At some point in the ongoing argument about whether or not America is a Christian nation, both sides run out of quotes. When that happens, the Christian Nation side frequently retreats to vagueness and begins talking about how America was founded on “Christian principles.”

Which Christian principles are these? I’ve read through the Gospels a time or two, but I missed the part where Jesus sermonizes on the virtues of mixed government and republican virtue. I’ve never seen a section of Paul’s letters where he instructs on the meaning of the social contract.

Given that both men were apparently apocalyptic, it would be very surprising if either of them had much to say about government. God was about to take over that role in the new Kingdom of Heaven, so what’s the point?

Perhaps you can take a passage and expand on its meaning until you have something approaching one of America’s founding principles. Perhaps you could argue that “render unto Cesar” is really a call for federalism. But really, this doesn’t pass the laugh test. There’s no way to get from a snippet of scripture to a fully developed political concept.

It’s worth noting that at the time of America’s independence, most confessionally Christian nations were monarchies. “Christian principles” still included the old hierarchies of the medieval period. Things were getting more complicated – see England and its strengthening Parliament – but the basic idea of the monarch as God’s lieutenant on earth was still in force.

Not that America deviated too much from this. As I’ve said before, hierarchies were still very important in America: white over black, male over female, etc. Which makes statements like the one left recently by Jason so baffling: ” … you would have the rest of us to believe America’s not a nation built on the moral fabric of Christ’s teachings? ”

What, the slavery, racism, anti-catholic sentiments, anti-Indian violence, oppression of women and minorities and general intrusiveness of government? If you want to claim all that for Christian morality, go right ahead.

What makes this particularly comical is how it compares to Jefferson’s rather wonky view of “saxon liberty.” Jefferson always held to the romantic notion that the roots of British liberty lay in the Anglo-Saxon tribes. This meant that, to Jefferson, America’s idea of freedom actually predated Britian’s conversion to Christianity (perhaps it even predated the existence of Christianity. I’m a little vague on Jefferson’s dating.)

This idea was not taken seriously, then or now. It’s also a rather racist idea. But it’s a good example of how at least the father of the Declaration of Independence saw America’s founding as separate from Christian principles.

Virginia’s Board of Social Services has recently approved regulations for state-licensed adoption agencies that will allow for discrimination against damn near everybody. About the only thing you can’t discriminate against is race, which might have been an oversight. From the Richmond Times-Dispatch:

Virginia’s Board of Social Services on Wednesday approved final regulations on adoption that, starting in the spring, will effectively allow state-licensed private agencies to deny the adoption of a child by same-sex couples.

The regulations also will allow the adoption agencies to deny services to prospective parents on the basis of age, gender, disability, religion, political belief and family status.

The regulations, however, will prohibit discrimination based on race, color or national origin.

The board voted 5-1 to approve the regulations, with Social Services Board Chairwoman Bela Sood casting the lone “no” vote.

“The science really doesn’t substantiate the notion,” she said, referring to the traditional family structure of a married man and woman, “that that is the only way children should be raised.”

The focus so far has been on gay adoption, since that has been the hot-button issue for some time now. Of course, the danger is that the Catholic adoption centers might close down if they weren’t allowed to practice such discrimination. But allowing adoption agencies to discriminate against couples for religious reasons seems like a potential landmine in the process. Given the prevalence of the view that atheists are automatically less moral than believers, I can see this causing a major problem.

While reading about the last post, I came across this neat little video:

Via All Over Albany

(via)

One of my classmates in a Library Science course had paid some of her dues by working for Archie Comics, publishers of the various Archie comics and their spinoffs. She told me that the company was just as old fashioned and patriarchal as you’d expect of a company that has been mass producing comics about the same high school love triangle for the past sixty years. So I never, never expected to see this:

From Bleeding Cool: “This is the new cover to the upcoming Life With Archie #16, the comic which envisions possible futures for Archie characters. And this upcoming issue features the gay inter racial wedding of soldier Kevin Keller and his intended. On the cover. Of an Archie comic.”