"America Founded on Christian Principles"

I often hear people say, "America was founded on Christian (or Aberhamic or Judeo-Christian) values. Where does this belief come from? What roll should Christianity play in American politics?

Mike Huckabee went all the way to candidacy for the Republican Presidential nomination

on the platform that the Constitution should be ammended to adhear to an inerrant reading of the Bible.

I must admit, as a non-Christian American, this worries me. I'm very interested to hear what the Christians here have to say about the topic.

He did? It was my understanding that he dropped out early on. Whre is he now?

I was an early supporter of Huckabee and I'm not familiar with this. Do you have any source for this?

Whe should it threaten you that much that our nation is founded on the ideal that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights?

Yes, as I said, Mike Huckabee was a candidate for the Republican nomination. It worries me that one can make it that far on a blatantly theocratic platform.

He said it in February when campaigning in Michigan.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=onHkywYc_1M

That does not threaten me. I believe very strongly in the concept of inalienable rights. I also don't think it matters if you think they were endowed by a creator. What I worry about is a specific religion being put into legislation.

No legeslation should be passed on the grounds that it was written in a bronze age text.

I see. Do you believe we should have three branches of government with checks and balances? Because that principle comes from the Bible.

Clearly amending the constitution to 'adhear to the word of the living God' is as theocratic one could hope for- or in my case and in the case of the founding fathers, hope against.

Please link to a source?

You're missing my point. I'm not worried about whether or not a particular idea is referenced by the Bible. I just don't want things to be made a law for no other reason than because they are in the Bible.

Ideas must also be backed up by reason, evidence and logic, the stuff that makes sense to everybody, regardless of religion.

Again, not only is it out of context, but saying that something should be compatible is not theocratic.

Do you know what a theocracy is?

You just quoted it.

So then, as long as something "makes sense" to you, you have no problem with laws or governing documents being based on scripture?

A government where a specific god or deity is considered the supreme ruler.

Huckabee said, "We need to amend the Constitution so that it's in God's standards," claiming on no uncertain terms that God should decide what goes in the constitution rather than "some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family."

So Huckabee wants the Christian God to rule America. It's not that difficult.

I would not vote against a law because it happened to be in the Bible, and I don't think anyone should vote for a law because it happened to be in the Bible. I'm saying that whether or not something is in the Bible is inadmissable evidence when it comes to rational discourse.

For instance, if you don't want gays to be able to get married, that's fine. You have every right to hold that opinion, and your church has the right not to conduct the cerimony. However, if you want a law to be passed, you must present a sufficient arguement against gay marriage based on objective evidence and reasoning. Christian tradition doesn't bear any weight on the issue.

No he does not. He acknowledged that the Constitution is the governing document of our nation.

I was asking for this part of the Bible you claim we got the idea for a three branched government from, so no, I did not 'just quote it'.[/quoet]

That's another subject for another time.

You brought it up in the first place. If you won't produce a source, I'll have to assume you can't produce a source.

Why?

Why is it inadmissable evidence?

1) This is a nation of many different religions, not just Christians.

2) Unless you can prove the validity of the Bible, it has no authority on truth. You may believe that it does, in your own life, but this does not give you the right to force that opinion on others, not in America, land of the free and home of the brave.

If we were having rational discourse about the character of Jesus, would it be evidence then?

I'm talking about politics here, not every possible conversation between two people.

Apropose to the US Federal Government:

Not if a particular behavior or precept is submitted as if it were true just because Jesus did it. Otherwise you must also allow the followers of Zeus, Posidon, Muhommed and Buddah the same curtesy. Would you like it if laws were passed requiring women to wear burkahs in public based on the reasoning that Muhommed would want it that way?

[quoteIf we were having rational discourse about the church and it's persecution under the Roman government, would it be evidence then?

First of all, and not to get off track, but this is a very common tactic of the left.

We're not trying to pass laws to say that homosexuals can't "marry" (and, of course, they can't be married by definition because marriage is between a man and a woman). We're trying to protect the laws we have now.

Second, why can't the argument be based on scripture when scripture, itself, is an objective source?

What are you talking about!? That is exactly what he said, verbatim; hence the "quotation marks". All anyone has to do is click play on the video to hear him say those exact words.

No, he says "It would be alot easier to change the Constitution than to change the word of the living God. and that's exactly what we have to do..."

So for Huckabee, the Christian God should dictate the constitution.

Again, you're equivocating. I'm talking about how our government decides which laws to pass, where public money should go etc...

You've been watching too much Bill Oreilly.

That's exactly what you're doing.

Right now, there is no federal law saying homosexuals can't marry, so each state makes its own decision.

The Christian lobby groups have been pushing for a federal law assuring no state can make laws allowing gay marriage. So 'trying to pass laws to say homosexuals can't marry' is precisely what is being done.

This is rediculouse. Scripture is highly subjective. There's a different interpritation of the Bible for every Christian who reads it (or more often the case hears it from a preacher).

Even if every Christian had the exact same interpritation of the Bible, this wouldn't make it a rationally sound piece of evidence for anything.

That's another subject for another time.You brought it up in the first place.

So then, you're a "Constitutionalist" and a "libertarian", but you want to take the right of the state to make that decision and give it to the federal government?

Actually, what they did was to push for the Defense of Marriage Act, which just defines marriage as between a man and woman.