This American Christian Nation.

Recently, Comrade Barrack Hussein Obama, peace be upon him, flatly declared that America is not a Christian nation, but a nation with “values.” He then quickly moved on, to avoid dwelling on what those values might be and where they might have come from. That pretty well lit my fire, as I’m sure it did yours, too, and I wrote a little something about it to try to set the record straight. His statement was patently false.

Then, a comment was submitted on another page on this site that raised the question again, regarding what kind of people we are and what kind of nation this is. And I remembered past discussions along those lines, so I did a new page on It, and this is it

Vic Biorseth, Monday, January 18, 2010
http://www.Thinking-Catholic-Strategic-Center.com

This is to reaffirm the Christian nature of this American Christian nation. Recently a new commenter on another page on this site raised the old question of whether America is a Christian nation, or something other than a Christian nation, and it brought back memories of past arguments.

In the days before I got rid of the private CONTACT ME option and replaced it with separate unique subject dialogue options at the bottom of each Webpage, I may have had as many as seven or eight separate private email dialogues going at one time on the Christian nation topic alone. Of course, those dialogues, and so many others on so many other topics, got too unwieldy, time consuming and unmanageable, and so it had to be stopped. Now, all such dialogues are public, at the bottom of any Webpage, and multiple people may join in if they so desire. Until now, nobody ever raised that particular topic again, and I never thought to include it among the Arguments Pro and Con. Until now.

The position I take issue with says that, by law, America is not a Christian nation. The law says no such thing. There is no such law in America. So this new argument page stands to defend the true nature of this Christian nation of America.

Question: How many of America’s Founders and Signers were not raised up in Christian households and taught Christian religion, tradition and mores in their formative years?

Answer: One. He was a Jew.

Question:What was the basis or the common sense of telling right from wrong that under laid development of American civil law and the American Constitution?

Answer: The Judao-Chrisitian Ethos that comes out of the Judao-Christian Religion of Western Civilization. (Note well that Christianity was born of Judaism and that Jewish Scripture is permanently included in the first books of the Christian Bible. However uncomfortable that fact may make some Christians and some Jews, the relationship itself cannot be denied, and is too important to be ignored.)

Question: What is the religion professed by the majority of the people of the United States of America?

Answer: Christian, by more than 85%.

Question: Is the government, and the law, of the United States of America supposed to be representative of the population, or unrepresentative of them?

Answer: Representative government, and legislated representative law.

Very simple; nothing to it; America is a Christian nation.

America is a Christian nation, that is, until and unless we are governed by unrepresentative dictatorial government, or, except when we have unrepresentative anti-Christian law imposed upon us by deceit, trickery or fraudulent un-Constitutional political act.

Following the pattern of post-Reformation Europe, the original American colonies each established official state religions in their founding documents; all of them were Christian. See the Separation of Church and State argument for the individual denominations, and for the disgusting history of the bogus “Constitutional Principle” that is not in the Constitution at all. I won’t rehash all that again here. Suffice it to say that the only two religious things our Constitution insists upon are, first, that the federal Congress not establish any new official state religion, and second, that free exercise of religion not be interfered with in any way by the federal government. Period.

Opponents of the notion of a Christian nation always argue from strange moral positions that deny an over-all guiding moral code, or that morality comes out of religion. Atheists, of course, deny the existence of any fixed moral code. Stupid or naïve people equate all existing moral codes to be the same, including personal stand-alone moral codes. Libertarians fall into this category; we discussed that in the Opposing Libertarianism argument. What all of this drives toward is changing the whole purpose of law. The argument says that you cannot legislate morality, which we refuted in the Legislating Morality argument.

This is just practical, real-world, common sense stuff here. When the founders sought to protect diversity, it was diversity among Christian denominations and interpretations. It did not include religions that practice head hunting, or cannibalism, or human sacrifice, or “evangelization” via the sword, as in Islam. They were Christians. They were civilized. They knew right from wrong.

I won’t belabor the point any farther. Look at the Arguments Pro and Con and at the rest of this site. Look at the Abortion in America for a gross example of the establishment of clearly un-Constitutional and unrepresentative American “law” via paths other than legislative.

If you have an argument opposing the notion that America is a Christian nation, let’s have it. I think by this time I’ve heard them all, but if you think you have a good case and if you have the heart, by all means, go for it.

Try not to ever loose your ability to tell right from wrong, or to forget the Source of the rules.

And do not allow anyone to superimpose any new set of rules over the old one in any unrepresentative way.

Due to reader comments it is felt necessary to copy original Christian denominations originally established in law in the original American Colonies. This is copied out from the Argument Refuting Separation of Church and State page.

The intention of the Founders was similarly crystal clear. Most of the Colonies-becoming-States already had legally established official State Religions in their pre-existing formational Constitutions or Charters, and they (at first) fully intended to keep them. The Delegates from the individual Colonies were seeking to prohibit the larger Federal Government form legally establishing some official National religion right over the top of their own existing, legally established, official State religions.

That was the whole purpose for the Establishment Clause being put into the First Amendment of the National Constitution. The Framers sought two things: First, to prohibit any Federal legal requirement for citizens to join any religion other than the Colonial one to which they already belonged. Second, to have religious toleration established in Federal law for open practice or “Exercise” of their existing official and legal Colonial religions. Here are our founding era official State religions:

Rhode Island	Baptist
Pennsylvania	Quaker
Maryland	Roman Catholic
Connecticut	Congregational
Georgia	Church of England
Massachusetts	Congregational
North Carolina	Church of England
New Hampshire	Congregational
South Carolina	Church of England
Virginia	Church of England
Florida	Catholic (Spanish era) Church of England (British era)
West Indies	Church of England

See the actual Argument Refuting Separation of Church and State page for the gross miss-interpretation of Jefferson’s Wall and for Justice Black’s dumb-assed and unconstitutional interpretation of the establishment and exercise clause.

Reference Material

Return to Arguments Pro and Con page

Return to Web Site Log (Blog) page

Return to HOME PAGE

Build/Host/Maintain Your Own Personal Website using SBI! (Advertisement)

Date: Thu Jan 21 22:00:14 2010
From: T. J. O’rourke
Email:
Location:
Comment:

The Constitution (Amendment I religion clause) has always been interpreted to protect exercise of all religions. You seem to be saying that it only protects Christian exercise. What about legal precedent?

T.J.

Date: Fri Jan 22 06:09:49 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

T.J.:

That is quite correct. I am no attorney, but to me, original law and the intent of the authors takes precedence over any following interpretations. If a precedent was wrong, it should be overturned or ignored. Has that clause been legitimately amended? If not, then, the law stands unchanged. What was the intent of the framers of the clause?

All of the authors were representing the various colonies, all of whom had Christian religions officially established in their legal domains. Those were the established religions they intended to protect from any possible federal religion that might be imposed over the top of them in the new federal constitution. The official state religions in question were Roman Catholicism, and the Protestant denominations of Church of England, Congregational, Baptist and Quaker. (Catholicism may not properly be called a denomination.) None of these official colonial faiths wanted another faith super-imposed over them in the new federal constitution.

Look at what they wrote and recorded about it, study the period, and you will see that it is quite a stretch to say that they intended to protect any religion at all, or that they intended for the ethos of the American people to be changed from Judao-Christian to something else, by law.

Look at the pictures in the Church and State in Art page, and count the number of times Ten Commandments, and Moses, the Law Giver, are depicted on, in, all over and around the Supreme Court building, and all over Washington D.C. for a graphic example of the relationship of the Judao-Christian religion to our constitution and our civil law.

What would you replace that relationship with?

Regards,

Vic

Date: Mon Jan 25 02:09:29 2010
From: Isaac
Email:
Location:
Comment:

Gentlemen:

There is nothing sacred about precedent. If precedent could never be overturned, Dred Scott would not have been overturned and all blacks in America would today be slaves.

Cordially,

Isaac

Date: Tue Jan 26 10:14:33 2010
From: T.J.
Email:
Location:
Comment:

What about Wica?

Date: Tue Jan 26 19:37:57 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

T.J.:

Do you really think the Founding Fathers intended to protect and encourage practices such as witchcraft, Satanism, atheism, etc., on an equal footing with Christianity?

Regards,

Vic

Date: Wed Jan 27 22:58:38 2010
From: T.J.
Email:
Location:
Comment:

Yes.

Date: Thu Jan 28 05:59:21 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

T.J.:

You would have us believe that the Founders of this Christian nation intended legal protections, on an equal footing with the diverse practices of Judao-Christian religion, practices such as

1. dancing naked around a fire;
2. sexual orgies;
3. casting evil spells;
4. hideous torture of animals;
5. animal sacrifice;
6. blasphemy;
7. desecration of Christian churches, scripture and holy objects;
8. direct opposition to all of the Ten Commandments;
9. etc.

This amply illustrates how far our unique Christian American culture has degenerated under the Secularism movement. Secularists, like Marxists, are evil, stupid, or both. Oftentimes they are the same people.

Regards,

Vic

Date: Tue Feb 02 21:21:03 2010
From: Tagalog Lad
Email:
Location:
Comment:

Does your constitution say that one must be a Christian before one can be an American?

Date: Wed Feb 03 06:34:12 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

Tagalog Lad:

No. The American Constitution places two restrictions on federal government and none on the states or the people in the states. Those two restrictions on government regard establishing a state religion, and prohibiting the exercise of religion. There are no Constitutional restrictions on the states or the people regarding religion.

To say that America is a Christian nation is not to say that Americans must by law attend any particular Christian church, but that Christianity is our national heritage and strong tradition, and that it supplies our definitive American national character. Christianity supplies the moral code, the common sense of telling right from wrong, that underlies our theoretically representative civil law.

Our federal government has no Constitutional business involving itself in the religious beliefs or practices of the people. That is for the states to decide. The federal Congress should not legislate, the federal executive should not order, no federal bureaucracy should regulate, and the federal court should not adjudicate any law, rule, regulation or precedent affecting or changing in any way the religious practice of the American citizenry. To do so would be un-Constitutional.

It remains for future sitting governments to undo the damage that has been done, illegitimately, by past sitting governments.

It is crystal clear that the current sitting Obama government despises the Judao-Christian Ethos of America and seeks to destroy it.

Regards,

Vic

Date: Wed Feb 03 07:45:33 2010
From: Tagalog
Email:
Location:
Comment:

Do the states say one must be a Christian?

Date: Wed Feb 03 17:30:18 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

Tagalog:

Not any more. The Colonists came here, largely, to escape the religious persecutions and denominational warfare of Britain and Europe; each new colony in America established in law a specific Christian religion as the official state religion, so the colonists would always be free to practice it. The American Revolution presented the necessity of a central federal government over all of the united individual colonies, all of whom were fearful of future religious wars as in the Reformation wars of the Old World.

The Constitutional Congress, therefore, expressly prohibited the establishment of a national religion by the government, and prohibited the national government from interfering with anyone’s free expression of his religion. Over time, this was seen to be such a wise decision that the states, one by one, “disestablished” their own individual official state religions and amended their state constitutions with the same restrictions on government, and none on the people.

Thus, in this still Christian nation, no religion is imposed upon anyone by government.

Regards,

Vic

Date: Sat Nov 13 20:01:14 2010
From: Thomoa
Email:
Location:
Comment:

Is T.J. any relation to P.J.?

Date: Fri Dec 24 11:07:45 2010
From: Jayson
Email: Joyfull40@shaw.ca
Location: newwest canada
Comment:

America is a multi-cultural country. It has been for a long time. The Christian religion is not the only religion in America, its not exclusive. Its just another religion, along with all the other religions practiced in America. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever they wish, or in some cases, not believe in any religion at all. To think we should all be the same, be Christians, to keep the country strong, is ridiculous and outdated. Get your head out of the clouds and wake up.

There’s room for all religions in America, not just the Christian religion. As it is, the majority of Christians are nothing but hypocrites or religious nutcases anyway. They'll say one thing, and practice another. Go to church on Sundays, act like the fools they really are the rest of the week. As for the Catholic religion & Catholic church, it should be banned completely. Nothing but houses (not deserving of the word church) of ill repute, filled to the brim with filthy priests, nuns, yes nuns, who get away with child molestation in the name of god and "religion".

Date: Mon Dec 27 05:52:40 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
Comment:

Jayson:

Where to begin.

Rarely have I seen such monumental blithering. You clearly do not understand what you have read here if you think America bans rather than frees and protects various religions. What God do you think America’s founding fathers were referring to in our foundational document, our Declaration of Independence, if it was not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

Our American corporate sense of right versus wrong, the very basis for our civil law, comes out of the Judao-Christian Ethos which is founded on the Ten Commandments and Christian doctrine. I’m sure you would prefer something else, but you don’t say what. Perhaps you might prefer one of the atheist strains of Marxism, such as Lenin’s death to the bourgeoisie, or Hitler’s death to the Jews and the Gypsies, or Stalin’s death to all non-Stalinists, or Mao’s death to all opposition. Or maybe just death to all Catholics since you would like to legally ban the Church Christ founded.

It is clear that you despise Christianity as much as Marx did, even to the point of making up nonsensical charges against vowed religious, slandering innocents and condemning the overwhelming population of America solely because of their faith. But what is not so clear is whether you are illiterate, or stupid. Since you wrote this submission with only a few miss-spellings I had to correct for you, I suppose that leaves us with the later option.

Regards,

Vic

Please note the language and tone already established in this Website. This is not the place to stack up vulgar one-liners and crude rejoinders. While you may support, oppose or introduce any position or argument, your comments must meet our standards of logical rigor and of civil discourse. We will not participate in trading insults, and we will not tolerate participants trading insults with each other. Participants should not be thin-skinned or over sensitive to criticism, but should be prepared to defend their arguments when challenged. If you don’t really have a coherent argument or counter-argument of your own, sit down and don’t embarrass yourself. If you have something serious to contribute to the conversation, please keep it civil. We apologize to religious conservative thinkers for the need to even say these things.