I beg to differ with Swordsmith, his reasoning is a bit dull (pun intended). For example, he sites the First Amendment to undergird his argument. Said amendment I'll quote, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The plain intent in historical context is this: the federal government cannot *establish* a particular Christian sect *by federal law* as the official church of the nation (as was the Anglican church in Britain) nor prohibit the freedom of worship (*free exercise*) for other Christian groups outside of the Church of England within the nation. As an example Virginia, like some of the other states, did have a state established church [1]. The state established churches at the time were not disestablished by the ratification of the Bill of Rights, but rather by each states' legislature...and definitely not because the legislators thought that they should prohibit the state government "from taking any religion's side" with regard to the foundation of law.
As to this nation's founding document -- the Declaration of Independence [2] -- to say that it religion (in context, the common precepts of Christianity to be found in the Holy Bible) had nothing to do with law is ridiculous. Let's take a look:
* The signers based their actions to separate from Britan upon the Law of God (paragraph 1). Again, in historical context we are not talking about any god: not Allah, nor Budda, nor Krishna, nor the Force, nor a secular general concept of a higher power, etc. but rather the Almighty God revealed in the Bible. "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
* That the rights they had were given by God and saw them as truth, not their opinion against the opinion that sided with King George III, Parliment, and their sympathizers in the Colonies (paragraph 2). "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." If Swordsmith is correct then the King and Parliment were correct in rejecting the Colonies representatives appeals based on this basis (surprising since the Colonist's view had its source in English law.[3]) Sir William Blackstone, author of the Commentaries on the Laws of England and a contemporary with our nation's Founders, explained this foundation at length. (By the way, the Commentaries were a top seller in the American colonies.) The following Blackstone quote is a bit long, but I include it because it gives you some context of what foundation our nation's founders' stood.
"Law, in its most general form and comprehensive sense, signifies a rule of action; and is applied indiscriminately to all kinds of action, whether animate or inanimate, rational or irrational. Thus we say, the laws of motion, of gravitation, of optics or mechanics, as well as the laws of nature and of nations. And it is that rule of action which is prescribed by some superior, and which the inferior is bound to obey.
Thus, when the supreme Being formed the universe, and created matter out of nothing, he impressed certain principles upon that matter, from which it can never depart, and without which it would cease to be. When he put that matter into motion, he established certain laws of motion, to which all movable bodies must conform. And, to descend from the greatest operations to the smallest, when a workman forms a clock, or other piece of mechanism, he establishes, at his own pleasure, certain arbitrary laws for its direction, - as that the hand shall describe a given space in a given time, to which law as long as the work conforms, so long it continues in perfection, and answers the end of its formation.
If we farther advance, from mere inactive matter to vegetable and animal life, we shall find them still governed by laws, more numerous indeed, but equally fixed and invariable. The whole progress of plants, from the seed to the root, and from thence to the seed again; the method of animal nutrition, digestion, secretion, and all other branches of vital economy; are not left to chance, or the will of the creature itself, but are performed in a wondrous involuntary manner, and guided by unerring rules laid down by the Creator.
This, then, is the general signification of law, a rule of action dictated by some superior being; and, in those creatures that have neither the power to think, nor to will, such laws must be invariably obeyed, so long as the creature itself subsists, for its existence depends on that obedience. But laws, in their more confined sense, and in which it is our present business to consider them, denote the rules, not of action in general, but of human action or conduct; that is, the precepts by which man, the noblest of all sublunary beings, a creature endowed with both reason and free-will, is commanded to make use of those faculties in the general regulation of his behavior.
Man, considered as a creature, must necessarily be subject to the laws of his Creator, for he is entirely a dependent being. A being, independent of any other, has no rule to pursue, but such as he prescribes to himself; but a state of dependence will inevitably oblige the inferior to take the will of him on whom he depends as the rule of his conduct; not, indeed, in every particular, but in all those points wherein his dependence consists. This principle, therefore, has more or less extent and effect, in proportion as the superiority of the one and the dependence of the other is greater or less, absolute or limited. And consequently, as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker's will.
