Here are 2 excellent sites that demonstrate the diversity of beliefs in the
US, as well as within Christianity.

http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions

http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/welcome

I think our forefathers probably just got tired of having the same debates
that we have had going today.  Hence, the really ambiguous language about a
lot of things in the Constitution.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Harry Hays" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [UTCSTAFF]


> pam, you create a "straw man" and then proceed to knock him down. no one
> that i know favors stifling your religious voice. i, and the others who
> have participated in this discussion, most of whom are undoubtedly
> christians themselves, will defend your right, as an individual, to
express
> you religious beliefs anywhere, anytime. we will not support attempts to
> legislate such ideas or to make the state a sponsor of them. proclaim your
> piety and pray when and where you wish, but don't force me, or my kids, to
> do it at school or in public venues.
>
> what we really object to is the self righteous sanctimony of many
so-called
> christians who arrogantly assume that they are right and that all other
> viewpoints are wrong, or even evil. they think that the state should
openly
> endorse, not just christianity, but their narrow interpretation of it.
they
> even claim that this country was founded on christian principles, and that
> the ten commandments form the basis of our legal system. as an historian,
i
> must state emphatically, that this is not so. our nation was founded on
> secular, enlightenment principles by a group of individuals who were
> profoundly agnostic. the basis of our legal system comes from a
combination
> of roman and english common law. one might as well assert that our legal
> system is based on the code of hammurabi as on the commandments, for the
> legal precepts found in the ten were anticipated by much earlier codes,
> hammurabi's included. the founding fathers stressed the importance of the
> separation of church and state, not so much to protect the state as to
> protect religion from being manipulated by the state as the
> psuedo-christians i refer to are attempting today. they also stressed that
> in matters of conscience, the government should remain strictly neutral. i
> find it interesting that the one religious group that originally supported
> the separation idea more than any other were the baptists, who were viewed
> by mainstream christians then much the same way that mormons are by
> mainstream christians today. yet, now, the sbc is in the forefront of
> attempts to enforce religious conformity upon us.
>
> personally, i find the creed of a group of people who call themselves
> "militant agnostics" attractive. Their motto: I DON'T KNOW AND NEITHER DO
YOU!
>
> Harry M. Hays
> History Dept.
>
> At 12:48 PM 8/21/2003 -0400, Pam Carlisle wrote:
> >I have been reading the e-mails bounced back and forth about religion
this
> >morning and have to put my 2 cents in. I am a christian but I do not
judge
> >others for their choice but I do get angry when I am told that I have the
> >freedom to choose to be a christian as long as I do not speak of Jesus
out
> >in public....which seems to be what is happening now. It seems to me if a
> >christian says something about Jesus there is always someone around that
> >thinks they are a Bible thumper. It just seems like you can be a
christian
> >today....as long as you don't tell anyone and I think that is sad.
> >
> >
> >Mrs. Pamela Carlisle
> >Graduation Specialist
> >Veteran's Affairs Certifying Official
> >Office of Records and Registration
> >University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
> >(423)425-4418
> >email [log in to unmask]
>