Sarah Palin goes off the deep end

LA Chronicle: Palin Wants Bible as Basis for US Law

An Atheist public policy groups today sharply criticized remarks by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who appeared on the Bill O'Reilly Factor Thursday night and called for U.S. law to be based on the Judeo-Christian Bible.

Palin, who was the Republican candidate for Vice President in 2008, is reportedly considering a run for the White House in 2012 or beyond.

During her interview, Palin gushed: "I think we should keep this clean, keep it simple, go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant," adding, "They´re quite clear that we would create law based on the God of the Bible and the Ten Commandments."

Are they now?

Several of the Founding Fathers were quite explicit about separating church from state. Jefferson springs to mind immediately, but James Madison said something similar, just to name a few. This was why they included the Establishment Clause in the Constitution, explicitly there to prevent the federal government from interfering in religious matters.

Of course, in case their "intent" is unclear to some people, John Adams, the second President of the United States, signed the Treaty of Tripoli, saying this:

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.

My boldface. The treaty was accepted unanimously by the Senate.

So here we have the US Senate in 1797, unanimously passing a treaty that explicitly states the United States are not, in any sense, a Christian nation, and 200+ years later, a former Alaska governor arguing that what they "really wanted" was to found a Christian nation under Mosaic law.

In my opinion, this nonsense about what the Founding Fathers "really wanted" comes down to two simple questions:

1) Why didn't they say so? From what we know, none of the Founding Fathers were in favor of a Christian state based on the Bible, or anything like that. If it was what they "really wanted", you'd think they might have said so.

2) Why didn't they found one, then? I mean, these were the guys who created the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Both of these are historically noteworthy for a lack of any appeal to divine authority. If what they "really wanted" was Mosaic law, well, why didn't they found a Christian commonwealth based on the Bible?

Any idea that they "really wanted" something different from what they did is ridiculous. The religious right in the US simply can't get to grips with the idea that the revered Founding Fathers really did found a non-religious state, because they need to portray themselves as strict constitutional conservatives and strict religious conservatives. The two just don't add up, so they're reduced to this idiot notion that the Founding Fathers didn't really write what they wrote.

For Palin to suggest that the Founding Fathers "really wanted" a Christian state is completely ignorant. For her to suggest that basing national legislation on the Bible would be a good idea is terrifying.