A Judeo-Christian Nation?

[Muravyets]

First, there is the little point that some of care about TRUTH.

Second, those like Rep. Forbes that claim we were "founded as a Christian nation" almost always seem to think this has some significance for how our nation should be run. And those notions tend to be unconstitutional and evil.

I have to say this is one of the things that piss me off the most about the "what does it matter?" attitude. It matters because people who make that false claim are the ones who would like the US to be a Christian theocracy. (And trust me, the pro-forma "Judeo-" part will disappear faster than a fart when it comes to actual application.)

[Maurepas]

First, there is the little point that some of care about TRUTH.

Second, those like Rep. Forbes that claim we were "founded as a Christian nation" almost always seem to think this has some significance for how our nation should be run. And those notions tend to be unconstitutional and evil.

I have to say this is one of the things that piss me off the most about the "what does it matter?" attitude. It matters because people who make that false claim are the ones who would like the US to be a Christian theocracy. (And trust me, the pro-forma "Judeo-" part will disappear faster than a fart when it comes to actual application.)

Makes me think of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran and how I really dont want to live in a Christian version of it...even a Judeo one...

[Poliwanacraca]

Are you serious? I mean, the value system and culture of Britain was massively and explicitly judeo-Christian, the Church had massive authority in the law for many years, most historians agree that the western value system of today (of which our law is based) is massively based partly on Judeo-Christian ethics and Greco-Roman ethics. I mean I can believe that it is possible someone might say it is completely untrue, but I would at least expect that some acknowledgement that their opinion is.. controversial.

One might as well say we are a Greco-Roman nation, then.

We're.....not? Fuck all, what am I supposed to do with three dozen togas and a half built vomitorium in the back yard then?

I think the internet has broken me. My actual first thought was, and I quote, "".

[The Cat-Tribe]

You've played a nice game of bait-and-switch, but the objection (of at least most of us) isn't to the term Judeo-Christian itself, but it application to the U.S. as a nation.

What is a Judeo-Christian nation?

What makes the U.S. one?

Sorry for the confusion, I wasn't debating whether the US is a Judeo-Christian nation, that doesn't interest me. I was just originally addressing that statement by I think Sarkhaan saying that the law had no judeo-Christian influence.

So, because that isn't what Sarkhaan said, you've been fighting a raging battle against a strawman.

Not based on Christianity =/= no Judeo-Christian influence. (And, this raise the question of what is sufficient "influence" to make something Judeo-Christian?)

[Enadail]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJNsWN-QGW8

The intellectual dishonesty and ignorance of history, it burns!!!

Good god (that I don't believe in)! What's scarier yet, is people will listen to him, think hes accurate, and adopt those views!

Sorry, the founding fathers, whether theist or deist, agreed that the American government should not support, endorse, nor imbue unto itself religious ties.

And Hydesland, the idea that Rome (greco-roman value) was overwhelmingly influenced by Christianity is about as historically accurate as saying Lincoln was a cyborg. A new idea does not permeate and rewrite an empire, and specially not the Roman empire. It was founded on a level of tolerance, absorbing localites but allowing them independence as long as they followed a few precepts. Greco-roman values are not based on Christianity; its probably more true that Christianity absorbed philosophies from Roman ideology.

[Anti-Social Darwinism]

My quibble is with the idea of putting a narrow interpretation on this whole notion of national religion in the name of phrasing. I did not hear Obama's actual speech, but I suspect it was subject to misinterpretation on many levels and this particular idiot happily misinterpreted it on the most obvious level.

Obama, however, should have, if possible, avoided the question of religion altogether. If he could not have avoided it, he should have sacrificed his burning desire for the perfect, quotable phrase for accuracy - 'the people of the US are a multi-cultural, religiously diverse people with many and deep convictions and the government respects this diversity' (well, ok, it doesn't really, but we must pretend it does to outsiders).

[UNIverseVERSE]

My quibble is with the idea of putting a narrow interpretation on this whole notion of national religion in the name of phrasing. I did not hear Obama's actual speech, but I suspect it was subject to misinterpretation on many levels and this particular idiot happily misinterpreted it on the most obvious level.

