Treaty of Tripoli.. Proof that the US is not founded by Christianity?

[Lullaby Chainer]

US Treaty with Tripoli, 1796-1797

This is an interesting piece of history that might be useful against those "the-US-is-a-Christian-nation" statements.

Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation.

Article 11 states:

As the Government of the United States of America 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 Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan 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.

[Halofan48]

That certainly will help our debates. Now lets wait for the ones who will dismiss this.

[HelioPrime]

Sounds like something cooked up just to appease Tripoli.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: HelioPrime Sounds like something cooked up just to appease Tripoli.

Well it is a peace treaty..

[Jack]

As does the idea that "America is a Christian nation" sound like something cooked up to appease Christians. All national policy is "cooked up". It's created to apply to a situation at hand and provide a framework for future action.

[Rainbow]

As the Government of the United States of America 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 Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan 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.

That is politics.
It was written to satisfy all the interested bodies.
In other words : it is *-*-* to give some guys impression of "honest intentions" presented by "this" or "that" side.
A sterotypical formula, most often enclosed within some diplomatic documents and/or protocols in order to cease hostility (between interested bodies) and pave the way to proceed with "peaceful solution(s)".

[Matt W]

Quote by: Rainbow That is politics. It was written to satisfy all the interested bodies. In other words : it is *-*-* to give some guys impression of "honest intentions" presented by "this" or "that" side. A sterotypical formula, most often enclosed within some diplomatic documents and/or protocols in order to cease hostility (between interested bodies) and pave the way to proceed with "peaceful solution(s)".

It's a legal document. Therefore, unless otherwise stated or repealed, it stands as law.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Matt W It's a legal document. Therefore, unless otherwise stated or repealed, it stands as law.

Am I questioning that document (itself) ?

That Treaty was signed in particular time in order to open up trade routes.
What is more important, then :
- treaty
or
- profits
???

[GHook93]

America was founded by Christians, but it was founded on secularism. Freedom of religion! Separation of church and state! These are simple ideals of America that was founded on and holds sacred!

The ten commandment are nowhere near the constitution. Not even those shall not kill is in the constitution.

[Morality Games]

I have always enjoyed thinking that the finest features of our country were founded by Enlightenment-style deists and skeptics (like Jefferson and Franklin) who were only nominally Christian.

Of course, everyone has to be at least a little skeptical to think that a country is better off founded on secularism than a particular religion. At the very least, you doubt the ability of your religion to immediately serve as the best basis for political action.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Morality Games I have always enjoyed thinking that the finest features of our country were founded by Enlightenment-style deists and skeptics (like Jefferson and Franklin) who were only nominally Christian. Of course, everyone has to be at least a little skeptical to think that a country is better off founded on secularism than a particular religion.

That's an interesting question. Obviously, a "secular nation" could still be terrible, and many of them are (at least where largely secular states have existed). However, I think theocracy is generally quite worse.

It's unsettling that some still think secularism is bad and that theocracy is good. I'm an atheist and think it has brought so much peace into my life, at least mentally. I wouldn't want the state preaching to me about burning in hell, making me follow religious doctrine. Of course, an argument could be made that loyalty to a country is a religion in itself.

Grandpa h.

[Morality Games]

Of course, an argument could be made that loyalty to a country is a religion in itself.

It isn't constructive to consider all bad ideologies as religions, except in analogical (analogy) terms (only as a means of demonstrating a point -- not as an effective categorization).

Religion inspires various ways of thinking, and many of them are alright most of the time can be exceptional some of the time (Martin Luther King's way of thinking was very religious and yet very exceptional), but one of the most prolific is the dogmatist's style (which I loathe). Since unquestioning loyalty to a state is a type of dogma, it falls under that category, but not under that of religion.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Morality Games It isn't constructive to consider all bad ideologies as religions, except in analogical (analogy) terms (only as a means of demonstrating a point -- not as an effective categorization). Religion inspires various ways of thinking, and many of them are alright most of the time can be exceptional some of the time (Martin Luther King's way of thinking was very religious and yet very exceptional), but one of the most prolific is the dogmatist's style (which I loathe).

Well, I think any thought pattern can become orthodox and religion-like. That's one of the marvels of the human mind. It seems even easier to compare ideology and religion when the ideology villifies some one or some thing while praising another. Obviously, many Americans had September 11th as their basic introduction to the religion "Islam," and plenty of these many now view Islam in its entirety as totally villainous -- and feel very strongly about it, almost religiously. The inescapable point is: Religion is a matter of thought pattern like virtually everything else. An unbiased observer (a child, for example) might make very little distinction between a national ceremony and a religious one. Both usually have their pageantry, have authorities wooing the crowds and a significant degree of subservience which can be dangerous.

