Does Marriage Equal Happiness?

New research on marriage has drawn significant attention recently, leading to several widely read articles on the matter. Early last month, at UnHerd, in a piece entitled The best predictor of happiness in America? Marriage, authors W. Bradford Wilcox and David Bass write,

Americans who are married with children are now leading happier and more prosperous lives, on average, than men and women who are single and childless.

Is that statement surprising? In an age that prizes individualism, workism, and a host of other self-centric “isms” above marriage and family, it may well be. But the reality is that nothing currently predicts happiness in life better than a good marriage. 

The UnHerd authors base their conclusions on marriage and happiness on new research out of the University of Chicago. Looking at “The Socio Political Demography of Happiness,” the research concluded, “Being married is the most important differentiator with a 30-percentage point happy-unhappy gap over the unmarried.”

On the results of the study, the researcher, Sam Peltzman declared,

Marital status is and has been a very important marker for happiness. The happiness landslide comes entirely from the married. Low happiness characterizes all types of non-married. No subsequent population categorization will yield so large a difference in happiness across so many people.

With countless amounts of anecdotal evidence, and with decades of social science research that shows the same, there’s little doubt that marriage is indeed an important “predictor” or “marker” for happiness. However, this shouldn’t be confused with the idea that marriage is the cause of happiness. In other words, if you’re miserably unhappy, or even moderately so, don’t simply look to marriage to change this.

The latter conclusion is my own, based on my experiences, knowledge, and observations of the world. However, there is research that supports my conclusions as well. Additionally, another article on the recent University of Chicago study—whether it means to or not—supports my take on marriage and happiness. Ironically, this article is written by what seems to be a rather liberal author—Olga Khazan—at the leftist publication The Atlantic.

Miss Khazan begins her piece by citing the University of Chicago study and concluding,

Married people are much happier than the unmarried, according to these data. Looking at those same 100 people, 40 married people will say they’re happy, and 10 will say they’re not happy. But single people are about evenly split between happy and not happy. It doesn’t really matter if you are divorced, are widowed, or have never married: If you’re not married, you’re less likely to be happy. “The only happy people for 50 years have been married people,” Peltzman told me.

This puzzles Miss Kahzan because, in her own words, “[A]fter 13 years of cohabitation, I’m currently trying to get married, and it’s not making me very happy at all.” I have news for Miss Kahzan and all of those like her: It is quite unlikely that marriage will do anything to increase your happiness.

Miss Kahzan’s scenario is quite telling and is a perfect example to illustrate my conclusion on marriage and happiness. It is not the mere act of marriage that brings, or increases, happiness. Perhaps this was once the case in our culture, when there was a widespread, proper understanding of what is marriage. However, in these times, where we have so perverted the meaning of marriage, sex, and the like, almost certainly many of those who are looking to marriage to increase their happiness will be sadly disappointed.

In other words, it’s those—whether they are married or not—with the proper understanding of what is marriage who are most likely to be happy before and after marriage. As Miss Kahzan herself admits, “marriage doesn’t make you happy; rather, happy people get married.” She continues,

One 15-year study of more than 24,000 Germans, for instance, found that those who got married and stayed married were happier than the unmarried ones to begin with, and any happiness boost they got from the marriage was short-lived. “Most of the research indicates that the happiest couples marry, not that marriage causes happiness,” Brienna Perelli-Harris, a demography professor at the University of Southampton, in the United Kingdom, told me over email. 

So, who are these happy people? Most likely, they’re Christians, or at least the “religious.” Again, there’s plenty of anecdotal evidence that proves this true. As we live out our daily lives, typically those who have a measure of faith in the One who made us are the most pleasant to encounter and seem most content with the world around them. This is in spite of whatever difficult circumstances they might find themselves in.

And yes, there is research that shows Christians, or at least those who are “religious,” to be the happiest among us. In April of this year, Christian Headlines declared “Americans Who Believe in God Are the Happiest People in the U.S.” They based this conclusion on a Wall Street Journal-NORC survey and report,

A handful of strong beliefs separate those who are “very happy” from the rest of Americans. An overwhelming majority of “very happy” people – 68 percent – say belief in God is very important to them. That’s a significantly higher percentage than among the “pretty happy” group (47 percent) and the “not too happy” group (42 percent).

“They tend to say belief in God is important,” The Wall Street Journal reported of the very happy group. “Two-thirds describe themselves as very or moderately religious, compared with less than half of adults overall.”

A 2019 Pew Research Center study found “regular participation in a religious community [emphasis by Pew] clearly is linked with higher levels of happiness and civic engagement (specifically, voting in elections and joining community groups or other voluntary organizations).” 2016 Pew research found similar results, noting that “highly religious” people were happier than others. The “highly religious” are “overwhelmingly (95 percent) Protestant, Catholic or other Christians.”

In 2016, using data from a study by Great Britain’s Office for National Statistics, The Christian Post reported that, among all faith groups, Christians were the happiest. The article declared, “Statistics from Britain's national happiness index have suggested that Christians are among the happiest people in the nation, while those who don’t identify with any particular religion generally scored the lowest life satisfaction numbers.”

Christians are among the happiest people in the world, not simply because of who we are—and not simply because we are more likely to marry, or because of our view on what is marriage—but because of who God is and because of all that He’s done and will do. We’re generally a happy people because of the faith, hope, and love, and all the other good “fruit” that permeates Christianity. Won’t you join us?!

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2023, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com 

Pastor Alistair Begg on the Bible and Sex

At the recent Keswick Convention, Pastor Alistair Begg goes where FAR too few pastors and other Christian leaders are unwilling to go:

Take heed Christian! The supreme issue in the "City of Man" in today's world is almost exclusively centered around sex. Pretending this is not the case has had disastrous results. Whether in our churches, in our homes, or out in the world, and whether we are talking about what is marriage, who is a male or female, homosexuality, or the proper role of sex in our culture, Christians must boldly and frequently speak the truth in these grave matters. 

Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com

Christian Artists Should Not be Partnering with Dolly Parton (and the like)

Recently, Dolly Parton made big news in the contemporary Christian music industry. Ms. Parton is certainly no stranger to big news when it comes to her music. Parton has had a stellar, decades-long career as a country music artist. She has produced 25 number-one songs—a record she shares with Reba McEntire—seven chart-topping albums, and 44 top-10 albums—which leads all artists. In addition, she has been nominated for 49 Grammys and won 10. 

