The Bible and Conservatism

As a rabid Leftist in my youth, I loathed Christians and the Bible. I hated the rich, America, capitalism, and private property. After I heard the Gospel for the first time and turned to Christ, my politics changed. I became conservative, and I registered as a Republican.

Although I don't buy Klinghoffer's views entirely, I suppose he's onto something.

What a-theists, Leftists, and liberals--including the so-called religious ones--do not understand is that we are all spirits having a human experience.

Politics, divorced from spiritual values, tend to serve the lowest common denominator. When God is removed, there is always room for another Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

Naturally I concur with the general sentiment of Klinghoffer's perspective. However, I don't think that there is any Biblical support for his views on race. People are people. I will have to read his book to see if he goes into race any deeper in order to support the notion that race is a spiritual thing. If that were true, then the same must be true for hair color, eye color, left-handedness, one's height or weight. I don't buy it.

Good interview!...Jamie Glazov's columns are a must read for me.
There was a column in AT from Aug.23, 2007 entitled 'Who is Allah?' I'll give the 'Cliff Notes'...Allah originated in a pagan Sumerian desert moon deity called...'Al-iliah'...and based in Mecca. Their crescent moon symbol is on ancient Sumerian reliefs. Gimme that old time religion! The jihadists are a pagan, pre-Islamic, blood thirsty, seperatist murder cult, like the 'Thugees' in 'Gunga Din', who never got the message. The Allah of moderate, mainstream Islam is a tame, non-belligerent God of peace and love. I've met many Muslims and they were kind, sweet, polite, friendly, moral, civilized humans. (Who would give any fellow human CPR in an emergency.)
Keep in mind the repulsive Jesus of Timothy McVeigh's bible quoting Aryan crew with his bandelleros of ammo hung with grenades. Same crude, hateful mindset. Same programmed murdering devils. If one takes holy scripture of any religion literally, we'd all still be in a feral tribal dark age...as are many parts of the planet. They are kept in check by carrier groups, stealth bombers and Special Forces.

i am a devout atheist, but i also consider myself as a conservative.

now what??

To Mark,
I'll tell you what now. This doesn't change anything for you. Eventually you will come around to religion, Just trust me on that. Remember the Democrat party is just a bunch on groups that happen to have a single position in common with the party. The Republican party is a lot of People who may have one or two positions not in common with the party.

Biblical penalties were completely unenforceable?? Surely that was a misprint?

Mark,
I personally believe there are two kinds of atheists, one who hates God, and one who just doesn't believe. If you don't believe in God, but don't hate the idea of God, then you could be paradoxically filled with God's Holy Spirit without realizing or acknowledging it; and you could be one of the best people around, and better than some of us religious ones.

During graduate school I tried on atheist belief; took it for a serious test drive, but in the end I realized atheism is just another faith.

unreal. i post i'm an atheist, and i get replies preaching to me about god. perhaps you missed the part where i said i was a devout atheist??

let me be blunt: i do NOT believe in any god or anything god related.

however, i believe in the conservative political ideologies. you christians don't own conservatism, it just fits into your religious/political beliefs better than any other party.

Ayn Rand laid out one of the strongest cases for non-religious conservatism, based on Aristotle's theory of identity (A is A). Bottom line: No man should have the power to force another man to work for any good other than his own. I am a Christian, but I understand Rand's rejection of religion as a tool for compulsion (as it was practiced historically in Russia - as in Europe).

Mark,
American conservatism, as I understand it, is paradoxically built upon the great liberal ideas of the Declaration of Independence.

There are three great ideas in the Declaration of Independence, one is religious, one is purely rational, and one is a hybrid of religious and rational.

The self-evident truth that all men are created equal is a hybridized idea whereby man was created in the image of God and all men are therefore self-evidently equal before God and the law.

The second idea in the Declaration is purely religious, that our basic human rights to life, liberty and creative pursuit of happiness are of Divine origin. It is this religious understanding of the Divine origin of human rights that renders those human rights inalienable.

Lastly there is the purely rational idea that government are instituted among men in order to secure those inalienable God-given human rights and the purely rational idea that, in order to be just, government power must derive only through the consent of the governed.

As a religious person I have completely accepted the purely rational ideas of the Declaration along with the religious ideas. How can an atheist accept both the religious and the rational ideas of our most fundamental "expression of the American mind"?

In a letter to Richard Henry Lee dated May 8, 1825, Jefferson wrote that the object of the Declaration was, "Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before, but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take." The Declaration, Jefferson wrote, "...was intended to be an expression of the American mind."

http://www.suppressednews.com/mynews/news/EElFulyuFExhYdbLzo.shtml

One may choose to adhere to a philosophy centered on the idea that we are endowed by our Creator, but an a-theist has to do so on purely rational grounds, grounds that tend to shift with the passage of time. Thus are we in danger of secular interpretations of the Constitution that purport said document to be "living and breathing", and hence, meaningless.

Let's not forget the problem with "devout" secularists is not that they believe in nothing, they, in fact, are susceptible to believing anything.

Let's not fail to remember, either, that far more people were murdered by a-theists in the name of "progress" during the 20th Century than were killed in all the religious wars from Christendom's inception two millennia ago.

If you don't believe in God or anything God-related, what is your moral basis for believing in Conservative ideology?

