In regards to a Philosophy, in a way yes in that Religion can be considered a subset of a specific type of philosophy that mixes the traditional aspects with it along with the facets of "Belief" (Forgoing philosophies normal focus on the "rational" answers to the philosophical questions of the world) and “Organization” based on a religions (as opposed to spirituality) codified and defined nature.
However, if we’re to say that then it would apply equally to Islam, Buddhism, or any other religion as they would fit under the “philosophy” view point just as easily as Christianity. If you hold that view, more power too you. I disagree with it. I just hope you’re consistent, such as believing then that Shari’a law…you know, a PHILISOPHICAL LAW by your definition…would be perfectly constitutional. Me personally, I view religion as relative to philosophy but one that is distinct enough that it does present its own category. I believe the founders did as well, since they decided to place the freedom to practice religion, not philosophy, within the constitution.
As to the voting issue, you seem to have a large misunderstanding of what a “right” is under the constitution. Women did not have a “Right” under the framework the Founders presented (The constitution) to vote (neither did men technically). The states had the ability to determine who could or could not have voting rights. The founders as a collective group deemed it unnecessary to determine who a state could or could not allow to vote. There was no constitutional right at the founding for every citizen to be able to vote, thus there was no “Right” for women to vote. While some states did ALLOW for it, most states did not.
Notice, again, that you were attempting to debate by using a straw man…IE making an argument against something I did not say. I did not state that women could not vote under the original version of the Constitution. I stated that many founders did not agree with the notion of giving women and blacks the right to vote. I then later stated that prior to the 19th that women didn’t have the RIGHT to vote. That’s not the same as having the ABILITY to vote.
For example, in some states people have the ABILITY to get a civil union with someone of the same sex. Does that mean that people have the “Right” to same sex marriage when we’re talking about things from a federal level?
Women, and blacks (and men as well) did not have the RIGHT to vote in federal elections until the 15th and 19th amendment, when the Constitution was amended to forbid denying votes on the basis of Race and Sex. At the countries founding, by and large, most states allowed only white men with property the ability to vote, save for four states allowing Freed Slaves with property to do so as well.
As to the youtube videos, I can’t access them where I’m at. Perhaps rather than having to listen to however many minutes of Glenn Beck prattling on, you just simply state the names of those Founders who were black. I’d be extremely interested to know which ones signed the were at the convention that drew up the Constitution in 1787 or at least perhaps signed the DOI, as those are the people most often referred to as Founding Fathers.
If you’re taking the broader terminology to mean essentially
ANYONE that was involved with any portion at all of winning American Independence, then I’d absolutely agree. I'm sure there were a handful of black people who in some way, shape, or form had a hand in securing American Independence. However, to clarify for you, my use of the word refers to those classically and typically considered the “Founders” or “Founding Fathers”…IE those who were signees of the Declaration of Independence or those who were the drafters of the Constitution.
And, even so, a handful of black people in the extremely broader interpritation of "Founders" doesn't counter the statement I made in regards to the apparent political view of many of the othe Founders...ESPECIALLY if we take your broader definition of the word.
