Replies

Sten posted on Sunday, July 10, 2011 6:59:29 PM by sten: yes, the puritans were more strict... that doesn’t matter. the point was they fled religious persecution and helped found a country within which ALL citizens are free to practice / worship how they see fit free from persecution which is what this thread is attempting to do personally, i see these threads on FR as phoney libtards posing as fringe Christian types attacking mormons in an attempt to divide the conservative base. they went into overdrive when Romney was running. looks like they’re ramping up again.”

I don't want to get into the details of the Mormon fight. I don't have expert knowledge of the subject.

I do know that anyone who thinks that either the Pilgrims of Plymouth or the Puritans of Massachusetts came to New England for freedom of religion has failed to understand some of the most basic principles of the English Separatist and Puritan movements.

I'm well aware that the Founding Fathers wrote a Constitution that was deliberately designed to tolerate not just a variety of Protestant viewpoints but also the Roman Catholics of Maryland and even the Jewish population, which had personal ties with Alexander Hamilton. Both groups included a number of American patriots who were very interested in supporting the American Revolution, and the ardent support of religious minority groups for American independence was a key factor in framing the federal Constitution to preserve their freedoms.

I support the Founding Fathers’ views on religious tolerating, while noting that three states still had formally established tax-supported state churches at that time, one of them into the 1830s.

To read that view of the Constitution back into the Pilgrims and Puritans, however, simply does not agree with the facts.

Those who hold office or serve in the military swear allegience to the Constitution of the United States, not the Mayflower Compact. There are important differences.