American Family Association bigots disrupt first-ever Hindu prayer in Senate

[Dan_Norder]

@FriarTed

the common view of Deism is that of acknowledging a remote uninvolved God, which even the most heterodox of the Founders- Franklin, Jefferson & Paine, did not regard God as being.

Nonsense. Where did you cook that up?

[mhendo]

@Dan Norder

Nonsense. Where did you cook that up?

Exactly my reaction.

There’s quite a bit of debate over the extent to which Jefferson was or was not a Deist, but read Franklin’s autobiography and you’ll soon get a sense of his Deism, which was very much an Enlightenment-inspired view of God as a creator who then left the world to operate on natural principles. This was very much in contrast to, for example, the Puritan view of God as a performer of miracles, as a creator who reached into the world to perform supernatural acts.

While Franklin did believe that God’s ruled the world through his providence, this was a rather generalized notion in Franklin’s writings, and not one that involved direct intercession. In fact, Franklin was very explicit to state that our actions in this world need to be considered and evaluated based upon their consequences in this world, not upon some supernatural or other-worldly set of criteria. He placed the natural before the supernatural, for example in a section where he discusses his attitude to human behavior:

In this piece it was my design to explain and enforce this doctrine, that vicious actions are not hurtful because they are forbidden, but forbidden because they are hurtful, the nature of man alone considered; that it was, therefore, every one’s interest to be virtuous who wish’d to be happy even in this world…

[chaoticbear]

I had never even known that prayer was allowed in any form in the Senate. These people who argue that America is a Christian nation and so religion belongs in our official proceedings can suck it. America is no longer a band of misfits who didn’t like what was going on in England.

[BrainGlutton]

@chaoticbear

I had never even known that prayer was allowed in any form in the Senate. These people who argue that America is a Christian nation and so religion belongs in our official proceedings can suck it. America is no longer a band of misfits who didn’t like what was going on in England.

Nor, for that matter, did the Founding Fathers think of America as a Christian nation.

In 1797 our government concluded a “Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, or Barbary,” now known simply as the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 of the treaty contains these words:

As the Government of the United States…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 Musselmen–and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan 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.

This document was endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and President John Adams. It was then sent to the Senate for ratification; the vote was unanimous. It is worth pointing out that although this was the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it was only the third unanimous vote in the Senate’s history. There is no record of debate or dissent. The text of the treaty was printed in full in the Philadelphia Gazette and in two New York papers, but there were no screams of outrage, as one might expect today.

[Terrifel]

It’s kind of a shame that contemporary Muslims haven’t embraced the archaic term “Musselman.” Whenever I read about the Treaty of Tripoli, it evokes the image of a society of incredibly bulked-up, well-oiled guys wearing nothing but turbans and tiny Speedos. “We’re all really pumped to hear about the treaty, America!” flex “You rock!” pose

“Mehomitan,” on the other hand, sounds like Charlie Callas attempting Ebonics. That one’s probably better left to history.

[Der_Trihs]

@Terrifel

It’s kind of a shame that contemporary Muslims haven’t embraced the archaic term “Musselman.” Whenever I read about the Treaty of Tripoli, it evokes the image of a society of incredibly bulked-up, well-oiled guys wearing nothing but turbans and tiny Speedos. “We’re all really pumped to hear about the treaty, America!” flex “You rock!” pose

Actually, “Musselmen” makes me think they are from some bad sci-fi movie called “The Invasion of the Mollusc Men”

[FriarTed]

@chaoticbear

I had never even known that prayer was allowed in any form in the Senate. These people who argue that America is a Christian nation and so religion belongs in our official proceedings can suck it. America is no longer a band of misfits who didn’t like what was going on in England.

Yeah, prayer in both the House and Senate have been offered daily under the direction of their Chaplains since… oh… SEVENTEEN-FRICKING-EIGHTY-NINE.

http://chaplain.house.gov/histInfo.html

U.S. Senate: 404 Error Page

Explore the sites- learn some history.

The people protesting the Hindu prayer in Congress were indeed bigots. The good secularist people here at the Dope might object to Congressional prayer in general but are at least civil enough not to disrupt it.

[FriarTed]

@mhendo

Exactly my reaction.

There’s quite a bit of debate over the extent to which Jefferson was or was not a Deist, but read Franklin’s autobiography and you’ll soon get a sense of his Deism, which was very much an Enlightenment-inspired view of God as a creator who then left the world to operate on natural principles. This was very much in contrast to, for example, the Puritan view of God as a performer of miracles, as a creator who reached into the world to perform supernatural acts.

While Franklin did believe that God’s ruled the world through his providence, this was a rather generalized notion in Franklin’s writings, and not one that involved direct intercession. In fact, Franklin was very explicit to state that our actions in this world need to be considered and evaluated based upon their consequences in this world, not upon some supernatural or other-worldly set of criteria. He placed the natural before the supernatural, for example in a section where he discusses his attitude to human behavior:

James Madison in his notes on the Constitutional Convention mentions Franklin making a plea to open in prayer so as to invoke the blessings of God on their
endeavor. This is not the act of someone who regarded God as only a remote watch-maker.

