Quantcast

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. - John Adams

FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX 2013/01/21 07:46:50

Says Who?

Says the 5th Congress of the United States,
President John Adams
and Vice President Thomas Jefferson
AS STATEMENT OF FACT
In Writing - Officially - AS LAW
.



This is the official denial of a Christian basis for the U.S. Government penned by directive of President and founding father, John Adams. Submitted by him to the 5th Congress of the United States - and passed as part of the Treaty of Tripoli.

It was submitted to the Senate by the President on May 26, 1797, receiving ratification unanimously from the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 under Senate President and Vice President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, signed by President Adams, and took effect as the law of the land on June 10, 1797. While the Treaty itself is long dissolved, the statements of fact contained therein can never be.



tripoli2


tripoli1


jefferson signed president adams effect law land june 10 1797


jefferson signed president adams effect law land june 10 1797





You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • rusty shackelferd 2013/01/21 23:36:28
  • FAWKES'... rusty s... 2013/01/22 01:08:40
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    +1
    Better read the SH TOS before you go and get yourself deactivated, Gribble.
  • FAWKES'... FAWKES'... 2013/01/31 02:56:28
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    Oh dear. Too late. The poor feller is deactivated.
  • FAWKES'... rusty s... 2013/01/31 02:55:50
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    Oh my... "Moderated"

    Why oh why couldn't you just control yourself???!!!
  • Messenger 2013/01/21 17:38:18
    Messenger
    +2
    It is sad that christians refuse to read history and continue to force their religion onto everyone in their path.
  • Stratweenie57 2013/01/21 09:56:40
    Stratweenie57
    +1
    You guys are really slow on the uptake at times. That line in the Treaty of Tripoli was actually a small exercise in knowing one's enemy,in this case the califate of Islam at the time. Jefferson obtained a Koran for that purpose,and in it read about the so-called "art" of Taqiyya(lying),and Adams simply turned it around on them...gave them a taste of their own medicine as it were. You know,as often as the left practices such tactics on others-you'd think they'd recognize it when they saw it,but then again...probably not.
  • FAWKES'... Stratwe... 2013/01/21 17:51:56
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    Irrelevant. The statement is a fact acknowledged unanimously by Congress, The President and the Vice President. Facts do not dissolve. They do not get repealed. They do not expire. They remain FACTS.
  • Stratwe... FAWKES'... 2013/01/22 19:17:00
    Stratweenie57
    +1
    The one point you seem to be confused about is tbe difference between the country itself and the government of the country. I don't deny the government is NOT a theocracy,but that has nothing to do with the individual states or tbe hearts and minds of the people themselves. The 1802 Danbury Letter clearly points out that the government shall not exercise any influence over the church,however it is mute as it concerns anything else. I would direct you to look into this site so as to further your edification: www.tektonics.org/qt/tripoli....
  • Mike 2013/01/21 09:13:18
    Mike
    +2
    John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813

    “Now I will avow, that I then believed, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System.”

    http://www.constitution.org/p...
  • FAWKES'... Mike 2013/01/21 17:53:35 (edited)
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    Irrelevant. What I posted was a statement of fact passed as law. What Adams felt personally in a private letter has no bearing on official the official position of the Government as ratified by Congress.
  • Mike FAWKES'... 2013/01/21 18:10:10
    Mike
    Law or not, you cannot decouple one’s belief about the “Principles of Liberty” being “Christian” according to John Adams, a founding Farther of our Nation. The US Constitution’s design was based in light of the principles of the Declaration of Independence to protect and embrace the individual’s Unalienable Rights of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”
  • FAWKES'... Mike 2013/01/21 18:41:57
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    LMFAO!!!!!

    THAT'S THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE!! ROFL!!!!!

    The Declaration of Independence is not a law. It grants no rights. It cannot be referred to in any court of law. It is a "Dear John" letter to the King of England. That is all.

    The ignorance of Cons always astounds me.
  • Mike FAWKES'... 2013/01/21 21:27:47
    Mike
    As for “rights”, the Declaration of Independence explains our Unalienable Rights are part of the Laws of Nature, not manmade.

