News-Record.com

How indeed...

However, if one googles enough one can prove the founders not only weren't Christians, but most likely were either Muslims or atheists who encouraged zoophilia. You can also prove that 'to promote the general welfare' means to confiscate the property of one and turn it over to another.

"The first settlers were 100 percent Christian"

Um, dude? The first settlers were pagans from Asia. Europeans came many centuries later and stole, cheated and murdered their way to power here. Even then they weren't 100% Christian. An awful lot of religious dissenters lived here, including a lot of Unitarians and Deists who had nothing to do with Christianity, beyond being enrolled in it at birth. And by the time of the Revolution, they had a pretty sizable population of pagan slaves working here as well. Oh sure, those folks didn't have any say-so in what happened, but they did live here.

"Thomas Jefferson had Congress fund spending for the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the Indians."

Boy, President Jefferson is a real puzzle for you folks, isn't he? The man created his own version of the Bible and created the phrase "Wall of Separation," but you want to claim him as one of your own as well? Sheesh!

"A cursory investigation of true American history, not a recent revisionist version, reveals that our heritage is totally Christian."

Ah -- so the Treaty of Tripoli, which was ratified unanimously, and states that the government is in no way based on the Christian religion -- that just never really happened, is that it?

Quote from an Amazon book review:

"The words "separation of Church and State" do not appear in the Constitution, and several state-endorsed churches (notably the Anglican Church in Virginia) continued to receive state backing in one form or another even after the Constitution's ratification.

But Barton's case for a "myth" goes too far. The Framers of the Constitution were gravely concerned that the government might get too involved in the operation of churches or that religion would be foisted upon people by the state.

In making his case, Barton embellishes and overstates. Take the example of his "quotation" from the 1892 US Supreme Court opinion in Holy Trinity Church v. United States. Barton cites the Court as saying, "Our laws and institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise. And in this sense, and to this extent, our civilization and institutions are emphatically Christian."

A pretty theocratic declaration if ever there was one. The problem is, this quotation can't be found in the Supreme Court case. The actual source of the quote? The 1883 opinion of the Supreme Court of Illinois in the case of Richmond v. Moore. And what's worse is that the quote is taken way out of context . Take a look at the full quote, with the portion Barton cites set of by asterices.

"Although it is no part of the functions of our system of government to propagate religion, and to enforce its tenets, when the great body of the people are Christians, in fact or sentiment, *** our laws and institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise. And in this sense, and to this extent, our civilization and institutions are emphatically Christian *** , but not for the purpose of compelling men to embrace particular doctrines or creeds of any church, or to support one or another denomination by public burthens, but simply to afford protection to all in the enjoyment of their belief or unbelief."

Ironically, when one views the quotation in its entirety and in context, it is actually a clear call for separation of Church and State! And by the Supreme Court of Illinois less than 100 years after our Constitution's ratification, what's more.

How sad to see such a disingenuous argument from one who lays claim to Christian principles."

Amazing how some "Christians" find it hard to believe that this country's founders believed in the separation of church and state. Folks, you should get down on your knees and thank your God everyday that the founders were wise enough to embrace the concept of separation. And for you "Christians" who still do not believe--how do you like the Islamist states in the world???

Well, there’s innocent ignorance, there’s religious ignorance, and there’s outright lies. If you want to wallow in a cesspit of Christian lies - history, science, biography, even theology - the best sources come from the fundamentalist protestant publishing houses’ tracts and pamphlets. It’s truly amazing how bold and blatant their lies are, and have been since they were founded. I find this saddening, for the teaching of respectable morality is the only useful function those publishers perform, and surely advocating truth (which in their hands becomes only slightly less synonymous with “lies” than does “Biblical Truth”) is the basic goal of morality.
It would have really helped if Mr Marschall was at all as familiar with American history as he wants us to think he is, rather than being the ignoramus he actually is. The first Euro-American settlers were not Pilgrims or Puritans. They were Catholics and Church of England folks, some of which were rabid about their religion, some of whom just wanted to get busy looking for gold or starting their farms, and many of whom - one suspects - were content to share unmindfully the prevalent superstiton of their times.
The Pilgrims were protestant dissenters, but most of the people on the Mayflower were CofE who insisted on a compact to protect their right to worship CofE-style while the Pilgrims did their own thing. Their first act on coming ashore was to rob a native grave. The Puritans were something else, though it’s interesting that their modern version is one of the more liberal Christian sects that usually gets labeled “not real Christians” by the clueless fundamentalists when they support civil and gay rights.
While we have no direct confirmation from GW that he was a Deist (I’m using Marschall’s terminology. GW was a theist by the standards of his day and ours, but Christians even back then refused to make the distinction and used Deist for both), his clergyman while he was president and his government associates certainly thought him to be one. I have posted in response to another LTE information to this effect and will not repeat that here, but it is significant that when a delegation of Christian priests specifically tried to pin him down, GW carefully refused to declare himself a Christian.
There are only three “declarations” of his religion I know of. One is by “Parson” Weems, which needs no further comment. Another is by a priest whose offspring claimed had successfully offered communion to GW in a private service. Their claim is completely unsubstantiated, was only made several years after GW’s death, and - even if vaguely true - resulted in no subsequent actions by GW. The third is by GW’s adopted daughter, who claimed that his devotions were not out of the ordinary, which one can take to mean “Christian,” though she also said that he always did his devotions in private and that she was never actually present.
The only time GW recommended Christianity to anyone was his hope that Catholic missionaries would go among the Indians of the old NW. I’ll discuss the whys and wherefores below.
There is one quotation from Thomas Jefferson - “I am a true Christian.” - that goes around from time to time. This is so totally out of context as to be a direct lie. TJ didn’t stop there but went on to say that he was such because he rejected the mockery Paul had made of Jesus’s teachings and rejected foolish Trinitarian concepts that had been added to his simple message. TJ was writing to John Adams, the letters are still extant, and UNC press has an annotated edition available that anyone with a grain of sense and intellectual integrity can read. They discussed religion quite freely, considering that they knew their letters were often intercepted and read by others. I doubt, however, that Marschall will bother to read these “revisionist” letters.
TJ was labeled a Deist or even an atheist during his lifetime by the Christian priesthood because of his public statements and writings, starting with his Notes on the State of Virginia, and his promotion of religious freedom for everyone. It is another anomaly of modern fundamentalist stupidity that those folks now take a passage from the Notes as evidence that TJ was at least not an outright atheist. He was an Epicurean/Lucretian empiricist.
All of our early presidents had to deal with Indian problems. GW and TJ both recognized that “civilizing” the tribes was the cheapest way to ameliorate those problems in the short and long term. They were not concerned with preserving or destroying native culture, just saving lives and resources. Jesuit missionaries (GW) and missionaries from the newly emerging protestant sects (TJ) were seem as a means to that end. After all, there were no Deist or Jewish or Muslim missionaries available.
This remained an important part of US Indian policy well into the 20th century. It never worked very well excapt to get the Indians displaced and killed- Euro-American settlers who were already Christians were notably dishonest and violent towards Indians, so how could the living example of Christianity help the Indians do other than submit calmly to extinction, which few tribes had any intention of doing?
Mr Herman has dealt well with the Supreme Court lie. Taking things out of context and stitching together widely separated phrases - not to mention just plain making things up - have been stock in trade for the religious press. You’d think that they know they’ll get caught. But they are playing to their constituents, and they also know that their constituents will never have the depth of knowledge or interest to follow through and see the corrections and exposures - just like neocon jumping in with more reactionary nonsense. When they do see the religious press exposed as liars, they just get mad at the exposers like other gullible naifs get mad at people who expose the mountebanks they’ve fallen for.
It’s appropriate that Mr Marschall ends with a shopping list of reactionary/fundamentalist whining. We may get to hell in a handbasket, but it’ll be more because of “good Christians” like Fallwell, Robertson, and their lying ilk and certain politicians who must remain nameless than those who stand up for each individual’s freedom to think and believe according to the dictates of his own conscience.

Thanks to those who have already posted factual evidence to refute poor Gary's LTTE.

