writers; James Wilson and William Patterson-placed on the Supreme Court by President George Washington, they had prayer over juries in the U. S. Supreme Court room; and the list could go on. And this does not even include the huge number of thoroughly evangelical Christians who signed the Declaration or who helped frame the Bill of Rights.