    As for the relationship of our Constitution relative to the Declaration:

    “The Constitution exists to fulfill the promises made by the Declaration; it provides a legal and political framework through which those promises can be redeemed in history. Thus, if we want to understand the meaning of the Constitution, we must understand the meaning of those promises. The Constitution creates a structure of government; but the Declaration tells us why governments are instituted. Our Constitution is a living document; but the Declaration explains the reason that it lives. The Constitution is a body of law; but the promises contained in the Declaration are its soul.”

    http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/jb...
  • FAWKES'... Mike 2013/01/21 21:36:11
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    The Declaration of Independence explains NOTHING and grants NOTHING.

    It is a statement only to advise the Crown of Colonial Independence.

    Seriously? You're using a student paper as an argument?
  • Mike FAWKES'... 2013/01/21 21:52:09
    Mike
    “The Declaration of Independence explains NOTHING and grants NOTHING.”

    See the book: “Scientific Proof of Our Unalienable Rights, a Road to Utopia”, Takac, 2012.

    “Seriously? You're using a student paper as an argument?”

    Professor Balkin’s credentials:
    http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/jb...
  • FAWKES'... Mike 2013/01/21 23:08:24 (edited)
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    Go file any Civil Suit using the Declaration of Independence as the basis of argument and see how far you get.

    nowhere sign
  • Mike FAWKES'... 2013/01/21 23:21:11
    Mike
    You are missing the point my Friend.

    “The Constitution exists to fulfill the promises made by the Declaration… The Constitution is a body of law; but the promises contained in the Declaration are its soul.”

    Of course, the Declaration is not the body of law; and therefore, one cannot “file any Civil Suit using the Declaration...”

    I can’t get to your “photospin” site. The link is incomplete.
  • FAWKES'... Mike 2013/01/22 01:09:59
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    Irrelevant. The Declaration of Independence is not the law and it grants NOTHING.
  • Mike FAWKES'... 2013/01/22 04:36:51
    Mike
    Of course the Declaration “grants NOTHING.” Jefferson stated in the Declaration, a discovery in the Laws of Nature, presenting our Unalienable Rights pertaining to all of humanity.

    Just like Isaac Newton, did not “grant” the Laws of Motion, he presented a discovery in the Laws of Nature pertaining to the motion of objects.
  • FAWKES'... Mike 2013/01/22 05:04:58
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    You are implying that everything in the Declaration of Independence is magically and invisibly included in the Constitution. That is sophomoric.

    The Constitution says what it says and nothing more. The Constitution is the law. The Declaration of Independence is a statement.
  • Mike FAWKES'... 2013/01/22 05:16:37
    Mike
    I’m not “implying that everything in the Declaration” is in the Constitution. I’m just pointing out the Declaration is the foundation to our Constitution (Professor Balkin at Yale University, Law).
  • FAWKES'... Mike 2013/01/22 05:35:09 (edited)
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    The Constitutional Convention certainly had the Declaration of Independence to use as a reference. They could have included its verbiage in the Constitution if they wanted to. They did not. Stop trying to read between the lines. Its not there. And I don't give a crap what any professor says. Show me 10 Professors that say "UP" and I'll show you 10 that say "DOWN."

    The Declaration of Independence is in no way, shape or form a granting or implication of rights afforded to the Citizens of the United States.

    "They pant to restablish by law that holy inquisition, which they can now only infuse into public opinion. We have most unwisely committed to the hierophant of our particular superstition, the direction of public opinion, that lord of the Universe." - Thomas Jefferson
  • Mike FAWKES'... 2013/01/22 16:36:16
    Mike
    +1
    “The Declaration of Independence is in no way, shape or form a granting or implication of rights afforded to the Citizens of the United States.”

    Again, the Declaration does not “grant” anything. Jefferson stated in the Declaration, a discovery in the Laws of Nature, presenting our Unalienable Rights pertaining to all of humanity. Recently Takac proved Jefferson’s claim in his book “Scientific Proof of Our Unalienable Rights, a Road to Utopia”, Takac, 2012.

