brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Joseph A Nagy Jr pagan_prince at charter.net
Tue Aug 13 17:41:41 EST 2002


Bob LeChevalier wrote:
<snip>
>>I'm neither, just mistaken, Mr. Knight. I apologize for my assumptions.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you are apologizing for.  You were both wrong on a
> point of fact, and he was more wrong than you because your error was
> not fundamental to the argument, and indeed as will be seen below,
> your point agreed with Jefferson.  

It's nice to know that I could agree with such a great man as he, even on only one point. Who knows, 
maybe I should hit my local library and read some more of his writings (if they are available).

> 
> Jefferson actually was NOT involved in the writing of the Bill of
> Rights (so you were wrong), 

Not surprising I was wrong, but my heart was in the right place.

>so he could not have "wanted to include
> the word "Christian" in the Bill of Rights" (so the nincompoop was
> wrong).  Jefferson was in France as the US ambassador from 1784 until
> 1789 when he took office as Washington's Secretary of State, and had
> little role in writing or ratification of the Constitution.
> 

I knew that he was an ambassador to France, but numbers are not my forte, hence why I write poetry 
and try to do web design.

> His major contribution to religious liberty other than the phrase
> "separation of church and state" was his 1779 bill on religious
> liberty, which most certainly did NOT include the word "Christian" nor
> favored Christianity. In that bill are words that pretty much agree
> with what you wrote above:
> JAN,Jr.:
> 
>>The religious of this nation (or any nation) should NOT
>>push their views upon those within in the nation.
> 
> TJ:
> 
>>the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as
>>ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired
>>men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their
>>own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible,
>>and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, 

Was Jefferson ever a soldier?

> 
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7842/bill-act.htm
> 
> After years of controversy, with the pro-religious-establishment
> opposition led by Patrick Henry, and the pro-religious-freedom side
> led by James Madison, it did not pass until 1786, by which time
> Jefferson was in France.  While Jefferson's bill did not use the
> phrase "separation of church and state" (that came a couple decades
> later in a letter), it had the basic concept, which Madison developed
> more fully in his "Memorial and Remonstrance", a petition that so
> strongly argued the case against establishment that it attracted a
> huge following and led to passing Jefferson's bill.
> http://www.jmu.edu/madison/remon.html
> 
> The *principle* of separation of church and state (without that
> particular phrase used) was then embodied in both the Constitution and
> in the Bill of Rights, as written by Madison only a couple years after
> the Remonstrance.  What the phrase  means is clearly reflected in
> Jefferson's bill and Madison's remonstrance (and how the US SC saw
> those writings as being consistent with vouchers is beyond me).
> 
> The phrase actually occurred in a letter he wrote as President in
> 1802, in which he said:
> 
>>Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between
>>man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or
>>his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach
>>actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign
>>reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that
>>their legislature should `make no law respecting an establishment of
>>religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a
>>wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this
>>expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights
>>of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of
>>those sentiments which tend to restore man to all of his natural
>>rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social
>>duties.
>>
>>I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessings of
>>the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you and your
>>religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.
> 
> 
> Note that despite the nincompoop's doctored quote "I am a Christian"*,
> he replied to the Danbury Baptist Association which prayed for
> Christ's mediation with an invocation of the Father and Creator AND NO
> MENTION OF CHRIST.  He also explicitly equated the 1st amendment to a
> wall of separation, which is precisely the opposite of what the
> nincompoop claimed.
> 
> http://sc94.ameslab.gov/TOUR/tjefferson.html
> 
> 
> *The full quote is:
> 
>>"A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it
>>is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a
>>disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the
>>Platonists, 

Why am I not surprised?

>>who call me infidel and themselves Christians and
>>preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic
>>dogmas from what its Author never said nor saw." --Thomas Jefferson
>>to Charles Thompson, 1816.  ME 14:385
> 
> 
> where the "document" in question was Jefferson's rewrite of the Bible
> that eliminated all the miracles, leaving Christ as merely a great
> teacher of morals and ethics, by which standards, probably many
> Moslems and Wiccans could say "I am a Christian", too.

I'd like to think I could. I do try my best to be a nice guy, but sometimes idiots make that hard.

> 
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7842/archives/christn.htm
> 
> The documents quoted in the web pages that I've cited are as
> fundamental to the history of our religious freedom as the 1st
> amendment itself, and every American should know what they say, and
> why our religious freedom is important.
> 
> So please take back your apology.  

What? I apologized for my assumptions and not much else.

>Your grasp of details was fuzzy,

Not surprising in the least. I think I am now seeing some of the long term effects of my 
chemo-therapy (e.g. memory sucks like Hoover vacuum cleaner).

> but at least you understand the essentials of Jefferson's position.

The essentials are what matters in the end, to be sure, but it's nice to know the details behind the 
essentials.

> 
> lojbab

I do thank you, though, for these links. I'm actually contemplating saving this whole thread (from 
where I have it in my ISP's archives) to my personal computer. Who knows, one day I'll write up a 
paper on the decline of civilization from my own perspective, although I might change a few names 
here and there to protect the innocent (and not so innocent). To be honest, though, I'll probably 
not write that paper and just lament the fact that I ever came across such bigotry hiding behind 
something that had the potential to do more good then it has.




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list