I suppose if you take everything at face value and fail to see everything is
based on military strategy then I guess I understand your confusion.  We are
in Iraq because we have to get out of Saudi Arabia and we need a military
launch pad in the region to maintain some semblance of stability in the
production of fuel for the rest of the world.  Having Saddam pull the short
straw was a no brainer.  We continue to buy oil because if we didn't the
world economy would collapse and www3 would begin.  It is nothing more than
a wealth redistribution system.  "Food for Oil" on a much grander scale if
you will (and just as corrupt).

Same for China.  We are at war with China... not a hot or cold war, a green
war.  We can not win traditionally so we are taking the Ron Reagan approach.
We are compromising their will as a nation by infecting them with
Capitalism.  As soon as we help them grow a middle class, we will have the
necessary tools in place INSIDE the country to overthrow the existing
COMMUNIST government.

Same for social security.  SS is nothing more than socialism with lipstick
on.  Government is big, dumb, and slow.  It's only most dangerous when it
implements something new because the true implications are rarely known.
Once something is in place, the parasites that feed on it will NEVER let the
core elements change.  It becomes the evil we know.

-john


-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 12:29 PM
To: Vortex
Subject: Role of God in government


It is obvious that several contributors to Vortex hold very strong
opinions about the Christian religion. It is also obvious that such
opinions are shaping national policy in ways that are not beneficial to
the general population.  We went to war based on the lie that Iraq had
WMD, the social security system is being changed based on several lies,
we send our work overseas based on the lie that this is good for our
economy, we now have the largest debt of any nation at any time in
history based on a lie that this does not matter, and now the
fundamental relationship between religion and government is being
changed based on a lie.  I'm interested to know how people who support
the present government justify this approach and how this tendency to
lie squares with their understanding of the Christian religion. If a
person supports obvious lies, how can anything they say be trusted?

Regards,
Ed Storms


Our Godless Constitution

WASHINGTON, Feb. 6, 2005



Church And State Voters


  (Photo: AP / CBS)



Our nation was founded not on Christian principles but on Enlightenment
ones. God only entered the picture as a very minor player, and Jesus
Christ was conspicuously absent.


(The Nation) This column from The Nation was written by Brooke Allen. It
is hard to believe that George Bush has ever read the works of George
Orwell, but he seems, somehow, to have grasped a few Orwellian precepts.
The lesson the President has learned best -- and certainly the one that
has been the most useful to him -- is the axiom that if you repeat a lie
often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administration's
current favorites is the whopper about America having been founded on
Christian principles. Our nation was founded not on Christian principles
but on Enlightenment ones. God only entered the picture as a very minor
player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent.

Our Constitution makes no mention whatever of God. The omission was too
obvious to have been anything but deliberate, in spite of Alexander
Hamilton's flippant responses when asked about it: According to one
account, he said that the new nation was not in need of "foreign aid";
according to another, he simply said "we forgot." But as Hamilton's
biographer Ron Chernow points out, Hamilton never forgot anything important.

In the eighty-five essays that make up The Federalist, God is mentioned
only twice (both times by Madison, who uses the word, as Gore Vidal has
remarked, in the "only Heaven knows" sense). In the Declaration of
Independence, He gets two brief nods: a reference to "the Laws of Nature
and Nature's God," and the famous line about men being "endowed by their
Creator with certain inalienable rights." More blatant official
references to a deity date from long after the founding period: "In God
We Trust" did not appear on our coinage until the Civil War, and "under
God" was introduced into the Pledge of Allegiance during the McCarthy
hysteria in 1954 [see Elisabeth Sifton, "The Battle Over the Pledge,"
April 5, 2004].

In 1797 our government concluded a "Treaty of Peace and Friendship
between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of
Tripoli, or Barbary," now known simply as the Treaty of Tripoli. Article
11 of the treaty contains these words:

"As the Government of the United States... 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."

This document was endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and
President John Adams. It was then sent to the Senate for ratification;
the vote was unanimous. It is worth pointing out that although this was
the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it was
only the third unanimous vote in the Senate's history. There is no
record of debate or dissent. The text of the treaty was printed in full
in the Philadelphia Gazette and in two New York papers, but there were
no screams of outrage, as one might expect today.

The Founding Fathers were not religious men, and they fought hard to
erect, in Thomas Jefferson's words, "a wall of separation between church
and state." John Adams opined that if they were not restrained by legal
measures, Puritans -- the fundamentalists of their day -- would "whip
and crop, and pillory and roast." The historical epoch had afforded
these men ample opportunity to observe the corruption to which
established priesthoods were liable, as well as "the impious presumption
of legislators and rulers," as Jefferson wrote, "civil as well as
ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men,
have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own
opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as
such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and
maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and
through all time."

