Home > Community Lounge > Politics > Santorum: Separation Of Church And State 'Makes Me Want To Throw Up'

Santorum: Separation Of Church And State 'Makes Me Want To Throw Up'

  1. Rick Santorum on Sunday took on separation of church and state.

    "I don't believe in an America where the separation of church and state are absolute," he told 'This Week' host George Stephanopoulos. "The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/26/santorum-church-and-state_n_1302246.html
     
  2. Santorum should be more concerned about separation of brain and mouth. And the lack of separation of foot and mouth.
     
  3. The only good thing about Rick Santorum is that he has a chance of stealing Michigan from Romney, which would just power up the spotlight on Mittens' shortcomings. "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt." What a douchebag.
     
  4. Yes, wasn't that a delight? And it's not going away.
     
  5. I agree that if they let the city of Detroit go bankrupt it would help it recover better.......oh, BTW same for the auto companies.

    Wait until gas hits $4-$5, GM will be in trouble again.
     
  6. Santorum is correct, the founding fathers had no intention of separating Religion from Government, what they didn't want was for Religion to be mandated or regulated by Government. In essence protecting Religion for Government, not the other way around as we currently misinterpret.

    You can spin all the agnostic, atheistic crap you want, if anyone would just do some genuine investigation into the thoughts and beliefs of the founding fathers, besides the cursory modern-day revisionist spin, they would find a group of deeply religious "Christian" patriots. Their Judea-Christian beliefs permeate their writings and are seen woven through our establishing documents.

    Let the God hating, atheistic rebuttals begin............
     
  7. Have you met that Muslim judge who said it was OK to beat up someone walking around in a zombie Mohammed suit?
    I'm sure that's not what you had in mind, but you know, that First Amendment was put there for a reason, one that neither you nor that judge seem to have the first clue about.
     
  8. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.html
    The Christian Nation Myth
    Fundamentalist Christians are currently working overtime to convince the American public that the founding fathers intended to establish this country on "biblical principles," but history simply does not support their view. The men mentioned above and others who were instrumental in the founding of our nation were in no sense Bible-believing Christians. Thomas Jefferson, in fact, was fiercely anti-cleric. In a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, Jefferson said, "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes" (George Seldes, The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371). In a letter to Mrs. Harrison Smith, he wrote, "It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. By the same test the world must judge me. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest" (August 6, 1816).
     
  9. You have no concept of history. People fled the Old World, among other reasons, because religion was too entrenched in government. Religious persecution flourishes when one religion gets a foothold in government, to the detriment of others including none at all. It was the separation of church and state that marked one of the distinctions of the American experiment. At least that was the intent.

    And now YOU speak of revisionists? Don't ever lose that sense of humor.
     
  10. I'm not going to get into this debate, people can look for themselves...... every quote, link you give I can point elsewhere that contradicts in overwhelming evidence.

    The idea that America's Founding Fathers were "Christian" and Deeply Religious individuals isn't something "new" or that there's some type of agenda to pull a fast one on the American people..... it's been the long held view and what has been taught in schools for centuries, until very recent. No the revisionism comes from an atheistic attempt to separate this country from it's original roots, to eradicate all mention or intention of God from the annals of American history.

    You have to look no father that what's written above in our US House and Senate chambers " IN GOD WE TRUST" or the fact that all Senate sessions for the past 200+ years are opened with prayer.

    From their (US Senates) own website, " Throughout the years, the United States Senate has honored the historic separation of Church and State, but not the separation of God and State."

    Your attempts are feeble at best, take it somewhere else.
     
