Author Topic: How we have changed in two centuries  (Read 9553 times)

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #30 on: August 10, 2011, 08:49:25 PM »
Here is the leter in its entirety M58. It was written to the Baptists of Danbury Connecticut.
FQ13
PS it is worth noting that at his death Jefferson did not consider the Declaration, but rather the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which was the model for the 1A as his greatest achievment.


Letter to the Danbury Baptists

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
 Jan. 1. 1802.



It sems FQ is, as usual, wrong.

http://wallbuilders.com/?utm_source=WallBuilders+Mailings&utm_campaign=a5850e22c0-The_Response3&utm_medium=email


An Historic Event
Office of the Governor*
This past Saturday, over 32,000 from across the nation gathered at Reliant Stadium in Houston at the request of Texas Governor Rick Perry for a day of fasting, repentance, and prayer for America. Protestors ringed the outside of the event, which is a potent commentary on the condition of the culture today that so many object to Americans voluntary gathering for prayer.

Media coverage prior to the event was largely negative, with many articles happily providing critics a free platform from which to spew their hate. Particularly preposterous were the historical arguments leveled against the event.

For example, in the Houston Chronicle, so-called “First Amendment scholar” David Furlow claimed that “the Founding Fathers wouldn’t have been fans of Gov. Rick Perry’s official involvement with a Christian day of prayer.” [1] To prove his point, he asserted:

“Thomas Jefferson famously coined the phrase ‘wall of separation between Church & State’ when describing the First Amendment to Baptists who asked if the president would dare ‘govern the Kingdom of Christ’.”

First, Jefferson did not coin the phrase. It was introduced in the 1500s by leading clergy in England who objected to the government taking control over religious doctrines and punishing religious activities and expressions. In America, many famous early ministers also used the phrase – all well over a century before Jefferson did.

Second, nowhere in the letter from the Baptists to Jefferson or in his reply to them was it ever questioned whether “the president would dare ‘govern the Kingdom of Christ’.” To the contrary, the Danbury Baptists, Jefferson’s ardent supporters during the presidential election, consoled him by telling him that the vicious attacks against him by his political enemies in New England had been because he had properly and vigorously refused to “assume the prerogatives of Jehovah and make laws to govern the kingdom of Christ.” Jefferson’s reply letter simply reassured the Baptists that the government would definitely not prohibit, inhibit, limit, or regulate religious expressions – exactly the opposite of what Furlow claimed.

Third, on multiple occasions, Jefferson called his state to Christian prayer and worship. In 1774, he called for a day of fasting and prayer, [2] which included that all the legislators “proceed with the Speaker and the Mace to the Church” to hear prayers and a sermon. [3] He also urged his home community around Charlottesville to arrange a special day of fasting, prayer, and worship. [4]

In 1779, Jefferson again called his state to prayer, asking the people to give thanks for “the glorious light of the Gospel, whereby through the merits of our gracious Redeemer we may become the heirs of His eternal glory.” [5] He further asked Virginians to pray that . . .

He would . . . pour out His Holy Spirit on all ministers on the Gospel – that He would bless and prosper the means of education and spread the light of Christian knowledge through the remotest corners of the earth. [6]

Rick Perry did nothing more than what Thomas Jefferson did – a fact that Furlow ignores. Furlow further claims:

“The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli . . . said ‘the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion’."

Furlow has lifted 19 words out of an 83 word sentence, thus making it say exactly the opposite of what it actually does say.

