Notes on the Founding Fathers
By AtheistDad
of AtheistParents.org
Here's a little quiz for you. What do Oliver Ellsworth, Abraham Baldwin, and Hugh Williamson have in common? They were the only members of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 who entered the ministry at some point. Ellsworth, who opposed the abolition of the foreign slave trade, later quit religion to study the law. Baldwin too decided against his original course, declining later in life a proferred divinity professorship at Yale. And Williamson was bitten by the philosopy and science bugs and abandoned his Presbyterian ministry. Other members of the convention who had narrow brushes with the ministry include James Madison, who reconsidered his early idea of becoming a man of the cloth, and William Samuel Johnson, who resisted his father's wishes that he become a preacher.
James McHenry and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, two more faithful members of the convention, were members of Bible societies. Other contributors to the convention who are notable for having been church-goers are Richard Bassett, Jacob Broom, William Few, David Carroll, David Brearly, and Thomas Fitzsimmons. Brearly even helped to write his Episcopal church's prayer book. I'll bet you've never heard of Brearly or his brothers in God. I'll bet most Christers who speak of the founding fathers and their piety have never heard of Brearly either.
Surely there were some names at the bottom of the Constitution that are more familiar to us. There's Thomas Jefferson, of course, and everybody knows he was pious and morally spotless. And then John Hancock. He must have been important. And then there was John Penn and good old Samuel and John Adams and Benjamin Franklin. Right? They're the religious souls in whose name Christers want to plaster the 10 commandments all over the place. Actually, the only person on that list whose name can be found at the bottom of the Constitution is Ben Franklin, who had a common law wife and kids as his main familial diversion and a nameless woman with bastard children as a sideline. Ben is known much more for his aphorisms based on common sense and his patronage of civic causes such as libraries than for any sort of piety. I don't think he's the one who based the Constitution solely on the 10 commandments.
To hear the notions of lots of Christers, you'd think that the Constitutional Convention was a big love-fest that started and ended in peaceful spontaneous prayer each day, the members holding hands in a big circle and asking for Yahweh's help in guiding the country. Far from it. As with any board meeting or similar grouping of powerful, headstrong people making important decisions, there was conflict. It took 100 days to write the Constitution, and many of the people who were involved in the beginning had bowed out by the end. Of the 55 who were initially invited to take part, only 39 signed. Some, like Elbridge Gerry (whose name and behavior we have to thank for the term "gerrymander") refused on the basis that the constitution was "full of vices," including inadequate representation of the people and dangerously ambiguous legislative powers. Others, such as John Lansing Jr., homed in on the dangers of consolidating government. William Blount missed a month of the convention, but signed reluctantly at last. Alexander Hamilton thought the Constitution was deficient in many respects. Luther Martin walked out during the middle of the convention and fought the ratification of the Constitution to the end on the basis that it aggrandized the rights of states and individuals to the detriment of the nation.
Note what's missing here: Religion. The Constitution deals with other issues. Nowhere in the text of the Constitution does the word "God" appear. The only passage of the document that contains any reference to religion is the following clause:
And that clause, though theoretically honored in letter, is disregarded in spirit, as no one professing non-belief would ever be welcomed into national public office. The Constitution does not contain the word "kill" and makes no reference to bearing false witness. It imposes no sanctions for coveting thy neighbor's wife. There is in fact nothing even similar to the 10 commandments contained within the Constitution.
Many Christers, I suspect, confuse the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence, which does mention God. Here's the first sentence:
"A ha," the Christer says, "that's where God comes in. Jefferson clearly appeals to good old Yahweh." Of course, I maintain that it's still up for debate. Jefferson mentions the Laws of Nature and Nature's God separately. It could be argued on my side that he conceded that there was a god who set up natural laws and created people (Jefferson also mentions a Creator in his next paragraph), but that the god then took off for the hills and let the world run on its own. Jefferson's word selection here, and the doctrine implicit in the document that people should be in charge of their own destiny only back up the idea that he's not exactly calling on the Hebrew god here. It's pretty widely acknowledged that Jefferson and some of his peers were Deists, which means that they believed more or less what I've described. Christers ignore the historical record and argue in other directions, of course, and that's fine. It's not the point here.
What does matter here is the relevance of the Declaration of Independence to the laws of our nation. Discounting the fact that without a Declaration of Independence, we might not be our own nation with its own laws, there is no relevance. Have you ever read the declaration? It's an indictment of King George III on a number of very specific charges and a justification, based upon that indictment, of the U.S.'s severance of ties with England. That's all it is. Again, there is no reference whatsoever within the document to the 10 commandments or the Bible or even explicitly to the Christian god. Moreover, the fundamental tenet of the declaration (universal equality and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness), is based in large part French philosopher Montesquieu's Spirit of Laws, which is based in large part on the work of John Locke.
The final confusing document I'll cover herein is the Bill of Rights. For the most part, the Constitution deals with matters of government -- how and when elections will take place and how old you have to be to hold office and how the checks and balances work. Civil liberties are addressed briefly in the amendments to the Constitution, of which the first 10 make up the Bill of Rights. And the amendment that causes state/religion controversy is the first. It reads as follows:
The amendment offers protection of and from religious beliefs. It states explicitly that Congress will establish no religion and will make no laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. So if Congress endorses or mandates Christian prayer under any circumstances, it is violating the first amendment. On the other hand, if Congress monitors your home and tosses you in jail for practicing Christianity, it is also violating the first amendment. This amendment states plainly that religion is not the business of the federal government. What it doesn't state is that Congress can govern the establishment of or impediment to religion within the states. Other amendments that affect all states apply specifically and verbally to "the United States," while this amendment simply restricts Congress's behavior.
It's your individual state constitution that determines what your religious rights are. The Tennessee Constitution, for example, reads as follows:
No wonder people are confused about what determines their religious rights. The long and short of it is that our federal government documents in no way reflect the 10 commandments and confer no right or requirement upon anyone to post the 10 commandments on government facilities. To suggest that the laws of our country are founded on the 10 commandments is to display ignorance of our laws and rights. And to suggest that the founding fathers came up with the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights over open Bibles during a Southern Baptist prayer meeting is simply wrong. Don't let the Christers use that argument. If you weren't armed to rebut before, you should be a little better armed now.
The facts in this document come courtesy of the National Archives and Records Administration.
By AtheistDad
of AtheistParents.org
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
James McHenry and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, two more faithful members of the convention, were members of Bible societies. Other contributors to the convention who are notable for having been church-goers are Richard Bassett, Jacob Broom, William Few, David Carroll, David Brearly, and Thomas Fitzsimmons. Brearly even helped to write his Episcopal church's prayer book. I'll bet you've never heard of Brearly or his brothers in God. I'll bet most Christers who speak of the founding fathers and their piety have never heard of Brearly either.
Surely there were some names at the bottom of the Constitution that are more familiar to us. There's Thomas Jefferson, of course, and everybody knows he was pious and morally spotless. And then John Hancock. He must have been important. And then there was John Penn and good old Samuel and John Adams and Benjamin Franklin. Right? They're the religious souls in whose name Christers want to plaster the 10 commandments all over the place. Actually, the only person on that list whose name can be found at the bottom of the Constitution is Ben Franklin, who had a common law wife and kids as his main familial diversion and a nameless woman with bastard children as a sideline. Ben is known much more for his aphorisms based on common sense and his patronage of civic causes such as libraries than for any sort of piety. I don't think he's the one who based the Constitution solely on the 10 commandments.
To hear the notions of lots of Christers, you'd think that the Constitutional Convention was a big love-fest that started and ended in peaceful spontaneous prayer each day, the members holding hands in a big circle and asking for Yahweh's help in guiding the country. Far from it. As with any board meeting or similar grouping of powerful, headstrong people making important decisions, there was conflict. It took 100 days to write the Constitution, and many of the people who were involved in the beginning had bowed out by the end. Of the 55 who were initially invited to take part, only 39 signed. Some, like Elbridge Gerry (whose name and behavior we have to thank for the term "gerrymander") refused on the basis that the constitution was "full of vices," including inadequate representation of the people and dangerously ambiguous legislative powers. Others, such as John Lansing Jr., homed in on the dangers of consolidating government. William Blount missed a month of the convention, but signed reluctantly at last. Alexander Hamilton thought the Constitution was deficient in many respects. Luther Martin walked out during the middle of the convention and fought the ratification of the Constitution to the end on the basis that it aggrandized the rights of states and individuals to the detriment of the nation.
