The Declaration of Independence



Many Christian’s who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration of Independence as "proof" of a Christian America. The reason appears obvious: the Declaration mentions God. (You may notice that some Christians avoid the Constitution, with its absence of God.)



However, the Declaration of Independence does not represent any law of the United States. It came before the establishment of our lawful government (the Constitution). The Declaration aimed at announcing the separation of America from Great Britain and it listed the various grievances with them. The Declaration includes the words, "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America." The grievances against Great Britain no longer hold today, and we have more than thirteen states.



Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets and believers, and judges may mention it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. It represents a historical document about rebellious intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our government.



Of course the Declaration stands as a great political document. Its author aimed at a future government designed and upheld by people and not based on a superstitious god or religious monarchy. It observed that all men "are created equal" meaning that we all get born with the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men." Please note that the Declaration says nothing about our rights secured by Christianity. It bears repeating: "Governments are instituted among men."



The pursuit of happiness does not mean a guarantee of happiness, only that we have the freedom to pursue it. Our Law of the Land incorporates this freedom of pursuit in the Constitution. We can believe or not believe as we wish. We may succeed or fail in our pursuit, but our Constitution (and not the Declaration) protects our unalienable rights in our attempt at happiness.



Moreover, the mentioning of God in the Declaration does not describe the personal God of Christianity. Thomas Jefferson who held deist beliefs, wrote the majority of the Declaration. The Declaration describes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God." This nature’s view of God agrees with deist philosophy and might even appeal to those of pantheistical beliefs, but any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone.



The Treaty of Tripoli



Unlike most governments of the past, the American Founding Fathers set up a government divorced from any religion. Their establishment of a secular government did not require a reflection to themselves of its origin; they knew this as a ubiquitous unspoken given. However, as the United States delved into international affairs, few foreign nations knew about the intentions of the U.S. For this reason, an insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s explicitly reveals the secular nature of the U.S. goverenment to a foreign nation. Officially called the "Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary," most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states:

"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 Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan 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."

Click here to see the actual article 11 of the Treaty



The first part of Article 11 at the top got copied and scanned from the original treaty of Tripoli book of 1797. Because of the water stains, most of the Article proves difficult to read (thus I only show the first portion for brevity).



Joel Barlow had full charge of the Treaty of Tripoli. He authored and wrote the entire English version of the treaty document. Article 11 at the bottom comes from a second treaty book, coped from the original treaty book and does not contain as much stain damage. Joel Barlow hand wrote both English versions and signed both of them on the same day on January 3rd, 1797.



The Senate received the Barlow text from the original treaty book and John Adams ratified it. This served as the text which the U.S. printed in the Statutes at large and in treaty collections generally; it comes from Barlow’s English text that, in the United States, has always deemed the text of the treaty.



The original treaty of Tripoli and the treaty copy remain preserved in the National Archives in Washington D.C. and found under Treaty Series No. 358. The official Senate treaty exists in the American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II, 18-19.



For more information and history on the treaty, which includes the Arabic text from the original treaty book, see "Treaties and other International Acts of the United States of America," Vol. 2, edited by Hunter Miller, United States Government Printing Office, Washington: 1931

although the original Pledge of Allegiance did not have it in it . The later members of Congress though it important enough to have the words one nation "UNDER GOD" added to the pledge.





   dajcat

Quote: Originally posted by kspletzer on 07 October 2009

---

EVERY state has in their constition that it is founded God or a Supreme Being.



This great nation did have a founding of religious beliefs-- They did not want a Church forced on them like it was in England--- So what did they do? They told people they had to go to their churches or they were heretics-- people were punished, seperated and even killed. That’s probably why we say worship like you want now. Government should stay out of Religion and Religion should stay out of Government -- But we still want honest, law-abiding people to be in office. In as much we want religious people with high standards.



We should not have the government telling us what we can do in our Churches or what our personal beliefs are-- we should NOT be stopped for proclaiming Jesus and his saving Grace from any corner, or that our beliefs about homosexuality or abortions should only stay in our heads or churches. Even then, some pastors have been diciplined and even jailed for preaching against these things from the pulpit--WHERE is our religious freedoms. People have the right to not hear us or walk away from us, but WE HAVE the God given right to live by and preach the Bible. We are told to follow the authority of our rulers/government but HIS gospel over rules everything else in the long run.