Conservatism and Liberalism alike are two different belief systems about morality. But without a belief in God, where does morality come from?

johnny appleseed...

your "rights" are not god given. god has absolutely nothing to do with your rights. sorry to disappoint you on that. thanks the men who wrote your constitution and bill of rights. NOT god.

and, robert, i beg to differ on your post. christian or religious wars have killed far more people than any atheist, as you have wrongly claimed.

If you don't believe in God or anything God-related, what is your moral basis for believing in Conservative ideology?

Conservatism and Liberalism alike are two different belief systems about morality. But without a belief in God, where does morality come from?

Mark,
You say my rights are not God-given but our founding fathers said that they are God-given. I've decided to adhere to the thinking of our founders and reject your thinking. Sorry to disappoint you on that.

I agree with you that the U.S. Constitution is purely rational and man-made, but the human rights that it secures are not man-made - so said our founding fathers - sorry to disappoint you on that.

Human rights, if they derive only from human government and human law, will never be inalienable; they will always be reversible. Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Vladimir Lenin came up with a purely rational and atheistic communist government, and so did Mao Zedong; and yes, human rights under communism were not God-given. There are no human rights under purely rational man-made government and law.

Mark, you have it wrong on the numbers; and Robert McClain has is right. According to The Black Book of Communism the total murdered by Atheist-Communist regimes approaches 100 million people killed. According to R.J. Rummel (author of Death By Government), the figure could exceed 250 million. There is some uncertainty over who is the all-time killer: the Soviet Union or China. The Black Book of Communism attributes roughly 20 million deaths to the USSR (Lenin and Stalin) and 65 million to China (Mao). Rummel's best estimates are 62 million USSR deaths and 35 million Communist China deaths (but could be up to 127 and 103 million, respectively).

R.J. Rummel credibly estimates other death counts throughout history, and he pulls no punches or otherwise minimizes the death counts from Christian and Western movements.

• African slave trade with New World - up to 2 million.
• Christian Crusades - 1 million.
• Spanish Inquisition - 350,000.
• North American Indians - up to 25,000.

Like Mark, I am an atheist and a right-of-center supporter of small government, free markets and a generally conservative political philosophy. My question to those defending the God-given view of rights is this: are you saying that there no rational basis for our rights, for a small-government philosophy, for morality? Can they not be derived from consideration of our nature i.e. from the facts of reality? If you say there is no rational basis for those things, then you might want to think through the implications of that. If you say that there is a rational basis for all of those things, then what is the need to base them on a belief in God? Moreover, how do you answer those believers whose God is not that of Judeo-Christianity? How do you persuade someone who doesn't already believe?

There is no necessary basis for either relativism or immorality in a secular natural law foundation for our morals, rights or system of government. And, there is no guarantee that a religious basis for any of those things will not lead to absue.

Incidentally, and speaking of abuse of ideologies or beliefs, it is not a question of competing body counts. The moment you get into the position of saying religions have murdered fewer people than secular or atheist philosophies all that you've done is shown each to be equally immoral or subject to abuse (after all, the great religious atrocities occurred at a time of simpler technologies: the better comparative measure would be deaths as a percentage of population). I'd also note that there is nothing, absolutely nothing, rational about either communism or fascism, no matter what their adherents might say. The test for the rationality of an idea is not that it was conceived by academics and internally consistent, but that it is fully in accord with the facts of reality. Socialism in all its forms fails that test comprehensively.

surely you guys aren't trying to tell me god gave all the rights to mankind...are you? i suppose next you are going to tell me that god decided he would join the USA and adopt this as his own country? did he perhaps give up on the rest of the world?

had not our man-made constitution be written as it was, the "rights" you talk about would never exist. and, i doubt your god sat there and decided that every man has the right to bear arms and kill his fellow man.

give me a break.

as for morals, if you don't know how to be a decent human being without having the crutch of religion to hold you up, then i feel sorry for you. morality is not capitalized by religion.

and, sorry, but i don't buy into your sources of who killed the most humans.

back to the original article, i can still believe in conservative political ideologies without being a christian and have done so for years. christianity likes to claim a foothold on conservatism, but i have noticed that many christians are swinging into the liberal arena now because liberalism today appears to be more along the christian teachings.

"My question to those defending the God-given view of rights is this: are you saying that there no rational basis for our rights, for a small-government philosophy, for morality? Can they not be derived from consideration of our nature i.e. from the facts of reality?"

Our founding fathers did not believe that human rights, and therefore just human government, could be maintained without the idea of Divine source of human rights; and as much as I like my atheist friends, I'm inclined to just go ahead and stick with the founders on this.

George Washington:

"It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible." George Washington

"Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." George Washington

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_washington.html

John Adams:
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other." John Adams

http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/John_Adams/

"It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue." John Adams

"The safety and prosperity of nations ultimately and essentially depend on the protection and blessing of Almighty God." John Adams

http://www.earstohear.net/Heritage/quotes.html

James Madison:

"The eyes of all should be turned to that Almighty Power, in whose hands are the welfare and the destiny of nations" James Madison

http://www.heritage.org/research/americanfoundingandhistory/wm375.cfm

Thomas Jefferson:

"I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their native land and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_jefferson

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" Thomas Jefferson

http://www.monticello.org/reports/quotes/memorial.html

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

The experiences of the twentieth century seem to back up these ideas of our founders in my mind, and so too the conclusions of many other brilliant men coming from their experiences under unjust societies; societies which were not built upon the idea of Divine individual human rights, even societies built upon the false and irrational religious notion of the Divine right of kings.

