This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Official Confirmation that the United States is NOT a Nation Founded on Christianity

Official Confirmation that the United States is NOT a Nation Founded on Christianity - Comments

KRKBAB's Avatar Comment 1 by KRKBAB

Yeah, baby!

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:47:00 UTC | #382333

KRKBAB's Avatar Comment 2 by KRKBAB

Okay, it sure is nice to see in writing "Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."- but I'm a bit uneasy about it being all wrapped up in this "Mahometan Nation" appeasement.

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:51:00 UTC | #382335

mattincinci's Avatar Comment 3 by mattincinci

odd that the document can't be found in the library of congress

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 13:25:00 UTC | #382341

Max of Earlobes's Avatar Comment 4 by Max of Earlobes

As if anybody will take any notice.

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 13:49:00 UTC | #382344

Rev.JeffroBodean's Avatar Comment 5 by Rev.JeffroBodean

Here is the address of the treaty from the Library of Congress website:

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llac2&fileName=009/llac009.db&recNum=340

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 13:56:00 UTC | #382346

The Madder Hat's Avatar Comment 6 by The Madder Hat

Yeah, like facts are going to get in the way.

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 13:58:00 UTC | #382347

Acumen's Avatar Comment 7 by Acumen

It's no use, it doesn't work.

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=125

And that's from people who actually sat down and tried to reason out a counter-argument. Your average wingnut just dismisses it as "irrelevant" and continues to misquote Patrick Henry and claim our laws come from the Ten Commandments ("But if that were true, why isn't blasphemy illegal?" "It is!" "No, it really isn't." "Well, it should be.")

As my father likes to say about liberals and secularists, but which applies better to himself: "Don't confuse me with the facts, I know how I feel about it."

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 14:08:00 UTC | #382348

Mayhemm's Avatar Comment 8 by Mayhemm

I think most people here were already aware of the contents of the treaty. And, since this is hardly a new document, the whole "Christian Nation" was still able to be brought about despite its existence.

The only thing that will really convince people is if the President were to go on national television and declare the "Christian Nation" thing for what it is; bullshit.

Even then, some of them would probably proclaim it an atheist conspiracy and rebel against the government.

My point is, we need some top level people to step up and say "here's how it is and has been for 300 years". Referring wingnuts to some old document (as they would see it) just won't do the job. They'll just point to some even older document *cough*bible*cough* and say "mine trumps yours".

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:10:00 UTC | #382365

antx's Avatar Comment 9 by antx

Don't confuse me with the facts, I know how I feel about it."


Hahaha... that is, just so, "laalalalalaa, I can´t hear you, laalalalalaa...". -> Kindergarten!!!

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:24:00 UTC | #382367

cam9976's Avatar Comment 10 by cam9976

If they want to think that Jesus wrote the constitution, there's not much we can do to stop them. Yes, we were founded by secularists, agnostics, deists, and at least one atheist: but the founding fathers made the unfortunate mistake of using the term god: so now all the Christians can always say "he said His name, therefore we're a Christian nation."

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:17:00 UTC | #382394

serotonin_wraith's Avatar Comment 11 by serotonin_wraith

The only thing that will really convince people is if the President were to go on national television and declare the "Christian Nation" thing for what it is; bullshit.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMOiZB6KNko

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:22:00 UTC | #382396

The_Metatron's Avatar Comment 12 by The_Metatron

@mattincini:

It's here at the Library of Congress:

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsp&fileName=002/llsp002.db&recNum=23

Not easy to find, I assure you.

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:57:00 UTC | #382410

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 13 by Diacanu

I'm convinced the Christian fundies aren't the slightest bit "confused", about the facts.
They want a theocratic country, they don't care what gets in the way, they just WANT it, and they're willing to lie, and cheat, and bully to get it.

Doubt me, look at history.

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 20:10:00 UTC | #382414

the great teapot's Avatar Comment 14 by the great teapot

So what.
They could have been wrong.
The USA has every right to base it's current law on religion should it wish.
Why base law on a few atheists who didn't even know electricity existed. (except for the bit about guns)
must add :) for the irony free.

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 20:27:00 UTC | #382421

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 15 by Diacanu

the great teapot-

You're doing a put-on, right?

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 20:30:00 UTC | #382423

the great teapot's Avatar Comment 16 by the great teapot

right.
Sorry Diacanu, just enjoying too many G&Ts watching highlights of the tour de france,(at last my fav sporting event has a couple of good brits in it, well done to Lance the superhuman and stropy git btw)

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 20:32:00 UTC | #382424

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 17 by Diacanu

'Kay, sorry, Poe's Law and all that....

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 20:37:00 UTC | #382426

j.mills's Avatar Comment 18 by j.mills

Hot news. Next up: Napoleon invades Russia. :)

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 20:44:00 UTC | #382433

Topher's Avatar Comment 19 by Topher

It's a nice argument, but unfortunately, it does pale in comparison to The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783, which, arguably, really was responsible for the founding of the United States:

"In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity.

"It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the grace of God, king of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of Brunswick and Lunebourg, arch-treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire etc., and of the United States of America..."

