If the US Constitution was based on God and Jesus's laws

[yankeedem]

Then why don't their names appear anywhere in the Constitution?

I also hear how the Constitution is based upon the Ten Commandments. Now, I'm no Biblical scholar, nor am I a Constitutional scholar, but what part of the Constitution was derived from these commandments?

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me
If the founders had followed this commandment, then freedom of religion wouldn't be part of the Constitution.

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
I don't see a ban on painting portraits of God, although the founders could be forgiven for not anticipating photography.

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain
Freedom of speech pretty much negates this commandment. The founding fathers GUARANTEED us the right to take the Lord's name in vain.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy
So the 7-Eleven being open Sunday is extra-Constitutional?

5. Honour thy father and thy mother
Again, the Constitution is mum.

6. Thou shalt not kill.
Again, the Constitution mentions nothing about killing.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
If this was part of law, half of the Congress would be in prison. I'm looking at you Mr. Hyde.

8. Thou shalt not steal.
Pretty much common sense, don't you think? In fact, so common that the Constitution doesn't mention theft.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Again, common sense. In fact, Freedom of Press guarantees that bearing false witness will never be truly illegal. It would bring down the cable news industry.

10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
Unfortunately, the Constitution didn't address my neighbours ass, and his ox died two years ago.

So not one of the Ten Commandments made it into to the U.S. Constitution. Remember that next time one of the mouth breathers starts talking about the "founding fathers" and their intentions to create a "Christian nation".

[LiberalFighter]

1. It's a secret code embedded in the Constitution

[TaleWgnDg]

6. Oh, sheesh, here all along I thought it was a secret map on the

back of the Declaration of Independence. Thanks for clearing that up.

[LiberalFighter]

14. I bet that movie is so lame.

[walldude]

38. Actually it was fun mindless entertainment...

Nothing special but it could have been worse...

[psholtz]

2. The U.S. is a Republic

The U.S. is a Republic (or, it's supposed to be). One (pretty good) operating definition of a Republic is a place where each citizen is free to exercise his Free Will, so long as it doesn't interfere w/ the Free Will of another citizen.

Free Will is God's greatest gift to Man (per the Bible), and the Republic is therefore the most perfect form of government (Biblically speaking).

Also, if you follow the 10 Commandments, chances are that (a) you'll be free to exercise your free will; and (b) you won't be interfering w/ the free will of another citizen.. So you can look at it from either angle..

[Art_from_Ark]

15. A republic can be any independent country

that has a president as its titular head, or is not a monarchy. Iraq was a republic, and Syria and Sudan are republics. The United Kingdom is not a republic, neither are Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Norway, and Japan.

[psholtz]

19. dogs aren't cats

No, a Republic can only be a country that has strict Separation of Powers (like those in the U.S. Constitution), that has extensive checks and balances on those powers, and that has strictly enumerated privileges bestowed onto the government by the (sovereign) people.

Lots of Communist governments during the Cold War got into the habit of naming their countries "Republics", just b/c Commies love being Orwellian and naming things after what they aren't (People's Republic of China, and so forth).. but that doesn't mean that it's a Republic.

If I take my pet dog, and I name him "Cat", and I take him for a walk, and I say, "Here Cat! Come here Cat! Good Cat!! That's a good Cat!" are you going to think that it's a dog or a cat?

Based on what you just said, you'd think the damn thing is a cat.. I say it's a dog (no matter what I name it).. ;-)

[Art_from_Ark]

22. You are mistaken

A republic can be what you have described, but is in no way limited to your definition; it can be nearly any independent country that is not a monarchy. Check your World Almanac for "Type of Government" of the various countries I listed. Or check the CIA Factbook.

I live in Japan. It has those governmental features you listed, but it is not a republic, it is a constitutional monarchy.

[psholtz]

29. republic is what it is..

Sorry, I'm not mistaken and a dog is still a dog, and a cat is still a cat.

Maybe it's b/c you are Japanese, and not American, that you don't understand the principles underlying a Republic??

[Art_from_Ark]

33. Why let a few facts get in the way of an argument?

I work for a Japanese export company that sells to a lot of countries which you probably haven't heard of. Part of my job is to find information about these countries to prepare our sales representatives for their visits to the countries in question. Sources include almanacs, the US State Department, the United Nations, and the country itself. If you worked at such a job, you would soon find that republics, like cats, come in a variety of flavors. You have your "calico" federal republics, and your "tabby" Arab republics, and your "bobtail" parliamentary republics, and your "Persian" Islamic republics, and your "mixed breed" miscellaneous-type republics. They're all cats/republics, but they've got their own character and idiosyncrasies .

