|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
[Order David Horowitz’s new book, America Betrayed, HERE.]
You knew that the New York Times wouldn’t let a patriotic holiday like Independence Day pass without taking a subversive shot at patriotism or America itself or her founding. Sure enough, author, editor, and Times columnist Pamela Paul wrote a July 4th opinion piece with a headline that, in addition to being wrong, was insulting to all Americans of faith: “Your Religious Values Are Not American Values.” Predictably, it regurgitates many of the Left’s usual negative tropes about Christianity and our country’s founding.
Allow me to address some of those tropes, and please forgive the belated response to a 4th of July editorial. The news cycle was understandably hijacked by the Trump assassination attempt, but I couldn’t let this Times op-ed go unanswered, because the debate over whether America is a Christian nation is one that continues to rage today, in no small part due to misconceptions about what the term even means. But mostly the debate rages because secular subversives like those at the New York Times work perpetually to dismantle the moral and religious foundations of America and the West.
Pamela Paul begins her article, “Whenever a politician cites ‘Judeo-Christian values,’ I find it’s generally followed by something unsettling.” Of course she does, because as a self-identified “rationalist,” she rejects the biblical basis of our morality – or at least, the parts of it that “unsettle” her. She’s fine with the “Thou shalt not kill” part, she states, but chafes at the “jealous God” part.
She segues quickly to raise the terrifying specter of Christian nationalism which – as I’ve written elsewhere – is the boogeyman the Left relentlessly warns will transform the country into a patriarchal theocracy, a Handmaid’s Tale dystopia in which infanticide is illegal (horrors!) and women are reduced to baby-making slavery. As evidence that Christian nationalism is an ominous Threat to Democracy™, Mrs. Paul cites the mission statement of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers. It reads, in part, “doing everything we can to restore the Judeo-Christian foundation of our nation.” This is scary only if you object to Judeo-Christian values.
The crux of her argument is,
Despite what the Christian nationalist movement would have you believe America was not founded as a Christian nation. Nor is it one today. In a pluralistic country, neither the Bible nor Judeo-Christian values are universal…
Yes, of course this is a pluralistic country; people of all faiths and none populate our shores. Being a Christian nation does not mean that every American is, or always was, or must be, Christian. No one who says America was founded as a Christian nation means that Hindus or Buddhists or even satanists are not allowed to live here or worship their gods (or lack thereof) freely. What the expression “Christian nation” means is quite simply that this country was founded on and sustained by Judeo-Christian principles.
What are Judeo-Christian principles? I’m glad you asked. They are the religious moral code that forms the foundation of Western civilization and that powered it to become the freest and most prosperous civilization in history (change my mind). They derive from the Bible, the single most foundational text of the Western world.
By the way, for those who complain that there is no such religion as “Judeo-Christian”: that’s true, but the term is not intended to suggest as much. Judaism and Christianity are distinct faiths, but at the same time they are bound together by the code of values called Judeo-Christian because Christian morality is rooted in the Ten Commandments of Old Testament Judaism. Jesus was a Jew.
Rather than get into a definitive list of Judeo-Christian values, let me just summarize the ones most relevant to the New York Times piece: there is one God who is the source of objective morality and from whom our rights and freedoms flow to all men, who are created in the image of God. These values confer an historically unprecedented dignity and worth on the individual, and are all reflected in the founding documents of our nation. The values of Islam or Shinto or Wicca, etc., are not.
Many argue that we were not founded as a Christian nation because the Founding Fathers themselves held a variety of unorthodox beliefs including and especially deism. Deism posits a god who sets the universe in motion and then acts essentially like an absentee landlord, removed from the affairs of men. But as Mark David Hall writes in Did America Have a Christian Founding?, “there is virtually no evidence that America’s founders embraced such views.” On the contrary, the Founding Fathers routinely referred to God as the “Providence” who most definitely involved Himself in the affairs of men. In the main, the Fathers were all orthodox (with a small “o”) Christians and believed that our freedoms flow from the Creator. Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, asked, “Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?”
Anyway, Mrs. Paul asserts that “not everyone draws ethical guidelines from religion” and that the Commandment “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” implies “there is one true god.” Sorry, but that’s how monotheism works, and the West’s religious origins lie in monotheism. Maybe that’s not inclusive enough for the atheist left, but monotheism works; the alternative of embracing a pantheon of false gods is a recipe for civilizational disaster.
