ONE NATION UNDER GOD!

ONE NATION UNDER GOD!
This is for those modern day "liberals"/atheists/left wing nuts, etc etc who want us all to to believe that this nation was not "founded under God" by Christians. Revisionists is another word that fits those who would deny and denigrate our history.

This Nation was founded under God/Divine Creator by men who were primarily Christians.
They were true liberals in that they upset some very conservative apple carts. I look upon the modern day Conservatives as the champions and protectors of what those brave men brought about at the risk of their lives, liberty and property. Had they lost we might very well still be speaking The King's English. But they could not lose because they were a unique group of individuals and intellectuals meeting at the right time in history and the right place on Planet Earth. Never before, and never since, that time have those very propitious circumstances taken place. Just as Planet Earth was not created by pure dumb chance, neither was this great nation of ours. God, the Divine Creator of us all, played the dominant role.

Todays 'liberals', with their roots in the 1930's world events and history, would destroy that which was wrought on the shores of this nation. Bought and paid for by the blood, sweat, tears, toil and deaths of good honest American patriots.

The Declaration of Independence

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
________________________________________
The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:
Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton
Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton
Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean
Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton




Religious Affiliation of the
Founding Fathers
of the United States of America

Related Pages:
- Religious Affiliation of First U.S. Congress
- Religious Affiliation of the Modern U.S. Congress
- Religious Affiliation of U.S. Presidents
- Religious Affiliation of the U.S. Supreme Court

On this Page:
- signers of the Declaration of Independence
- signers of the Articles of Confederation
- Constitutional Convention delegates including signers of the U.S. Constitution
Ennumerating the Founding Fathers
The three major foundational documents of the United States of America are the Declaration of Independence (July 1776), the Articles of Confederation (drafted 1777, ratified 1781) and the Constitution of the United States of America (1789). There are a total of 143 signatures on these documents, representing 118 different signers. (Some individuals signed more than one document.)
There were 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence. There were 48 signers of the Articles of Confederation. All 55 delegates who participated in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 are regarded as Founding Fathers, in fact, they are often regarded as the Founding Fathers because it is this group that actually debated, drafted and signed the U.S. Constitution, which is the basis for the country's political and legal system. Only 39 delegates actually signed the document, however, meaning there were 16 non-signing delegates - individuals who were Constitutional Convention delegates but were not signers of the Constitution.
There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 "slots" or "positions" in these groups which one can classify as "Founding Fathers" of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of "Founding Fathers." These are the people who did one or more of the following:

- signed the Declaration of Independence
- signed the Articles of Confederation
- attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
- signed the Constitution of the United States of America
- served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
- served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress
The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an "American Founding Father." But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more.
Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers # of
Founding
Fathers % of
Founding
Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204
NOTES: The table above counts people and not "roles," meaning that individuals have not been counted multiple times if they appear on more than one of the lists above. Roger Sherman, for example, signed all three foundational documents and he was a Representative in the First Federal Congress, but he has been counted only once.

In the table above, some people have been counted more than once because they changed religious affiliation from one denomination to another. Thus, the individual amounts added together total more than 100%. This method is used because it results in accurate numbers for each individual religious affiliation. For example, a total of 7 Quakers are shown in the table above. There were indeed 7 Quakers who were in this group. (However, not all of these were life-long Quakers.) For the most part, very few Founding Fathers switched denomination during their lifetime (less than 8%), so double-counting has occurred only rarely in this table. Quakers, in fact, are more likely to have switched denominations than members of any other religious denomination. Along with taking up arms and supporting military action against the British, a large proportion of Quaker Founding Father officially renounced or were expelled from the ardently pacifistic denomination they had been raised in and joined another denomination (usually Episcopalianism).

Also, note that the proportions shown (percentage of each religious affiliation out of the total group of Founding Fathers) is the proportion out of Founders whose religious affiliation is known. The religious affiliation of a significant number of signers of the Articles of Confederation is not known, but if that information was available, it is expected that such information would not change the overall proportions signifcantly.
________________________________________


Religious Affiliation of the Signers of the
Declaration of Independence
Religious Affiliation # of
signers % of
signers
Episcopalian/Anglican 32 57.1%
Congregationalist 13 23.2%
Presbyterian 12 21.4%
Quaker 2 3.6%
Unitarian or Universalist 2 3.6%
Catholic 1 1.8%
TOTAL 56 100%

Name of Signer State Religious Affiliation
Charles Carroll Maryland Catholic

Samuel Huntington Connecticut Congregationalist

Roger Sherman Connecticut Congregationalist

William Williams Connecticut Congregationalist

Oliver Wolcott Connecticut Congregationalist

Lyman Hall Georgia Congregationalist

Samuel Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist

John Hancock Massachusetts Congregationalist

Josiah Bartlett New Hampshire Congregationalist

William Whipple New Hampshire Congregationalist

William Ellery Rhode Island Congregationalist

John Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist; Unitarian

Robert Treat Paine Massachusetts Congregationalist; Unitarian

George Walton Georgia Episcopalian

John Penn North Carolina Episcopalian

George Ross Pennsylvania Episcopalian

Thomas Heyward Jr. South Carolina Episcopalian

Thomas Lynch Jr. South Carolina Episcopalian

Arthur Middleton South Carolina Episcopalian

Edward Rutledge South Carolina Episcopalian

Francis Lightfoot Lee Virginia Episcopalian

Richard Henry Lee Virginia Episcopalian

George Read Delaware Episcopalian

Caesar Rodney Delaware Episcopalian

Samuel Chase Maryland Episcopalian

William Paca Maryland Episcopalian

Thomas Stone Maryland Episcopalian

Elbridge Gerry Massachusetts Episcopalian

Francis Hopkinson New Jersey Episcopalian

Francis Lewis New York Episcopalian

Lewis Morris New York Episcopalian

William Hooper North Carolina Episcopalian

Robert Morris Pennsylvania Episcopalian

John Morton Pennsylvania Episcopalian

Stephen Hopkins Rhode Island Episcopalian

Carter Braxton Virginia Episcopalian

Benjamin Harrison Virginia Episcopalian

Thomas Nelson Jr. Virginia Episcopalian

George Wythe Virginia Episcopalian

Thomas Jefferson Virginia Episcopalian (Deist)

Benjamin Franklin Pennsylvania Episcopalian (Deist)

Button Gwinnett Georgia Episcopalian; Congregationalist

James Wilson Pennsylvania Episcopalian; Presbyterian

Joseph Hewes North Carolina Quaker, Episcopalian

George Clymer Pennsylvania Quaker, Episcopalian

Thomas McKean Delaware Presbyterian

Matthew Thornton New Hampshire Presbyterian

Abraham Clark New Jersey Presbyterian

John Hart New Jersey Presbyterian

Richard Stockton New Jersey Presbyterian

John Witherspoon New Jersey Presbyterian

William Floyd New York Presbyterian

Philip Livingston New York Presbyterian

James Smith Pennsylvania Presbyterian

George Taylor Pennsylvania Presbyterian

Benjamin Rush Pennsylvania Presbyterian


The signers of the Declaration of Independence were a profoundly intelligent, religious and ethically-minded group. Four of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were current or former full-time preachers, and many more were the sons of clergymen. Other professions held by signers include lawyers, merchants, doctors and educators. These individuals, too, were for the most part active churchgoers and many contributed significantly to their churches both with contributions as well as their service as lay leaders. The signers were members of religious denominations at a rate that was significantly higher than average for the American Colonies during the late 1700s.
These signers have long inspired deep admiration among both secularists (who appreciate the non-denominational nature of the Declaration) and by traditional religionists (who appreciate the Declaration's recognition of God as the source of the rights enumerated by the document). Lossing's seminal 1848 collection of biographies of the signers of the Declaration of Independence echoed widely held sentiments held then and now that there was divine intent or inspiration behind the Declaration of Independence. Lossing matter-of-factly identified the signers as "instruments of Providence" who have "gone to receive their reward in the Spirit Land."
From: B. J. Lossing, Signers of the Declaration of Independence, George F. Cooledge & Brother: New York (1848) [reprinted in Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, WallBuilder Press: Aledo, Texas (1995)], pages 7-12:
From no point of view can the Declaration of American Independence, the causes which led to its adoption, and the events which marked its maintenance, be observed without exciting sentiments of profound veneration for the men who were the prominent actors in that remarkable scene in the drama of the world's history...
The signing of that instrument was a solemn act, and required great firmness and patriotism in those who committed it... neither firmness nor patriotism was wanting in that august body...
Such were the men unto whose keeping, as instruments of Providence, the destinies of America were for the time intrusted; and it has been well remarked, that men, other than such as these,--an ignorant, untaught mass, like those who have formed the physical elements of other revolutionary movements, without sufficient intellect to guide and control them--could not have conceived, planned, and carried into execution, such a mighty movement, one so fraught with tangible marks of political wisdom, as the American Revolution...
Their bodies now have all returned to their kindred dust in the grave, and their souls have gone to receive their reward in the Spirit Land.
From: Robert G. Ferris (editor), Signers of the Declaration: Historic Places Commemorating the Signing of the Declaration of Independence, published by the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service: Washington, D.C. (revised edition 1975), pages 27-28:
Liberally endowed as a whole with courage and sense of purpose, the signers [of the Declaration of Independence] consisted of a distinguished group of individuals. Although heterogeneous in background, education, experience, and accommplishments, at the time of the signing they were practically all men of means and represented an elite cross section of 18th-century American leadership. Everyone one of them of them had achieved prominence in his colony, but only a few enjoyed a national reputation.
The signers were those individuals who happened to be Delegates to Congress at the time... The signers possessed many basic similarities. Most were American-born and of Anglo-Saxon origin. The eight foreign-born... were all natives of the British Isles. Except for Charles Carroll, a Roman Catholic, and a few Deists, every one subscribed to Protestantism. For the most part basically political nonextremists, many at first had hesitated at separation let alone rebellion.
________________________________________


Religious Affiliation of the Signers of the
Articles of Confederation
Religious Affiliation # of
signers % of
signers
Episcopalian/Anglican 14 29%
Congregationalist 9 19%
Presbyterian 4 8%
Catholic 1 2%
Quaker 1 2%
Huguenot 1 2%
Lutheran 1 2%
Protestant, denomination unknown 18 38%
TOTAL 48 100%

Name of Signer State Religious Affiliation
Daniel Carroll Maryland Catholic

Andrew Adams Connecticut Congregationalist

Richard Hutson South Carolina Congregationalist

Samuel Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist

Josiah Bartlett New Hampshire Congregationalist

William Ellery Rhode Island Congregationalist

John Hancock Massachusetts Congregationalist

Samuel Huntington Connecticut Congregationalist

Roger Sherman Connecticut Congregationalist

Oliver Wolcott Connecticut Congregationalist

Thomas Heyward Jr. South Carolina Episcopalian

John Penn North Carolina Episcopalian

Francis Lightfoot Lee Virginia Episcopalian

Richard Henry Lee Virginia Episcopalian

Francis Lewis New York Episcopalian

Elbridge Gerry Massachusetts Episcopalian

John Banister Virginia Episcopalian

James Duane New York Episcopalian

Edward Langworthy Georgia Episcopalian

Gouverneur Morris New York Episcopalian

Nicholas Van Dyke Delaware Episcopalian

Robert Morris Pennsylvania Episcopalian

Cornelius Harnett North Carolina Episcopalian (Deist)

John Dickinson Delaware Quaker; Episcopalian

Henry Laurens South Carolina Huguenot

John Hanson Maryland Lutheran

Thomas McKean Delaware Presbyterian

John Witherspoon New Jersey Presbyterian

John Walton Georgia Presbyterian

Nathaniel Scudder New Jersey Presbyterian

William Clingan Pennsylvania Protestant, denomination unknown

Joseph Reed Pennsylvania Protestant, denomination unknown

Daniel Roberdeau Pennsylvania Protestant, denomination unknown

Jonathan Bayard Smith Pennsylvania Protestant, denomination unknown

Francis Dana Massachusetts Protestant, denomination unknown

Samuel Holten Massachusetts Protestant, denomination unknown

James Lovell Massachusetts Protestant, denomination unknown

Henry Marchant Rhode Island Protestant, denomination unknown

John Collins Rhode Island Protestant, denomination unknown

Thomas Adams Virginia Protestant, denomination unknown

John Harvie Virginia Protestant, denomination unknown

John Mathews South Carolina Protestant, denomination unknown

William Henry Drayton South Carolina Protestant, denomination unknown

William Duer New York Protestant, denomination unknown

Titus Hosmer Connecticut Protestant, denomination unknown

Edward Telfair Georgia Protestant, denomination unknown

John Wentworth Jr. New Hampshire Protestant, denomination unknown

John Williams North Carolina Protestant, denomination unknown


________________________________________


Religious Affiliation of the Delegates to the
Constitutional Convention of 1787, including the
Signers of the Constitution of the United States of America
There were 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 at which the U.S. Constitution was drafted and signed. All participated in the proceedings which resulted in the Constitution, but only 39 of these delegates were actually signers of the document.
From: Robert G. Ferris (editor), Signers of the Constitution: Historic Places Commemorating the Signing of the Constitution, published by the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service: Washington, D.C. (revised edition 1976), page 138:
Most of the [signers of the Constitution] married and fathered children. Sherman sired the largest family, numbering 15 by two wives... Three (Baldwin, Gilman, and Jenifer) were lifetime bachelors. In terms of religious affiliation, the men mirrored the overwhelmingly Protestant character of American religious life at the time and were members of various denominations. Only two, Carroll and Fitzsimons, were Roman Catholics.
Religious Affiliation # of
delegates % of
delegates
Episcopalian/Anglican 31 56.4%
Presbyterian 16 29.1%
Congregationalist 8 14.5%
Quaker 3 5.5%
Catholic 2 3.6%
Methodist 2 3.6%
Lutheran 2 3.6%
Dutch Reformed 2 3.6%
TOTAL 55 100%

Name of Signer State Religious Affiliation
Daniel Carroll Maryland Catholic

Thomas Fitzsimons Pennsylvania Catholic

Roger Sherman Connecticut Congregationalist

Nathaniel Gorham Massachusetts Congregationalist

John Langdon New Hampshire Congregationalist

Nicholas Gilman New Hampshire Congregationalist

Abraham Baldwin Georgia Congregationalist; Episcopalian

William Samuel Johnson Connecticut Episcopalian; Presbyterian

James Madison Jr. Virginia Episcopalian

George Read Delaware Episcopalian

Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer Maryland Episcopalian

David Brearly New Jersey Episcopalian

Richard Dobbs Spaight, Sr. North Carolina Episcopalian

Robert Morris Pennsylvania Episcopalian

Gouverneur Morris Pennsylvania Episcopalian

John Rutledge South Carolina Episcopalian

Charles Cotesworth Pinckney South Carolina Episcopalian

Charles Pinckney South Carolina Episcopalian

Pierce Butler South Carolina Episcopalian

George Washington Virginia Episcopalian

Benjamin Franklin Pennsylvania Episcopalian (Deist)

William Blount North Carolina Episcopalian; Presbyterian

James Wilson Pennsylvania Episcopalian; Presbyterian

Rufus King Massachusetts Episcopalian; Congregationalist

Jacob Broom Delaware Lutheran

William Few Georgia Methodist

Richard Bassett Delaware Methodist

Gunning Bedford Jr. Delaware Presbyterian

James McHenry Maryland Presbyterian

William Livingston New Jersey Presbyterian

William Paterson New Jersey Presbyterian

Hugh Williamson North Carolina Presbyterian

Jared Ingersoll Pennsylvania Presbyterian

Alexander Hamilton New York Huguenot; Presbyterian; Episcopalian

Jonathan Dayton New Jersey Presbyterian; Episcopalian

John Blair Virginia Presbyterian; Episcopalian

John Dickinson Delaware Quaker; Episcopalian

George Clymer Pennsylvania Quaker; Episcopalian

Thomas Mifflin Pennsylvania Quaker; Lutheran


Name of Non-Signing Delegate State Religious Affiliation
Oliver Ellsworth Connecticut Congregationalist