  11. That slogan was adopted in 1956. I'm guessing most of the founding fathers were gone by then.
     
  12. christians have long had a habit of lying about peoples beliefs soon after their deaths. i saw that even after chris hitchens, one of the worlds most vocal atheists, died some were claiming that he professed belief on his deathbed. same old same old among the deluded. anyway what did the founding fathers really believe:

    http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
    One of the many attacks on our country from the Religious Right is the claim that our country is a Christian Nation...not just that the majority of people are Christians, but that the country itself was founded by Christians, for Christians. However, a little research into American history will show that this statement is a lie. Those people who spread this lie are known as Christian Revisionists. They are attempting to rewrite history, in much the same way as holocaust deniers are. The men responsible for building the foundation of the United States were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were Deists who did not believe the bible was true. They were Freethinkers who relied on their reason, not their faith.
    If the U.S. was founded on the Christian religion, the Constitution would clearly say so--but it does not. Nowhere does the Constitution say: "The United States is a Christian Nation", or anything even close to that. In fact, the words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, Creator, Divine, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution-- not even once. Nowhere in the Constitution is religion mentioned, except in exclusionary terms. When the Founders wrote the nation's Constitution, they specified that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." (Article 6, section 3) This provision was radical in its day-- giving equal citizenship to believers and non-believers alike. They wanted to ensure that no religion could make the claim of being the official, national religion, such as England had.
     
  13. The Constitution is a blue print for the day to day workings of the Government, it's not intended to be a statement of belief, but still given it's nature they still included reference to God. If you want to find the reason for writing the Constitution or the reasons why they wanted to separate from England and form their own government look at the Deceleration of Independence, in that tell me you don't find any mention of God.

    The absence of the words "Christianity, Bible, et al" in the Constitution doesn't mean they are not implied or those ideas and beliefs were not held by it's originators. If you have a group of 100 men whose backgrounds are Protestant in nature, you don't have to guess at their intent when they reference "GOD".

    Your link is atheistic in nature, written by atheists for atheists and very shallow and narrow in it's view when compared to actual history....... free in though and blinded to truth.

    done with this
     
  14. Are you sure?

    Looks like we have the makings of another 300 page Jem vs. Stu epic.
     
  15. you are correct. we dont have to guess. we can get a feel for what they believed from their writings. almost none would be considered a christian today. here are a few of their views on the subject:

    In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Horatio Spofford, 1814; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371)

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unlike Thomas Jefferson--and Thomas Paine, for that matter--Washington never even got around to recording his belief that Christ was a great ethical teacher. His reticence on the subject was truly remarkable. Washington frequently alluded to Providence in his private correspondence. But the name of Christ, in any correspondence whatsoever, does not appear anywhere in his many letters to friends and associates throughout his life. (Paul F. Boller, George Washington & Religion, Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, pp. 74-75.)



    if to believe in the divinity and resurrection of Christ and his atonement for the sins of man and to participate in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper are requisites for the Christian faith, then Washington, on the evidence which we have examined, can hardly be considered a Christian, except in the most nominal sense. (Paul F. Boller, George Washington & Religion, Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, p. 90.)


    Washington's religious belief was that of the enlightenment: deism. He practically never used the word "God," preferring the more impersonal word "Providence." How little he visualized Providence in personal form is shown by the fact that he interchangeably applied to that force all three possible pronouns: he, she, and it. (James Thomas Flexner, George Washington: Anguish and Farewell [1793-1799], Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1972, p. 490.)

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Let the human mind loose. It must be loose. It will be loose. Superstition and Dogmatism cannot confine it. (John Adams, letter to John Quincy Adams, November 13, 1816. From Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 88.)

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [Benjamin] As to Jesus ... I have ... 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 it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble." (Alice J. Hall, "Philosopher of Dissent: Benj. Franklin," National Geographic, Vol. 148, No. 1, July, 1975, p. 94.)

    Though himself surely a freethinker, Franklin cautioned other freethinkers to be careful about dismissing institutional religion too lightly or too quickly. "Think how great a proportion of Mankind," he warned in 1757, "consists of weak and ignorant Men and Women, and of inexperienc'd Youth of both Sexes, who have need of the Motives of Religion to restrain them from Vice, to support their Virtue, and retain them in the Practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great Point for its Security." (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 61.)