"If God does not exist, then everything is permitted" Fyodor Dostoyevsky

The idea of Divine human rights alongside a purely rational means of securing those rights comes from the two parallel strains of Western Civilization: Judeo-Christian religious and Western Enlightenment Reason. These two strains of Western reasonable thought and religious faith were never united into national idea and national government until the 1776-1789 period; and now here we are, thank God.

The beauty of this American arrangement is that it can become universal, and not just Judeo-Christian.

"I can still believe in conservative political ideologies without being a Christian and have done so for years. Christianity likes to claim a foothold on conservatism, but I have noticed that many Christians are swinging into the liberal arena now because liberalism today appears to be more along the Christian teachings."

Mark, I agree with you completely here; and politically speaking you and I may be much closer to each other than I am to the leftist Christians. European Socialism and Communism have some of their collectivist roots in Medieval Christianity - with such violent groups as the Cathars, Taborites and the Anabaptists. These collectivist Christians actually got the jump on Karl Marx. We don't disagree on everything.

http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/a_pdfs/newslet/preface/03pref.pdf

http://www.robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevich/001SocialistPhenomenon.html

A list of quotations proving that most of the Founders believed in God is still not an answer to the question that I raised, nor to its implications. Moreover, the Founder's belief in God or a Creator and a belief in either biblical literalism or in the view that that God was the Christian (or Judeo-Christian) God are different. In evidence, though, I'd suggest considering the following other quotations, also from our Founders.

"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.

". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."

Those three are from John Adams.

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."

Those three are from James Madison.

If these do not serve to convince, perhaps article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, signed on Nov 4, 1796 (during Washington's presidency) and subsequently ratified by the Senate, and printed in the newspapers of the time. To whit...

"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."

http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html

Until you can address these quotations, an argument that the United States has and requires a religious justification is false. As noted, and acknowledged, the Founders generally believed in God, most were at least nominally Christian, and all believed that morality was essential for the long-term sucess of the country. They were not Biblical literalists, nor evangelical Christians, but men of the Enlightenment for whom Reason was of paramount importance.

As to Dostoyevsky's quotation, it is merely an assertion and an opinion, and proves nothing.

gee...are we going to quote famous people instumental with building our nation?

i can do that:

"The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma."

- Abraham Lincoln, American president (1809-1865).

"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life, I absenteed myself from Christian assemblies."

"Lighthouses are more helpful then churches."

-Benjamin Franklin, American Founding Father, author, and inventor

James Madison, American president and political theorist (1751-1836).
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, Famous Atheist & Quotessuperstition, bigotry, and persecution."
"In no instance have . . . the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people."
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."

"What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy."

During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."

John Adams, U.S. President, Founding Father of the United States

"Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of other trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days?"

"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."

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

"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose. " - Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813

"The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."

"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity." -Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782.

"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors." -Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823

"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies."

"I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature."

"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man."

"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

- Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat

remember, our country was NOT formed by christians alone. it's a lie that modern day christians attempt to make people believe that our founding fathers created america based on what "god" wanted.

Anthony,
Considering all the quotations and ideas of our founding fathers here published I'd say that the founders had a certain hostility to some of the Christian churches and Christian clergy based on Christian European persecutions of religious minorities during Medieval and Renaissance times.

So, our founders separated church from state, but they were not hostile to God. Divine human rights and rational government to secure Divine human rights is purely American - just as set forth in the Declaration of Independence - "an expression of the American mind."

Fyodor Dostoyevsky's conclusion matched that of our founding fathers; and I've decided to stick with them in this regard, and not with you.

Thank you, Mr Appleseed, for your passionate, sincere and coherent defense of God's role in America's blessed history - so far, anyway.

One important question I have learned to ask myself: If you were wrong, would you want to know?

Mr Abby, in your refutation, free of any supporting evidence, you merely say you don't buy into the evidence contrary to your position on relative bodycounts: Christian and atheist. It's certainly a popular argument in our troubled and secular times, often among those who have lost confidence in our Western culture and its Judeo-Christian underpinnings. I challenge you to support your thesis.

But then this may be a moot point if our future lies in the hands of Islamists, who have the concept of spilling the blood of others built into their Koranic manifesto.

Mr Abby, Christians believe that honoring God is often the cause of the blessings that follow. The prosperity and strength that America has enjoyed may have flowed from the honoring of the Lord built intrinsically into our Constitution and other democratic institutions. God honors those who honor and serve Him. Your contention that Christians believe that God has chosen the USA over other nations is a misunderstanding.

Atheism vs. belief in God: could there be a more important question? Mr Abby, if you were wrong, would you want to know?

Mark Abby says that this is a quote from Abraham Lincoln:

"The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma."

This is a quote that you can find on atheist websites, but these are not the words of Abraham Lincoln; so you've foisted false information here, and I caught you. Get your facts straight before you post comments here.

If you go to the University of Michigan online Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln you will not find that quote.

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=lincoln&cc=lincoln&type=simple&rgn=full+text&q1=The+Bible+is+not+my+book+nor+Christianity+my+profession&cite1=&cite1restrict=author&cite2=&cite2restrict=author&singlegenre=All&Submit=Search

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=lincoln&cc=lincoln&type=simple&rgn=full+text&q1=The+Bible+is+not+my+Book+and+Christianity+is+not+my+religion&cite1=&cite1restrict=author&cite2=&cite2restrict=author&singlegenre=All&Submit=Search

This is the actual quote of Abraham Lincoln regarding the Bible, and you will find it at the University of Michigan Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln.

