Michael Flynn, former national security advisor in the Trump administration, is back in the news this weekend with another startling declaration. While speaking at the “Rewaken America” rally, Flynn declared “If we are going to have one nation under God, which we must, we have to have one religion.” It is a deeply offensive and frankly unAmerican viewpoint. This country was founded (and has been defended) by people of many religions. Arlington cemetery has Christian, Jews, Muslim, and other faiths represented on the tombstones of those who gave the final measure of devotion to this country and its freedoms, including the freedom of religion. Thomas Jefferson famously declared “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God.”
The posted clip is short and does not include the full context of Flynn’s remarks, which seem to include a discussion from Matthew in the Bible:
Flynn was pummeled by prosecutors to the point of bankruptcy and subjected to serious errors in prosecutorial and judicial misconduct for years. Despite my criticism of his prosecution, however, some of us noticed a rise of unhinged and undemocratic rhetoric from the former national security adviser. This includes comments that appeared to call for a military coup.
The comment about religion is equally reckless and hopefully Flynn will publicly correct it.
In any correction or clarification, Flynn would be wise to incorporate the words of Thomas Jefferson (who famously translated his personal copy of the Koran):
“The subject of religion, a subject on which I have ever been most scrupulously reserved, I have considered it as a matter between every man and his maker, in which no other, and far less the public had a right to inter-meddle.”
Jews fought in our revolution including Colonel Mordecai Sheftall and possible Brigadier general Moses Hazen (though his religion is still a matter of debate). The role of the Jewish community was honored by George Washington in a letter on August 17, 1790 to the Sephardic congregation of Newport, Rhode Island:
May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in the land continue to merit and enjoy the goodwill of the other inhabitants. While everyone shall sit safely under his own vine and fig-tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.
In the War of 1812, Sapelo Island in Georgia was defended against a British attack by a group of 80 slaves, including their leader Bilali Muhammad, who were mostly Muslim.
Since that time, Jews, Muslim, and people of other faiths have fought with distinction in every war and helped transform this country. The same is true of many atheists, including the hero Pat Tillman. Indeed, some believe that Jefferson himself may have been an atheist.
I do not doubt that Flynn recognizes the contribution of such heroes of other faiths or atheists to our country. Moreover, in fairness, Flynn did not say that we should impose one religion. He clearly believes that Christianity is the one true faith and may have just been saying that everyone should embrace a faith in Jesus. However, that does not change the reckless and insulting meaning suggested by his words.
This country was based on the rejection of the “one religion” model. Indeed many of the colonists fled nations with such religious intolerance. Even with our guarantees of separation of church and state, such rhetoric can easily lead to sectarian divisions and even violence. That point was made by the great Edmund Burke who declared “Religious persecution may shield itself under the guise of a mistaken and overzealous piety.”
This is why we took a different path and embraced the concept of E pluribus unum — “Out of many, one.”
Please do not blame his “unhinged and democratic behavior“ on “serious errors in prosecutorial and judicial misconduct”.
He is just showing who he is and what he stands for.
That is nobody else’s fault and simply what he stands for. There is something wrong if we constantly have to be explaining and correcting what we have said.
Sita says:
Please do not blame his “unhinged and democratic behavior“ on “serious errors in prosecutorial and judicial misconduct”. He is just showing who he is and what he stands for.”
True. Turley is trying to spread the blame onto Democrats when the blame lies squarely on Flynn’s shoulders. I’m sure Lieutenant General Flynn would take full responsibility for what he said not unlike the fictional character Colonel Nathan Jessup.
Flynn’s comment is reminiscent of the joke about the two young fish who, unlike the older fish, do not realize they are swimming in water. When asked how they liked the water by the older fish, both young fish replied, “What’s water?”
Today, we not only do not now what the culture was in the 1700s, we have difficulty defining our own culture and its subcultures.
With regard to the comment, it is useful to note the context of his comment, especially the culture of the group he was addressing. Think back to Obama’s comment in 2008 about rural whites in Pennsylvania who were obsessed with guns and God, the sort of remark he made to a group of elite supporters in San Francisco (if I recall correctly), but one that played badly in the general population and surprised me, since I had not realized some of the nicest people I had ever met were gun-toting religious maniacs.
