tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post6114193508283988974..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Constitution Day - In the Company of HeroesBrad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-80072251854912446472014-10-12T16:26:18.553-06:002014-10-12T16:26:18.553-06:00Out of context. What Washington objects to is ONE...Out of context. What Washington objects to is ONE chaplain being appointed over all the rest. [Indeed, a precursor of the First Amendment, that no <i>one</i> religion of sect be given dominion over all the others!]<br /><br />...and also of the original concept of federalism, that Massachussets could be Congregationalist if it chose, without interference from the national government.<br /><br /><i> I shall here take occasion to mention, that I communicated the Resolution, appointing a Brigade Chaplain in the place of all others, to the several Brigadiers; they are all of opinion, that it will be impossible for them to discharge the duty; that many inconveniences and much dissatisfaction will be the result, and that <b>no Establishment appears so good in this instance as the Old One.</b><br /><br />Among many other weighty objections to the Measure, It has been suggested, that it has a tendency to introduce religious disputes into the Army, which above all things should be avoided, and in many instances would compel men to a mode of Worship which they do not profess. <br /><br /><b>The old Establishment gives every Regiment an Opportunity of having a Chaplain of their own religious Sentiments, it is founded on a plan of a more generous toleration, and the choice of the Chaplains to officiate, has been generally in the Regiments.</b> Supposing one Chaplain could do the duties of a Brigade, (which supposition However is inadmissible, when we view things in practice) that being composed of four or five, perhaps in some instances, Six Regiments, there might be so many different modes of Worship. I have mentioned the Opinion of the Officers and these hints to Congress upon this Subject; from a principle of duty and because cause I am well assured, it is most foreign to their wishes or intention to excite by any act, the smallest uneasiness and jealousy among the Troops.</i><br /><br />http://www.beliefnet.com/resourcelib/docs/104/Letter_from_George_Washington_to_the_Continental_Congress_1p.htmlTom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-48690880587679265192014-10-08T20:22:13.681-06:002014-10-08T20:22:13.681-06:00Among many other weighty objections to the Measure...Among many other weighty objections to the Measure, it has been suggested, that it has a tendency to introduce religious disputes into the Army, which above all things should be avoided, and in many instances would compel men to a mode of Worship which they do not profess.<br />-- George Washington, to John Hancock, then president of Congress, expressing opposition to a congressional plan to appoint brigade chaplains in the Continental Army (1777)Glennhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10231369551535844495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-29614542462612439182014-09-30T19:57:55.042-06:002014-09-30T19:57:55.042-06:00"And that foot is me."---Dean Wormer
;-..."And that foot is me."---Dean Wormer<br /><br />;-)<br /><br /><br />It would be good to occasionally note that "So Help Me God" appears in <i>some</i> federal oaths. Not all our readers are up on the whole picture re this issue. If we restrict ourselves to just the "inside baseball" bones of contention, the general reader might get the wrong impression 180 degrees the OTHER way and that's no good either.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-8595385884778050092014-09-30T11:17:00.420-06:002014-09-30T11:17:00.420-06:00In Alexander's 10/21/2013 column, The Left'...In Alexander's 10/21/2013 column, <a href="http://assets.patriotpost.us/pdf/letter_to_usafa_on_military_oaths_11-18-2013.pdf" rel="nofollow"><i><b>The Left's End Run on SHMG</b> - Who Aletered the AFA Officer Oaths?</i></a>, the author displays his enthusiasm for the comprehensive inclusion of SHMG laden oaths at the federal level.<br /><br />Accordingly, the <b>Editor's Note</b> alerts the reader to the following:<br /><i>In response to Alexander’s column, 28 members of Congress</i> [including Congressman J. Randy Forbes (VA-04)]<i> issued an official <a href="http://assets.patriotpost.us/pdf/letter_to_usafa_on_military_oaths_11-18-2013.pdf" rel="nofollow">letter of inquiry to the Superintendent</a> of the Air Force Academy asking for “a detailed explanation as to why the [AFA handbook] omits ‘so help me God’ from these oaths, ..."</i><br /> <br />A full response to the historical inaccuracies contained in the 28-members, congressional letter requires a future American Creation blog all by itself.Ray Sollerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07950061062767093373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-17047838552106748572014-09-30T07:42:35.115-06:002014-09-30T07:42:35.115-06:00The Alexander article first appeared here at The P...The Alexander article first appeared <a href="http://patriotpost.us/alexander/29208" rel="nofollow"><b>here</b></a> at <i>The Patriot Post</i>.<br /><br />The whole article is a worthwhile read. <br /><br />My problem is with what he is using as the source for his information. His saying that GW placed his hand on the Bible opened to Dt.28 is problematic. That's something I've not been able to track down.Ray Sollerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07950061062767093373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-42016677998837172102014-09-29T21:20:46.552-06:002014-09-29T21:20:46.552-06:00Never heard of "The Jackson Press" befor...Never heard of "The Jackson Press" before, and it has a subliterate error ["it's" for "its"] on its bannerhead.<br /><br />Its good you correct them. Extremism in defence of liberty is no vice.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.com