Why Pres. Obama is wrong: America is not a secular nation

[ArtisticSpaz]

Do christians somehow have a monopoly on the words "creator" and "god"?  Seriously Gingrich go retire already you're a tiring old fool

[MrBlueconservative]

Secularism and the Creator are not the same thing.

We are a secular government - that just means seperating Church and State it does not mean - no faith or no freedom to choose a faith.

E Pluribus Unim

The republicans and the Fox Christian Network want to re-write history.

[hazydavey]

Of COURSE we're a secular country.

How is the belief that our rights came from a "Creator" inconsistent with secularism?

Secularism isn't "Godlessness" - it's the commitment to Civil Law, and to the separation between church and state - the principles that protect freedom of conscience. Our foundational law makes that commitment to secularism perfectly clear. Anyone who's remotely familiar with our Constitution knows this.

Gingrich ought to be ashamed of himself.

[UESFHNSAKD]

the only validation in saying that our country is a christian nation is from the fact that an overwhelming majority of our citizens are chrisitan. however, if that makes us a christian nation, then we must be a white nation as well, knowing that a large majority of our citizens are caucasian. but i dont see any conservatives willing to say that. if you want to call america a christian nation, youd have to call it a white nation, too.

[UESFHNSAKD]

"endowed by out Creator" refers to the declaration of independence. nowhere in the constitution does it mention a God or any gods. the declaration was simply saying that were separating from Great Britain. the constitution is what this country is based on. furthermore, the Treaty of Tripoli specifically spells out what the first amendment means in its reference to religion: "... the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion ..."

[masterkeep]

@UESFHNSAKD A treaty written afterward or by another entity does not speak for the writers when they in their own letters during the writing of the Constitution clearly say from where they base their beliefs.

[dimondwoof]

@masterkeep - "Another entity"? Are you implying that JOHN ADAMS wasn't part of the founding fathers? Do you think that the majority of the founding congress wasn't in place when they approved this wording to tell the world WE ARE NOT A XIAN NATION? Try to learn just a smidgen of history before you try to pander your delusional beliefs. Taking a few words here and there out of context doesn't make anything "clear". Try reading ANY book written by Thomas Paine. The WHOLE book.

[UESFHNSAKD]

@masterkeep it was not written by another entity. it was ratified by mostly the same founding fathers that wrote the constitution. it was only ratified 7 years after the constitution. only 7 years. it was used to clarify what the second amendment meant, so that the muslims of that nation knew that america, a mostly-christian nation, couldnt force their beliefs onto the muslims.

[masterkeep]

@UESFHNSAKD No, the treaty was with a Muslim nation and it was "supposedly" to let them know we would not force anything on them. It turns out that that particular phrasing, which was only suppose to be a translation of the Arabic, was made up by the translator and doesn't match the Arabic at all. Because it lead to the cessation of hostilities it was applauded by our Congress, not because of the wording. The founders were 50 of 53 christian pulling from their background for inspiration.

[UESFHNSAKD]

@masterkeep thats not true at all. that clause does not even appear in the arabic translation of the treaty of tripoli. it never had an arabic translation at all. the only people who read that portion of the treaty were americans. and i should let you know that its not in the nature of our government to simply add in certain clauses to official documents only to appease someone else. if it was put into the some government document or doctrine, we should regard it as our official policy.

[masterkeep]

@UESFHNSAKD Officially all treaties are to be identical in ALL languages that they are published in. The people reading the English version were lead to believe that the statement was in the Arabic portion and that was why it was in the English. I could as easily demand proof against the use of the founders of their background in their creation. It violates common sense that they would not pull from what they know. They wrote extensively to each other and the proof is there that they did.

[UESFHNSAKD]

@masterkeep and you still have yet to provide any concrete evidence that the founders drew from their christian background. i know for a fact that franklin & jefferson were at the very least agnostic. furthermore, you should know that just saying that certain founding fathers were devout christians is not enough. you have to show that they specifically used their christian ideals to form this country. finally correlation between american laws and chrisitan beliefs does not imply causation.

[vaguelyreptilian]

I says "creator" sure, but it doesn't say "Judeo-Christian deity."

[EqualAndFree]

Sorry Newt, it looks like Jesus agreed with the 1st Amendment separation of Church and State:

* Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm." - John 18:36

* And Jesus said to them, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." And they were amazed at Him. - Mark 12:17

[DandAinTac]

I want someone who believes in the mantra that "we are a Christian Nation" to tell me what this means. In other words--let's suppose we are, and let's suppose the argument is over. What's supposed to happen at that point? What do you see as flowing from that notion? Are Christian churches supposed to be favored? Given tax money? Only Christians can hold office or vote? Legislation must pass Biblical scrutiny? What is supposed to happen as a result of us being a "Christian Nation"?

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac The only thing that holds is that the majority of the founding fathers were Christian and at time wanted to make sure people were free to worship in whatever "flavor" they wanted. The basic principles of our laws [from then] are based on the Bible. They wanted people of faith to be involved in government but didn't want the government to have ANY power over ANY "church". They wanted a moral compass not based on whim. That is what the US being a "Christian nation" means.

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep Okay, a moral compass not based on whim--then based on Christianity? And what does that mean--moral compass? What is the practical result of that? What laws are supposed to be passed? How would Christians who believe this is a "Christian Nation" ensure that laws are enacted that pass muster with "Christian morality", and who decides if they do? And if didn't want go to have any power of a church, did they want the church to have power over the government? Please cite evidence.

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac The founding fathers intention was that religious people would be involved in the legal process. The idea of a moral compass was on the 10 commandments and related laws from the Old Testament. These laws would be acceptable to Muslims, Christians, & Jews. The limitation on this was that there would be no respect to any given flavor of Christianity, and could logically be extended to other religion so long as they don't violate the Old Testament law principles.

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep Okay, I think that the founding fathers' intent was that ALL the people would be involved--whether they were religious or not. Do these laws need to be acceptable to atheists or Buddhists or Hindus? Is respect to be given to Christianity in general over other religions? Old Testament law principles also include stoning the unbeliever to death, so the very tolerance of any other religion, and the Constitution, violate Old Testament law principles.

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac The idea of what is proper is what they gather from the Old Testament, not the punishment. Yes they wanted all involved, but were clarifying that religious must be involved or they would lose out on protecting their beliefs. I would hope that Hindu and Buddhists would be ok with the laws from that perspective. There have been numerous cases laying out the rights of the students to pray because many school systems have tried to abridge that right.

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep There are times, when the schools and administrators go too far and get too nitpicky with regards to separation of church and state. For example, a teacher was told she couldn't wear a cross. I think this is way overboard, nitpicky, and infringes on the teacher's right to express herself. I think most rational atheists would agree with this. The only thing I would add though--is, would we be okay with a Muslim teacher wearing a hajib in school?

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac Again, the term Christian Nation is more looking at the founding and the basis for the legal system. Anyone is free to run for office, but everyone is free not to vote for them if they feel that their moral basis is flawed. The government isn't allowed to discriminate, but individuals [for good or bad] are allowed, so long as the individuals freedoms are unimpaired unless their freedom infringes on others [as previously stated].

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep Okay, I'm not trying to be difficult, but I'm still trying to get down to "brass tacks". As a practical policy matter, if all argument ceased, and everyone said--"okay, you're right. We ARE a Christian Nation"--what is supposed to happen in terms of practical policy? Is it really just about one's theory regarding the basis of our laws--no more? One can make these assertions--but what does it matter in real practical policy terms for me and others who are not Christian?

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac Sorry for the delay in a response, I have been under the weather and wanted to give the response the time to think through that your question deserved.

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep Yeah, I've been sick too. Worst cold I've had in years--both my wife and I have been miserable. Take your time with your response. This is a good conversation.