Silly me!
It is useful to realize that religion and religious in the 1700s meant something quite different from what they mean today, and it was the meanings of the 1700s, not those of today, that informed the thinking of Jefferson, Franklin, Hancock, Adams, & cpy.
Jefferson was a philosophe, a man who read widely and reflected the elite culture of his era, which was neither established church nor athiest; it as usually theist/deist or a diluted form of mainline Anglican in the colonies. Paine may have been an atheist, but, like many other American leaders, Jefferson was a deist. Hence his advice to a young man to shop around before choosing a religion because the choice was an important one.
But tolerance only went so far, and it did not extent to England, here Catholics had virtually no rights through the early 1800s and most Englishmen who wanted to get ahead belong to the established Church. The religious divides were not so much between Christians, Jews, and Muslims, as they were between Christians. Anglicans and other Protestants considered Catholics to be dangerous Papists who owed allegiance to the Pope, a foreign “despot,” a view that resurfaced during JFK’s run for office as late as 1960 and continued to divide Christians in the South through the 1990s (at least in the places I lived).
What Flynn meant is for him to explain, but Jerry Farwell is no longer a major force in politics, and Christian fundamentalists have lost most of their political clout outside some areas of the South. Perhaps Flynn was attempting to encourage unity, but until he clarifies his comment, I have no idea what he meant, and I have even less desire to play gotcha journalist and condemn him for a single remark.
Old Guy:
“Perhaps Flynn was attempting to encourage unity, but until he clarifies his comment, I have no idea what he meant, and I have even less desire to play gotcha journalist and condemn him for a single remark.”
I agree. We all speak in-artfully at times especially on the spur of the moment. Let’s hope he corrects himself. But I strongly doubt it since it will seen as caving-in n to his perceived enemies. Generally, it’s safer to stand by what one wrongly said as opposed to evidencing any weakness.
We’ll also have to wait and see whether any of Turley’s Fox colleagues will take a righteous stand as he did and condemn Flynn on their Monday shows. I would not bet on it.
“What Flynn meant is for him to explain . . .”
What Flynn stated is straight out of dominion theology (dominionism) — a growing, theocratic movement seeking the unConstitutional union of state and church.
Not a huge surprise to hear of him speaking this way publicly as a private citizen.
He revealed flashes of this type of rhetoric during public rallies for candidate Trump in 2016.
I also think he was mistreated by the judicial system, but I also have a better understanding of why he was first fired by the Obama Administration.
The bottom line is that he never had the temperament to be the first choice for such a lofty position in government.
I’m sure the Taliban agree with Flynn.
Christian Dominionist morons like him should be as far away from public office as possible — considering that the public, in a free country, do not live under theocratic rule. If he and the dimwits like him want to live under a sky tyrant (while hilariously whining about freedom), go right ahead: so long as you leave the rest of us alone.
Also, I’m still waiting on Paula White’s South American angels. Anyone seen them yet? Maybe they’re delayed in the supply-chain.
“so long as you leave the rest of us alone” Right there is the problem, they won’t. The American Taliban is alive and well right here in the USA.
It is of course possible that Flynn did not think his statement through before making it. Especially if the speech was prepared shortly before delivery without review. Turley is justified in correcting Flynn who obviously is mistaken in the philosophical foundation of our country, but I would assume that Flynn indeed spoke erroneously and meant to say something about the necessity of unity and simply took it too far without thinking. Of course, that means he has to correct his statement.
Cherry pick much? You are as dishonest as Thomas Jefferson, nay, self-serving. The reason this once great country has fallen is precisely because of the attitude of Non-serviam. You know all too well that Jefferson was the second largest slave owner in Albemarle County, making him a slave titan running a very profitable slave trade. He also, presciently, edited with a blade any and all sections of the Bible he felt were fluff. Hubris by no other name.