And contrary to Mrs. Paul, everyone does draw ethical guidelines from religion. As mentioned above, without a god who is the authoritative source of our morality, there is no objective basis for morality at all. Everyone could simply “do what was right in their own eyes” – a quote from the Book of Judges referring to a biblical era that was a time of terrible human misery and moral chaos. That is where we are currently headed, precisely because our civilizational values are breaking down and being replaced by the new pagan faith of expressive individualism.
Paul claims her faith lies in “science or humanity, as disappointing as humanity can be.” First, the cliché that faith and science are irreconcilable opposites is false. In fact, Western science was born out of the Christian impulse to understand the laws of nature and the nature of God Himself through the faculty of reason with which He imbued us. Second, science is not a faith system but an investigative procedure, and as we are all painfully aware after the pandemic, behind the push to posit science as a faith system is a corrupt and controlling cabal of corporate false prophets.
She goes on to complain that the Bible is a questionable moral source because it justifies slavery and “has inspired and abetted many of the world’s most violent and deadly wars.” Let me remind her that it was biblical values that led to the Christian abolition of slavery in the West before anywhere else in the world. As for war, it is endemic to human nature; not only is it ludicrous to think that we would be a more peaceful species without religion, but the “world’s most violent and deadly” ideologies have in fact been atheist, not biblical.
“This Fourth of July,” Paul concludes, “let’s bear in mind that what many Americans value in this country is its inclusion and protection of everyone, regardless of their beliefs.” Yes, of course. That’s called religious freedom, and she can thank the Judeo-Christian convictions of the Founders for the establishment of protections for those “sacred rights of conscience.”
The New York Times’ dismissive headline “Your Religious Values Are Not American Values,” on the birthday of our independence no less, couldn’t be more wrong. Indeed, it is because we have devolved into a post-Christian America today that our country is in such distress. Our nation and civilization will rise again only when we have reclaimed those religious values as our guiding star.
Follow Mark Tapson at Culture Warrior
Excellent Mark, thank you.
Scientists need to be held back otherwise they will create dangerous things such as happens with gain of function research, climate engineering, nuclear weapons, genetic engineering, poisons and pharmaceutical research the list goes on.
It is the Judaism Christian values that holds them back NOT some man made international world order, anyone who thinks that the UN is morally superior hasn’t looked into it.
There is Augustinian Christianity and there is Thomist Christianity.
Augustinian Christianity is thoroughly anti-reason, anti-science, anti-this world, anti-life, and anti-happiness.
Thomist Christianity represents the introduction of the secular, rational, and logic-based philosophy of Aristotle into the Christian Dark Ages. Thereafter, and because of the pagan Aristotelian influence, the Renaissance began. “Renaissance” means rebirth, not the rebirth of Christian faith and Christian dogma, but the rebirth of Aristotelian reason and logic.
“What were the practical results of the medieval approach? The Dark Ages were dark on principle. Augustine fought against secular philosophy, science, art; he regarded all of it as an abomination to be swept aside; he cursed science in particular as “the lust of the eyes.” Unlike many Americans today, who drive to church in their Cadillac or tape their favorite reverend on the VCR so as not to interrupt their tennis practice, the medievals took religion seriously. They proceeded to create a society that was anti-materialistic and anti-intellectual. I do not have to remind you of the lives of the saints, who were the heroes of the period, including the men who ate only sheep’s gall and ashes, quenched their thirst with laundry water, and slept with a rock for their pillow. These were men resolutely defying nature, the body, sex, pleasure, all the snares of this life — and they were canonized for it, as, by the essence of religion, they should have been. The economic and social results of this kind of value code were inevitable; mass stagnation and abject poverty, ignorance and mass illiteracy, waves of insanity that swept whole towns, a life expectancy in the teens. “Woe unto ye who laugh now,” the Sermon on the Mount had said. Well, they were pretty safe on this count. They had precious little to laugh about.” – Leonard Peikoff
Too bad. The Founders were not thinking about Augustinian Christianity or Thomist Christianity. And no one cares about Lenny Puke-off.
But the THX beer drinking game is in full effect with the mention of Christianity and the non existent “Christian Dark Ages”
At least 4 Kilt Lifters for me
The U.S. will always be a predominantly Christian nation, and it’s not even a theocracy, your biggest fear.
“The Handmaid’s Tale”: is an accurate description of how women are treated in Muslim countries.
