Is America a Christian Nation?

Zyphlin said:

However the cultural bond of being "Christian", in believing in Jesus Christ is the son of god and their savior, is a coming binding linkage between the two regardless of the rest of the culture surrounding them.

Click to expand...

How many nominal Christians actually believe Jesus was the son of god and was the Savior? I happen to know a good number who call themselves Christian but remain fairly Agnostic about Jesus' divinity.

Plus a single shared belief doesn't make for a shared culture. It just makes for a shared singular belief.

"Cultural" is the genre of nation, with "religion" being the common cultural theme...that religion being the christian baseline. That is not to say all the variations of their culture is the same. Its not, its saying that the base foundation is the same between the two.

Click to expand...

I don't agree that Christianity is the baseline for most of the US subcultures.

1. Most people who label themselves as Christian do not make that the basis of their overall beliefs, social practices and standards of behavior.

2. It's one thing to say that the majority of people in a nation self-label themselves as Christian, but it's an entirely differnt thing to say that their culture is based on Christianity.

If your claim is that the common cultural theme is religion (a highly dubious claim for our particular nation) and that Christianity is the baseline, you need to show that the shared beliefs, social practices and standards of behaviro are based on christianity.

My stance is that this is false. My evidence for that is the fact that too large of a proprotion of the nation supports Abortion Rights and Homosexuality as well as many other things that are in direct contradiction to what one could legitimately call "Christian Culture".

My contention is that claiming a majority of the country has a Christian Culture is both flawed and invovles logical fallacy such as "If one is Christian, one must have a Christian culture". That necessary premise for the claim is the fallacy of the "package Deal".

Zyphlin said:

Yes and no.

There's two types of Nations technically speaking, the cultural and the political.

Without a doubt America was a Christian Nation at the founding and continues to be one to this day. At the time of the founding the vast majority of the population shared a common cultural bond, that being the religion they shared which was at its based Christianity. This particular cultural lynchpin is second only to language, as the most constitant common bond amongst the majority of individuals within our generalized borders. From the earliest days till now there have been a large variety of ethnic backgrounds. While sharing a common history, the immigrant nature of our country makes this a slightly less concrete connection as well.

Its reasonable to assume that likely close to 95%+ considered themselves some form of Christian at the time of the countries founding, with it still being more than 3/4ths of the country today considering itself as part of that faith. The overwhelming majority that represents Christians in this country makes it unmistakable to me that as a cultural nation the U.S. is without question a Christian Nation.

I answered Yes and No however, because as a political nation we are joined not by the notion of Christianity but by the notion of governance by the people, for the people, with an understanding of an inherent right to freedom for individuals. The Delcaration of Independence was written on the notion that a political nation can establish its own right to rule. In some ways one could potentially argue its due to this reason that the U.S. is a Nation-State, though I don't quite know if the term would be appropriate for it. This is not to say that in this case it is a "secular" nation, as while freedom of religion in general was a portion of the initial make up of the country that notion did come after the true founding of the American NATION, coming into being truly during the time of the Constitution. Additionally, while not directly relating to a specific religion, the notion of divinity or of some sort of higher power is present throughout the founding documents and the arguments for independence and the formation of said political nation, so arguing that it is a secular nation even on the grounds of a political nation to me would be wrong. It would be however an argument that America is a nation of freedom.

So to me, its two fold in how one could describe the U.S. as a nation.

In regards to culture the United States is a Christian Nation, while with regards to politics the United States is a Nation of Freedom.

Your thoughts?

Click to expand...

What he said, mostly.

Tucker Case said:

How many nominal Christians actually believe Jesus was the son of god and was the Savior? I happen to know a good number who call themselves Christian but remain fairly Agnostic about Jesus' divinity.

Plus a single shared belief doesn't make for a shared culture. It just makes for a shared singular belief.



I don't agree that Christianity is the baseline for most of the US subcultures.

1. Most people who label themselves as Christian do not make that the basis of their overall beliefs, social practices and standards of behavior.

2. It's one thing to say that the majority of people in a nation self-label themselves as Christian, but it's an entirely differnt thing to say that their culture is based on Christianity.

If your claim is that the common cultural theme is religion (a highly dubious claim for our particular nation) and that Christianity is the baseline, you need to show that the shared beliefs, social practices and standards of behaviro are based on christianity.

My stance is that this is false. My evidence for that is the fact that too large of a proprotion of the nation supports Abortion Rights and Homosexuality as well as many other things that are in direct contradiction to what one could legitimately call "Christian Culture".

My contention is that claiming a majority of the country has a Christian Culture is both flawed and invovles logical fallacy such as "If one is Christian, one must have a Christian culture". That necessary premise for the claim is the fallacy of the "package Deal".

Click to expand...

At first I was prepared to get annoyed with you, but I thought about some of that a bit longer and you have a point.

Frankly about half of those who self-identify as "Christian" might best be described as "Christian Lite": That is, they're Christian on Sunday Morning and maybe give the Big Ten Do's and Don't a moment's thought now and then, but otherwise their religious beliefs don't really impact their life or their political views all that much.

