Giving Thanks to God: Is It Constitutional?

December 4, 2025

Host: Hon. Sam Rohrer

Guest: David New

Note: This transcript is taken from a Stand in the Gap Today program aired on 12/04/25. To listen to the podcast, click HERE.

Disclaimer: While reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate transcription, the following is a representation of a mechanical transcription and as such, may not be a word for word transcript. Please listen to the audio version for any questions concerning the following dialogue.

Sam Rohrer:

Hello and welcome to this Thursday edition of Stand In the Gap Today, and it’s also our bimonthly constitutional update program where we generally bring together some aspect of current event that relate to the Constitution, but we always intertwine what the Bible says in how that colors what it is, and we also bring in some element because you can’t help to as some aspect of US history. Now my recurring guest, as is normal on this focus, is constitutional attorney David New, historian, author, and public speaker. Now as far as where we’re going to go today, we thought this as David and I did as we were talking about the direction to go, but because we’re in the holiday season, having just now passed as we know Thanksgiving and moving toward Christmas, millions of Americans, all of you listening I am sure have celebrated, will celebrate frankly our most favorite holidays in our nation.

And do you know what are the favorite holidays in America? Well, I did a little research on that one report that I have found from September of 2024. The latest ones, it would be pretty accurate. It was you gov survey, they surveyed a thousand Americans and Christmas is ranked as the most favorite by 36% of that sample. Thanksgiving ranked second by 23%. That’s pretty good. I didn’t know how that would come out, but that’s what it’s now. Christmas is the time we know established to remember the coming of Christ to Earth and the beginning of Christianity, which shaped the beginning of our nation and our national laws. Thanksgiving just passed, was established as a national holiday and we’ll talk more about that next segments. But in keeping with our pilgrim fathers who set this time to formally express their dependence on God and his blessing.

Now both days are in every way, not just holidays, but they are by definition holy days. That’s where we get holiday from. But holy days, celebrations and days of remembrances. But since America has moved so deeply into secular humanism, many people now, particularly our youngest of generations, have no idea what our founders actually thought about these holy days and what guidance our constitution affords us today about officially reflecting on, for instance, Jesus’ birth Christmas or giving thanks to God at Thanksgiving. For instance, how does our Constitution fit in with the holiday season Holy day season? Did the framers of the Constitution think America should be thankful? Did they think America should be thankful to God or did they believe what the secular humanist groups like Americans United for separation of Church of State would say? And as they said in a recent article entitled, is America a Christian Nation? In that article they said concerning the Constitution, this is them saying this, the US Constitution is a holy secular document. It contains no mention of Christianity or Jesus Christ. Christianity does not appear in the Constitution. But are they correct technically, are they correct even beyond that? So what was the framer’s view? So title I’ve chosen to frame today’s conversation is this giving thanks to God? Is it constitutional? And with that, David new thanks for being here again. It’s a great topic. I think it’ll be a great interest to all of our listeners.

David New:

It’s wonderful to be here and blessings to everyone that’s with us as day.

Sam Rohrer:

David, before we get into the core of all of this, the content in the next segments, I want to ask you another question about this will be a recent event. Last week in DC, two National Guardsmen were shot and much is being said, if somebody is following that from many perspectives, who did it? Why did all that kind of thing, but you mentioned to me that in one narrative you read or you saw that you heard something which had a direct connection to the Constitution, but hardly anyone understands, would you share what that was?

David New:

Yes. What happened was the president in the Oval Office was being interviewed by a lot of members of the press and one individual asked the president, Mr. President, the family members of this Afghan individual who is accused of shooting these National Guard people, sad to say one has left us, but the other one we’re still praying for, for sure. Are you going to deport them? The person wanted to know was this family of this man, this Afghan man, this alleged shooter, are you going to deport them? And the President said he didn’t know. He hasn’t made up his mind or et cetera, et cetera. The moment I heard that, the moment I heard that I thought of a phrase that’s very exotic and unusual that people never discuss, but it’s in the US Constitution. It’s a phrase called corruption of blood, corruption of blood. What an odd term defined in the United States Constitution. If you look at Article three and you go down to section three of the Constitution, it says this, the Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood. It is an interesting thing, I mean to use that kind of language in such a document. Now what it refers to is this.

This shows you again how advanced the framers of the Constitution were, how in an odd way progressive they were. Because today the word progressive is not really quite progressive, but be that as it may in the olden days, if a member of your family did something bad to the government, pretty much everybody in the whole family suffered. It wasn’t limited to that one person. And for example, if that person who did something bad to the government, the government will not allow his family members to inherit any property from that person who violated the law or whatever it was. And the thinking was this phrase corruption of blood. It was the thinking that this business of this person doing the bad thing, it must be bad blood and the bad blood must flow through the whole family so they all suffer when something like that happens. Well, in the United, I don’t know if this applies to this Afghan family, I don’t know what their status is or anything like that specifically, but the US Constitution does not allow this type of thing to go on. If I did something bad to the government, the government cannot punish my family for what I did. It’s limited. It’s following the scripture teaching that each person is responsible for his or her own sin.

Sam Rohrer:

All right David, we’re running out of time, but that is a great, great point to make for that ladies and gentlemen, we do, it’s called free will each of us make our choices as granted by God. The eternal choice obviously is of the biggest consequence, but it tends even to these kinds of things that David just mentioned. Stay with us. We’ll be back in just a moment. Well, if you’re just joining us today here on Stand in the Gap today, thanks so much for being a part of the program. David New is my guest today and whenever that happens, one of our bimonthly emphasis is on the Constitution, always involve some aspect of American history as a part of it. Try to throw in some current event as well to connect it to which we just did in the last segment and we will do that further as we go into the program.

Now, the theme that I have chosen today, the title is This Giving Thanks to God, is it Constitutional. Now obviously giving thanks to God we can do within our heart and it doesn’t make any difference anybody says about it, but this has more of a public aspect to it when we give thanks to God and that’s what we’re looking at here today because a lot of folks don’t understand. Lemme just go into it from here and I want to go to David and he’s going to begin to lay out some content, some information that I think will be very helpful. Now, official holiday, here’s just some background official holidays such as Thanksgiving and Christmas, but there are many, many others that we observe, but official holidays established by government, which makes it a national holiday, government eating that does lie within the function of civil government.

It’s an appropriate thing to do. It’s not a problem with that. And whether it is Thanksgiving Day, labor Day, Christmas or even Halloween, there is usually some justifying reason given as a part of the official establishment. When it’s done, there’s always some kind of a preface or a whatever that’s done to say why it’s being done and the date that’s being observed and all that. Now, some days like Labor Day, I have no real connection to an underlying spiritual foundation while Christmas and Easter and Thanksgiving as an example, they do, for instance, let’s just take Thanksgiving, we just passed that, it was in 1789 that President George Washington issued the first proclamation regarding this establishment of Thanksgiving. Let me read just a portion of this and you’ll get the idea and think of it, is it constitutional to give God thanks. Here’s what President George Washington said, he said, whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits and humbly to implore his protection and favor.

And whereas both houses of Congress have by their joint committee requested me to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness. He goes on to say, now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the people of these states to the service of that great and glorious being capitalized, being God who is the beneficial author of all the good that was, that is or that will be, that we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks for his kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interposition of his providence, which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war.

And then he concludes with this given under my hand and the city of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789 George Washington. Now David in short did President Washington in 1789 or frankly Abraham Lincoln in 1863 when he did a Thanksgiving proclamation or even FDRs proclamation in 1941 where they assigned the same Thursday, the last Thursday of November, did they have a right, did they violate some constriction of the Constitution or put it another way? Is our government a good fit to celebrate the holiday or holy day season? Is our constitution complimentary for Thanksgiving and Christmas?

David New:

Well, that absolutely is, and I don’t want to spend too much time on that proclamation that George Washington signed. I want to go into another area, but one thing I would like to point out to our audience is that this proclamation, the George Washington, he was the president of the Constitutional Convention. He was there every day from May to September and he saw the Constitution be put together line by line. And so here he is now in his six month of his presidency and he’s issuing something that he should not be doing if our secular friends are correct. This proclamation is so powerful and so contradictory to the secular theology, shall we say that generally when they write books against why America is not a Christian nation and the evidence they put forward, guess what they don’t include in the book the proclamation you just read. There’s a book called The Goddess Constitution by Isaac Kramnik and r Lawrence Moore.

They wrote this book about 20 years ago, very, very popular. Makes all the arguments for why the United States is not a Christian nation. Guess what? They never one time referred to. That’s right. This proclamation. What do you do with it? How can you deal with it? Now, I want to go on now and go to the subject I had wanted to discuss with our audience. I want to take a look at this quote that you quoted earlier. Let’s take a quick look at this Americans United quote that our friends there and the A CU believe is America Christian Nation. Here’s the quote, listen to this. The US Constitution is a holy secular document. It contains no mention of Christianity or Jesus Christ. The Christianity does not appear in the Constitution.