Personally, I think the U.S. Constitution trumps both documents (meaning that the U.S. is not a Christian nation), but while the Treaty of Tripoli is a nice document, it really doesn't settle anything, unfortunately.

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:06:00 UTC | #382445

shemp333's Avatar Comment 20 by shemp333

Hey I think this is just great. I knew of this already, but in order for people to hear it, it has to be repeated many times over until people hear it. I am overjoyed to read it over again, and again, and again... over and over.... Crimson and Clover!!!!

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:07:00 UTC | #382446

shemp333's Avatar Comment 21 by shemp333

Hey I think this is just a terrific post. Although I know this already many people may not. And in order for people to hear something it may have to be repeated many times until they actually hear it. I am overjoyed to read these words once again. And again, and again, and again. Over and over, Crimson and Clover!!!

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:10:00 UTC | #382448

AtheistJon's Avatar Comment 22 by AtheistJon

Article 1. There is a firm and perpetual peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary, made by the free consent of both parties, and guarantied by the most potent Dey and Regency of Algiers.

Art. 2. If any goods belonging to any nation with which either of the parties is at war, shall be loaded on board of vessels belonging to the other party, they shall pass free, and no attempt shall be made to take or detain them.

This is an interesting treaty since not long after this, this murderous Pasha Yusev of Tripoli declared war against the US anyway, and in 1804 took 300 prisoners from the USS Philadelphia, not just as POWs but as interned slaves. He should have been dealt with militarily as soon as possible. When Tobias Lear (on behalf of Thomas Jefferson) signed a new treaty with this same guy in 1805, it was a disgrace. The arabic translation of the "new" treaty (which in English said that no prisoners of war were to be taken as slaves) stipulated in Arabic that they would be taken as slaves. TJ and Lear were very stupid to sign this 2nd treaty and pay still further sums of tribute, when William Eaton and the US Marines and Navy together with a mercenary army had just conquered the Libyan city of Dern. These guys who bravely conquered Dern were betrayed by their own countrymen... I wouldn't have thought that Jefferson was capable of this. Read the story in "The Pirate Coast" by Richard Zacks.

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:22:00 UTC | #382455

prolibertas's Avatar Comment 23 by prolibertas

'The only thing that will really convince people is if the President were to go on national television and declare the "Christian Nation" thing for what it is; bullshit'.

No, that would just turn them against the President. Nothing will change their mind.

All the rest of us have to do is read the Constitution and the Bible. The Constitution contains no mention of Jesus, and it contradicts the Ten Commandments: 'Have no other gods before me' and 'Don't blaspheme' contradict separation of church and state, and free speech. No discrimination against women and no keeping of slaves contradict the Bible right up to St Paul. Even punishing crime (and therefore the whole of the rule of law) goes against Jesus himself: 'Whosoever takes your coat, give him your other also'.

And what about those Christians who try to end church/state separation, censor free speech, and 'bring the Constitution more in line with the Bible' (Mike Hukabee). If the Constitution is founded on Christianity, then why is it always Christians who are trying to get it changed?

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:35:00 UTC | #382461

SnapperLaFleur's Avatar Comment 24 by SnapperLaFleur

If we can only get them to strike all of the "In God We Trust" and "One Nation Under God" stuff!

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:44:00 UTC | #382478

stephenray's Avatar Comment 25 by stephenray

@ Mayhemm:

"The only thing that will really convince people is if the President were to go on national television and declare the "Christian Nation" thing for what it is; bullshit."

Well, but yeah: any fule kno Hussein Obama dun got borned in Keenyer and is dag-blamed raghead, ennyway.

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:43:00 UTC | #382486

friendlypig's Avatar Comment 26 by friendlypig

The fact that this Treaty was drawn up as a result of incidents which occurred off the coast of North Africa towards the end of the 18th Century is surely not relevant.

What matters here is that the Treaty was read out loud before the assembled Senate and accepted without dissent and then signed by John Adams.

It might not get through to the fundies but there is enough there to make the more enlightened ones think.

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:01:00 UTC | #382489

Colwyn Abernathy's Avatar Comment 27 by Colwyn Abernathy

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen;


PWND. Now how about a nice tall, frosty glass of SHUT THE FUCK UP ALREADY?

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:08:00 UTC | #382495

refuteist's Avatar Comment 28 by refuteist

Do we always need to reduce the argument to profanity?

"It is a vice so mean and low without any temptation that every man of sense and character detests and despises it." George Washington

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:35:00 UTC | #382543

Mr. Forrest's Avatar Comment 29 by Mr. Forrest

I don't believe in curse words. I believe a lot of people have deemed some words unacceptable, but quite frankly it's idiotic.

If I feel the need to call someone a moron I will. Making ones arguments by the use of cursing does not make ones argument any better OR worse.
Anyone and everyone should be allowed to vent their frustrations using such words... and my God theists are a bunch frustrating WANKERS.... So there

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:51:00 UTC | #382583

Sconnor's Avatar Comment 30 by Sconnor

Do we always need to reduce the argument to profanity?

"It is a vice so mean and low without any temptation that every man of sense and character detests and despises it." George Washington



I got another great quote from another George -- on why he chooses to use profanity.

"Because it‘s a form of spice in my stew." -- George Carlin

Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:31:00 UTC | #382642