Do yourself a favor-- educate yourself, rather than relying on John Birch for your information.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[psholtz]

32. CIA has no facts..

btw, those two words, "CIA Factbook" is probably the most Orwellian oxymoron I'm seen in a while.. The word "CIA" should never be set against the word "fact"... I'm not sure I, or anyone, can remember the last time the CIA ever got a fact straight!! :P

[Toots]

26. How about the Republik of North Korea

What a bunch of Crap...... The Ten commandments is in direct contradiction to the US constitution. The Treaty of Tripili which is/was the Supreme Law of the Land is the very first treaty ever written by America and it says the US is not in any fashion a Christian Nation. what is it about that American Law that you don't understand???

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. well really none of them except perhaps

for 'thou shall not steal' as there is some mention of property rights.

However strictly speaking the Bill of Rights is not part of the Constitution proper, they are a set of amendments to the Constitution. So your arguments using the BoR are on the weak side.

Forget the 10 Commandments. Just ask your fundy friends how many times the Constitution mentions god or religion?

The answer is that there is exactly one reference to god in the entire document. That reference is the date at the end of the document and in many versions it is not even considered to be a part of the actual document. The date reads '... year of our lord ....'. That's it. That is the entire religious foundation in our founding document.

[ProfessorGAC]

23. Sorry, Warren, You Are Incorrect

The ammendment is just that! It's an AMMEDING OF THE CONSTITUTION! The adoption of such an ammendment makes it PART of the original document. Once the Constitution was ammended, those additions become part and parcel of that document. So, the Bill of Rights, BY DEFINITION, are in the Constitution.

The original argument is not at all weak for the reasons you state.
The Professor

[whistle]

4. Very good, that 10th commandment is all about envy, jealosy...

...and lust which pretty much would make the entire world of marketing, advertising and propaganda unconstitutional had that commandment been incorporated into the constitution. As for commandment number 8, usury laws for charging interest on borrowing would have been unconstitutional as well had that commandment been part of the constitution. Commandment 9 would turn the entire law enforcement and justice system on its head.

Had the other commandments been written into the U.S constitution by our founding fathers, the entire country would be made up of religious communes today.

[RedFireDiamonds]

5. Good logic, but...

Though the language is certainly different the constitution was based upon Christian moral principles, our founding fathers were Christian. The argument is really that all the major religions have moral codes that coincide. Our Constitution could easily have been based upon the five precepts for Buddhists, of the Hindu moral code, or Islamic ethics, because they all state the same basic truths. Religion is a major part of humanity, it has always shaped governments and it will continue to do so.
I think the truly effective argument is one where you point out that there is a difference between having religion in your government and having religious morals in your government. Even for people like me who claim no affiliation to any religion can understand that religious morals are a good thing. Don't steal, don't kill, don't lie: these are all good ideas to live by. You're right that the ten commandments don't exactly appear in the constitution and using the bible as the first governmental reference is clearly a violation of church and state.
I'm not entirely sure what I'm trying to get at here, I started to respond with a specific goal in mind and now I've just been rambling. I guess the ten commandments issue has come up a lot recently with the whole controversy over whether they should be displayed in the courtroom in...Alabama, I think. We can't say that our government wasn't based upon Christianity; it was. We can say, though, that while the moral truths of Christianity are the basis of our law, the constitution clearly states freedom of speech, expression, religion and the separation of church and state.

[Disturbed]

7. "our founding fathers were Christian"

False! Please do some research.

[yankeedem]

9. Moral truths aren't necessarily "Christian" truths

because Christianity has no "license" on them. You are correct in saying that all religions have moral codes that coincide, but I don't believe them to be divine revelations (as you say "religious morals").

It doesn't take religion to figure out that stealing and lying aren't real good policies to run a society with. And most governments really don't have a problem with killing, even murdering, if it furthers the aims of the nation.

I think everyone is ingrained with basic moral values, if for no other reason than for survival. Even the cavemen knew that if you stole from the other caveman the other cavemen may come over and bash your head with a stick.