Her most recent Grammy win was this year and was the result of her collaboration with the contemporary Christian duo, For King & Country, on the song “God Only Knows.” However, this effort was not what got Parton recent headlines in the Christian media. According to The Christian Post, Ms. Parton’s duet “There Was Jesus” with Christian artist Zach Williams “marks Parton’s first No. 1 on Billboard's Christian charts.” 

Nevertheless, the biggest story here is not Parton’s Christian music Grammy or her number-one song. The biggest story here is that Christian artists would pair themselves, and produce work—Christian songs—with an individual who has been wrong on some of the most important moral issues of our time: marriage and homosexuality. 

Ms. Parton has not only been wrong, she’s been very outspokenly wrong. What’s more, this is not a recent development. On the gravely important issues of marriage and homosexuality, Parton has been on the wrong side of the truth for quite some time and has frequently made her anti-biblical positions known. 

According to Baptist Press, over 15 years ago, in early 2005, Ms. Parton joined dozens of other deceived music artists—including Christina Aguilera, Pink, the Dixie Chicks, and Emmylou Harris—in contributing to a CD entitled “Love Rocks.” All of the proceeds for “Love Rocks” went to the Human Rights Campaign. The Human Rights Campaign is the largest organization in the U.S. devoted to spreading LGBT propaganda and was co-founded by the infamous (and under arrest) Terry Bean. (Bean is a prominent democrat donor and fund raiser who was arrested and indicted in 2014 on two felony counts of third-degree sodomy and one count of third-degree sexual abuse after allegedly having sex with a 15-year-old boy he met online. Bean was again arrested last year for the same crimes, and after allegedly paying $200,000 to make the original charges go away.) 

The largest advocate in the U.S. for the perverse LGBT agenda, the Human Rights Campaign was a leading voice in pushing for nationwide same-sex “marriage” in the U.S. Ms. Parton and those like-minded aided and abetted them. 

In 2018, The Advocate—the “oldest and largest LGBT publication in the United States—called Ms. Parton “an enduring queer icon” and chronicled eight times that she “Cemented Her Status as an LGBTQ Icon.” Among other sad disclosures, The Advocate revealed that “Dolly loves drag.” They also noted how that, in 2005 Parton contributed the song “Travelin' Thru” to the film Transamerica. 

The Advocate describes the film as “a trans woman's journey to self-love, and a reunion with the son she didn't know she had.” They also describe “Travelin' Thru” as a “lovely ditty” that “became an anthem of transformation and bravery, and it endeared us even more to Dolly.” The song was nominated for an Academy Award. 

The Advocate piece also noted how Ms. Parton rejects the idea of “bathroom bans.” They wrote, 

Of the bans, Dolly said to CNN Money in 2016: “I think everybody should be treated with respect. I don’t judge people and I try not to get too caught up in the controversy of things. I hope that everybody gets a chance to be who and what they are. I just know, if I have to pee, I’m gon’ pee, wherever it’s got to be.”

Such words from Ms. Parton remind me of the ignorant claptrap spouted by godless post-modernists who reject virtually every tenet of the Christian faith. Yet Parton considers herself a Christian. Her current number-one song frequently declares, “There Was Jesus.” She seems to have forgotten “why was Jesus” and why He died. There’s nothing in Scripture that indicates Jesus died so that “everybody gets a chance to be who and what they are.” 

If a Christian can’t stand for the basic truth of who is a male and who is a female, what aspect of the faith can they be trusted to defend? Additionally, if Christians can’t be trusted to tell the truth on something as foundational as marriage, on what will they tell the truth? 

In a foolish desire to be “relevant” or “tolerant,” Christians across the world—especially mainline Protestant churches and the Catholic Church—have abandoned long-heeded truths for heresy. This is especially the case when it comes to matters in the sexual realm. Nevertheless, the Bible is very clear on what is marriage and on what is moral when it comes to sex and sexual behavior.

In fact, there are few things that the Bible is clearer on than marriage. Marriage is “the Crown of Creation.” It is the priority relationship within the family, with all other relationships being subordinate, and functioning subject, to it. After our relationship with our Creator, the most important relationship in the universe is the relationship between husband and wife. The union is so profound that throughout the New Testament, God uses the analogy of the bride and bridegroom to describe the relationship between Jesus and the Church.

What’s more, marriage is the oldest institution in the history of humanity—older than God's covenant with the nation of Israel, older than The Law, older than the church. Marriage is one of the earliest truths revealed by God. If ANYTHING is true, marriage as the union of one man and one woman is true. On this, there can NEVER be compromise. 

And neither can there be silence. This is especially the case for Christians with a wide audience and significant influence—like Christian musicians with voluminous radio airplay. Such Christians who know the truth but choose to remain silent would do well to recall the words of Mordecai to his cousin Esther (paraphrased):

Do not think that if you remain silent in this matter you will escape. For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise from someone else. And who knows but that you have come to your influential position for such a time as this?

On the matter of marriage, the stakes are too high, and the deceit too widespread to compromise. 

Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith and Reason.

www.TrevorGrantThomas.com 

Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America

tthomas@TrevorGrantThomas.com  

Colin Kaepernick Needs the Truth

On the same day that GQ—sometimes known as Genuflecting Quarterbacks—named Colin Kaepernick as its “Citizen of the Year,” several mainstream media outlets—including Christian websites—reported that some Christian players in the NFL who support Kaepernick’s protest of “systemic oppression and…police brutality toward black people” are frustrated at the criticism directed at Mr. Kaepernick. They are especially frustrated that the out-of-work quarterback isn’t getting more support from the Christian community within the NFL.

As ABC News reported,

Eric Reid and other Christian players who support Colin Kaepernick's social justice movement want believers on the opposite side of the controversial anthem protest to ask themselves a simple but powerful question: What would Jesus do?

Reid—then a teammate of Kaepernick—was quick to join the back-up quarterback last year in taking a knee during the National Anthem. Reid would later tell the AP that his faith was instrumental in his decision to kneel. Referencing Proverbs, Reid declared that he wanted to be a “voice for the voiceless.” He added,

We all have a love for people. The Bible tells us love your brother as yourself so that's why we're doing it. We have to speak up for those who can’t do it for themselves. My faith is ultimately what led me to start protesting and it's what continues to drive me. Faith without works is dead. I feel like the past year before we started protesting, the Lord has prepped me for this moment.

