Except that this country was founded by people who escaped their homeland because of religious persecution? If I had a dollar for every so called "real murrican" who thinks that he/she knows the law beyond the right to free speech and the ability to own/carry a gun, I'd probably be richer than Trump by this point

Ehhh...not so much.  The people fleeing religious persecution, while true of some, is largely another American myth.  And even when it is true, most people don't understand it.  

The Southern colonies were almost universally colonized by adventurers and people looking for an economic advantage.  Maryland was something of a refuge for Catholics, but it was a very mixed colony religiously and was subject to the Protestant Revolution of 1689 which brought about pretty severe repression of Catholics.  

The Quakers were initially oppressed.  But that largely ended with the Toleration Act of 1688.  

Most of the myth of the religious person seeking freedom comes from the Pilgrims and the Puritan colonies in New England.  However, it's generally conceded that the Pilgrims were not actively persecuted.  And the Calvinist Puritans were largely disgruntled because they weren't allowed to force their views on their neighbors, something they actively did in the New World. 

Beyond that the French and Spanish were almost completely a-religious.  There were a few scattered communities of French Huguenots, but that's about the size of it. 

That is mostly true, except it is very difficult to tell who was a huguenot or not since it was illigal and punishable by death to be one since 1685, but heavily disciminated decades before that, so that most people had to lie and change name to survive. And as no french migrants to Acadia and other northern american regions were required to provide birthplace, previous adress or parents name, there's no way to say why they migrated. 300 000 identified huguenots migrated during that time, but far more who weren't  identified as such. Still, it would be very presomptuous to claim only those 300 000 peple fled France because of religious discrimination or persecution. And after regions like Acadia went back and forth from Acadia to New Scotland because of small local wars, very few records have survived.

I fondly remember when I studied Constitutional law, my history teacher who used to be at the french constitutional council told me that you should always doubt global conclusions on historical records for facts or events older then 50 years old

Here is a paragraph from Kenneth Stampp's America in 1857: A Nation on the Brink:



Taney also used a very imaginative interpretation of Article Four, Section Three, which states that Congress shall "make all needful rules and regulations" regarding the governing of the territories of the United States. Taney rather arbitrarily decided that this could only mean the territory possessed by the U.S. in 1787. Conveniently for proslavery advocates, this interpretation meant that no laws regarding the territories (especially those laws restricting slavery) were Constitutional.

There's lots more, and the seeker of knowledge can find out many things on the Internet and at the local library.

I am still trying to get over "If you live by the pen, you die by the pen. And my pen has an eraser."

Which he'd file in his Trapper Keeper.

I was disgusted at how several of the GOP candidates lamented the safe and quick release of the US sailors held (for 16 hours) by Iran. Not one of them said they were glad the sailors were released safely. Several of them spoke with insane, saber-rattling rhetoric about how such a thing would never happen if he was president, basically implying WAR if Iran ever dares defend its territorial waters during his presidency.

And the audience loved it.

If you ever wonder why I'm very distrustful of conservatives as a whole ... yeah. It's stuff like this. I would have loved to have heard anybody in that audience, any of the candidates, any of the commentators expressing disgust at that display and their childish, petty refusal to give the administration any credit or to express any appreciation for the safe return of the sailors.

Disgusting.