Welcome to DU!

[Kathy in Cambridge]

37. Our constitution was based on the precepts of the Enlightenment

and the Founding Fathers were Deists, and not necessarily religious.

[Jokinomx]

8. My Favorite Founding Fathers Quote...short and to the point....

“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” George Washingtons Treaty of Tripoli Article 11. Signed into law by John Adams

[Igel]

27. What nobody here's ever bothered to say is why that

line's in the treaty.

Assuming you say what's necessary in a treaty, why is it there? If it wasn't there, would the treaty have been as acceptable to both parties.

Adams also said that our constitution was meant for a religious and moral people.

[RedCappedBandit]

10. Good post!

Where did the term mouth breathers originate? :thumbsdown:

[GreenArrow]

11. If one is really a Christian...

then one should take Jesus' word for it.

Matthew 22:36-40 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" And He said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' "This is the great and foremost commandment. "The second is like it, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."

Funny how one never hears "Christians" talking about Jesus' Two Commandments in any regard, much less putting them on courthouse walls.

[yankeedem]

12. I thought the 2nd was

"You shall love your neighbor as yourself, except if he is poor, or a Negro, or a Jew, or worships another God, or doesn't believe in laissez faire capitalism, or would vote for Hilary".

At least that's the version I see being preached on CBN.

[GreenArrow]

13. preached by wolves

to a flock of slowly fattened sheep.

[timtom]

35. Why would you

look to cable television for an exegesis of Biblical scripture?

[infusionman]

16. No One ev er hears another say...

DAMN Krishna,

or

Damn Mohhamed...

Do they?

[GreenArrow]

18. I'm not sure what your point is

?

As a side note, Krishna is a deity, Mohammed is not. And I have no doubt that there are plenty of good Americans who damn Mohammed good and plenty.

[Igel]

28. Do you often hear people say "Damn god"? I don't. n/t

[timtom]

36. Excellent point!

As a Christian, this passage is one to which I most often refer, both with fellow Christians and non-Christians alike.

[kweerwolf]

17. Ethics vs. morals

I've been reading C.A. Tripp's book "The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln" (yeah, the one that suggests he was gay) and came across an interesting topic in it last night: the difference between morals and ethics.

Ethics comes from the Greek ethos while morals come from the Roman mores. Both words mean "customs" in their respective language and thus there has been lots of confusion. The difference between them, according to the author, is that "'morals' and 'morality' are largely the language of local standards and values, often upheld by religion and religion-based judgments, while 'ethics' and 'ethical' imply less emotion and are more often the language of the law."

The problems exist in the Ten Commandments because it contains both moral and ethical laws. Murder, lying, and stealing are condemned across cultures, for example, but keeping the Sabbath day holy, not making graven images, and having no other gods before you are moral codes siince they apply to a specific religion.

All major religions condemn murder and stealing, so shouldn't we call such commandents the laws of God, Mohammad, Buddha, Zoraster, etc., etc.? And if want to enact the Ten Commandments into the Constitution, how do we deal with enforcing keeping the Sabbath for persons whose religion tells them a different day of the week is holy?

[leftofthedial]

20. I'm so sorry for your tragic loss

of the opportunity to covet your neighbor's ox

RW'ers don't think for 2 seconds about 90% of the crap they "believe"

[Warren DeMontague]

21. Scalia believes that "God is the source of our government's authority"

Really. He should have let the founders know before they penned that bit about government deriving authority from the consent of the governed.

[Solomon]

24. Excellent post Yankeedem.

Bowing head solemnly and shaking head at the fools who can't see your point because they're blinded by "faith".

[ryan_cats]

25. Interestingly enough

Interestingly enough, the Catholics have removed the graven image commandment and split the covet one up into two, the neighbor's wife and then the neighbor's stuff. How this relates though to this thread is beyond me, I just thought it was an interesting tidbit.

[walldude]

39. George Carlin does a great bit about

the 10 Commandments being a marketing ploy. He then proceeds to explain why really there are only 2 commandments, they just made up 10 because it sounds good, like 10 most wanted, top 10, 10 is a nice round number...

[datasuspect]

31. interesting. thanks

what you said:

"10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
Unfortunately, the Constitution didn't address my neighbours ass, and his ox died two years ago."

i wonder if this conflicts with eminent domain or civil asset forfeiture? nah! what was i thinking!