A very good book which is in large part just a compilation of their original writings is “IN GOD WE TRUST”- The Religious Beliefs and Ideas of the American Founding Fathers, compiled by Norman Cousins. It’s an eye-opener to those who would cast the Founders as evangelical Christians or as ACLUist “God”-banning secularists.

[Kozmik]

@BrainGlutton

Story here.

Video here.

Shiva forgive us.

Here is the prayer (from the Congressional Record).

[BrainGlutton]

Benjamin Franklin, in a letter to Ezra Stiles, 1790

You desire to know something of my religion. It is the first time I have been questioned upon it. But I cannot take your curiosity amiss, and shall endeavor in a few words to gratify it. Here is my creed. I believe in one God, the creator of the universe. That he governs by his providence. That he ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable service we render to him is doing good to his other children. That the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental points in all sound religion, and I regard them as you do in whatever sect I meet with them.

As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think his system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting changes, and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble. I see no harm, however, in its being believed, if that belief has the good consequences, as probably it has, of making his doctrines more respected and more observed; especially as I do not perceive that the Supreme takes it amiss, by distinguishing the unbelievers in his government of the world with any peculiar marks of his displeasure.

Christianity? Definitely not. Deism? You make the call.

[BrainGlutton]

And here is a pretty measured debunking (by John J. Reilly, a conservative Catholic intellectual) of Fighting for Liberty and Virtue, by Marvin Olasky (in which Olasky argues the Revolution was fought for Christian principles against the decadent, immoral British – and was hijacked by secularists at the Constitutional Convention).

[mhendo]

@FriarTed

James Madison in his notes on the Constitutional Convention mentions Franklin making a plea to open in prayer so as to invoke the blessings of God on their endeavor. This is not the act of someone who regarded God as only a remote watch-maker.

We could trade quotes all day, but i’m not really interested in having this debate with someone who apparently has little idea about what America’s republican Enlightenment was all about.

[crowmanyclouds]

@Der Trihs

… “The Invasion of the Mollusc Men”

I for one … Musselmen

CMC fnord!

[FriarTed]

@mhendo

We could trade quotes all day, but i’m not really interested in having this debate with someone who apparently has little idea about what America’s republican Enlightenment was all about.

You mean you’re not interested in having a debate. That’s OK- I’m not interested in having a debate with someone who’ll disregard the 1789-onward practice of the Congress and the Founders because it offends modern secularist sensitivities.

America’s republican Enlightenment - a non-sectarian Theistic humanist culture
governed by a democratic, representative Constitutional republic- pretty well
summarized in this quote from the Declaration-

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Hell, I’d jettison any idea of prayer, a moment of silence or the Pledge of Allegiance to get this spoken each morning in public schools and government
offices. In Gov’t offices especially they can add this clause-

— That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

By the way, since this is the Pit- Crow from MST3K voice bite me.

[mhendo]

@FriarTed

You mean you’re not interested in having a debate. That’s OK- I’m not interested in having a debate with someone who’ll disregard the 1789-onward practice of the Congress and the Founders because it offends modern secularist sensitivities.

Has noting to do with ignoring or not ignoring the practice. It has to do with your original assertion, which was:

the common view of Deism is that of acknowledging a remote uninvolved God, which even the most heterodox of the Founders- Franklin, Jefferson & Paine, did not regard God as being.

and which is bullshit.

Kindly go fuck yourself.

[FriarTed]

@mhendo

Has noting to do with ignoring or not ignoring the practice. It has to do with your original assertion, which was:and which is bullshit.

Kindly go fuck yourself.

I love liberal tolerance.

Which part is BS- the definition of Deism as seeing God as remote & uncaring, or the claim that Franklin, Jefferson & Paine did not share that perspective on God? They could well be called Deists, but not ones that regarded God as removed or unconcerned from human affairs.

[Princhester]

What’s your position, FriarTed? That there doesn’t need to be a separation of religion and state, or that it needn’t be complete, or that there does need to be a seperation generally, but because a particular anomaly has occurred regarding opening prayer for the last few centuries it is an anomaly that should remain?

[OttoDaFe]

As long as Congress makes no law establishing or restricting religion, what it does within its own chambers is its own business. And there is plenty that goes on which is established by tradition and/or precedent rather than the Constitution — the positions of Majority and Minority Leader come to mind.

The Republic has survived invocations to the Great Sky Pixie since 1789, so I think it will probably endure. That said, the protesters were idiots.

[FriarTed]

@Princhester

What’s your position, FriarTed? That there doesn’t need to be a separation of religion and state, or that it needn’t be complete, or that there does need to be a seperation generally, but because a particular anomaly has occurred regarding opening prayer for the last few centuries it is an anomaly that should remain?

I believe in a fence between friendly neighbors, not an uncrossable wall. And I think the word “anomaly” is totally out of place here. Common practice consistent with the intent and ideas of the Founders is not an anomaly. However, I am more of a separatist than the Founders were as they allowed for state-level established churches and attended Sunday church services in the Congressional halls. Public assistance to faith-based charities & vouchers to religious schools is a tricky issue, and probably should be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

[Terrifel]

Also, let us not forget that if America ever strays from the path of Ceremonial Deism, we risk incurring the wrath of the Ceremonial Deity, who will smite us all with a sternly worded letter of formal censure.