In regard to this Great Book, I have but to say, it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Saviour gave to the world was communicated through this book. But for it we could not know right from wrong. All things most desirable for man's welfare, here and hereafter, are to be found portrayed in it. To you I return my most sincere thanks for the very elegant copy of the great Book of God which you present." Abraham Lincoln

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=lincoln;cc=lincoln;type=simple;rgn=div1;q1=In%20regard%20to%20this%20great%20book;singlegenre=All;view=text;subview=detail;sort=occur;idno=lincoln7;node=lincoln7%3A1184

Mark,
Here are some more actual words and ideas of Abraham Lincoln. Our founders were believers in the Biblical God, but as I can tell, no one here is asserting that they were all Orthodox Christians.

"God must love the common man, he made so many of them." Abraham Lincoln

"Surely God would not have created such a being as man, with an ability to grasp the infinite, to exist only for a day! No, no, man was made for immortality." Abraham Lincoln

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/abraham_lincoln.html

"We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven; we have grown in numbers, wealth, and power as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us, and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to fell the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us." Abraham Lincoln

"I have been driven many times upon my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go. My own wisdom, and that of all about me, seemed insufficient for that day." Abraham Lincoln

http://www.earstohear.net/Heritage/quotes.html

"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate---we can not consecrate---we can not hallow---this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us---that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion---that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain---that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom---and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Abraham Lincoln

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=lincoln;cc=lincoln;type=simple;rgn=div1;q1=nation%20under%20god;singlegenre=All;view=text;subview=detail;sort=occur;idno=lincoln7;node=lincoln7%3A40

Separation of church and state does not mean separation of God and state.

Mark,
You confuse the hostility that many of our founding fathers had for some Christian clerics and some Christian churches with hostility to God. The former is true, and for good reason; but the latter is a lie.

John Adams:

"The Hebrews have done more to civilize men than any other nation. If I were an atheist, and believed blind eternal fate, I should still believe that fate had ordained the Jews to be the most essential instrument for civilizing the nations." John Adams

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_adams.html

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other." John Adams

http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/John_Adams/

"That they call to mind our numerous offense against the Most High God, confess them before Him with the sincerest penitence, implore His pardoning mercy, through the Great Mediator and Redeemer, for our past transgressions, and that through the grace of His Holy Spirit, we may be disposed and enable to yield a more suitable obedience to His righteous requisitions in time to come." John Adams - Proclamation of a National Day of Fasting and Prayer, March 6, 1799

"It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue." John Adams

"The safety and prosperity of nations ultimately and essentially depend on the protection and blessing of Almighty God." John Adams

http://www.earstohear.net/Heritage/quotes.html

Benjamin Franklin:

"I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs the affairs of men. And if the sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that 'except the Lord builds the House, they labor in vain who build it." Benjamin Franklin

http://www.flipsideshow.com/Documents/Founding%20Fathers%20Faith%20Quotes.htm

Thomas Jefferson:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." Thomas Jefferson

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

"Almighty God hath created the mind free. All attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens . . . are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion." Thomas Jefferson

""God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" Thomas Jefferson

http://www.monticello.org/reports/quotes/memorial.html

James Madison:

"The eyes of all should be turned to that Almighty Power, in whose hands are the welfare and the destiny of nations" James Madison

http://www.heritage.org/research/americanfoundingandhistory/wm375.cfm

"Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe." James Madison

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/memorial.htm

Abraham Lincoln:

"That I am not a member of any Christian church is true; but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion in general, or of any denomination of Christians in particular....I do not think I could myself be brought to support a man for office whom I knew to be an open enemy of, or scoffer at, religion." Abraham Lincoln

"It is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God" Abraham Lincoln

http://www.greatamericanhistory.net/lincolnsfaith.htm

Johnny,
If you'll read what I've written, you'll see that I agree with you about the Founders not being atheists. If you'll read what they wrote, you'll see that whatever their individual belief in the existence of God, the country was not founded on Christian beliefs nor through specific reference to a particular interpretation of God, and that their disagreement was not with specific religious practices but with a religious mentality that elevated faith over reason, evidence, and knowledge.

I just don't see how you can get past explicit statements by Adams, Jefferson and Madison on this point, nor the equally explicit statement in the Treaty of Tripoli. None of the Founding documents make specific provision for a religious interpretation and the entire record of the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention, the ratification debates and the Federalist papers do not contain religious arguments. People are entitled to their opinions, but not their own facts.

The Founders appealed to men's minds. If they also believed that the universe had a creator and that our basic nature (and thus rights) came from that, the difference between that and a belief in Jesus Christ et al is enormous. Deism flows from the Founder's assumption, not any particular religion, and the teachings of any particular religion have to stand on their merits. The uniquely American idea in this context is to unite a belief in an underlying order to the universe (created by a single creator - God if you will) and man's ability to reason and thus understand and use that universe for his ends. Our rights come from the facts of that order, not because God said we had them. In fact, I would ask you to cite a single passage in the Bible, Old or New Testament, that contains a statement of political philosophy that mirrors our country's ideas explicitly. A belief in God does not automatically lead to our country's ideas. Men had to work that out, and other men, working with the same belief, have reached wholly opposite conclusions. If our views are superior to theirs, it must be because of rational reasons, not more fervent belief.