So yeah, while I maintain that Christianity is a major influence in the US, the culture as a whole is not nearly as "Christian" as you might think from looking at raw numbers.

Zyphlin said:

In regards to culture the United States is a Christian Nation, while with regards to politics the United States is a Nation of Freedom.

Click to expand...

I think any amount of time I've spent on the internet has proven how un-Christian the U.S. is culturally.

Tucker Case said:

How many nominal Christians actually believe Jesus was the son of god and was the Savior? I happen to know a good number who call themselves Christian but remain fairly Agnostic about Jesus' divinity.

Plus a single shared belief doesn't make for a shared culture. It just makes for a shared singular belief.



I don't agree that Christianity is the baseline for most of the US subcultures.

1. Most people who label themselves as Christian do not make that the basis of their overall beliefs, social practices and standards of behavior.

2. It's one thing to say that the majority of people in a nation self-label themselves as Christian, but it's an entirely differnt thing to say that their culture is based on Christianity.

If your claim is that the common cultural theme is religion (a highly dubious claim for our particular nation) and that Christianity is the baseline, you need to show that the shared beliefs, social practices and standards of behaviro are based on christianity.

My stance is that this is false. My evidence for that is the fact that too large of a proprotion of the nation supports Abortion Rights and Homosexuality as well as many other things that are in direct contradiction to what one could legitimately call "Christian Culture".

My contention is that claiming a majority of the country has a Christian Culture is both flawed and invovles logical fallacy such as "If one is Christian, one must have a Christian culture". That necessary premise for the claim is the fallacy of the "package Deal".

Click to expand...

I can't truly make an argument, because you're arguing onto semantics, attempting to cut to the micro notion of it when what I am speaking of is a far more macro comment. You're focusing on the word "culture" and extrapolating far more meaning and far more merit to its use than is actually used here or is being stated. Culture, primarily, is being used as the designation of two separate definitions of nation...one of which is called cultural, the other is called political...not as the actual micro notion of culture which you continually harp on. Indeed, a shared "culture" in and of itself is one way in which a cultural nation can be defined. However simply sharing a common baseline religion is another way.

While many in the U.S. may be "Christians Lite", may not be the most devout, may be of various denominations, at its base it is absolutely, without question, impossible to argue that over 75% of the country does not consider itself Christian. Rather you think they're "Real Christians", whether you think they're practicing Christians, whether you think they're Christians in name only, is all irrelevant to the fact that over 75% of the country considers itself Christian and thus has a shared religion. Now you COULD argue that it is not worth while enough to consider it a designation for a nation because a portion of that is weak, however you can not make the argument that they're not really Christian because ultimately that's not for YOU to decide for someone else, its for them to decide, and over 75% have decided they classify themselves as Christian.

It doesn't matter if every single solitary one of them have a different Christian CULTURE, because the common bond in this cultural nation is NOT "culture" but "religion", which in this case is "Christianity".

You are harping on what is essentially an irrelevant word for my argument.

This was likely my mistake in speaking about a "Cultural Bond" in reference to being a Bond needed for a cultural nation designation more than a legitimate shared "Culture" as in very defined and set common attitudes, values, goals, and practices.

As a general baseline, I simply have not seen a single reasonable or realistic argument for you to honestly say that every person who considers themselves Christian does not have some base feature with regards to religion in common amongst each other. Then again, I honestly don't understand how one can seriously make any kind of legitimate rational argument attempting to be suggest somehow Baptists and Catholics are entirely and completely separate religions, on the same scale that Judaism is a different religion as Islam or Wicca is different than Hinduism or Zoroastrianism is different than Taoism. That in and of itself is suggesting that "Christianity" doesn't actually exist as a religion, though by that definition Judaism and Islam don't actually exist because they have various denominations and sects as well.

Yup, America is a theocracy.

Thank you Tucker for being the only person who stated "No" that explained his reasoning in thread.

Zyphlin said:

Thank you Tucker for being the only person who stated "No" that explained his reasoning in thread.

Click to expand...

Hey! I explained my reasoning in the thread.

Sorry sam, missed it

Zyphlin said:

I can't truly make an argument, because you're arguing onto semantics, attempting to cut to the micro notion of it when what I am speaking of is a far more macro comment. You're focusing on the word "culture" and extrapolating far more meaning and far more merit to its use than is actually used here or is being stated. Culture, primarily, is being used as the designation of two separate definitions of nation...one of which is called cultural, the other is called political...not as the actual micro notion of culture which you continually harp on. Indeed, a shared "culture" in and of itself is one way in which a cultural nation can be defined. However simply sharing a common baseline religion is another way.

While many in the U.S. may be "Christians Lite", may not be the most devout, may be of various denominations, at its base it is absolutely, without question, impossible to argue that over 75% of the country does not consider itself Christian. Rather you think they're "Real Christians", whether you think they're practicing Christians, whether you think they're Christians in name only, is all irrelevant to the fact that over 75% of the country considers itself Christian and thus has a shared religion. Now you COULD argue that it is not worth while enough to consider it a designation for a nation because a portion of that is weak, however you can not make the argument that they're not really Christian because ultimately that's not for YOU to decide for someone else, its for them to decide, and over 75% have decided they classify themselves as Christian.