Obama, however, should have, if possible, avoided the question of religion altogether. If he could not have avoided it, he should have sacrificed his burning desire for the perfect, quotable phrase for accuracy - 'the people of the US are a multi-cultural, religiously diverse people with many and deep convictions and the government respects this diversity' (well, ok, it doesn't really, but we must pretend it does to outsiders).

As it happens, that's pretty much exactly what he did say.

What President Obama actually said:

I think that where -- where there's the most promise of building stronger U.S.-Turkish relations is in the recognition that Turkey and the United States can build a model partnership in which a predominantly Christian nation and a predominantly Muslim nation, a Western nation and a nation that straddles two continents -- that we can create a modern international community that is respectful, that is secure, that is prosperous; that there are not tensions, inevitable tensions, between cultures, which I think is extraordinarily important.

That's something that's very important to me. And I've said before that one of the great strengths of the United States is -- although as I mentioned, we have a very large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation; we consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values.

What about that last sentence makes a false statement about the beliefs and values of our nation?

And, yes, Rep. Forbes is a complete idiot. We have never been a "Judeo-Christian nation" -- whatever the hell that means. Our nation was created with a deliberately secular government that values religious freedom.

[Hydesland]

And Hydesland, the idea that Rome (greco-roman value) was overwhelmingly influenced by Christianity is about as historically accurate as saying Lincoln was a cyborg. A new idea does not permeate and rewrite an empire, and specially not the Roman empire. It was founded on a level of tolerance, absorbing localites but allowing them independence as long as they followed a few precepts. Greco-roman values are not based on Christianity; its probably more true that Christianity absorbed philosophies from Roman ideology.

Nononon, I didn't say that at all. You got it mixed up, I said that the judeo-Christian value system as it was developing through the centuries with theologians like Augustine ad Aquinas, were very strongly influenced by Greco-Roman philosophy and values. It was the other way round, modern Judeo-Christian thought and philosophy was strongly influenced by Greco-Roman concepts, not vice versa.

[Enadail]

Nononon, I didn't say that at all. You got it mixed up, I said that the judeo-Christian value system as it was developing through the centuries with theologians like Augustine ad Aquinas, were very strongly influenced by Greco-Roman philosophy and values. It was the other way round, modern Judeo-Christian thought and philosophy was strongly influenced by Greco-Roman concepts, not vice versa.

Well, then I do apologize for having misinterpreted you.

[Ifreann]

Are you serious? I mean, the value system and culture of Britain was massively and explicitly judeo-Christian, the Church had massive authority in the law for many years, most historians agree that the western value system of today (of which our law is based) is massively based partly on Judeo-Christian ethics and Greco-Roman ethics. I mean I can believe that it is possible someone might say it is completely untrue, but I would at least expect that some acknowledgement that their opinion is.. controversial.

One might as well say we are a Greco-Roman nation, then.

We're.....not? Fuck all, what am I supposed to do with three dozen togas and a half built vomitorium in the back yard then?

A vomitorium is not what you think it is, and it should not be in your back garden.

[Chumblywumbly]

Fuck all, what am I supposed to do with three dozen togas and a half built vomitorium in the back yard then?

A vomitorium is not what you think it is, and it should not be in your back garden.

It could be, if your back garden was covered and needed an exit...

Nah.

EDIT: I recently returned from a wee holiday in Rome. During the stay, a tourguide I was following started spouting all this bullshit about vomitoriums and throwing up, and I stood there all dubious, thinking, "this isn't what Horrible Histories taught me", and I felt like a douche.

[Collinstan]

Plenty of other past Presidents would have agreed that this is a Judeo-Christian or simply Christian nation in the sense of the vast majority of our initial population (when we declared our Independence) were Christians, the majority of this country today are Christians, and Christianity or at least Christian values have certainly been an important part of this nation's history. This is not to say we don't provide freedom of religion, or that we should have a state church etc.

The special interests groups who have turned the concept of secularism into some sort of cult need to be reminded of some of Washington's speeches, and the fact that men like him would be rolling in their graves to hear these idiots demand the President not say "God" in his speeches or that "In God we Trust" be removed from the dollar. Much of the reasoning behind that statement in the Constitution was to protect churches from government interference, not the other way around.

[Muravyets]

Plenty of other past Presidents would have agreed that this is a Judeo-Christian or simply Christian nation in the sense of the vast majority of our initial population (when we declared our Independence) were Christians, the majority of this country today are Christians, and Christianity or at least Christian values have certainly been an important part of this nation's history. This is not to say we don't provide freedom of religion, or that we should have a state church etc.