I also find it astonishing that you seem to think it impossible to provide a rational basis for our country's founding ideas, nor that you seem to have no interest in doing so. That is wholly at odds with the very explicit statements of the Founders. Are you saying that a rational argument that reaches the same conclusions would be meaningless??

There is also a large difference between a belief in God and a belief in a particular religion. The founding documents of every single religion, including that of Christianity, were written by men and applied by men. The moment anyone claims divine authorship, the debate moves beyond the realm of reason. That's why religious wars are so violent. And, that's something the Founders also understood. All debates had remain grounded in concepts that anyone could grasp.

John Quincy Adams wrote, "Our Constitution is written for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other."

Without the moral restraint of the masses, stemming almost completely from religion, our system of governance is incapable of maintaining peace and order.

However, despite the Herculean efforts of the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the People's Democratic Party, and the CPUSA, to wipe out religious expression and belief, America remains a nation of believers.

Anthony,
First of all, as a Christian, I'm the first to agree with you that the United States is not officially based on the Christian religion. The United States is, however, built upon Biblical Judeo-Christian Values; and those values are reflected in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights. Judeo-Christian Values are based both on the compatibility of both faith and reason, whereas Jewish and Christian theology is based primarily on faith. Our founders put Judeo-Christian religious values, i.e.: both faith and reason, into our government; but not faith above reason. As I commented earlier, which you may have missed, the Declaration of Independence is a combination of both faith and reason; and therefore without some degree of Biblical religious faith you can't adhere to the American Declaration of Independence; "an expression of the American mind" as Thomas Jefferson said of it.

As for our inalienable God-given human rights, I'm firmly with Thomas Jefferson and all the other founders and you are not. Your disagreement is not so much with me as is with Thomas Jefferson and the other founders. Our founding fathers appealed to our minds and our faith - not just our minds. Our sacred rights to life, liberty and creative pursuit of happiness will not last unless we acknowledge that our human rights come from a source higher than our reasoning minds and human government. The problem with human reason is that it can, and as history shows, always is corrupted by human evil; and human evil, with the aid of reason, will destroy human life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Reason alone is just not a good enough guide in building a just society, or for that matter, in building a good family.

That all men are created equal is self-evident through human reason, but it also derives implicitly from the Bible: "So God created man in His own image". The right to life is explicitly stated in the Bible: "Thou shall not murder." The right to liberty is inferred from the Exodus story and from the New Testament passage: "Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." The right to pursue happiness is explicitly stated in Genesis: "Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it...""

In any event, our founding fathers believed that our sacred human rights are of Divine origin, and I'm with them. Not only were they right philosophically on this point, they were strong and brave enough to struggle for their God-given rights; and wise and rational enough to secure them with our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." Thomas Jefferson

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" Thomas Jefferson

http://www.monticello.org/reports/quotes/memorial.html

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_adams.html

"The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased." Alexander Hamilton

"Man is a reasoning rather than a reasonable animal." Alexander Hamilton

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/alexander_hamilton.html

As for the use of human reason in the development of human law and government, we are in partial agreement. I agree completely with you that human reason is a wonderful thing, and I see human reason and scientific advance as the result of the human mind being made in the image of God, the creator of reason. Irrationality goes against my religion, and I believe, like John Locke and Thomas Jefferson, that if something is unreasonable it is not true, and is therefore not from God. Anthony, you make a serious error if you believe that Judeo-Christian faith and reason are somehow incompatible; that notion would be seen as silly by John Locke, Isaac Newton, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton; and even by Albert Einstein:

"the doctrine of a personal G-d interfering with natural events could never be refuted... by science, for [it] can always take refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot." Albert Einstein

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/avi/shafran_einstein.php3

"The founding documents of every single religion, including that of Christianity, were written by men and applied by men. The moment anyone claims divine authorship, the debate moves beyond the realm of reason."

Anthony, this is not a matter of reason alone; it as a matter of which faith, and whether faith is allowed to join with reason. I understand you don't have faith in God or in the Bible; yours is an atheistic faith in conjunction with reason. Our founding fathers had Judeo-Christian faith in conjunction with reason; and I, along with most Americans, prefer the faith and reason of our founders; even if most of the founders and many Americans today are not Orthodox Christians. The faith and reasoning of our founding fathers was expressed succinctly in the Declaration of Independence, and that beautiful American combination of Judeo-Christian faith and reason has made the United States exceptional and successful. The founders separated church from state, but not the Biblical God from state. Some religions, it is sad to note, seem to be a combination of faith an irrationality, violence, subjugation and injustice; but not the Judeo-Christian faith of our founding fathers - their faith joined seamlessly with reason - and our great nation is the result.

