Is The US Founded
Upon Christian Principles?
Robert Howard Kroepel
Copyright © 2003
Is The US Founded Upon
Christian
Principles?
#Is_US_Common_Law_Based_upon_Christian
Common Law?
#Was_the_US_Founded_on_the_Christian_God
or the Christian Religion?
#Are_the_Judeo-Christian_Ten_Commandments
the Basis of US Law?
Christians claim that the US Constitution and therefore the US itself
is founded upon uniquely Christian principles, and that the Christian
principles have Biblical sources.
Thomas Jefferson, one of the influential US Founders, a Deist,
described the fact that in the deliberations by Virginia statesmen for
the wording or the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom, which preceded
the US Constitution 1st Amendment, the Virginians rejected the linkage
of the name "Jesus Christ" to the phrase "the holy author of our
religion":
"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." [1]
What are the Christian principles Christians claim are the principles
upon which the US Const. and therefore the US was founded? (2)
1. Equal treatment for all before the law.
Ex. 12:49 (NKJV)
49 One law shall be for the native-born and for the stranger who dwells
among you.
Num. 15:16 (NKJV)
16 One law and one custom shall be for you and for the stranger who
dwells with you.
Fact: The Code of Hammurabi predates Jewish/Christian law and declares
noblemen are not exempt from punishment before the law for injuries to
innocent
individuals.
Conclusion: Judeo/Christian lawyers/legislators did not invent the
legal concept/principle that rulers are not above the law--that all men
are equal before the law.
2. The subservience of gov't to the written constitution.
Deut. 30:10 (NKJV)
10 If you obey the voice of the LORD your God, to keep His commandments
and His statutes which are written in this Book of the Law, and if you
turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
Question: What meanings in the written words of Deut. 30:10 declare a
government is to be subservient to a written constitution?
Josh. 1:8 (NKJV)
8 This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall
meditate in it day and night, that you may observe to do according to
all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous,
and then you will have good success.
Question: What meanings in the written words of Josh. 1:8 declare a
government is to be subservient to a written constitution?
2 Chron. 17:3-4 (NKJV)
3 Now the LORD was with Jehoshaphat, because he walked in the former
ways of his father David; he did not seek the Baals, 4 but sought the
God
of his father, and walked in His commandments and not according to the
acts
of Israel.
Question: What meanings in the written words of Chron. 17:3-4 declare a
government is to be subservient to a written constitution?
2 Chron. 34:20-22 (NKJV)
20 Then the king commanded Hilkiah, Ahikam the son of Shaphan, Abdon
the son of Micah, Shaphan the scribe, and Asaiah a servant
of the king,
saying, 21 "Go, inquire of the LORD for me, and for those who are left
in
Israel and Judah, concerning the words of the book that is found; for
great
is the wrath of the LORD that is poured out on us, because our fathers
have
not kept the word of the LORD, to do according to all that is written
in
this book.
Question: What meanings in the written words of Chron. 30:20-22 declare
a government is to be subservient to a written constitution?
Conclusion: There are no written words among those cited in Chron.
30:20-22 which declare a government shall be subservient to a written
constitution.
3. The three branches of gov't with equal power,
Isa. 33:22 (NKJV)
22 For the LORD is our Judge, The LORD is our Lawgiver, The LORD is our
King; He will save us.
Question: Have any other governments in existence in history prior to
any Jewish governments had problems requiring the specification of (1)
who is/are to establish public laws and policies and therefore who is a
lawgiver/who are lawgivers, (2) who are to be judges in a judicial
system,
and (3) who is to be a governor or dictator or king and who therefore
performs
executive functions? Is the tripartite division of government into (1)
a legislative department, (2) a judicial department, and (3) an
executive
department uniquely Jewish/Christian?
Conclusion: Without further research, the likelihood is very low that
the
Jewish/Christian governments were the first uniquely tripartite forms
of
government.
4. The concept of inalienable rights with power/authority flowing
from the people to levels of gov't.
Rom. 13:1-7 (NKJV)
1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is
no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are
appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the
ordinance
of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For
rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be
unafraid
of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the
same.
4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be
afraid;
for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an
avenger
to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be
subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For
because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers
attending continually to this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all
their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear
to whom fear, honor to whom honor.
Comment: This quote clearly claims that the authority for government
comes from the Judeo-Christian god, not from the people governed.
The Preamble of the US Constitution:
We the people of the United States, in
order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general
welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our
posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United
States of America.
The key phrase herein, "We the people of the United States," declares
clearly that the authority for the US Govt comes from the people and
not from gods.
John Adams, one of the influential US Founders, a Deist, and Second US
President, wrote:
The United States of America have
exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the
simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently
enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy,
and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their
history. Although the detail of the formation of the American
governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or
in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will
never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had
interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of
Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in
merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these
governments were contrived merely by the use
of reason and the senses.
... Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the
natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or
mystery,
and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole
quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights
of mankind. [From "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the
United States
of America" by John Adams, 1787.] [5]
We can note that according to John Adams, again, one of the Founders,
who was present at the US Constitutional Convention and therefore in a
position to know of what actually happened therein, by the writing of
the basis
of US law, the US Constitution, the US government was 'erected on the
simple principles of nature' 'by the use of reason and the senses,' and
the authority of the US government comes not from gods but from 'the
natural authority of the people alone.' [6]
Conclusion: The concept of inalienable rights with power/authority
flowing from the people to levels of gov't is not found in the
Christian Bible but is found in words of J. Adams in his "Defense of
the US Consitution," and, therefore, the concept of inalienable rights,
etc., is not a unique Christian principle.
5. The republican form of democracy.
Ex. 18:21 (NKJV)
21 Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear
God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be
rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers
of tens.
Deut 1:13 - 17 (KJV)
13 Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes,
and I will make them rulers over you. 14 And ye answered me, and
said, The
thing which thou hast spoken is good for us to do. 15 So I took
the
chief of your tribes, wise men, and known, and made them heads over
you, captains
over thousands, and captains over hundreds, and captains over fifties,
and
captains over tens, and officers among your tribes. 16 And I
charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your
brethren, and
judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger
that
is with him. 17 Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye
shall
hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face
of
man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you,
bring
it unto me, and I will hear it.
Comment: A democracy is a form of government in which political power
flows from the people to government officials and the people vote to
elect public officials and to legislate public laws and policies.
In a pure democracy, the people vote not only for political leaders but
also upon each and every public law and policy.
Democracy is known to have been developed by Cleisthenes of Athens (570
BC - 507 BC) in Athens, Greece, circa 508 BC. (3)
In a republican, or representative, form of government, the political
power again flows from the people, but instead of voting upon each and
every public law and policy the people elect representatives who then
vote upon and thereby legislate public laws and policies.
In the supposed Biblical sources of the republican form of democracy,
Ex. 18:21 and Deut 1:13-17, the representatives are appointed, chosen
not by the people
through elections, but by decree of the king. A representative form of
government in which the representatives are appointed by and therefore
are subservient to a king is not a republican form of democracy; in a
republican
form of democracy the representatives are elected by the people.
Thus, the claimed Biblical source of the republican form of government
is not the true source of the republican form of government.
From ...
http://www.jmu.edu/madison/prayers.htm
... we have the following report by B. Franklin inre his proposal for
opening each daily sessions of the US Constitutional Convention with
prayers:
Benjamin Franklin
Motion for Prayers in the Convention
[Motion made June 28, 1787]
Mr. President,
The small Progress we have made, after 4 or 5 Weeks' close Attendance
and continual Reasonings with each other, our different Sentiments on
almost every
Question, several of the last producing as many Noes as Ayes, is,
methinks, a melancholy Proof of the Imperfection of the Human
Understanding. We indeed seem to feel our want of political Wisdom
since we have been running all about
in Search of it. We have gone back to ancient History for Models of
Government,
and examined the different Forms of those Republics, which, have
been
orig[i]nally formed with the Seeds of their own Dissolution, now
no
longer exist; and we have viewed modern States all round Europe, but
find
none of their Constitutions suitable to our Circumstances.
In this Situation of this Assembly, groping, as it were, in the dark to
find Political Truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented
to
us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of
humbly applying to the Father of Lights to illuminate our
Understandings? In the Beginning of the Contest with Britain, when we
were sensible of Danger, we had daily prayers in this Room for the
Divine Protection. Our Prayers, Sir, were heard; -- and they were
graciously answered. All of us, who were engaged in the Struggle, must
have observed frequent Instances of a superintending Providence in our
Favour. To that kind Providence we owe this happy Opportunity of
Consulting in Peace on the means of establishing our future national
Felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we
imagine we no longer need its assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long
time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this
Truth, that GOD governs in the Affairs of Men. And if a Sparrow cannot
fall to the Ground without His Notice, is it probable that an Empire
can rise without His Aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred
Writings that "except the Lord build the House, they labour in vain
that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe, that,
without
his concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political Building no
better
than the Builders of Babel; we shall be divided by our little, partial,
local
Interests, our Projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall
become
a Reproach and a Bye-word down to future Ages. And, what is worse,
Mankind
may hereafter, from this unfortunate Instance, despair of establishing
Government
by human Wisdom, and leave it to Chance, War, and Conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move,
That henceforth Prayers, imploring the Assistance of Heaven and its
Blessing on our Deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning
before we proceed to Business; and that one or more of the Clergy of
this city be requested to officiate in that Service.*
*"The convention, except three or four persons, thought prayers
unnecessary!" [Franklin's note.]
Comment: We can note that Franklin described the Founders' search for
models of government to use for the creation of the US Constitution and
the US Government:
"We have gone back to ancient History for Models of
Government, and examined the different Forms of those Republics,
which, have been orig[i]nally formed with the Seeds of their own
Dissolution, now no longer exist; and we have viewed modern States all
round Europe, but find none of their Constitutions suitable to our
Circumstances."
From Franklin's comment we can justifiably conclude that the US
Founders did not base their concept of a republican form of government
upon pre-existing republican forms of government, including any claimed
Jewish, or Judeo-Christian, form of republic.
The Constitutional Conventioneers, the US Founders, accepted Franklin's
suggestion that Congress would have two branches, the House of
Representatives,
whose members would represent the people according to population, each
State
therefore having representation according to its population, and the
Senate,
whose members would represent the States, each State having two
Senators
and thus equal representation.
General Comments: Most of the claimed Christian principles of
government are not Christian but are, instead, Jewish. The claimed
sources of Christian principles 1, 2, 3, and 5 are clearly Jewish
because they are original
to the Old Testament of the Bible, which is Jewish, and are not
original
to the New Testament, which is Christian.
Conclusion: The US republican form of democratic gov't is unique to the
US Founders and not found in the Christian Bable, certainly not in the
supposed Biblical sources of the republican form of democracy,
Ex. 18:21 and Deut 1:13-17, wherein the representatives are appointed,
chosen not by the people
through elections, but by decree of the king.
Is US Common
Law
Based upon Christian Common Law?
#Return_to_Top_of_Page
US Constitution 7th Amendment:
In suits at common law. . . the right of trial by jury shall be
preserved; and no fact, tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined
in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the
common law.
Thomas Jefferson, one of the influential US Founders, A US President,
and a Deist, and therefore not supportive of Christian claims of the
origin of US law, wrote:
"For we know that the common law is
that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their
settlement in England, and altered from time to
time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of
Magna
Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. . . This
settlement
took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was
not
introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first
christian
king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that
of
the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during
which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.
". . . if any one chooses to build a
doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is
incumbent on him to prove it to have
existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of
the
common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt
Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the
settlement
of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that
system
of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were
not
yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close
of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of
adoption,
we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers
on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the
common
law." [Thomas Jefferson, from a letter to Thomas Cooper, February
10, 1814] [4]
The Latin phrase "ancien scripture" appears in the words of a writer
named Priscot, and although "ancien scripture" translates into English
as "ancient scripture," meaning "old writings," Jefferson explained
that
Christians have chosen to translate "ancien scripture" to mean "Holy
Scripture,"
as in "Holy Bible" to justify their claim that the US common law was
based
upon the Bible:
"And Blackstone repeats, in the words
of Sir Matthew Hale, that 'Christianity is part of the laws of
England,' citing Ventris and Strange ubi surpa.
4. Blackst. 59. Lord Mansfield qualifies it a little by saying that
'The
essential principles of revealed religion are part of the common law."
In the case of the Chamberlain of London v. Evans, 1767. But he cites
no
authority, and leaves us at our peril to find out what, in the opinion
of
the judge, and according to the measure of his foot or his faith, are
those
essential principles of revealed religion obligatory on us as a part of
the common law."