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep So to put it another way, let's suppose people like Newt Gingrich, Randy Forbes, Pat Robertson, etc.--they have all the power, and the debate is over--everyone has given in to the notion that we are a "Christian Nation"--what are they supposed to do to enact this vision? What happens next? What will they do to make sure that we are indeed a "Christian Nation" and that we remain so?

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac I think that a jihab would be ok but a burka would not necessarily be.  Religious freedom must be maintained, as well as a morality that protects the community from excesses [this is perhaps the hardest part to regulate]. Everyone is free to be involved with government but the individual must be protected from the excesses of the masses. Pornography should not be broadcast on public channels for individuals are no longer safe from its effects then [example].

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac The reason I think that jihab would be ok is that is dress that is based on modesty, so a head covering is not so bad. I don't think a burka would work in school because identity becomes an issue and that truly is an excessive idea according to the quran. Aside from protecting the individual through a "public" morality not based on the masses I am not sure what would be appropriate within the statement "a christian nation.' What remains? What else I don't know.

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac The easiest way to look would be that people were responsible for their own actions [imagine that today] and that their freedoms ended where they would effect the freedoms of others. I can't imagine this being to big of a problem for those that aren't religious. The only problem would be if someone didn't realize how what they wanted to do actually did effect others and so would be restricted. That is the big argument today. Requirements to pray no, the opportunity, yes!

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep I agree--opportunity--yes. Coercion, intimidation, captive audiences, public endorsement or support--no. The thing is--I'm pretty sure everyone is pretty free to pray whenever they want. In my 47 years, I've seen many people pray, but never once has anyone said--"that's not allowed". I've heard claims it's outlawed in the schools, but the only thing I can find on this is that the schools cannot lead, compel or endorse prayer, but students can pray on their own.

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac I would hope that most understand the constitution that way and realize that we do need to allow others their personal worship or lack of worship so long as we don't restrict the opportunity for worship for anyone. If people are offended by worship they are trying to impose their liberty over everyone else. I hope this all made sense [I will attempt to clarify if it didn't].

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep So if everyone is free to worship as they choose, or not to--then does "Christian Nation" really apply? Maybe we are just a "free nation?" And those who want to be Christian can be so, and those who do not, need not be worried that laws will have to pass Biblical scrutiny, or that only Christians would be allowed to run for office or vote? Or whether we will continue to be able to speak out about our beliefs or non-belief--even if doing so offends Christians?

[masterkeep]

@DandAinTac None of this means that those NOT of faith are precluded in any way. People are to be protected to believe and act as they wish so long as their liberty doesn't infringe on others [which it often does but they don't see it]. We are a Republic to protect the minority and individual from the mob of the majority. I hope this helps. Happy Thanksgiving [late].

[DandAinTac]

@masterkeep I think you would agree that of course, there are legal curbs on how we act. So if we are a "Christian Nation" what does that mean as far as who gets to hold office, and how does that affect my children? Would they have to pray in school? Does this mean that we have to choose a Christian Religion? Who is going to make us choose if we refuse? Do you believe most other Christians share your particular definition of a "Christian Nation"?

[dmfc593]

I dislike Obama also, because he is a Progressive(Not a Democrat), but what I dislike more and even hate is Conservatives that try to re-write our history.If I must label myself, I am a Republican not Conservative. Jefferson would be appalled to see what the Conservatives have done to the Republican Party

[UnderlordZ]

@dmfc593 "I dislike Obama also, because he is a Progressive..."

And...what's wrong with progress?

[dmfc593]

@UnderlordZ There is nothing wrong with progress, just because their name is progressive does not mean they are for progress. Progressives have brought us many laws that should have never been on the books including prohibition, the Federal Reserve(which is one of the oldest blueprints for banking) marijuana laws. I am for moving forward, but not at the expense of all of my liberty and freedoms.

[kjunn317]

@dmfc593 Jeffersonian Republicans changed their name to Democrats sometime during Andrew Jackson, the Democratic Party is the oldest political party still in operation I believe. The GOP was formed right before the Civil War. I agree completely with the comment about misrepresenting the Founders tho. Cheers.