George Washington:

"It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible." George Washington

"Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." George Washington

"Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour..." George Washington

http://www.americankernel.com/2005/11/whereas-it-is-duty-of-all-nations-to.htm

James Madison:

"The eyes of all should be turned to that Almighty Power, in whose hands are the welfare and the destiny of nations" James Madison

http://www.heritage.org/research/americanfoundingandhistory/wm375.cfm

"Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe." James Madison

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/memorial.htm

Thomas Jefferson:

"I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old..." Thomas Jefferson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_jefferson

Benjamin Franklin:

"I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs the affairs of men. And if the sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that 'except the Lord builds the House, they labor in vain who build it." Benjamín Franklin

http://www.flipsideshow.com/Documents/Founding%20Fathers%20Faith%20Quotes.htm

Abraham Lincoln:

"In regard to this Great Book, I have but to say, it is the best gift God has given to man.
All the good the Saviour gave to the world was communicated through this book. But for it we could not know right from wrong. All things most desirable for man's welfare, here and hereafter, are to be found portrayed in it. To you I return my most sincere thanks for the very elegant copy of the great Book of God which you present." Abraham Lincoln

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=lincoln;cc=lincoln;type=simple;rgn=div1;q1=in%20regard%20to%20this%20great%20book;singlegenre=All;view=text;subview=detail;sort=occur;idno=lincoln7;node=lincoln7%3A1184

Johnny,
Once again, we're talking past each other. How do you explain that the same Judeo-Christian tradition to which you referred was also used to justify slavery? How do you explain that the same principles a few hundred years before the founding of our country led to religious wars in Europe, and before that, to the Dark Ages? What specific part of the Bible speaks of representative government? Of inalienable individual rights? The Founders reasoned to those things, albeit from a philosophical view that encompassed a Creator? The people who did bad things in the name of religion also reasoned (if you will) to their conclusions, from the same principles.

You say that reason cannot be the foundation for morality. Why? Are there no rational reasons for not killing one another? For not controlling ourselves? For not treating other people decently? For making ourselves productive and self-reliant?

Where I think we part company is that many people who sincerely believe in a religious justification for either morality or government think, honestly enough, that the transcendent and absolute nature of this removes it from human tinkering. But, this is illusory. The religious principles in question are the product of human thought and application, and thus subject to error and abuse every bit as much as secular principles. Ultimately, there is no short-cut to either morality, freedom or good government: all require thought and action, and involve risk.

I choose to think through the principles in question on their merits. Any specific conclusion of our Founders has value only to the extent that it is true, not simply an expression of their views.

As a Canadian and "capital-O" Orthodox Christian, I find baffling the near worship many of you Americans offer your 'founding fathers'. How, ultimately, does their opinion about anything matter beyond your own borders -- other than when you need oil, that is?

As a Christian, there is only one appropriate response to this world: to die to it, to count yourself as nothing and to empty yourself in compassion for your fellow human beings in imitation of your gracious master. Where atrocities have been committed by Christians --whatever the numbers -- it is not because they were radical but because they were NOT radical! If they were true followers of Christ they would have done as he commands in Scripture and taken up the cross, not the sword. (Historical note: if you 'took up your cross', it was because you were about to be put on it.)
The way of the cross is the way of radical and kenotic (self-emptying) love. Period. Let others who do not profess Christ do what they will do. "Inalienable rights" are an illusion, which is why they are so often separated from the person who supposedly has them. Arguing about whether they came from man or from God is like arguing over whether the Easter bunny is sent by your Mom or the government. If we need an idea of 'rights' to keep us from tearing each other limb from limb (and we do), it only points to the sorry state of mankind. It is into this sorry state that Christians believe Christ came -- not to establish our 'rights', but to make us truly free by conquering death by his death. There is no real discussion to be had, since the above idea is either equivalent believing in fairies (or the Easter Bunny, for that matter) or it isn't. But the whole notion of rights is a red herring.

Following the overthrow of Communist rule in Russia, our media began calling the Communists "conservatives." Many American conservatives viewed the media's designation as a slap.

However, I fully recognized the validity of the label.

The Communists in Russia were, in fact, conservatives. They wished to preserve (or conserve) the legacy of the Bolshevik revolution.

The anti-communists, or Russian liberals, desired to undermine the Communist legacy and change Russia into a different nation all together.

Likewise, in America, conservatives wish to preserve (or conserve) the legacy of the American revolution.

It's the liberals in America who seek to undermine the American revolution and change America into a different country all together.

Russian liberal recognize the necessity of the church as a bulwark against the Bolsheviks returning to power.

American liberals, conversely, realize that most of those who stand against the desire to turn America into another Worker's Paradise are Christians.

Therefore, war has been declared upon religious symbols, the founding documents, and a Christian's right to free speech.

I am a conservative because of my faith. I am a Republican because I am a conservative. And I will never vote for an avowed Communist, no matter how good he looks in his empty suit, or how lofty his rhetoric.

Which is why I have no choice but to vote McCain.

Anthony,
Slavery was a violation of Judeo-Christian Values. American Judeo-Christian Values were the moral force behind the abolition of American slavery. Slavery violated the Judeo-Christian golden rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and slavery violated the self-evident truth that all men are created equal; so slavery violated both Judeo-Christian values and reason.

The religious wars of Europe were a violation of Judeo-Christian Values, and were the result of the corruption of Orthodox Christian Churches by political and economic power. I refer to this corruption of Christianity as the separation of God from church.

The idea for representative government derives from human reasoning, i.e.: the self-evident truth that all men are created equal; but, as you can see, this idea also contains the Judeo-Christian understanding that all men are created in the image of God, and therefore with a supernatural soul of infinite value; and thus there is self-evident equality of infinitely valuable individuals. The infinite value of all human life is a religious idea based on Biblical revelation and faith, and the corollary is inalienable individual human rights. How can human rights be inalienable if humans are of measurable value; that is if we are merely intelligent animals? The law of the jungle is what follows if we are mere animals; and this explains much of the brutal history of the human race; one big "Lord of the Flies." Do you as an atheist believe in the infinite value of human life?

