Answers to Responses

Thank you to all who responded to my letter to the editor listed below which also follows closely, though not as explanatory based on the 200 word limitation placed by the opinion section editors.
Here is what I submitted and what was printed:
“Some would like to re-create the United States in their own image. To accomplish this they need to rewrite the constitution, interpreting it to fit their image. They also need to rewrite history. One recent contributor to the opinion page did just that when he claimed that Yakima’s Mayor acted inappropriately when he called the people of the city to prayer. The truth is the mayor’s action were entirely appropriate, backed by precedent, grounded in the true history of our founding fathers and the true intent of the constitution. Our Christian heritage is clearly reflected in that constitution. Secular humanists have been working for years to rewrite history saying the founders were not even religious. History, however, shows that most, including Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson were ardent believers in the Bible, Jesus Christ, and prayer. I applaud Mayor Cawley for calling our community to prayer. The Constitution protects that right and obligation. It does not separate church and state as the humanists say, but protects us from the state forcing a particular religion upon us. That is actually what these humanists attempt to do with their actions, even recently encouraging churches to promote their secular agenda from the pulpit.”

From pdf6161 this comment was made: “John, one clarification: Even Ben Franklin, though he did not believe in Jesus, was an ardent believer in the Bible and prayer, and he argued successfully for daily prayer at the Constitutional Convention.” My answer: Thank you. You are almost correct. Ben Franklin admitted to having some doubts about the divinity of Jesus. He did believe in the historic Jesus, besides merely having some doubts does not make one a non-believer and a secular humanist as those who totally reject the idea. I maintain that Ben Franklin was more of a believer than many who profess to be believers today, though he may not have been as much so as some of the ministers who were among the founding fathers. He certainly was devout and believe in the Christian principles reflected in the Constitution.
Jlang wrote: “’Some would like to re-create the United States in their own image. To accomplish this they need to rewrite the Constitution, interpreting it to fit their image.’ In this, Mr. Abercrombie is entirely correct. However, it is those [who] wish to ascribe a Christian foundation to the Constitution that are guilty of this particular conceit. Jefferson made it abundantly clear in both his autobiography and his letter to the Danbury Baptists that the intent of the First Amendment was exactly to build a wall of separation between church and state. That is what the First Amendment states. ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…’”
Let me make a comment on Mr. Lang’s comments here. I believe the difference here is in how the words are interpreted and how they were intended. I believe it is the secular humanists who have misinterpreted the words. Jefferson did not intend a “wall of separation” that would preclude government officials from praying in public and/or in their official capacity. His intent, and that of the words quoted from the Constitution were intended to preclude Congress from imposing on the American people a prescribed doctrine, church organization, or form of worship, or to prescribe what is to be preached or prohibited from being preached from the pulpit of any church. Does it allow prayer before Congress, courts, city council meetings, or in public schools. No! We have decades of precedence saying it is legal according to the Constitution to pray in public and even in official capacity which was ignored by the Supreme Court and other courts in making subsequent rulings, as was the intent of the Constitution itself. I believe if we were able to ask Jefferson himself what he intended he would be in favor of public and official prayer.
Mr. Lang continues: “This means that people are free to observe whatever religion they believe is correct for their lives and most accurately reflects their beliefs. To state that the Constitution has a Christian basis creates a logical non-sequitur. Why would the Founders state that you have the freedom to choose your own beliefs while at the same time saying that it is a Christian nation? The assertion is essentially logically bankrupt.”
I believe the founders did state that you have the freedom to choose your own beliefs while at the same time saying that it is a Christian nation. Those who are somewhat enlightened and perceptive would see beyond logically bankruptcy and understand the actual situation. I believe that the founders were looking at religious freedom primarily as that among differing Christian faiths. They wanted all Christian faiths and beliefs to be allowed as Mr. Lang stated above. To do so they did not discriminate between Christian and non-Christian beliefs. They even allowed atheists, but all allowed the others to believe and worship as they pleased. It was a Christian nation and the vast majority of the founders were ardent, devout, Christians, and some were even ministers of the Christian faith. The overwhelming majority of the population were also Christian. It seems that only the secular humanists want to limit what people believe and want to force people to accept their point of view, not practicing any faith that would offend them. The founding fathers were not so. It was, in fact, the benevolence of the Christian faith and the principles reflected in the Constitution that gave men the freedom to practice the worship of their Creator as they desired.
Mr. Lang continues: “Though the Declaration does mention a higher power, it fits in with the concept of a personal and individual view of who that higher power may or may not be. ‘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...’ Note that the text specifically mentions 'their Creator', not 'THE Creator' nor 'OUR Creator' nor even 'Jesus'. This points to the choice of Creator being with the individual, not a view of any particular faith or any particular god.”