That 1797 treaty was one of several that America negotiated with Muslim nations during America’s first War on Islamic Terror (1784-1816), [7] in which five Muslim countries were indiscriminately attacking the property and interests of what they called the “Christian” nations, including America. But America sought to ensure the Muslims that we were not like the ancient European Christian nations – that did not hate Muslims because of their religious faith. Thus, the full sentence in that treaty states:

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] . . . [8]

That is, we were not one of the Christian nations that held an inherent hostility toward Muslims. (See our full article on the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli and America’s first War on Terror.) Furthermore, in 1805 under Jefferson, that treaty was renegotiated and the clause stating that “. . . the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion . . .” was deleted. [9]

Finally, Furlow complained that “the day of prayer [was] announced on the state website and the official invitation printed on Perry’s gubernatorial stationery.” But by 1815, some 1,400 official calls to prayer had already been issued by government leaders, [10] each printed and distributed at government expense – the Founders’ equivalent of using the “state website” and “gubernatorial stationery.”

In conclusion, despite what critics claim, history is clear that Rick Perry did exactly what the Founding Fathers themselves had done – on hundreds of occasions.



*Picture of Governor Perry is courtesy of the Office of the Governor. Permission to reproduce from this website for noncommercial purposes is freely granted. This permission statement must be included in any noncommercial reproduction.
[1] Kate Shellnutt, “Lawyer: Perry’s plans raise First Amendment, church-state issues,” The Houston Chronicle, July 27, 2011 (at: http://blog.chron.com/believeitornot/2011/07/lawyer-perrys-plans-raise-first-amendment-church-state-issues/).
[2] Thomas Jefferson, The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Paul Ford, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904), Vol. II, p. 42, “Notice of Fast to the Inhabitants of the Parish of Saint Anne,” June 1774.
[3] Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd, editor (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950), Vol. 1, pp. 105-106, “Resolution of the House of Burgesses Designating a Day of Fasting and Prayer,” May 24, 1774.
[4] Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd, editor (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950), Vol. 1, p. 116, to the Inhabitants of the Parish of St. Anne before July 23, 1774.
[5] Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd, editor (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1951), Vol. 3, p. 178, “Proclamation Appointing a Day of Thanksgiving and Prayer,” November 11, 1779.
[6] Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P.Boyd, editor (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1951), Vol. 3, p. 178, “Proclamation Appointing a Day of Thanksgiving and Prayer,” November 11, 1779.
[7] See, for example, the 1787 treaty with Morocco; the 1795, 1815, and 1816 treaties with Algiers; the 1796 and 1805 treaties with Tripoli; and the 1797 treaty with Tunis. The American Diplomatic Code, Embracing A Collection of Treaties and Conventions Between the United States and Foreign Powers from 1778 to 1834, Jonathan Elliot, editor (New York: Burt Franklin, 1970; originally printed 1834), Vol. I, pp. 473-514.
[8] Acts Passed at the First Session of the Fifth Congress of the United States of America (Philadelphia: William Ross, 1797), pp. 43-44.
[9] The American Diplomatic Code, Embracing a Collection of Treaties and Conventions Between the United States and Foreign Powers: From 1778 to 1834. With an Abstract of Important Judicial Decisions, On Points Connected with Our Foreign Relations, Jonathan Elliot, editor (Washington, D. C.: Jonathan Elliot, 1834), Vol. I, p. 499, Art. 11, “Treaty of Peace and Friendship Between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary,” November 4, 1796, signed January 4, 1797.
[10] Deloss Love, The Fast and Thanksgiving Days of New England (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company 1895), pp. 464-514, “Fast and Thanksgiving Days Calendar.”

Pathfinder

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
  • DRTV Ranger -- NRA Life Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #31 on: August 10, 2011, 09:19:26 PM »
Path, prohibitions against murder and stealing are widespread is any religion.  They will all have exceptions to varying degrees, but they will be present if nothing else to protect the lives and property of the "clergy". 

Any functional society has had those prohibitions far before Christianity was established and far outside the realm of the 10 Commandments.

Not true. Greeks and Romans had prohibitions against murder of specific classes of people only. A Roman man could kill anyone in his family without repercussions. The Roman edict of being an enemy of the People and Senate meant that people were supposed to murder you if they found you.