In the aftermath of 9/11 the author, Margaret Atwood, was interviewed on an NPR program (I forget which one). The host didn’t even bother to ask this idiot about the parallels between her dystopia and the Muslim dystopias which were all over the news that year. Neither did Ms. Atwood volunteer any observations about it without being asked.
This was one of the last NPR programs I ever listened to before giving up on the network’s offerings completely.
As for Ms. Atwood: *There are none so blind as those who will not see.*
When I read that entertaining but ultimately vapid book, my response was, “Iran”. Unfortunately, Iran has been joined by other countries since then as Islamofascism continues to spread.
Excellent and informative article. Thank you. Absolutely, the American grand experiment in liberty is based upon Judeo-Christian moral principles, classical Greco-Roman principles as well (philosophical ethics). Perhaps part of the confusion among some lies with what is deism. According to professor emeritus, Alan Kors, there were two forms of deism in the 18th century. One was positive deism, which was based upon the idea that the moral nature of God can be discerned in nature itself. (By the way, the Apostle Paul alluded to that concept as well.) The other was critical deism, which reflected the view of a “great clockmaker,” one with no interest in the affairs of humanity. Clearly, the Founders believed in the idea of natural law-natural rights, which reflects the former. The idea of natural law-natural rights extends back to the ancients (e.g. Marcus Tullius Cicero), down through and including the historical Church (e.g. Martin Luther). Whereas the private spiritual beliefs of the Founders may have varied–with some beliefs even somewhat unorthodox–collectively they understood that God created a world with both incredible material complexity and divinely inspired moral precepts.
Rational principles and rational values embedded in an ocean of contradictory mysticism, contradictory superstition, and contradictory supernaturalism become practically impotent, here on earth, in this life.
That’s why and how someone like Martin Luther could embrace the contradiction of freedom and liberty from the Roman Catholic theocracy but not secular, individual, freedom for pursuing personal and individual happiness here on earth, in this lifetime.
Christianity, in its full and complete context, does NOT offer the individual, personal freedom to pursue his personal happiness. Christianity, in its full and complete context, only offers the individual the freedom to serve God, or be sent to Hell for eternity.
“All rights rest on the ethics of egoism. Rights are an individual’s SELFISH possessions—his title to his life, his liberty, his property, the pursuit of his own happiness. Only a being who is an end in himself can claim a moral sanction to independent action. If man existed to serve an entity beyond himself, whether God or society, then he would not have rights, but only the duties of a servant.” – Leonard Peikoff
And yet many people who are Christians have the freedom to pursue and achieve happiness. Too bad you never did even as an atheist. You will always be a miserable atheist.
The dumbbitch Pamela is employed at a newspaper who’s average employee’s were so inclusive, that the drama-queens demanded the scalp of editor James Bennet.
Bennet’s “sin” was to allow Tom Cotton to write an op-ed. (Apparently the National Guard is only to be used for useless, high priced, photo-ops after Jan 6th.)
Think about that. Management at the NY Times bent the knee to their intolerant, underlings who enforce a zero inclusion policy.
Leftist dogma uber alles, or else!
“Rather than get into a definitive list of Judeo-Christian values, let me just summarize the ones most relevant to the New York Times piece: there is one God who is the source of objective morality and from whom our rights and freedoms flow to all men, who are created in the image of God. These values confer an historically unprecedented dignity and worth on the individual, and are all reflected in the founding documents of our nation.”
Right there lies your flawed argument. Christianity is way more than a few cherry-picked values. If you have a rational value (the freedom and dignity of the individual) embedded in a contradictory context of mysticism, superstition, and supernaturalism, that value becomes practically worthless.
Not to mention that you are ignoring the secular, pagan, influence of the works of Aristotle and Cicero on the thinking of the Founders.
“Greece created philosophy, logic, science, mathematics, and a magnificent, man-glorifying art; it gave us the base of modern civilization in every field; it taught the West how to think. In addition, through its admirers in ancient Rome, which built on the Greek intellectual base, Greece indirectly gave us the rule of law and the first idea of man’s rights (this idea was originated by the pagan Stoics). Politically, the ancients never conceived a society of full-fledged individual liberty; no nation achieved that before the United States. But the ancients did lay certain theoretical bases for the concept of liberty; and in practice, both in some of the Greek city-states and in republican Rome, large numbers of men at various times were at least relatively free. They were incomparably more free than their counterparts ever had been in the religious cultures of ancient Egypt and its equivalents.” – Leonard Peikoff
(continued below)
Do you really think anyone will take this two part pile of Objective dogma seriously?