If we define a Christian as a person who believes in the divinity of
Jesus Christ, then it is safe to say that some of the key Founding
Fathers were not Christians at all. Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson
and Tom Paine were deists -- that is, they believed in one Supreme Being
but rejected revelation and all the supernatural elements of the
Christian Church; the word of the Creator, they believed, could best be
read in Nature. John Adams was a professed liberal Unitarian, but he,
too, in his private correspondence seems more deist than Christian.

George Washington and James Madison also leaned toward deism, although
neither took much interest in religious matters. Madison believed that
"religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for
every noble enterprize." He spoke of the "almost fifteen centuries"
during which Christianity had 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." If Washington mentioned the Almighty in a public address,
as he occasionally did, he was careful to refer to Him not as "God" but
with some nondenominational moniker like "Great Author" or "Almighty
Being." It is interesting to note that the Father of our Country spoke
no words of a religious nature on his deathbed, although fully aware
that he was dying, and did not ask for a man of God to be present; his
last act was to take his own pulse, the consummate gesture of a creature
of the age of scientific rationalism.

Tom Paine, a polemicist rather than a politician, could afford to be
perfectly honest about his religious beliefs, which were baldly deist in
the tradition of Voltaire: "I believe in one God, and no more; and I
hope for happiness beyond this life.... I do not believe in the creed
professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek
church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any
church that I know of. My own mind is my own church." This is how he
opened The Age of Reason, his virulent attack on Christianity. In it he
railed against the "obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the
cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness" of the
Old Testament, "a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and
brutalize mankind." The New Testament is less brutalizing but more
absurd, the story of Christ's divine genesis a "fable, which for
absurdity and extravagance is not exceeded by any thing that is to be
found in the mythology of the ancients." He held the idea of the
Resurrection in especial ridicule: Indeed, "the wretched contrivance
with which this latter part is told, exceeds every thing that went
before it." Paine was careful to contrast the tortuous twists of
theology with the pure clarity of deism. "The true deist has but one
Deity; and his religion consists in contemplating the power, wisdom, and
benignity of the Deity in his works, and in endeavoring to imitate him
in every thing moral, scientifical, and mechanical."

Paine's rhetoric was so fervent that he was inevitably branded an
atheist. Men like Franklin, Adams and Jefferson could not risk being
tarred with that brush, and in fact Jefferson got into a good deal of
trouble for continuing his friendship with Paine and entertaining him at
Monticello. These statesmen had to be far more circumspect than the
turbulent Paine, yet if we examine their beliefs it is all but
impossible to see just how theirs differed from his.

Franklin was the oldest of the Founding Fathers. He was also the most
worldly and sophisticated, and was well aware of the Machiavellian
principle that if one aspires to influence the masses, one must at least
profess religious sentiments. By his own definition he was a deist,
although one French acquaintance claimed that "our free-thinkers have
adroitly sounded him on his religion, and they maintain that they have
discovered he is one of their own, that is that he has none at all." If
he did have a religion, it was strictly utilitarian: As his biographer
Gordon Wood has said, "He praised religion for whatever moral effects it
had, but for little else." Divine revelation, Franklin freely admitted,
had "no weight with me," and the covenant of grace seemed
"unintelligible" and "not beneficial." As for the pious hypocrites who
have ever controlled nations, "A man compounded of law and gospel is
able to cheat a whole country with his religion and then destroy them
under color of law" -- a comment we should carefully consider at this
turning point in the history of our Republic.

Here is Franklin's considered summary of his own beliefs, in response to
a query by Ezra Stiles, the president of Yale. He wrote it just six
weeks before his death at the age of 84.

"Here is my creed. I believe in one God, Creator of the universe. That
he governs it by his providence. That he ought to be worshipped. That
the most acceptable service we render to him is doing good to his other
children. That the soul of Man is immortal, and will be treated with
justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to
be the fundamental points in all sound religion, and I regard them as
you do in whatever sect I meet with them.

As for Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I
think his system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, the
best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has
received various corrupting changes, and I have, with most of the
present dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity; though it
is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and
think it needless to busy myself with now, when I expect soon an
opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble. I see no harm,
however, in its being believed, if that belief has the good consequence,
as it probably has, of making his doctrines more respected and better
observed, especially as I do not perceive that the Supreme takes it
amiss, by distinguishing the unbelievers in his government of the world
with any particular marks of his displeasure."

Jefferson thoroughly agreed with Franklin on the corruptions the
teachings of Jesus had undergone. "The metaphysical abstractions of
Athanasius, and the maniacal ravings of Calvin, tinctured plentifully
with the foggy dreams of Plato, have so loaded [Christianity] with
absurdities and incomprehensibilities" that it was almost impossible to
recapture "its native simplicity and purity." Like Paine, Jefferson felt
that the miracles claimed by the New Testament put an intolerable strain
on credulity. "The day will come," he predicted (wrongly, so far), "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 Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." The Revelation of St. John he
dismissed as "the ravings of a maniac."

Jefferson edited his own version of the New Testament, "The Life and
Morals of Jesus of Nazareth," in which he carefully deleted all the
miraculous passages from the works of the Evangelists. He intended it,
he said, as "a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to
say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." This was clearly a defense
against his many enemies, who hoped to blacken his reputation by
comparing him with the vile atheist Paine. His biographer Joseph Ellis
is undoubtedly correct, though, in seeing disingenuousness here: "If
[Jefferson] had been completely scrupulous, he would have described
himself as a deist who admired the ethical teachings of Jesus as a man
rather than as the son of God. (In modern-day parlance, he was a secular
humanist.)" In short, not a Christian at all.

The three accomplishments Jefferson was proudest of -- those that he
requested be put on his tombstone -- were the founding of the University
of Virginia and the authorship of the Declaration of Independence and
the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. The latter was a truly
radical document that would eventually influence the separation of
church and state in the U.S. Constitution; when it was passed by the
Virginia legislature in 1786, Jefferson rejoiced that there was finally
"freedom for the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mohammeden,
the Hindu and infidel of every denomination" -- note his respect, still
unusual today, for the sensibilities of the "infidel." The University of
Virginia was notable among early-American seats of higher education in
that it had no religious affiliation whatever. Jefferson even banned the
teaching of theology at the school.

If we were to speak of Jefferson in modern political categories, we
would have to admit that he was a pure libertarian, in religious as in
other matters. His real commitment (or lack thereof) to the teachings of
Jesus Christ is plain from a famous throwaway comment he made: "It does
me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It
neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." This raised plenty of
hackles when it got about, and Jefferson had to go to some pains to
restore his reputation as a good Christian. But one can only conclude,
with Ellis, that he was no Christian at all.

John Adams, though no more religious than Jefferson, had inherited the
fatalistic mindset of the Puritan culture in which he had grown up. He
personally endorsed the Enlightenment commitment to Reason but did not
share Jefferson's optimism about its future, writing to him, "I wish
that Superstition in Religion exciting Superstition in Polliticks... may
never blow up all your benevolent and phylanthropic Lucubrations," but
that "the History of all Ages is against you." As an old man he
observed, "Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been
upon the point of breaking out, 'This would be the best of all possible
worlds, if there were no religion in it!'" Speaking ex cathedra, as a
relic of the founding generation, he expressed his admiration for the
Roman system whereby every man could worship whom, what and how he
pleased. When his young listeners objected that this was paganism, Adams
replied that it was indeed, and laughed.

In their fascinating and eloquent valetudinarian correspondence, Adams
and Jefferson had a great deal to say about religion. Pressed by
Jefferson to define his personal creed, Adams replied that it was
"contained in four short words, 'Be just and good.'" Jefferson replied,
"The result of our fifty or sixty years of religious reading, in the
four words, 'Be just and good,' is that in which all our inquiries must
end; as the riddles of all priesthoods end in four more, 'ubi panis, ibi
deus.' What all agree in, is probably right. What no two agree in, most
probably wrong."

This was a clear reference to Voltaire's Reflections on Religion. As
Voltaire put it:

"There are no sects in geometry. One does not speak of a Euclidean, an
Archimedean. When the truth is evident, it is impossible for parties and
factions to arise... Well, to what dogma do all minds agree? To the
worship of a God, and to honesty. All the philosophers of the world who
have had a religion have said in all ages: 'There is a God, and one must
be just.' There, then, is the universal religion established in all ages
and throughout mankind. The point in which they all agree is therefore
true, and the systems through which they differ are therefore false."

Of course all these men knew, as all modern presidential candidates
know, that to admit to theological skepticism is political suicide.
During Jefferson's presidency a friend observed him on his way to
church, carrying a large prayer book. "You going to church, Mr. J,"
remarked the friend. "You do not believe a word in it." Jefferson didn't
exactly deny the charge. "Sir," he replied, "no nation has ever yet
existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian
religion is the best religion that has been given to man and I as chief
Magistrate of this nation am bound to give it the sanction of my
example. Good morning Sir."

Like Jefferson, every recent President has understood the necessity of
at least paying lip service to the piety of most American voters. All of
our leaders, Democrat and Republican, have attended church, and have
made very sure they are seen to do so. But there is a difference between
offering this gesture of respect for majority beliefs and manipulating
and pandering to the bigotry, prejudice and millennial fantasies of
Christian extremists. Though for public consumption the Founding Fathers
identified themselves as Christians, they were, at least by today's
standards, remarkably honest about their misgivings when it came to
theological doctrine, and religion in general came very low on the list
of their concerns and priorities -- always excepting, that is, their
determination to keep the new nation free from bondage to its rule.

By Brooke Allen
Reprinted with permission from the The Nation.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03-Feb-05


Reply via email to