Grandpa h.

[LOGAN]

This misconception apparently is the entire reason for all the confusion in our younger generator. They have been tutored from birth to believe that the US Government "is" the Untied States of America....when in reality, "we the people" are in fact The United States of America. Wake Up! People, the government IS NOT, was not, nor never WILLbe, holding to any ONE religious doctrine to go about its sole duty, PROTECTING THE PEOPLE (we the people), THAT ARE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

The government with a small "g", is secondary to the transcending rights granted to THE UNTIED STATES OF AMERICA ( we the people) by the CREATOR, not by some MAN MADE entity, government.

What? Are we now espousing the opinion that the United States of America is not a democratic republic who's power rests with people but a socialist republic who's allowances to people rests from power of the STATE....like other communist nations?

With EVERY new law, every small piece of legal doctrine that allows more restraint upon our freedoms, we give the power of control over to the Government. And this is being done despite the 10 articles of confederation or Bill of Rights that was intended to clearly place limits upon the central government ( THE FEDS), now, it seems we have allowed the bottom feeding scavengers (Lawyers, ACLU) to invert this clear legal ideology into taking the Bill of Rights to limit the freedoms of "we the people". Just, social communist propaganda. People! Know your rights as a US citizen, they by far out weigh the rights of our proxies....the politicians, that use legal loopholes to manipulate our freedoms and establish "JOB" security for themselves, as most politicians do not have the material to make it in the real world. Like most College Professors, those that don't do well themselves....INSTRUCT instead of PERFORM.

You want to see the real UNTIED STATES OF AMERICA? TAKE A HISTORICAL LOOK at each individual STATE CONSTITUTION, and see just where the PEOPLE place their trust of endeavors, it sure as hell is not in the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

An example, just one. Take a look as the "original" state constitution for the State of Mass. Notice the "preamble", the reference to the "great legislator" of the universe.
In fact, this constitution held that it was a "prerequisite" to hold a belief in both God and the Christian faith before being allowed to hold "public office".

Massachusetts Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[grandpa]

Quote by: LOGAN They have been tutored from birth to believe that the US Government "is" the Untied States of America....

Not that I never make mistakes, but I think you meant to type "the United States of America" (though "the Untied States of America" is an interesting title -- maybe for a book or a rousing speech).

Anyway, when it comes to the religious right in recent years, they have been unable to crush opposition. I imagine it's very frustrating to them, and it explains in part the appeals to "original intent of the Founding Fathers" and the slogan that this is "a Christian nation." Meanwhile, they try to get God (what I would call confusion) into the schools under any guise that works. The most recent guise is so-called "intelligent design," a theory which certain groups are trying to impose on school curricula by legal means (and, most certainly, by social shaming). The problem is, none of these means are the most legitimate regarding the application of reason. In other words, they are by no means scientific.

If a "Founding Father" said it, it isn't necessarily true. It's only evidence of what that one person believed, which is by itself not very compelling. Also, if a law says God should be considered as real it obvious doesn't mean God does exist, nor does it mean that people will actually believe so in their heart of hearts. And social shaming is just a general technique of manipulation. It has as much to do with science as slapping someone you disagree with.

Grandpa h.

[Rainbow]

(Here we go again)

As the Government of the United States of America 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 Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan 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.

That specific phrase was written within the specific time-frame and applied to specific conditions.

The U.S. was relatively newly created state, at that time.
In order to open up new trade, the U.S. needed a free access to ports all over the globe. Islam-driven states remembered all the crusades, very vividly. They did not want to hear the word "Christian", since all the crusades were echoing those times back.
Since it is written that "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" it gives Islamic states a sort of assurance that No Christian crusade is going to take place ever, and that treaty is based on economic demands solely.
Yet, the U.S. - as a new body, state, etc. , needs some masses to fill out the space the U.S. is in a possession of. Therefore, that phrase gives ALL the people an option to migrate to, since the Religious and/or Non-Religous approach is meaningless, and encourages ALL the people to migrate to the U.S.
What do you expect to be written (within that document), guys ?

Here, it is the situation :
- newly created state
- huge territory
It is obvious that One wants people to settle on that land, and start make that state stronger. Then, that One issues a document that All the rights to All the people are being respected.
That is very simple and extremely effective.

Whether that One's true intention(s) was/is "this" or "that", I suggest you to view some History pages.
In case it may take some time, "The Good Shepherd" film - based on true story, is a quite worthy to get some answers.
In short :
(A conversation between one of the Italian mafia bosses and one of the CIA's top official, as an example )
- " Jews have this, Germans have that, etc. What do you have ? Besides, I came to U.S. when I was 2 months old."
- "We have the U.S. You are just visiting"
(not quotted, though).
What that means ?
That part is for you, guys.
("Illuminati", hmmm ? )

I do not want to diminish this document. However, I think you had better start analyzing the sub-text within that document as well instead, having all the accumulated informations available to you today, guys.

