The Separation of Church and StateThe Leftist Battle Cry

Jeremiah Project ^ | Jeremiah Project

[RepCath]

The Leftist social liberals continue to harangue on the "separation of church and state" as justification for eliminating religious issues from public view. The phrase "Separation of Church and State" has been bandied about for so long that 67% of all Americans believe that it is actually in the Constitution. In fact, those three words appear nowhere in the Constitution.

Oblivious to the irrelevance of their arguments, and at the same time refusing to acknowledge that no document of state, let alone the Constitution, has ever proposed such a concept, those on the Left have tried to convince the American people that our founding documents warned of the dangers of mixing politics and religion.

[RepCath]

Another view.

[DLfromthedesert]

Except when liberal pols preach in black churches.

[So Cal Rocket]

Ah... but it does appear in the Constitution ...

Of the Soviet Union!!!

Article 52 [Religion]

(1) Citizens of the USSR are guaranteed freedom of conscience, that is, the right to profess or not to profess any religion, and to conduct religious worship or atheistic propaganda. Incitement of hostility or hatred on religious grounds is prohibited.

(2) In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church.

[hleewilder]

Amen!

[GaltMeister]

Or when Slick Willie carried a bible and bit his lip for the cameras all the time.

[AirborneMedic]

Seperation of Church and State does appear in the constitution. "The constitution of the former USSR".

[GoBucks2002]

When I taught intro to poly sci, I *always* asked the following question: Where does the phrase "separation of church and state" appear in the Constitution?

A. The 2nd Amendment

B. The 10th Amendment

C. Article I.

D. Nowhere

[Stiletto]

It can be argued that "respecting an establishment of religion" narrowly limits government from declaring an official state religion, and that we are free to make laws grounded in religious belief.

Of course, you then couldn't cry foul when a community decides to create and enforce Islamic based laws (or Buddhist, anyone?), could you? The sword cuts both ways.

[LauraleeBraswell]

Okay- heres the truth


Article [I.] (See Note 13)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Congress:The NATIONAL legislative body of the United States, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

ESTABLISHMENT- means An arranged order or system, especially a legal code.

as in THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND or the CATHOLIC CHURCH

So basically we cannot have national organized religion but as it says in

Article [X.]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

An individual state like Pennsylvania may have a state sponsored religion Like Quaker

The whole idea of natural rights, Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness was built on the foundation that there was a God, A Deity, and individuals were entitled to their natural rights by GOD.

Infact- many of our founding fathers,including Thomas Jefferson were not Christians, but Deists. Deism is a belief in God through reason, So this country was founded on the premise of GOD not on organized religion, two completely separate Ideas

[Always Right]

It can be argued that "respecting an establishment of religion" narrowly limits government from declaring an official state religion, and that we are free to make laws grounded in religious belief.

And it could be argued that you are a newbie troll. The fact is that is a very extreme intepretation that has lead to numerous ridiculous rulings. The concept of separation of church and state was not the intent of the First Amendment.

[Always Right]

Sorry, I kind of misread your statement.

[carrier-aviator]

Good one.

The First Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof";...

So, the federal CONGRESS can't establish a relgion. That's it.

The legislature of the State of New York can establish Catholicism as the official religion of the state of New York if it so desires (there were state relgions in some states of the U.S. 'til the 1850s). The City of Los Angeles can erect a cross on the law of City Hall. The boro of Brooklyn can erect a menorah in the lobby of a courthouse.

The phrase "separation of Church and State" was a phrase first uttered by Jefferson in the early 1800s. His utterance gave it NO legal significance.

It wasn't until the 1940s that the Supreme Court started ruling on the restrictions of people and local governments, etc. to express faith in the public square. Sixty years versus 170. It's not too late to reverse this post-1940 erroneous path of history.

[Stiletto]

That's OK.. You're right that I'm new here. I hope I didn't offend you but that's the way I read the 1st Amdmt. Up to the States / communitites.

[Tealc]

I bet many got that one wrong!

[Always Right]

So, the federal CONGRESS can't establish a relgion. That's it.

This is where the 14th Amendment came along. They used that Amendment to apply it to all government.

[carrier-aviator]

Then let's amend the 14th Amendment.

[LisaMalia]

The Leftists need to call their "man", John Kerry.

He trampled on the Separation of Church and State during his campaign more than any Christian EVER has.

[LisaMalia]

Help me to understand, please, why high schools allow Muslins student a special "prayer" room during Ramadam, but Christian students cannot even pray out loud during school hours.

Thank you.

[Always Right]

That's OK.. You're right that I'm new here. I hope I didn't offend you but that's the way I read the 1st Amdmt.

Your reading would lead to more reasonable rulings than what we currently have. If some rule was based on Islam, it would not be a problem. But I am not sure what that would be. Legalized Wife beating perhaps.

[IrishCatholic]

You are a bit off target. The elimination of God from all public mention or representation in public discourse is quite a bit different from making laws. Laws may be based on a tradition of Judeo-Christian and English common law, but they are also based on the standard of the Constitution. They are done by a legislature of the people in accordance to the above.
So, your second paragraph really means a lack of understanding of the whole topic.