This issue has been approved by whereIstand editors.
This page shows the dialogue between users and editors regarding the merits of this issue. If you have comments about the issue's wording, relevance, etc., write them here. Only registered whereIstand members can edit an issue. Users must register in order to participate in all aspects of the whereIstand community.
whereIstand editor
76 Opinions
14 Followers
This one's always made me wince a bit. The sample evidence helps though. I'm fine with it.
whereIstand admin
821 Opinions
90 Followers
Capitalism Magazine
A curious notion is mushrooming lately on programs such as "The O'Reilly Factor" and other current events shows. Certain commentators claim that the United States of America owes its existence to what is termed "Judeo-Christian" philosophy. Now I will not dispute that such a philosophy exists or that it has proved influential for the past two millennia. I will further stipulate that many persons subscribe to this philosophy's doctrines, both now and back in the 1700s. What cannot be accepted, either on a philosophical or historical basis, is that such a philosophy could, or in fact did, lead to the creation of the United States. This is because the political theory underpinning the creation of America is contradictory to every religious philosophy on earth. Thus Judeo-Christian philosophy is incapable of creating a country such as the United States. America exists in spite of Judeo-Christian philosophy, not because of it.
Newsweek
Sherman Jackson Co-founder, American Learning Institute for Muslims On this criterion, I think there is very a strong case for considering America a Christian nation. If we look at such common religious constructs as "sacred," holy," "spiritual," "sin," even "religion," we find that our understandings of these things are deeply informed by Christian sensibilities, a Christian heritage and a Christian intellectual landscape. For better or worse, Christianity informs the way the overwhelming majority of people in America tend to think about, talk about, love and hate religion -- their own, as well as others'. And in this light, I think we might do well to recognize just how "Christian" a nation America is.
I guess that's cool. Are Christian values easily defined? "Was America founded on Christian principles?"
whereIstand member
353 Opinions
3 Followers
i'm with esperanto
608 Opinions
At this point I think I'd lean towards "Christian values." Because it seems patently obvious that this nation was not founded on a religion. However, whether or not explicit religious principles informed our founding documents is, I guess, debatable. As much as I think this is kind of a silly issue, I also realize that I have consented to the approval of issues that are way dumber than this one could ever be. So if we make that change I would be in favor of it.
Keep this as is.
define christian values for me.
15 Opinions
I think this could be argued either way. There are those who will say that America was founded on Christian values. Although I do agree with Adam's previous suggestion to change the wording slightly.
327 Opinions
6 Followers
I think it will be debated regardless. I would prefer that it be "Christian Values" to be more accurate of what people argue. Otherwise, this will be another prejudicial issue that people won't take a stand on.
123 Opinions
This is an issue which I believe is very important to this nation and that many, including public government-funded schools, seem to change in the textbook or rather re-write history. If you read the Constitution and Declaration you will see a belief and fouding upon the Christian faith. It is further evident that this nation was founded as a Christian nation in that the Mayflower compact shows the reason for their venture to the New World (currently America) was for the propogation of the Christian faith along with being able to practice Christianity in the way that they saw Biblical and right. If you read any of the letters wrote by our founding fathers, you will also find that the Seperation of Church and state, first is not mentioned in the Constitution, and that the origins of this are found in letters that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Church simply to assure them that no one church would come in to control the government as had the Catholic church in government past and in Britian. Also, in much of Jefferson's and many of the other founding father's letters and debates, it is prominent that they felt that Christianity was essential to the well-being and preservation of this country, and that the US was to be rooted in it. They saw that Christianity was not to rule over as in one church, but that those in leadership roles understand that the principles taught in Christianity were to be prevelant in government. They also appealed to God Almighty for the protection of this country and preservation of this land. Just to reiterate this point of Christianity being at the very foundation of this country is to show that at one point in the begginning of this country, before the Constitution was written, one of the requirments to hold office (for sure in NC, and I am confident in most other states) was that those to be elected must hold a faith/belief in a higher power or God.
I'm still pro-this issue.
this is fine with me as is.
Viz makes a good point to keep the issue. He makes a reasonable argument that America wasn't founded on Christian values and I think it's fair that Adam and many others would disagree. We now know we have two sides and I think it's an issue that galvanizes both, so that's good for the site. It's certainly fair to say Christianity influenced the founding fathers one way or another in my judgment. So why would this be a bad issue to debate when you always see the religious right using the argument that we were a country founded on religion, when they fight to keep prayer in school, or the term "God" in the pledge of allegiance? I'm for some variation of this issue by the way.
I've changed my mind. Esperanto and vizinertia make good points. It's either too general ("be nice, it's a Christian value") or patently false (as vizinertia points out).
I'd say Christian Values would be good. John Adams used the term General Christianity. I'd say that Christian values are not just limited to helping the poor.
274 Opinions
10 Followers
I hate to be a nay-sayer here, but I really don't like this so-called issue. People can argue all they want that Christian values or religious values are important to society (other issues); but to argue that the U.S., with its specific separation of Church and State, was "founded" on Christianity? What?
I think "Christian values" is a little too soft. Because you know, that could just mean being nice to poor people and whatnot, not necessarily an explicitly religious principle. Then again, I'm apparently the only person on WIS who thinks this issue is really boring and doesn't really even know what it means. Sounds to me more like an opportunity for pseudo-historical bloviating than intelligent debate.
Adam's point is why I suggested a lighter version, "was it based on Christian values?"
I think the problem is that few people are going to argue that it's founded on Christianity. Generally words such as "Judeo-Christian ethic" will be used.
i think christian values is too ambiguous. we all know what christianity is ...
I like Michael M's suggestion. Should we bring it back a notch and ask whether it was founded on "Christian values? Does that make for less of debate though?
I like it.
148 Opinions
Great topic. To throw it out there, i think, "Was America founded on Christian values?" also works well because it narrows the focus a bit, but if you want to leave generally as "Christianity" then I say go for it.
in response to brian: we can move this issue to US Politics right before we approve it. Let's wait until we get some comments on it before we move it though.
I have no idea what "PG evidence is," sorry.
You'll definitely find PG evidence. I can post it for Gingrich and a host of others right now. I have no problems with it. Should we move it under "US Politics?"
i think given the fact that Nick's blog on this issue generated 21 comments, it's clear this is a relevant debate. we might even be able to find public figure evidence on it.
You must be signed in to participate on whereIstand.com.
Register now to take stands, follow people and issues, request opinions and interact with other whereIstand members.