Reason alone cannot be the foundation of morality and self-control because of the contaminating influence of human evil. Human evil becomes the usurper of human reason and leads us to treat other people indecently; to treat other people as animals, and not as individuals created in the image of God and with infinite value. Judeo-Christian religious principles are compliant with human reasoning but not the sole product of human reasoning. It is not always reasonable to tell the truth because, due to self-interest, the lie can be seen as rational; whereas the Judeo-Christian understanding is that truth is of infinite value. Do you as an atheist believe in the infinite value of truth? It is not always reasonable to love your neighbor or your enemy when they have treated you badly, and to hate them can be seen as rational. As an atheist do you require yourself at all times to love your neighbor as yourself, and also love your enemy? There is a Biblical injunction to hate and oppose evil. As an atheist, do you believe there is such a thing as human evil, and if so, do you hate evil? Do you agree that human evil can usurp love, truth and human reason?

I don't agree that certain core Judeo-Christian Values are subject to error. The infinite value of human life and the golden rule are not subject to error, and they are the basis for our inalienable rights to life and liberty; nor is the infinite value of truth, reason and human love subject to error; and so too the Judeo-Christian religious duty to hate evil. If you as an atheist also believe this, then I would say that much of our disagreement about God is irrelevant.

To mark & Anthony: the fundamental problem with allowing society or indeed - rational thought - to dictate morality is that you do come back to the problem of relativism. In Western culture, for example, we know murder is wrong, but what about some ancient cultures who practiced (and sometimes, still practice) cannibalism, infanticide, etc. How are we - as Western society - to say our morality is superior to them? For murder to be wrong, as it has been since time immemorial, it would have had to have superseded all other civilisations. There have been times in the past - as recently as last century - where murder was not always wrong. It is well documented that as early as 1940, Europe and the USA knew what Hitler was doing to the Jews, but no-one did anything. Great Britain & the USA only entered the war out of self-preservation, not any altruistic ideals. That is a very clear example of murder (and by extension, morality) being relevant to the society at the time.

As far as atheism is concerned, if you are open to it, may I suggest reading the book 'Permission to Believe' by Lawrence Kelemen? The fundamental position of the book is that atheism is not an intellectually sound position. Kelemen goes on to say that most 'atheists' - upon deep intellectual analysis - are merely agnostic. The premise of this theory is that it is impossible - unless you are G-d - to know all things and all people/beings that exist or have ever existed. Therefore it is almost impossible to 'know' there is no G-d in the same way that most religious monotheists believe that G-d exists but cannot know with 100% certainty.

Johnny,

I think human life has ultimate but not infinite value i.e. I do not hold the life of a Hitler or Stalin, or for that matter an ordinary murderer, to have any value once they have demonstrated their character. Accordingly, I would not and do not love my enemies. In my view, to take that literally is to surrender to and sanction evil. Ditto, turning the other cheek. I think this is the one life that we do have that I think justice matters, and why the guilty must be punished and evil fought. You seem to say the same when you point out the Biblical injunction to hate evil. How do you square that with the injunction about loving your enemy? "Love the sinner, hate the sin," is to my mind, wrong because the sinner commits the sin. They cannot be separated without letting the sinner off the hook.

As to my neighbor, I will follow the Golden Rule and give him the benefit of the doubt unless by his actions he proves to deserve otherwise. To me, that is simple justice. I am not required to love someone to treat them with dignity and respect. Neither am I required to hate them to treat them with justice.

Likewise, I do believe in the value of truth, truth being the recognition of reality in its full context i.e. all facts considered. I think lying is wrong because you can't fake the nature of reality and that to try to do so is self-defeating. Would I tell the truth to a terrorist, Nazi or communist who was asking me for information that would destroy what I consider good? No. If telling the truth in a particular instance actually contributes to the destruction of values (including those values that both a theist and an atheist would agree upon), then I would consider it immoral to tell the truth in such a situation. I do not consider this to be relativism but rather the appropriate application of absolute moral principles. In any ordinary situation, honesty is the best policy.

I will certainly acknowledge that one important, very important, contribution Judeo-Christianity made to liberty was its view of the imporance and the uniqueness of the individual human. This was something that the Greeks and Romans, amongst others, missed entirely. I can, however, reach that conclusion rationally, too. In my view, it is self-evident that even if man is characterized as merely an intelligent animal, it is the fact of his intelligence, his reason, his capacity for higher order thought and emotion that separates him completely from every other living thing on the planet and makes him profoundly special.

Mark,

My point is that all human behavior, morality, laws, social customs and such ultimately result from human action and human thought. Since no human is omniscient nor infallible, errors are going to be made. I would consider our views superior to those of ancient civilizations, generally, and could argue such rationally.

Very few people in our country (perhaps no more than 5%) describe themselves as atheists. People with radically non-conservative views (i.e. liberals) believe in God and the Judeo-Christian values. Religion played a strong role in the Progressive movement. That's why I don't see a belief in God as necessarily guaranteeing the sort of society and morality that most religious conservatives claim to want.

I will look into Keleman's book.

