Nor have you disproven it.

You know perfectly well that it is impossible to prove a negative, so why do you resort to this? Were you hoping that I wasn't smart enough to know that?

The Enlightenment was about moving from blind faith to empiricism and scientific skepticism. From blind acceptance of authority (church and king) to acknowledgement of the rights of the governed. This was (and still is) opposed by the more traditionally religious, particularly the Biblical literalists.

The only 3 of the 10 Commandments enshrined by law in the US and the 4 that are not specifically prohibited by the Constitution (3) or practicality (3) from being enacted into law in the US predate Moses in written form in the region by hundreds of years*. They are universal enough in scope that they have been adopted by most cultures prior to Judeo-Christian contact.

* Code of Hammurabi, Ur-Nammu's Code, the Hittite Code of Laws, and the Kassite Code of Laws

You haven't proven a linkage

Nor have you disproven it.

[1]It was late, and I must say my tolerance for religious bigotry goes down when I’m tired.

There is no religious bigotry on my part, most of my family and friends are christian, and I attend church twice a week on average. I like Christians, and I like Christianity, but I don't like being treated differently by my government because I'm not one.

[3]There are millions of stupid people I’ve never met, however you do have a point, perhaps you just didn’t listen to the smart ones.

Again you assume that because you don't like what I'm saying, that not only am I wrong, but that I am wrong because the people I listen to are stupid. That's a pretty big assumption based simply on the fact that you disagree with me.

[4]It’s not the disagreement, it is the unwarranted vitriol.

What vitriol? This has been one of the more civilized threads lately.

[5]God forbid, that anyone should imply that you had gleaned knowledge from others.

It was more the fact that you didn't have enough respect to hold me responsible for my claims, you assumed I was just the unwitting follower of someone else.

So, it took a while.
this disproves the linkage, or are you just, as I suspect, over-reaching, now?

You haven't proven a linkage, you just made a claim which I pointed to as having no logical reasoning behind it.

[1]It was late, and I must say my tolerance for religious bigotry goes down when I'm tired.
[2]It is of course nice to hear that there is something you don't know.
[3]There are millions of stupid people I've never met, however you do have a point, perhaps you just didn't listen to the smart ones.
[4]It's not the disagreement, it is the unwarranted vitriol.
[5]God forbid, that anyone should imply that you had gleaned knowledge from others.

I should have been better informed by Paul's first letter to Timothy 6:20-21.
In other words you may not have been offended if only I had held closer counsel to the very thing you eschew.

That is a pretty ridiculous claim, since Christendom was around for one and a half thousand years before the Enlightenment brought back pre-Christian ideals like democracy, republicanism and the sciences.

So, it took a while.
this disproves the linkage, or are you just, as I suspect, over-reaching, now?

Heads-up! Your teachers were stupid!

I don't know which is more offensive, you claiming that people you've never met are stupid just because I said something you disagree with, or the fact that you think all my knowledge must have come from other people.

Heh. Nice try, but in many ways, the enlightenment itself would not have occurred but for the cultural influence of Christendom.

That is a pretty ridiculous claim, since Christendom was around for one and a half thousand years before the Enlightenment brought back pre-Christian ideals like democracy, republicanism and the sciences.

The Constitution was based on a culture of enlightenment philosophy much more than Judeo-Christian theology.

Heh. Nice try, but in many ways, the enlightenment itself would not have occurred but for the cultural influence of Christendom.

to explain the following anecdote.....

“The potatoes are piled as high as the eye of God, comrade!” declares the farm manager . “Now, now, comrade, you know very well there is no God,” replies the commissar . “Yes,” says the manager, “and there are no potatoes!”

We need a different analogy instead of chocolate peanut butter. I don't see these wiping off on one another or mixing from this resolution. Government is made up of individuals who can bring religion into government as part of who they are. It has been that way for the life of this country.

No.
Rather, the reverse. The Constitution (as written) is a product of the culture that wrote it. Think; If the constitution, as approved back in the day, ran afoul of the culture of the time, would it have been written, much less approved?

The Constitution was based on a culture of enlightenment philosophy much more than Judeo-Christian theology.

It’s also heavily based on the Constitution of the United States of America.

No.
Rather, the reverse. The Constitution (as written) is a product of the culture that wrote it. Think; If the constitution, as approved back in the day, ran afoul of the culture of the time, would it have been written, much less approved?

I thought the first duty of any government was to ensure the safety and prosperity of the people it governs

Both of these are also products of the culture, and without that foundation, any government efforts are worse than nothing.