Revisionists trying to distort Founders' view of religion

Published: Sunday, Nov. 1, 2009 12:05 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 

Last week's column on the Founders' view on the indispensability of religion provoked a large number of comments and e-mails. Some were thoughtful and some under cloak of anonymity were quite mean-spirited. A theme touched on by a number of these comments related to the purported "secular" nature of the Constitution and the Founders.

For example, Bob Ritter, founder and president of the Jefferson Madison Center for Religious Liberty, notes that "the Constitution is a wholly secular charter ... (and) religion is not essential at all for the Constitution's efficaciousness." Indeed, Ritter's Web site takes issue with "those who claim the United States is a Christian Nation or based on Christian principles." Another commenter states that "the First Amendment effectively says 'religion is irrelevant to government.' " Yet another comment says "the secular founding guys — James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams — won out over the religious founding guys — Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams and others. Our government was founded on secular (nonreligious) principles through and through."

All of us are inclined to view historical events and personalities through the prism of our own philosophy and ideology. This includes me. I have tried very carefully to understand why there is such a wide divergence of views over the principles on which our government was founded and, in particular, the views of the Founders on religion.

Story continues below

It strikes me that, in part, some of the confusion and hostility derives from trying to put the Founders squarely on ones' own team. For example, many Christians believe and find various quotations to support their view that the Founders were Christian and intended for this to be a Christian nation. On the other hand, those who believe this is a secular country and founded on secular principles find various quotes among the Founders to support that position. Indeed, it is possible, to read various comments of the Founders to support either of these propositions.

Recent comments

Nice article Joe. You are far too diplomatic to have remarked on...

Bob Pomeroy | Nov. 6, 2009 at 1:43 a.m.

Mr. Cannon: Let me add one more thing from my last post. You mention...

To Joe Cannon | Nov. 3, 2009 at 3:23 p.m.

Mr. Cannon: I have five points to make.
1. Just because someone...

To Joe Cannon | Nov. 3, 2009 at 3:09 p.m.

previousnext

Latest comments

Letters: Forget about Hall

Sorry, John not going to happen, I just ordered my Max Hall hates me, Go Utes...

So Josh Powell designs websites as his profession, yet he doesn't create one...

Best wishes to Sister Monson, and also to President Monson. Hope you continue...

Letters: Marxist takeover

To JohnC, Lew did get it right (once again), if Obama wanted to push Marxist...

Lately Utah has had a great team. Year in and year out. And so does BYU and...

Frances Monson recovering well

Pres. and Sr. Monson we are grateful that Sr. Monson is recovering well. We...

You're paranoid.

Sunset to discuss chickens

I believe a Chicken in every Pot was also a Harry Truman campaign promise -...

If a premedidated murderer knew he would be put to death there would be...

Susan Powell notebook seized

Geez I'm glad there are so many 'experts' out there. The police wouldn't...

Advertisements