July 4, 1776 - July 4, 2011

[JudeBrando]

The Declaration of Independence.

What a magnificent document. I just read it for the first time in years. Read it again yourself.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

<snipped long list of grievances, but read them too>

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

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


That was then. This is now. Surely, we are so much smarter now. Surely, most here are vastly superior both morally and intellectually to those dead white men, right?

How could such brilliant men that crafted such a brilliant document to the world be so stupid as to believe so firmly in God?

"Nature's God.. created.. endowed by their Creator.. appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions.. with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence..."

That's quite an emphasis on God in the founding document from the fathers of the nation.

Do you object to this? Would you favor a vote or document which declared a national renouncing of any faith in or reliance on God?

Would you consider their faith in God, even if you personally disagree, a good thing or a bad thing?

Do you believe that expunging their faith from the nation, as much as reasonably possible, would make for a better nation?

Are Americans better now than they were then?

 

[NewtonTrino]

Simply a sign of the times and nothing more.

Frankly they had a few things figured out but they were pretty ignorant about natural philosophy. I'm quite confident that those of the founding fathers who were of an intellectual nature would more likely be atheists if they had the information available to them that we do.

In fact I'm wondering what evidence besides some platitudes here you're using to ascribe such a large amount of religious influence.

 

[MG1962]

I think you have to look at it as a child of the time. Virtually all Western nations where monarchys. It was common knowledge royalty was invested by God.

The United States created a form of government that destroyed that linkage to God. So the constitution had to be written as if it was being invested by God.

 

[epepke]

That's Deism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism#Deist_terminology

 

[epepke]

I think you have to look at it as a child of the time. Virtually all Western nations where monarchys. It was common knowledge royalty was invested by God.

The United States created a form of government that destroyed that linkage to God. So the constitution had to be written as if it was being invested by God.

The Constitution doesn't mention God at all. This is the Declaration of Independence.

 

[goodm0urning]

Fortunately, none of their ideas require God in order to work.

 

[MG1962]

The Constitution doesn't mention God at all. This is the Declaration of Independence.

I realise that - but the Declaration sets the tone the Constitution will take. The colonies were basically comitting regicide by proxy

 

[JJM 777]

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"

What did they think about women back then, when writing this? I know the word "men" could theoretically mean humans generally, but it didn´t back then, not in a context of political rights.

 

[MontagK505]

I think you have to look at it as a child of the time. Virtually all Western nations where monarchys. It was common knowledge royalty was invested by God.

The United States created a form of government that destroyed that linkage to God. So the constitution had to be written as if it was being invested by God.

The Constitution doesn't mention God.

The Declaration of Independence states why.

The Constitution states how. For the how, they didn't intend to rely on God.

 

[steve s]

That's quite an emphasis on God in the founding document from the fathers of the nation.

Did you notice that nowhere in there are the words Christ, Christian, or Jesus? Jefferson was a deist who did not accept the divinity of Jesus. That's why he used terms like "nature's god" and "providence."

ETA: Here you go. A quote from Jefferson comparing Christianity to Roman mythology. If a modern Democratic politician did that the right would be calling for his head on a platter.

"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 Minerva in the brain of Jupiter"--Thomas Jefferson

Steve S

 

[epix]

Do you believe that expunging their faith from the nation, as much as reasonably possible, would make for a better nation?

What faith? You sound as if the mid-18 century atheism was an influential and potent philosophy wielding enough power of reason to relegate God to a mere option supported by faith. But that wasn't so, coz atheism was still wallowing in the cesspool of pseudoscience and outright irrationality the way it announced itself in the 17th century just to offend the scientific community back then.

 

[Robin]

The Declaration of Independence.

What a magnificent document. I just read it for the first time in years. Read it again yourself.

From your bolding it seems that you judge it magnificent by virtue of it's mentioning God a few times.

In fact it is the US Constitution that is the more magnificent document and for very concrete reasons. It drew upon the very best of political philosophy and jurisprudence and invented a new form of democracy - one that could last. It invented the modern era.

Are Americans better now than they were then?

Let me have a look and count the slave owners around today.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

This seems as good a place to post this as any...

Happy fourth of July, folks across the pond! Have a great day!

 

[Craig4]

Yes we are. We don't own people. We have universal suffrage. We don't have segregation of races. Yes we are better than we were when the founders (who were really just a bunch of deviant political hacks) wrote the Declaration of Independence. Their real genius was in creating institutions that were bigger than the people who ran them, and checking the powers of the branches of government.