Too Long Didn’t Read. Don’t care. Hint: you aren’t changing anything other than your attempt to undermine this country.
In ancient Rome, a new born child was placed in front of its father. If he held it and named it, it got to grow up. If he ignored it, it was exposed for wild animals to eat. One of the many glories of a Classical civilisation that was non-patriarchal and respectful of the rights of all human beings, you understand.
You forgot the /sarc/ tag; some people will not understand what you are saying.
“The early Christians did contribute some good ideas to the world, ideas that proved important to the cause of future freedom. I must, so to speak, give the angels their due. In particular, the idea that man has a value as an individual — that the individual soul is precious — is essentially a Christian legacy to the West; its first appearance was in the form of the idea that every man, despite Original Sin, is made in the image of God (as against the pre-Christian notion that a certain group or nation has a monopoly on human value, while the rest of mankind are properly slaves or mere barbarians). But notice a crucial point: this Christian idea, by itself, was historically impotent. It did nothing to unshackle the serfs or stay the Inquisition or turn the Puritan elders into Thomas Jeffersons. Only when the religious approach lost its power — only when the idea of individual value was able to break free from its Christian context and become integrated into a rational, secular philosophy — only then did this kind of idea bear practical fruit.
What — or who — ended the Middle Ages? My answer is: Thomas Aquinas, who introduced Aristotle, and thereby reason, into medieval culture. In the thirteenth century, for the first time in a millennium, Aquinas reasserted in the West the basic pagan approach. Reason, he said in opposition to Augustine, does not rest on faith; it is a self-contained, natural faculty, which works on sense experience. Its essential task is not to clarify revelation, but rather, as Aristotle had said, to gain knowledge of this world. Men, Aquinas declared forthrightly, must use and obey reason; whatever one can prove by reason and logic, he said, is true. Aquinas himself thought he could prove the existence of God, and he thought that faith is valuable as a supplement to reason. But this did not alter the nature of his revolution. His was the charter of liberty, the moral and philosophical sanction, which the West had desperately needed. His message to mankind, after the long ordeal of faith, was in effect: “It’s all right. You don’t have to stifle your mind anymore. You can think.” – Leonard Peikoff, “Religion versus America”
Got news for you. No one but your 5 or 6 acolytes, who show up to downvote me, care about Lenny Puke-off either. You should be less obvious.
How did I know this article would send you over the edge. Because this type of article always does.
“No one who says America was founded as a Christian nation means that Hindus or Buddhists or even satanists are not allowed to live here or worship their gods (or lack thereof) freely.”
I notice you do not mention the Muslims. Their religion is more overtly hostile to our Christian faith, but Hindus and Buddhists are only less so. This being the case, the question becomes how much hostility do we tolerate, knowing toleration becomes acceptance? Do we care about our children? Do we so easily give up our patrimony?
Religious freedom in the time of the founders extended only to Jews and Christians, who share the same essential religious foundation. As ugly as it might seem, as difficult as it might be to implement, we need to return to our jealous God, who requires Truth and hates syncretism.
We shouldn’t be allowing Muslims to live here. They are intent on destroying us and have openly said so. Let the deportations begin on day one of the Trump admin. Or we will be fighting them in the streets.
Read Kurt Schlichter’s “The Attack” Its’ a warning. $17 @ Amazon.
No religion, including Judaism and Christianity, when it is true to itself, can tolerate the freedom to think for oneself and leave the individual alone, in peace, to live his life as his mind concludes his life should be lived.
Christianity and Judaism, when they are true to themselves, in complete form, lead to theocracy and intolerance of each other, and all other religions. The same is true of Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, and all other religions, when they are true to themselves, in complete form.
The respect for freedom of conscience, the freedom to think and act for oneself, comes from the respect for reason and logic, the respect for man’s rational abilities and capacity. The respect for man’s rational nature.
When men respect reason above faith, REALITY, becomes their objective standard and frame of reference. In such a case a demonstrable means of peaceful PERSUASION is possible but when men claim to know something is true by means of FAITH, no persuasion is possible. In that case the only recourse is to FORCE a non-believer into compliance.
“To live, man must use his mind; he must think. All human values — from money to art to love — are based on and require unbroken commitment to rationality. This is why, in the Objectivist ethics, rationality is the primary virtue.