Most early religions were based on human sacrifice. Baal worship and the Mayan, Aztec and Incan (to a lesser degree) religions all were predicated on murder to placate and mollify the gods. The Egyptians seem to be a notable exception to ritual religion-based murders from the 1st Dynasty onwards. Assyrians, Babylonians and Persians where the gummint and religion were truly indistinguishable were notoriously violent against their own people as well as those captured in conquests.

What is different about Judaism and later Christianity is that these 2 religions codified prohibitions against murder starting more than 3000 years ago. They are distinctive precisely because they went against all prevailing religious "wisdom" of that time.

And do we even need to address the advocation of infidel murder in the Koran? Islam spread precisely through the application of violence and murder.

Buddhism is another non-violent religion of sorts, although its main tenant is that this world sucks, deal with it.


I don't believe Adultery is against the law in the US any longer, as should be the case.  It is a moral issue rather than a legal issue.

Neither is sodomy illegal anymore. That is now, however, we were talking about what was going through the Founding Fathers' heads 250 years ago, not what is true now. Being rational men, they would understand what the breakdown of religiously-based prohibitions would mean to this country.
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do this to others and I require the same from them"

J.B. Books

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #32 on: August 10, 2011, 09:35:51 PM »
Morality is what makes "Society" possible by setting limits on what is or is not acceptable behavior.
My neighbor plays his music to loud, to late. Why should I not beat his head in with a bat ? He also has a nice stereo, why shouldn't I take it ?
It's the law? So what ? They aren't going to stop me any more than they stop me from doing 70 on a highway marked 55.
They may punish me if they catch me, but over 50% of murders go unsolved, and since it's my first offense I may just get probation. That's not much of a deterrent.
So what real deterrent is there to keep me from caving in his skull or taking his stuff because I want it ?
In Liberal Dem dominated Urban black areas , nothing. That's why the crime rate is so high.
In the rest of the country order is primarily maintained by a religion based sense of what is inherently "right" or "wrong".

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #33 on: August 10, 2011, 10:22:29 PM »
It sems FQ is, as usual, wrong.


Tom, I brought the board the full text, word for word, of an historical document written in 1802 that said exactly what I said it did. This makes me wrong how? ???
FQ13

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #34 on: August 10, 2011, 10:41:39 PM »
Tom, I brought the board the full text, word for word, of an historical document written in 1802 that said exactly what I said it did. This makes me wrong how? ???
FQ13

Your interpretation of that letter is flawed , failing, as it does to take into account contemporary and prior usage of the phrase.

Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #35 on: Today at 10:16:57 AM »

MikeBjerum

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11007
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1175
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #35 on: August 10, 2011, 11:03:23 PM »
FQ,

I have not had time to dig in to find the letter I have in mind, but even if you take the one you posted it does not justify what has happened to Judeo Christian beliefs in our nation.  Many have used this phrase to remove certain people and reasoning from the governmental process and public life.  Many have used this phrase to rewrite the First Amendment from free expression of, to freedom from.

The flaw used in interpreting this statement from the letter and the flaw that the Court put into case law was that they did not match Mr. Jefferson's actions in his public life to this short comment.
If I appear taller than other men it is because I am standing on the shoulders of others.

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #36 on: August 10, 2011, 11:12:18 PM »
Your interpretation of that letter is flawed , failing, as it does to take into account contemporary and prior usage of the phrase.
Umm, I think the author of the passage you cited might be a bit flawed. You gently admonished me, correctly, not to cite works that only peripherally, rather than directly made my point. The same is true here. This guy assumes Jefferson was a Christian. He wasn't. He was a Deist (cf "The Jefferson Bible"). TJ respected religion, but he sure as hell wasn't someone who thought that Christianity governed this nation as he made it clear, contrary to the revisionist author you quote, that a man's faith is between him and God alone. This fool is trying to A) Establish that Jefferson says we are a Christian nation because he called for some ceremonial days of prayer. B) Tie the wars against the Barbary Pirates (a commercial issue) into a war between Christianity and Islam with a direct link to 911 ::).
C) Assert that to question our core "Christian character is to be Un American, because the secularists are at odds with the founding ideals. This is straight out of the Pat Robertson playbook. McCain called Robertson "an Agent of intolerance". He was right.
 Read the letter I posted again. It puts paid to this "idjit", as you say.
FQ13