[d3reilly]

@dmfc593 Uhh, you have to realize that the "republican party" of Jefferson was not in any way other than perhaps name related to the current one. Different parties--different issues.

[dmfc593]

President Jefferson re-wrote the New-Testament for God sakes

[dmfc593]

Because they were DEISTS Newt, you dimwit.

John Quincy Adams Refused to take the oath on a Bible and instead used a US book of law.

Learn some history shit head

[masterkeep]

@dmfc593 Only 3 of were deists. The other 51 were members in good standing with their local church. You also should look at history and their writings instead of the propaganda currently being used in our public schools.

[dmfc593]

Newt is an idiot. Just a little taste of our founders thoughts on Christianity

‎"Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. " Thomas Paine, Age of Reason

[dmfc593]

@dmfc593 "It is within our lives and not from our words that our religion must be read, but this does not satisfy the priest hood they must have a positive a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been and infidel if there had never been a priest." Thomas Jefferson 1815-AUG-06

[F33bs]

I love how arrogant Christians are. As if only their religion has a "Creator." No other religion on Earth incorporates the Concept of a Creator. What a laugh.

[AndrewDeLong]

Well, I never thought I would see such blatant idiocy from someone so high up in the political spectrum.

This is profoundly disturbing, this Gingrich is.

[Bestman1177]

The god reffered to in the declaration is not the god of the bible. God has nothing to do with religion.

[UnderlordZ]

@Bestman1177 Except, you know, the whole "worship him or go to hell" thing...

[seanstrnad]

Newt Gingrich. Idiots take note.

[dastaylor]

@seanstrnad Newt is an idiot he should take note. We are endowed by our creator, not the Christian God necessarily.

[d3reilly]

By saying "endowed by our Creator", Jefferson was referring to the god of the Enlightenment, the deist god. Hasn't this smarmy little fuck ever read Jefferson's Bible?

[Bestman1177]

@d3reilly Im so glad someone knows his history!

[dimondwoof]

@d3reilly - No, because it would go against is delusional xian beliefs. It's easier just to take some small statement out of context to justify his own delusion and leave it at that.

[SaganAppreciationSoc]

Newt is some kind of idiot.

[iversonmatthew]

If we are a Christian Nation, then everyone should go get their gun cuz we have another revolution to fight.

[jasedotcom]

We are not a secular country? "We are endowed by our creator" is not written anywhere in the 7 articles or 27 amendments of the US Constitution. It is part of the Declaration of Independence written by Deist Thomas Jefferson.

[PowerSprinter]

@jasedotcom how is Deist Thomas Jefferson a deist if he says we are endowed by our creator? dont you see a problem with that statement

[jasedotcom]

Those words are from the Declaration of Independence which was not adopted as part of the Constitution in September 1787 at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. The words "God" or "Creator" are not written anywhere in the Constitution. Secondly, Deists believe in a higher power "a Creator" - not a man-God (Jesus) who came to earth and now expects all of us to worship him. Deists believe in a noninterventionist deity who never revealed anything to human prophets.

[LordDirk]

@PowerSprinter Deism is the belief in a creator, but not a personally connected creator. On that note, creator doesn't have to mean the christian god, many other religions have creation myths and creation god/gods.

[PowerSprinter]

@LordDirk Well thats not true for all dietist, some believe in a personally connected creator, they just dont put solid characteristics and depictions of God. they have no stories, they just no that they are connected to a higher power. I dont think that we are secular as we do incorperate God in to some extent, but we are not a christian nation. my comment earlier on this page was wrong, i mispoke

[deathstar367]

try reading the fucking first ammendment u moron.

[madzyzome]

We are not secular? Then we are a theocracy.... oh wait isn't there a separation of church and state? I guess we are secular anyway.

[houhumanist]

"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it." - John Adams

I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.

- Susan B. Anthony

"The Bible is not my book, and Christianity is not my religion. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma."