It doesn't matter if every single solitary one of them have a different Christian CULTURE, because the common bond in this cultural nation is NOT "culture" but "religion", which in this case is "Christianity".

You are harping on what is essentially an irrelevant word for my argument.

This was likely my mistake in speaking about a "Cultural Bond" in reference to being a Bond needed for a cultural nation designation more than a legitimate shared "Culture" as in very defined and set common attitudes, values, goals, and practices.

As a general baseline, I simply have not seen a single reasonable or realistic argument for you to honestly say that every person who considers themselves Christian does not have some base feature with regards to religion in common amongst each other. Then again, I honestly don't understand how one can seriously make any kind of legitimate rational argument attempting to be suggest somehow Baptists and Catholics are entirely and completely separate religions, on the same scale that Judaism is a different religion as Islam or Wicca is different than Hinduism or Zoroastrianism is different than Taoism. That in and of itself is suggesting that "Christianity" doesn't actually exist as a religion, though by that definition Judaism and Islam don't actually exist because they have various denominations and sects as well.

Click to expand...

I just clicked the wrong button on accident and screwed up a huge argument showing that Individualism, not Christianity is the foundational cultural bond in the US so I'm not going to rewrite it all, but I'll give the crib notes version.

Just take a look at collectivist countries that are still predominantly Christian, such as Greece, Brazil, Mexico or Guatemala. While we share the same "Christian" bond you claim is the foundation of our commonality in the US, we have very little in common culturally with these nations.

But when we look at some Individualistic countries (we rank as the most individualistic country in the world, BTW), such as Germany, Australia, Switzerland, and the UK, we can see that these cultures are far "closer" to ours.

For the UK and Australia, there is also the common language bond and the fact that both Australia and the US were English colonies at one point. Unsurprisingly, these are considered the three most individualistic cultures in the world:

Individualistic Trade Cultures: Me First Countries Value Independent Achievements


Both extremes on this list are dominated by predominantly Christian countries. The top five in both categories. Even more interesting is that the top five collectivist countries are one's that are stereotypically Christian while the top five individualistic countries are predominantly Christian, but not stereotypically so. The stereotype is closer to secularism.

So I contend that your claim based only on demographic data is flawed. The concept of Individualism (which is so absurdly evident in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence) is the foundation upon which the American Cultural bond was built. Christianity may be an influence, but it is not, in any way shape or form, the baseline cultural bond.

I contend that your argument has absolutely no merit because it is based on a fallacious assumption (package deal fallacy).

I've presented a counter argument for the baseline cultural which has actually been supported by evidence that:

1. Contradicts your claim of Christianity being, in and of itself, enough to form a baseline "cultural bond" at the macro level
2. Provides evidence of a different baseline cultural bond which I contend to be the true cultural bond that the vast majority of American subcultures share (I can provide evidence of that if needed as well)



(P.S. This is really the crib notes version. The other post was freakin huge before I lost it.)

Actually, I agree with the vast majority of what you said Tucker, and "Individualist Nation" is likely a far better way to say then a "Nation of Freedom" for how I'd define the U.S. as a POLITICAL nation. As you even point out in regards to the founding documents, individualism...which in turn is what really bread the whole freedom notion...is the generalized center piece for the idea of self governance by the people, for the people, of the people, that makes up the foundation for our political nation.

So I can't really disagree with your argument, save for stating that this individualism is not a "culture" in and of itself but an ideology, and one that is tied to the Political Nation of America rather than the Cultural Nation.

Thus the whole reason for my answer as a "yes or no". As a "cultural nation" as its generally defined, I would consider us a Christian Nation. Is that the ONLY type of cultural nation we could be? Absolutely not. We are also an English Nation (focusing on the "language" portion of being able to define a cultural nation). There are others. However one of those potential nations that can be described of America is a Christian Nation due to the significantly majority demographic that self identify as such.

I also said "no", to distinguish the fact that a Christian Nation is not the ONLY type of nation one could describe within the United States of America. I pointed out one other cultural one already above, and another would be the "political nation" founded upon the idealistic individual notions espoused by the founders and in our founding documents that lays the groundwork for the idea of freedom for all and governance by the people, for the people, of the people. Thus, the United States of America is also an "Individualist Nation".

While a particulare STATE can be singular...IE there can not be multiple "states" of the United States of America, there can be numerous NATIONS within a particular state.

Tucker Case said:

I've presented a counter argument for the baseline cultural which has actually been supported by evidence that:

1. Contradicts your claim of Christianity being, in and of itself, enough to form a baseline "cultural bond" at the macro level
2. Provides evidence of a different baseline cultural bond which I contend to be the true cultural bond that the vast majority of American subcultures share (I can provide evidence of that if needed as well)

Click to expand...

Actually, you proved neither.

For a Cultural Nation to exist a significant grouping of people within a generalized location would need to have a common bond of some sort, with simply put a specific religion being one of those bonds. NOTHING you have shown, in any singular post you've made, proves that the fact that more than 3/4ths of the country self identifies as having the same religion is false. Without proving that false, you can not prove that over 3/4ths of the country has a shared religion. Without being able to prove that you can't state that it could not be considered a nation. You can argue that a portion of that grouping is a "weak" variety of that religion, but my counter is they still self identify as that religion so whether you think its "weak" or not still does not change the fact that its their religion, and that its a shared religion with the vast majority of hte country.

And two, proving there are other potential nations that one could denote within the United States does not disprove the existance of other potential nations within it. Because the vast majority of the country speaks English does not mean that one could not identify within the United States any other "nation" simply due to the fact there's already one defined through language.

The only argument you could possibly make is that a "Christian Nation" is not the largest designation one could make of the type of nation the US is, but that is different than arguing that it ISN'T one.

You keep speaking of what you have "proved" tucker but you've proved nothing, save for what your opinion is. You've offered no proof to contradict my statements, simply opinions as to why you disagree and proof that mine isn't the only definable version....which is a fallacy of your own as I've never made the argument that the U.S. can ONLY be considered a Christian nation.

You're issue tucker is a continued focus on the word "culture" in a literalistic sense in regards to the lifestyle, habits, and processes of people within a particular group. So when I say "Christianity" you immedietely try to think and immedietely start arguing against "Christian Culture". However, never had I said CHRISTIAN CULTURE, I have simply said christainity...the religion....that's it. Not the culture surrounding the religion, simply "the religion". I classify that as a "Cultural Nation" because that's what the definition of the type of nation that deals with things like language, religion, ethnicity, culture itself, etc as opposed to a Political Nation which is based off of a group ideology or value that leads towards a governmental structure.

So your continual disproval of there being stronger cultural, as in the actual word cultural, bonds does not disprove the notion of a Christian Nation nor is it really event relevant to the discussion of one save for attempting to say those cultural bonds are strong enough to constitute a nation based on that culture. However even then, as I said, the existance of multiple nations within a state is not impossible. Indeed, I even acknowledged in my first post talking about nations that Relgion isn't even the largest and most wide spread "cultural" (in regards to the term cultural nation) bond within America, as that would be the common language.

Zyphlin said:

Actually, you proved neither.

For a Cultural Nation to exist a significant grouping of people within a generalized location would need to have a common bond of some sort, with simply put a specific religion being one of those bonds. NOTHING you have shown, in any singular post you've made, proves that the fact that more than 3/4ths of the country self identifies as having the same religion is false. Without proving that false, you can not prove that over 3/4ths of the country has a shared religion. Without being able to prove that you can't state that it could not be considered a nation. You can argue that a portion of that grouping is a "weak" variety of that religion, but my counter is they still self identify as that religion so whether you think its "weak" or not still does not change the fact that its their religion, and that its a shared religion with the vast majority of hte country.

And two, proving there are other potential nations that one could denote within the United States does not disprove the existance of other potential nations within it. Because the vast majority of the country speaks English does not mean that one could not identify within the United States any other "nation" simply due to the fact there's already one defined through language.

The only argument you could possibly make is that a "Christian Nation" is not the largest designation one could make of the type of nation the US is, but that is different than arguing that it ISN'T one.

You keep speaking of what you have "proved" tucker but you've proved nothing, save for what your opinion is. You've offered no proof to contradict my statements, simply opinions as to why you disagree and proof that mine isn't the only definable version....which is a fallacy of your own as I've never made the argument that the U.S. can ONLY be considered a Christian nation.

Click to expand...

False. Once you started using the term "baseline" and "foundation" you were making it the primary description. I've proven it is not the baseline or foundation with data.

I am not the one who is only offering an opinion here. I'm the only one hwo has offered actual data. You have never once presented anything but your opinion. This whole time I've been asking for you to once, just once, offer some data to show that the baseline or foundation of the shared cultural bond is Christianity.

You haven't. you've relied on multiple fallacies to argue for your opinion. Equivocation ("I don't mean culture, I mean culture" ) the package deal fallacy ("Since the majority labels themselves as Christians, that is our baseline cultural bond).

Here's what you originally said:

"Its reasonable to assume that likely close to 95%+ considered themselves some form of Christian at the time of the countries founding, with it still being more than 3/4ths of the country today considering itself as part of that faith. The overwhelming majority that represents Christians in this country makes it unmistakable to me that as a cultural nation the U.S. is without question a Christian Nation."

Here's the same flawed argument (where everything is accurate) but with a different term instead of Christian:

"Its reasonable to assume that likely close to 95%+ considered themselves white at the time of the countries founding, with it still being more than 3/4ths of the country today being part of that group. The overwhelming majority that represents whites in this country makes it unmistakable to me that as a cultural nation the U.S. is without question a white Nation."


The truth is, you aren't even presenting an argument. You are stating your opinion and then backing that up with a fact that doesn't support that argument. I enlarged and bolded "cultural" in your claim to show that from the start, you've been using equivocation to defend your non-argument.

When I focused on that term, which was extremely relevant to your claim, you said I was "harping" on it and that it was actually irrelevant to your claim. Of course, this was after you admitted you couldn't give any evidence of cultural uniformity amongst Christians.

Because you couldn't support the claim in any way, you moved the goalposts to say that you meant the "baseline" (which is the "foundation") cultural bond was Christianity.

I then showed evidence that proves that the foundation of our shared culture is not Christianity, it is Individualism.

Then you move the goalposts again to point out "proving there are other potential nations that one could denote within the United States does not disprove the existance of other potential nations within it"

I agree with that. I would even say that the Chrsitian nation of which you speak is, at best, a nation within the nation.

The problem with that argument is that the Christian nation is, itself, a one of those nations within the US, but that does not comprise the whole of the US. Your own demographic data proves that it doesn't comprise the whole.

So if we designate these potential smaller nations within the US as "subnations" of the US, your best argument is that the Christian nation is the largest subnation within the US, but that the US itself cannot be described as a Christian Nation because it is not a universally shared belief for the entire US as whole.

Every time you move these goalposts, you are damaging your own argument.

The "Super nation" that can be used toe describe the US as a whole is not the Christian nation. That is a sub-nation within that super-nation. The Super-nation can be described as an Individualistic one, but it cannot be described as a Christian one.


Even though you want to call what I'm saying just my "opinion", it isn't "just" my opinion. It's not only supported by evidence, it's supported by your own words chosen in defense of your own claims.

You have to look at it from the outside in. To make the claim that, as a cultural nation the US is _____ Culture, the thing that fills in the blank must comprise the whole of the US culturally. Not just the majority. If it only comprises the majority, it becomes a Nation within the nation, which you have already pointed out can exist.

See, I'm not arguing that nations within nations can't exist. I'm arguing that Christian Nation is not the nation that comprises the cultural nation of the US.

Even more to the point, using your own definition of Nation provided earlier:

"its a grouping of individuals sharing some sort of common bond"

The 'Christian nation" would encompass more than just the Christians in the US, but would also include Christians all over the globe.

It would include every Christian in the US, but it wouldn't include the entire US because not everyone in the US shares that common bond.

I'm not simply giving an opinion. I'm showing the flaws in your argument by targetting the ground-rules that you yourself set up.

If you actually use that definition honestly, you will see that you can never make the claim that the Nation of people comprising the US is a Christian nation, because the grouping of individuals that comprise the entire US do not share that common bond of Christianity.

Even takn to the simplest level of the common bond, your claim is demonstrably false.
This means that the entire Christian nation has over 2 billion people.

Zyphlin said:

You're issue tucker is a continued focus on the word "culture" in a literalistic sense in regards to the lifestyle, habits, and processes of people within a particular group.

Click to expand...

If it doesn't mean that, then your argument is founded on equivocation becuxse you are using culture as your definition of Nation.

I voted no even though I misunderstood the question, I thought you were asking if the government itself was a Christian one.

Rereading your question, I would say yes we are a nation of Christians, but No, we are not a Christian Nation.

I don't think Christ would be too happy with the so called Christians of America. So no. America is not a nation of Christians. Just people who pretend to be Christian when it suits them.

Tucker Case said:

If it doesn't mean that, then your argument is founded on equivocation becuxse you are using culture as your definition of Nation.

Click to expand...

I have training I have to go to real quick at work so can't respond to the long one now so will respond to teh short one.

Its not equivocation. You can see from the very first post I made actually concerning my views on this that I clearly detail that there are two Types of nations that generally are thought to exist.

The CULTURAL nation and the POLITICAL nation. Neither of these are my terms, and I'm not going to simply not use them because they are confusing you.

A CULTURAL nation is a grouping of people sharing a common language, ethnicity, culture, religion, or history. Notice "culture" is one of the actual ways in which a "Cultural nation" can be defined. Notice it can also be defined by a number of things that are not cultures, such as language or history. When I say its their common culture in regards to the nation I am meaning it as the common bond that forms a cultural nation, not necessarily they all share the same "Culture". Yes, I fully understand how this is confusing and its the fault of the way the terms are used. Perhaps if I call a "cultural nation" a "Non-Political Nation" it would help.

Let me restate my statement then to perhaps make it easier to understand. Religion provides a common non-political connection required for that type of Nation amongst a majority of people in this country, thus it is a Christian Nation.

There, I've extract the word cultural from it to remove confusion. Admittedly, it was likely my mistake with attempting to use that designator and not realizing the inherent confusion it may supply. I was using culture NOT as the definition for the nation I was speaking about, but as the classification.

Let me reclassify with there being "Non-Political" Nations and "Political" Nations. Let me further clarify that "Non-Political" Nations are groupings based upon common language, ethnicity, religion, history, and culture. Where as "Political Nations" are those that are formed through rational and political ideological beliefs commonly held amongsts the people that allows them to assert their common will to form a nation.

Mind you this is not "moving the goal posts" as both of those are the same definitions I've been going off of since the beginning, but simply rebranding "Cultural Nation" to something less confusing.

Zyphlin said:

A CULTURAL nation is a grouping of people sharing a common language, ethnicity, culture, religion, or history. Notice "culture" is one of the actual ways in which a "Cultural nation" can be defined. Notice it can also be defined by a number of things that are not cultures, such as language or history. When I say its their common culture in regards to the nation I am meaning it as the common bond that forms a cultural nation, not necessarily they all share the same "Culture". Yes, I fully understand how this is confusing and its the fault of the way the terms are used. Perhaps if I call a "cultural nation" a "Non-Political Nation" it would help.

Let me restate my statement then to perhaps make it easier to understand. Religion provides a common non-political connection required for that type of Nation amongst a majority of people in this country, thus it is a Christian Nation.

Click to expand...

The problem with this is that it is equivocation. The reason is that you are changing the meaning of nation when you are saying the political nation of the US and when you are saying the Christian nation of Christian Americans.

When you use it to describe the US, you are talking about the geo-political area of the US, when you use it to decribe the Christian nation within the US, you are using the religion.

That's the fatal flaw in your argument.

If you stick with the same classification throughout, which would be "A CULTURAL nation is a grouping of people sharing a common religion." in this case.

Then the cultural nation of the Christian nation includes ALL Christians WORLDWIDE but does not include ALL AMERICANS.

Thus, the argument that America is a Christian Nation fails. The problem is that you cannot consistently apply the same definition to "cultural nation" throughout the entire argument and reach the conclusion you want to force into place.


Your argument must involve equivocation in order to say "The US is a Christian Nation" using the very rules you have created. It absolutely positively has to be present.

Because a consistent application of the terms and rules means that the Christian Nation being discussed is both larger than the US and doesn't fully encompass the US.

Tucker Case said:

False. Once you started using the term "baseline" and "foundation" you were making it the primary description. I've proven it is not the baseline or foundation with data.

Click to expand...

"Baseline" and "Foundation" as being a common thing found across that population. While a house may look different in a hundred parts in a thousand ways, the majority of its foundation is similar. While there are many different levels above a particular baseline, the base is still the same. I am using those words not to denote that a Christian Nation is the PRIMARY type of nation, the very notion that I acknowledge in my first post on this that it isn't even the most prevelant binding thing shows that the accusation is false, but simply pointing out that Christianity presents a commonly held trait amongst the majority of the population. From that point forward there are many divergences in regards to what denomination, how they practice their religion, how staunch they are in their faith. However, when it is tore down to is foundation, the common block for them all is "Christianity".

That is why I used the words foundation and baseline, not as a denotion that Christianity was the absolute singular common bond amongst the majority of the people in the country but as a designated common starting point in regards to the SPECIFIC type of designation that can reflect a "Non-political Nation", IE a shared religion.

According to the American Religion Identification Survey 76% of American's self Identified in 2008 as Christian. This means more than 3/4ths of the American Population holds a common religion. That is data. That is data you've failed to dispute. You've claimed some of them may practice it differently. That does not dispute the fact that when boiled down, they still consider themselves Christian. You've claimed some of them may be weak practicioners. That does not dispute the fact that when boiled down, they still consider themselves Christian. You have claimed some of them may actually be more agnostic. That does not dispute the fact that when boiled down, and agnostic is an option, they still consider themselves Christian.

A shared common religion, of which Christianity is one for more than 3/4ths of the country, is one way in which a nation can be defined. Despite your claims, you have no provided data that shows the data provided concerning 3/4th's of the country being Christian as incorrect.

Now, granted, I accept the notion that you reject MY definition of a significant majority being more than 3/4th's of the population and believe it should have to be 100%, or 90%, etc. I fully admit that my number is arbitrary though I have reasons for it. However disagreeing that its a significant enough of a populations is different then providing data that the population is not as large as I say.

I am not the one who is only offering an opinion here. I'm the only one hwo has offered actual data. You have never once presented anything but your opinion. This whole time I've been asking for you to once, just once, offer some data to show that the baseline or foundation of the shared cultural bond is Christianity.

Click to expand...

As stated in the other post, this is an issue of confusion of you looking for a cultural bond in regard to the literal meaning of the word, where I was speaking to a specific type of nation that happened to be labeled as Cultural without requiring a specifically shared culture.

Their shared bond is their religion, which is Christianity.

You haven't. you've relied on multiple fallacies to argue for your opinion. Equivocation ("I don't mean culture, I mean culture" )

Click to expand...

As explained in the other post, I used a terminology that in and of itself was contradictory in that it is called a "Cultural Nation" while not actually requiring a shared "culture" in the way you're using it. it was not equivocation, it was an attempt to better explain what was being said.

the package deal fallacy ("Since the majority labels themselves as Christians, that is our baseline cultural bond).

Click to expand...

That's not a fallacy, that's the very definition of a nation. A majority of people share a common [x], thus creating a baseline bond that they all share, thus creation a nation.

where X is equal to language, religion, culture, ethnicity, history, etc.

In this case "A Majority of people share a common religion, thus creating a baseline bond that they all share, creation a Christian Nation".

Unless you're somehow saying "People considering themselves christian" doesn't mean they're Christian, and that two people who have the same religion don't actually have the same religion.

Here's the same flawed argument (where everything is accurate) but with a different term instead of Christian:

"Its reasonable to assume that likely close to 95%+ considered themselves white at the time of the countries founding, with it still being more than 3/4ths of the country today being part of that group. The overwhelming majority that represents whites in this country makes it unmistakable to me that as a cultural nation the U.S. is without question a white Nation."