Reid—one of three NFL players who took a knee during the NFL’s Veteran’s Day celebration—expressed particular frustration with his Christian colleagues,

I do see some hypocrisy with the people that call themselves Christians. If you know Jesus, he went into the house of God and turned over the tables and was angry and said they made the house of God into a marketplace so I would say this is something that He would do.

Baltimore Ravens tight end, Ben Watson—a long-time outspoken Christian in the NFL—was also critical of Christians who put “politics above the gospel, empathy and understanding.” He added,

We talk about what Jesus would do. Let's think about that. How should I Biblically look at this situation? Is my response as an American going against what my response should be as a Christian?...Being kind is not predicated on what you can do for me. Justice is not predicated on if I experienced injustice or not. We can advocate for people who have experiences that we don't even have. True justice is blind and righteous. Christians should be about expanding and promoting the gospel. If you listen or think about the subject matter that players and people are concerned about, you could not as someone who reads scripture turn a blind eye to it.

Philadelphia Eagles safety Malcolm Jenkins, who often raises his fist during the anthem, wants the Christian community to be more united.

As big as we are, as much influence as we have on policy and politics, if the Church ever got behind really being for equality and really being for justice, it would show up, it would come. But a lot of times we don't show the empathy, we don't take the time to listen and we're just as segregated as the world is right now.

I’m not sure about the “Christian cred” of these other professionals, but I’ve long admired and respected the words and deeds of Ben Watson. As I’ve noted before, more than once Mr. Watson has boldly and articulately stood for the truth on some of the most important moral issues of our time—namely marriage and abortion. However, I think he needs to reexamine his approach to Colin Kaepernick and his protest and get his coworkers to do the same.

For example, when it comes to “What Would Jesus Do?” in this situation, of course, I can’t say for sure how Jesus would deal with a modern-day millionaire “social justice warrior,” but from what Scripture reveals, I imagine He would begin and end with what He always did: the truth.

As He did with the Samaritan woman at the well, Jesus might start by asking Mr. Kaepernick about his spouse. The woman of Samaria told Jesus, “I have no husband.” Likewise, Mr. Kaepernick would have to reply that he has no wife. Yet, as was the case with the Samaritan woman, Mr. Kaepernick is steeped in an immoral (sinful) relationship.

It is well known that for several years now Kaepernick has been “dating” (often known as “living in sin” with) Nessa Diab. Ms. Diab is a “radio and TV personality.” Specifically, she is an MTV host. That alone should send shutters down the spine of any spiritually “woke” individual. As if we needed direct clarification, Diab has openly spoken of her sexual exploits with Kaepernick.

What’s more, while Kaepernick claims to be a Christian, Diab is a Muslim and a raging liberal. (While this seems very contradictory, Islam and liberalism do have much in common.) Before trying to understand his kneeling protests, maybe Mr. Watson should speak to Colin about being “unequally yoked” and the sin of fornication.

What if Diab gets pregnant? Will they kill yet another black baby? Will they bring yet another American child into the world who doesn’t have a married mother and father? In other words, instead of being part of any a solution to what really plagues the American black community, Mr. Kaepernick is part of the problem and is very likely about to make things even worse.

What if, while standing among the crowds of urban youth—where he so often finds himself—instead of talking about the myth of “systemic oppression and police brutality,” Mr. Kaepernick would speak of the importance of marriage, family, and sexual morality? And more importantly, what if he lived those truths himself?

Again, Kaepernick kneels for a lie and is living his life according to multiple lies. Instead of trying to “understand” a lie, Mr. Kaepernick’s Christian friends should tell him the truth.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2017, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Harvey Weinstein Proves Why the Left Really Hates Trump

Chalk up the Harvey Weinstein sex scandal as one of the most unsurprising big media stories of the modern era. It’s like when a magazine run by liberals and devoted to promoting and encouraging the “sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll” lifestyle flubs a story about campus rape. (And subsequently—and quite deservedly—gets sued into near oblivion.) In other words, almost no one should be surprised that a big-time Hollywood producer and film studio executive such as Harvey Weinstein is a sexual miscreant.

If you want to find a “rape culture,” look no further than Tinseltown. Hollywood is littered with men—and women—who are sexual predators and provocateurs ready and willing to take advantage of most anyone and/or any situation in order to satisfy their lust and/or greed. Again, it should come as little surprise that an industry built on the notion that “sex sells” is filled with people who act out that perverse proverb for their personal pleasure or personal profit. People who have no qualms about filling their movies and television shows with smut are also prone to filling their personal lives with smut.

I can think of no culture, no industry, no group of people less qualified to lecture anyone—especially the culture at large—about sexual immorality than the depraved, sex-crazed deviants that permeate Hollywood, U.S.A. The smug Jimmy Kimmel—whose early claim to fame was as the co-host of Comedy Central’s trashy The Man Show—should get nowhere near a compass of any sort, but especially a “moral compass.” Likewise, most every well-known Hollywood actor, actress, producer, director, et al, has played a role in corrupting the sexual mores of America.

Thus, when these “nasty” Hollywood harlots, gigolos, pimps, perverts, and like-minded stooges in the general public (thank God, an electoral minority—for now!) don their vagina hats and Antifa masks and start howling about the sexual misconduct of President Trump—or any other politician or pundit of whom they disapprove (read: Christian, conservative, or republican)—we know that it’s not really the sexual immorality that troubles them.

In spite of the claims of Hillary Clinton and her ilk, nothing President Trump has done in the sexual realm runs afoul of the sexual standards presented by Hollywood—which, of course, are the sexual standards of liberalism. It’s not what President Trump “has said about women”—like many of us, in his worst moments he sounds like one corrupted by liberalism—that sets liberal snowflakes to melting. Rather, it’s the threat that conservatism and Christianity present to their selfish, hedonistic lifestyles that really terrifies these Hollywood hypocrites.

Craving the power that big government affords them—and with little to no qualms about any perceived (or real) hypocrisy—these liberals take every opportunity presented them to go after republican politicians—especially the President. Joy Behar recently explained this quite well when discussing Republican U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy. Murphy, from Pennsylvania and a member of the U.S. House Pro-Life Caucus, was caught encouraging his mistress to get an abortion. He is resigning next month, as well he should.

Addressing her aghast audience, Behar attempted to explain how democrats like herself don’t have a hypocrisy problem when complaining about the behavior of men like Tim Murphy. As she tellingly revealed, “the difference between me and the people who voted for [Murphy] is the Democrats are not the family of values…They’re not hypocrites — they’re just dogs. You see the difference?” Yeah, we got it. According to Behar’s liberal logic, it’s better to be a reliably immoral “dog” than a hypocrite.