Ecce homo:
The Practice of Slavery at Monticello
Although Jefferson’s granddaughter Mary Jefferson Randolph maintained that most were “sold to persons in the state,” namely several faculty members at the University of Virginia, this was cold comfort to spouses, parents, and siblings divided forever by the slave trade. As Peter Fossett, who was sold away from his family at the 1827 sale, later remembered, “we were scattered all over the country, never to meet each other again until we meet in another world.”
monticello dot org
It profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world … but for America, Jonathan?
I was separated from my daughter for ten years by the state for no substantive reason; I hear no public condemnation for these these mass public policy driven parent child divorces made in modern times.
Vicarious empathy is only given to the politcally favored.
“. . . the attitude of Non-serviam.”
If you want to bow your head in submission to an imaginary being, that is your choice. When you compel others to also submit (which is the implication of Flynn’s quote), then you are no better than the fascist Left. And your “onward, Christian soldiers” will be responsible for creating a second Dark Ages.
Incidentally, the Bible does need editing. It’s wordy and poorly structured.
Is it my choice to wear a mask ?
It is my choice to get vaccinated ?
Is it my choice to open my business ?
Freedom for thee, but not for me is incredibly hypocritical.
Flynn is off the mark, but so was Jefferson. What my neighbor believes about God, what my neighbor worships, and the teaching my neighbor follows, can do me great injury. I would think, given the evidence of human history, that would be beyond obvious.
Absolutely – your neighbor could be an atheist or a theist and still decide to murder you.
Which is more likely ?
At many times in history religion has resulted in significant oppression and vile conduct.
The same can be said of socialism.
Conversely throughout history there are myriads of examples of religion driving selfless and good conduct.
Saying that about socialism is much harder.
In context, One Nation “Under God” was added to our Pledge it was not originally in the text.
As for our Country and it’s Founding Fathers, and based on actual history and their writing. I believe many of their hearts and minds were guided by their belief in a Sovereign God and that the authors of our Constitution, in context, intended, perhaps even expected, for this to be a country of believers and trusted that God would be a part of its success
We are not to have freedom from religion but freedom of religion
🧼📦
Most of our founders were strongly tied to their own specific religion.
US religious toleration was more a product of history and compromise than envisioned as a positive value in and of itself.
Separation of church and state and freedom of religion in the US were incorporated to avoid bitter and often violent conflicts that had occured in europe in the prior centuries. Not as an aspiration.
I recently read where someone said that the Constitution does not need to br re-written, it needs to be re-read. Sound advice that you should heed General. along with many others
John Adams may have said this: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”, but note that he did not specify any particular religion.And regarding the issue with Barbary, he noted “As the Government of the United States…is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion–as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity of Musselmen…” And, finally, ” Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion”
Watching Narcos last night, I was contemplating this very issue: how can a populace that calls itself Catholic, countenance the mass murder and corruption that is Mexico? I don’t think religion has anything to do with it. It’s more likely that the Spanish imposed a demoralizing hierarchy that rewarded only the truly depraved. Still, the question should be, how to avoid this fate in the U.S.
Alleluia.
“It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God.”
Jefferson was not quite accurate in this quotation.
Belief in the unprovable, religion, can inform actions, right? And, importantly the laws the lawmakers make.
The writers of our constitution wanted to make sure there was no state religion.
It does me no injury for my neighbor to say anything at all. If those words convince a lawmaker to incorporate a tenet of my neighbor’s religion into law that is a problem. If those words are a threat then that’s a problem, too.
To paraphrase the Dream speech: We must judge others. Not by the color of their skin nor their religion, but by what they do. What they do reflects the content of their character in ways no mere speech can.
What do you do with a religion that teaches to spread the religion by the force be the religion Christianity, Islam, Communism, or the government as the Supreme Being?
In the US today is that a serious problem ?
The only religions being foist on us by force today in this country are those of the left.
When catholics or southern baptists are seeking to dictate our laws, or to force their ideology into our schools – I will join in opposing them.
Brian Wilson, I believe you have stated a fundamental which most of the commenters above cannot comprehend – “government” has become the “established religion” and is in direct conflict with the First Amendment restriction on an “established religion”. … I would add that the majority of the “common folk” within American society; “common” having no correlation with “education”. In fact the majority of the most educated by reference to degrees and certifications are narrowly focused “technicians” comfortable only with the structure others provide. These most educated, validated by degrees, titles, associations and income are without capacity to understand that most religions are based on beliefs and values (and not hierarchy or validation by others), and thus they are without the capacity to consider the meaning of life and death, or their temporary role in the continuum of “life”; independent of any structured governance and hierarchy that claims to speak for a religion’s “god(s)” (this includes Christianity; and certainly the theocracies of islam, communism, etc. (which the US government increasingly represents – “convert, pay taxes or die”).
As despicable as Flynn’s statement was, Turley’s colleague Tucker Carlson invited Flynn on his show Friday night in order to LIE that Bannon was criminally indicted because of his opinion of Trump’s election. Tucker endorsed that unmitigated lie.
https://youtu.be/arrapaSuvPA
In addition, would it surprise you to learn that Carlson did NOT mention Flynn’s “one-religion” statement which Turley finds so abhorrent and prompted him to denounce Flynn publicly?
Unfortunately, this is not the first time Turley has looked the other way when Carlson has endorsed a liar. Not long ago, Carlson interviewed and promoted the views of Ted Nugent who Turley has called a “true lunatic.”
https://jonathanturley.org/2016/02/10/ted-nugent-unleashes-rabidly-anti-semitic-rant-over-gun-control/
Turley will not criticize his Fox buddy Carlson for championing these Q-Anon believers and ignoring their anti-Semitic views. Why?
Because Turley is a sell-out. If he ever criticizes Carlson, Hannity, Ingraham or Levin just ONCE, I will cease calling him a “sell-out.”
I need to correct my above statement. Flynn made his “one-religion” comment on Saturday after his Friday appearance on Carlson’s show so that Carlson had no way to confront him on that statement. My bad. My every other criticism still applies.
I am genuinely grateful that Turley will condemn publicly Flynn’s repulsive comments. If only he did not give his co-workers at Fox a pass.
Religious Freedom?Tell that to the Native Americans.
Hate to tel you but the Native Americans aren’t native to America – they “conquered” the Americas from Eurasia according to genetic studies.
Where in America right now do “Native Americans” not have freedom of religion?
I never liked the term. They are no more “native” than any of us. They merely got here first.
Doesn’t mean I respect their beliefs and traditions any less.
I know it’s trying to hear from these anti-American sickos, but we need to keep a microphone under their chin so we can all learn what makes them tic.
In some respects I totally agree with Michael Flynn: The one religion we should all be taught is a reverence for the Constitution, separation of powers, and the Bill of Rights. In this digital age the government violates our rights on a daily basis and oversteps the limits of power set forth in the Constitution
I believe where Flynn’s comment comes from is the realization that the beliefs of a very few religions – those that teach the spread of their beliefs by the sword, are incompatible with a governing system where individual rights and freedom of belief are core to its founding philosophy.
The Founding Fathers believed that government derived its legitimacy from the consent of the people and exists to protect the rights of the people. But when one’s core belief and guiding principle is that one’s philosophy, be it political or religious, entitled one to spread one’s beliefs by force or fraud outside of Constitutional limits then in my view one disqualifies oneself from membership in the American experiment.
Don’t kid yourselves folks, Flynn’s not the only one out there that thinks that way. The whole right-wing Christian movement has been working on that one idea for a while. Since the 1980’s, it has been said by the right-wing, Jesus is a republican, and that hand has gotten only stronger with the Trump cult.
You know what really gets my head shaking is the lack of critical thinking skills in the American public exemplified in an inability to separate a person’s personality from a person’s policies. Let me give you an example:
General Omar Bradley and General George S Patton in their leadership styles were polar opposites but yet they were both two of the greatest generals of their time. Indeed Patton could be considered the Donald Trump of his time, brash, arrogant, pompous, narcissistic, harboring strange metaphysical views. Despite these personality traits, arguably he was the greatest battlefield commander of WWII.
