Constitution Party

Frankly, that is revisionist history used by those that want to remove any mention of Christianity from public life. Please don't fall for their misrepresentations of history.

Ken</font>[/QUOTE]I've read most of the writings of Jefferson and Madison. I saw no mentions of devotion to Christianity. Paine's The Age of Reason is quite anti-Christian. I admit to reading less of Washington's, Franklin's, and Adam's work (which is why in my post I speak rather delicately on them), but what I have read, I've seen no mention of faith in Christianity. The Treaty of Tripoli is certainly not revisionistic. I assure you, it existed. It was passed unanimously by the Senate and signed into law by Adams. It states:

"The United States is not a Christian nation any more than it is a Jewish or a Mohammedan nation."

How do you respond to this?

 

Most likely what was meant was that the United States was not a "Christian nation" in the sense that the European states considered themselves to be "Christian nations" where one denomination or church was favored by the government.

Also, you might be interested in this quote from the same President Adams that signed the treaty:

"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature." - June 28, 1813

Ken

 

I think there is a difference concerning words, then and now. The U.S. was not founded as a "fundamentalist"(as we understand the word in 2002) Christian nation. I have no idea what the founders beliefs were as far as inerrancy, etc. goes, issues that divides Christians today. That they expected the government to promote right doing and expected the general populace to follow God's law in their lives is what it means to say that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation - not to be defined in narrow, fundamentalist terms.

Ken

 

I do not know.

Ken</font>[/QUOTE]In that case, is not the name this party chooses to call themselves ironic?

It seems to me, the founding fathers, if they intended on us to be a non-denominational Christian nation, would have said so in the document that created our government.

I give you this quote from Jefferson's Autobiography. It refers to a measure passed by Virginia's Congress. Many of those men were present at the signing of the Constitution.

[When] the [Virginia] bill for establishing religious freedom ... was finally passed, ... a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, 1821

 

Of course, as you know, quotes of various founders can be given that support the Christian nation view. The founders did not speak with one voice on the issues of the day.

Of course the law of God as embodied in the Ten Commandments apply to all people everywhere. So no nation, and no person, is exempt from following them.

Ken

 

Do you agree that your initial assertion of the Deist roots of our nation as revisionism was in error?

And for no good reason, I'll give my favorite quote of all on this subject:

When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.
-- Benjamin Franklin

[ July 12, 2002, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: Candide ]

 

No. Our founding as a nation was rooted and grounded in Christianity, just not fundamentalism as we know it today.

Ken

 

Thanks, Webmaster, for posting the info on the Constitution Party.

Here's an intreesting scenario:

The pro-lifers in the Libertarian Party (I think they call themselves "Libertarians for Life") gain more power in their party, and a merger is worked out between the Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party. If you thinnk about it, if the agreement were based on the pro-life position, the other differences between the parties are relatively minor, and the compromises needed for a merger would not be much for either side. The result would be a strong third party that would look much like what Webmaster has posted.

I LOVE many of the things that have been said on this thread. We need to do (and vote)right and leave the results to God. He will give victory to Constitution Party candidates if He wishes, but our job is simply to vote for candidates who TRULY uphold Godly constitutional government.

http://covenantnews.com/baldwin010306.htm

 

Hello folks, I am new to this forum. I didn't have time to read every post but I noticed this thread and just wanted to let you know that I am a member of the Constitution Party of New York and if there is anyone here from NY I invite you to check out our website and get involved.

Thanks,
Joe

 

Folks, please check the link that the Webmaster has posted, and support these folks.

I have done some work for them in the past, and believe me, there's nothing more saddening than having a GOOD candidate, and having Christians refuse to support him because they would rather vote for a liberal leftist Republican who "has a chance to win".