Yet, whether in their TV monologues, protests, talk shows, political speeches, tweets, posts, and so on, as they attack President Trump and court the American electorate, liberals aren’t presenting themselves as “dogs.” Far from it. As they continue the Obama mission of remaking America into a nation our Founders would not recognize, the modern American left presents itself as wise, rational, reasonable, and compassionate. They brazenly tell us that they have the solutions we crave if only we would give them the power to act.

As long as President Trump acts on conservative—especially Christian conservative—principles, he is undermining the left’s agenda and reminds them that, at least to some extent, they are losing their grip on the American culture. Thus, he must be politically destroyed.

Andrew Breitbart often declared that politics is downstream from culture. If this is to be believed, then the last decade has seen the culture—at least the voting culture—slip from the hands of the modern left. In addition to the federal courts, the U.S. Presidency was the last firm grip liberals had on power in D.C., and until about 9 p.m. on November 8, 2016, they were quite sure they were going to control at least the executive branch of the U.S. government. When this was lost, an angry despair set in, one that has rarely let up since.

The more that Trump appoints sound conservative judges and officials, the more he works at repealing Obamacare and building a wall, the more tax money he keeps out of the hands of abortionists, the more religious liberty is restored—the more that the federal government operates according to the laws of the Law Giver, the more President Trump and his allies will be vilified and attacked.

(Read this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2017, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

NBA Players Should Boycott Their All-Star Game

If the malevolent hypocritical fools in charge of the NBA don’t reverse their decision to pull the 2017 NBA All-Star Game out of the city of Charlotte, every NBA player with a shred of sense of what is good and right should refuse to play in the mid-season contest.

As they rush to see who can grovel the most upon the blood- and semen-stained altar that houses the perverse priests and priestesses of the LGBT movement, many of the major U.S. professional sports organizations—but especially the NBA—are taking nearly every opportunity to undermine eternal truths on sex, sexuality, and the family.

Goose-stepping along with the rest of the liberal elite in ignorant opposition to a common sense law (HB2) that reversed a foolish Charlotte city ordinance, about three weeks ago the NBA decided to pull their All-Star game from the city of Charlotte. Ignoring science and sound morality, in late February of this year, liberals on the Charlotte City Council passed an ordinance that would allow men into women’s restrooms, locker rooms, and so on. As is typical with the left, the ordinance did not apply only to city-owned property, but to private businesses as well. In other words, Charlotte liberals “legislated morality,” and they did so to the point of forcing all of its citizens to adhere to perverse liberal dogma. All the North Carolina legislature did was correct such an egregious wrong.

The very same ordinance failed the Charlotte City Council in March of 2015. Nevertheless, three months later, the NBA awarded Charlotte the All-Star Game. Somehow the ideas of “core values” and “diversity, inclusion, fairness and respect for others” evaded NBA Commissioner Adam Silver until July of this year.

Thank goodness a more enlightened city—New Orleans—will now have a chance to host the NBA’s All-Star Game. But wait, as Dr. Michael Brown points out, in terms of bathroom access, there’s no fundamental difference between New Orleans and Charlotte. In other words, the NBA moved their All-Star Game out of Charlotte merely as a stunt to score political points. What’s more, the state of Louisiana—like the state of North Carolina—along with 22 other states, has joined in a federal lawsuit against the Obama administration’s gross overreach in the transgender bathroom battle.

Since there’s no way a biological female could ever compete in the NBA—you know, because of biology, anatomy, physiology, and all of those other stubborn science things—I’ll accept that the NBA really believes in “transgender rights” the moment they allow biological males to compete in the WNBA. (Maybe then people would actually watch!) Perhaps Jason Collins—the NBA’s seven-foot, 250-plus pound poster-boy for “tolerance”—could be the first “transgender” WNBA star.

It’s little surprise that the corporate elites at the NBA share a perverse worldview with most other corporate and political elites across America. However, I am disappointed that none of the faithful among the NBA players has spoken out against their league’s foolishness in this matter. Many high profile NBA players are noted for their Christian faith—Stephen Curry, Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, Kevin Durant, and Dwight Howard, to name a few. Lebron James has been recently noted for giving glory to God and even referencing the return of Christ. As this Olympics season has again revealed, it’s not uncommon for U.S. athletes to praise God and point to Christ after their success. I’m always thankful for those moments. I think it’s important that we all give glory to God for whatever we achieve in this life. After all, He created us. He gives us every good thing that we have, so certainly we should praise and honor Him in our victories.

However, as most seasoned Christians know, it’s rather easy to be thankful and filled with praise when we’ve won things, but what about being obedient and truthful when it’s difficult and unpopular? In fact, if we walk with Christ long at all in this world, we are much more likely to be given opportunities for the latter. Given the spiritual battles raging in our culture, this is certainly true when it comes to matters in the sexual realm.

As I noted last year, the NFL’s Ben Watson (like myself, a University of Georgia alumnus) is a great example of a professional athlete who has used his high-profile platform to speak truth to Americans. After the rioting in Ferguson, Missouri, in late November of last year, Watson wrote,

I’M ENCOURAGED, because ultimately the problem is not a SKIN problem, it is a SIN problem. SIN is the reason we rebel against authority. SIN is the reason we abuse our authority. SIN is the reason we are racist, prejudiced and lie to cover for our own. SIN is the reason we riot, loot and burn. BUT I’M ENCOURAGED because God has provided a solution for sin through…his son Jesus and with it, a transformed heart and mind. One that’s capable of looking past the outward and seeing what’s truly important in every human being. The cure for the Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice and Eric Garner tragedies is not education or exposure. It’s the Gospel. So, finally, I’M ENCOURAGED because the Gospel gives mankind hope.

After the Supreme Court’s infamous ruling on marriage, Watson declared,

Relative morality is as capricious as the wind, leaving each generation to do what is right in their own eyes, while unknowingly undermining the exact concept of “right” that they are so desperately trying to attain. Instead of shooting for the mark, we lower it, doing what is good for “us” at the time, effectually creating our own truth, which when taken to its logical conclusion is always problematic. 