    Just like Isaac Newton, did not “grant” the Laws of Motion, he presented a discovery in the Laws of Nature pertaining to the motion of objects.

    There is no legal reference to Newton’s Laws of Motion in the US Constitution; however, man obeyed Newton’s Laws otherwise, there would be no industrial revolution at the turn of the last century or SodaHead in this century.

    Unlike Newton’s Laws not being in the US Constitution, there is reference, however, to our Unalienable Rights in the Constitution. You will find this reference in the Bill of Rights, Amendment V:

    “… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; …”

    The law, in our Constitution, protects our Unalienable Rights of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”. Of course, the government cannot protect “Happiness” but “Happines...

    “The Declaration of Independence is in no way, shape or form a granting or implication of rights afforded to the Citizens of the United States.”

    Again, the Declaration does not “grant” anything. Jefferson stated in the Declaration, a discovery in the Laws of Nature, presenting our Unalienable Rights pertaining to all of humanity. Recently Takac proved Jefferson’s claim in his book “Scientific Proof of Our Unalienable Rights, a Road to Utopia”, Takac, 2012.

    Just like Isaac Newton, did not “grant” the Laws of Motion, he presented a discovery in the Laws of Nature pertaining to the motion of objects.

    There is no legal reference to Newton’s Laws of Motion in the US Constitution; however, man obeyed Newton’s Laws otherwise, there would be no industrial revolution at the turn of the last century or SodaHead in this century.

    Unlike Newton’s Laws not being in the US Constitution, there is reference, however, to our Unalienable Rights in the Constitution. You will find this reference in the Bill of Rights, Amendment V:

    “… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; …”

    The law, in our Constitution, protects our Unalienable Rights of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”. Of course, the government cannot protect “Happiness” but “Happiness”, in part, is a function of “property.” One’s “pursuit” of property includes money, shelter, food, assets; these are the fruits of one’s labor. In a civil society, in a large part, freedom is a function of money. In general, more money results in more freedom, manifesting in more “Happiness.”

    Perhaps, during the enlightenment era, our founding Fathers knew how important it was to follow the Laws of Nature. When man embraces the Laws of Nature supports the positive side of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”; on the other hand, when man goes against the Laws of Nature embraces the negative side of “Death, Tyranny, or the pursuit of Failure.” The Unalienable Rights is the interface between Life and Nature, for all Life is part of Nature.
    (more)
  • Messenger Mike 2013/01/21 18:00:14 (edited)
    Messenger
    +1
    John Adams was not a christians.

    QUOTE

    John Adams “The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity”
    “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it”



    Thomas Jefferson: Religions are all alike -- founded upon fables and mythologies”
  • Mike Messenger 2013/01/21 18:13:34
    Mike
    Please provide a reference to your quotes as I did in my reply.
  • FAWKES'... Mike 2013/01/21 18:45:33
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    Incapable of research? We learned these quotes in high school. Look it up. Look up this one too:

    "Christianity...(has become) the most perverted system that ever shone on
    man...Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the
    teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and imposters led by Paul, the
    first great corruptor of the teachings of Jesus." - Thomas Jefferson.
  • The Sane One 2013/01/21 07:57:18
  • Lam Sai Wing 2013/01/21 07:48:20
    Lam Sai Wing
    +2
    Ah. Retaliation to the other post. Bravo!
  • FAWKES'... Lam Sai... 2013/01/21 07:49:39 (edited)
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    +1
    Yoop. lol

    Fact and Law vs. Hearsay.
  • Lam Sai... FAWKES'... 2013/01/21 07:51:55
  • FAWKES'... Lam Sai... 2013/01/21 08:04:19
    FAWKES' NOOSE ~ ΔTX
    +1
    ...and they LOVE quoting Liberal Progressive Democrats.
  • Lam Sai... FAWKES'... 2013/01/21 08:09:30
    Lam Sai Wing
    +1
    They'll quote(or misquote) anything they can take advantage of :3

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/24 12:18:47

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals