Posted on 03/22/2005 7:12:01 AM PST by Babwa
The New York Times recently ran a story about historian David Barton and his efforts to educate Americans on the religious beliefs of the Founders, titled Putting God Back into American History. The article correctly describes Mr. Barton as “a point man in a growing movement to call attention to the open Christianity of America’s great leaders and founding documents.” It appears that while the Times recognizes this movement, it does not yet understand it. Their lack of understanding results in: 1. Minimizing the movement by limiting it to “evangelical” Christians. 2.Equating the State with society and the Church with religion, both major divergences from the ideas of the Founders. This leads to the alarmist fear of theocracy which drives much of the hatred of George W. Bush and the “religious right.” 3. Mischaracterizing Jefferson’s religious beliefs. 4. Accepting the opinions of revisionist “historians” without reading and hearing the words of the Founders in their proper historical context.
.......A deeper analysis of the religious thoughts of the Founders in their own words demonstrates that while they were all self-described Christians with a wide variety of beliefs, most were not theologians, but political leaders. As public citizens, their concern was neither in defining nor imposing their theological differences. Their objective was the creation of a political system established on the basic moral and religious truths common to all sects of Christianity, which they believed necessary for the survival of their revolutionary republic.
Read more at http://www.towardtradition.org/article_God_and_History.htm
(Excerpt) Read more at towardtradition.org ...
Excellent discussion of the misnomer of Separation of Church & State using the words of the Founders - even Jefferson.
another day, another reason to home school
So right! See Mr. Silver's comments on education in the article:
They understood that Adams’ “moral and religious people” required moral and religious children. Government had responsibility to encourage, not stifle, parents’ ability to raise their children as spiritual beings sharing basic religious and moral values, without having to share the same theology.
Secularists would argue that they are not stifling parents’ desire to raise religious and moral children by removing any positive reference to Judeo-Christian values from government schools, but most parents would disagree. These parents are forced to pay (through taxes) for government schools that do not meet the educational needs of their children, but unless independently wealthy they cannot afford to send their children to private schools. If the removal of traditional values from the government schools does not end quickly, then parents will soon demand, at the ballot box, the right to choose schools for their children (with vouchers), whether private or government run.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1367895/posts
(Pence)He has co-authored legislation that he says would prevent the federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court, from ordering judges to remove the Ten Commandments or other "acknowledgment[s] of God" from their courtrooms, leaving such matters in the hands of state courts.
"The most secular, atheist historian on the planet would have to grant that the entire legal system of Western civilization pivots off those tablets," Pence said. "And so the idea that, whether it be in Alabama or elsewhere, that states or public officials can't acknowledge a God or acknowledge that list of principles without violating the Constitution, I think, is anti-historical. And I think it's offensive to most Americans."
AMEN!
David Barton & Wallbuilders bump!
http://www.wallbuilders.com/
Babs, NYT is finished.
Secularists understand Christian America like fish understand bicycles.
Bump for later.
Whenever you hear a "liberal" talk about how "society should" do such and such, ask him what is the difference between "society" and "government." The socialist conflates the two - my socialist uncle responded to that question with the admission (he didn't consider it such) that he didn't think there was any difference between the two concepts.Fact is, of course, that
"society" minus "government" equals "freedom." If "society" does not differ from "government," there is no room for freedom.
"If the removal of traditional values from the government schools does not end quickly, then parents will soon demand, at the ballot box, the right to choose schools for their children (with vouchers), whether private or government run."
We are already screaming for a choice. We will find a way to send our kids to private schools. I do not want my kids to be ashamed of being Catholic or have to hide it from their classmates in public school for the sake of being "cool." I want my kids to be as free at school as they are at home.
>>>Government had responsibility to encourage, not stifle, parents’ ability to raise their children as spiritual beings sharing basic religious and moral values, without having to share the same theology.
If we were to begin once again posting the 10 Commandments in our schools, would the schools be expected to enforce those rules? It seems to me that if they were posted but ignored, that would be worse for instilling moral values than if they were not posted at all. A child raised in a home where they are considered important would see much of society openly flaunt these rules while experiencing no direct punishment. This might actual devalue them in that child's eyes.
What about the past several thousand years of clear annecdotal evidence for the existence of G_d, Satan and several other nefarious divine types? Why pin this on some dead white guys. No one listens to them any more any way.
The best example of human hubris was Carl Sagan. He was so sure that there is no other life (including G_D) in the univeres that he repeated it on TV, wrote it in his books and probably used it as an epitaph. Pride Goeth Before a Fall. If Carl Sagan didn't get an engraved invitation to meet G_D or attend the second coming then it didn't dignify his recognition as a real event, apparently.
Nice post!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.