David Barton Pt. 2

  • Aired:  05/04/11
  •  | Views: 151,347

David Barton clarifies that he only made policy recommendations based on the Bible to groups of ministers. (4:26)

SAY ABOUT THAT.

BUT LET'S GET TO YOU BECAUSE I

DO... YOU ARE AN IMPORTANT

FIGURE.

YOU GO IN AND YOU ARGUE IN FRONT

OF THE SUPREME COURT.

YOU GO IN AND YOU WORK WITH OUR

CONGRESS.

YOU WORK WITH CONGRESS PEOPLE.

YOU GO IN AND YOU WRITE

CURRICULUM, AND I CAN'T HELP BUT

THINK THAT, AND IN YOUR

WRITINGS, YOU TALK ABOUT

RECLAIMING OUR FORGOTTEN

HISTORY.

>> RIGHT.

>> Jon: WHEN IT SEEMS TO ME

SOMEONE WHO PROBABLY HAS A VERY

DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ON THIS

NATION'S HISTORY THAT YOU ARE

REWRITING MORE THAN RECLAIMING.

>> LET ME GIVE A SHOT AT THAT.

ONE THING I'M REALLY PROUD ABOUT

THAT WE GOT DONE IN TEXAS IS WE

TOOK THE NUMBER OF MINORITIES

WHO ARE COVERED IN THE STANDARDS

FROM 9% TO 25%.

THE WAY I DID IT IS SAID WE'RE

NOT COVERING ANY OF THE JEWISH

FOUNDING FATHERS OR THE BLACK

FOUNDING FATHERS, THE WOMEN OF

THE REVOLUTION.

WE'RE ALSO NOT COVERING

HISPANICS IN THE REVOLUTION.

THAT'S FORGOTTEN HISTORY.

I BET YOU MOST JEWISH PEOPLE

CAN'T NAME THE JEWISH FOUNDING

FATHERS.

>> Jon: I CAN.

SANDY KOUFAX.

>> EXACTLY.

[LAUGHTER]

YOU'RE RIGHT.

SANDY KOUFAX.

THAT'S ALL I GOT.

>> EXACTLY.

>> Jon: SO I AM INCORRECT IN

SAYING THAT YOU... I'VE SEEN

TAPES OF YOU SPEAKING WHERE YOU

MAKE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

BASED ON THE BIBLE, THINGS LIKE

I WOULD LIKE THE SEE THE CAPITAL

GAINS TAX AND THE ESTATE TAX

GONE BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAYS SO.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

BUT THOSE ARE ALSO SPEECHES

GIVEN TO GROUPS OF MINISTERS,

AND I'M SPEAKING TO MINISTERS.

THAT'S NOT A TEXTBOOK.

THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT

SETTING.

FOR EXAMPLE...

>> Jon: YOU'RE SAYING THERE IS

A WALL OF SEPARATION?

>> THERE IS.

AND THAT IS... YOU GOT TO

UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT CAME FROM,

TOO.

>> Jon: A WALL OF SEPARATION

WITHIN YOU OF CHURCH AND STATE?

>> NO, NO, ANY MORE THAN THE

FOUNDERS WANTED IT.

THEY WANTED SEPARATION OF THE

INSTITUTIONS, NEVER SEPARATION

OF THE INFLUENCE.

NEVER AT ANY POINT DID THEY

SAY...

>> THAT'S WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS

THE ROAD HERE BECAUSE THAT'S

KIND OF WHAT I'M GETTING TO.

AS MUCH AS YOU MIGHT PROTEST

THAT YOUR MAIN THRUST IS NOT TO

GET US BACK TO THIS IDEA THAT

THE FOUNDERS DIDN'T WANT

RELIGION SEPARATED FROM THE

STATE, THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU

PULL, GOING OFF THE

CONSTITUTION, IT DOESN'T MENTION

THE CREATOR.

IT DOESN'T MENTION JESUS.

IT DOESN'T MENTION PRAYING IN

ANY WAY.

SO WOULDN'T THEY BE EXPLICIT IN

THE MENTION OF RELIGION IF THEY

HAD WANTED IT SO BECAUSE THEY

WERE NOT COY PEOPLE FOR THE MOST

PART.

>> THEY WERE NOT COY.

THEY WERE VERY BLUNT.

WHEN YOU READ THE FEDERALIST

PAPERS, THEY SAID RELIGION

BELONGS TO THE STATE.

YOU READ THE STATE

CONSTITUTIONS, THEY'RE EXTREMELY

GRAPHIC ON RELIGION, BUT THERE

ARE SEVEN REFERENCES IN THE

CONSTITUTION TO RELIGION,

WHETHER IT BE ARTICLE 7.

AND BY THE WAY, THE DECLARATION

IS INCORPORATED INTO THE

CONSTITUTION, SO THERE'S FOUR

REFERENCES TO GODS IN ARTICLE 7.

>> Jon: REFERENCES TO GOD ARE

VERY DIFFERENT THAN EXPLICIT...

THEY WERE SO EXPLICIT THAT IF

YOU WANT TO HOLD THIS OFFICE,

YOU HAVE TO BE THIS AGE.

BLACK PEOPLE COUNTED FOR

THREE-FIFTHS.

THEY USED FRACTIONS.

>> THAT'S ONLY FEDERAL OFFICE.

THAT'S NOT RELIGION.

>> Jon: BUT THEY DIDN'T EVEN

SAY... THERE IS AN OATH OF

OFFICE FOR THE PRESIDENT IS

TRANSCRIBED WORD FOR WORD IN THE

CONSTITUTION.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> Jon: BUT THEY DON'T SAY YOU

HAVE TO DO IT ON A BIBLE, AND

THEY DON'T MENTION GOD.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

BUT THE STATE LAWS IN ALL 13

STATES REQUIRED EVERY OATH TO BE

DONE ON A BIBLE AND MENTION GOD.

>> Jon: BUT ONLY THREE OF THEM

WERE STILL THERE.

THAT LITMUS TEST WAS ONLY THERE

WHEN THE BILL OF RIGHTS CAME

INTO EFFECTED, ONLY THREE STATES

STILL HAD THOSE LAWS AND THE

FOUNDERS HAD BEEN TRYING THE

PHASE THAT OUT.

>> LET'S TAKE THE RELIGION SIDE.

THE FIRST AMENDMENT SAYS

"CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW

RESPECTING AND ESTABLISHMENT OF

RELIGION."

ONE CASE IN THE U.S. SUPREME

COURT WAS RABBILESSLY GUTTERMAN

WAS ASKED IF PROVIDENCE, RHODE

ISLAND TO, GIVE A PRAYER AT A

GRADUATION, AND HE WASN'T

ALLOWED TO.

NOW, TELL ME HOW CONGRESS SHALL

MAKE NO LAW MEANS THAT A RABBI

CAN'T SAY THE WORD "GOD" AT A

PRAYERMENT THAT'S A PRETTY

STRANGE PARSING OF THE

CONSTITUTION.

AND THAT'S WHAT I ARGUE IS

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW AS A

RESTRICTION ON CONGRESS.

IT'S NOT A RESTRICTION ON THE

RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO SAY THE WORD

"GOD" IN PUBLIC.

>> Jon: DO WE HAVE TO GO?

DAMMIT.

CAN WE GO AND THEN COME BACK?

DO YOU MIND STICKING AROUND?

>> HAPPY TO.

>> Jon: THIS IS THE KIND OF

CONVERSATION THAT I DON'T GET.

SO I'M GOING TO

Loading...