This would be distinct from the *other* Treaty of Paris, in 1783, which formally established the independence of these United States. Heh. Can you imagine what today's Dems would do if presented with a treaty that opened thusly:
The Definitive Treaty of Peace 1783
In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity.
I thought that you'd all like to see what those $20-M bought you. I took this picture back in '86. What can I say about it? All those flying rats are dead (though their offsprings still polute Old San Juan). The kid is all grown-up and most likely has kids of his own by now. The 60ish looking lady is in an old home, and the 40ish man is now in his 60's. But the timeless chapel at the end of Cristo Street still stands.
I BTW owe my own existence to President McKinley's splendid little war. The father of the mother of my father, you see, came to my island as a PFC in the Army Signal Corps. He liked the island so much that the first thing he did upon landing in Ponce, was to find himself a creole belle and make babies. In 1910, Grandma was born one door down from that chapel. And the rest as they say, it's history.

Boq



Sure. They'd sanctimoniously pontificate that they would refuse to be bound by any document obviously penned by fundamentalist religious extremist fanatic homophobic wingnut enemies of the People's Democratic Republic of the United States...
Certainly nicer than people on the island of Manhattan!
We've been there, Boq, back in our brief 2008 visit. That exact place. I took a rest on the chain across the road that is at about the place the picture snapper was standing.
As for Manhattan, dear - there are a lot of 'Rican's living there!
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
Treaty of Tripoli, 1797. Ratified by John Adams.
Just sayin'.
Um, okay. Help this ignorant untututored square state rube out, Orson - what *is* the counterpoint?
Me, I was just mocking the rigidity of doctrinaire politicians for an easy laugh.
I would have approached it differently were the Republicans the target. Something along the lines of "This treaty was clearly negotiated by Pat Robert's great-great-great-great-great Grandfather" or such.
Just sayin'...
Shirley, you jest!!
0>;~}
Cheers
It's nice to see something as old as the Treaty of Tripoli stating it so baldly: We're the USA, not some two-bit member of the Protestant League (or whomever) and don't wander around with THAT specific baggage when dealing with foreigners. It might be nice to *snerk* at the Dems with similar wording on a modern bill and their predictable reaction, but they'd be right.
Shirley, you can't be serious!
In memory of the late great Leslie Nielson...
As for the Treaty of Tripoli, John Adams didn't ratify it, the Senate does that. The statement on religion is also ahistorical in that principles on which the country was founded were found only in Protestant Christian countries. Adams was a Unitarian whose opinion changed over the years and he was in the throws of that change as president. A look at Adams statements prior to that treaty certainly deviate from that statement.
Like it or not, any :"realpolitik" that ignores religion will be doomed to fail. The religionists of pieces are rubbing that in the collective faces of the world at the moment.