Note what's missing here: Religion. The Constitution deals with other issues. Nowhere in the text of the Constitution does the word "God" appear. The only passage of the document that contains any reference to religion is the following clause:
No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
And that clause, though theoretically honored in letter, is disregarded in spirit, as no one professing non-belief would ever be welcomed into national public office. The Constitution does not contain the word "kill" and makes no reference to bearing false witness. It imposes no sanctions for coveting thy neighbor's wife. There is in fact nothing even similar to the 10 commandments contained within the Constitution.
Many Christers, I suspect, confuse the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence, which does mention God. Here's the first sentence:
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.
"A ha," the Christer says, "that's where God comes in. Jefferson clearly appeals to good old Yahweh." Of course, I maintain that it's still up for debate. Jefferson mentions the Laws of Nature and Nature's God separately. It could be argued on my side that he conceded that there was a god who set up natural laws and created people (Jefferson also mentions a Creator in his next paragraph), but that the god then took off for the hills and let the world run on its own. Jefferson's word selection here, and the doctrine implicit in the document that people should be in charge of their own destiny only back up the idea that he's not exactly calling on the Hebrew god here. It's pretty widely acknowledged that Jefferson and some of his peers were Deists, which means that they believed more or less what I've described. Christers ignore the historical record and argue in other directions, of course, and that's fine. It's not the point here.
What does matter here is the relevance of the Declaration of Independence to the laws of our nation. Discounting the fact that without a Declaration of Independence, we might not be our own nation with its own laws, there is no relevance. Have you ever read the declaration? It's an indictment of King George III on a number of very specific charges and a justification, based upon that indictment, of the U.S.'s severance of ties with England. That's all it is. Again, there is no reference whatsoever within the document to the 10 commandments or the Bible or even explicitly to the Christian god. Moreover, the fundamental tenet of the declaration (universal equality and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness), is based in large part French philosopher Montesquieu's Spirit of Laws, which is based in large part on the work of John Locke.
The final confusing document I'll cover herein is the Bill of Rights. For the most part, the Constitution deals with matters of government -- how and when elections will take place and how old you have to be to hold office and how the checks and balances work. Civil liberties are addressed briefly in the amendments to the Constitution, of which the first 10 make up the Bill of Rights. And the amendment that causes state/religion controversy is the first. It reads as follows:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The amendment offers protection of and from religious beliefs. It states explicitly that Congress will establish no religion and will make no laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. So if Congress endorses or mandates Christian prayer under any circumstances, it is violating the first amendment. On the other hand, if Congress monitors your home and tosses you in jail for practicing Christianity, it is also violating the first amendment. This amendment states plainly that religion is not the business of the federal government. What it doesn't state is that Congress can govern the establishment of or impediment to religion within the states. Other amendments that affect all states apply specifically and verbally to "the United States," while this amendment simply restricts Congress's behavior.
It's your individual state constitution that determines what your religious rights are. The Tennessee Constitution, for example, reads as follows:
That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any minister against his consent; that no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishment or mode of worship.Compare this to another portion of the Tennessee Constitution:
No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state.
No wonder people are confused about what determines their religious rights. The long and short of it is that our federal government documents in no way reflect the 10 commandments and confer no right or requirement upon anyone to post the 10 commandments on government facilities. To suggest that the laws of our country are founded on the 10 commandments is to display ignorance of our laws and rights. And to suggest that the founding fathers came up with the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights over open Bibles during a Southern Baptist prayer meeting is simply wrong. Don't let the Christers use that argument. If you weren't armed to rebut before, you should be a little better armed now.
The facts in this document come courtesy of the National Archives and Records Administration.
January 19, 2002