America’s Founding in the Ron Paul Curriculum?


I was on my friend Jeremiah Bannister’s Paleoradio show this week talking about Gary North being in charge of developing the Ron Paul Curriculum, to be used primarily by homeschoolers, and he brought up a very interesting question? How are they going to treat the question of America’s founding and Christianity?

It’s an interesting question because North has long been at odds with the dominant conservative Christian view on this. He wrote a book called Conspiracy in Philadelphia, in which he denies the David Barton position that America was founded as a Christian nation and argues that the Constitution was an explicitly godless document that destroyed the nation’s covenant with God. In fact, he says it was a coup d’etat and part of a plot involving the Freemasons and Enlightenment philosophers.

This new covenant meant a new god. The ratification of the United States Constitution in 1787–88 was not an act of covenant renewal. It was an act of covenant-breaking: the substitution of a new covenant in the name of a new god. This was not understood at the time, but it has been understood by the humanists who have written the story of the Constitution. Nevertheless, they have not presented the history of the Constitutional Convention as a deception that was produced by a conspiracy…

They have argued that there was no deception, that America is still a Christian nation, that the Constitution “in principle” was and remains a Christian document, and it is only the nefarious work of the U.S. Supreme Court and the American Civil Liberties Union that has stripped the Constitution of its original Christian character. There is no greater deception than one which continues to deceive the victims, over two centuries after the deed was done.

So when they get around to writing a history or government book, will this be the stance taken on such questions? That would be strongly at odds with the overwhelming majority of the homeschooling community and with most conservative Christians as well.

Comments

  1. raven says

    The xian Dominionists, of which Gary North is one, aren’t real big fans of democracy.

    North was an associate of Rusa Rushdooney and married his daughter.

    Rushdooney, was the only theologian the fundies ever produced and highly influential. He was also a psychopath.

    wikipedia:

    The book was also critical of democracy. He wrote that “the heresy of democracy has since then worked havoc in church and state … Christianity and democracy are inevitably enemies.” He elsewhere said that “Christianity is completely and radically anti-democratic; it is committed to spiritual aristocracy,” and characterized democracy as “the great love of the failures and cowards of life.”[5]

    Democracy is a heresy and the ineviable enemy of xianity.

    Rushdooney wanted to set up a theocracy with him as head and then kill a few hundred million Americans.

    These are broken, human failures whose best feature is that less than half the population takes them seriously.

  2. says

    “How are they going to treat the question of America’s founding and Christianity?”

    Wait, Ed; don’t you mean, “how are they going to treat the question of KKKristian MurKKKa’s founders?”?

  3. raven says

    This new covenant meant a new god.

    Well, at least he knows where gods come from.

    People just make them up.

    Thanks to the Mormons and Scientologists, we already knew that.

  4. slc1 says

    He wrote a book called Conspiracy in Philadelphia, in which he denies the David Barton position that America was founded as a Christian nation and argues that the Constitution was an explicitly godless document that destroyed the nation’s covenant with God.

    As I understand it, that was the position of many of the clergy at the time who opposed ratification of the Constitution on the grounds that it was a wholly secular document.

    In fact, he says it was a coup d’etat and part of a plot involving the Freemasons and Enlightenment philosophers.

    Only because Skull and Bones, the Bilderbergers, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission didn’t exist in the 18th Century. Of course, the Illuminati might have had a hand in the conspiracy as they were founded in 1776.

  5. says

    How are they going to treat the question of America’s founding and Christianity?

    Libertarian Jesus told St Rand “fuck the people.” And it was done!

  6. Akira MacKenzie says

    Edit: …always been with us.

    This weird quirk of me either forgetting or typing a word twice is getting worrisome. I need to get that checked out.

  7. blf says

    But, but, but… USAlienstan existed waaaay back in Mr Carpenterson’s time, c.2000 years ago. He even spoke ‘Merkin! Just read y’alls babble. Ain’t no silly constitution or so-called “rule of law” in thar!

  8. raven says

    wikipedia Rushdoony:

    Rushdoony believed that interracial marriage, which he referred to as “unequal yoking”, should be made illegal.[16] He also opposed “enforced integration”, referred to Southern slavery as “benevolent”, and said that “some people are by nature slaves”.[17

    Rushdoony was also a Holocaust denier.

    We humans can produce monsters. North and Rushdoony are plain old, garden variety monsters. It takes fundie xians to elevate such monsters to authorities and thought leaders.

  9. blf says

    I need to get that checked out.

    You mean: I need to get that checked out out.

    (I have a nasty tendency to drop the word not — which can obviously be a bit of a problem…)

  10. Sastra says

    (North) wrote a book called Conspiracy in Philadelphia, in which he denies the David Barton position that America was founded as a Christian nation and argues that the Constitution was an explicitly godless document that destroyed the nation’s covenant with God … So when they get around to writing a history or government book, will this be the stance taken on such questions?

    I think this question is easily answered if you keep in mind what the “David Barton position” actually is: cherry-pick like hell and spin it. Selective quoting will satisfy the Barton fans — and being quoted at all will satisfy Gary North.

    An alternative plan would be to read the founding of the United States as multiple conspiracies: devout Christians went undercover and posed as secular humanists in order to write a “godless” constitution which snuck God in under the radar of the real secular humanists.

    Wheels within wheels, my friend. Wheels within wheels.

  11. snoeman says

    “In fact, he says it was a coup d’etat and part of a plot involving the Freemasons and Enlightenment philosophers.”

    I don’t know what it is, but somehow the image of a cabal of Enlightenment philosophers plotting to write the Constitution is kinda cool.

  12. dingojack says

    Sastra (#13) – “… like the circles that you find, in the windmills of your mind.”
    : Dingo

  13. Nick Gotts (formerly KG) says

    IIRC, jonathangray, aka Piltdown Man, is of the opinion that the American Revolution (like the French) was a Masonic Plot. But he and North would consider each other (at best) as sorely deceived by the Evil One, since Pilty is more Catholic than the Pope.

  14. says

    Um, what was the original covenant with god? A covenant basically says if you do something for me I will do something for you. The DoI is not a covenant. Do I expect a logical, sane answer? Of course not.

  15. escuerd says

    There is no greater deception than one which continues to deceive the victims, over two centuries millennia after the deed was done.

    FTFY

    Not literally true, still, but better.

  16. peterh says

    With regard to ” It takes fundie xians to elevate such monsters to authorities and thought leaders,” I caused a near riot in another (ultra-rightist) forum by calling into question an Official Statement™ from Tim LaHaye™ on some nuttery or other..

Leave a Reply