Jenny Hainsworth wrote: "If they were true followers of Christ they would have done as he commands in Scripture and taken up the cross, not the sword."

May I remind her, as a small-o orthodox Christian, that Jesus Himself said, "Believe not that I come to bring peace, but a sword. I come to set a man against his father, a mother against her daughter..."

As Christians, let us not be so heavenly minded that we are no earthly good. Every Christian has a ministry from the moment he or she is called to accept Christ.

We Yanks revere our founding fathers because they created a republic with the idea that the government that governs least governs best.

We had to fight the English, at the time, the world's only superpower, and we Yanks prevailed (by the grace of God).

Might I be so impolitic to suggest that Canada exists as it does today because Canadians did not have their own Washingtons, Jeffersons, or Franklins. No surprise, therefore, that your kangaroo courts...er, Human Rights Commissions, have declared war on Christianity.

What shall Canadians do as their country slides inexorably into Politically Correct Dictatorship?

I suspect nothing.

Yours is truly not a revolutionary society which may explain your lack of understanding ours.

And please remember the reason the sun never set on the British Empire is because not even God Himself can trust an Englishman in the dark.

Anthony,
I believe you are wrong not to accept the infinite value of human life, but based on your analysis I'll modify my statement on the value of truth. It is better to say that truth is of infinite value unless it becomes the enemy of human life; as would be in the case where a Nazi Gestapo agent asked the question: "Is there a Jewish family hiding around here?" Better to lie, and if necessary die, than tell the truth in instances like this. And this example also points out that human reason is, by its self, incapable of leading men to choose right over wrong, because self-interest will lead most to rationally tell the truth in such circumstances; and thereby allow human evil to usurp human reason.

As to the value of life for Adolph Hitler or Joseph Stalin, I'll agree that it is up to us to judge the value of their bodily life when confronted with their evil; and I'll agree that their bodily life had no value - they deserved to be killed for their evil, primarily as a means of self-defense for the innocent. As far as the infinite value of their eternal souls, that is only for God to judge; but if you read the story of Pharaoh in the Old Testament, it is clear that God sometimes judges the souls of men before they leave this earth. It is my belief that evil men like Pharaoh, Genghis Khan, Adolph Hitler, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, etc., etc., by their evil actions, place their bodies under our judgment and their souls under God's judgment.

Jesus' command to turn the other cheek was not a sanction of evil, that command only refers to refraining from physically striking back in social situations when an insult is delivered; and it is not referring to just self-defense when innocent life is threatened by evil. I have no trouble squaring the Biblical injunctions to hate evil and to love your enemy. When my father destroyed the life of his enemies on the Island of Saipan on July 7, 1944, he judged and then destroyed their bodies and their capacity for human evil, but I don't believe he hated their eternal souls. My father understood that God would judge their souls, and that is the lesson he taught me; and I believe it is a rational and just way of squaring the two Biblical injunctions.

Anthony,
I believe some of what we disagree on could actually be a matter of semantics. It appears to me, even though I'm an unorthodox Christian and you are an atheist, we have much in common; certainly more in common than the Marxist/Socialist Jews and Christians on the American left.

I'm linking you to two references on Socialism that you might enjoy reading; here you will discover more about the medieval Christian roots of Socialism and Communism. Some of these Christians actually got the jump on the atheists Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin and Mao Zedong; but I don't believe they murdered nearly as many, even on a percentage basis.

http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/a_pdfs/newslet/preface/03pref.pdf

http://www.robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevich/001SocialistPhenomenon.html

Mark,

Almost all those quotes from the founders were not anti-Christian, but statements directly lamenting corruption in the bureaucracy and traditions of churches. Essentially, these are pleas for reform by CHRISTIANS, not statements against Christianity. Only Jefferson was not a mainstream Christian, and even his beliefs were fluid all the way to his death.

With all the bantering about the Constitution and christianity, the blog has gone off on a series of rabbit trails. Interesting to read, as they were put up by well informed people.

However, did you notice the part in the article where Klinghoffer referred to a couple sections regarding immigration? He conviently did not list the passages where a naturalization process is detailed and the difficulties of life if these processes are short circuited. (Historically during the reconstruction of Jerusalem in the Post-Babylonian era).

when I think of the Bible and a passage"I will bless the nation that calls me their lord" I know that is why the USA is so blessed with so many riches..remember George Washington and his faith..you can or not believe in the Boble but you cannot deny the richness of this country..a view I see is after 9/11 the city of new york and all people of nation got in prayer and all religions got involved while in Katrina people rioted turned angry towards God and goverment and look to this day is not "together" yes prayer does help and bonds of
fellow christianity does help..

As a Christian it amazes me how "conservative" Christians not only preach at atheists, but down right "club 'em" over the head with their point of view.

Christianity ain't about good moral conduct. Any fool, religious or otherwise, can do that. I do agree however, that one who does not believe in a "Supreme Lawgiver" is hard pressed to justify his definition of right and wrong, good and evil, etc.

But let me remind y'all that you can give all the observable evidence and arguments you want. Don't assume it's going to convert any one. Even the majority of folks who saw Jesus Himself perform miracles, including raising Lazarus from the dead, did not believe Him to be the Messiah. And they were there. Like St. Seraphim of Sarov said, "A philosophical argument will win few souls, if any. Acquire the Holy Spirit and win souls by the thousands."