[The Urban Sombrero]

We've already covered that topic in times past and I have no further interest in a rehash. The deist argument was thin when first presented, and to this very day is a laughably insufficient basis on which to reject the fact that the US was founded on Christian principles.

I can give at least one parallel by way of analogy. The fact is the vast majority of people in this world reject God, it follows then that they also reject the fact that we are created. So in an attempt to put together a plausible alternative to Creationism they turned to science. Some of the scientific community eventually came up with the theory of Evolution. It's bull, but those determined to deny the almighty His just due, rather choose to believe that the universe and all life came from a huge exploding rock floating out in inky blackness, surrounded by nothing.

Freedom of conscience, like Evolutionism or a magic exploding rock, is a baseless fabrication. Dreamed up by those who reject the Light of the world in an attempt to salve their own consciences.

The four questions or steps to take in evaluating the Founders as presented in the Brittannica article are not biased. If pursued, they lead toward an inexorable conclusion. I simply invite other posters to make their own inquiry.

Freedom of conscience does not sanctify the choice. It does not seek to change moral law. What it does is recognize the dangers inherent in too much power vested in church or state. The individual chooser will stand before the Almighty in my view to give account. I do not believe God wants anything but worship and love freely chosen, freely given. The dangers of man's trampling of conscience fill history's pages. Our founding documents evidence this awareness.