Uploaded on May 23, 2011 by goffnett
Is America A Christian Nation?
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Is America a Christian Nation? Many people don’t think so today. The truth is, however, that our great nation was founded on principles that are all throughout the Bible. Author and historian David Barton highlights our christian heritage in this eye opening message.
If you say America is a christian nation, then you are against the first amendment of the constitution, as the lion said: Just my 2 cents
Not going to watch it, heard people argue over this too much so here is my response to this idiotic debate:
We are a nation of INDIVIDUALS, not a nation of christians, athiests, patriots or anything else, we are INDIVIDUALS, free to choose our own beliefs and philosophies. The moment we become anything other than such, (a christian nation) we lose our individualism and become a HIVE MIND.
Cf. Robin v. Hardaway, 1 Jefferson 109, 114, 1 Va. Reports Ann. 58, 61 (1772) aff’d. Gregory v. Baugh, 29 Va. 681, 29 Va. Rep. Ann. 466, 2 Leigh 665 (1831) (Now all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right and justice, are, in our laws, and must be in the nature of things, considered as void. The laws of nature are the laws of God; whose authority can be superseded by no power on earth. A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to him from whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions which contradict his laws, we are in conscience bound to disobey. Such have been the adjudications of our courts of justice. And cited 8 Co. 118. a. Bonham’s case. Hob. 87; 7. Co. 14. a. Calvin’s case.);
Virginia Bill of Rights (June 12, 1776) (The term “religion” in 1787 meant “the Duty which we owe our Creator, and the Manner of discharging it,..” It was to “be directed only by Reason and Convictions, not by Force or Violence; and therefore all Men [were] equally entitled to the free exercise of Religion, according to the Dictates of Conscience; and [it was] “the mutual Duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love, and Charity towards each other.”); [pp.627-628]).
Virginia Statute of Religious Liberty (January 16, 1786) (“Well aware that Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burdens, or by civil incapacitations… are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion.”) [emphasis added] [p.628] http://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Virginia_Statute_for_Establishing_Religious_Freedom_1786
Northwest Ordinance of 1787 (13th day of July, in the year of our Lord 1787, and of their sovereignty and independence the twelfth) Art. 1. No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments, in the said territory. http://www.ourdocuments.gov/print_friendly.php?flash=true&page=transcript&doc=8&title=Transcript+of+Northwest+Ordinance+%281787%29
Constitution for the State of Oregon, Article I, Section 2 (1857) (Freedom of worship) (All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences.); http://bluebook.state.or.us/state/constitution/orig/const.htm
Vidal v. Girard’s Ex’rs., 43 U.S. 127, 2 How. 127, 11 L.Ed. 205 (1844) (The Plaintiff argued: “The Christian religion is… a part of the public law… The charter [of Pennsylvania] says that [Mr.] Penn came over to spread the Christian religion; and the legislatures have often acted upon this principle, as where they punished the violation of the Lord’s day. “By the laws of Pennsylvania it is blasphemy to attack the Christian religion… -p.146 “That it is a part of the common law, see 11 Serg. & R. (Pa.), 394, Updegraff v. The Commonwealth.” -p. 177 “In the case of Updegraff, 11 Serg. & R (Pa.) 400, the court said that Christianity was part of the law. But it was Christianity with liberty of conscience to all men.” -p. 154); http://www.justia.us/us/43/127/case.html
Church of Holy Trinity v. U.S., 143 U.S. 457, 12 Sup. Ct. 511 (1892) (There is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons; they are organic utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people. While because of a general recognition of this truth the question has seldom been presented to the courts, yet we find that in Updegraph v. Com. 11 Serg. and R. 394, 400, it was decided that, “Christianity, general Christianity, is, and always has been, a part of the common law of Pennsylvania; … Not Christianity with an established church, and titles, and spiritual courts; but Christianity with liberty of conscience to all men” And in People v. Ruggles, 8 Johns 290, 294, 295, Chancellor Kent, the great commentator on American law, speaking as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New York, said “The people of this State, in common with the people of this country, profess the general doctrines of Christianity, as a rule of their faith and practice; and to scandalize the author of these doctrines is not only, in a religious point of view, extremely impious, but even in respect to the obligations due to society, is a gross violation of decency and good order;…”); http://www.justia.us/us/143/457/case.html
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 400, 67 L.Ed. 1042 (1923) (The American people have always regarded education and acquisition of knowledge as matters of supreme importance which should be diligently promoted. The Ordinance of 1787 declares: ‘Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.’); http://laws.findlaw.com/us/262/390.html
Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 63 S.Ct. 870 (1943) (Spreading one’s religious beliefs or preaching the Gospel through distribution of religious literature and through personal visitations is an age-old type of evangelism which is entitled to protection under Constitution guaranteeing “freedom of speech”, “freedom of press” and “freedom of religion.”); http://laws.findlaw.com/us/319/105.html
McCreary County, Kentucky, et al. v. American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky et al., 545 U.S. 844 (2005) (06/27/2005) (Our guiding principle has been James Madison’s–that “[t]he Religion … of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man.” Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, 2 Writings of James Madison 183, 184 (G. Hunt ed. 1901) (hereinafter Memorial). To that end, we have held that the guarantees of religious freedom protect citizens from religious incursions by the States as well as by the Federal Government.
Everson v. Board of Ed. of Ewing, 330 U.S. 1, 16 (1947); Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940). Government may not coerce a person into worshiping against her will, nor prohibit her from worshiping according to it. It may not prefer one religion over another or promote religion over nonbelief. Everson, supra, at 15-16. It may not entangle itself with religion. Walz v. Tax Comm’n of City of New York, 397 U.S. 664, 674 (1970). And government may not, by “endorsing religion or a religious practice,” “mak[e] adherence to religion relevant to a person’s standing in the political community.” Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 69 (1985) (O’Connor, J., concurring in judgment). When we enforce these restrictions, we do so for the same reason that guided the Framers–respect for religion’s special role in society. Our Founders conceived of a Republic receptive to voluntary religious expression, and provided for the possibility of judicial intervention when government action threatens or impedes such expression. Voluntary religious belief and expression may be as threatened when government takes the mantle of religion upon itself as when government directly interferes with private religious practices. When the government associates one set of religious beliefs with the state and identifies nonadherents as outsiders, it encroaches upon the individual’s decision about whether and how to worship. In the marketplace of ideas, the government has vast resources and special status. Government religious expression therefore risks crowding out private observance and distorting the natural interplay between competing beliefs. Allowing government to be a potential mouthpiece for competing religious ideas risks the sort of division that might easily spill over into suppression of rival beliefs. Tying secular and religious authority together poses risks to both.); http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/03-1693.html
Year of the Bible, Act of October 4, 1982; 96 Stat. 1211
Religious Liberty under the Free Exercise Clause (US Justice Dept. 1986) http://d.scribd.com/docs/17xtl4kvbm3c93tsxje3.pdf
Religious Freedom Restoration Act. 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1(b); https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000bb
Religious Liberty Archive: http://www.churchstatelaw.com/casetopics.asp
Nam: The cause of the church is equal to public cause; and paramount is the reason which makes for religion {Causa ecclesiæ publicis æquiparatur; et summa est ratio quæ pro religione facit; Coke, Litt. 341}; The law of God and the law of the land are all one; and both preserve and favor the common and public good of the land {Le ley de dieu et ley de terre sont tout un; et l’un et l’autre preferre et favour le common et publique bien del terre; Keilw. 191}; A sacrilegious person transcends the cupidity and wickedness of all other robbers {Sacrilegus omnium prædorum cupiditatem et scelerem superat; 4 Coke, 106}; That is the highest law which favors religion {Summa est lex quæ pro religione facit; 10 Mod. 117, 119; 2 Chanc. Cas. 18}; N.B. Error of law is injurious {Error juris nocet}; Fiction yields to truth {Fictio cedit veritati}; We can do nothing against truth {Nihil possumus contra veritatem; St. Albans, Doct. & Stu. Dial. 2, c. 6}; He who does not freely speak the truth is a betrayer of the truth {Qui non libere veritatem pronunciat proditor est veritatis}; The thing speaks for itself {Res ipsa loquitur};
——————————————————————————–
Several of the nation’s key Founders were either unorthodox in their Christian beliefs or not Christian at all. And nowhere in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution is there any explicit mention of Christianity. So no, America was not founded as a Christian nation. Hence the First Amendment.
Even so, there’s little doubt that Christianity has always been the majority religion in America, and it has always played a key role in American history and culture — at least nominally.
The problem is that most people who call themselves “Christians” don’t follow Jesus’ teachings. This is all too evident in America. For example:
** Many “Christians” support senseless wars overseas and scoff at the “hippies” who oppose militarism, even though they claim to worship Jesus, a.k.a. the Prince of Peace. (Of course, these same warmongers are quick to mock Islam as the “religion of peace.”) Yeah, I’m sure Jesus would approve of “peace through superior firepower.” These people mock their own religion.
** Many view the poor with contempt.
** They’re promiscuous.
** They support locking up people for victimless “vice” crimes, even though we’d expect them to have read the story where Jesus said, “let the one among you who is without sin cast the first stone at her.” As we know, Jesus was referring to a woman who had committed adultery — a far greater vice than, say, abusing drugs — yet he left her unpunished.
** Most embrace Zionism, even though the New Testament explicitly contradicts “Christian Zionism,” and the notion that God plays favorites, in several verses.
The New Testament contains some great moral teachings. Too bad they’re lost on those who are better at thumping their Bibles than reading them.
When America broke from England, the European countries had a state religion. Our founders wanted to throw the shackles of religion off for humanism. Secret societies replaced religion in this country and most of the leaders belonged to something unholy. The only reason Christianity prospered here was due to freedom. The freemasons also prospered along side them.
the united states is a freemason jew faggot country inundated with half assed self deluded “christians” that no more care about the gospel of JESUS christ than they do about the bill of rights……………..Isaiah 5:.14 Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it……………………………………….In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. jn 1;1 ………………………………………….but to this fallen country of hellions ……..”words” mean nothing………just “follow yer heart”..right?..The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? Jeremiah 17:9
……..
As a serious believer in Jesus Christ but NOT religion (which is why I call my “Bible blog” “http://christnotreligion.blogspot.com” aka Truth Not Heresy”), I categorically answer the question above with “NO”. Not Constitutionally (due to freedom of or from religion, and separation of Church and State), and not lawfully in any other way shape or form, as well as the following:
1. Christian nations are not run by psychopaths, Jews, or any one who is not a Christian.
2. Christian nations follow the Word of Christ, not try to destroy the planet
3. Christian nations are not filled with the “doctrines of demons” and do not allow abominations like abortions, sex changes, LBGT crap, political correctness, George Soros funded thugs to stamp out decency, or allow cops to kill humans and dogs with impunity.
4. Christian nations seek the truth in all things, not run rampant with lies
5. Christian nations worship God, not mammon, Satan, and any other false god
And 100s more reason why the US is NOT a Christian nation and likely never will be.
Being that the vast majority of Christian churches in this country have been thoroughly corrupted by the Enemy… I’d say it’s a moot point.
including “in touch ministries”
I well knew that I would stir the pot with this article … but I intended to ‘Weed The Garden’ of those who failed to actually understand the historical reason, purpose and logic of the First Amendment (Liberty of Conscience) as opposed to the small and prejudical minds of [wo]men, little Boys and Girls …
Thank you all who have shown us what SORT you are …