(Via Talking Points Memo):
I’ve sort of gotten tired of explaining that, no, the Founding Fathers actually weren’t all born-agains and bible thumpers. Not hardly. (Probably better to say that the great majority ranged from believers in an entirely impersonal God — Deists — to believing Christians who nonetheless viewed popular religious enthusiasm with a polite and paternal disdain.) But presidential candidate and former Arkansas Governoer Mike Huckabee, himself a Baptist minister, actually told a crowd yesterday that “most” of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were “clergymen.”
As these folks at Politifact.com point out, one out of 56 were clergymen.
It’s a creative definition of ‘most’.
“Most” meaning “More than none”.
Not only that but the Founders did not give a rat’s ass about abortion. Oh yeah one more thing, Franklin and Hamilton were notorious ladies men.
No, I think they founding fathers *thought* this part covered it:
“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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.â€
From the moment someone is created (not when we can define them as a “person” instead of a “human”) they have a right to live, according to that line. Just like how some people re-define “more”, others are redefining “life”.
I beg to differ. The Founders were, by and large, legal scholars. William Blackstone, arguably the foremost legal scholar at the time of the Founding, had this to say on the matter:
Most, huh? My understanding of US history is that the founding fathers assumed that people would continue to have a belief in a Creator; most likely the Judeo-Christian God. Most came from a variety of religious backgrounds; Deists, Episcopalians, etc. Their priamry concern was that no one religion/denomination became the State Church.
But most were clergy…that’s a new one to me!
To answer the question posed in the title– neither. I am sure in his own heart he believes that they were all God-fearing men. And that’s all that matters, right? (Especially when speaking before a large group of influential evangelical politicos.)
In the evangelical mindset, what good can be created by those who are not deeply steeped in the strongest evangelical brew? And every time the Founders wrote, they referred to the generic well-respected Creator, which everyone can read as their own personal God. So, to say that these men’s theological backgrounds were sketchy calls all of the good into question.
Just like questioning what God and the devil do to Job makes them blanche. It just can’t be. So, they deny worse than an ex-gay at a gay bar.
As Joseph Goebbels said, if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.. or something to that effect.
Kind of like truthiness instead of actual truth.
I find it amazing, the utter lack of historical context when thinking about the founding fathers.
While our modern American psyche is very much influenced by WWII, the Cold War, etc…
The Founding Fathers were a generation not far removed from the great disruptions in Europe from the Reformation and often violent religious persecution.
Our understanding of their work on the Constitution shows this thread of conscience quite clear. They took every active measure to decentralize the effects of religion on the state, while preserving it for personal observation.
They sought to create the antithesis to Europe during the Reformation that very much defined men of their time.
Huckabee’s folksy delivery scares me as a Democrat – though as an educated man (with obviously different political views) I cringe when he says things like this. But often only when I read them… If you see the man speak – you can go a good 20-30 mins without thinking he’s in the least bit polarizing, etc. Totally unlike the rest of the pack.
Huckabee 2008: You dont even realize hes nuts
There were vastly more slaveholders than clergymen among the signers. By Huckabee’s reasoning that would make us a nation of slavers. Jesus.
Terry,
Well, that’s pretty much what we were. Mercifully we eventually had the sense to abolish slavery, though after Reconstruction ended, that abolition became a hollow formality, much as separation of church and state is today.
Myself, I’m less concerned with the original sins and virtues of the Framers than I am with those we have today.
I appreciate the obvious comparision some have made of Romney’s ‘country-before-religion speech’ with JFK’s ‘I-wont-let the-Pope-tell-me what-to-do speech’ which I personally remember.The call for secular government is an ovious tack to use when a candidate is in trouble for his own religion. (But I think JFK was sincere with his speech).Perhaps we’ll see more and more conservative-religious candidates call for a return to secular government,but I’m not sure they know what they’re really saying but at least ‘secular’ sounds good again.
Idiots get caught in the abortion web that the candidates weave when actually they don’t have a damn thing to do with it. That would be congress (and Supreme Court). Both the Repub and the Dems have had their time to change that law and have not. Why do people think the president can go in and just change a freaking law? It blows my mind.
I am from Arkansas and have followed the Huckabee fiasco for years. He is a liar and he believes his own lies. He strictly in it for the money. Money is everything to him. Just think of him as a greedy TV Evangelist who takes money from the poor. To be fair he is just a opportunist like a vulture. Would he be any different as a president? One thing for sure is he is a better speaker then George Bush. But it would be scary to think if the United States had a Huckster in the White House. Bottom line again he is in it for only the money I repeat show him the money.
My understanding of the founders are the mass murderess of red Indians, enslaving blacks and rushing for the Gold, where were God’s men?Huckabee and others must Be realistic and a little carful, he should always remember that history travels a long way across the Glob.