The Unites States is not a Christain Nation

Rebuttal: Danbury Letter: To prove intent. This letter along with “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” and “Establishing Religious Freedom” influenced the First Amendment. #4 citation R3, pertained to Touro Synagogue. I failed to delete after reducing character counts. Pres. Washington address to Touro Synagogue, "the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support." Considering that Jews were barely tolerated, this was a poignant statement [1]. Rebuttal: Jefferson attended various denominations; he did not ascribe to a sect. Jefferson was a delegate for the Continental Congress and Confederation Congress [9]. He was in France at the time of the signing but, was influential in Constitution content; thus had authority and expertise. An amendment proposal by Patrick Henry [7] for the “General Assessment Bill” sought sponsorship of all Christian religions. Madison con: “Who does not see that the same authority, which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects?” Jefferson concurred: “ the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination” [2,6,9]. As I stated earlier, the bill died in process and was resubmitted as Jefferson’s “Establishing Religious Freedom,” the precursor to the FA [5]Legal: Everson v. Board of Education 1947, the Supreme Court deemed Jefferson as the authority on the First Amendment religious clause. “This Court has previously recognized that the provisions of the First Amendment, in the drafting and adoption of which . . .Jefferson played such [a] leading role “[7]. Upheld, Jefferson/Madison: Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Education 1948, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 [8] Inaugural Address“… enlightened by a benign religion, professed indeed and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty…”[3] Read his address in full. Jefferson refers to freedom to “practice in all forms” He felt strongly about religious freedom and did not cast a negative tone on others of a different faith. Rebuttal: Your Christian “terminology” is an interpretative stretch (ref. quotes above). Furthermore, Madison's quote is out of context. During arguments for GAB he made this statement due to these sects not seeking, nor wished state tax support, whereas the Anglican Church at the time was receiving it and trying to maintain. Rebuttal: 13 ColoniesUsing your Nation definition: 30% in the US are not Christians; therefore, the US is not a Christian Nation. Your contention counter rebutted. Rebuttal: (#7 link is broken) John Adams: “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.” [8] Rebuttal: Ben Franklin, It is upon you to interpret quote correctly. Here's another “who could "live a virtuous life without the assistance afforded by Religion." Most of the world, he believed, was made up of "weak and ignorant Men and Women" who needed religion to "restrain them from Vice, and to retain them in the practice of it [virtue] till it becomes habitual." [10] Franklin had no objections toward religion, he felt it had purpose in developing morality and virtue for the public good; but, he did not belong to a sect as an adult. Rebuttal: Early AmericaLinguistic assumptions, I have provided evidence the term religion used in a Constitution sense is global to all forms. Regarding sources: I have provided substantial authoritative academic sources throughout this debate. Straw Man Position: It is by process of one point to another, that if God is not mentioned in the Constitution, Christianity is not inferred; resulting in the angry ministers. Treaty of Tripoli: Using your citation #9, [11] “the country assured the world that the United States was a secular state, and that its’ negotiations would adhere to the rule of the law, not the dictates of the Christian faith.” Treaty assured that tenants of Christianity would not influence the treaty's enforcement or interpretation. SC Cases: I will clarifyPeople v. Ruggles 1811-Cursing was considered blasphemous to public order and morality. Since there was no previous US precedence, the judge referenced English Common Law. Kent did not make it unlawful to slander any religion, only Christian. Judge Kent violated the NY State Constitution. His opinion incorrect due to America having no establish church he could not cite English Common Law (Anglican). Laws created by his ruling were struck down during the 1821 constitutional convention; which Kent backed. Later “Kent offered that his opinion did not declare Christianity to be the legal religion of the state”. [12, items 12, 14, 17, 18, 19] Runkel v. Winemiller 1799:-Prior to the 14th Amendment, interpretation of religious freedoms was left to individual states; but states were restraining and discriminating against specific religions; in this case Maryland. The Federal Everson case cited Interstate Ry. v. Massachusetts 1907, negating state interpretation as it excluded “Catholics, Lutherans, Mohammedans, Baptists, Jews, Methodists, Nonbelievers, Presbyterians, or the members of any other faith, because of their faith, or lack of it”[13]. Due to this transfer of interpretative power to the federal level Runkel v. Winemiller’s ruling, establishing “Christian religion is the established religion” was negated. Updegraph v. The Commonwealth-The court's decision on this trial was reversed by appellate court [14]. Holy Trinity v. US-This was a case on imported labor. Court decisions are written in 3 parts. Rule of Law as if applies to case facts of the case, Rational, reasons for the decision, within this are Non-Essential Comments (dictum). Dictums are not law binding or weigh on future cases or law. The court's decision pertained only to the immigration law and not religion. The Christian nation statement was a part dictum which has no bearing in law or rational applied [15]; ergo, the statement has no legal value. Precedence: I have address precedence in my above arguments.1. http://www.mountvernon.org...2. http://www.earlyamerica.com... 3. https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu...4. https://www.loc.gov... 5. http://www.crf-usa.org...6. http://www.earlyamerica.com...7. http://www.pewforum.org... 8. http://www.thefederalistpapers.org...9. https://history.state.gov...10. http://www.phmc.state.pa.us... 11. Ref. Con’s R3 #912. http://candst.tripod.com...13. https://supreme.justia.com...14. http://candst.tripod.com...15. http://candst.tripod.com...