We, as a nation, have continued our course into dangerous waters, shaking our fist and becoming our own gods. This individual Supreme Court ruling is not the cause, but simply evidence of how far we’ve gradually drifted. The moral decay of America is not unlike moral decay in my own life, as I continually battle against self rule. It’s a gradual decline. The tire usually doesn’t spontaneously blow out. No, it’s an aggravating slow leak, that needs constant refilling of air, until eventually, busyness takes precedence and the now unattended to tire is completely flat. Life’s proverbial morality tire responds in much the same way. It’s neglecting to read and respect the Bible. It’s listening to or watching things that aren’t uplifting. It’s allowing myself a second look. It’s removing prayer from schools and our homes. It’s legalizing the murder of babies in the womb. It’s glorifying promiscuity and reducing sex to a simple physical animalistic act. It’s objectifying woman and praising the “playa”. It’s condoning divorce. It’s standing by in silence. It’s ignoring the promptings of the Spirit. It’s Christians, myself included, not living like Christians.

These are powerful words, and we need more of them from high-profile Christians. However, if we are going to change our culture in the most significant battles of our time, our efforts must go beyond words. We need actions, and we especially need them from those who would garner the most attention. If only the half-dozen NBA players mentioned above took a stand and declared that they would refuse to participate in their league’s All-Star Game unless it was returned to Charlotte, the world would notice.

One of our greatest acts of love is telling people uncomfortable truths that they don’t want to hear. The sad fact is that, like those struggling with sexual sin, those struggling with gender-identity are hurting and in deep pain. They need truth and healing, not lies and accommodation.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2016, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the brand new book The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

The Liberal Media Slanders Manny Pacquiao

Boxing legend and Filipino politician Manny Pacquiao, a devout Christian, recently has found himself on the wrong side of a unanimous decision of a different sort. Last week, Pacquiao, already elected twice to the Philippines National Assembly and now a candidate for the Filipino Senate, was questioned by a Manila Channel 5 reporter on the issue of same-sex "marriage."

When asked, Pacquiao responded, "It’s common sense. Will you see any animals where male is to male and female is to female? The animals are better. They know how to distinguish male from female. If we approve male on male, female on female then man is worse than animals."

Shortly later, Nike announced that it was cutting endorsement ties with Pacquiao. Of course, the rabidly liberal mainstream media took the opportunity to paint Pacquiao as an ignorant, hateful, (and again making use of the dumbest word in the English language) "homophobe." In doing so, in almost every instance, the liberal mainstream media deceitfully reported on (lied about) what Pacquiao actually said.

Demonstrating an amazing ignorance of human biology, in the largest paper in my home state of Georgia, the Atlanta-Journal Constitution, reporter Michael Cunningham wrote, "Nike ended its endorsement deal with the Filipino boxer following his vile, bigoted comments about gay people. In an interview posted online, Pacquiao said gay people are 'worse than animals' and displayed unsurprising ignorance about animal biology."

At the beginning of its piece on the matter, USA Today said, "Nike announced it has dropped Manny Pacquiao in the wake of the boxer’s controversial remarks where he said those in gay relationships 'are worse than animals.'" The New York Times began, "Nike has terminated its relationship with Manny Pacquiao, the champion boxer who is campaigning for the Senate in the Philippines, one day after he publicly apologized for calling people in gay relationships 'worse than animals' during an interview with a local broadcaster."

According to The Times, Nike said, "We find Manny Pacquiao’s comments abhorrent. Nike strongly opposes discrimination of any kind and has a long history of supporting and standing up for the rights of the LGBT community."

Life Site News gets the matter correct as it points out, what Pacquiao was actually saying "is that 'man' –society in general—'is worse than animals,' 'if we approve' same sex 'marriage.'" What's more, as I have pointed out before, Pacquiao's views are very much in line with those of Thomas Jefferson, Sir William Blackstone, and almost every other human being most responsible for the founding of this great nation.

As my column nearly two years ago notes,

Under British law, sodomy was a capital crime. Sir William Blackstone was a renowned and favorite English jurist of our Founders, and his Commentaries on the Laws of England served as the basis of legal jurisprudence in America. 

As David Barton remarks, “In addressing sodomy (homosexuality), [Blackstone] found the subject so reprehensible that he was ashamed even to discuss it.” Nevertheless, Blackstone declared: 

“What has been here observed…the infamous crime against nature committed either with man or beast. A crime which ought to be strictly and impartially proved and then as strictly and impartially punished….I will not act so disagreeable part to my readers as well as myself as to dwell any longer upon a subject the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature [sodomy]…A taciturnity observed likewise by the edict of Constantius and Constans: …(where that crime is found, which is unfit even to know, we command the law to arise armed with an avenging sword that the infamous men who are, or shall in future be guilty of it, may undergo the most severe punishments). 

“THIS the voice of nature and of reason, and the express law of God, determine to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance, long before the Jewish dispensation, by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven: so that this is an universal, not merely a provincial, precept.” 

Following the same moral precepts, each of the original 13 colonies treated homosexuality as a serious criminal offense. Thomas Jefferson himself authored such a law for the state of Virginia, prescribing that the punishment for sodomy was to be castration. (You think modern courts will look to this for guidance?) 

New York’s law read, “That the detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . shall be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that every person being thereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall be hanged by the neck until he or she shall be dead.” 

Connecticut’s law read, “That if any man shall lie with mankind as he lieth with womankind, both of them have committed abomination; they both shall be put to death.” Georgia’s law (surprisingly—at least for today’s liberals) did not call for the death penalty, but stated, “Sodomy . . . shall be punished by imprisonment at hard labour in the penitentiary during the natural life or lives of the person or persons convicted of th[is] detestable crime.”

Minus the punishment of death, until just the last couple of decades, this view on homosexuality was predominant, not only across the U.S., but the world over. But of course, history, nor human law determines truth. The truth on homosexuality, sexuality in general, marriage, and the like is revealed by the Law Giver. Any human laws or opinions contrary to Him and His Word is what should be found "abhorrent."

Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Where Are the Christian Celebrities on Marriage? (Updated)

This past Thursday evening, my undefeated (5-0) Atlanta Falcons faced their division rival, the 1-4 New Orleans Saints. The Falcons were on a bit of a roll, and despite playing on the road, were favored over the struggling Saints. Alas, turnovers and a hot Drew Brees did in the Falcons. Brees favorite receiving target that night was his tight end, the former University of Georgia stand-out Ben Watson. Watson had a career night, catching 10 passes for 127 yards and a touchdown. (He had 20 catches for 136 yards all of last season.)