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #37 on: August 10, 2011, 11:59:15 PM »
I'll take you to task on the Barbary Pirate/9-11 issue since that is my stronger subject, I'll let M58 and others tear you up on the Freedom of, not freedom from issue.
These are not 2 separate issues, there is a continual historic thread of Koranic anti Western violence that flows through history. The Barbary Pirates, the death of Charles Gordan, and 9-11 are not 3 unrelated affairs.
They are way points in a continual war against Western civilization that started before Al Tarak ever looked across the straights of Hercules and tried to figure how to get an Army across to the big honking rock that today bares his name
Jebel Al Tar, in (appropriately ) English, Gibraltar.
The current war with Jihadi's began with the invasions of Spain and Byzantium by desert barbarians, it progressed though the siege of Vienna and the Mahdi uprising in Sudan, they have often been stymied as with the fall of the Ottoman empire, but they always recover and take up where they left off, Kind of like the Germans of the 20th century, they are either at your throat or at your knees, they invented the concept of terrorism as diplomacy .
History shows that even if we destroyed the Taliban, which the West lacks the ruthlessness to do, the same menace would reappear some where else under a different name within a few years.

Oh hell I'll comment on the religious part too.
You are misrepresenting the beliefs of Jefferson and the other founders when you label them as "Deists" in a manner that is, in essence, lying. Most were followers of fairly standard Protestant sects of the day, even conceding that Jefferson was a "Deist" over looks the fact that he was a CHRISTIAN  "Deist" . and ignores the fact that the reason he called for , far from merely ceremonial, day' of prayer, was because he, and his contemporaries strongly believed in the strength of Prayer. They had FAITH in Gods intervention.
The revisionist propaganda is what you are spewing in your ignorance. Path is right that you are a tool.
You are a tool of the socialist elitist conspiracy that has been working to under mine our culture.
Undermining religious faith, the opiate of the masses, was a specific item on the agenda of that "Frankfurt School" that I keep telling you about that you apparently lack the courage to research for yourself.
Instead you just continue to pooh pooh the idea and remain fat, dumb, and oblivious.

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #38 on: August 11, 2011, 12:40:56 AM »
But oddly enough Tom, of the two of us, I'm the Christian, and  who came to God at 25. I'd call myself born again except that the right has made that a political rather than theological term >:( You will find me in church most Sundays and attending evening prayer during the week. I love Christ and I love the faith. I just have issues with those who think its a political party. This might make me more ornery than a secularist, as I do take it personally when some tool like Robertson or Dobson says "Christians have always believed X...." and yet I and lots of other Christians believe Y and these douche bags don't even acknowledge us, they just presumes to speak for God.  ::) >:( It does make one a bit pissy because the secularists think I agree with the christian jihadi',s and the fundamentalists say those like me aren't "real" Christians because we disagree with their theology. Yes, I get testy, but I think its justified . Its hard to present a third POV when you are trying to intervene in a debate between two paranoid fanatics who take any sign of disagreement as disloyalty and basically say "You are with me or against me", Well, I'm some one who is is with you part of the way, but I think you're full of crap on the rest of it and I'm not going to keep my mouth shut about it. Where does that leave me? Honestly, I don't care because I think I'm right and I'll argue my case.
FQ13
FQ13

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: How we have changed in two centuries
« Reply #39 on: August 11, 2011, 12:52:00 AM »
Professing Christians out number practicing Christians by a depressingly huge margin .
I posted somewhere else, the only way you can take a persons religious faith out of his political beliefs is to elect immoral c*cks*ckers, a method we seem to have perfected.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk