Jim,

>Hi Tom,
>
>In the general case I too have had problems with "Our founding fathers meant..." or "Christopher Columbus intended..." or "King Tut very much liked..." and statements like that.
>
>BUT... in the case of the founding fathers of the U.S.of A. historians do have tons of letters, meeting minutes, business documents, etc. that do seem to give reasonable insight into at least some of some of their intentions.
>There remains, of course, BOTH the contexts in which the documents under scrutiny were written AND the advent of factors that were not even dreamed of in those days.
>For instance, they had: slavery, women weren't permitted to vote, communicating between states could take days and countless other factors. And they sure didn't dream of machine guns or passenger planes or microphones or tape recorders or radio or countless other things.

Indeed we do Publius. <g>


>
>cheers
>
>
>>Jim;
>>
>>While LBJ was President of the United States, he would put on his sad hound dog face and go before congress and say with his wonderful accent, “President Kennedy would have wanted this”! During the 1970’s the court would say, “Our founding fathers meant this…”!
>>
>>It is unknown to me how some one can understand the will or thoughts of another. LBJ knew Kennedy but did the judges of our Supreme Court know the founding fathers? You might argue yes when taking the age of some judges into consideration! :)
>>
>>Tom
>>
>>
>>
>>>Tom,
>>>
>>>I searched transcripts on the "National Archives Records Administration" site of the original (I think, with original amendments in the "Bill of Rights") of:
>>>1) The Declaration of Independence
>>>2) The Constitution of the United States
>>>3) The Bill of Rights
>>>
>>>There was but a single mention of "God" - in the Declaration of Independence - and it said "...and of Nature's God entitle them...".
>>>
>>>Maybe the IE search mechanism is wanting, or maybe God was added in later amendments, but it seems that "the forefathers" were far more consistent in the church/state thing than I had presumed.
>>>
>>>cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>>Craig;
>>>>
>>>>Next the court will tell us the Constitution must be abolished because of reference to God.
>>>>
>>>>It would seem that an atheist is in fact expressing his/her religious preference. Doing so seems illogical as it puts such a person in a position of “knowing God does not exist”. Where all this will go will be most interesting.
>>>>
>>>>Tom
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>3. Will the Pledge be changed to its original form or never be allowed to be recited again?
>>>>>
>>>>>My guess is Congress will change the Pledge back to its original form.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mr. Newdow is a physician. I would like to see physician’s become responsible members of his/her profession. Too many physicians are incompetent, non-caring or both and would better serve humanity in another field. Ditch digging comes to mind. A lawsuit filed on behalf of all members of society against physicians is certainly in order. Physicians kill more people each year in this country than drunk drivers.
>>>>>
>>>>>Sounds like Mr. Newdow is swearing on his "hypocritic" oath.