The Godless Constitution Essay

David Barton’s Original Intent: The Courts, The Constitution, and Religion, breaks down the significance of how religion was intended in the First Amendment and its effect on the phrase, “Separation of Church and State.” Barton well illustrates how the founding fathers incorporated the position of religion into the First Amendment. Barton explains how the House Judiciary Committee believes, “The founders did respect other religions; however, they neither promoted pluralism nor intended that the First Amendment do so” (175). They continue to discuss how the founding fathers were all Christians and they expect it to remain that way in the lives of the citizens. In Barton’s views of the First Amendment, he believes it has changed dramastically

In the “Letter to Danbury Baptist,” the author Thomas Jefferson develops and refines the central idea of “separation between church and state” by explaining the importance of keeping a good relationship between himself and the Baptist people but also standing firm on the importance of the first amendment. The danbury Baptist people wanted to change the division of church and state but Jefferson used his rhetoric to help explain to the people that the separation of church and state is good for all men and all religions. Jefferson states, “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man

A constitution is a written document that sets forth the fundamental rules by which a society is governed. Throughout the course of history the United States has lived under two Constitutions since the British-American colonies declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776. First in line was the Articles of Confederation (1789-1789) followed by the Constitution of United States of America (1789-present). The Articles of Confederation was the first formal written Constitution of America that specified how the national government was to operate. Unfortunately, the Articles did not last long. Under the words of the Article’s power was limited; Congress could make decisions, but had no power to enforce them. Also the articles stated

With sounds of youthful laughter, conversations about the students’ weekends, and the shuffling of college ruled paper; students file into their classrooms and find their seats on a typical Monday morning. As the announcements travel throughout the school’s intercoms, the usual “Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance” becomes no longer usual but rather puzzling to some students. “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all.” Confusion passes through some of the student’s minds. With the reoccurrence of “God” in the backdrop of American life, the relationship between church and state has become of little to no matter for American

Summary: The division between church and state is a gray line that is often crossed and argued about. For example, Gwen Wilde, the author, argues that the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance requires people who do not believe in God to recite something they do not necessarily believe in. If a person chose not to say the full Pledge, including to utter the words “under God” they run the risk of being called unpatriotic. The author continually argues that the words “under God” add a religious doctrine that not all Americans believe in.

In 1787 at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, the framers of the Constitution of the United States of America worked together to identify the best way to elect the President (Patterson, 2013). The ideas suggested varied and ranged from selection by members of congress chosen by lottery, to a popular vote of the people. By the end of the Convention the matter had yet to be settled as the framers fore saw that many of the suggestions were prone to corruption, error, and were very chaotic. The issue was passed down to the Committee on Postponed Matters, who in turn created the system that is used today and is commonly known as Electoral College (Kazin, 2011). The Electoral College was outlined by the Committee to up hold the views of the founding fathers, who were the framers of the Constitution.

In American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation, Jon Meacham explores the dynamic relationship between religion and government in America in the hope that contemporary America can learn from the past. The period covered by the book spans from 1620 until Reagan’s presidency in the late 1980s. However, Meacham focuses on the Founding Fathers stances and their continued impact on American politics. More specifically, the book details the conflict over the separation of private religious expression and the more neutral ‘public religion’.

When discussing the intertwining of church and state; soul liberty and freedom from religious belief, we must recognize that freedom and faith were at one point complementary ideas. Faith was once the foundation for freedom and vice versa. The Declaration of Independence clearly states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights." With these words from the Declaration of Independence, our founding fathers set up their vision of what this country would come to be. Among those rights, which are deemed “inalienable”, is the right of religious liberty. (Neumann, 1990: p. 241)

The Constitution reflects our founder’s views of a secular government, protecting the freedom of any belief or unbelief. Some will argue religion, specifically Christianity, played a large role in the creation of this great nation’s government, the United States Constitution; however the facts reveal otherwise. The historian, Robert Middlekauff, observed, "the idea that the Constitution expressed a moral view seems absurd. There were no genuine evangelicals in the Convention, and there were no heated

The constitution of the United States of America is the founding document on which the government of America is built. It currently has twenty-seven amendments. It lines out the specific government practices as well as the system of check and balances. It was first drafted July, 1787 after the first form of government, the articles of confederation, had proven very inefficient to a point where it became almost redundant to have them in place. After a large amount of debate the acting continental congress decide to completely revise the current system. The constitution was efficient and fair and it kept the parts of government in place while not giving too much power to one or more branches.

Despite the fact that the founding fathers assumed the existence of an almighty power, they also protected the right of the people to believe or not. Gewertz does not agree with all ideas of the founding fathers, but he also says, "the phrase under God is in keeping with the intentions of the Founding Fathers. They anchored their thinking in the idea of a higher law in order to ensure that all power does not reside in the state." Agreeing with Gewertz, Cameron thinks that the founding fathers would not be too happy with the way things are going now.

The plan to divide the government into three branches was proposed by James Madison, at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. He modeled the division from who he referred to as ‘the Perfect Governor,’ as he read Isaiah 33:22; “For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king; He will save us.” http://www.eadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm

This paper is a book critique of The Godless Constitution. The first chapter of the book is titled “Is America a Christian Nation?” and it is an introduction for the rest of the book. In this chapter, the main idea is to open the reader’s mind about that the constitution was created with the idea that religious believes will not influence in the politics of the nation. The authors state that “The principal framers of the American political system wanted no religious parties in national politics” (Kramnick and Moore, 23). Actually, the creation of a constitution without influence of religion was not an act of irreverence. The authors believe that the creation of the constitution was a support to the idea that religion can preserve the civil morality necessary for democracy, without an influence on any political party. The end of the chapter is the description of the following chapters and with a disguise warning that both authors were raise in religious families and they wrote the book with high respect for America’s religious traditions (Kramnick and Moore, 25). The second chapter, called “The Godless Constitution” explains how the different terms to talk about God were taken out and a “no religious test” clause was adopted with little discussion. This clause was a “veritable firestorm” during the ratification debates in several states (Kramnick and Moore, 32). For many people the “no religious test” clause was considered as the gravest defect of the Constitution (Kramnick

However, to overturn this saying, one can simply point out that this official motto is the result of the law approved in 1957, therefore, it has no influence on the national foundation. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” As John Adams mentioned in the Address to the Military, no matter what people’s religious beliefs are, government would not be based on religion, include

Professor Larry Sabato is the founder of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia presents 23 proposals to revitalize our Constitution and Make America a Fairer Country. His book provides insight for a hard fought debate. Whether you like his suggestions or not or you agree with him or not, you have to respect anyone that can outwardly state that the United States Constitution as it has been handed down is “outdated.” This quest for reform I’m sure would anger many political conservatives who believe that the Constitution that we know today, is not in need of any reform, and is just the true document that is has always been and should remain.