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish [Muslim], appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit. I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine. But it is necessary to the happiness of man that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. He takes up the profession of a priest for the sake of gain, and in order to qualify himself for that trade he begins with a perjury. Can we conceive anything more destructive to morality than this? (Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, 1794-1795. From Paul Blanshard, ed., Classics of Free Thought, Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1977, pp. 134-135.)

    ------------------------------------------------------------------
    Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprize [sic], every expanded prospect. (James Madison, in a letter to William Bradford, April 1, 1774, as quoted by Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 37.)
     
  16. Shut up Rick, separation is not only good it is great!

    Who gave the guy the right to talk on behalf of christians? He should prove he is a christian and independent. Here is a test for him: Why does he not call for a public trial to investigate the murder of Jesus Christ?
     
  17. Yawn...... Why would a Deist who believes that the "Supreme Architect of the Universe" who doesn't involve itself in worldly affairs... pray for Divine interaction, protection or direction or presume that the Deist's Divine Being is interested in human affairs? in essence asking the Divine to be against it's very Nature. Your own definition is in opposition to their actions.

    I don't have enough time to list the countless links and quotes that contradict your earlier posts...............
     
  18. With Santorum as Vomiter in Chief, perhaps it is God's will that he should aspirate for our sins.
     
  19. in a time before science deism was an intellectually honest position on gods.
    even though they did not believe in the bible or the christian god they had no explaination for the world. hence deism, the belief that something started it all even though there was no evidence that it exists now. we know better now. science has answered most of the "god did it "questions.
    are you done yet or do you plan to continue defending the delusion? i have lots of time. i just wish you guys would come up with some new arguments.
     
  20. Yes and they (deists) also discounted prophecy and miracles, also holding the belief that this unknown, unnamed divine entity did not alter the universe by intervening in it. The universe was created by god and left to it's own demise.

    Hence if the founding fathers were true deists they wouldn't have assumed divine providence or prayed to their god for guidance, assumed divine endowment of rights, or anything as the very act would not be in it's divine nature.
     
  21. you think? religion has always been used by the powerful to pander to the masses:

    "Religion is regarded by the common man as true, the wise man as false, and the rulers as useful."

    ~Seneca the Younger 4 b.c.- 65 a.d
     
  22. ?????

    Throwing out a few cut and paste quotes doesn't negate my earlier post. Sorry freethinker, it's convenient for the atheistic fringe to paint the founding fathers in an atheistic-deist manner but the very actions and writings by those men show the inaccuracy and folly of the attempt. A true deist wouldn't believe that God would care or act on behalf of man.

    The Founding Fathers believed just the opposite.
     
  23. Here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1274502/posts


    (We receive numerous requests from across the country to answer various editorials and letters-to-the-editor. The subject is usually the religious persuasions of the Founding Fathers, and the standard assertion is that they were all deists. The following is but one of many possible replies to such accusations.)

    I notice that your newspaper has an ongoing debate concerning the religious nature of the Founding Fathers. A recent letter claimed that most of the Founding Fathers were deists, and pointed to Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, Hamilton, and Madison as proof. After making this charge, the writer acknowledged the "voluminous writings" of the Founders, but it appears that she has not read those writings herself. However, this is no surprise since the U. S. Department of Education claims that only 5 percent of high schools graduates know how to examine primary source documentation.

    Interestingly, the claims in this recent letter to the editor are characteristic of similar claims appearing in hundreds of letters to the editor across the nation. The standard assertion is that the Founders were deists. Deists? What is a deist? In dictionaries like Websters, Funk & Wagnalls, Century, and others, the terms "deist," "agnostic," and "atheist" appear as synonyms. Therefore, the range of a deist spans from those who believe there is no God, to those who believe in a distant, impersonal creator of the universe, to those who believe there is no way to know if God exists. Do the Founders fit any of these definitions?

