School Books Rewritten in Texas

[Kadagar_AV]

I agree. Some seem to see any mention of Christianity as playing any part in the shaping of the nation as having some sort of theocratic intentions. Maybe Mrs. Dunbar (the only board member the Guardian decided to highlight for a story about the Board's decisions) does feel that way and maybe she doesn't, but the actual changes do not seem to reflect such a goal.

Every president has been a Christian, most other politicians and policy makers have been Christian, and the vast majority of the nation's populace has always been Christian. I think those facts can exist along with the very important concept of the separation of church and state in America's history books without creating any cognitive dissonance among students. Trying to erase Christianity from textbooks is a true example of agenda-driven revisionism.

Source?

The right wing gains much from this claim, you want to back it up? From what I have read you seem to be wrong, but I will accept the facts you speak of if you can produce them.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Source?

The right wing gains much from this claim, you want to back it up? From what I have read you seem to be wrong, but I will accept the facts you speak of if you can produce them.

Historically, everyone in the cultural West was Christian, at least nominally. The same was true in America, Britain, even Sweden I'm afraid. This is still much more true in America than in Europe.

[PanzerJaeger]

Source?

The right wing gains much from this claim, you want to back it up? From what I have read you seem to be wrong, but I will accept the facts you speak of if you can produce them.

Which of the three did you take issue with?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Source?

The right wing gains much from this claim, you want to back it up? From what I have read you seem to be wrong, but I will accept the facts you speak of if you can produce them.

This source provideds information on the religious affiliations of US Presidents as well as links to such assessments for other government figures. It cannot, of course, offer evidence as to the depth of their faith or its relevance to their policies save anecdotally.

Consider this assessment of current religious affiliation, and this gives some timeline perspective.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This source provideds information on the religious affiliations of US Presidents as well as links to such assessments for other government figures. It cannot, of course, offer evidence as to the depth of their faith or its relevance to their policies save anecdotally.

Consider this assessment of current religious affiliation, and this gives some timeline perspective.

those stats don't add up, about 5% of the total Christians population claimed (76%) in 2008 is unaccounted.

[Skullheadhq]

Dutch Reformed -> 2 presidents but 0,1% of the population.
Catholic -> 1 president but 24,5% of the population

How funny, never knew this.

[drone]

Dutch Reformed -> 2 presidents but 0,1% of the population.
Catholic -> 1 president but 24,5% of the population

How funny, never knew this.

Presidential candidates of the Roman Catholic persuasion are not trusted by the electorate. The theory is that we don't want our executive to be a Papist lackey taking orders from Rome.

It took a bootlegger's son to break the seal for Catholics, and it didn't turn out so well.

[Centurion1]

Until I run............ Thenwe got two catholic presidents

[Kadagar_AV]

This source provideds information on the religious affiliations of US Presidents as well as links to such assessments for other government figures. It cannot, of course, offer evidence as to the depth of their faith or its relevance to their policies save anecdotally.

Consider this assessment of current religious affiliation, and this gives some timeline perspective.

I would argue that the early presidents, founding fathers additionaly so, were secularists first and foremost. It has even been argued by far greated minds than mine, that several of them were atheists, paying lip service.

Remember that the US of A was not founded as a christian nation, no matter how much todays right-wing winds blow.

Take the treaty with Tripoli as an example, drafted in 1796 under George Washington and signed by John Adams in 1797:

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 tranquillity, 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.

Kind of fun reading this with modern eyes, no?

Ironic how a nation founded in secularism today is one of the, if not the, most religious countrys. A scientific study has shown that the spining corpses of the founding fathers could be used as a alternative energy source, George Washington alone has been calculated to be able to fully suply the energy needs of an average town.


I could of course also point at Jefferson, or how about this quote:

To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, god, are immaterial, is to say they are nothings, or that there is no god, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise... ... without plunging into the fathomless abyss of dreams and phantasms. I am satisfied, and sufficiently occupied with the things which are, without tormenting or troubling myself about those which may indeed be, but of which I have no evidence.

Not the words of a Christian, now is it?

Or Benjamin Franklin: Lighthouses are more useful than churches, sure, he was a deist, but it is not a great leap of faith to imagine he today would have been atheist. Christian however, he defianetly was not.


However, main point would be, no matter if they all were atheists, deists or christian they had one thing in common - secularism!

[Lemur]

Ironic how a nation founded in secularism today is one of the, if not the, most religious countrys

There's absolutely nothing ironic or unexpected in that result. If anything, the codification of a religion with the state is bad for the state, but more importantly bad for the religion. Just imagine if, say, Lutheranism were legally aligned with George W. Bush, and had its prestige and status tied to him politically. Or imagine if Episcopalianism were paired up with Barack Obama.

The separation of church and state is what has allowed and encouraged the U.S.A. to be one of the most religious nations on the face of the Earth. How this connection escapes both Europeans and American fundamentalists is beyond me.

[Kadagar_AV]

There's absolutely nothing ironic or unexpected in that result. If anything, the codification of a religion with the state is bad for the state, but more importantly bad for the religion. Just imagine if, say, Lutheranism were legally aligned with George W. Bush, and had its prestige and status tied to him politically. Or imagine if Episcopalianism were paired up with Barack Obama.

The separation of church and state is what has allowed and encouraged the U.S.A. to be one of the most religious nations on the face of the Earth. How this connection escapes both Europeans and American fundamentalists is beyond me.

I said ironic, not unexpected ;)

And I do believe your analyzis is correct.

A common hypothesis is that the US became what it is just because of the secularism, as you said. It created an open playing field, or a "free market of religion" if you so will.

Different religions in a way became enterprises , churches rivalled for the congregation, if for not other reason than the money it brought. Thus came to be the same hard-sell, aggressive techniques seen in todays commercial world. This created something of a mania among the less educated.

Sweden is the opposite example, with a set national religion. Complacency of the church in Sweden has over the years lead to religious people being met with scorn if they dare confess their belief in the first place.

[Centurion1]

OK so do we all agree Sweden sucks? ..........OK good now onto more pressing issues

[Kadagar_AV]

OK so do we all agree Sweden sucks? ..........OK good now onto more pressing issues

That is rude, even with the clown.

It is just two very different cultural attitudes, trying to co-exist on this earth.

The scorn a religious person would be met with in sweden just about equals the scorn an atheist is often met with in some parts of the US. So please do not claim some national moral victory here.

In sweden, an openly believing christian could never be elected. *
In USA, an openly atheistic person could never be elected. *

Two sides of the same coin.



* "never" meaning not in the near future.