When you look at the effectiveness of Trumps policies rather than focusing on his personality quirks, he was the most effective president since Reagan.
Three years 6% wage gains, lowest black, latino, female unemployment in 50 years, females a workforce majority, record tax collections while lowering taxes, Arab / Israeli peace deals, low energy prices and inflation, energy independence for the first time.
That is why he is so popular – not because he is a narcissist, pompous, hyperbolic ass, who has no political correctness.
You seemed to critically think to forget that Trump was in office four years. That last year was not so great and he lead his followers to a mindset that caused them to oppose every covid prevention measure, which cost hundreds of thousands of deaths.
You seem to forget that Biden is now president, has reversed nearly every single Policy of Trump on nearly every single issue and on nearly every single issue we are doing WORSE.
More disastrous still when Biden took office democrats and the left could have done nearly nothing and coasted to success with the wind at their backs.
There is no reality based means to compare Trump and the mess Biden and “the children in charge” have made, that does not come out favorable for Trump.
Democrats and the left have given us all a gift – the ability to make direct comparisons – and they have LOST.
Regardless, this is not a battle of people, it is one of ideas. Those of the left have FAILED – accross the board.
Maybe Trump will be back in 2024, maybe not. But the ideological conflict in 2022 and 2024 will not change regardless.
And absent the intervention of the gods, the outcome is easily foreseeable.
Yes. Biden has removed all of Trumps tariffs, reversed his tax cuts, removed all of the Federalist Society judges, put all Ds on the Supreme Court, and the rest of Trump actions. Oh wait, Biden has reversed very few of Trumps actions. It is time to acknowledge that the President has little control over the economy. What we are seeing now is a byproduct of covid.
“What we are seeing now is a byproduct of covid.”
In part, but the lockdowns have had a huge effect on the economy as have the monies being paid so that people don’t work. There are other Biden actions that affected the economy in a bad way, but Trump’s actions created an economy that would be climbing upwards very quickly so it would last for a number of years. Biden inherited that and squandered money and the nations ability to add to the people’s standard of living.
A lot of people are now waking up to the fact that Biden has caused harm with almost everything he has touched.
You continue to be under the delusion that those covid measures work.
Do you have evidence of that ? Anywhere ?
Public health is primarily a state rather than federal issue – and policies have been varied across states.
Do you have a state that has imposed these measures that has clearly done better than those that did not.
What of the world – is there some country that has done all you demand and succeeded better than those that did not ?
From the very begining right through this moment Covid, Covid deaths correlate strongly to the demographics and geography or a region, and not at all to the policies.
You seem to keep trying to force fit blame for the failure of policies that relatively simple math and logic tell us can not work, on to Trump.
I have never ever heard any Republican, right-wing or otherwise, say “Jesus is a Republican”. I have heard, however, many Demovrats say “…Jesus would have been a Democrat…” and “…he rode a Donkey…”. Jesus transcended politics; that was his message. He did say, render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar’s, and give him, what is his, which is case in point – He wanted us to obey the earthly authority of the law, but sdvised us to not set our hearts on things of this world, including politics, lest we risk our souls – the two seem to coincide, ironically, because of man’s lack of understanding – i, myself, am guilty. Jesus was and is, neither a Republican or Democrat – He is Jesus Christ, the Messiah – He transcends all. This is in response to Fish Wings’ comments. To address the article: as a Christian American, i do not believe the U.S. should be a Theocracy and/or have a one-state religion – obviously, it is un-American and un-Christian.
There is only one god, and his name is Donald.
Surprised really because he usually comes across as intelligent. This is one of the dumber things I have heard anyone say in years and will keep him out of serving ever again in the US Government.
I thought Flynn would have done a good job of reining in our intelligence community in Trump’s administration (and that is probably why the intelligence community wanted him out). But this remark about a single religion is terrible. It is just so obviously an attack on the constitution that it cannot be ignored. It is on a par with the left’s attacks on freedom of speech.
It looks grim. We will have one religion under covid, or one religion under Mr Flynn”s state religion.