14 votes

Why Religion and Morality I think Ron Paul knew this as well.

A interesting website I found and would like to share.
I believe Ron Paul knew this as well.

WARNING this might offend some anti religion or anti moral viewers


below is a part quoted from link below

Why Religion and Morality

In 1776, the year Thomas Jefferson drafted the Declaration of Independence, John Adams wrote to his cousin, “It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand.” There it is again. Why did the Founding Fathers keep pointing back to these fundamental building blocks? Adams himself answered that question in 1798, while serving as president: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

There is the answer! They kept referring to religion and morality because, as Adams said, our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people! Now the question is, why? Why was the Constitution written only for moral and religious people? Why was it inadequate to the government of any other?

Alexis de Tocqueville’s 19th-century observations on the American republic answer this critical question. After touring America for two years in the early 1830s, he returned home to France and wrote his political classic, Democracy in America. Like the Founding Fathers, Tocqueville acknowledged that religion and morality were indispensable to the maintenance of the American republic. Why indispensable? He said that while the constitutional law of liberty allowed Americans complete freedom to do as they pleased, religion prevented them from doing that which was immoral and unjust. In short, Tocqueville surmised, liberty could not be governed apart from religious faith, lest there be anarchy.

Without the moral restrictions of a higher spiritual law, the liberty afforded Americans in the Constitution would be abused. George Washington knew that! So did the rest of the Founding Fathers. That’s why they kept harping on religion and morality. They did not want to see the United States of America self-destruct.

The success of our Constitution does not depend on which political party we belong to—it depends on how biblically spiritual we are!


-Ron Paul

My faith is a deeply private issue to me, and I don’t speak on it in great detail during my speeches because I want to avoid any appearance of exploiting it for political gain. Let me be very clear here: I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Savior, and I endeavor every day to follow Him in all I do and in every position I advocate.

It is God Who gave us life. As He is free, so are those He created in His image. Our rights to life and liberty are inalienable.



"I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ."
--The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, p. 385.

John Hancock
1st Signer of the Declaration of Independence

"Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual. ... Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us."
--History of the United States of America, Vol. II, p. 229.

George Washington
1st U.S. President

"While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian."
--The Writings of Washington, pp. 342-343.

Thomas Jefferson
3rd U.S. President, Drafter and Signer of the Declaration of Independence

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever; That a revolution of the wheel of fortune, a change of situation, is among possible events; that it may become probable by Supernatural influence! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in that event."
--Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, p. 237.

John Dickinson


Rendering thanks to my Creator for my existence and station among His works, for my birth in a country enlightened by the Gospel and enjoying freedom, and for all His other kindnesses, to Him I resign myself, humbly confiding in His goodness and in His mercy through Jesus Christ for the events of eternity.27

[Governments] could not give the rights essential to happiness… We claim them from a higher source: from the King of kings, and Lord of all the earth.28

granted not all founding fathers had a religion or had a different religion but a lot were Christians.

and some extra sites if interested in reading.
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkJwwtxGJMs i found this to be a good video. added this here June 25,2012 at 8:00pm

2. http://www.americanheritagealliance.org/heritage7.htm

3. http://americanpatriotseries.blogspot.com/2011/07/faith-of-o...

also a interesting part of a Ron Paul news letter.

The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity. ~ Ron Paul

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders' political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government's hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.

The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people's allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation's Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.

December 30, 2003

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Denise B's picture

How about the arrogance of man??

How about your arrogance?? Somehow believing that you have the right and authority to dictate to God Himself what is right and fair and just and what is not. Human pride and arrogance has got to be two of the worst sins known to man! Listen to what you're actually saying...that God, the Creator of all things, including us, does not have a right to dictate only one way to get to Him, no, in your opinion, He should offer a wide variety of ways to do so, especially one that you are more comfortable with (why, well because YOU said so) and if he doesn't, well then he is just not fair and you want nothing to do with him - and believe me when I tell you that you will get your wish, along with everyone else who feels the way you do. It sounds to me like you are on the one hand preaching libertarianism, and at the same time, trying to dictate to the God of the universe how He needs to do things. Kind of an oxymoron don't you think?

No, what I'm saying is that

No, what I'm saying is that you get more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. By attacking those of different beliefs rather than winning converts you only serve to push them further away from that religion. Instead, try showing the benefits of being Christian, demonstrate the compassion and wisdom that Christ taught, model his behavior and you'll get far more people on board with your beliefs. Its the attack mode whenever someone doesn't believe the same that drives people away from the Christian church. Christ didn't use his beliefs as a weapon, as I see here on this thread.