However, I will use just one statement from his LTTE to settle it; "......remove God from public education..."

As I have noted previously, most recently to dear Mr. Fife, thie above statement is totally UNTRUE for ANY person of Christian faith who believes in the omniscience and omnipotience of God. If these two concepts are believed, then God is NOT removed from ANYWHERE!

I rest my case!

Shalom

" our first president was not a deist, but a Christian who incorporated prayer to the triune God throughout his life;"

Man, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried too be.

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/chapter_3.html

The Rev. Dr. Wilson, who was almost a contemporary of our earlier statesmen and presidents, and who thoroughly investigated the subject of their religious beliefs, in his sermon already mentioned affirmed that the founders of our nation were nearly all Infidels, and that of the presidents who had thus far been elected -- George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, and Andrew Jackson -- not one had professed a belief in Christianity. From this sermon I quote the following:

"When the war was over and the victory over our enemies won, and the blessings and happiness of liberty and peace were secured, the Constitution was framed and God was neglected. He was not merely forgotten. He was absolutely voted out of the Constitution. The proceedings, as published by Thompson, the secretary, and the history of the day, show that the question was gravely debated whether God should be in the Constitution or not, and, after a solemn debate he was deliberately voted out of it. ... There is not only in the theory of our government no recognition of God's laws and sovereignty, but its practical operation, its administration, has been conformable to its theory. Those who have been called to administer the government have not been men making any public profession of Christianity. ... Washington was a man of valor and wisdom. He was esteemed by the whole world as a great and good man; but he was not a professing Christian."

But if Bishop White cherished a faint hope that Washington had some faith in the religion of Christ, Dr. Abercrombie did not. Long after Washington's death, in reply to Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him as to his illustrious auditor's religious views, Dr. Abercrombie's brief but emphatic answer was:

"Sir, Washington was a Deist."

Yes our first president was in fact a deist. A little education is a marvelous thing.

Rebel Snake,
Great retort! I am with you on this one 100%. George Washington was a deist as were many if not most of the founders.
Somehow, people just visualize a Sunday morning hand shaking before "Sunday School" with all the founders. What a crock. A little education is all it would take--better yet, if some would just R-E-A-D!!

Well done, all. That was a very well-cited smackdown if I do say so myself.

Guess GOP Congressman Robin Hayes is in the "Christian" corner on this one....

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=24f14158-07da-4f52-9c08-a182a33680f0&p=hotvideo_m_edpicks&t=m5&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/&fg=

First, a quote from our first president, George Washington, “Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. I had hoped that liberal and enlightened thought would have reconciled the Christians so that their [not our?] religious fights would not endanger the peace of Society.” (Letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792). It cannot be proved otherwise that George Washington never received communion.
Another quote from our Nation’s second president John Adams written in the Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by the Senate and signed into law by John Adams on 10 June, 1797. “[T]he Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion…” Another from his letters to F.A. Vandercamp 1809-1816 , “How has it happened that millions of myths, fables, legends and tales have been blended with Jewish and Christian fables and myths and have made them the most bloody religion that has ever existed? Filled with the sordid and detestable purposes of superstition and fraud?” This is not the sentiment of a Christian..
I’ll move on to Thomas Jefferson, writer of our country’s constitution. In Notes on the State of Virginia, he said of this religion, "There is not one redeeming feature in our superstition of Christianity. It has made one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites" (quoted by newspaper columnist William Edelen, "Politics and Religious Illiteracy," Truth Seeker, Vol. 121, No.3, p.33.) Another quote from Jefferson in a letter to Thomas Whittemore on June 5, 1822, “Christian creeds and doctrines, the clergy's own fatal inventions, through all the ages has made of Christendom a slaughterhouse, and divided it into sects of inextinguishable hatred for one another.” Yeah, that sounds like a Christian.
...And Abraham Lincoln whose own wife Mary Todd Lincoln stated, “Mr. Loncoln was not a Chritian.”
James Madison, fourth president, was not religious in any conventional sense. "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise." Also, in a letter to William Bradford April 1, 1774, "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."