 

[dafydd]

You've done very well over there in the colonies. Many happy returns of the day.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I've never liked it. They didn't properly source their Enlightenment philosophy, and didn't back up their "self-evident" ideas, thus setting the tone of college papers to this day.

And how could such brilliant men be racist, sexist, heterosexist, and let's say bad at fashion?

 

[BStrong]

I've never liked it. They didn't properly source their Enlightenment philosophy, and didn't back up their "self-evident" ideas, thus setting the tone of college papers to this day.

And how could such brilliant men be racist, sexist, heterosexist, and let's say bad at fashion?

Because they were the product of their times.

Years back three of us were having a discussion at a party - myself, another guy my age that had done a tour in the Marines, and an old time Marine that did two of the invasions in WWII before being wounded and released from service.

Three veterans talking.

The pejorative term "Jap" was used by the old timer, and was overheard by a young lady. who promptly corrected the old timer, reminding him that the correct term was "Japanese."

His response, I will never forget.

"Today they're Japanese. I drive a Japanese car. When they're shooting at you on a beach in 1945, they're *********** Japs!"

The Founding Fathers were no different than that old timer. They can't be judged by current polite conventions and standards.

 

[Foster Zygote]

The Declaration of Independence is not "the founding document" of the United States of America. It is a piece of political rhetoric, not a legal document. The actual founding document of the USA is the Constitution of the United States and it contains no mention of deities at all other than the traditional dating convention.

 

[Ladewig]

The Declaration of Independence.

What a magnificent document. I just read it for the first time in years. Read it again yourself.

Yes. It is magnificent. My first question is why you didn't highlight any of the magnificent parts?

That was then. This is now. Surely, we are so much smarter now. Surely, most here are vastly superior both morally and intellectually to those dead white men, right?

I am unsure what answer you expected, but as others have pointed out: hell yes!
No one today owns slaves. Everyone today believes that blacks and women should have the right to vote, the right to own property, the right to hold political office, etc, etc.

How could such brilliant men that crafted such a brilliant document to the world be so stupid as to believe so firmly in God?

How could they be so stupid as to think slavery was compatible with a Divine Creator? [not a rhetorical question]

Do you object to this?

No, sir.

Would you favor a vote or document which declared a national renouncing of any faith in or reliance on God?

We already have one - it is called the U.S. Constitution and the very first amendment explains quite clearly that the government does not rely on God at all. But to answer your question more precisely, no I do not favor any additional renunciation of faith or reliance on God. The three branches of the government have already established time and time again that there is no reliance on God. Making a formal declaration would only upset the people who still mistakenly believe that this is a Christian nation. Speaking of which, JudeBrando, do you believe we are a Christian nation?

Would you consider their faith in God, even if you personally disagree, a good thing or a bad thing?

The faith in God that the founders had is nothing like you imagine it to be. See previous posts.

As for my opinion on faith in God in general, my answer is: It depends. The faith that drives people to open soup kitchens, to give scholarships to poor students to attend private schools, to found charity hospitals and clinics, to advocate for the rights of the oppressed, to give comfort to the marginalized, to create a sense of community - that is a good thing. The faith that drives people to limit the rights of others [cough]fighting the WTC Mosque[/cough], to legislate their bigotry, to assert that those without faith have no foundation for morality, to lie about others [cough]e.g. "Obama is a Muslim"[/cough], to send obscene amounts of spam filled with nonsense to people who don't want to hear nonsense, to fear scientific facts to the point that they insist that religious ideas should be taught in science class - that is a bad thing. ¹

Do you believe that expunging their faith from the nation, as much as reasonably possible, would make for a better nation?

As long as it is expunged from government, I'm fine. As for other aspects of religion, I will follow the spirit and letter of First Amendment and will violently defend everyone's right to worship as they wish.

Are Americans better now than they were then?

Clarification: do you mean better off now or do you mean better able to distinguish right from from wrong now? Or do you mean something else?


.....................
1) I would have given credit to the 1920's politician who created this type of answer when asked about his opinions on alcohol, but I cannot think of his name.

 

[Resume]

Would you consider their faith in God, even if you personally disagree, a good thing or a bad thing?

Do you believe that expunging their faith from the nation, as much as reasonably possible, would make for a better nation?

Are Americans better now than they were then?

The FFs were deists, theists and agnostics. Nice mix and the reason imo for the (non) establishment clause. Expunging faith as a de-facto requisite for public office would be nice. Don't really much care about a person's personal superstitions as long as I don't have to follow them.