h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Interestingly offbeat article and very informative!If I memorise these names, it's the sort of thing you get asked in pub quizzes where money may be at stake.

About this time, didn't a lot of these people get together and write the Constitution? Some of the names above sound familiar in this context.

One thing that fascinates me about the American Constitution is its reference to "Nature and Nature's God", which seems to be both very specific and very vague at the same time. (This sounds Theist, Unitarian, possibly Animist, but not a nod towards orthodox Trinitarian Christianity)

Specific because it's pointing to one clear definition of the Supreme Being, but not in generally used Christian terms.

Vague, because it isn't a Christian definition.

You wonder if they foresaw a time when Bible-bashing nutters would be insisting Creationism gets taught in state schools, and insisting that the seperation of Church and State be ended (in preference, for their own narrow view of Christianity). If the Constitution of the United States just has one fairly vague exposition on the nature of God, then it could be anyone's God, and therefore in keeping with the freedom to follow any religion or none which they felt the new nation should be about. Which hopefully would make "Christianizing" the USA (in the sense of right-wing fundamentalism)that bit more difficult!

not that i really care.

Jefferson was the third President After John Adams. He was the second Vice President and first Secretary of State, though, so he's still got a pretty good resume.

I don't know about the Nature and Nature's God thing, but I don't think too many of these folks were at the Constitutional Convention. Most would have been in the Continental Congress or retired by that time.

Many of the framers of the constitution were Deists who believed in some sort of single god who created the world and then left man to his own devices, so that Earth itself was Heaven.

The insanely irritating thing about articles like this (seemingly written without reading them back!!) is, if Washington was either the 8th or 15th President...why are there eight or 15 names before his???? Maybe there is a good reason but, if so, do you think we should be let in on it...or is it hidden somewhere in the article and we have to read it in the finest detail to discover why? I care a little more than you perhaps...but not that much!!

Love

Irritated by Sloppiness