The special interests groups who have turned the concept of secularism into some sort of cult need to be reminded of some of Washington's speeches, and the fact that men like him would be rolling in their graves to hear these idiots demand the President not say "God" in his speeches or that "In God we Trust" be removed from the dollar. Much of the reasoning behind that statement in the Constitution was to protect churches from government interference, not the other way around.

Hilarious. How many more individuals in history will you trot out until you find one whose personal opinions and stump speeches are relevant to the reality of what the USA is?

You complain that others have turned secularism into a cult, but you do so in the context of complaining about people not wanting to treat "Judeo-Christianity" with cult-like devotion, or treat the hallowed memory of George Washington with similar cult-like reverence.

Bottom-line: The US is not a nation defined, controlled, directed, or dominated by any particular religious category. Rather it is the LACK of a dominant religious category that defines this nation.

EDIT: Oh, and you're wrong. It was an even 50/50 split between protecting churches from government influence and protecting government from church influence. This is evident in the writings and letters of the founders and framers of the Constitution. The separation of church and state in the US does not give one particular religious category carte blanche to claim ownership over or credit for the entire nation.

[New new nebraska]

My like 4th or 5th erratic two or three post return with the excuse I've been too busy to post. Anyway yes we are, to a degree a Judeo-Christian nation. We were founded by Christians. Every president has been Christian. The majority of Congress is Christian. Also we have debates over the morality of gay marrige, abortion and other topics. Its safe to say we are at least a little Judeo-Christian.

[Buffett and Colbert]

If what I think is right, I would like to out that Judeo-Christian does not refer to Judaism and Christianity, but Christianity excluding forms founded much after ancient times outside of what was Judea. For example, Mormonism.

[The Cat-Tribe]

My like 4th or 5th erratic two or three post return with the excuse I've been too busy to post. Anyway yes we are, to a degree a Judeo-Christian nation. We were founded by Christians. Every president has been Christian. The majority of Congress is Christian. Also we have debates over the morality of gay marrige, abortion and other topics. Its safe to say we are at least a little Judeo-Christian.

"debates" over morality in which Christians inject their view no more make us a Judeo-Christian nation than a heathen nation, a Muslim nation, or a nation of any other viewpoint. Not the word "debate" necessarily implies disagreement.

We weren't "founded by Christians" in any meaningful sense of the word and we were expressly founded a religiously neutral nation.

If all you mean by "to a degree a Judeo-Christian nation" is that we have a lot of Christians here, fine. That doesn't disagree with what President Obama said nor does it conform to Rep. Forbes extreme inanity.

[Enadail]

The special interests groups who have turned the concept of secularism into some sort of cult need to be reminded of some of Washington's speeches, and the fact that men like him would be rolling in their graves to hear these idiots demand the President not say "God" in his speeches or that "In God we Trust" be removed from the dollar. Much of the reasoning behind that statement in the Constitution was to protect churches from government interference, not the other way around.

Please tell me, what is a cult by your definition... "special interest" groups don't need to promote secularism: the government should be doing it on their own.

If we're gonna play the history game, George Washington also believed in slaves... mayhaps we should reinstate that? Washington lived in a different time, where the idea of not believing in a God made you a heretic, and marked for death. So not having God in a speech meant at the least social banishment and at worst, death by mob. As for money and motto, any idea when "In God we Trust" was added? Or made it into the Pledge of Allegiance? 1956 for the motto, and while it appeared randomly, it was never mandated on money until 1955, with the whole "godless commies" scare. I personally think Washington would be rolling in his grave if he knew how his ideology and caricature were being abused.

[Treznor]

My like 4th or 5th erratic two or three post return with the excuse I've been too busy to post. Anyway yes we are, to a degree a Judeo-Christian nation. We were founded by Christians. Every president has been Christian. The majority of Congress is Christian. Also we have debates over the morality of gay marrige, abortion and other topics. Its safe to say we are at least a little Judeo-Christian.

We are a secular nation with a renewed movement by Falwell's self-described "Moral Majority" trying to inject religion into politics and public policy. It's as accurate to say our nation follows Buddhist values as it does to say we follow Christian values. No religion has a lock on good values, and there are a lot of values in the traditional Christian ethic I never want to see put in the US like returning women to the status of second-class citizens. It is safe to say that the nation's population is dominated by Judeo-Christian worshipers, but not to say that the nation itself is a Judeo-Christian nation. Our government and its laws are supposed to stay separate from religious concerns.

[New new nebraska]

We are a secular nation with a renewed movement by Falwell's self-described "Moral Majority" trying to inject religion into politics and public policy. It's as accurate to say our nation follows Buddhist values as it does to say we follow Christian values. No religion has a lock on good values,

I know. Its semantics. Many religions values are similar to say the least. In this case the question was are we Judeo-Chrisitan. Since values people believe in (at least sometimes) and reflected in the law (sometimes. George Carlin pointed out only 2 of the 10 commandments are laws) that would make our laws, at least, relatively Judeo-Christian. Basically I'm saying Judeo-Christian would be an appropriate adjective to describe some aspects of our society.

[Christstan]

"Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Treaty of Tripoli November 4 1796 as signed by President John Adams.

Yeah, John Adams wasn't President in 1796, he was still VP and was running against Thomas Jefferson. Treaty of Tripoli was signed on June 10, 1797. Also in a 1936 review of past US treaties, it is said that the English version is at best a poor translation and that Article 11 doesn't even exist. If it does exist, then the wording is very likely faulty as errors have been found throughout the document.

Here is a quote from his report -

The Arabic text which is between Articles 10 and 12 is in form a letter, crude and flamboyant and withal quite unimportant, from the Dey of Algiers to the Pasha of Tripoli. How that script came to be written and to be regarded, as in the Barlow translation, as Article 11 of the treaty as there written, is a mystery and seemingly must remain so. Nothing in the diplomatic correspondence of the time throws any light whatever on the point.

But the US senate did sign the document that had article 11 in it. Just sayin'

[Treznor]

We are a secular nation with a renewed movement by Falwell's self-described "Moral Majority" trying to inject religion into politics and public policy. It's as accurate to say our nation follows Buddhist values as it does to say we follow Christian values. No religion has a lock on good values,

I know. Its semantics. Many religions values are similar to say the least. In this case the question was are we Judeo-Chrisitan. Since values people believe in (at least sometimes) and reflected in the law (sometimes. George Carlin pointed out only 2 of the 10 commandments are laws) that would make our laws, at least, relatively Judeo-Christian. Basically I'm saying Judeo-Christian would be an appropriate adjective to describe some aspects of our society.

Judeo-Christian is an accurate description to describe the religious beliefs of the majority of the people. But since our founders went to great pains to avoid entangling the religious beliefs of its people with its government, it cannot be accurately said that we are a Judeo-Christian nation. No matter how much certain groups want us to.

[The Romulan Republic]

Others have already given responses that are probably superior to mine, but I just figured I'd throw out my take on this whole story.

This person takes issue with Obama stating that we are not a Judeo-Christian nation. Though I am neither Jew nor Christian, I do too. I just don't believe that the President of the US has the right to make a blanket statement concerning the beliefs and values of an entire nation.

Personally, I think this person is an idiot. But then, I'm beginning to think that OBama is, perhaps, not as bright as I once did.

He made a factual statement. America is primarily Judeo-Christian in its beliefs, but not exclusively, nor officially.

He made no "blanket statement about the beliefs and values of an entire nation." In fact, it sounds like he did almost the opposite, by pointing out that America does not belong to one religious background, but to many.

I'm beginning to think that he'll tell people what they want to hear, regardless of whether it's true or not - but then, he's a politician and the definition of politician is liar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpQOCvthw-o

In a country where 60% don't believe in evolution and the vast majority of that number are probably Judeo-Christian, I highly doubt he was telling anyone "what they want to hear."

Also, check a dictionary. The definition of politician is not "liar."

[Ifreann]

Guise! I've figured it out. America is a Judeo-Christian nation because Christian run the government and Jews run everything else.

[Farnhamia]

Guise! I've figured it out. America is a Judeo-Christian nation because Christian run the government and Jews run everything else.

Brilliant! But ... "guise"?

[Ifreann]

Guise! I've figured it out. America is a Judeo-Christian nation because Christian run the government and Jews run everything else.

Brilliant! But ... "guise"?