Thus we find this string of authorities, when examined to the
beginning, all hanging on the same hook, a perverted expression of
Priscot's, or on one another, or nobody." [Thomas Jefferson, from a
letter to Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814] [4]
The Encyclopedia Britannica: "The nature of the new common law was at
first much influenced by the principles of Roman law, but later it
developed more and more along independent lines." [4]
The concept of the jury and trial by jury as well as the concept of the
right to a speedy trial came out of Saxon common law. [4]
Conclusion: US common law was not based upon Christian common law but
instead was based upon English common law which was based upon Saxon
common law.
Was the US
Founded on the Christian God or the Christian Religion?
#Return_to_Top_of_Page
John Adams, one of the influential US Founders, a Deist, and Second US
President, wrote:
The United States of America have
exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the
simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently
enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy,
and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their
history. Although the detail of the formation of the American
governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or
in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will
never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had
interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of
Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in
merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these
governments were contrived merely by the use
of reason and the senses.
... Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the
natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or
mystery,
and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole
quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights
of mankind. [From "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the
United States
of America" by John Adams, 1787.] [5]
We can note that according to John Adams, again, one of the Founders,
who was present at the US Constitutional Convention and therefore in a
position to know of what actually happened therein, by the writing of
the basis
of US law, the US Constitution, the US government was 'erected on the
simple principles of nature' 'by the use of reason and the senses,' and
the authority of the US government comes not from gods but from 'the
natural authority of the people alone.'
The Treaty of Tripoli, between the people of the United States and the
people of Tripoli, was negotiated by Joel Barlow, who had been
appointed by George Washington to be a chaplain to the Continental Army
and later
to be the US Consul General to Algiers; negotiations for the Treaty
were
concluded November 4th, 1796 [6], which was during George Washington's
second
term of office as the first US President. [7]
We can reasonably assume and thereby conclude that Washington knew of
the content of the Treaty and of the wording of Article 11 because it
was negotiated and signed in Algiers during his second term. [7]
US President John Adams presented the Treaty of Tripoli to the US
Senate on May 26th, 1797, in his first term; it was ratified
unanimously by the US Senate on June 7, 1797: Adams signed it on June
10, 1797.
The Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11:
[The] Government of the United States of America is not in
any sense founded on the Christian religion. [6]
According to The Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the United
States Senate, the text had been presented by being read aloud as well
as by copies printed "for the use of the Senate. No record shows any
dissent among Senators, but records otherwise note that the vote was
unanimous in favor of ratifying the Treaty. [7]
The treaty was printed in newspapers and thereby circulated among US
citizens; there is no record of a public complaint concerning the
wording
of Article 11. [7]
The lack of Senatorial dissent and the lack of public complaint or
debate shows that the US citizens were generally accepting of the idea
that the US government was not founded upon the Christian religion and
thereby not founded upon Christian principles, and, therefore, the US
was not a Christian nation. [7]
The US Const. Art. VI Sect 2 declares thus:
"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States
which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or
which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be
the supreme
law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby,
anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary
notwithstanding."
The linkage of the US Const. and the US Treaty of Tripoli thus declares
the US was not founded upon the Christian religion nor upon Christian
principles.
Conclusion: The US was not founded on Christian principles nor upon the
Christian religion.
Are the
Judeo-Christian Ten Commandments the Basis of US Law?
#Return_to_Top_of_Page
The Ten Commandments of the Judeo-Christian Religions:
Exodus 20: 3-17 [KJV].
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make any graven image, or any likeness of anything
that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in
the waters beneath the earth; thou shalt not bow down thyself to them,
nor serve them.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, for the
Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour
and do all thy works; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord
thy God; in it thou shalt do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy
daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy stranger which
is within thy gates.
5. Honour thy father and thy mother, that thy days be long upon the
land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house; thou salt not covet thy
neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox,
nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor’s.
We have thus a set of laws, but that set is easily divisible into (A)
religious standards and (B) secular legal standards arising from
natural necessities.
A. The Judeo-Christian Commandments which are Religious Standards:
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make any graven image, or any likeness of anything
that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in
the waters beneath the earth; thou shalt not bow down thyself to them,
nor serve them.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, for the
Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour
and do all thy works; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord
thy God; in it thou shalt do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy
daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy stranger which
is within thy gates.