This is Watson’s 12th season in the NFL. He’s not a future hall-of-famer, but he’s had a long and productive football career. He’s also one of the smartest players in football. Prior to being drafted by the New England Patriots, Watson scored a 48 on the NFL’s Wonderlic Test (an intelligence test the NFL gives to prospective players). Watson’s score is tied for third highest ever in the NFL. Watson having a great night helped lessen the blow of the Falcon’s first loss for me. Lately, I’ve become even more of a fan of the former UGA Bulldog.

Watson seems to be a devoted family man. He’s married (only once it seems, which in-and-of-itself is quite unusual for today’s celebrities) to Kirsten Watson. They have five children: Grace, Naomi, Isaiah, Judah, and Eden. Note the biblical theme to the names. Watson is a Christian, and refreshingly, not a very shy one.

More than once in the past year, using white-hot current events, Watson has used his Christian worldview to present the world with the unabashed truth. After the rioting in Ferguson, Missouri, in late November of last year, Watson wrote,

“I’M ENCOURAGED, because ultimately the problem is not a SKIN problem, it is a SIN problem. SIN is the reason we rebel against authority. SIN is the reason we abuse our authority. SIN is the reason we are racist, prejudiced and lie to cover for our own. SIN is the reason we riot, loot and burn. BUT I’M ENCOURAGED because God has provided a solution for sin through…his son Jesus and with it, a transformed heart and mind. One that’s capable of looking past the outward and seeing what’s truly important in every human being. The cure for the Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice and Eric Garner tragedies is not education or exposure. It’s the Gospel. So, finally, I’M ENCOURAGED because the Gospel gives mankind hope.”

After the Supreme Court’s infamous ruling on marriage, Watson declared, 

“Relative morality is as capricious as the wind, leaving each generation to do what is right in their own eyes, while unknowingly undermining the exact concept of “right” that they are so desperately trying to attain. Instead of shooting for the mark, we lower it, doing what is good for “us” at the time, effectually creating our own truth, which when taken to its logical conclusion is always problematic.

“We, as a nation, have continued our course into dangerous waters, shaking our fist and becoming our own gods. This individual Supreme Court ruling is not the cause, but simply evidence of how far we’ve gradually drifted. The moral decay of America is not unlike moral decay in my own life, as I continually battle against self rule. It’s a gradual decline. The tire usually doesn’t spontaneously blow out. No, it’s an aggravating slow leak, that needs constant refilling of air, until eventually, busyness takes precedence and the now unattended to tire is completely flat. Life’s proverbial morality tire responds in much the same way. It’s neglecting to read and respect the Bible. It’s listening to or watching things that aren’t uplifting. It’s allowing myself a second look. It’s removing prayer from schools and our homes. It’s legalizing the murder of babies in the womb. It’s glorifying promiscuity and reducing sex to a simple physical animalistic act. It’s objectifying woman and praising the “playa”. It’s condoning divorce. It’s standing by in silence. It’s ignoring the promptings of the Spirit. It’s Christians, myself included, not living like Christians.”

It’s those last three sentences that’s bothered me lately. There’s far too many “standing by in silence” when it comes to the significant moral issues of our time. Sadly, this is especially the case when it comes to Christian celebrities. In other words, there are far too few Ben Watson’s out there.

For example, my older three children, ages 13, 11, and 9 have recently discovered that they really enjoy musical concerts—contemporary Christian concerts. They’ve attended several this year (in the state of Georgia where we live). Each of these events contained very popular Christian artists that most everyone would recognize if I named them. Tragically, at each of these worship events, hardly any mention of marriage or family was made. And no mention was made in the context of “Our nation is in a spiritual crisis when it comes to marriage and the family.” Neither were the grave matters of sexual purity and sexual temptation given any attention. This should not be.

All Christians have a responsibility to be “salt and light” in this dark world. This is true for the secluded or isolated Christian with a small circle of influence, as well as the celebrity Christian who can gain the attention of millions, and everyone in between. Of course, the larger your sphere of influence, the more opportunity you have to widely impact the world for Jesus Christ.

Throughout history, and the world over, the union of one man and one woman is the foundation of every social institution. Strong and healthy marriages lead to strong and healthy families. Strong and healthy families lead to strong and healthy communities. Strong and healthy communities lead to strong and healthy churches, schools, businesses, governments, and so on.

What’s more, marriage is “the Crown of Creation.” It is the priority relationship within the family, with all other relationships being subordinate, and functioning subject, to it. After our relationship with our Creator, the most important relationship in the universe is the relationship between husband and wife. The union is so profound that throughout the New Testament, God uses the analogy of the bride and bridegroom to describe the relationship between Jesus and the Church.

Of course, honoring ones "father and mother" is given specific attention in God's "top ten." I say "of course" because I assume most every American is aware of the Ten Commandments. It's not as if the Ten Commandments have been removed from our culture--oh, wait. If we take away the Ten Commandments, we shouldn't be very surprised that many Americans have decided that things like mothers and fathers are no longer very important. I suppose such Americans now find the Ten Commandments "discriminatory."

Of course, Satan is well aware of the significance of marriage. Virtually every sexual sin that plagues our culture—promiscuity, pornography, divorce, homosexuality, et al—is ultimately an attack on marriage and the family. Satan knows well that, if you want to destroy a culture, you go after the foundation.

Thus, there are very few things in the world today that deserve more attention of the followers of Jesus than does marriage. It is under attack as never before. Our witness to the eternal truth on marriage is more important now than ever. (See: The Marriage Commitment Challenge.) We must be very deliberate and opportunistic in our defense of marriage. Whenever we have the opportunity, we must speak out in defense of marriage. This is especially true of pastors, politicians, teachers, authors, and apologists.

Christian artists should produce music, movies, and other forms of entertainment that defend and glorify marriage, and whenever given a stage, Christian entertainers should vigorously defend what God gave us when it comes to marriage. Those of us who are policemen, firemen, work in an office, work in a warehouse, work on a farm, mow lawns, work in the home, and the like, must also take every opportunity to model and speak the truth on marriage.

As I’ve already noted, many Americans are going to have to make hard choices about whom they are going to obey. As we’ve already seen, such obedience will cost some of us our jobs or our businesses. For others, the loss of a job may be only the beginning of the suffering that results from standing for the truth on marriage.

As Pastor Rick Warren instructs us, we cannot be afraid to be unpopular (which is very hard for most politicians and celebrities), and we must remember that the only way to be relevant is to make sure that our words and actions align with eternal truths. We don’t need to worry if we’re on “the right side of history;” we just need to be on the “right side.”

