It is a contemptible lie for the “Religious Right,” judgmental fascists who seek to impose their personal view of Christianity on the rest of the country through political activism, and who now invade and taint the Tea Party and Liberty Movements with hateful sophistry, to amazingly claim to wave the banner of liberty in memory of our Founding Fathers. It is a strange twist of logical impossibility, veritable insanity, to hear a man profess support for the Constitution out of one side of his mouth and support for teaching the inerrancy of the Bible in public schools out of the other. These professed leaders of the Tea Party Movement, these self-proclaimed authorities on natural liberty, are vile hypocrites who twist the facts of history to suit their desire for power and control over the religious beliefs of every American.

The Religious Right Fake Tea Party is led by arrogant prideful theocrats who think they speak with spiritual authority, but clearly they don’t speak in the Spirit of the Lord. Jesus says, “My kingdom is not an earthly kingdom.” The false pastor says, “Vote for so-and-so or such-and-such bill or you are going to hell.” Jesus says, “Let the one among you who is without sin cast the first stone.” The false pastor says, “If you don’t agree with my religious views, you will not be saved.” Jesus says, “For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and everyone who humbles himself will be exalted.” The false pastor says, “I am called by God to run for political office.”

But never mind the evidence of scripture, and the words of Jesus. The fact of the matter is that this nation was not founded as a Christian nation. This nation was not founded by men who believed in the inerrancy of the Bible. It was founded by men who didn’t believe in the divinity of Jesus. It was founded by men who didn’t believe in the Trinity. It was founded by men who thought the Bible was hogwash. But even the Christian founders of this nation professed the liberty of men to believe as they wish. They respected the right of men to disagree on matters of religion, the right of all religious sects to exist, that none should be exalted or found superior over the other in the realm of government.

Fundamentalist Christian preachers certainly have a right to believe that their religious views should be imposed on the citizenry of the United States of America through political action. They are American citizens after all and like every other American have a right to freedom of thought and belief. But they cannot under any circumstance claim to support the Constitution and the ideals of liberty as proclaimed by the Founding Fathers of this country. To make such an outrageous claim would be a lie worthy of the Archon himself. In order to comprehend the opinions of the Founding Fathers regarding religious freedom in our country, let us consider their own words.

George Washington, First President of the United States of America, President of the Constitutional Convention, Signed the United States Constitution:

If they are good workmen, they may be from Asia, Africa or Europe; they may be Mahometans, Jews, Christians of any sect, or they may be Atheists…. [letter to Tench Tighman, 24 March 1784, when asked what type of workman to get for Mount Vernon]

I beg you be persuaded that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution. [letter to United Baptists Churches of Virginia, 10 May 1789]

Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. [letter to Sir Edward Newenham, 22 June 1792]

As the contempt of the religion of a country by ridiculing any of its ceremonies, or affronting its ministers or votaries, has ever been deeply resented, you are to be particularly careful to restrain every officer from such imprudence and folly, and to punish every instance of it. On the other hand, as far as lies in your power, you are to protect and support the free exercise of religion of the country, and the undisturbed enjoyment of the rights of conscience in religious matters, with your utmost influence and authority. [letter to Benedict Arnold, 14 September 1775]

Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society. [letter to Edward Newenham, 20 October 1792]

 It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support. [letter to Touro Synagogue, 1790]

May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants—while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid. [letter to Touro Synagogue, 1790]

John Adams, Second President of the United States of America, First Vice-President of The United States of America, Drafted and Signed the Declaration of Independence:

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. [Treaty of Tripoli, 4 November 1796]

The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature: and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history… [T]he detail of the formation of the American governments… may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had any interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the inspiration of heaven… it will for ever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses… Thirteen governments thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favour of the rights of mankind. [A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States of America, 1787]

Christianity, you will say, was a fresh revelation. I will not deny this. As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed? How has it happened that all the fine arts, architecture, painting, sculpture, statuary, music, poetry, and oratory, have been prostituted, from the creation of the world, to the sordid and detestable purposes of superstition and fraud? [letter to F.A. Vanderkamp, 27 December 1816]

Let the human mind loose. It must be loose. It will be loose. Superstition and dogmatism cannot confine it. [letter to John Quincy Adams, 13 November 1816]

Admire and adore the Author of the telescopic universe, love and esteem the work, do all in your power to lessen ill, and increase good, but never assume to comprehend. [Written in the margin of one his books.]