Caleb Strong Massachusetts Congregationalist

John Lansing, Jr. New York Dutch Reformed

Robert Yates New York Dutch Reformed

William Houstoun Georgia Episcopalian

William Leigh Pierce Georgia Episcopalian

Luther Martin Maryland Episcopalian

John F. Mercer Maryland Episcopalian

Elbridge Gerry Massachusetts Episcopalian

George Mason Virginia Episcopalian

Edmund J. Randolph Virginia Episcopalian

George Wythe Virginia Episcopalian

James McClurg Virginia Presbyterian

William C. Houston New Jersey Presbyterian

William R. Davie North Carolina Presbyterian

Alexander Martin North Carolina Presbyterian


________________________________________
Multiple Roles
Of course, virtually all of the "Founding Fathers" had multiple roles in the formation of the country, in the broad sense that takes into account military leadership, financial sponsorship, various miscellaneous state and federal positions, etc. But there were many individuals who had multiple roles among categories of Founding Fathers enumerated on this page. That is, they signed more than one of the foundational documents (the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution) or they signed one (or more) of these documents and also served in the First Federal Congress. These individuals with "multiple roles" were: Abraham Baldwin; Benjamin Franklin; Charles Carroll; Daniel Carroll; Elbridge Gerry; Francis Lewis; Francis Lightfoot Lee; George Clymer; George Read; Gouverneur Morris; Hugh Williamson; James Wilson; John Dickinson; John Hancock; John Penn; John Witherspoon; Josiah Bartlett; Nicholas Gilman; Oliver Wolcott; Pierce Butler; Richard Bassett; Richard Henry Lee; Robert Morris; Roger Sherman; Rufus King; Samuel Adams; Samuel Huntington; Thomas Fitzsimons; Thomas Heyward Jr.; Thomas McKean; William Ellery; William Few; William Floyd; William Paterson; William Samuel Johnson; James Madison Jr.; John Langdon; Caleb Strong; Oliver Ellsworth; George Wythe.
________________________________________
Please submit suggestions, comments, corrections, etc. to webmaster@adherents.com.
Religion of Founding Fathers / religious affiliation of American Founding Fathers webpage created 4 November 2005. Last modified 7 December 2005.

2ND AMENDMENT EROSION

Schwarzenegger is married to a member of the Kennedy clan, right? Has their liberal gun control philosophy rubbed off on the Terminator Man??? His wife Maria toed the family line in endorsing the family's choice for prez. a damned liberal. And Arnold endorsed a liberal Senator masquerading as a Conservative Republican. They all know that the 2nd amendment will never be overturned completely so they just chip away at it in the hope that sooner or later it will mean absolutely nothing. It will remain just a figment of a freedom that once was.

Remember 2 things: guns don't kill people, people kill people.

when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

People don't need a gun to kill, guns just make it more convenient and less personal. outlaw guns and you might as well outlaw cars, trucks aircraft knives razor blades fertilizer, etc, etc, etc. When it comes right down to it why not outlaw hands, feet, heads, etc. All of those deadly body parts can be used to kill someone. Just ask the Terminator, or Rambo, or...........



Schwarzenegger Sides With Gun-Control Advocates
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
October 15, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the Crime Gun Identification Act over the weekend, and that means gun sellers by 2010 - if there are any left in the state by that time -- will have to use "microstamping" technology on every semiautomatic pistol they sell.

The new law, AB 1471, requires information about a gun's make, model and identification number to be laser engraved onto the gun's firing pin. Theoretically, the information would transfer itself onto the bullet cartridge when the pistol is fired, allowing police to match bullet casings found at crime scenes with the gun that fired the bullet.

Gun control groups say the new law will help police solve crimes.

"We applaud Gov. Schwarzenegger for taking a bold step to solve gun murders in California," said Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke. "This ground-breaking law gives police officers a powerful tool to apprehend armed criminals and gang members before they strike again," he added.

According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Schwarzenegger "has set a new national standard for the rest of the country to follow."

But critics say the bill is back-door gun control. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association of the firearms industry, accused Gov. Schwarzenegger of betraying law-abiding gun owners, retailers and hunters by signing the bill.

First of all the "microstamping" technology is "flawed," as indicated by multiple studies, the NSSF said in a news release.

Criminals will be able to remove the laser engraving in moments, using common household tools, the group said. And it would be easy for criminals to scatter microstamped cartridges from other guns at crime scenes to confuse police, critics say.

Some say the new law will dry up gun sales in California - and that may be the point:

"By signing the microstamping legislation, Governor Schwarzenegger chose to disregard warnings that major firearms manufacturers would be forced to abandon the California market altogether rather than bear the astronomical costs associated with reconfiguring the manufacturing and assembly processes necessary for microstamping," NSSF said.

"Governor Schwarzenegger has now effectively banned more firearms than Senators Kennedy, Feinstein and Schumer combined," said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.

"The governor's decision to mandate this unreliable technology is clearly one of family politics, not sound public policy," said Keane, referring to Senator Ted Kennedy, the uncle of the governor's wife, who has announced plans to introduce a federal microstamping bill.

NSSF also noted that according to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives, firearms used in crimes are mostly old guns -- beyond the reach of microstamping legislation.

Save the condors

In another blow to Second Amendment supporters, Gov. Schwarzenegger also signed a bill banning lead ammunition in certain hunting areas of the state.

Assembly Bill 821, backed by "anti-hunting extremists," is intended to save the California Condor from lead poisoning -- despite the fact that there is no conclusive scientific evidence that the birds are getting sick from ingesting ammunition fragments, NSSF said.

The group said Schwarzenegger was advised on the issue by Marty Wilson -- "his political adviser who entered a business relationship this year with the Audubon Society -- an anti-hunting organization fighting to ban lead ammunition."

