Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

You don't understand the question...

American money at one point needed gold in order to LEGITAMIZE it.

The American Constitution at one point used GOD to LEGITAMIZE it.

The question is whether or not GOD is still USED to LEGITAMIZE the Constitution.

Gold is obsolete as far as backing currency.
Is God obsolete in that same respect, as the concept of God relates to the Constitution?
quote:
Originally posted by HeruStar:
You don't understand the question...

American money at one point needed gold in order to LEGITAMIZE it.

The American Constitution at one point used GOD to LEGITAMIZE it.

The question is whether or not GOD is still USED to LEGITAMIZE the Constitution.

Gold is obsolete as far as backing currency.
Is God obsolete in that same respect, as the concept of God relates to the Constitution?


I think I see your point now. It seems that nowadays, no one even knows the Constitution. Much less do they require the backing of God for it. Don't get me started on George Bush and his whole anti-constitutional administration. Puhlease....

But it seems like the Constitution is just like our money now: barely worth the paper it's printed on.
quote:
Originally posted by HeruStar:
The American Constitution at one point used GOD to LEGITAMIZE it.

I don't think this is true. One of the first precepts in the Constitution is the separation of church and state. The reasons for this were totally self serving. The colonists were tired of the Church (as in Church of England, which differed hardly at all from the Roman Catholic Church) influencing the rules of state, as it did so heavily in England. The idea was a complete breakaway from European conrol. The orthodoxy of Catholicism makes it very difficult for a country to experience self determination, and the colonists knew that first hand. Consider today, how much influence the Vatican has over Mexico. Who really runs that country, President Fox or the Pope?

But, we are talking about revolutionary prodestants. Although revolutionary in outlook, I suspect they couldn't even write a document that didn't have some sort of religious context. Especially since it was their religious teachings (taken entirely out of context) that gave them the right to come to this land and take whatever they wanted anyway. But the clause of separation of church and state effectively writes God out of consideration before the document is even finished.

I think this is one of the truely defining concepts in the Constitution that has yet to be fully realized. The founding fathers wanted a system of law and government that worked for them. They worded it very carefully to achieve that end. The results of this are obvious. The farther apart church and state are, the better both institutions function. The Constitution has changed over time to adapt to the changing needs of its people and it should continue to do so, IMO. But none of it should be changed unless and until it is proven not to work.
quote:
Originally posted by HeruStar:
quick question...

We used to have gold back the dollar...
We no longer need that backing so we discarded it

We used to have God back the Constitution

Does God still back the Constitution?

What is the basis of your assertion that "we" used to have God back the Constitution? I recall no reference to God in the document.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×