> In a word... To ensure the existence of the nascent nation of
> America. Remember that in Jesus' own words "give unto Ceaser".
> There is no need for a christocentric nation to have within its
> legal documents the word Christ or God to be so focused. In
> fact by leaving that out it ensures a long lasting link between
> religion and state by virtue of its ability to adapt. The fact
> that much of the founding fathers words are in line with both
> the christian teachings and the philosphy of the Greeks and
> Romans is proof positive of how deeply they understood the
> idealogical connections.
It just so happens the Judeo-Christian "ethic" is the base/foundation because of geography (it's what people grew up with/around). Much the same way the bible belt has more fundamentalists (i.e. they are exposed to fundamentalism at a higher rate than the "blue" state big cities).
To say that this country was not
> founded on christian ideals, for good or ill is a woefull
> misunderstanding on the natures of the men who founded this
While I agree, I think there is a fundamental difference between a believer (Xian) who DOES believe in an interative god and a believer who does NOT believe in an interactive god. Thus, deists seem less "dangerous" to me (philosophically).
Not only the "great men" we all know and love but the
> lesser known thanks to the qhims of history figures like Sam
> Adams (a devout quaker) who could be argued to be responsible
> for creating the spark that would become the burning torch of
> liberty. He was the great firebrand in the beginning after all.
When it's all said and done, the theocracy thumpers in the U.S. don't care about anything but themselves (and their fellow "believers").