One Nation, Under God

Which is the God of America?  Is it just acknowledging that there is a god in general?

The U.S. Constitution acknowledges that the rights it recognizes are those given to mankind by God, a higher power and thus immutable by mankind.

I think most people would say that the god in question is the christian god.  However, it is not spelled out thus.  No, it is left to subtlety.  For example, most assume that by referring to capital "G" God, automatically refers to the christian god.

Technically speaking though, the christian god has a name.  YHWH, Yahweh, also known as Jehova.  some sects admonish using the name directly, but that is the name.  Our founding documents do not recognize any of those appellations.

It is not likely they were referring to the islamic god, which most likely would have been referred to as "Allah" though it is claimed that the islamic god has 99 names.

One could just about bet every penny that it was not the name of a native american name for god. 

Personally, I am of the mind to say that the writers of said historical documents were thinking that there is only one god and that by any other name, is the same.  thus, the capitalized "G" God refers to a singular deity which is called by many names in many languages and religions.

For me, that resolves the concern of "what God" is America's god.  It is the one and only god that goes by many other names but is one and the same.  (them still thinking to themselves this is the christian god most likely).

What of those at the time and now, who profess to acknowledge no deity at all?  If there is no deity to confer these rights upon mankind, then where do the rights come from if not the Constitution?

If the rights come from the document, then surely they come from the assembled men who created/signed the document.  If men can confer these rights upon other men, then men can take them away.

In the context of the rights that we observe as applying to all men, the is notion of men conferring and men taking away bothers me a lot, a whole lot.

This sets the stage for one or a few people to step up and try to force or otherwise convince the people that they are the "special" one(s) to give, change or take away the peoples rights.

They see people as the highest authority and themselves in particular as the ones who should wield that authority over other people.  That's not a good thing.   I don't trust people at all.  The best intentioned would be "leaders" have brought societies to their knees because of their failed and imperfect wielding of absolute power.

That's what it really comes down to in my thinking.  Do we trust humans with absolute power?  The writers of the U.S. Constitution did not.  We must divide power over the people among many and separate them so that collusion is unlikely, if not impossible.

By accepting that the rights we recognize are from "on high" beyond us and that we are held to those as a nation of people having to work together, absolute power is kept away from the one or few and the people will lead themselves.

Just my own, scattered, meandering thoughts on the subject.  Feel free to leave comments in a respectful, polite manner to discuss it more.