As to those on the “right” who seek to combine reason, individualism, and individual rights with the religious faith and the primordial view of man as an object of sacrifice, Rand was clear: “In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.”
To those who seek such a compromise, we say: if you think you can reconcile reason and faith in your personal life, go ahead and try. But we urge you not to base your support of freedom and capitalism on religion: to say freedom stems from faith is to say that reason is on the side of dictatorship.” – Harry Binswanger
You wouldn’t know if a religion is true to itself because you are an atheist. You simply get your stupid ideas from other atheists like Lenny The Puke-off.
But let me tell you, when I want to get some high level B.S. about religion the guy I always turn to is Harry Binswanger….the great regurgitator of that other giant pip squeak, Randy Andy the Ayn.
Bitter, Thy Name is THX the Little
“No religion, including Judaism and Christianity, when it is true to itself, can tolerate the freedom to think for oneself and leave the individual alone, in peace, to live his life as his mind concludes his life should be lived.”
THX, you do not think for yourself. You do not have freedom. And you are not content to let us irrational Christ lovers be.
Thomist Christianity, the diluted and leashed Christianity we have today, is syncretism.
Thomist Christianity is an incompatible, ultimately unstable, mixture of Aristotelianism and Christianity.
“[Thomas Aquinas} has a monumental, ingenious philosophic system, more thorough, more systematic, than any in all of philosophy prior to his time. In its key concepts, however, it is not very original; it is an attempted synthesis of Aristotle and Christianity.” – Leonard Peikoff
“Thomas Aquinas: The Union of Aristotelianism and Christianity by Leonard Peikoff, part 28 of 50”
Oh pleassssse noooo. Not another homework assignment. Sorry teach. Just don’t have the time or the interest.
Unlike you I have a life. Oh yeah, I am not a loser either.
A sublime ass can only offer sublime asininity.
Goodness, you might even have a spouse and children. Can THX even imagine people with lives like that?
Uh, no one cares. Thomist Christianity….really? Someone once called you the king of abstract sophistry. I agree. Your arguments amount to nothing.
Talk about women being reduced to “baby-making slavery.” That is at the very core of Islamic culture. Just read any of Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s books. Or Nonie Darwish. Jaw-dropping stuff.
America was Not founded on Slavery but on a Christian Nation its just we have a secular M.S. Media and leftists run Campuses and the Hollywood left as well
Apparently, Ms Paul has never read this well known part of The Declaration of Independence:
“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.”
These are godless totalitarians whose dystopian ideology never ceases in its desires to destroy freedom while erroneously claiming to be its champion.
It is my guess she has NEVER read The Preamble, The Declaration of Independence or the totality of The Constitution. Creator is a reference to YHVH, the sovereign of all creation and not some self-serving idol eagerly chosen by people like her.
The USA is not governed by the Declaration of Independence but by the Constitution.
Neither God, Jesus Christ, nor Moses are mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, and that is thoroughly — INTENTIONAL.
The Founders, at least Madison and Jefferson, did NOT want a country ruled by Christian law, or Mosaic law, but by objective and rational laws that could be objectively and rationally demonstrated and proven to be true. They were first and foremost men of reason and logic, not of faith, they were men of the Enlightenment.
“The absence of references to “God” in the Constitution is consistent with the strict religious neutrality of the entire document. There is no state religion and Article VI of the Constitution provides that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” The First Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1791, provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
As creatures of the Enlightenment, the writers of the Constitution were keenly aware of the threat to the principle of universal freedom of religion. Indeed, shortly before the Constitution was proposed and ratified, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison squared off against Patrick Henry and his bill for “Establishing A Provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion” for Virginia in the mid-1780s. Jefferson and Madison won the day, and the Virginia legislature did not enact Henry’s bill.
Thus, when Madison drafted the Constitution he left out the term “God” since he wanted no part of religious intolerance and bloodshed, and established the first government in history to separate church and state.” – Paul A. Ksicinsky
“GOD IS NOT A PART OF THE CONSTITUTION FOR A REASON”
https://www.paulksicinskilaw.com/blog/2020/07/god-is-not-a-part-of-the-constitution-for-a-reason/
Not so sure anyone disagrees w/ ya. Are we to discern from your comment, however, that you disagree w/ the article’s basic and accurate premise that the United States was founded upon and its Constitution is grounded in Judeo-Christian principles? If so, say so – exactly. Your comment doesn’t. Instead it dances around the pole and only seems to disagree, if not attack, the article (and/or its author) by implication. Express yourself clearly and your true intentions.
