Idiot of the Day - Sarah Palin.

Sarah joins us as a frequent guest of the Idiot of the Day. At this point I can only question whether she is really just that dumb or if she just says these things to draw attention (probably a great deal of both!).


Today, the charming blow-hard from Alaska tells us that we should "go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant -- they're quite clear -- that we would create law based on the God of the bible and the ten commandments."

Now where the hell did she get that idea? If anything the founding fathers of this country were concerned and wary about the impact of religion on a true democratic form of government. Did she ever read the Constitution and its express separation of church and state?


From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States):

Most historians define the "founding fathers" to mean a larger group, including not only the Signers and the Framers but also all those who, whether as politicians or jurists or statesmen or soldiers or diplomats or ordinary citizens, took part in winning American independence and creating the United States of America.

Some of the 1787 delegates had no affiliation. The others were Protestants except for three Roman Catholics: C. Carroll, D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons. Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (Episcopalian, after the Revolutionary War was won), eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutherans, two were Dutch Reformed, and two were Methodists, the total number being 49. Some of the more prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical or vocal about their opposition to organized religion, such as Thomas Jefferson (who created the "Jefferson Bible"), and Benjamin Franklin.

So that is Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin who were clearly not Judeo-Christian, as well as others.

As to whether our laws and beliefs are based on Judeo-Christian believes look at http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/culture/religion/3485-Judeo-Christian-Philosophy-and-the-Founding-America.html for an excellent article on why they are not.  In fact they say that the political theory underpinning the creation of America is contradictory to every religious philosophy on earth. America exists in spite of Judeo-Christian philosophy, not because of it.

Of paticular note are two important elements which show our laws and government differ from Judeo-Christian belief:

To blindly emphasize only the religious alignment of the founders fails to take into account other influences that had a much greater impact on eighteenth century political thought. Of particular import is that all the founding fathers lived in the age of the Enlightenment, a humanist (or secular) intellectual movement. One source comments, "Central to Enlightenment thought were the use and the celebration of reason, the power by which man understands the universe and improves his own condition. The goals of rational man were considered to be knowledge, freedom, and happiness." This philosophy stands in total contrast to Judeo-Christian thought.

The model of ancient Rome's republic had considerable impact as well. The institution of the Senate, Latin for council of old men, is one example of borrowing from Rome. Indeed, American governmental concepts based on the Roman model are too numerous to be coincidental: the rule of law, representative assemblies, courts, term limits, civilian control of the military, election of government officials and so on. Further, the very words conveying these concepts betray their Latin/Roman origins: constitution, federal, republic, representative, vote, president, magistrate, congress, veto, quorum and statute suffice as examples. Even the architecture of our nation's capitol reflects Greco-Roman influences and values. Lest we forget, Anglo-Saxons contributed to the future United States with concepts such as common law, trial by jury and yes, the Magna Carta.

So what is left for Caribou Barbie?  Rhetoric!

Sarah Palin joined Fox News's Bill O'Reilly recently to condemn the critics of the National Day of Prayer, saying that the Judeo-Christian belief was the basis for American law and should continue to be used as a guiding force for creating future legislation.

According to Palin, the recent backlash against the National Day of Prayer is proof that some people are trying to enact a "fundamental transformation of America" and to "revisit and rewrite history" in order to shift the Christian nation away from its spiritual roots.

Palins's advice: "Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant -- they're quite clear -- that we would create law based on the God of the bible and the ten commandments."

When facts don't matter, you can say anything!  I am not saying that Judeo-Christian beliefs are somehow wrong; just that they are not the basis of the United States and are in some ways antithetical to its core.