The Europeans are all deeply tainted with prejudices, both ecclesiastical and temporal, which they can never get rid of. They are all infected with episcopal and presbyterian creeds, and confessions of faith. They all believe that great Principle which has produced this boundless universe, Newton’s universe and Herschell’s universe, came down to this little ball, to be spit upon by Jews. And until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world. [letter to Thomas Jefferson, 22 January 1825]

Thomas Jefferson, Third President of the United States of America, First United States Secretary of State, Principle Author of the Declaration of Independence, Signed the Declaration of Independence:

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law. [letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, 10 February 1814]

I concur with you strictly in your opinion of the comparative merits of atheism and demonism, and really see nothing but the latter in the being worshipped by many who think themselves Christians. [letter to Richard Price, 8 January 1789]

Priests…dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversions of the duperies on which they live. [letter to Correa de Serra, 11 April 1820]

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination. [Autobiography, 1821, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom]

The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills. [letter to John Adams, 24 January 1814]

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. [Notes on Virginia, 1782]

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes. [letter to Alexander von Humboldt, 6 December 1813]

Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. [Notes on Virginia, 1782]

They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion. [letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, 23 September 1800]

I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did. [letter to John Adams, 11 April 1823]

In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. [letter to Horatio G. Spafford, 17 March 1814]

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State. [letter to Danbury Baptist Association, 1 January 1802]

James Madison Jr., Fourth President of the United States of America, Third United States Secretary of State, Drafted the United States Constitution, Signed the United States Constitution, Author of the Bill of Rights, Author of the Federalist Papers:

That diabolical, hell-conceived principle of persecution rages among some; and to their eternal infamy, the clergy can furnish their quota of impas for such business… [letter to William Bradford, Jr., January 1774]

What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not. [A Memorial and Remonstrance, addressed to the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 1785]

Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and corruption, all of which facilitate the execution of mischievous projects. [letter to William Bradford, Jr., January 1774]

Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution. [A Memorial and Remonstrance, addressed to the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 1785]

…Freedom arises from the multiplicity of sects, which prevades America and which is the best and only security for religious liberty in any society. For where there is such a variety of sects, there cannot be a majority of any one sect to oppress and persecute the rest. [spoken at the Virginia convention on ratifying the Constitution, June 1778]

Whilst we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess and observe the Religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us. If this freedom be abused, it is an offense against God, not against man: To God, therefore, not to man, must an account of it be rendered. [A Memorial and Remonstrance, addressed to the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 1785]

Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprize,.. [letter to William Bradford, 1 April 1774]

It was the belief of all sects at one time that the establishment of Religion by law, was right & necessary; that the true religion ought to be established in exclusion of every other; and that the only question to be decided was which was the true religion. The example of Holland proved that a toleration of sects, dissenting from the established sect, was safe & even useful. The example of the Colonies, now States, which rejected religious establishments altogether, proved that all Sects might be safely & advantageously put on a footing of equal & entire freedom…. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson that Religion flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of Gov. [letter to Edward Livingston, 10 July 1822]

The brotherhood of our countrymen truly consists of all our glory and imperfections, so it is hard for me to recognize a man who supposedly has never made a mistake as my brother. I’ve run into too many good people who were concerned for their country and otherwise capable of being a great leader, but were terrified of how the media could destroy them for not being perfect. An individual that might find them to be a splendid choice for an elected leader may feel obligated to scream at them to reconsider, but it’s likely hopeless. We know full well the media circus we now exist in.

Do we wish for our country to be run by idyllic paladins of virtue who reflect not one of us? I would prefer the leader who has character through his or her experiences, be they right or wrong turns in life, and who has enriched and steeled their conviction and resolve through these trials. I prefer leaders that have seen the world in the same eyes that I do tackling daily frustrations and somehow keeping the ship afloat. Men and women who have grown their principles through experience are what we all should seek to elect to higher office.

They say good men don’t run for politics but that contradicts the squeaky clean image we’re forced to swallow about many of our present leaders. If good men don’t run for politics, then this would suggest that good men don’t normally have clean records. We would have a brighter future for our country if we made room for those that are great leaders regardless of small failings, especially in the past. Without question the Davy Crocketts and Theodore Roosevelts from our nation’s history would not survive long in today’s political blood bath of strict intolerance. This complete lack of public forgiveness is a loss for our nation because the greatest leaders are tested by fire. A leader that I can follow has scar tissue on his heart and sees power as a burden like an ox knows the plow as opposed to someone who sees a position of power as a feather to put in his hat. It was Teddy Roosevelt that demanded that other nationalities judge our people by our President and I personally do not believe he meant that as a constant negative condemnation.

Our country is merely an idea that rests in the minds of all Americans and we elect leaders to uphold our founding principles in what ever may pass. Stephen Decatur once stated the following, “Our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right; but right or wrong, our country!” I relate that quote in how I feel about leaders. I’m proud of our nation’s many heroes who were as diverse as the clouds that pass over us. I do not expect them to always pick the right path, but to always be looking for it for all of us. I expect them to share the same faith in my country as I do.

We can imagine the media-soaked cynic in his darkened great hall, with weeds and rubble at the feet of his last and greatest hero. Perhaps that cynic may under great pain grant his hero forgiveness for a flawed past once he can forgive himself for the same.

Our closest example of such a change is Deadwood. Deadwood became an amusement park regardless of the good intentions of many of the original supporters of the introduction of limited gambling there in 1980. Deadwood has become a town that accommodates tourists at the expense of a quality of life for residents. Did gambling save Deadwood from extinction? No, it only replaced the town with something else entirely.

Ft. Pierre will not allow just a few city lots to offer casino games. That would be unfair to reward a few people with skyrocketed property value and opportunity. Using Deadwood as a historical perspective would make me assume nearly all small business will flee to cheaper property outside Ft. Pierre city limits or into Pierre. You cannot have a high school next to a gambling district, so that is the end of the school district as we know it in Stanley County. Coincidentally this would serve well those who would have the Pierre and Ft. Pierre school districts consolidated. When a town allows casinos, the fluctuation in property values will make some property, especially rental properties, seem under utilized and cause homeowners much need to worry. Businesses will have a smaller job pool to pick from as a result of highly competitive wages offered by the new casinos. Locals will be squeezed out as non-residents with big money invest to remodel Ft. Pierre to solely accommodate gambling. The focus of local politics will be dramatically changed with the introduction of gambling. Historical preservation will take place, just as it has in Deadwood; however, it is not for the residents of Ft. Pierre. The landmarks of Ft. Pierre will be restored, exploited, and profited by someone a Ft. Pierre resident potentially has never met. As a rule, antiques should not hold more value than people.

All these statements I have made I stand behind, but none of what has happened in this scenario is un-American. In fact, the people of Ft. Pierre would have exercised their freedom to evolve how they wished. This is not an article against gambling. Gambling is part of the human condition that holds court in all sectors of society, and it remains a constant facet in our lives. Gambling is a cheap thrill that can be innocently enjoyed like a soda on a sunny day, although easily overdone and abused through the instant excitement it potentially offers. However, I offer this dissent on gambling in Ft. Pierre because I see it as the disintegration of a robust community.

The religious community in South Dakota would be quick to point out the immorality that springs from gambling. I am not going to offer statistics that one could easily find themselves so I am simply going to state that crime has risen disproportional in Deadwood since gambling was instituted there, and it is safe to say the same will occur in Ft. Pierre. I rely on common sense to say gambling increases crime, and therefore, diminishes its attractiveness to families looking for residence.

The question that one could ask him or herself is not if Ft. Pierre should allow casinos, it’s why Pierre has not discussed the same question? Pierre would keep the possible mess on the other side of the river while they remain on the proverbial moral high ground. By allowing traditional casino gaming in Ft. Pierre it will then remain captive to the gaming industry from then on as a result of the lucrative private and public revenues generated from it. Deadwood will never be separated from the gaming industry.

All the movements toward additional venues for gambling in South Dakota contribute to our downward slide towards dependence on gambling tax revenues and it will not serve a long term benefit or productive pursuit for our people that our state should be espousing. Each individuals judgement will always be varied as a result of their perception, however any communities goal to move towards additional vice certainly demands great scrutiny.

Until we live in a country that allows regulated and easily accessible gambling across the country, the destructive vacuum of allowing gaming into select communities only can be remarkable. Deadwood exemplifies what that vacuum can do, as evidenced by the original intention to limit the amount of gaming licenses that were issued. This disappeared quickly after adoption of gaming. Ft. Pierre is a proud frontier town that needs no such offense to their pioneer ancestors, for they built a town for a safe and prosperous future for their children.