In that most of the founders were devout Christians, ardent believers in God, Jesus Christ, and the Bible, it would be logical that their definition of “Creator” would have been the God of the Bible, the Creator of the Universe, and not some abstraction of the idea to fit one’s own personal desires. Their view of the Creator mentioned in the Declaration would logically be the God of the Bible. It is revisionist, and somewhat dishonest, to impose some different intent.
Mr. Lang continues: “Though many point to quotations from some of the founders expressing opinions about the proper place of religion in people's lives, these are simply that. Opinions. In Jefferson's autobiography he states that it was the intention of the majority of those debating the Constitution that there be no connection between church and state, and that is how it is written, from beginning to end.”
Let us suppose that Mr. Jefferson meant “no connection between church and state” as you have stated it, and lets suppose that this was the intention of the majority (we should probably take a vote to see if it was actually a majority), that does not mean that they meant that there could be no public or official prayer, because they prayed publically and in their official capacities, probably even Jefferson. It also does not mean that there could be no prayer in schools, or in courts, or that a national day of prayer could be declared where each person prayed (or did not pray) as he or she desired. If they did have this intent, it would be logical that it referred to specific church organizations, not to official and public calls to prayer. Here again Jefferson’s words are being twisted to mean something he may not have intended.
Lang continues: “Mr. Abercrombie is entirely correct in his first sentence. However, it is his view of the subject that contradicts what the Constitution clearly says. As well, he has apparently not studied Mr. Jefferson very well, as he was adamant regarding his opinion of organized religion.”
It is my opinion that my position is correct and it is Mr. Lang’s that contradicts what the Constitution clearly says, and I do not study any of the founders to make their words mean something they did not intend. When taken in the overall context of the writings of the founders, the words of Jefferson that are cited by most secular humanists are an infinitesimal part of the body of literature. Most adamantly supports the Christian principles clearly evident in the Constitution.
Let me clear something up. I think organized religion is OK, but it has many flaws. Christianity in its truest form is not a religion but a relationship with Jesus Christ, our Creator, showing a way of salvation from our sins that are condemning us to death. I also believe it is built into the Constitution for me as a Christian to support our government in prayer and service publicly and officially.
Mr. Lang quotes several sources. Let’s decipher what they may really be saying about this issue – separation of church and state, and what was truly their intent:
“Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear." -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787
God can indeed be questioned, and the evidence for Him is clear to those who want to see it. There is no need to give God homage out of fear because He is a loving God. Those who refuse to give Him homage are the ones who need to fear.
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes." -Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813
Remembering history, those who came to America were fleeing countries where the head of the national religion dictated to the people by law or decree was a part of the government. They did not just support the government and put input into it, but many times had power equal to the king of that country. They were dictators. The founders did not want a government dominated by a single religious organization. They did, however, recognize the principles of Christianity that make a government stronger, and did want that incorporated into the administration of the nation, such principles as equal justice, seeking God in prayer for those things men had no control over, and protection from outside enemies and influences that would seek to destroy the nation. I believe this is the intent of Jefferson’s statement. It is backed by his actions and a bulk of his own writings.
"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Hopkinson, March 13, 1789
I wonder how Jefferson would feel about the move by secular humanists and atheists to impose their religious views on the rest of the nation by their misguided view of the separation of church and state. I am sure he would not agree with Phil Maher’s statement that 60% of Americans don’t believe in evolution and it is “our” (his word) duty to drag them to it. If you are a thinking man and you don’t want to pray, don’t pray. But don’t limit other thinking men from doing what they think is right.
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State." -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802
I have already discussed this letter above. Those who want all prayer or acknowledgement of God taken out of the public sector and government are in violation of Jefferson’s intent.
Mr. Lang concludes: “This nation had founders who were Christian, but it is NOT a Christian nation any more than it is a Muslim nation or a Jewish nation or an Atheist nation. It is all of those things and we are freed from the tyranny of the religious expectations of others by the Constitution, which grants us the right to believe as we choose.”
I totally disagree with this statement. I would probably agree that it is no longer a Christian nation, but the intents of the founders reflected Christian principles and reflected them in the Constitution and in the workings of the government as a whole. There is no tyranny of religious expectations and yes, the Constitution grants us all the right to believe what we choose. I believe it is the tyranny of secular humanism and atheism that wants to force their beliefs on everyone else, all of whom have the right to pray and support our government as they see fit unrestricted by the restrictions that the secularists would force upon us.

More responses to come.