-- Abraham Lincoln

Lighthouses are more helpful then churches. — Benjamin Franklin

[behemuth]

on paper america is a secular nation... however... recently christian bigots have more or less, behind the scenes taken over... so today, america in reality is not a secular country... well i mean err south northern america? uhh i mean USA... america is the term used on two continents, not one nation, my bad......

[MagnificentFiend]

*facepalm*

[waz89]

the first fucking ammendment u prick!

[TheVikingsRevenge]

I hope this is a joke.

[imsocuteable]

the day America becomes a "christian nation" is the day I start using my guns.

[MadMAn12gauge]

First of all the founding Fathers were all Deists and agnostics...They did not base this country on christianity, they refuted that, they baced it on Secular beliefs...

FOX news needs to be Shut down. If any of you are a christian you should be very Offended about how they are representing you...They are spreading lies, and twisting words and interpreting them the way they want to spin it.

[Akin42]

countries are either

1. Theocracies (UK at time of revolution, modern Saudi Arabia)

2. Atheist (USSR, China)

3. Secular (USA as intended)

The the right-wingers really want to get on record calling USA a theocracy?

[MumblingMickey]

The USA was FOUNDED with a constitution... that... is the foundation.

Now... point out the bit in the constitution that says america is a Christian nation? Or do you have a problem with the constitution?

[AtheistCitizen]

thank god the Declaration of Independence is not a legal document like the Constitution is! This is why I disdain the holy ritual fireworks of the 4th, instead to read the Constitution to my kids..

[SoulStealer124]

America isn't secular? wtf!

[TheRationalthinker]

If you find Newt's comments challenging, watch this video:

America is not a christian nation: true or false?

[JustinBaker2567]

America is a nation where you can choose to believe in what you want or nothing so its niether a christian or non christian nation. its a nation of choice. Well, not for long i supose.

[darris321]

secularism is not caring which religion

you are secluded from religion

you can believe we were created if youre islamic as easily as if youre jewish or christian.

besides most of the founding fathers were deist; and just to make sure nothing comes up saying that we are a christian nation

read the treaty of tripoli, "the government of united states is in no sense founded upon the christian doctrine"

[matt4787]

And another thing is that saying their is a creator with inalienable rights was in the Declaration of Independence. It has technical nothing to due with how our government is ran. So I have to disagree with Newt on this. Also I think the point doesn't matter because it says a creator but never specifies it being supernatural even. It doesn't have to be supernatural for the inalienable rights. They believed that these rights were the ideal naturally or supernaturally.

[ramblinman312]

didnt your fuckin church believe the world was flat even after it was proven otherwise?? we learn as time goes on...or at least some of us do.

[Stopmotion]

we believe what the bible says, don't point out 1 fault in 1 group in a certain time in history then throw out all possibility of truth. Study it all, then make an argument.

[makeinstall]

Damn , leave it to a devout Catholic like Galileo Galilei to prove the world was round like many of his time thought. Leave it to people like you to try and seperate science and someones faith. Narrow minded folks like you can't seem to grasp a belief in God and search for truth through science.

Ramblinman: You're a fucking moron. I got one name for you Andrew Dickson White.

Read a damn book.

[silv3rr]

It's simply called: SHIT CHANGES...

People are conscious and minds evolve... stupid stubborn arrogant thickheaded narrow-minded monkeys.

[makeinstall]

Shit changes? Really? Is that the only thought your pathetic mind could muster?

I wonder if peoples instincts change? The US Constitution was based on The Law of Nations and created around Natural Law by (Oh My Gosh) Christains. The Constitution even allows for your pathetic attempt at being a retard.

[stopthinklisten]

If the founding fathers wanted this to be a Christian nation, why did they *never* mention Christ in the constitution? They clearly did not intend for this to be a "Christian" nation so stop your wishful thinking. Even Newt talking about "Creator" simply doesn't mean anything about being a Christian nation. Jews, Muslims, deists (which many of the founding fathers were), all believe in a Creator. Stop trying to highjack our country. If you don't like our secular nation, move to a religious one.

