"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."
Accusing any widely accepted theory of having been motivated to fool people is not a position we choose. However, Lincoln’s quote does make us believe that anything deviating from truth must have its day in which its erroneous nature is unveiled. Therefore, we do choose a position to encourage tighter scrutinizing on many of them.
Chapter 2 The Absolute and Only Natural Choice
A sole being, represented by the word “Creator,” as well as “divine Providence,” is clearly revered in the nation’s birth certificate. Therefore, right at the threshold, if anyone is going to set foot on this land, this birth certificate tells him that America is a country that is permeated with an overwhelming religion.
If anyone must put up an argument that America is not a country that is religiously shaped, he must first remove the words that refer to the super natural sole beings from the nation’s birth certificate. If anyone must put up an argument that any name dominating in other beliefs should share the same throne with God in the belief of Christianity as Creator and divine Providence in the Declaration, he must first prove that the belief held by the Founding Fathers allows two or more Creators to be identified. Doing so, he is to declare that the Founding Fathers are apostates, infidels, and religiously hypocritical to their own belief. Can anyone do this? At the time this certificate was signed, without the signature of anyone from Islam, Buddhism, and Sikhs… any name of any being, including Mohammad, Buddha, Karl Marx… must be found absent in the Founding Fathers’ hearts to guide them to do what they did.
Truly, the name of God in the belief of Christianity is not directly referred to in the document, but why should it be so needed? Why could or should a signature from a Christian be regarded as endorsement of other beliefs? Can a signature put up by a Muslim be regarded as evidence that he has placed Jesus or Buddha as his creator? When someone mentions his grandfather without explaining the existing nature of the grandfather, people will assume his grandfather as being a human being in his mind, but not a crow, not a serpent; what is so unnatural? If someone shows his family name as XYZ without mentioning his ancestral origin, people just traditionally assume the family name of his great grandfather in the straight paternal line also to be XYZ; what is so unnatural?