From watching the video, it looks like Jon Stewart may have slightly changed his views about how secularists have attempted to eliminate the Christian Nation thesis. It wasn't as secular as liberals claim. I would add from the evidence we have, the United States was formed--not now--a Christian nation in every part of its structure--the courts, government departments (see John Adams' Inaugural Address) and religiously. However, I disagree with David on two points he makes; one, Unitarians in the 18th century did not believe in the Trinity, two, no person, city, state, or government should have the freedom to practice Sharia Law. By reading the koran and hadith, a high schooler could see it's true intent. The Founding Fathers would outlaw Islam--in light of the Canada Act--because it violates the Laws of Nature's God; with the goal to enslave the planet.
6 comments:
Hey OFT-
I thought I's stop by your site after Blogger went down and lost our exchanges at Fea's place.
First, a few thoughts in agreement with Barton.
As a conservative, I feel his concern about the condition of our nation. I share his belief in limited, constitutional government and his charge that activist judges and liberal politicians have misconstrued the Constitution and our founding principles.
I believe that this country once was (and is in many ways still) a Christian nation. (I probably disagree on the extent of that idea—I'll bring that up later).
And I believe that most of our most pressing social and political problems are at root moral problems.
That said,
I disagree with his solution. From some pieces at Wallbuilders and interviews, he seems to believe that if we reintroduce prayer, remove evolution, and teach students about Christian founders that this will restore us to being the Christian nation that we once were. As I posted at Fea's place, I believe this is a dubious educational theory resembling the equally dubious liberal theory that if we drag out the achievements of obscure women and minorities in history class, this will enhance the self-esteem of female and minority students and result in better academic performance.
Moreover, I believe his charge that historians are complicit in bringing about the more secular tone to our society is bogus. As Fea noted in his analysis of Barton's appearance, Barton seems unaware of the vast literature on American religious history. If all he did was speak before churches about lesser known evangelicals and their contributions to our founding or even their non-political achievements (starting bible colleges, missionary societies, etc.) he would be engaging in a valid educational mission. But he implies that more evangelical founders are deliberately snubbed. I believe he is setting up a strawman in order to advance his educational mission as described above.
Finally, I think often he overreaches in his claims regarding the Christian beliefs of some founders or the influence of distinctively Christian or biblical ideas.
Ill check back later to see where we might agree and go from there. I hope to read more time at your interesting blod. Right now I must go to work to do my part in paying down the national debt.
Hey Lee,
My blog is having problems as well.
Do a search on Timothy Dwight on my blog. He, and Jedidiah Morse were the leaders of the New Light movement in the late 18th Century. The New Light Calvinists believed Christian practices produced nobel behavior, which I agree with. I believe there is a correlation with prayer and blessing. That notion is on every page in the Bible. God hears our prayers, and as Psalm 33 says, "any nation can follow God."
I don't know how enhancing self esteem in class is beneficial, but telling the truth about our framers is a good place to start.
You wrote: But he implies that more evangelical founders are deliberately snubbed
Take a gander into this blog, and you will find many Evangelical framers--and there are many--the school system ignores. One of which is Elias Boudinot, senior to Madison and Jefferson, Chairman of the Committee that framed the Bill of Rights.
Yes, Barton makes mistakes. Using that letter from John Adams is blatantly wrong, but as I note, that letter has nothing to do with the Christian Nation thesis. He has made some other mistakes as well; just as I have.
At http://www.philipvickersfithian.com/search/label/David%20Barton%20on%20the%20Daily%20Show
John Fea posted, "5:50: Barton pushes this federalist argument ("its a states issue") a bit too far. I am not constitutional scholar, but didn't the 14th amendment (1868) set a precedent for the Federal government to intervene in the affairs of the states in order enforce the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The second clause of the fourteenth amendment states: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Yet in WAS AMERICA FOUNDED AS A CHRISTIAN NATION? Fea argues the opposite position on pages 160-162.
Is Fea not contradicting himself?
Anonymous,
From the records of the 14th amendment, we know there was no departure from the principles of the Constiution. We know this because the Father of the 14th Amendment, Senator Bingham said so in the debates.
That amendment was strictly about giving recently freed blacks the rights as citizens and the courts have now perverted the entire amendment. Read on this blog what John Marshall wrote about applying the Bill of Rights to the States.
He said he couldn't apply ONE right to the States. The courts are as corrupt and negligent as all hell.
Thank you, OFT.
But I'm unable to locate the relevant post(s) through your search engine. Would you please post a link? Thank you.
Post a Comment