[Stopmotion]

highjack our country? how does that verb apply in that sentence?

[makeinstall]

Hi Jack,

76% of the population are Christians.

3.9% are Other Religions.

15% are No religion Identified - (As in Agnostic, Atheist and people who are not identified as affiliated with a religion. Atheist account as 0.7%, Agnostics as 0.9)

Don't know/refuse to answer 5.2%

Looks like the only person trying to Hijack the Country is you.

This comes from ARIS DATA from 2008.

[stopthinklisten]

So you are pointing out that we have a nation with a high Christian population? Thanks, I couldn't tell.

The point of the argument is that 100% of everyone you mentioned above live in a *secular* nation. That is it, plain and simple. Anyone that is attempting to change that definition our founding fathers left us with (unless done through a proper constitutional amendment) is attempting to steal this basic definition that is at the core of our democracy.

We are *not* a Christian nation.

[rayjones100]

CORRECT - Secular simply means "not belonging to a Religious order". Many of the Founding Fathers believed in God, but were not religious. In fact, many of them and the early Presidents despised religion - Christianity to be exact. But believed everyman should be free to practice whatever religion he wanted...or didn't want. So, it doesn't matter if the country is 99% Christian...you have no more rights than anyone else. The government, fabric and political structure will remain secular.

[5506]

well christianity is not a religion, its a way of life. religion is mans way of reaching god. christianity is Gods way of reaching man.

amen.

[rayjones100]

You also have to be special don't you? Now Christianity is not a religion :-). Its every bit as much a religion as Judaism, Islam, Buddhism etc. In fact, call it what you like...religion, way of life, life doctrine, just some ideas, Word of the one true God. It matters not. The US is a secular country, and should be. Deal with it.

[MumblingMickey]

Your statement would make no sense if there was no god. Such a way of life would evaporate in this case!

Christianity IS a religion. For one can not adopt its teachings without being a theist!

It does not cover anything else. How you choose to interpret that is another thing, and the way of life you apply it to is another thing entirely.

Some Christians believe in the bible literally and this affects there way of life... but the base stands. Christianity by definition...is a religion.

[rayjones100]

Obama suggesting that America is secular is therefore correct. The constitution was designed so that you all had religious freedom. That if you came to America, you would not be persecuted for being Christian, or Muslim, or Jew, or non-believer. It makes no difference if more Christian showed up than any other religion. Same rights for everybody, that's the beauty of it. Can't you see that? Too many people talk about the founding fathers without knowing a damn thing about what they wanted.

[KirbyNp]

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution created a "wall of separation" between church and state.

Regardless of the founders' religious beliefs, the FIRST Amendment clearly describes the founders' intentions.

You can participate in wish thinking all you like, it will do you no good.

[makeinstall]

The First Amendment clearly states the "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" Why? Because of all the various Christian denominations represented by our founding fathers. Look up the religions of the founding fathers.

You will not find the words "separation of church and state" in the US constitution.

Maybe what you are referring to is T. Jefferson letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802.

[matt4787]

It is irrelevant if it says those exact words or not in the constitution. You can not respect one religion with making a law. Period. That is a seperation of Church and State right there. Where in the constitution does it say anything about the power of the church? It doesn't because they don't have a political power with the state. IT DOES NOT HAVE TO SAY SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. In later federal documents it was made clear their was a seperation of church and state.

[bertly71]

I think that Obama is just trying to heap coals on the liberal theory that Bush alienated our allies and the rest of the world. They have no real military might to help us in Afghanistan or Iraq. Collectively all of our NATO allies have about 15% of our military power so what could they contribute anyway? We protected them for years from the Soviets and they squandered their peace dividend with social programs that have made all of them weak militarily.

[FyodorShuss]

Christopher Hitchens, who is about twenty times smarter than any of these pundits on SLN (Sore Loser Network), yesterday gave the most salient description I've seen so far of the Founding Fathers - that they were, in fact, deists not theists, and that their use of the word "creator" in the Declaration by no means was intended to suggest America be a Christian nation, per se.