The decision to ban lead ammunition in Condor habitat will have far-reaching implications, Keane noted.

"A study by the Responsive Management Company found that if a ban on lead ammunition were to become law, 24 percent of hunters would hunt outside the state, hunt less or stop hunting altogether. This, in turn, affects the retailers of hunting equipment, their employees and the small mom-and-pop businesses that run lodges and restaurants that hunters patronize."

NSSF said a ban on lead ammunition could cost 2,230 jobs, $15 million in state and federal income tax, $3.9 million per year in hunting license costs, $131 million a year in retail sales and $624,000 in federal excise tax money normally returned to California."

Keane called the governor's decision to sign the two gun-related bills "stunningly bad public policy decisions."

"To ban traditional ammunition without evidence [that it is harming condors] and to mandate a flawed [microstamping] technology that criminals will laugh at could very well see every major firearms manufacturer abandon the California market," he said.

"Today is a sad day for sportsmen, gun-owners, small business owners, firearms enthusiasts and indeed wildlife in the Golden State," concluded Keane.

See Earlier Stories:
Gun Control Bill Heads to California Governor (Sept. 11, 2007)
Gun 'Microstamping' Bill Passes California Senate (Aug. 25, 2006)

CONTACT CONGRESS

ELECTIONS 2008

Alabama Alaska American Samoa Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

OBAMA WHO???????

Hillary is a brainless bitch who, as far as I know, has never had an original idea in her whole life and the thought of her in any national office scares the crap out of me.....but this Peter Panish wonder kid from Illinois scares me even more. He has shown no respect for the American flag (watch reruns of the debates--he stands with his hands at his sides). It has been said that IF he is elected Prez he might appoint John Edwards to be Attorney General. Edwards is the man who was asked if he thought handgun ownership was a right or a privilege. His response,'it is a privilege not a right' This from a man who took an oath to uphold the constitution and the rights there-in. He must have read a version of that precious document that was thought up in some liberal minded back room some where on the road to hell.



Get IBD Editorials Via Email

Email To Friend | Print

Barack Guevara

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, February 12, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election 2008: How is it a front-runner for the highest office in the land can reject an American flag on his lapel but permit the display of a huge Cuban flag at one of his offices, emblazoned with a mass murderer's mug?

Related Topics: Election 2008 | Latin America & Caribbean

Improbable as it sounds, it's true. Barack Obama, displaying the same "anything goes" standard of patriotism he showed when he ostentatiously refused to wear a U.S. flag in his lapel, now shows he's got a whole different idea about patriotism.

One of Obama's volunteer offices in Houston was caught operating under a huge flag of communist Cuba with Che Guevara's face printed on it, according to images shown on Fox News. Flak from bloggers ensued — followed, of course, by spin control.

But rather than repudiate the image, Obama would only call it "inappropriate," apparently without insisting it be taken down. That contrasts with his dismissal of his Senate colleagues who wear lapel flags as "hypocrites." Some hypocrites.

The display of the Castroite flag with Che's picture on it sends a particularly disturbing message about his campaign. Apparently, Obama tends to attract the kind of people who think of mass murderers like Che and Fidel as romantic revolutionaries. Those same people see Obama as a man with a messianic message. These are the voters he'll be indebted to should he win higher office.

Worse yet, it signals that a U.S. commander in chief tolerates supporters with loyalties to nations other than the U.S., including those loyal to enemy states that spy on and seek to harm the U.S.

It coincides uncomfortably with Obama's call for no-strings-attached diplomatic relations with communist Cuba. He's even offered to meet with the dictators of Cuba, sanctimoniously implying that other administrations had no good reason for not doing so.

Obama's naive idealism is based on a false understanding of history. Cuba is a nation that aimed Soviet missiles at us in 1962 and is likely to do the same if and when Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez gets advanced weapons from Russia or Iran. That's not all:

• Also in 1962, Cuba attempted to launch the first 9/11-style attack on New York's subways and department stores — with the mastermind behind that none other than Che Guevara himself.

• In 1982 it tried to get the USSR to launch nukes at the U.S.

• In 1996, Cuba shot down two U.S. planes, killing six Americans whose only "crime" was trying to rescue Cuban refugees at sea. Had a political candidate in Latin America pasted up a picture of Che at election time, there'd be no doubt where he stood — ones who did just that are now running countries with names like Bolivia and Venezuela. Is that what Obama really stands for?