d
Quote:
Originally Posted by djplong
"Establishment" is a NOUN, not a verb. We are NOT a Christian nation though we're a nation made up of mostly Christians.
I'll quote the Treaty of Tripoli, Article 9, signed by President John Adams:
Our Founders were largely Deists. Heck, Jefferson wanted to edit the Bible! In addition, he took it upon himself to work on what might have been the first English translation of the Koran!
|
It seems a bit disingenuous to hold the controversial Treaty of Tripoli as the litmus test for defining Christianity and Government. I believe it was the vigorous debate over
Article 11 you are actually referring to. The administrator would not allow me the keystrokes required to give the topic a full scholarly airing. Here goes the greatly abridged version. Keep in mind, context is important.
For centuries, Muslim pirates from the Barbary Coast of North Africa preyed on Mediterranean commerce. The U.S. was forced to pay tribute before the Revolution. Afterward, a series of Barbary Treaties including the Treaty of Tripoli were created. That treaty was originally created in Arabic and it has been convincingly held that Article 11 was not part of the original translation.
The Treaty went from Tripoli, to Algiers, to Portugal and then to the United States. This was around 1797 and transportation options were limited and slow. The disputed document was 7 months in transit being signed by officials along the way. By the time it reached Adams and Congress, they would have been unable to cancel the misinterpreted and incompetently translated terms. This is the core of the ongoing debate over Article 11.
Historians and scholars are largely in agreement that the flawed and mistranslated Article 11 was according to Frank Lambert of Purdue University, "
intended to allay the fears of the Muslim state by insisting that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced. John Adams and the Senate made clear that the pact was between two sovereign states, not between two religious powers." Lambert writes. The translation flaw remains an arguable mystery.
The Treaty was remarkably short lived and broken by President Jefferson in 1801 when the Barbary bad guys tried to shake the U.S. down. In an interesting aside, the U.S. had built an impressive fleet to protect our assets in the Med from the pirates. The government authorized Commodore Dale to engage the enemy in protecting assets. In political pandering style, Congress precluded the Commodore from attacking Tripoli who had declared war on the U.S. Sound familiar in today's context? In classic United States Navy style and ingenuity, and in deference to Congress's "no attack" order, Dale gave Tripoli rulers an opportunity to negotiate the terms of their surrender. I'd love to buy the Commodore a drink.
Is it me or is there a fascinating parallel with today's Muslim pirates. Anyway, before you doze off, there will not be a quiz.