I made some additions to my original post.

Luanne Traud:

What does the First Amendment mean in stating:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..."

Though our Founders could not see into the future, they successfully wrote a Constitution that is timeless. The Constitution is a living, breathing document. The First Amendment provides for the separation of church and state--to protect each from the other. Also protected are individual rights to freedom of conscience and free expression of religious beliefs. What was customary practice in public schools and meetings in the past is now questioned. What seems to have changed has been an increased awareness and understanding of diversity within our culture. Our diverse religious beliefs are a personal choice deserving of equal protection, regardless of popularity. Politics and religion are subject to change over time, yet the unalienable rights of all people through a government established by the consent of the governed remains the same. I sense that our Founders saw the solution to issues such as this in the U.S. Constitution, the supreme law of the land. The First Amendment seems to be standing the test of time and is protecting the choice of all citizens to practice their beliefs.  

Liniel Gregory:

First, what did Thomas Jefferson mean when he used the phrase "Nature's God"?

Welcome back, Liniel, and warm regards to Ardis.  Mr. Jefferson was a brilliant political philosopher, architect, naturalist, and politician.  (He was a poor businessman, living far beyond his means and leaving his heirs a huge burden of debt.)  He was also a deist and what Clonnie might call... dare we say it... a "secular humanist."  The Declaration of Independence was a vitally important document in the creation of our nation, though technically not an official document of the United States of America, since it was written in 1776 (thirteen years before the constitution established the new republic in 1789).  What did Mr. Jefferson mean?  A supreme being (the Almighty) created the universe and intended for man to abide by certain rules of personal and social behavior based on both faith and reason.  As a product of the Age of Enlightenment, he believed in natural laws revealed to mankind through observation and empirical anaylsis.  He was a champion of religious freedom, including freedom from state-sponsored religion.

Deb Landgraf:

I made some additions to my original post.

Brilliant, Deb!  Many woofs and rapid tail wags.

Ricky:

Brilliant, Deb!  Many woofs and rapid tail wags.

Ricky (and Dave) - Many thanks. I felt brain-dead after catching up on all of the posts last night and should have waited to respond. When we break this down into what has changed in our lifetime, I think it is the cultural understanding of our diversity and an end to practices that essentially assumed others were of similar beliefs. This cultural change may possibly be most upsetting to evangelicals. (Corrections made in later post in reference to the last sentence.) Deb

I believe that the first amendment means that we are a secular state in which their is no established religion of any sort. While there may be references to God in public buildings or other activities funded by tax payers(ie; convening a session of congress) any reference to the diety which supports a particular believe system should not be permitted. These references should  be considered to be only a recognition of his existence. That means that even if the majority of us consider ourselves Christian we do not have the right to cast any reference to the diety in a manner consistent with our beliefs when making public statements or policy. I do not disagree with the current rigor applied to the interpretation of the first amendment. I think it is legally appropriate and a recognition of the fact that we are a diverse society that respects the religious beliefs of all our citizens. The " New Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom" (reference newvastatute .org) seems to me to be a totally superfluous exercise based on the explanation provided in the referenced article. The comment in the article that;" In our age, religious liberty finds its greatest antagonists within the secular forces of society, not from any specific religion or Christian denomination.  Today the threat to liberty comes from a secular hegemony that seeks to erect an absolute wall against religious ideas, symbols and rituals, create a god-less government and relegate religious people to the confines of a private fellowship or a position of lessening influence in society;" does not in any way seem objectionable or alarming to me. In fact I am alarmed that some people feel that such a  "New Statute for Religious Freedom" is necessary. I don't understand why we need a new state statute given the current interpretation of the US constitution. It appears to be a mechanism for the Christian majority to impose its preferences.  Government can perform effectively without a religious emphasis. 

Deb Landgraf:

When we break this down into what has changed in our lifetime, I think it is the cultural understanding of our diversity and an end to practices that essentially assumed others were of similar beliefs. This cultural change may possibly be most upsetting to evangelicals.

We won't speculate too much on what upsets Evangelical Christians, other than to say that their faith occasionally compels them to behave in ways can be contrary to the practical, social, and legal constraints of our nation.  We will assert that what frustrates many social and political conservatives is change.  No all change, of course, for aside from Amish and similar folks, most conservatives in 21st century America drive cars, watch television, and use computers, cell phones, microwave ovens, etc.  What they tend to find upsetting are changes they interpret as deterioration (moral decay).  Instead of a bucket that is filling, they see a bucket that is draining.  Their negative view of human nature results in a pessimistic view of human social development.  In the mindset of Fundamentalist Christians, the world has been on a downhill slide ever since Adam and Eve got kicked out of the Garden of Eden (you know, the snake, apple, sex...). 

There is an alternate view.  Mankind is growing wiser and fairer, using the resources provided by the Almighty, learning and respecting natural laws, making progress toward a better world.  It is an eternal journey, from one generation to the next, expanding the inalienable rights of life and liberty to all mankind in the pursuit of happiness.  Two centuries ago in America the road was not open to women and blacks.  Today it is.  That's change.  Two centuries ago it was considered disgraceful for a person to openly campaign for public office.  It was considered tacky for a public official to invoke the name of God in the game of politics.  Sex was for the most part a private matter.  Not all change is good.  But good or bad, change is inevitable.

David Smith:

The " New Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom" (reference newvastatute .org) seems to me to be a totally superfluous exercise

Brilliant commentary, Mr. Smith.  Many woofs and rapid tail wags.

Ricky:

There is an alternate view.  Mankind is growing wiser and fairer, using the resources provided by the Almighty, making progress toward a better world.  It is an eternal journey, from one generation to the next, expanding the inalienable rights of life and liberty to all mankind in the pursuit of happiness.  Two centuries ago in America the road was not open to women and blacks.  Today it is.  That's change.  Two centuries ago it was considered disgraceful for a person to openly campaign for public office.  It was considered tacky for a public official to invoke the name of God in the game of politics.  No all change is good.  But good or bad, change is inevitable.

Dave - I appreciate the thoughts and the great points you have shared. According to a lecture I once had by the late Kermit L. Hall, who had been a scholar of American constitutional, legal and judicial history, different periods of time in history have seen different rights emphasized. In the 19th century, property rights tended to take precedence over civil rights and liberties while in the 20th century, the reverse was true. In my opinion, we continue to see attention to civil rights and liberties extended in our current topic - diverse beliefs. Society plays a timeless role in these discussions open to all. The more that participate, the better it is. We can all learn from others. Dave, you have added much to our Voices of the Valleys discussion with your extensive knowledge. Deb

Ricky:

Upon what uniquely Christian principles was the United States of American founded in 1789?  The word "principles" (plural) implies two or more.  We'll make it easier for you.  Can you name just one?

Ricky, thanks for asking a very thought-provoking question, although I believe our friend Dave may have instigated it! Now you make me start thinking…and that is dangerous!

In thinking about your question, there are probably no uniquely Christian principles in our constitution or declaration of independence. (Now note that I did not say "uniquely Christian" in my original post.) I am not a theologian, but I believe there is only one uniquely Christian principle and that is really more than a principle…it is the cornerstone or foundation of the Christian faith. That is our belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God, who came to earth in human form, was crucified and then rose from the dead and that this is the path to heaven.

Other principles of the Christian faith I believe are shared by the Jewish faith and perhaps others with which I am not familiar enough to comment. Actually if we strip away all the ritual and get to the core beliefs, I believe that is the only real difference between Christianity and Judaism.

Some of the principles that I believe our country was founded on include:

1) the existence of a supreme Creator (Declaration of Independence)

2) reliance on that Creator to guide us (from the Declaration of Independence…"with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence…")

3) the belief that all men are created equal with certain rights.

Of course we realize that there is sometimes a big gap between principles and what is actually put into practice. I think we all agree that slavery and the lack of women’s rights in our early years was not in alignment with "all men created equal."

Now my brain is exhausted from all this thinking!!!!

David Smith:

I don't understand why we need a new state statute given the current interpretation of the US constitution.  Government can perform effectively without a religious emphasis. 

Marvin Foster:

In thinking about your question, there are probably no uniquely Christian principles in our constitution or declaration of independence. (Now note that I did not say "uniquely Christian" in my original post.)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Marvin.  I believe you correctly answered the question.  Setting aside the fact that the Declaration of Independence, technically speaking, predates the United States of America by thirteen years, there are references to the Almighty Creator in various official documents of that era.  These references could just as well apply to Islam or Judaism as to Christianity.  As Harlan pointed out, some religious scholars argue that those three major relgions are branches of one tree.  It is a historical fact that many of the founding fathers were Christians of some sort, and probably none were Muslims (and many were Deists), but that is beside the point.  If they had wanted to invoke the name of Jesus Christ in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, they would have done so.  The fact that they did not, and even went further by specifically proscribing religious oaths of any kind as a prerequisite for public office, combined with the First Amendment, clearly suggests that they wanted a secular government that is neutral in matters of religion.

So, why the common assertion that "America was founded on Christian principles?"  I think it is an honest, albeit inaccurate, effort to promote Christianity as the de facto state religion of our nation.  Unable to establish Christianity as the de jure state religion of America, that is for them the next best thing. 

Dave, back from the secret meeting of the secular humanist environmentalist socialists, borrowing Ricky's computer.

                                 Art, Religion, & Earthquakes

Hi guys,

- Art - My friends at the museum are trying to set up something for us - it sounds good & I'll write as soon as I know the details.

- Religion & politics - wow, this is amazing! A NY Times op/ed piece (5/16) tells of Donald Rumsfeld's (now declassified) daily war update memos (hand-delivered) to then Pres. Bush with biblical quotations superimposed over Iraqui war photos. Examples: "Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you will be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand." Ephesians 6:13                "Commit to the LORD whatever you do, and your plans will succeed."  Proverbs 16:3     "Open the gates that the righteous nation may enter, The nation that keeps faith."  Isaiah 26:2  To see and read the rest, go to GQ, 5/18 or NYtimes.com 5/16.  Click on ."Bush's Bible Briefings."  Really scary stuff

- Earthquakes - Just had to add my 2 cents. One of my kids was finishing her very first week of college when the Loma Prieta (CA) earthquake struck - a 7.1.  The epicenter was just 40 miles south of her campus. Horrendous damage, but none of the students were seriously injured. Then, just a week after arriving in India (where she worked for 2 years after graduation), another biggie hit - a 6.4 in which over 30,000 people were killed.  She's had an interesting life!

 Deb, enjoyed your post...that a way to get the ole brain up and running. Good job. Gip

Sandy with a Y..." Art - My friends at the museum are trying to set up something for us - it sounds good & I'll write as soon as I know the details."

Hey Sandy, you big tease. Count me in please. Which building is it? Gip

 David Smith..."Government can perform effectively without a religious emphasis."

Mr. Smith, I enjoyed reading your fine post. Don't feel like you have to answer my question if it is wrong of me to ask...Have you ever thought about whether it is Love of God, or Fear of God, that defines Christians? Just curious, Gip