How sad that some are willing to degrades God name, in order to force (or pressure) school children to say it. The court has ruled that this isn't really religious, blah, blah, blah.
So IOW, kids are just engaging in vain repetitions, or are taking God's name in vain.
How sad, and yet there are many who probobly see this as some sort of victory for Christianity.
>I think we all need to read our founding papers, they thought rights were given from God not government.<
Actually have read them. Have you? The only mention in either the Declaration and the Constitution of any deity is a vague reference to a "creator" in the Declaration (that famous statement "endowed by their creator...") which can be interpreted in many ways.
In fact, even atheists like me have no problem with that statement. I have two creators, or perhaps better termed procreators, namely my parents.
Quite simply, our founding fathers made a specific point to NOT include God or Jesus in the primary documents of our nation's founding. Jefferson explains clearly why the constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia doesn't include any such reference (or at least did not on the original):
Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
Yes, our founders were in large part religious men, but they made a point of NOT excluding those who believed differently and bent over backwards to ensure that our government was not founded with any specific reference to any god or religion. They consciously made that decision, and in fact our current usages of "In God We Trust" as a national motto and the inclusion of "under God" in our Pledge are less than a century old, and only came into common usage in the mid 20th century.
They were flawed men, as is easily seen by their exclusion of full citizenship rights for non-whites and women, but on religion they were remarkably enlightened, unlike our modern day obsession with public displays or faith.
This is one of many UNCONFIRMED quotes that David Barton has circulated. This has not been traced to any primary source.
From the article
"In a separate 3-0 ruling Thursday, the appeals court upheld the inscription of the national motto "In God We Trust" on coins and currency, saying that the phrase is ceremonial and patriotic, not religious."
So the values we were founded on are the non-religious use of the word "God" ?
I didn't know that our nation was founded on using God's name in vain, or vain repetitions of his name. And I don't understand why founding a nation on using His name in vain, or vain repetitions of his name would be pleasing to any religious person, but whatever.
While it may be "unconfirmed" even the "doubters" concede that it's intent and sentiment were precisely in keeping with Washington's point of view and character...
Although the modern secularists avoid his numerous religious maxims, Washington's views on religion are easily documented. He often spoke on religious themes, to include the ruler of nations, the light of Revelation, and the symbiotic relationship between the Church and the state. There is overwhelming evidence to support this thought as belonging to Washington.http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=126
...further, their belief that "There is a very real possibility that the quotation has its origin in an 1835 biography by James K. Paulding. In a description of Washington's character, with supporting quotations" doesn't hold much water.
First they try to dismiss Paulding by searching for a more "scholarly reference"...usually the first tactic in trying to discredit an idea is to attack the messenger.
Second, Paulding's book is published only 36 years after Washington's death...obviously within living memory of many who actually knew Washington...and the quotes in the book were provided to support depictions of Washington's character.
As has been noted above, Washington made many statements of similar theme that could have been used to illustrate his character...Paulding had no need to simply make one up out of whole cloth and risk being discredited by those who knew Washington.