    None of the notable Founders fit this description. Thomas Paine, in his discourse on "The Study of God," forcefully asserts that it is "the error of schools" to teach sciences without "reference to the Being who is author of them: for all the principles of science are of Divine origin." He laments that "the evil that has resulted from the error of the schools in teaching [science without God] has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism." Paine not only believed in God, he believed in a reality beyond the visible world.

    In Benjamin Franklin's 1749 plan of education for public schools in Pennsylvania, he insisted that schools teach "the necessity of a public religion . . . and the excellency of the Christian religion above all others, ancient or modern." Consider also the fact that Franklin proposed a Biblical inscription for the Seal of the United States; that he chose a New Testament verse for the motto of the Philadelphia Hospital; that he was one of the chief voices behind the establishment of a paid chaplain in Congress; and that when in 1787 when Franklin helped found the college which bore his name, it was dedicated as "a nursery of religion and learning" built "on Christ, the Corner-Stone." Franklin certainly doesn't fit the definition of a deist.

    Nor does George Washington. He was an open promoter of Christianity. For example, in his speech on May 12, 1779, he claimed that what children needed to learn "above all" was the "religion of Jesus Christ," and that to learn this would make them "greater and happier than they already are"; on May 2, 1778, he charged his soldiers at Valley Forge that "To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian"; and when he resigned his commission as commander-in-chief of the military on June 8, 1783, he reminded the nation that "without a humble imitation" of "the Divine Author of our blessed religion" we "can never hope to be a happy nation." Washington's own adopted daughter declared of Washington that you might as well question his patriotism as to question his Christianity.

    Alexander Hamilton was certainly no deist. For example, Hamilton began work with the Rev. James Bayard to form the Christian Constitutional Society to help spread over the world the two things which Hamilton said made America great: (1) Christianity, and (2) a Constitution formed under Christianity. Only Hamilton's death two months later thwarted his plan of starting a missionary society to promote Christian government. And at the time he did face his death in his duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton met and prayed with the Rev. Mason and Bishop Moore, wherein he reaffirmed to him his readiness to face God should he die, having declared to them "a lively faith in God's mercy through Christ, with a thankful remembrance of the death of Christ." At that time, he also partook of Holy Communion with Bishop Moore.

    The reader, as do many others, claimed that Jefferson omitted all miraculous events of Jesus from his "Bible." Rarely do those who make this claim let Jefferson speak for himself. Jefferson own words explain that his intent for that book was not for it to be a "Bible," but rather for it to be a primer for the Indians on the teachings of Christ (which is why Jefferson titled that work, "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth"). What Jefferson did was to take the "red letter" portions of the New Testament and publish these teachings in order to introduce the Indians to Christian morality. And as President of the United States, Jefferson signed a treaty with the Kaskaskia tribe wherein he provided—at the government's expense—Christian missionaries to the Indians. In fact, Jefferson himself declared, "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." While many might question this claim, the fact remains that Jefferson called himself a Christian, not a deist.

    James Madison trained for ministry with the Rev. Dr. John Witherspoon, and Madison's writings are replete with declarations of his faith in God and in Christ. In fact, for proof of this, one only need read his letter to Attorney General Bradford wherein Madison laments that public officials are not bold enough about their Christian faith in public and that public officials should be "fervent advocates in the cause of Christ." And while Madison did allude to a "wall of separation," contemporary writers frequently refuse to allow Madison to provide his own definition of that "wall." According to Madison, the purpose of that "wall" was only to prevent Congress from passing a national law to establish a national religion.

    None of the Founders mentioned fit the definition of a deist. And as is typical with those who make this claim, they name only a handful of Founders and then generalize the rest. This in itself is a mistake, for there are over two hundred Founders (fifty-five at the Constitutional Convention, ninety who framed the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights, and fifty-six who signed the Declaration) and any generalization of the Founders as deists is completely inaccurate.

