• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

History Was America founded on Christianity?

Vladibus

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
1,016
I've heard many times how Liberals are Christian haters because they want to remove all mention of God from governments domain and so forth.

I was wondering what people thought of the following Article from the Treaty of Tripoli of 1796, during the final term of George Washington extending into Adam's term:

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.

Among those in Congress that ratified it were many of the Framers and founders of this country. No rumblings or objections were raised in the ratification process over this article, I doubt the same could be said today.

Unlike the Declaration of Independance, The treaty of Tripoli was law at one time, thereby making it official policy of the US that it was not founded on the Christian Religion.

Constitution, Article VI, Sect.2: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

This is not to say that Christian morals, culture and ideaology did not play a role in its formation but rather that the US is not a Christian Nation built for the extension of Christianity. It is a secular nation that protects the rights of all religions and will not foster one over another.

I just wanted to hear what others thought over this historic document.
 
Ok, try this one on for size. Using a historical text and making some offhand remark about how the US doesn't follow its own treaties is plainly ridiculous. If we balanced out the countries that haven't followed its own treaties vs the ones who had we would have this statistic:

The Whole World = Not Following
No one = Following
 
^^^

That the president of the US can violate a treaty anytime he wants. Hence, nothing in that treaty could ever bind him. Of course, its expired anyways. The treaty does not bind us not to be a Christian Nation. The 1st Amendment does.
 
Geez, you sycophants of the status quo sure do need to take a lesson in debate.

The thread addresses the "Christian nation" fallacy. Sure Miles, the thread topic has been done before, but if you're going to bother to respond I would suggest the following:

a) Given that you've bothered to respond, at least TRY to respond with a little more counterpointing than simply the "headshrugging" option so in vogue with apologists,

b) If you've asserted a nonresponsive "gee, that's informational" response, at least TRY to provide some factual ON POINT counterpoint info YOURSELF when you DO bother to try to counterassert, rather than just some generalized BS alleging "everybody does it", or

c) Make your own thread attacking the treaty violations of other countries.

Case in point...even assuming you CONCEDED that the US is not a Christian nation, you COULD have much more effectively argued that there is no treaty violation here anyway in your exchange with glog, since a) religion was not nominally the basis for attacking Iraq, a Muslim country, b) the Treaty does not bind the US with respect to FUTURE hostilities against "Muslim" non-signatory nations, and c) Iraq was not a signatory nation to the Treaty of Tripoli in any case.

Defending against criticism with the "but they did it too" went out the window in kindergarten. For the sake of the folks who enjoy reading good debate in here, could you at least try to keep those ideas in mind?
 
the treaty of tripoli doesn't seem to slow down those who always claim that the US is a christian nation. Evidence and proof arent things that interest them :\
 
gloggawogga said:
^^^

That the president of the US can violate a treaty anytime he wants. Hence, nothing in that treaty could ever bind him. Of course, its expired anyways. The treaty does not bind us not to be a Christian Nation. The 1st Amendment does.
8(

The fact that was included in the wording demonstrates the convictions of the time. It is a point of historic clarification.

Surely you can see that.
 
^^^

Sure, that and other things like the Federalist Papers, and some letters Jefferson and others wrote. But they all carry no legal precedent.

Don't get me wrong. This is all good stuff. Liberal Academia(tm) should teach this to kids. But its not the actual law. :)
 
Last edited:
glowbug, you missed the plainly obvious point. The original post did nothing to bring to light the basic subject. I have continually tried to encourage debate the right way (intelligently) but unfortunately that approach rarely works. I could have also pointed out that the reply was plainly a half-truth and bluntly moronic but I didn't extend to that realm either.

So thanks for the information. Next time I want a lesson in debate I'll pull out 'A Guide to Parliamentary Debate' and get to reading.

However, in light of your intrusive criticism that neither addressed the points nor was taken in the proper media (PM) I'll respond.

The United States of America may plainly hold to certain Christian ideals but those ideals are a continual string throughout most of society and is merely a misnomer for partisan politics. The simple fact is that many of the 'Christian' ideals are inherent in most of the world. Now, many Christian are influential in the US but does that say that our core is or ever was purely Christian? I say no for the reasons stated above.

Happy?
 
Miles, that's better, thank you. Of course I don't say that because you have to please me...I just think people ought to be thanked for responding calmly to criticism.

Yes, glog's assertion was not directly on point to the thread topic, but it did address a tangential implication in light of the US attack on Iraq. What irritated me was your seemingly flippantly dismissive response...unfortunately that happens in here a bit.

Given your most recent response, I withdraw my objections to your earlier posts and apologize for misinterpreting your motives.
 
Last edited:
The writings of the "founding fathers" are like the bible...
their words may be twisted in every which way to benefit she who invokes them.

The question is not, "what did they say?" or "what was our country founded upon?" The questions are, "what do we do now?" and "where do we go from here?"

ebola
 
Well fuck, they also used smoke signals way back then, I propose we start using those!

Can you see me now?

Good!
 
gloggawogga said:
Sure, that and other things like the Federalist Papers, and some letters Jefferson and others wrote. But they all carry no legal precedent.

"no legal precedent"

And neither does the claim that "the United States was founded on christian values." So attempting to invoke the "legal precedent" issue is completely without merit.

Besides, christian values suck and they have no place in government. =D


gloggawogga said:
Don't get me wrong. This is all good stuff. Liberal Academia(tm) should teach this to kids. But its not the actual law. :)

"Liberal Academia(tm) should teach this to kids."

Exactly where have you learned about Liberalism to have arrived at such a statement?


8(
 
ebola! said:
The writings of the "founding fathers" are like the bible...
their words may be twisted in every which way to benefit she who invokes them.

The question is not, "what did they say?" or "what was our country founded upon?" The questions are, "what do we do now?" and "where do we go from here?"

ebola
Good point ebola! You saved me from making the point.


BlueAdonis said:
Well fuck, they also used smoke signals way back then, I propose we start using those!

Can you see me now?

Good!
:D :D :D

That's good! I laughed so hard, I almost fell out of my chair!
 
Just so you guys don't get confused, I'm about to leave class in 5 minutes and that smoke you're about to see isn't me sending you best wishes, it's just my car's exhaust.
 
Top