The phrase "secure the Blessings of Liberty" in the Preamble to the US Constitution presupposes something or someone bestowing the blessings.

That's really stretching it. I agree that many of the founding fathers were influenced by religion, but why do you want to look for it in all their works?

blessings does not imply a theistic blessER.

I'm sorry, Ley, you're a smart guy and make a lot of good points - but your search for finding religious justification in the early writings has stretched beyond all historical justification.

I've no argument with your Faith - and I am glad that your Faith guides you to support the values of freedom, tolerance and democracy - but to stretch so greatly to find proof that the Framers shared this faith and wrote it into the framework of this govt... can be seen as an attempt to say that those of us who do NOT share your Faith are somehow un-American, unpatriotic or outside the sphere of civitas that the Framers intended when they shaped this Nation.

While I do not know if the latter is your intent - and I do hope it is not - which I argue so vehemently against. I believe that the blessings of freedom and prosperity are meant for all of us; that atheists and theists of all flavors may share in the general welfare; and that this nation was meant to serve as a beacon of freedom and hope for everybody who might come to her seeking the same in their hearts.

That's my flag, too, and I will not allow anybody to say that isn't so.

E pluribus unum

XavierAM:Does this claim stipulate a theistic blesser?

What are possible sources from which blessings can flow?

For purposes of focusing the discussion, it would be helpful that you make a related claim using the "Make a claim link" instead of imputing a fog of imaginations.

Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof. Yes, let freedom Ring!

Jim: The dictionary defines blessing as "something promoting or contributing to happiness, well-being, or prosperity; a boon". I don't see why this sense of the word requires a deity or any other source.

(I'm a Christian myself, so I certainly don't lack respect for your faith. I just think you might be grasping at straws with this claim.)

Well, Jim, you're right, your claim did not directly state a theistic blesser. OTOH, it was you claiming it, and you've pretty much stayed on a one track, one god, one faith focus the whole way through.

In the sense that any verb implies some force which is behind it sure. However, I believe the sentence means that the "blessings of liberty" are bestowed by the nature of liberty itself as one of the aspects of possessing that.

Since I do not generally think of virtues, or states of political configuration as having a tangible nature, I do not think of them as "things." Those, I suppose any word, well, any thing IS a thing, so that's true by definition. However, my long standing policy of either voting against or not voting upon tautologies would apply in that case.

Given the context, and your history, and the absurdity of any other notion, I do not believe it is unreasonable to assume that the Claim implied that you were speaking of some person or other coherent entity which gives out these blessings.

And I was very careful in my previous comment NOT to impute anything upon your intent. I remarked that a strong focus on "The US is a Christian Nation founded on Christian principles" - CAN BE SEEN - as way of saying non-Christians are foreigners here. I confessed that I feared - but did not want to believe it was so - that this was your intent, as it has been the intent of so many others I have come across.

Now, you can chose to address those concerns or not, but I don't believe it is unreasonable that they are brought up.

XaiverAM: I have already pointed out in another claim that God is mentioned in each of the states' constitutions.

For you to reject any historical veracity to religious justification boggles my mind.

Jim: I have no idea what your first sentence of your latest response has to do with this claim, or my objections to it.

I didn't respond to your other claim regarding the state constitutions. I really don't want to go and have to check 50 state websites. The fact remains there is no reference to religion in the federal constitution except to prevent religious tests for public office and the first amendment.

There were lots of religious people back then. There's lots of them now. Some of them get elected to govt and write things. However, a few mentions in preambles means nothing compared to the rest of the legislative and judicial wall separating the state establishment of religion, or the religious establishment of the state.

Quite frankly, it is simple wishful thinking to say the we were founded as a Christian Republic. The Framers were smart people. If they had intended to do that, we'd be living in the United Christian Republics of America.

XavierAM: I was confused by the phrase: "justification in the early 'writings'". If you had said "justification in the 'writing' of the Preamble to the US Constitution", I would
have been less boggled, but boggled none-the-less. For discussion sake, the Constitution, is one writing.

You wrote, "a few mentions in preambles means NOTHING...". "NOTHING" is an absolute. Is "NOTHING" the word that communicates your true understanding?

Granted, this is a claim about the presuppositions of the US Constitution's Preamble.

Granted, this claim was inspired by the quote in the New York Times article, "Darwin's God", about raison d’être.

The article, "Darwin's God" inspired my claim concerning presuppositions of the US Constitution.

I did say "nothing *compared to*" - denying an absolute sentiment.

XavierAM: Informed Christians are taught that the Kingdom of Jesus is not of this world.