5. Honour thy father and thy mother, that thy days be long upon the
land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
These are clearly religious standards and therefore not legal standards
under the US Constitution.
They are specific references to the Judeo-Christian god, and, as such,
their placement in US schools and courtrooms and government buildings
would be a violation of US Const. 1st Amend.:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ...
B. The Judeo-Christian Commandments which are Secular Legal
Standards:
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house; thou salt not covet thy
neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox,
nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor’s.
These are clearly secular legal standards, and they are founded upon
practical necessity for the preservation of the health, life,
liberties,
and properties of an individual specified to be a legal person, the
preservation
of a society, and the preservation of the human race, and, thus, they
are
not unique to the Judeo-Christian religions because they have been,
are,
and will be found in various forms in the laws of most tribes and
nations.
Thomas Jefferson said thus:
The essence of all law is that no man
should injure another; all the
rest is commentary. [8]
When 'injury' is defined as causing a loss of life, limb, liberty,
family, property, money, business and/or reputation, and when 'another'
is defined as an innocent
individual who does not intend to injure any other individual who does
not intend to injure him or any other innocent individuals, then
Jefferson's Essence of All Law can be
rephrased thus:
The essence of all law is that no man
should [be allowed to] injure [threaten to cause or cause an actual
loss of life/limb/liberty/family/property/money/business/reputation]
another [innocent man]; all the
rest [of the law] is commentary.
We can note that there is no idea within the Jeffersonian Essence of
All Law that is inherently religious, that is inherently based upon
religious principles, and, by contrast, that is not based upon secular
principles
of necessities for the preservation of individual rights to
life/limb/liberty/family/property/money/business/reputation, the
preservation of a society, and the
preservation of the human race.
The so-called Golden Rule, "Do unto others as ye would have them do
unto thee", is not unique to Judaism nor Christianity but, instead, is
found
in many religions and legal systems, including those pre-dating the
Jewish
and Christian religions. Christians therefore cannot claim that the
Golden
Rule was a uniquely Christian principle upon which the US Constitution
and
thereby the US government was founded.
NOTE: The Golden Rule can be corrupted by the Dictator's Twist: "Do
unto me what thou wish, but know that I will do unto thee what I wish".
By the Dictator's Twist a dictator can challenge someone to struggle
against him but in a strange sense of fair play if the dictator wins
then the loser has to submit. The Dictator's Twist can be the basis of
laws and policies that are violations of the Essence of All Law; for
example, whereas the Essence is clear that causing a loss of liberty
(freedom to choose what work to do, where to live, whom to marry, etc.)
is an injury and therefore is a violation of the Law the Dictator's
Twist of the Golden Rule can mean one person can enslave another who is
not able to defend himself and thereby prevent the enslavement.
Conclusion: The Judeo-Christian Ten Commandments are not part of US Law.
#Return_to_Top_of_Page
(1) Jim Walker, http://www.earlyamerica.com
(2) The information and Biblical quotes were provided by KW, a
Christian friend and emailer.
(3) Cleisthenes as the developer of democracy.
http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/weekly/aa121900a.htm
http://www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/characters/cleisthenes_p1.html
http://www.kat.gr/kat/history/Greek/St/CleisthenesAthens.htm
(4) Jim Walker, http://www.earlyamerica.com
(5) Jim Walker, http://www.earlyamerica.com
(6)
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39948&highlight=Deism+and+Founders
(7) Ed Buckner, http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/founding.htm#BOSTON
(8) I remember reading "The essence of all law is that no man should
injure another; all the rest is commentary" as attributed to Thomas
Jefferson,
who paraphrased it from a Jewish Rabbi, possibly Hillel. Jefferson
applied
it to secular law while the Rabbi applied it to Jewish religious law. I
cannot remember the source of the attribution to Jefferson, nor have I
found
the source in any quotes attributed to Jefferson, nor by internet
search
have I found a source of similar words or phrases/phrasings. I only
remember
the Essence being attributed to Jefferson and to a Rabbi.
There is, however, a reference to the concept/principle of the essence
of the law as relevent to injuries to innocent individuals:
objectivethought.com
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are
injurious to others."
--Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia.