User:Semorgan1pstcc/sandbox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense#cite_note-Paine_Britannica-2

Fact: In the third section, Paine examines the hostilities between England and the American colonies and argues that the best course of action is independence.

MLA Citation: Nelson, Craig. “Thomas Paine and the Making of "Common Sense".” New England Review (1990), vol. 27, no. 3, Middlebury College, 2006, pp. 228–50.

ISSN: 1053-1297

ISSN: 2161-9131

EISSN: 2161-9131

Quote:  Let a Continental Conference be held, in the following manner, and for the following purpose ... to frame a Continental Charter, or Charter of the United Colonies; (answering to what is called the Magna Charta of England) fixing the number and manner of choosing members of Congress, members of Assembly, with their date of sitting, and drawing the line of business and jurisdiction between them: always remembering, that our strength is continental, not provincial: Securing freedom and property to all men, and above all things the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; with such other matter as is necessary for a charter to contain.

Phase 3:

Noll, Mark A. “Religion in the Early Republic: a Second Tom Paine Effect.” Mod. Intell. Hist, vol. 14, no. 3, 2017, pp. 883–898., https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479244316000287. In this article, several contributors discuss the many ways that biblical teaching influenced polar reactions to Thomas Paine’s Common Sense. Support an unspoken plea for deeper understanding of what biblical omnipresence intended for American civilization. One author demonstrates how powerful the Old Testament, as well as Hebrew scriptures, provided descriptions of what national self-identity should be while another describes how some used the Bible to dispute the tempestuous reaction to Paine. Den Hardtog portrays the Bible as the crucial object around which post-Federalists rallied in their move toward voluntary social mobilization.

Solinger, Jason D. “Thomas Paine's Continental Mind.” Early American Literature, vol. 45, no. 3, 2010, pp. 593–617., https://doi.org/10.1353/eal.2010.0029. This article gives insight on the tyrannical relationship between the Kind, the peers, and the Commoners in the colonies. By providing a background on Paine’s British roots, the author sheds light on Paine’s ideas as well as the cultural and political appeal that urbanity had for British American in a time where their relationship with Great Britain was uncertain and confounded.

Phase Four:

Religion- Fact 1 Paragraph Quote: "The Bible likewise loomed large in the great evangelical mobilization that, at least in partial response to Paine, overwhelmed the threat of deism and nearly succeeded in making Protestant mores the informal law of the land. Almost immediately, however, contrasting views about how to follow scriptural teaching fragmented the new nation's evangelical movements--some constructing national voluntary societies to accomplish their mixed religious and civic aspirations, others regarding these national ventures as a new form of quasi-imperial tyranny.

Fact 1 Summary: Somewhat in response to Paine, the Bible was a predominate influence in religious unrest that overwhelmed a threat of deism while nearly resulted in Protestantism the unofficial law of the land. However, many had different beliefs about how scripture teachings should be implemented and followed. This led to a divide in the nation’s evangelical movements.

Monarchy- Fact 2 Paragraph Quote: Just as Paine portrays Lord Howe as acting in a "very illiberal" manner toward the colonists, so he often represents Great Britain as behaving ungenerously in its relations with other countries. In the seventh American Crisis, Paine writes of Britain: "Her ideas of national honor seem devoid of that benevolence of heart, that universal expansion of philanthropy, and that triumph over the rage of vulgar prejudice, without which man is inferior to himself, and a companion of common animals" (147). The remark figures the mother country, whose parental authority Paine contested at every turn, as not only inhumane but also inhuman: lacking the extensive sympathy and social affection that eighteenth-century moral philosophers attributed to humanity.

Fact 2 Summary: The monarchy’s demeanor toward the colonies was quite, as Paine described, narrow-minded. He often called out Great Britain for being stingy and unsympathetic towards other countries and the colonies. Paine claimed Great Britain’s lack of benevolence and their uncouth preconception as insensitive and callous.

Article Sections:

Paine found two tyrannies in the English constitution: monarchical and aristocratic tyranny in the king and peers, who rule by heredity and contribute nothing to the people. Paine criticized the English constitution by examining the relationship between the king, the peers, and the commons. The monarchy’s demeanor toward the colonies was quite, as Paine described, narrow-minded. He often called out Great Britain for being stingy and unsympathetic towards other countries and the colonies. Paine claimed Great Britain’s lack of benevolence and their uncouth preconception as insensitive and callous.

In response to Common Sense, Rev. Charles Inglis, then the Anglican cleric of Trinity Church in New York, responded to Paine on behalf of colonists loyal to the Crown with a treatise entitled The True Interest of America Impartially Stated.[36] Further in response to Paine, the Bible was a predominate influence in religious unrest that overwhelmed a threat of deism while nearly resulted in Protestantism the unofficial law of the land. However, many had different beliefs about how scripture teachings should be implemented and followed. This led to a divide in the nation’s evangelical movements.