--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Let's look at that. The Bill of Rights are amendments to the > > Constitution. > > Article V of the US Constitution gives two means of amending the > > Constitution. One of these, the constitutional convention, has yet > > to be > > used (we were close to it about 20 years ago). The other has been > > used > > numerous times. It requires approval of 2/3rds vote of each House of > > Congress and 3/4ths of the state assemblies. > > > > Unless there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I think we > > should see > > such a strong vote as indicating popular approval. > > You can if you like. It doesn't reflect the history. The population > at the time was overwhelmingly Christian, but many of the founders > were lapsed, or deists. Their views on a secular federal government > were very much a minority view at the time. That they signed the > Constitution and then convinced the Congress to approve the Bill of > Rights was testament to their vision and skills of persuasion. And it > was a pretty fine job they did (oddly placed comma in the second > amendment notwithstanding... ;-) ). There's no mention of any > religion at all in the Constitution, apart from to say that no > religious test may be required as a qualification to hold office. > This was almost unthinkable in the late 1700s.
Sorry, but in 1787 the world wasn't terribly far removed from the philosophy of the divine right of kings. Louis XIV was king of France just at the turn of the previous century. There were many things about the establishment of the republic that were "unthinkable" in the late 1700's - so its quite a different context than this being just one "radical idea" in the establishment of a new government. I don't know that you can make a strong case that the majority of Americans at the time were in favor of theocracy, nor in favor of having a European-style state religion. Indeed, several large portions of America had been settled by those seeking religious freedom from European-style state religions. Finally, while the religious protections in the Constitution have been interpreted in modern days as protecting atheists, they were originally intended as protections against sectarianism in a country that was already very diverse in the distribution of various Christian and near-Christian sects. One startling bit of evidence of this as that when the first Congress met under this Constitution, their first act was the Constitutionally-mandated task of certifying the election of George Washington as President by the electoral college. Their second act was to establish a Congressional chaplain and have a prayer. So, I think you are reading a bit much into modern interpretations of the Constitution, that did not reflect the views of those who were there at the time.... JDG _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