Our secular friends believe that the framers of the Constitution, the 39 signers of the Constitution, when they wrote the Constitution, they created a government that had never ever been seen before in the history of the world. It would be a secular government, a secular state. It would be a government that is completely and totally devoid of God. Now, they’re not saying that the Constitution denies the existence of God. What they are saying is whether God exists or not, does it matter to the Constitution? That is what they’re saying. So here we are, we’ve made history. We’ve created this new God constitution. And when they say that they don’t mean in a sense of evil that they want Americans to do evil wicked things. When they say godless religious people, when they use that term, that’s what they mean. But that’s not what these secular means. These secular people mean. They mean it’s just that they’re acting without the inspiration of God in any way and administering the government. Now here they are, allegedly have established something never proceed before in the history of the world and now comes the 14th state. You’ve got 13 original states and now you’ve come. A new state is about to enter the union. It is known as the state of Vermont.

Now there’s something very important. This is the first state in this new godless America, this new God constitutional system, and it’s the state of Vermont. And George Washington signed the active admission for Vermont on February 18th, 1791. He signed it, bring Vermont into the union and George Washington was the president of the constitutional convention. So he knows something about the constitution. Of course he was doing that in 1787 and now he’s admitting the 14th state in 1791. Now look what’s in the Vermont constitution and it’s still there to this day. It’s in article three. Listen to this ladies and gentlemen. It says, quote that all persons have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciousness and understanding as in their opinion shall be regulated by the word of God.

Sam Rohrer:

And David, that’s unbelievable, but you’re going to have to repeat that. Let’s continue in that ladies and gentlemen, you can see very clearly by what we’ve said already is giving thanks to God prohibited by the Constitution. Far from it, the fact that we don’t give thanks to God has nothing to do because of the constitution, other things, yes, we’ve walked away from him. We come back. We’re going to go further into that provision from Vermont when it was admitted and we’ll talk about consequences that the admission of that and the wording that David’s going to psych to you has sat on our country. Alright, David, let’s go back into that. You were reading a provision from Article three from Vermont when they were admitted. Read that again what you said, read the balance of it and then go ahead and answer the question because it is dramatic. What do you believe that the admission of Vermont at that point on request of President Washington, what kind of consequences do you think have occurred because of the clarity of that information? Do you want to read?

David New:

Absolutely. Let’s take a look again at Article three that all persons have a natural and unalienable, right? Unalienable means it can’t be taken away from you nontransferable to alienate something as an old English term to sell property. Unalienable means it cannot be sold. The government can’t take it away from you. Even if the government doesn’t respect your right to the freedom of religion, you still don’t lose the right then it goes on to say to worship almighty God, according to the dictates of their own consciousness and understanding as in their opinion shall be regulated by the word of God, but it gets worse and that no person or power whatever shall in any case, interfere with or in any manner control the rights of conscience in the free exercise of religious worship. Now watch what happens nevertheless, ever sect or denomination of Christians ought to observe the Sabbath or Lord’s day and keep up some sort of religious worship, which to them shall see most agreeable to the revealed will of God.

So look what you’ve got and this 14th state constitution, which the President and the Congress allegedly representing a government devoid of God, look at the words you’ve got in article three. You’ve got word of God, you’ve got Christian, it’s still there. After this program, download a copy of the Vermont Constitution. The word Christian is still in that state constitution, brother Bernie. Look at the word Sabbath or Lord’s day. Very popular view at the time in America that the Lord’s day of the Sabbath were the same day. A lot of people have moved away from that, but that was the general view at the time. You’ve also got revealed word of God. Now this tells you very strongly that something’s wrong with the secular point of view because the federal government should not be admitting a Christian state. The 14th state is a Christian state and they’re admitting that into the union.

Now, Vermont did not have an established church like Massachusetts did, but it still is a Christian state. It even uses the word Christian. The Constitution of Virginia uses the word Christian, but this is the 14th state. Virginia was one of the original 13. The word Christian was already there when the federal government came into existence, but now they’re admitting a 14th state with the word Christian in it. And there’s no evidence by George Washington or anybody in Congress to say, is there anything you could do to tone this down? Can you get rid of some of this religious, we’re a secular nation now and religion and government and politics don’t mix here. You have a powerful statement by government asking and suggesting to the people of Vermont honor the Lord’s Day, honor the Sabbath, honor the word of God, honor the revealed word of God. This contradicts their whole narrative. The whole secular narrative falls apart because of this. Well, what are the consequences of this? Well, for one thing, Vermont is one of the reasons why future states in the United States acknowledge God in their constitution. They set it up, they set the example. It’s not the only reason future constitutions acknowledge God in their preamble and so forth, but it’s one of them.

