The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.I guess some people don't read. I include myself as an Infidel, as do the multitudes of "religions of peace"--including the one of gentle Jesus meek and mild--that would have my godless gay libertine ass murdered in some horrible fashion.
7.12.2007
Who Doesn't [Heart] Thomas Jefferson?
From his autobiography:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Christer sophistry knows no bounds.
ReplyDeleteMr. Jefferson. He makes me feel better - "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither breaks my leg, nor picks my pocket."
ReplyDeleteThere are a few reasons I'm not all that keen on Ol' TJ.
ReplyDelete1. His time as VA Gov. during the war. (FAIL)
2. The "I'm above politics" attitude, particularly during the 1800 election. (To me that attitude is abhorrent and irresponsible, especially from a founding father.)
3. His selective reversal on federalism when he became president (see Louisiana Purchase, among other things).
4. The Virgina and Kentucky Resolutions.
5. Agrarianism.
Don't get me wrong, I like him more than say, Idi Amin, or even Pitt the Younger, even. But TJ had his drawbacks just like everybody else.
Nicely done Bromide. Dr. McDonald's thesis was that Jefferson had an essentially negative presidency, dismantling what Hamilton had built. I have to agree with your points, esp. 4, which contributed to state's rights arguments. I consider those Mr. Madison's low point as well. I think that Jefferson's contradictions can be seen as either hypocrisy or complexity (as Paul Johnson argues): liberty & slavery, govt. reduction & La./Embargo, and so on. I think that he is most useful to my teaching for the Declaration, obviously, and for the debate - his positions on separation and religious freedom/toleration.
ReplyDelete