Blessings )o(

Denise B's picture

You mean like

Jesus said onto them "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own inititiave, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I speak the truth, you do not believe me.." John 8:42-48

That sounds like a pretty sharp weapon to me...

There are many, many more examples of Jesus speaking truth and not really caring about who He offends, because the truth of the matter is that it was only His enemies who were offended by what He had to say...

Insisting that we believe

Insisting that we believe what we really believe?

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

There is much wisdom in the

There is much wisdom in the Bible, yet you choose to use it as a weapon rather than a teaching tool.

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -- Mahatma Gandhi

In this case, I have to agree.

Blessings )o(

Max, you have chosen to believe

in the concept of a God. Your choice. You chose to define your urge to bring meaning to creation. Do you recognize this? You also "rejected" a multitude of other ways to explain creation. Can I now declare this means "you are not saying much?"

Actually, my message was

Actually, my message was pretty clear that it was a logical if.

It has nothing to do with belief. It is logic. The original poster made a claim that was not true. Her belief is simply non-Christian. Defining words in a general way does not make it "all inclusive". It just means she doesn't believe Christ.

That is saying nothing much. To reword the original message, if you do not believe in Christianity, you can redefine spirituality to say you do not believe in Christianity.

Christianity does not believe that is spiritual.

John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Sorry Max. You are posting Max's thoughts.

Not the thoughts of all Christians. Some do define their faith as spiritual. Just like you chose to define it another way. Your logic is based on a regurgitated book of metaphors. Not a great foundation. Wide open to interpretation. If you choose to be a fundamentalist, fine. Many people have chosen a different path and their choice is not wrong.

You don't actually read

You don't actually read messages before you reply to them do you?

The original poster said you can be spiritual without being Christian.

I said Jesus Christ didn't say you could do that. It's just redefining spirituality to be all inclusive, when Christianity doesn't believe it is all inclusive.

You need to be saved by Jesus Christ.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

To be specific, we don't REALLY know what Jesus

said. We have a book written by several people claiming this is what Jesus said. You act like you heard him say it. You didn't. You are choosing to believe a creation myth. I think she is correct to disregard a book claiming to contain what Jesus said and follow her heart. I suspect Jesus is there, not a book. My heart tells me she is correct and the book was designed to protect a specific creation myth. It would be nice to know what Jesus really said. Unfortunately, we don't.

To be clear, one of us

To be clear, one of us (actually two of you) are pagans, telling us that Christians don't know what Christianity is. Muddying the waters, telling us lies about what you really believe, etc.

That is ridiculous. There is an old and new testament. It's the Christian's Holy Bible.

FYI - lying is a sin - but so is not believing the Lord. Does convincing anyone of something by being untrue save you? What type of hope can you have for yourself that way?

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Bump - not that the thread

Bump - not that the thread needs it, but so I can find it easier in my active posts search.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

The "Christian Solution"

Sin-less christians, are as numerous as honest leaders in America.

While every person has the unalienable right to believe or not believe whatever they want, our founding fathers DID integrate a very important christian concept into our Republic: DAMNATION!

It doesn't matter if our leaders believe in christianity. What really matters is that our judges and prosecutors believe they have the "Power-of-God" to use some good ol' fashioned FIRE & BRIMSTONE!

On that motivational point, perhaps god's been right all along!

Romans 3:23

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

If everyone obeyed the ten

If everyone obeyed the ten commandments, we'd need no government whatsoever.

You mean the ones taken from

You mean the ones taken from the Egyptian Book of the Dead?

or other concepts found in the classic education

our Founding Fathers had. This included MANY PAGAN writers. Greek and Roman. To suggest "Christians" created morality is absurd. History makes this very clear.

it be nice

it be nice


don't mind me .. just execising my 1st amendment right and then on my way .. recognizing I'm jumping into the frying pan here but ... can someone remind me how a mandate from God to shun nonbelievers, moral or not, (2 Cor.6:14-17) and, more shockingly, to stone nonbelievers to death (Dt.13:6-10) is evenly remotely moral?

How does one reconcile those words? I mean it's all there black on white. Most just say "oh that can't be taken literally" or "well I don't believe that can be applied to this day and age" ... but the fact is, umm.. God is very explicit. He doesn't say "stone nonbelievers .. if you feel like it". And since a lot of what is in the bible IS taken literally by millions, how does one reconcile what to follow and what not to follow? Since everyone is different, you could say every Christian will have slightly different interpretations of what things mean ... but is not that simply just a form of me-ism? Whether you believe in stoning people or not, it IS what the Bible advocates so Christians need to take some moral responsibility for that fact..

