Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jefferson and Lincoln managed to be POTUS w/o "relationship with the Lord"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 12:33 AM
Original message
Jefferson and Lincoln managed to be POTUS w/o "relationship with the Lord"
Despite *'s confused babbling to the contrary, AT LEAST TWO of our "greatest presidents" have managed the job WITHOUT a "relationship with the Lord".

Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln were both non-religious presidents, not even bothering to specify the minimal vague affiliation that most other Presidents choose to avoid being labeled "non-believers".

I hope many op-ed columnists bring this to light, and remind people that some of our greatest presidents have not been religious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. You can add Washington to your list. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. I was going to put Washington, but he is listed as "Episcopalian"
Now what that (Washington listed as an Episcopalian) really means is open for debate.

It's well established that Washington and most of the Founding Fathers of the United States were Deists. As Deists, they believed that there was a God, a Creator, but that's where it ended. They did not believe that God noticed, cared, or intervened in any way, shape or form with the happenings in the world. No divine plans, no divine intervention, no relationships, not even casual ones.

But Washington, for whatever reason, listed his religion as "Episcopalian", so I did not use him as an example. Better to stick to the hard cases, where no one can dispute the point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Yes, he was even a vestryman. But, as I recall, one of the first
scandals of his presidency was his failure to genuflect when attending a service in an Episcopal church. His reasoning was that, while admitting the civic benefits of church attendance, he did not believe in the divinity of Christ and therefore would not bow to a him.

His form of "Christianity" was well-fitted to The Age of Reason and deism , but would not please the Twentieth Century "morans" who are exerting so much power within the Bush Crime Administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Slickriddles Donating Member (157 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. He was a member of an Anglican(Episcopalian after the Rev.)
Church but only because it was part of the power structure. I go to a Catholic Church because I have kids and might need some cover some day (like if this ever becomes a "Christian Nation). I don't really think like a Catholic if you know what I mean. The other thing is what about all those frontier Presidents - Tyler, Harrison etc. I can't imagine them being all churched up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. Yes, belonging to the right church was part of getting ahead
No doubt about it.

Church has so declined in importance in American life. That's why this new Christian backlash is so strange.

I am very unusual in my circles in that I attend Mass. I know very few true atheists among my acquaintances: most people, in casual conversation, will say that they think there is some kind of deity and maybe an afterlife. But NO ONE goes to church.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
2. Yes.
Bush's self-serving leaning to right wing fundamentalists who wish theocracy is certainly not American as defined by our founders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ConservativeDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. they won't do it...comparing Bush with Jefferson or Lincoln would
hurt Bush. And the Media loves him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjdee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
5. Actually, you're mistaken a bit...
Edited on Wed Jan-12-05 12:51 AM by tjdee
Lincoln may have used Christianity for political purposes, but he did indeed specify more than a vague affiliation...

"These notions developed more profoundly as the lists of casualties grew. They reached their climax in words Lincoln prepared for his second inauguration as president in March 1865. That address stands as the most remarkably Christian public statement by any American president.

The critical section of the address, complete with citations from Matthew 18: 7 and Psalm 19: 9, deserves to be quoted in full (tjdee clipped):

If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope—fervently do we pray—that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bondman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said, 'the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.' "

http://www.christianitytoday.com/holidays/memorial/features/33h010.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPBasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
7. I knew Jefferson was just a Deist, but I didn't know
Edited on Wed Jan-12-05 09:21 AM by GOPBasher
about Lincoln's faith (or lack thereof). but you're right: some of our best Presidents have been non-religious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Lincoln is listed as "no affiliation"; cutting edge for his day
Things were a lot more progressive and enlightened in 1864 than they are today, of course, but it was still cutting edge to be a skeptic of religion.

I suspect that most skeptics in politics just listed some vague affiliation, to avoid being branded "atheist" and let it go at that.

Lincoln was the President SPECIFICALLY quoted by John Kerry during the Democratic Convention.

Kerry was addressing the issue of religiosity on the right, and contrasting it with true moral values:

"And let me say it plainly: in that cause, and in this campaign, we welcome people of faith. America is not us and them. I think of what Ron Reagan said of his father a few weeks ago, and I want to say this to you tonight: I don't wear my own faith on my sleeve. But faith has given me values and hope to live by, from Vietnam to this day, from Sunday to Sunday. I don't want to claim that God is on our side. As Abraham Lincoln told us, I want to pray humbly that we are on God's side. And whatever our faith, one belief should bind us all: The measure of our character is our willingness to give of ourselves for others and for our country."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPBasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. I loved that part of his speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
9. I don't know that Lincoln "wasn't religious"
Perhaps he had no affiliation with organized religion, but his writings mention the almighty often enough that he must have believed in a higher power.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Or perhaps invoked a deity to calm and speak in terms
that the populace could relate to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. I don't get that sense from his writings at all
Although most of us see ourselves reflected in other people.

I look at Lincoln and see a religious man because I am religious. Non-believers look at Lincoln and see a non-believer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Perhaps it's because you look only at his speeches
and not at his writings and anecdotal evidence from his law partner and business associates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC