Can this be spun by the fundies? Treaty w/ Tripoli

[johnnie]

I'm sure many of you have read the US Treaty with Tripoli, but I thought I would post part of it here again and ask if there is a way that the fundies can spin this to still claim that the US was founded on being a Christian Nation. It's just an opinion of mine, but it seems like the "founding fathers" seemed to agree on this.

Here is article 11:

"Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."




I'll add this from the site I got it from:

"Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation."


http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html

[MADem]

1. Anything to do with Tripoli is a political nonstarter

The Monkey doesn't like to advertise his relations with Ghaddafi of Libya, ya see. And we didn't take them off the Terra, Terra, Terra list, so they are pissed off at us:

Libyans angry US keeps them on terror list
Sherwood Ross
Special to the Middle East Times
May 8, 2006

WASHINGTON -- The US State Department's decision last March to keep Libya on its terrorism list "has outraged Libyans in and out of power," according to a lengthy account in an American publication.

In fact, the inability of Prime Minister Shukri Ghanem to get Libya off the list "helped insure his replacement" by hard-liner Baghdadi Al Mahmoudi, according to author Andrew Solomon in the May 8 issue of The New Yorker magazine.

"Deep down," the writer quoted one Libyan advisor as saying, "the Americans think that, if they normalize relations, Qadhafi will blow something up and make them look like fools."

The author says US Representative Tom Lantos of California told him, "Qadhafi has clearly made a 180-degree turn and we are turning around the aircraft carrier that is US policy."

But Lantos has been unable to muster Congressional support for a bill to strengthen bilateral relations between the two former antagonists, Solomon said....
http://www.metimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20060508-103052-2305r

[tocqueville]

3. was Khadaffi alive 1796 ?

read the date people

[MADem]

5. Duuuh....

I'm well aware of the treaty's history.


But you don't talk about your great love for a society, as affirmed in an ancient treaty, using as an example a treaty with a nation that is currently a pariah. A country that is associated with the downing of a PAN AM aircraft over Scotland.


That's why the whole concept is a nonstarter. There's no where you can go with it.

[johnnie]

6. It is what was written and signed

They state that the United States is not founded on Christian religion. I wasn't talking about the treaty itself, I was quoting what was written about the United States.

[MADem]

7. All I am saying, is that the minute you bring LIBYA into the mix,

no matter how peripherally you try to manage it, the crazyass fundies will call it a terrist plot.

It's pointless to try to teach those people using HISTORY, anyway. These are the assholes who think that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs through the apple orchard, fachrissake!

[Canuckistanian]

8. I get your point

And I don't think there's anything there to spin. They may not like it, but there's nothing they can say aganst it.

That was the prevailing attitude back then. Keep. Religion. Out. Of. Government.

They knew that having a state religion would be a disaster, as it had been for Great Britain.

[atreides1]

2. HOW?????

The treaty is straight forward, how would they spin it?

[magellan]

4. Try "Everything changed after 9/11"

It's lazy, and dangerous, but you can't expect reason from a bunch of ignorant RWers who think Bush** is their own personal Jesus.