Click to expand...

Yes, one could ABSOLUTELY make an argument of us being a "Caucasian Nation". More accurately probably at the early days of the nation, or even some 50 years ago. However I think it would be very difficult to do so now. Why? Because in my mind to rightfully consider a significant enough majority to be considered a nation one would need a significant one, IE more than 3/4ths in my eyes. Currently, Whites (removing latinos who double counted as both hispanic AND white) make up 65.4% of the American population leaving them under that 3/4ths factor.

So in my mind, while at one point you could claim that America was a Caucasian Nation, one could not do so any longer.

As a point of reference, we're extremely close of having a similar situation in regards to Christian Nation and if historical trends continue then by the next time the ARIS report comes out we likely will see it fall under that 3/4ths mark at which point I'd actually suggest we are no longer a Christian Nation.

The truth is, you aren't even presenting an argument. You are stating your opinion and then backing that up with a fact that doesn't support that argument. I enlarged and bolded "cultural" in your claim to show that from the start, you've been using equivocation to defend your non-argument.

Click to expand...

I've made an argument. My argument is that America, as the generalized entity, is a Christian Nation, specifically a cultural nation or how I'm using it now for this discussion "Non-Political Nation". My basis for this is that more than 3/4ths of its population has a shared common religion, Christianity, with a "shared religion" being a designator for determining a nation.

Again, your argument is centered around the use of the word culture, which I used only because it was the designation for the TYPE of nation. My mistake on not taking into account the likely confusion that would arise from it.

When I focused on that term, which was extremely relevant to your claim, you said I was "harping" on it and that it was actually irrelevant to your claim. Of course, this was after you admitted you couldn't give any evidence of cultural uniformity amongst Christians.

Click to expand...

Except it wasn't relevant to my claim, it was simply the classification of the type of nation based on the commonly held classifications. Said classification of nation can be defined by a shared religion rather than a shared culture, even though its a cultural nation.

Because you couldn't support the claim in any way, you moved the goalposts to say that you meant the "baseline" (which is the "foundation") cultural bond was Christianity.

Click to expand...

That was not moving the goal posts, that was trying to state it in another way since you were having issues understanding my meaning of why "culture" as you used it was not a requirement.

I then showed evidence that proves that the foundation of our shared culture is not Christianity, it is Individualism.

Click to expand...

You did, which does not diminish the foundation with regards to a shared religion, which is Christianity. It simply shows yet another particular way one could define the entity known as America in regards to a Nation. Individualism, specifically as you used it, would likely fall under the "political nation" definition and is actually a more succicnt way of putting the very thing I talked about in my first post concerning this with regards to the type of political nation America is.

Then you move the goalposts again to point out "proving there are other potential nations that one could denote within the United States does not disprove the existance of other potential nations within it"

Click to expand...

Again, this was not a moved goalpost. The very first post I made in this thread concerning my views on it established:

1. That Religion was not the most wide reaching commonality that is usable in the definition of a "non-political nation", but that it would be language.
2. That there were multiple nations one could label America as, citing both a Christian Nation and a Nation of Freedom (or, but far better by you, an Individualistic Nation)

How in the world can I change the goal post when they are in the same place I had them in the very first detailed post I made?

The problem with that argument is that the Christian nation is, itself, a one of those nations within the US, but that does not comprise the whole of the US. Your own demographic data proves that it doesn't comprise the whole.

Click to expand...

And this is your first argument that has merit in my eyes, which is arguing the only portion of opinion I used to state my assertion. My use of more than 3/4th's is arbitrary as there is no defined metric for how many people within a population is needed. The reason I use 3/4ths is because I've consistantly used that over the years as my designation for a substantial or extremely significant majority. I used the same general metric earlier last year when describing the difference between what I view as a strong win and a landslide in regards to elections. I've used it when arguing that America isn't a "White Nation" in previous threads. My view is that when more than 3/4th's of something is a particular way that makes up a significant majority. As such, I apply that to the notion of a nation with the belief that 100% adherance to something in particular is nearly if not literally impossible for such a designation, and thus for my mind a cut off would be needed.

There is nothing saying my cut off is correct. Someone could argue that 51% of the population of an entity having a similar religion, language, culture, ethnicity, or history. Someone could argue that 95% is required. Both aren't necessarily any more or less legitimate than my argument.

I fully acknowledge your argument that it is not shared by 100% so therefore you wouldn't consider it a nation. While I disagree, there's nothing wrong or in error about your argument. I would however say that such an argument would invalidate your own concerning individualism as there are still people within the state of America who would potentially uphold non-individualist ideology.

So if we designate these potential smaller nations within the US as "subnations" of the US, your best argument is that the Christian nation is the largest subnation within the US, but that the US itself cannot be described as a Christian Nation because it is not a universally shared belief for the entire US as whole.

Click to expand...

The "US" itself is simply an entity. You could claim that the United States could reference simultaneously a State (body of government with defined territory over defined population), a Country (A defined geographical region, generally with politically defined borders), and a Nation in and of itself (Based on the shared History of the state/country that all of its citizens share through the act of being citizens, or based on the Political Nation identity as Individualists).