Again, marriage is the oldest institution in the history of humanity—older than God's covenant with the nation of Israel, older than The Law, older than the church. Marriage is one of the earliest truths revealed by God. If ANYTHING is true, marriage as the union of one man and one woman is true. On this, there can NEVER be compromise.

Copyright 2015, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Tyler Perry Betrays his Faith and his Message

A few days ago, Tyler Perry did what is all too common these days among those who have surrendered themselves to the Hollywood hook-up culture: he proudly and glowingly announced the birth of his child with his long-time on-again, off-again girlfriend, Gelila Bekele, a 28-year-old Ethiopian model.

The 45-year-old Perry, in an interview with EXTRA, said, “We're having a baby. She and I are very excited. I'm happy. I'm really excited about it.” During the interview Perry noted how the pending birth of his son (Perry inadvertently revealed the child’s gender) which “God has allowed” to come into his life—as if the boy just fell from the sky—has already changed his life.

“The greatest gift that I'm being given right now,” Perry declared, “is the opportunity to give the little boy in me everything I never had. So that's what I'm so excited about. This beautiful human being that God has allowed to come into my life, for me to get to know, because they come in their own personalities and who they are, and just shepherd and usher him into whatever the child is supposed to be is what, I'm gonna do.”

Tyler Perry disappoints on so many levels with this news. Perhaps we should not be surprised from an enabler of liberalism, but when Perry burst into the national spotlight about a decade ago, his story and his story-telling seemed to be a refreshing departure from what Hollywood usually presents.

In an interview in 2005, Perry said that “family and faith” were very important to him, adding that “I am a Christian, I am a believer, and I know had I not been a person of faith, I couldn't be here in this place, and I wouldn't be walking the path that I'm on now.” Perry also discussed his efforts of working the themes of faith and family into his films.

Much of Tyler Perry’s story is admirable. He overcame a very rough childhood; he has openly acknowledged being the victim of both physical and sexual abuse. One of the reasons Perry has given for the physical abuse he suffered is that the man who raised him, Emmitt Perry, was not his biological father.

On this, Tyler Perry is probably correct. As I’ve noted before, one of the most dangerous places for a child in America is in a home where the man present is not the biological father (ask Adrian Peterson). Again, this is especially true within the black family. Tyler Perry almost certainly knows this. Yet, his actions have created a scenario where his own child may face such a situation.

After all, how likely is it that Perry and Bekele will marry, commit to one another for life, and give their children both a mom and a dad in the home? I certainly hope this is the case, but Mr. Perry has given no indication that this will happen. Given the culture of Hollywood, it is much more likely that we will soon hear that Perry and Bekele are both in other “relationships.”

As almost any real parent rooted in sound morality knows, marriage and parenting require a great deal of sacrifice and selflessness. And parenting certainly is not about giving the “little boy in you” everything you never had. Career paths and plans may have to be altered, and more time will need to be spent at home. Marriage and parenting are hard work!

Whether we’re talking marriage, money, or monogamy, because of the efforts of the great deceiver, doing the right thing is often difficult. Of course, we all fall short. However, once a Christian recognizes the error of his ways, the proper thing to do is repent, not celebrate. For a highly public figure like Tyler Perry, this repentance should take place somewhat publicly, or at least he should publicly display an attitude of repentance.

This is especially the case given the devastation that out-of-wedlock births have brought to our nation, particularly the black family. It’s one thing to stumble, fall, and then surrender to God and allow Him to pick you back up and place you on that narrow path. It’s quite another to fall and then wallow in the filth with those who say that your faith is a lie and you can do whatever you want as long as it makes you happy.

Tyler Perry spoke at the funeral of Whitney Houston. He also laid hands on and prayed for TD Jakes. He has been open and unapologetic about his faith. He has said that he believes that God has called him to tell his story. This makes it all the more important that he speak and live the truth when it comes to the defining moral issues of our time.

During his 2005 interview, Perry was asked about his reaction to Bill Cosby’s outspoken criticism of the black community. Cosby has been one of the rare bold voices speaking truth when it comes to the breakdown of the black family. Perry noted that “Dr. Cosby and I are saying the exact same things.” Of course, as even most children know, what we say matters little if our actions don’t support our words. In other words, it’s not enough to have fictional tales that reflect the biblical truth on marriage (or any other issue); your personal life should bear such witness as well.

Copyright 2014, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

What Libertarians (Like John Stossel) Get Wrong

John Stossel’s recent column, “There Ought Not to Be a Law” reveals many of the shortcomings when it comes to Libertarian orthodoxy. Stossel begins by proposing a false dichotomy. He declares that he is a libertarian because he sees “a false choice offered by the political left and right: government control of the economy -- or government control of our personal lives.”

Denigrating both the right and the left, Stossel declares, “The left thinks government can lessen income inequality. The right thinks government can make Americans more virtuous. I say we’re best off if neither side attempts to advance its agenda via government.”

A common charge leveled against conservatives is that, through our “social agenda” we are “legislating morality,” or attempting to “make Americans more virtuous” as Stossel puts it. While it is true that conservatives are “legislating morality,”—because every law is rooted in some morality—no sound-thinking conservative believes that we can legislate our fellow citizens into a virtuous lifestyle. That has never been the aim of conservatism.

However, what is a part of conservatism is the fact that religion is an indispensible pillar of liberty. Of course, as far as religions go, in the United States of America, the Christian religion has by far been the most influential. It has been this way from our founding.

Touring the young United States to discover why the representative democracy present in America was so successful here while failing in so many other places, French social philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville declared that, “the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention.”

Noting the direct influence of religion upon politics in America, de Tocqueville concluded that “In the United States the sovereign authority is religious…there is no country in the whole world in which the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility, and of its conformity to human nature, than that its influence is most powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth…The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.”

For most modern conservatives, it is still impossible to “conceive the one without the other.” Most of today’s conservatives also understand well that the influence Christianity has had in America is by no means an accident. America’s “Schoolmaster” Noah Webster bears this out in his 1832 History of the United States when he wrote that “our citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament or the Christian religion.” Webster added, “The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles…to this we owe our free Constitutions of Government.”

In other words, the liberty that libertarians love in America is implicitly linked to Christianity. Certainly our Constitution would not exist without it. Having legislation that reflects Christian morality is no detriment to liberty.

The true threat to liberty is the godlessness that is pervasive in today’s liberalism, which has, of course, taken over the Democratic Party. With its devotion to killing children in the womb, removing prayer, the Commandments, and the Bible from the public arena, and its support of sexual immorality and the redefinition of marriage, I always knew that the Democratic Party was the party of the godless. The recent Democratic National Convention just confirmed this.

Revealing the true nature of modern liberalism, the DNC removed a reference to God in the party platform, along with a reference to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. After conservatives pointed this out to Americans, embarrassed Democrat party leaders were forced to take action. On Wednesday of their convention, an amendment was proposed to reinsert God and Jerusalem into the platform. The ensuing voice vote was an even greater embarrassment.

Amidst boos, jeers, and raised fists, Los Angeles Mayor and convention chairman Antonio Villaraigosa had to take three voice votes before he weakly and deceptively declared that the two-thirds majority necessary was achieved. After his pronouncement, the boos grew even louder. Such is the state of today’s Democratic Party.

It is little wonder that a party so hostile to God and His Word has become an anathema to liberty. True liberty only exists in a society where God is revered. Our founding documents made this clear when they Declared, “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 them are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Only a culture that operates under the premise that they are to be free because they were created to be free by a God whose wisdom guides good government can enjoy true liberty. Libertarians would do well to remember this as they weigh the “social agenda” of the right against the Big Government agenda of the left.

Copyright 2012, Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

My Guest Appearance on "What's Up" Radio with Terry Lowry

Click here to listen to my interview on Terry Lowry's "What's Up" radio show.

Is America a Christian Nation? (A Response to Rick Bellows)

Mr. Bellows (letter to the editor, Gainesville Times) obviously misread my most recent column (Is America a Christian Nation?). He begins by noting that I failed to make the distinction between a “Christian nation” and a nation of Christians. This is so ridiculous it makes me wonder what column he was actually reading.

I went out of my way in the column to define what is a “Christian nation." I used historian David Barton’s definition: “A Christian nation as demonstrated by the American experience is a nation founded upon Christian and Biblical principles, whose values, society, and institutions have largely been shaped by those principles…Christianity is the religion that shaped America and made her what she is today.”

I then went on to given multiple examples of significant individuals who verbalized this understanding of America’s true heritage. I also gave examples of how Christianity is woven into the very fabric of America.

Nevertheless, for those who would like more evidence, note the following:

After the victory over Great Britain, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson both served the freshly birthed United States of America as ministers in Europe. Quoting from David McCullough’s Pulitzer Prize winning biography,John Adams:

“Of the multiple issues in contention between Britain and the new United States of America, and that John Adams had to address as minister, nearly all were holdovers from the Treaty of Paris, agreements made but not resolved, concerning debts, the treatment of Loyalists, compensation for slaves and property confiscated by the British, and the continued presence of British troops in America. All seemed insoluble. With its paper money nearly worthless, its economy in shambles, the United States was desperate for trade…To Adams the first priority must be to open British ports to American ships.”

During this time Adams and Jefferson corresponded regularly. According to McCullough:

“In eight months’ time, from late May 1785, when Adams first assumed his post in London, until February 1786, he wrote 28 letters to Jefferson, and Jefferson wrote a nearly equal number in return…Increasingly their time and correspondence was taken up by concerns over American shipping in the Mediterranean and demands for tribute made by the Barbary States of North Africa—Algiers, Tripoli, Tunis, and Morocco. To insure their Mediterranean trade against attacks by the ‘Barbary pirates,” the nations of Europe customarily made huge cash payments…On a chill evening in February came whatAdams took to be an opening. At the end of a round of ambassadorial ‘visits,’ he stopped to pay his respects to a new member of the diplomatic corps in London, His Excellency Abdrahaman, envoy of the sultan of Tripoli…The conversation turned to business. America was a great nation, declared His Excellency, but unfortunately a state of war existed between America and Tripoli. Adams questioned how that could be…[Adams was told that], without a treaty of peace there could be no peace between Tripoli and America. His Excellency was prepared to arrange such a treaty…Were a treaty delayed, it would be more difficult to make. A war between Christian and Christian was mild, prisoners were treated with humanity; but, warned His Excellency, a war between Muslim and Christian could be horrible.[emphasis mine]”

Thus, here we have a foreign diplomat, during the infancy of the United States, recognizing that the U.S. was indeed a “Christian nation.” A diplomat of the Barbary States nonetheless, of which the Treaty of Tripoli was with, which contains the one sentence (see paragraph below) which those who wish to deny our Christian heritage love to refer.

Also, it was not Jefferson, as Mr. Bellows stated in his letter, who “included it [the sentence to which is referred] in a treaty with the Barbary pirates in the early 1800's.” The “Treaty of Tripoli” almost always refers to the first treaty struck between the U.S. and the Barbary States, which was drafted and signed at Tripoli in 1796 when Washington was still president. It was ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1797 and signed shortly thereafter by President Adams. The sentence “The government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion” is usually attributed to Washington since he was president when it was drafted.

For an explanation on the proper context of this sentence see here.

Furthermore, as to the First Amendment of the Constitution:

The initial draft of the First Amendment was made by James Madison on June 8, 1789. His wording was:

            The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext infringed.

The House Select Committee on August 15, 1789 revised Madison’s statement to read:

            No religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed.

A representative from New York, Peter Sylvester, objected to the revised statement, declaring:

            It might be thought to have a tendency to abolish religion altogether.

Madison changed the wording slightly, but Congressman Benjamin Huntington still objected saying,

           

            The words might be taken in such latitude as to be extremely hurtful to the cause of religion.

Madison later responded to Congressman Huntington and Congressman Sylvester agreeing that he,

            …believes that the people feared one sect might obtain a preeminence, or two combine and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform.

The House agreed on the following, proposed by Ames on August 20, 1789:

            Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience.

The Senate then took up the debate with versions that read:

            Congress shall not make any law infringing the rights of conscience, or establishing any religious sect or society.

            Congress shall make no law establishing any particular denomination of religion in preference to another…

            Congress shall make no law establishing one religious society in preference to others…

Both houses agreed on the wording we have today:

            Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…

Given this small bit of history, one can see that what our Founders were trying to accomplish with the initial part of the First Amendment was to prevent an “official” government denomination/religion, one that people could be required to follow, not the removal of God and His Word from our government. This becomes more obvious when one examines the summary of words and deeds of all our Founders and not eight words of Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists. I can imagine that hardly any, much less a majority, of our Founders would intend for the First Amendment to be used to deny or disprove the Christian heritage of the United States. I think to conclude otherwise, one would have to rewrite our history.

Copyright 2009, Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.

Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World

tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com