 

As a complete outsider it was a positive thing to read what the webmaster had posted in the beginning of this thread. I am no expert on politics, but the program of this Constitution Party appears to be comparatively good, if not praiseworthy, especially when thinking of the evil and liberal and humanistic times we live in. I only found a few things worded in such a way that I personally might propose a change in it, but otherwise I think this would be the most honorable party in the USA today. If ever God the Lord was involved in politics I believe this party to be one He would not condemn too strongly. I know it is not the easiest thing to apply the word of God and its principles and teachings to the governing of a sovereign nation, including its written constitution, and its enforcement in practice. I cannot tell if any modern nation since the so called Reformation has fully succeeded in this task. I would tend to think the USA in its early years, up till the end of the 19th century about, was pretty well governed, and was reportedly a country envied by most other countries. I would also think that Great Britain also pretty much has been enabled to apply the principles of the Bible and the Reformation to its government. Its constitution has however developed over a perion of several hundreds of years, and I guess it differs quite much from that of the USA. But both of these nations are reportedly founded upon the most praiseworthy principles of the Protestant Reformation, which may be a clue to their prosperity. As for Great Britain I think most honest people would say its prosperity is no more. USA is probably far worse off, much due to the worthless leaders of past decades, who, as someone stated, have much violated the original constitution and brought in new laws, tending to the said New World Order. If I lived in America I think I would support the Constitution Party.

As for the founding of the USA in 1776 I believe the truth is that several of the signers of the constitution were practising Free Masons, which means they were hardly true Christians in the Biblical sense of the word. I believe however that they were more honorable and just than modern day Masons, e.g. Bush Jr., Clinton etc. I believe many of those founding father masons held the Bible in higher esteem than their modern day counterparts. The result was a constitution I find quite honorable and just. As to whether some signers were Christians I do not know about that, but at least many of them professed to be, and tried to the best of their understanding and ability apply Biblical principles to the constitution. But I do not see any use of denying the fact that some founders in fact were freemasons, because so many things point to this. Freemasonry is an antichristian religion which has borrowed its dogmas and stuff from many other religions. But nevertheless it appears that God in some measure blessed the forging of the constitution, and USA as a nation for many decades, and it reportedly prospered in many ways. So my advise would be to vote for the Constitution Party, despite the fact that before Almighty God it is far from perfect.

Harald

 

PA Jim,

Re your scenario, I'm afraid it is mostly fantasy. First of all, the pro-lifers in the Libertarian Party are hardly capable of delivering the rest of the party, in which they are a minority, over to the Constitutionalists. Secondly, I suspect that most Libertarians would be rather aghast at the religious underpinnings of the CP. BTW, what is the CP's view of the drug war?

 

The Constitutional Party as some good ideals. Better than the corrupt democratic and republican parties.

 

Interesting debate, lots of heat not much light however! To think that the answer to our countries ills lies in any political "movement" is fantasy. Whatever party you belong to or support, it is ultimatly a grab for power and control of a seriously flawed system. You cannot legislate morality. People do and say what is in thier heart to do and say and if you want that to change that, there is only one person that can accomplish that task, Jesus Christ. I challenge you to put down your political platforms and place the Gospel at the forefront of your life's work. BTW is really doesn't matter where you begin, country or otherwise, it matters where you end up!

 

And the problem with that, go2church, is that while we sit here putting our bibles first, those that don't have morality are in charge of legislating morality for the rest of us.

In other words, I agree with what you wrote; but in practice, if we simply allow others to dictate politics, we'll end up like Canada.

 

The Constitution Party (CP) has never suggested that they're the SOLE answer to the problem.

Of course a Christian's relationship with God comes first in life. I doubt there's even one CP member who would suggest that politics should be placed above that.

But political action has played an important part in America, for the entire history of our nation. Most of the Founding Fathers prayed, but if they had done only that, our nation would've never been founded, and we wouldn't be here.

Prayer is important, but to rely on prayer alone is folly. Many Christians and Jews prayed mightily to be spared from the Communists and Nazis, but millions of them still died. Some of the ones who actively resisted were able to live.

Should we have just prayed for Hitler to be defeated?! No, we had to send a heavily-armed military to accomplish the mission.

In the Bible, Jesus advised his followers to sell their coat and buy a sword. A clear message that prayer alone wasn't going to protect them.