[jonboy700]

Sorry, Fyodor, but Hitchens is in fact patently incorrect. Its alittle surprising he would be so bold to suggest this. The premiere document influencing the Dec. of Ind & the Constitution was....The Bible! 52% of the signers of the DOI were seminary graduates - 10 were pastors! Washington stated "our [DOI] was DESIGNED for a moral and religious people and is inadequate for any other...". PLEASE don't join the liars who try to establish this lie through repetition.

respecfully,

JP

[grantobean]

It's inconsequential how many of the signers attended seminary school or happened to be pastors. That was over 200 years ago. We've developed as a nation (and as a world) since then. No longer is a book of myths required as the basis for a civilized society. The real question is not are we a Christian nation, but rather, ought we be. I (respectfully) say no, and if current trends indicate a certain diminution of Christianity conformity, then the sooner the better.

[lemonycheese]

Christianity has done nothing but help society, there is no reason to let go of it.

[jasedotcom]

Christianity has done nothing but cause war, genocide, violence, and tear apart humanity. Nothing good ever came of that mass murdering cult leader - Jesus Christ.

[Guest4000]

jonboy700 says, "10 were pastors!"

Heh... uh, no.  Check the PolitiFact website. At most 4 could be considered pastors; and even then 3 out of those 4 were *former* pastors.

[matt4787]

First off Washington this was his opinion. Washington was religious no doubt. But does that really matter. All he said anyways it was designed for a moral a religious people. There was in no way an establishment of Church or religious doctrines in the political square that were intended to happen. Besides... Washington was wrong anyways on this quote. Also MOST politicians back then were seminary graduates. It doesn't say anything. We have more scientific understanding today than before.

[siberiandreams]

Gingrich is wrong. The US ***is*** a secular nation. That is what the Foundering Fathers intended. Gingrich may have studied European history, but apparently didn't spend much time on US history, especially the period around the American Revolution. Go read Jefferson, Adams, and the others. It is truly amazing that someone like Gingrich who knows better uses this issue for political purposes.

[2fHk4OiSKV1yF7jgs5n3]

I think you're getting the Constitution mixed up with the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution is the rule of law of the USA, *NOT* the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution clearly defines a separation of church and state. The Constitution states that the authority for rights come from the people, not from any Space Daddy. Thank Jesus, Muhammad, and Zeus that you're not in office anymore.

[brouhajoe]

1st off, unless Newt is referencing some other quote I've not heard, Obama did not say America is a "secular" nation, he simply said we are not a Christian nation. 2nd, "secular" does NOT mean "atheist," secular means "Not specifically relating to religion or to a religious body" according to The American Heritage Dictionary. Further, you don't need to follow a specific religion to believe in a creator, or to believe our rights are endowed by that creator.

[brouhajoe]

Also, the Declaration is not a legal document, as people like Newt often leap to point out when it is invoked for other reasons...like our right to overthrow or abolish our gov't if it becomes destructive of those aforementioned "inalienable rights."

[CountArtha]

The word "secular" has been co-opted by a lot of atheists and used as an antonym for "religious."

Remember, though: "Separation of Church and State" is a phrase that appears nowhere in the Constitution, and people are explicitly guaranteed the free exercise of their religion in the First Amendment.

[starcatcher7777]

CountArtha:

You are not correct! Freedom of Religion based on Christian Values! NOT ALL RELIGIONS as created equally or given equal tolerance ! FOR EXAMPLE ALMOST TAKE A LOOK AT THE VILE ACTS OF MUHAMMED THAT ARE CALLED CRIMES IN THE USA and yet are honored in Islam! Do you need some examples ? How about Muhammed fucking his dead auntie or at 54 + yo fucking a 9 yo child!

[rayjones100]

STARCATHCHER7777 - So silly, you think we couldn't go through the old testament and find things that disgust us and are barbaric?? Not defending Islam...or any religion, but these petty fights you religious folk pick with each other is the reason for half the shit in the world.

[RHCPfan]

Your precious bible states that man is entitled to the services of a slave. Every religion, not just Islam, is based on man-made nonsensical bullshit. Religion has lead to more destruction than piece, thanks to people like you continuing to advocate its unproven superstition. You believe in a God that punishes people for expressing their human imperfection and their personal beliefs.

[starcatcher7777]

RHC:

Who outlawed slavery? Christian or Muslim or Atheist ?

[jasedotcom]

Exactly. The stupid thing about religion is that - if you allow yourself to believe in one absurdity (i.e. a deadman rising from the dead) - then you have just opened the possibility of believing in any number of absurdities.

[RHCPfan]

If I were to suddenly proclaim that I am the son of God in today's society, I'd be lynched and judged as a schizophrenic suffering from delusions of grandeur. If this is the case, which in undoubtedly is, than why are you so inclined to believe that Jesus was the actual prophet of God? Did schizophrenia not exist back then? It's time for us to evolve as a HUMAN RACE, and live life based on reality.

[brouhajoe]

"The word "secular" has been co-opted by a lot of atheists and used as an antonym for 'religious.' "

-Maybe so, but as I said above, one can reject religion and still believe in God. So, a nation that is not a Christian nation, or any other brand of theocracy, is not necessarily inherently godless. The point being, "secular" is not an antonym for "religious," it's an antonym for "theocratic," which the US simply is not, and was never meant to be.

[brouhajoe]

As for the phrase "Separation of Church and State," you're right...that exact wording does not appear in the Constitution (nor does any phrase declaring us to be a Christian nation, but setting that aside)...it does, however, appear in a 1978 Supreme Court ruling interpreting the 1st amendment (Reynolds v. United States). I highly recommend reading it (it's not long), not just to clarify this issue, but because it's a very interesting read in general in my opinion.

[CountArtha]

I fully understand what Obama meant by "secular" and I agree that Speaker Gingrich is reading a little too much into it, but the United States simply does not fit the European conception of the secular state, or Laïcité. In other words, "secular" might mean something different to Europeans than it does to the President.

[brouhajoe]

This is true. I think they take the Separation idea to the extreme over there a lot of the time (France in particular). To me, secular means free to practice any religion one chooses, without being forced to adhere to any religion one rejects. Over there they make laws against free practice of religion on public grounds, which flies in the face of the idea behind our 1st Amendment.

[brouhajoe]

However, though I see the folly in what Obama said, as you've just described, I also see the value in it. There is a growing notion in much of the world, and in the middle east in particular, that America IS a Christian nation, and that we're fighting a holy war against Islam. This false notion only serves to fuel the propaganda and recruitment capabilities of those groups who wish to do us harm.

[CountArtha]

Well, there you go! We are 100% in agreement.

[crackingskulls]

Newt, it's good to hear we share something in common with Iran....Theocracy.

[starcatcher7777]

Cracking:

Nothing could be further from the truth:

Unless you value Christian and Biblical "Good" and "bad" then you have no clue as to what the USA was and intended to be! YOU TRY TO DIVERT THAT VALUE SYSTEM by using Islam?

Tell me in your moral compass is this a good thing or a bad thing? A 54+ yo man fucking a 9 yo child or how about your dead Auntie ?

[jimsterok1]

this is insane... what a nut case... neut stop talking u shame us all

[chm97chm97]

"The creator line is there to express a human right that cannot be endowed by a monarch, not as a literal expression of belief." // and our forefathers could not express themselves any other way??? If they wanted to express themselves differently they would have chosen to do so. They chose no such manner. They alluded to the Almighty four different times during the Declaration. If anyone wants to get a tone of forefathers beliefs read George Washington's 1st Thanksgiving Day proclamation.

[pcc68]

This is insane.

The creator line is there to express a human right that cannot be endowed by a monarch, not as a literal expression of belief. And Gingrich knows this. Being secular is the bedrock of a freely functioning Democracy, one that holds civil law as separate and above any religious law.