What Christianity has in common with that document, except that Christianity was/is one of the most popular form of religion ?
It is Ir-relevant whether it may apply to Christianity at all. It could apply to Atheism as well. It could apply to Any religious and/or non-religious masses. It applies to ALL the people.

What is the reason to post this within "Philosophy and Religion" forum ?
I think this subject should be posted in political forums, instead and indeed.

P.S.
That Treaty was broken by the U.S. governing body.

[Chancellor]

The United States of America (that geopolitical entity established by that document we call the Constitution) is not, and has never been, a Christian nation.

[LOGAN]

Quote by: grandpa Not that I never make mistakes, but I think you meant to type "the United States of America" (though "the Untied States of America" is an interesting title -- maybe for a book or a rousing speech). Anyway, when it comes to the religious right in recent years, they have been unable to crush opposition. I imagine it's very frustrating to them, and it explains in part the appeals to "original intent of the Founding Fathers" and the slogan that this is "a Christian nation." Meanwhile, they try to get God (what I would call confusion) into the schools under any guise that works. The most recent guise is so-called "intelligent design," a theory which certain groups are trying to impose on school curricula by legal means (and, most certainly, by social shaming). The problem is, none of these means are the most legitimate regarding the application of reason. In other words, they are by no means scientific. If a "Founding Father" said it, it isn't necessarily true. It's only evidence of what that one person believed, which is by itself not very compelling. Also, if a law says God should be considered as real it obvious doesn't mean God does exist, nor does it mean that people will actually believe so in their heart of hearts. And social shaming is just a general technique of manipulation. It has as much to do with science as slapping someone you disagree with. Grandpa h.

I do believe the lying assertion that this nation THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA was not founded upon religious principals was the intended topic of this thread, not someones "opinion" of what the religious right has done or has not done recently. Again this nation was very much founded upon the principals found in the Judeo Christian faith, as exampled by State constitutions which make up these United States. Offering any example of how a centralized federal government, whose sole purpose was in uniform protection and infrastructure between said states is a moot point....secondary to the actual states that are the UNITED STATES. I do agree that in recent history the role of the central government as been allowed to morph into a mirror of social communism, and take on the STATE RESPONSIBILITY of wet nursing each individual citizen. But again, the real power in this nation, does not rest in the central government nor the pompous supreme court system, but in the Sates, which has slowly given their status as individual entities away to the communist type government of socialism. And as by example of other futile efforts, we are destined to self implode in bankruptcy as well, due to the welfare mentality that now exists. The last true Democrat to hold the oval office was killed for his attempt in requiring the people to ask what they could do for the country, and not what can the country do for its citizens. Now he would be considered far right, in his political ideologies of strong centralized military strength and lower taxes. Of course, we are speaking of JFK. LOGAN

[Cephus]

Quote by: Matt W It's a legal document. Therefore, unless otherwise stated or repealed, it stands as law.

The importance of the Treaty of Tripoli lies not in the fact that it was a legal document, but that it had universal approval. It was approved by Congress unanimously and printed in all the national newspapers of the day, apparently without any rebuttal. If the American government and the American people, right around the time of the country's founding had no problem with the statement that we were not founded on Christianity, it's just pure ignorance and wishful thinking that modern-day Christians think that we were.

[LOGAN]

Quote by: Chancellor The United States of America (that geopolitical entity established by that document we call the Constitution) is not, and has never been, a Christian nation.

That's funny, because at the time of its founding over 90% of "we the people" professed to being of the Christian faith, are WE THE PEOPLE, not the UNITED STATES?. So, you obviously are 'gullible' enough to believe a LIE. So, as proven by HISTORY ACTUAL, and not the liberal lie, THE UNITED STATES WAS FOUNDED IN CHRISTIANITY, HAS LIVED IN CHRISTIANITY, AND EVEN TODAY, REMAINS A CHRISTIAN NATION. Because "YOU" and the rest of the loud mouthed minorities want to believe in lies does not make the other 90% wrong. Live with the fact, that all we are guaranteed is "equal representation", not totally equal lifestyles, as we live in a "DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC", NOT A "DEMOCRACY", again as directed by the will of "we the people". And your right not to believe in no way allows you to infringe upon my right to believe in that same religion, so go ahead and exercise your chosen selfish lifestyle of killing unborn children and allowing perversion a set in your house, but do not "demand" that your choice is superior, to the "transcending" authority tha allows all governments to exist. Most laughable. Logan