---

I agree with most of what you post. However, you assume that a person must be religious to have high ethical standards. This is not necessarily true. I know atheists with high moral and ethical standards who would never be the subject of current news stories involving scandal.



Secondly, your writing (second paragraph) undermines the concept of separation of church and state when you state, "HIS gospel over rules everything else in the long run."



I appreciate that you personally hold His Gospel in high regard and as a model for you to live by, but not all people hold the Bible in such high regard; yet they are good neighbors with high values and ethics.

Let us remember that it was Jesus who separated Church and State when he said to render unto Caesar that which was Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s. When wisdom in the Western World grew to put this principle into practice, these nations were blessed with material prosperity and scientific advancement. In the Muslim World this rule did not apply. These nations remained backward. It is important not to fall into the easy trap of Pharasaic religion and loud enforced pronouncements of empty public piety.

 On the other hand there does of late seem to be arising a spirit of evangelical atheism which seeks to deny to God that which should be his of right.

The term separation of church and state came from justice Hugo Black, an anti-Catholic in reference to a case of busing of school children to religious schools. I found it apalling that Irish Catholics for many years were forced to pay tithes in support of the C of E. Most states took 30 or more years to abolish their state religions. We do have a rich heritage of Judeo-Christian tradition which has benefited our society greatly. The Abolitionists come to mind. Most of the Ivy League schools were religious in their foundations.I truly enjoy learning about religions in this country and the UK.

I am not a Mormon but to follow your premise Sally they have the right to have more than one wife according to their faith. Why does the Gov’t force a law on them which is against their gods law? the Muslims are trying to get Sheite law to take prescedent over state laws. The law of the land must prevail otherwise we will have anarchy. There will be anarchy during the Tribulation period. People will refuse to take the mark of the Beast.





  dajcat

I was brought up in a devoutly religious family of not too prosperous people who worked on and were inventive and hard working and honest.



I’ve strayed but have not forgotten.



I don’t remember that any of them particularly expected the government to be Godly or Under God. I grew up in a noisy mix of Democrats and Republicans who considered such terms Monday through Friday discussions. Saturday they worked, and Sunday they rested.



They didn’t expect handouts from anybody, EITHER side of the family.



Since the sixties, and I lived through the decade and paid attention to religious people back then, this country has indeed relaxed ALL societal standards, including religious ones.



We’ve had evangelistic protests, but the protests are, honestly if one has a brain and thinks, dogmatic and dictatorial and self righteous. Yes, they have, in their probable at some point and dubious with big money involved sincerity, wanted all Americans to live for Jesus, but live for Jesus is Madison Avenue.



I am in NO way against Christianity, and if any politicians ever had it sincerely, it helped, I’m sure, but look at history. Most did NOT.



That’s not to say they had no values or ethics.



Ah, values and ethics that are good.



Can a person be ethical and have values leaning to honest productivity and NOT believe in God? Yes. I’ve seen it.



There’s the glitch.



Religion. Americans need to look to the Islam that has been shoved in my face WAY more than I ever wanted it to be in the last ten or fifteen years. The people who seek to destroy us are WAY more devoted to the same God we want our country devoted to than we are. They pray FIVE times a day, all prone on the floor. Then, they plan bombings.



Do we fail to see a GOD DIRECTS THE US people...and THESE thugs? I don’t.



One day this week I heard on NPR that the FUNDAMENTALIST Muslims hate America because Americans are, (gag, puke) "INFIDELS," because we do NOT support their causes. The causes? Destroy America among them. Hey, Catch 22 has just been anted up to can’t WIN with that statement.



I grew up in a religious family the likes of which no praise the lord sort of hand raising conservative Christian will EVER understand.



No, my history tells me we do NOT need evangelistic Christianity at the core of government. My republican grandfather would blast out of his grave to protest it.

Stay on topic and in fashion with this lovely teal bag, fringed!
From Wilson's Leather.