Which is kind of why it gets tricky talking about these things. I am seeing your point Tucker, and I think the biggest issue here is a matter that what a Nation is is still relatively loosely defined with a number of variables undefined...the largest of which in this instance for us is the amount of population within a state, country, or perhaps even nation that is required to share the common bond to be able to constitute a nation.

And now I feel like a dog chasing its tail. LOL

The "Super nation" that can be used toe describe the US as a whole is not the Christian nation. That is a sub-nation within that super-nation. The Super-nation can be described as an Individualistic one, but it cannot be described as a Christian one.

Click to expand...

As I stated above, by your own goal posts for what constitutes a Nation as far as numbers go ("entire US as whole"), we could not be considered an Individualist nation unless the entire US population as a whole held onto the notion of Individualist ideology.

You have to look at it from the outside in. To make the claim that, as a cultural nation the US is _____ Culture, the thing that fills in the blank must comprise the whole of the US culturally.

Click to expand...

And there was the disconnect we were having throughout this.

You go "cultural nation = _____ Culture" where the blank was the type of culture....I was going "Cultural Nation = _______ Nation" where the blank was the specific item relating to one of the designations of a Cultural Nation (specific religion, specific ethnicity, specific language, etc).

That was the disconnect throughout this I think, and your blank showed it perfectly. I regret not going for the non-typically used name immedietely and just starting with "Non-Political" and "Political" Nations.

It would include every Christian in the US, but it wouldn't include the entire US because not everyone in the US shares that common bond.

Click to expand...

This goes back to the whole nation within nations thing. My specific discussion was confined to the boundries of the population within the state/country of America.

If you actually use that definition honestly, you will see that you can never make the claim that the Nation of people comprising the US is a Christian nation, because the grouping of individuals that comprise the entire US do not share that common bond of Christianity.

Click to expand...

As I said, this goes to the differing opinions in regards to what is required for a nation...either 100% commonality, or majority commonality, and if majority commonality how large of a majority. You seem to require 100% commonality, even though your own definition of a type of nation America is wouldn't stand up to that scrutiny.

Tucker Case said:

The problem with this is that it is equivocation. The reason is that you are changing the meaning of nation when you are saying the political nation of the US and when you are saying the Christian nation of Christian Americans.

Click to expand...

No, its not. I am not using the term in an intend to mislead. I am using the term becasue that's what is commonly refered to. For example the United States Declaration of Independence is specifically at times mentioned as the creation of a "political nation" seperate from the more traditional "Cultural nation". These are not my words but the ones already defined by others. I am not choosing to use terms with multiple meanings with an intent to mislead but am simply using the words as they're supposed to be used. The issue is the definitions themselves are misleading, which I have admitted to my error in not identifying that from the beginning and rectifying it.

There are two types of generally accepted nations. What I'm not calling the "Non-Political" Nation (and more correctly called a cultural nation) that is defined off of more social and tangible things such as Religion, Language, Ethnicity, etc. Then there is a "Political Nation" that is based off of a the will of individuals to form a political community adhering to a shared political philosophy is enough to constitute a Nation.

When you use it to describe the US, you are talking about the geo-political area of the US, when you use it to decribe the Christian nation within the US, you are using the religion.

Click to expand...

When I speak of America I speak in general in regards to the Country and State, and thus the people within it. When I speak of "America" being a "Christian Nation" I am providing a definitive boundry (the country of America) regarding the population (those within that country) which is forming the particular nation (in this case a non-political one based on christianity)

If you stick with the same classification throughout, which would be "A CULTURAL nation is a grouping of people sharing a common religion." in this case.

Click to expand...

Correct.

In this case the grouping of people I'm speaking about are those that are within the country of the US, and the sharing of a common religion being Christianity.

Then the cultural nation of the Christian nation includes ALL Christians WORLDWIDE but does not include ALL AMERICANS.

Click to expand...

The "Christian Nation" in general without any other designations absolutely could refer to the entire entity of Christians World Wide.

When I specifically state "America is a Christian Nation" it is defining the population I'm speaking of as those within the borders of America.

Thus, the argument that America is a Christian Nation fails. The problem is that you cannot consistently apply the same definition to "cultural nation" throughout the entire argument and reach the conclusion you want to force into place.

Click to expand...

Yes, I have consistantly applied it. Simply because you wish to ignore the fact from the very onset of this thread, from its very title, that definitive paramaters upon what group of people is being spoken about doesn't mean I'm being inconsistant.

In regards to the not fully encompassing the US, again, I detailed that issue in my other post. You're absolutely right in stating that as a disagreement with my assertion of a Christian Nation based on your own definition of how many people within a particular population must share the common bond to be able to consider it a nation.

Thanks for the lively discussion by the way

Zyphlin said:

Thanks for the lively discussion by the way

Click to expand...

Agreed I've been following alng as well.

I've googled the following "A CULTURAL nation is a grouping of people sharing a common language, ethnicity, culture, religion, or history." and I can find no source to corroborate this definition.


Could you please provide a source?