    The reason that such critics never mention any other Founders is evident. For example, consider what must be explained away if the following signers of the Constitution were to be mentioned: Charles Pinckney and John Langdon—founders of the American Bible Society; James McHenry—founder of the Baltimore Bible Society; Rufus King—helped found a Bible society for Anglicans; Abraham Baldwin—a chaplain in the Revolution and considered the youngest theologian in America; Roger Sherman, William Samuel Johnson, John Dickinson, and Jacob Broom—also theological writers; James Wilson and William Patterson—placed on the Supreme Court by President George Washington, they had prayer over juries in the U. S. Supreme Court room; and the list could go on. And this does not even include the huge number of thoroughly evangelical Christians who signed the Declaration or who helped frame the Bill of Rights.

    Any portrayal of any handful of Founders as deists is inaccurate. (If this group had really wanted some irreligious Founders, they should have chosen Henry Dearborne, Charles Lee, or Ethan Allen). Perhaps critics should spend more time reading the writings of the Founders to discover their religious beliefs for themselves rather than making such sweeping accusations which are so easily disproven.

    Thank You,
    David Barton/WallBuilders
     
  24. Good job, Wallet.

    I'm confused why it is apparently a good thing for the President to lecture Christians at the National Prayer Breakfast that it is their religious duty to pay higher taxes. And why it is an outrage for Santorum to suggest that faith has to have a role in public policy. Are faith-based positions acceptable only when they fit the liberal media/big government template?
     
  25. its interesting,and amusing, to watch the thumpers work. here we have people professing things that would get them labeled heretics in most churches today. but because they were founding fathers the bible thumpers feel the need to revise history and call them devout christians.
    on the other hand we have obama who has done nothing but profess the christian line and they label him a fake christian.
    what we can tell from their writings is most rejected the idea that jesus was devine and they rejected christianity in government.
     
  26. Santorum is less like Jesus than Obama is.
     
  27. It will take a 'Miracle' to see Santorum on the ticket. That's for sure.



    c
     
  28. Well, your quote stated that GW used "Providence" instead of God.
    I went over to his famous Farewell Address, searched for God: nothing.
    Providence: one hit, as below, in line with what you posted re him:



    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp

    That's a primary source. Providence, not God.

    The other guys: search the Constitution for the word God. No hits.
    The Federalist? I searched a few at random, came up with one hit in number 43, as follows:

    Similar to the reference in the Declaration of Independence. A very general formulation, no reference to Christ or Jesus, just as in the Declaration.
    I see no evidence in any of these documents of any specific reference to a Christian God. As the Founders were emphatic about not showing partiality to any one religion officially, and were proud that this impartiality was a feature of the US Constitution, this is hardly a surprise.
    Y'all can argue what religion they were forever and never come to a definite conclusion. The three big documents left to us by them, the Declaration, the Constitution, and the Federalist Papers, are devoid of any reference to Christianity.
    As is George Washington's Farewell Address, which is probably in fourth place right behind those three.
    Regardless of what they believed in private, the official position of the US Government was strictly impartial, and it was so by design, so much so that GW didn't mention God specifically once in his last address to the nation.

    And really, Thomas Paine? Only a completely illiterate reading of history would dare mention him at all in this connection. We all know what he believed, since he wrote a big book about it: The Age of Reason.
    Sheesh.
     
  29. The religion of the founders / power holders of this nation is Masonry/Mystery School/Hermeticism. Look at the layout, architecture, and symbolism of Washington, DC - it's right there in the open.
     
  30. I've read and watched all that symbolic engineering and the rest from the Masons. Very interesting, very possibly some truth to it all. My feeling is, yes, there were some smart people, and maybe they belonged to a club of sorts, hopefully without all the nefarious underpinings attached (sp?).


    c
     
  31. He has to prove that his christianity is above politics. I bet that if he were to make the call for a public trial to investigate the murder of Jesus Christ, he might later apologize to non christian bosses.