Get It Right, Mike

I know I already wrote on this subject once, but the fact that people are still spouting off the nonsense that the founding fathers built this country with the intention that it be a “Christian nation,” I decided to do a little research on the subject. After all, Mike Huckabee (who, as a minister, should be held to the highest ethical standards) wouldn’t keep using the idea and wouldn’t have so much support if the idea didn’t have some basis in fact, right? Well, after only fifteen minutes of online research, I came up with this:

1. George Washington--deist (a sect which basically accepts the idea of a Divine Creator, but rejects most “Christian“ doctrine.)
2. John Adams--Unitarian (not deist but used deist terms in his writing)--rejected orthodox Christian doctrine of the trinity and the divinity of Christ. Supported the separation of Church and State.
3. Thomas Jefferson--deist. Rejected pretty much all Christian doctrine, accepting only Jesus’ moral teachings, but not his divinity or his virgin birth. He believed it was necessary to keep a separation between Church and State to prevent religious tyranny by allowing any Church to receive State sanctions.
4. James Madison--(with Thomas Jefferson) wrote the Bill of Religious Rights, which was acted into law as the Statute for Religious Freedom on January 16, 1786 and is still in effect today as part of the Constitution of the State of Virginia.
5. Alexander Hamilton--orthodox if somewhat indifferent Presbyterian. Made jokes about God at the Constitutional Convention. He didn't seem to care much one way or the other, but he certainly never supported the idea of a "Christian nation."
6. Benjamin Franklin--deist.
7. John Jay--Trinity Church, New York; the only one to support any kind of State sponsorship of religion--but only insofar as to bar Catholics from holding public office. In a famous quote within a letter to John Murray dated October 12th, 1816, the Chief Justice wrote, "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."
   

The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by Congress with little or no debate or contention (in fact, the document was read in it’s entirety on the floor of the Senate on June 7, 1797, and unanimously approved), clearly reveals the founding fathers' intentions that Church and State be separated, stating in Art. 11.: 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 tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. (Note: Today, instead of “Mahometan,” it would read “Muslim.”)

Section 1 of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom states, in part, “That to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own; that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.”

I know it’s a little hard to follow, but it is basically a mandate for the separation of Church and State on the grounds that government interference in religious matters tends to end in the restraint of religion and that civil rights do not depend on religious beliefs--essentially that what a person thinks is no business of the government, only what he does.

The point to all of this is simply that if you’re going to run for President of the United States of America and you’re going to use the ideals and principles of the men who founded those United States, then you should at least do them courtesy of not making a mockery of those ideals and principles by turning them inside out. And the ideals and principles of the Founding Fathers was not to create a “Christian nation” but to create a nation free of religious restraint or compulsion. Get it right, Mike, or get out of the race, because your shameless exploitation of the spiritually innocent (if historically ignorant) members of your following is unworthy of the Office at best. And if it’s any indication of the path you would take if elected, I can’t help but shudder at the fate of our nation at the hands of another hypocritical wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing.