Posted on 12/25/2005 2:07:38 PM PST by perfect stranger
Brit Humes excellent piece is on now.
I'm glad because I missed it the first time.
Merry Christmas to all.
Thanks for posting this. I just turned it on and it looks good so far.
P.S. you beat me to it ;)
They will..
I learned a lot from Brit's show. I also came away hating liberals even more, if that's at all possible.
It is an incredible show.
Nice slap down on Newdow.
BTW it is balanced to a tee.
Why should the mod's pull this. The show today was a repeat and probably deserves some discussion about it.
It doesn't seem to be bringing much discussion. The show is over now anyway, so I guess this thread has served it's purpose.
Merry Christmas.
Primarily the early states all came to the same conclusion to not have the state financially support the church or one church supported to the exclusion of others. Nothing will kill the giving spirit in a church like having the state providing monetary support when it should be the generous spirit of the members.
And I don't think any here would advocate that the state should enforce a religious practice on anyone else, such as tithe paying or Sunday attendence.
But from watching Brit Hume's show, it is evident that the actions of the 1947 ruling by Black (and since) have gone way too far and were fundamentally wrong in application. I had the thought about the approach using the "free exercise" clause before I even saw the show and I agree with the proponents of that approach.
CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL POLICY
The Social Democratic Party is striving for the abolition of the educational privileges of the propertied classes.
Education, schooling, and research are public matters; their operation is to be secured through public institutions and the expenditure of public funds. The provision of instruction and instructional materials free of charge. Economic support for pupils and students.
The public institutions of education, schooling, culture and research are secular. All legally grounded interference in these institutions by churches and religious or ideological communities is to be opposed. Separation of church and state. Separation of church and schools. Secular technical and occupational schools and institutions of higher education. No expenditure of public monies for ecclesiastical or religious purposes.
The unified structuring of the school system. The creation of the closest possible relations between practical and intellectual labor on all levels.
The common education of both sexes by both sexes.
Standardized training of teachers in colleges and universities. [...]
Program of SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY (SPD)
Accepted at the Heidelberg Sozialdemokratische Partei Congress on September 18, 1925.
"Mere mention of the word religion has caused eruptions of animalistic rage among National Socialists."
EWALD VON KLEIST-SCHMENZIN
National Socialism: A Menace
Der Nationalsozialismus (Berlin: Verlag Neue Gesellschaft, 1932).
Did any of you see this Special that Brit Hume did today?
It was an excellent look at Religion in America, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and where the idea of a wall between Church and State originated. Great look into the HISTORY of the founding of the United States of America.
Also a look at the current movers and shakers and the Supreme Court.
Watch it when it airs again. (I'm sure it will.)
(Just posted this on another thread. Missed this one.
**You know, a vanity post with no link.**
I looked on FoxNews for a link -- doesn't seem to be one. Didn't realize it had aired before.
I didn't realize that Black on the Supreme Court had been a former KKK member.
Definitely then, the establishment clause that ensued, was anti-Catholic.
Very balanced picture of the entire evolution of church and state from what the founding fathers intended to where it is today -- basically diametrically opposed to that idea.
That's because I posted it 11 months ago. ;*D
My TV is off. Did Fox just run the show again?
I didn't know either, Salvation. I must have missed it last year.
The 1st Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."
The fundamental problem with the metaphor of a "wall" separating church and state is that the wall is bilateral, restricting both government and the individual. This bilateral restriction is not found in the Constitution. The 1st amendment is aimed only at restricting govenrnment and orders it (Congress) to not restrict religion or its free exercise. It is a protection of individual freedom of religion. Nothing in the amendment points to restricting individual liberties. Atheistic opportunists have wrested the 1st amendment into meaning the exact opposite of what it actually says.
http://www.hillsdale.edu/imprimis/2006/10/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.