Question about One of Dr. Paul's Statements...

[Duckman]

Nothing calls for America to be a Christian nation, just as NOTHING calls for it not to be.

Nothing perhaps except the fact that many key founding fathers (Jefferson, Madison, Paine, Ethan Allen, Franklin and Washington) were Deists, which is not Christianity. Or the fact that the constition explicitly forbids government preference or opression of a religion, and it was NOT specified that the religion had to be a form of Christianity to get such treatment. Or the fact that the constitition really does not contain reference to a god.

The intent was that the government NOT establish a "state religion", not be assured, via onerous laws, rules and regulations, to be FREE of Christianity. [Yet depictions of pagan art or god names are permitted.] Double standard? Agenda?

Well, I agree that the complete banning of religious symbology is unnecessary and unwarranted. Religious people should be free, as people with natural rights, to show their religious affiliations. I think Christmas is so divorced from Christianity that there is little reason for atheists to object to it. But just as depictions of Jesus and other religious symbology has artistic or historical value, other religious symbols such as the ten commandments in or on a courthouse may give the impression, I would argue, that decisions inside are going to be influenced by the Christian religion. If the ten commandments are shown in an artistic piece containing depictions of other religions, then it would not be objectionable to me. However, I don't have much of an objection to the former either and I think the intolerance many atheists have towards religious displays is not in the spirit of a free nation.

 

[bygone]

Um, no.

He got that from the work of the French Baron de Montesquieu, Charles II , who wrote the The Spirit of the Laws. Look it up.

The Isiah hypothesis is false due to the fact that it gives three jobs to one person, God: King, Lawmaker, and Judge.

I don't see any office in America where one office contains all three of those roles, nor where we have any king anywhere in the U.S.

It was the Baron Montesquieu that first proposed the idea of separating these functions of government to independent and equal branches.

Rather than hijack the thread to argue this paticular point, I will let it pass. You may very well be right, but it matters not in the larger picture of the point.

The point is there was considerable influence of religous belief in the creation of both documents. I would think that the reference to God is implied by the ideas therein many times.

I know that many see religion as an evil. It can be used for evil, but that is not its only purpose. A great many people during that time believed in God, even many of those who had a part in forming these documents. You need look no further than the words these men have left behind that we quote them on today to find numerous references to their belief.

While Madison may be a poor example, I think you can make the case of implied reference easily.

As I said before not all of them believed in God. Nor am I advocating a combination of church and state. I am merely saying that the Dr. has a point, even if he stated it in a way that isn't easy to understand.

 

[bygone]

Nothing perhaps except the fact that many key founding fathers (Jefferson, Madison, Paine, Ethan Allen, Franklin and Washington) were Deists, which is not Christianity. Or the fact that the constition explicitly forbids government preference or opression of a religion, and it was NOT specified that the religion had to be a form of Christianity to get such treatment. Or the fact that the constitition really does not contain reference to a god.

This is an excellent point, and I would add:

Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God

It would be different if he had said "replete with references to Christianity". I too often mix "religion" with "God" in my words, forgive that if you took that meaning from my words earlier.