Reader comments
Founding Fathers' religious intent refereed

I was raised a Unitarian so I know a lot about the religion. They have no scriptures. They do not profess a belief in God (a few do believe however that God is in every rock and blade of grass). Their youth origanization is called Liberal Religious Youth; and they are. I learned about masterbation at an LRY Camp. Pre-marital sex is normal. Many are gay. They cause much trouble to the LDS Church in SLC. The ACLU and Unitarians have much in common. Please don't buy the book and therefore support this man.

Where was the Mormons' influence? Oh, that's right, they weren't able to have a Church until after these Unitarians, Congregationalists, Episcopalians, and Baptists established a nation in which Joseph Smith could then condemn them and start his own Church! Seems that Mormon's attacks on the "truth" of these other Churches is biting the hand that fed them!

Mormon theology clearly teaches not a Christian nation, but a MORMON NATION.
Mormon Prophet Hinckley, on Apr 6, 03, embraced the invasion of Iraq as part of Christ's mission, "I come to bring the sword," and justified war (by the US) as an instrument of foreign policy, to oppose oppresion, etc.
One day all will understand the force and certain success of Mormonism in America!

If, as many believe, all men were created equal, is there room in America for those who are members of a less equal church.
Clearly, whatever their background, the founders opposed religion, all religion, as part of the Federal Government.

The article did not make clear the fact that the First Amendment prohibition on Congress making any law respecting an "establishment of religion" was intended to protect the established churches in Virginia, Massachusetts and several other states from Federal action to either disestablish them, or to establish a Federal church like the Church of England for the purpose of advancing national unity. The "free exercise of religion" clause did not protect citizens from religious oppression by state governments, which was the legal basis for President Martin Van Buren's statement to Joseph Smith that the Federal government could do nothing to help the Mormons against official persecution by the State of Missouri. The First Amendment was not applied to the States until after the 14th Amendment regulating state action was enacted at the end of the Civil War, and held by the Supreme Court to "incorporate" most of the Bill of Rights. When the Supreme Court held that the Establishment Clause barred State action to "establish" a church, such as through prayer in schools, it was in direct contradiction to the plain original intent of the First Amendment.

From the article: "Adams and the New England clergy favored the English ideal of a Christian Commonwealth, and people like Jefferson promoted the French Enlightenment ideal of reason and personal freedom. At the heart of that divide was the nature of human nature. Adams, Church says, believed in the Puritan notion that humans were, at heart, sinners who needed moral guidance; Jefferson believed that people were by nature good."

I disagree that the nature of "human nature" was a major motivator in the debate. There really is no such thing as "human nature" because we are not run by our genetics. Humans have extragenetic programming that can override some (at least) of the ingrained behaviors of "human nature." It's called "education."

The core of the argument was, and continues to be, a belief in aristocracy as opposed to egalitarianism. Adams was of an aristocratic family in Boston and his attitudes were so shaped. While born of wealth, Jefferson (who died in debt because of his pursuit of perfection at Monticello) overcame his early indoctrination and became a clear egalitarian. Both men found religion "useful" for political purposes but utterly devoid of truth.

Forrest Church is the first book-author to discuss the question, "Did George Washington say, "So help me God?" as he was sworn in as first President of the United States. Reverend Church's discussion can be found in an "Appendix" which appears near the end of his book. In spite of the widespread belief to the contrary, there is no contemporary historical evidence to support the notion of George Washington having appended anything to his presidential oath. Notwithstanding this fact, the author defends this "tradition" as starting with George Washington.

Mitt Romney should address this topic. He often cites Abraham Lincoln's "political religion" as a future guide if he were elected President. However, Romney should be advised of Lincoln's reported response when he received a request "before his inaugural in 1861, and also before his second inaugural in 1865, asking him, in deference to the consciences of the Christian people of the land, to take the presidential oath in the name of God. He replied both times that God's name was not in the Constitution, and he could not depart from the letter of that instrument." [James Mitchell Foster, in his book, "Christ the King" (1894), page 27]