Now, the fact that Congress admitted a Christian state is enormous For another reason, it tells us that religion and government are not divorced. They are linked in America. That means that things like under God in the Pledge of Allegiance in God, we trust as our national motto are perfectly natural. If you’re going to talk about the Lord’s day, if you’re going to talk about the Sabbath, why not talk about under God and the pledge of Allegiance? Those of those who are members of the 1619 project who believe in that narrative. Please listen carefully when I’m about to say to you, Vermont was the first government in the world to end slavery. So when they admitted Vermont as the 14th state, they admitted a state free completely free of slavery. Who said that? Reuters. Reuters news service. This is what they said, 1777 State of Vermont, an independent republic after the American Revolution becomes the first sovereign state to abolish slavery.

Now that tells you a lot about the direction George Washington and Congress wanted to go with this issue of slavery. When they admit a state that is about as against slavery as it possibly compete, that also set an example of your future states in the north. Get rid of slavery. So you’ve got all kinds of things going on here that brother Bernie and our good brother Zhan should pay attention to. They talk about private property and the Vermont Constitution. If you’re going to get rid of private property, which is what these gentlemen believe, you’re going to have to undo the Vermont Constitution as well as the US Constitution. It is unconstitutional to be a socialist. Socialists want to abolish private property. The US Constitution protects private property. For those of you who are interested in socialism, you might as well admit what it means. You’ve got to toss the US Constitution, you got to toss it out. You got to toss out the Bill of rights too because private property appears in the Bill of Rights. So there’s all kinds of things in the Vermont Constitution that sets an important example for the future.

Sam Rohrer:

And David, that was quite a good recounting. I’m sure that was very new information for many, many people. But when people hear that, David, obviously our audience is well-informed on that. But when you hear that and reminded of it, it is very, very clear that you have to lie and deceive and twist and surgically remove the secularists have to go in and do great harm to history to rewrite it and to win and redefine terms that are within our organic documents of law, including constitution and declaration. However, David, and I’m not quite sure how I’m going to phrase this, but we have documents that are very much in every regard consistent with what the Bible is. So we have the Bible that tells us how to live, tells the whole world how to live. We have the constitutional or documents of law that are found is very clearly in the fear of God put together a system of government that was reflective of the word of God.

But today we have people in government that give no consideration for the Constitution. You have mayors that are being elected, people who are electing people who are socialists like you talk about, who have no fear of God. And it is by definition in violation of the Constitution. And yet it happens and goes on. David, it makes me think of other founding fathers who said that our constitution was made for a holy Christian people and if they do not observe and submit themselves voluntarily to the 10 Commandments of God, God’s moral law, this system of government will not work. That’s kind of like where we are now, isn’t it?

David New:

Yes it is. Listen ladies and gentlemen, especially those in the 1619 project, notice how carefully the first government to end slavery notice how deeply religious that government was. Notice word of God, Christian Sabbath Lord’s day revealed will of God here. This government is coming out against slavery. So what was the main impetus to get rid of slavery in the United States? Well, to be honest with you, it was religion. There was no secularism, did not end slavery in the United States. Secularism had nothing to do with it. They weren’t even secularists in those days. Secularism really in the modern sense of the word, doesn’t really come to blossom until the late 1960s and seventies and then it takes off. Now the early days of secularism in the sixties and seventies and eighties were very tame compared to the secularism after 2000. These characters are far more radical and extreme than their earlier ancestors.

Sam Rohrer:

Yes they are. And ladies and gentlemen, stay with us. We’re going into a final segment next. We’re going to wrap up what we’re talking about and then look ahead because next year is our 250th anniversary, our birthday. What are we going to celebrate? David and I are going to talk a little bit about that in next second. Alright, David, as we wrap up the program, between what you’ve shared and what I’ve shared today in that reading the Washington’s proclamation, I’m just going to ask you this question. Our title was put out this way and it was this Giving Thanks to God. Is it Constitutional? That was the title. I’m going to say this, giving thanks to God. How can it not be constitutional based on what we just said? Any comment on that before we go into wrapping it up and looking ahead to the 250th anniversary?

David New:

Yes, the preamble of the US Constitution has 52 words in it, but there’s one word in that preamble that is particularly of a religious nature. It is the word blessing. That word first appears in the Holy Bible in the anguish language. The word blessing first appears in the Holy Bible. That is a spiritual dimension that the Constitution refers to. Without question. Now, before I talked about Project two 50 and I asked our good friends in the audience to contact their local communities and find out what they’re doing to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the declaration of it mentioned that the most important word that needs to be emphasized in the Declaration of Independence is the word creator. That is the super lithium battery that gives the declaration is power.

But there’s also something else I want to mention that you may want to bring up. Where did we the people come from? Why does our Constitution begin with we the people? What is the source document for it? It is the Declaration of Independence. That’s the Declaration of Independence created. We the people, no Declaration of Independence. No, we the people. You can’t have one without the other. The foundation for the US Constitution is the Declaration of Independence. Well, David, where does it say in the Declaration of Independence that the source for we the people comes from this document by Jefferson? Well, let me read it to you. This is the sentence that created we the people. Jefferson said that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the government that when any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people. Hello, that’s we the people. It is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it and institute new government. That is the sentence that creates we the people in the US constitution. So when we celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, we should recognize and acknowledge how it created and established the US Constitution.

Sam Rohrer:

David, I think it’s a great point and it makes me think, I’m just looking back at one line in Washington’s proclamation about Thanksgiving and it’s an attitude that he expresses in conjunction exactly with what you just said. But I’m going to say it is an attitude that is nearly absent in anyone in the executive branch or even in Congress. It seems to be totally lost. And this is what the President said, he said. Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits. And humbly that’s the attitude to implore his protection in favor. And whereas both houses of Congress have by their joint committee, and here’s the key word, I think requested of me to recommend to the people of the United States, a day of public Thanksgiving and prayer. David, the idea that those in government are servants of the people I think has been totally lost. But it starts with what you just talked about and it was reflected heavily in what Washington said in giving thanks. I think if we’re not a humble people, we’re not a thankful people and humility has been replaced with arrogance. We see it on every hand in a government who knows better elites, who know better than the people. It’s completely turned this upside down. So David, as we go into the 250th anniversary, what is important to you that is remembered in that people just must not cut out?

David New:

We must remember that the Constitution teaches that the people are the master and the government is the servant. Now, if we pursue the direction that Brother Bernie and Brother Han and a OC sister, a OC, all these people want to go, it’s now going to be reversed. It will be reversed. The government will be the master and the people will be the servant because everything you have will be dished out to you by the government. You won’t have any private property. Your house will be owned by the government. Your car will be owned by the government. The government will decide what kind of education your children have. The government will decide where you work. These people are leading us to slavery, slavery, socialism. Slavery is a 21st century version of slavery. Wherever socialism has gone, the people end up being slaves.

Sam Rohrer:

And David, that’s a great place as we approach the end here. To wrap that up, ladies and gentlemen, as we’ve said so many, many, many times, until a person experiences freedom from their sin and the bondage of sin through faith in Jesus Christ, they really do not understand the civil freedom until one understands the principles as laid out by God himself for how mankind and human civilization should work and the whole concept of authority and all of that leading back to humility and gratefulness to God for all he is done. Unless that is done, there will be bondage, there will be slavery. That’s the history of mankind. And the only way that there can be freedom was when we experience our liberty in Christ. When we trust in him. That is why the Christian message, that is why the Christian thought that went into our government and to the creation of all that we have seen permitted God to bring great blessing.

But as God told Israel, you submit to me and I’ll give you great blessings more than you can handle. But if you walk away from me and you forget that I am the one from whom blessings flow, all that you have will disappear. You’ll go from creditor to debtor. Enemy will rise up within you. Respect from other nations will be lost. Whether will go haywire, what you thought was solid will begin to move. That’s what God said. Now you look at that in reflection to us in America today. I think it’s very clearer. We are. So what’s the response as we move into next year starts with being grateful to God for who he is and what he has done. And I implore all of us to remember that it’s not some policy out of Washington. Not some promise by somebody. No, not at all. It’s a return to God in humility. That’s where it starts. That’s where we once were. Thanks for listening to us today. David New, always a wonderful thing to have you on the program. Ladies and gentlemen, we are so thrilled and honored to have you apart. Go back and listen to the program again and share it with a friend. Perhaps they will be blessed as well.