Furthermore .. how does one reconcile all the inconsistencies found in the Bible? And why is it that any time you start asking simple questions, such as whether you believe that God does or does not intervene in the real world, that people quickly become uncomfortable and hostile towards you? So God tangibly intervened in the world back in the days when there was no scientific method or methodology for arriving at rational facts .. bu now that we have rational systems in place for arriving at validatable truths, God no longer tangibly intervenes?

I'll stop here but I could literally go on for hours with all the inconsistencies and contradictions inherent with believing in what I now consider irrational fantasies. This coming from a baptized, communionized, and confirmed former catholic christian who is probably the least violent person you'll ever meet, but when started asking very simple questions, and getting stonewalled left and right followed by the uneasy hostility that naturally followed, became increasingly skeptical of the fact that the idea of religion is rooted in the intentions for financial, political, and societal control. Having shaken myself free from this illusion, I actually find myself much happier now then ever.

In closing, let me get this straight ... i have to give you my money every week and conform to this societal norm my entire life and for that I receive a reward that can only be cashed in after I'm dead. Right.

I'll pass. Hope I haven't offended too many .. i mean to each their own, but just wanted to share my perspective.

Much love to all on here,

Denise B's picture


I am not offended by honest questions, I think the art of honest debate and discussion is quickly becoming a thing of the past; however, some of your questions I suspect, are the "drive-by" variety, where you're really looking to just make a statement and aren't really looking to hear the answers.

In the hope; however, that you really want some answers, I will address some of what you asked....

2 Cor. 6:14-17 states in part "Do not be BOUND (my emphasis) together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness with darkness?....come out from them and be separate".

I don't really see what you feel about that statement is immoral in any way. Do you not in your own personal life choose to surround yourself with people that you have things in common with? Do you not pick for a spouse someone who you have things in commong with? Why is that okay for you, but not for God. The passage says "bound together", that does not mean you can not talk to a non-believer or associate with one in any was (how, therefore, would the Gospel be spread otherwise?), it means do not "bind" yourself to them (i.e. marry them, create close friendships with them, etc.) because to do so, would be a snare to you. How can we be called to refrain from a life of sin and then choose to bind ourselves to people that see no problem with sin? That would clearly creates a conflict of interest for believers and it should be avoided. Not immoral, common sense.

Next, your refernce to Dt. 13:6-10 (the stoning of people who entice their fellow Israelites and family members to go and worship other gods). This needs to be put into context. You are talking about a time in our ancient history when the worship of other gods was rampant. If you read the bible, you will see that the worship of these others gods routinely required the sacrificing of small children and other detestable acts. Worshiping of these gods was one of the most detestable things any human being could do in God's eyes, primarily because it was a direct violation of God's law and an assault on God's authority as the only true Creator but, in addition to that, it required detestable things to be done as referenced above.

You also need to understand that the Israelites had just witnessed first hand the power of God who had delivered them from their Egyptian slavery. They witnessed incredible things first hand and should have known the power and authority of God at this point. In addition, they were just given God's Law, written in His own hand, specifically telling them not do this (worship others gods) and explaining to them what would happen if they did.

If after knowing all of that, they still proceeded to break God's Law and try to ensare their fellow Isrealites with doing exactly what God had directed them not to, then at that point, they were worthy of receiving capital punishment. Like I said, God has just recently given them the 10 Commandments and God told them what would happen if they violated them, was he to be a liar or pushover in their eyes?

And finally, you ask why God worked so intimately with the Israelites and why he no longer appears in your eyes to do that today. The short answer for that is because you need to realize that in the early days, God's Word - the Bible, did not exist as it does today and there was no method God had created at that point to communicate His will to His people other than directly interacting with them - in fact, it is exactly His interaction with them that the Bible consists of (whether it be the Old or New Testament). Today we are blessed to have God's word and can come to understand Him and get to know Him simply by reading it. He is still very active in today's society, but now He chooses to accomplish things through His Word and His Son. If you come across Chrisitians who get very uncomfortable when you ask them these types of questions, I would venture to say that it is simply because they haven't read their bibles as God instructs us to do, therefore, they do not know how to answer.

Hope this helps to answer some of your questions. As far as "alleged" inconsistencies in the Bible, you will need to be more specific about which passages you are referring to for me to provide a response.

Thanks Denise

for your time and insightful reply. While I appreciate your explanations, it's still simply your interpretation of those scriptures where someone else might feel very differently. God provides many moral commandments aside from the major ten throughout the Bible and many people abide (or at least attempt to abide) by those instructions. Unfortunately, you can't just pick and choose which to follow blindly and which you don't feel comfortable with based on the evolved societal norms. I mean .. you can, but you can't be expected to have any sort of rational consistency amongst other christians who may take other instructions more literally instead.

Here's another side of this multifaceted coin... If I were to go around giving moral instructions such as "Do not Kill" to others, but then turned around and killed people, would you not consider me a bit of hypocrite? I mean, at the very least you would probably question my stance of possessing the highest moral virtue, wouldn't you? Yet this is exactly what God does in the Bible. And why would God be angry? Is he not perfection incarnate? If one is perfect, then how could they be victim of the emotions of anger? Especially if they are omniscient as well... I mean, He KNEW what they would do, so how is it moral to then KILL people for what he knew they would do? If I were to conduct an experiment and I knew exactly how people would react in the experiment, yet I got angry at them and then killed them, I'm pretty confident you wouldn't hold me in the highest moral esteem. You'd probably call me a cruel, psychotic maniac in all reality. I'm having a hard time seeing the difference here.

Anyway, I've got dinner on the stove so I better jet. Thanks again for your time!

Denise B's picture

You're welcome

I understand the comments that you are making, and have heard them made before and it is not my intent to force you to believe anything that you choose not to believe. I think we can both agree that it is not necessarily that you are opposed to the idea of God, just the God of the bible because you don't like him or who you perceive him to be... We are looking at our situation from two completely different points of view and that is fine, I really do respect your right to believe whatever you choose,but I do base my beliefs on everything that is in the bible and if I see it misrepresented I feel an obligation to correct that misrepresentation whenever I can.

In my mind, the God that created the universe has full authority to set the rules and require that His creation adhere to them, and whether or not we approve of it doesn't really matter, and I can honestly say that since I have become a Christian and started a serious study of my bible, I have a much better understanding of who He is than I used to, and I frankly think He's awesome. If he tells us not to kill and then he punishes us by imposing a death sentence when we do, I do not find that immoral any more than today's mass murderers or child molestors are given the death sentence by our own justice system. Yes, God knew that after the fall when we invited the knowledge of good and evil in our lives that we would ultimately succumb to evil, because that then became our very nature and if it ended there, it would be a tragic story for mankind indeed; however, it doesn't end there - God had a plan to save us all along and it involved coming into this world as a man and paying the price for our sinful nature Himself, through His Son, who was in fact God Himself, and taking upon Himself all of the wrath and judgement that we deserved for our sins and trangressions so that we would not have to and reconciling us back to Him. To me, it is the most beautiful and loving thing I could ever imagine and I thank Him for it every day. But again, that is my point of view as a believer in God's Word and it may never be compatible with your views.

Sure, God could have made us all a bunch of robots with no capacity for free will, but I am frankly glad that He chose not to. The problem with your experiment scenario that you provide, however, is that it attempts to absolve the people who do the actual killing from any responsibility for their actions, and that is clearly not appropriate either. God does give us free will, but by the very essence of who we are as a fallen people, we will always choose the way of sin, not because we are unable to choose good, but because by the nature of who we are, we simply will not - the bible tells us that fallen man doesn't just repeatedly commit sin, but that he acutally enjoys it. Regardless of why the sin was done, it does not somehow make the sin itself good or right. You could say that a child molester does what he does because that is just the way he is, but that doesn't make his actions any less detestable.

Okay, I'm sure you'll agree at this point, it's time to move on. We can civilly agree to disagree. :)


Agreed. But I appreciate your civility as I know it's such a volatile subject. I also know why people choose to believe as I used to be in the same boat coming from a very religious family (I was born in Italy for Pete's sake) ... I understand that once you are introduced to these beliefs that your whole social unit is interlinked around these beliefs in terms of social acceptance ... which is pretty difficult to break away from without severe ostracization. I think we can agree that life is a journey of which there are infinite paths to the end of our days .. and as long as we can be loving, civil, respectful, and compassionate towards each other, our differences in belief systems should never be a problem.

Again, enjoyed the conversation, thanks for your time!

P.S. I won't stone you if you don't stone me :)

Denise B's picture


Agreed - I swear on my Bible that I will never try to stone you or anyone else who doesn't agree with me! :)

Carry on...we have a nomination to win!


Right on!


6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

Where Have All The Good Christians Gone?

I Hold out hope we gain most of the Santorum supporters.I look back at the strong Evangelical support Santorum had and could never understand it? Maybe it was not real and more MSM propaganda,But who are all the religious moral people going to support Romney Obama they are equally the same morally bankrupt humans.

It's too bad more people

around here don't subscribe to this view:

My faith is a deeply private issue to me, and I don’t speak on it in great detail during my speeches-Ron Paul

finish the statement where he

finish the statement where he said he doesn't do it for political gain
every one has right to free speech

tell us again why over 60 million American Catholics

aren't really Christians.