When I want to get some high level B.S. about the Constitution and the Declaration the guy I always turn to is Paul A. Ksicinsky….another of the great regurgitators of that other giant pip squeak, Randy Andy the Ayn.
The more you write about your hatred of Christianity and your pathetic attempts to turn people away from God and this country, the more desperate and pathetic you sound.
The bottom line is people in this country believe in God. They don’t go looking for God in either document. They find him in Church. And in my church we actually do talk about the founding docs as well. Whatcha gonna do about it, Fk-head?
Of course not. They were by and large devout Masons.
/sarc/
We no longer have a constitutionally limited government. The Constitution requires a moral and Christian people, as our founding fathers well knew.
The second President of the United States, John Adams, had, so rightly and wisely , declared “The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity …. I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are eternal and immutable as the existence of God.”
Much of the greatness of the history of the United States of America is because this nation was, for the most part , founded and based upon the Judo- Christian percepts and the concepts and values of Bible based Christianity and not Islamic precepts and “values.”
Furthermore,, when Donald Trump in the Office of the United States Presidency it could be appropriately said “God Bless America” but now with Joe Biden sitting in the Oval Office of the White House masquerading as a real, genuine US President it’s now fitting to pray “Please, God have mercy on America.”
I watch from a foreign nation with amazement at the peaceful response of most Americans (Christians) to the constant abuse the Fascist Democrat government has heaped upon these conservative ( look up the definition) patient people…Democrats harass and blame them for being terrorists and test them daily yet they patiently wait for legal means to seek redress…if they were any other ideology, Biden’s fake military would have been addressed long ago…yet the left keeps poking the giant.. hoping for a rise so they can blame them further for their own demise
American conservatives are among the most patient and peaceable of people; this could perhaps be construed as apathy but it is not. We simply will not do anything that could cause American to turn against American in another civil war and we abhor the idea of bloodshed. This morality is what differentiates us from the left.
Thank you for writing such a clear, accurate and succinct response to Ms. Paul’s & NY Times’ predictable & typical drivel of moral relevancy crossed with historical fiction. I cannot for the life of me understand why this is so hard for the “progressive left” to accept and what exactly is it afraid of? 8th grade history used to teach the same. The original pilgrims landed here for the express purpose to practice their Christian faith freely and according to their consciences, without unthinkable oppression from the crown. The Declaration of Independence was profoundly informed by if not based on the Magna Carta Libertatum – the operative but always omitted word being “Libertatum” – The Great Charter of LIBERTY! Indeed, Christianity itself is the basis for individual civil liberties as empowers the individual by faith a gift readily available to those who reciprocate the same w/ openness to Truth. No coincidence that Marxist, Communist, Socialist societies and regimes throughout history right up to today’s woke Left, China’s CCP, academia, pop culture and the usual suspects who prey upon the ill-informed and ignorant and who labor tirelessly to keep and affirmatively strive to make the population even furtherly confused and unaware of simple basic facts, historical and even those right before our eyes, to adopt such moral equivalency and to flat out hate Judeo-Christian tradition and faith, especially the Catholic faith. As quoted in the article, Thomas Jefferson question was a rhetorical one: “Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?” Of course not. History of mankind has proven as much time and again, and obviously, we are living through such a period in history today, which is by the calculated, demonic design of the Left. It must be fought against at every juncture, at every opportunity if we truly value such liberties and truly love and are truly grateful to Our One God who freely and so generously bestowed such gifts upon us – we who did nothing to inherit them are duty-bound to defend them for our sakes, our fellow man’s sake and for the sake of He who gave them to us. This article does that. We should do so as well. Thank you.
Science and the Bible are allies. You’ll find all the answers at reasons.org. Dr. Hugh Ross, an astrophysicist, and the team of scholars that includes biochemists, quantum Mechanics graduates, theologists And more, Believe in the God of the Bible and speak worldwide to lead other scientists to Christ.
There’s plenty wrong with this article, beginning with the judeo – Christian oxymoron. Either you follow Jewish law or Christian prevepts. They are mutually exclusive. As for being s Christian Nation…. Many founding fathers were deists (a clue is They talked more often of the “creator,” instead of .Jesus).