This will of his Maker is called the law of nature. For as God, when He created matter, and endued it with a principle of mobility, established certain rules for the perpetual direction of that motion, so, when he created man, and endued him with free-will to conduct himself in all parts of life, he laid down certain immutable laws of human nature, whereby that free-will is in some degree regulated and restrained, and gave him also the faculty of reason to discover the purport of those laws.
Considering the Creator only as a being of infinite power, he was able unquestionably to have prescribed whatever laws he pleased to His creature, man, however unjust or severe. But, as he is also a being of infinite wisdom, he has laid down only such laws as were founded in those relations of justice that existed in the nature of things antecedent to any positive precept. These are the eternal immutable laws of good and evil, to which the Creator himself, in all his dispensations, conforms; and which he has enabled human reason to discover, so far as they are necessary for the conduct of human actions, Such, among others, are these principles: that we should live honestly, should hurt nobody, and should render to every one his due; to which three general precepts Justinian has reduced the whole doctrine of law.
But if the discovery of these first principles of the law of nature depended only upon the due exertion of right reason, and could not otherwise be obtained than by a chain of metaphysical disquisitions [investigations - ed.], mankind would have wanted some inducement to have quickened their inquiries, and the greater part of the world would have rested content in mental indolence, and ignorance its inseparable companion. As, therefore, the Creator is a being not only of infinite power, and wisdom, but also of infinite goodness, he has been pleased so to contrive the constitution and frame of humanity, that we should want no other prompter to inquire after and pursue the rule of right, but only our own self-love, that universal principle of action. For he has so intimately connected, so inseparably interwoven the laws of eternal justice with the happiness of each individual, that the latter cannot be attained but by observing the former; and, if the former by punctually obeyed, it cannot but induce the latter. In consequence of which mutual connection of justice and human felicity, he has not perplexed the law of nature with a multitude of abstracted rules and precepts, referring merely to the fitness or unfitness of things, as some have vainly surmised, but has graciously reduced the rule of obedience to this one paternal precept, "that man should pursue his own true and substantial happiness." This is the foundation of what we call ethics, or natural law; for the several articles into which it is branched in our systems, amount to no more than demonstrating that this or that action tends to man's real happiness, and therefore very justly concluding that the performance of it is a part of the law of nature; or, on the other hand, that this or that action is destructive of man's real happiness, and therefore that the law of nature forbids it.
This law of nature, being coeval [existing at the same time - ed.] with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original.
But, in order to apply this to the particular exigencies of each individual, it is still necessary to have recourse to reason, whose office it is to discover, as was before observed, what the law of nature directs in every circumstance of life, by considering what method will tend the most effectually to our own substantial happiness. And if our reason were always, as in our first ancestor before his transgression, clear and perfect, unruffled by passions, unclouded by prejudice, unimpaired by disease or intemperance, the task would be pleasant and easy; we should need no other guide but this. But every man now finds the contrary in his own experience; that his reason is corrupt, and his understanding full of ignorance and error.
This has given manifold occasion for the benign interposition of divine Providence, which, in compassion to the frailty, the imperfection, and the blindness of human reason, hath been pleased, at sundry times and in divers manners, to discover and enforce its laws by an immediate and direct revelation. The doctrines thus delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they are to be found only in the holy scriptures. These precepts, when revealed, are found upon comparison to be really a part of the original law of nature, as they tend in all their consequences to man's felicity. But we are not from thence to conclude that the knowledge of these truths was attainable by reason, in its present corrupted state since we find that, until they were revealed, they were hid from the wisdom of ages. As then the moral precepts of this law are indeed of the same original with those of the law of nature, so their intrinsic obligation is of equal strength and perpetuity. Yet undoubtedly the revealed law is of infinitely more authenticity than that moral system which is framed by ethical writers, and denominated the natural law; because one is the law of nature, expressly declared to be so by God himself; the other is only what, by the assistance of human reason, we imagine to be that law. If we could be as certain of the latter as we are of the former, both would have an equal authority; but, till then, they can never by put in any competition together.
Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these. There are, it is true, a great number of indifferent points in which both the divine law and the natural leave a man at his own liberty, but which are found necessary, for the benefit of society, to be restrained within certain limits. And herein it is that human laws have their greatest force and efficacy; for, with regard to such points as are not indifferent, human laws are only declaratory of, and act in subordination to, the former. To instance in the case of murder: this is expressly forbidden by the divine, and demonstrably by the natural law: and, from these prohibitions, arises the true unlawfulness of this crime. Those human laws that annex a punishment to it do not at all increase its moral guilt, or superadd any fresh obligation, in foro conscientiae, [in the court of conscience] to abstain from its perpetration. Nay, if any human law should allow or enjoin us to commit it, we are bound to transgress that human law, or else we must offend both the natural and the divine. But, with regard to matters that are in themselves indifferent, and are not commanded or forbidden by those superior laws, - such, for instance, as exporting of wool into foreign countries, - here the inferior legislature has scope and opportunity to interpose, and to make that action unlawful which before was not so."
** End of Blackstone Quote **
* That when the civil govnerment becomes destructive towards the people's God-given rights, the people have the duty to alter or abolish it to restore those rights based upon the principles of the Law of God (paragraph 2). "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
To summarize, this nation's founding document advances the following view of law and government:
* There is an Almighty, Omniscient, Everlasting God revealed in the Holy Bible who is active in the affairs of men and nations.
* Our rights, including the right to life, liberty and property, come from that same God.
* The purpose of our established government is to secure, protect, and defend those God-given rights and if that government becomes destructive toward those God-given rights it is our duty to abolish that government.
Now, with that foundation I can address man_id_unknown's questions. My thesis is that today Americans are largely ignorant of the founding principles of this nation and its organic law, and that ignorance is a direct result of the nation forsaking Christianity in general and the Law of God revealed in the Bible as the foundation of law specifically. Alexis de Tocqueville, the Frenchman who visited our young nation and recorded his findings in his famous work, Democracy in America, noted, "It is therefore of immense importance to men to have fixed ideas about God, their souls, and their duties toward their creator and their fellows, for doubt about these first principles would leave all their actions to chance and condemn them, more or less, to anarchy and impotence." Rather that "fixed ideas," today multiculturalism (that is, all cultures and their moral standards are equally valid) is embraced as truth. Is it any wonder that in the ashes of our original law's biblical foundation that "anarchy and impotence" are rising.
So we are left with the question: what makes one man's moral (basis for law) more sound than another? Thankfully we have access to a standard that is sure and unchanging. "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." [4] President George Washington agreed; in his Inaugural Speech to Congress, April 30, 1789 he noted, "No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the united States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency...We ought to be no less persuaded that the smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained."
Imagine what would happen today if a president today made a statement like that before Congress? If he had shot the Speaker of the House of Representatives it would not compare to the public furor that would result! Again, it is a sign of the decline of America.
Charles Carroll, one of the signers of the Declaration, noted that, "Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime & pure, [and] which denounces against the wicked eternal misery, and [which] insured to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."[5]
The restoration of the American republic thus begins not with forced confession at the point of the sword, but rather your submission to the Creator and His will for you. To believe that He exists, that He established his Law which is for the good of all men, and that there is no wrong within Him, He is perfect, holy, and righteous. To acknowledge that in light of His law you and all men by their actions have rejected Him, and that God's justice demands the penalty of eternal death. To rejoice that God sent His Son, Jesus the Messiah, born of a virgin, who lived a life without sin and obeyed his heavenly Father at all points, yet laid down His life as a ransom for sinners like you and me. To everyone who acknowledges his guilt before God, places his trust in Jesus as the One who bore the penalty of sin, and follows Him will receive a changed heart to begin to do what is right before the Creator. As this change occurs in people's lives in abundance (even as it did during the "Great Awakening" a few decades before the War for Independence), hope will come again for the survival of America. And the people of this land one again will understand that there is one Law from the one true and living Creator God, and so-called "non-religious" reasonings will be scoffed at as the folly that almost destroyed America.