Another Liberal myth: Separation of church and state is not in the constitution

[Gadawg73]

When we ran the red coats off 100,000 humans from the colonies left the colonies and left for England and Canada. To this day their ancestors call the Founders and supporters of the revolution terrorists and anti church.
The church of the day then supported the CROWN.
And you folks claim the Founders supported that?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

naw.

It says that too.

no it doesn't dumbass.

If it did then every president from washington to obama has violated it.

dumbass?

When did texas become a republic?

1836

 

[Gadawg73]

Lonestar, The US Constitution mandates freedom of religion.
How is EVERY religion free if one religion has vast influence and is in government and the others do not?
That was the Founders intent. NO religion in government because if you allow one in and then politicians pander to the voters for votes the others may suffer.
We have been fighting this forever. Ask the Jews. They strongly favor seperation of church and state.
They strung up an innocent one here and the church fully supported it.
And that is why we need seperation of church and state. That wan EVERY RELIGION is free.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Who in their right mind wants religion involved and in government?
Certainly not the Founders. They ran from that.
The Church of England, and their many followers in the Colonies, THE TORRIES, you know, THE ENEMY, had a huge investment to protect and God was used. My forefathers were labeled as TERRORISTS by the religous folks in the colonies that had the support of the predominant religous organization of the day, THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
Every government in Europe of the day had religion in government and we hear claims here the Founders wanted to keep that. Laughable and absurd.
Religion in government supports the doctrine of divine right as we have seen in the Republican primaries. Three Republicans have claimed God told them to run.
Religion has no place in government and that is the best and ONLY way to protect EACH religion from the possible influences one religion may have over another with the powerof government.
As a strong conservative Christian I NEVER WANT my religion or any other to be in or ifluence government in any way.
Government is secular and was set up to be that way for a reason.
The Founders sure were smart.

Jefferson attended church services in the House of Representatives. Throughout his administration Jefferson permitted church services in executive branch buildings. The Gospel was also preached in the Supreme Court chambers.

Church services were held in what is now called Statuary Hall (The Old House of Representatives) from 1807 to 1857. The first services in the Capitol, held when the government moved to Washington in the fall of 1800, were conducted in the "hall" of the House in the north wing of the building. In 1801 the House moved to temporary quarters in the south wing, called the "Oven," which it vacated in 1804, returning to the north wing for three years. Services were conducted in the House until after the Civil War. The Speaker's podium was used as the preacher's pulpit.

Abijah Bigelow, a Federalist congressman from Massachusetts, describes President James Madison at a church service in the House on December 27, 1812, as well as an incident that had occurred when Jefferson was in attendance some years earlier.

On January 8, 1826, Bishop John England (1786-1842) of Charleston, South Carolina, became the first Catholic clergyman to preach in the House of Representatives. The overflow audience included President John Quincy Adams, whose July 4, 1821, speech England rebutted in his sermon. Adams had claimed that the Roman Catholic Church was intolerant of other religions and therefore incompatible with republican institutions. England asserted that "we do not believe that God gave to the church any power to interfere with our civil rights, or our civil concerns." "I would not allow to the Pope, or to any bishop of our church," added England, "the smallest interference with the humblest vote at our most insignificant balloting box."

In 1827, Harriet Livermore (1788-1868), the daughter and granddaughter of Congressmen, became the second woman to preach in the House of Representatives. The first woman to preach before the House (and probably the first woman to speak officially in Congress under any circumstances) was the English evangelist, Dorothy Ripley (1767-1832), who conducted a service on January 12, 1806. Jefferson and Vice President Aaron Burr were among those in a "crowded audience." Sizing up the congregation, Ripley concluded that "very few" had been born again and broke into an urgent, camp meeting style exhortation, insisting that "Christ's Body was the Bread of Life and His Blood the drink of the righteous."

Manasseh Cutler here describes a four-hour communion service in the Treasury Building, conducted by a Presbyterian minister, the Reverend James Laurie: "Attended worship at the Treasury. Mr. Laurie alone. Sacrament. Full assembly. Three tables; service very solemn; nearly four hours."

The first Treasury Building, where several denominations conducted church services, was burned by the British in 1814. The new building, seen here on the lower right, was built on approximately the same location as the earlier one, within view of the White House.

John Quincy Adams here describes the Reverend James Laurie, pastor of a Presbyterian Church that had settled into the Treasury Building, preaching to an overflow audience in the Supreme Court Chamber, which in 1806 was located on the ground floor of the Capitol.

Description of church services in the Supreme Court chamber by Manasseh Cutler (1804) and John Quincy Adams (1806) indicate that services were held in the Court soon after the government moved to Washington in 1800.

Charles Boynton (1806-1883) was in 1867 chaplain of the House of Representatives and organizing pastor of the First Congregational Church in Washington, which was trying at that time to build its own sanctuary. In the meantime the church, as Boynton informed potential donors, was holding services "at the Hall of Representatives" where "the audience is the largest in town. . . .nearly 2000 assembled every Sabbath" for services, making the congregation in the House the "largest Protestant Sabbath audience then in the United States." The First Congregational Church met in the House from 1865 to 1868.

The House moved to its current location on the south side of the Capitol in 1857. It contained the "largest Protestant Sabbath audience" in the United States when the First Congregational Church of Washington held services there from 1865 to 1868.

Sources and authentic letters.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Lonestar, The US Constitution mandates freedom of religion.
How is EVERY religion free if one religion has vast influence and is in government and the others do not?
That was the Founders intent. NO religion in government because if you allow one in and then politicians pander to the voters for votes the others may suffer.
We have been fighting this forever. Ask the Jews. They strongly favor seperation of church and state.
They strung up an innocent one here and the church fully supported it.
And that is why we need seperation of church and state. That wan EVERY RELIGION is free.

Well you're wrong and there is an abundant supply of historical documents that proves it.

 

[Immanuel]

Just as open to interpretation as is "separation of church and state"

Not hardly.

Pistols are implied, just as the separation is implied by the Congress not being able to respect an establishment of religion, nor prohibit free exercise thereof. It's telling government to leave religion alone altogether, thus separation of church and state.

While I agree that pistols and the Separation of Church and State are both implied this is where much of our problems stem from. People start "interpreting" what is implied by the Constitution and suddenly we have a battle on our hands between those who believe it implies something and those who don't. Everyone has different opinions and suddenly we have a frigging mess.

Take the right to privacy for instance. The courts have ruled that we have a right to privacy and with that right comes the right to kill a human being. Now, some judges are claiming that right does not apply to flushing the toilet when a cop is knocking on your door. Talk about the ultimate invasion of Privacy! Just what I want, some cop examining my stool in the toilet before I can flush... disgusting!

Officer Jones:Corn for dinner last night I see. Gross!!!

https://scottystarnes.wordpress.com...can-enter-your-home-without-a-search-warrant/

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court isn’t given to offering advice to people who are breaking the law, even in a minor way. But some justices on Wednesday effectively told those who might be sitting at home smoking pot when the police come knocking: Do not flush the toilet.

Because if officers smell the pot from the outside, think the occupants are trying to get rid of it and burst in without a search warrant to prevent evidence from being destroyed, some justices indicated they would approve.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Who in their right mind wants religion involved and in government?
Certainly not the Founders. They ran from that.
The Church of England, and their many followers in the Colonies, THE TORRIES, you know, THE ENEMY, had a huge investment to protect and God was used. My forefathers were labeled as TERRORISTS by the religous folks in the colonies that had the support of the predominant religous organization of the day, THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
Every government in Europe of the day had religion in government and we hear claims here the Founders wanted to keep that. Laughable and absurd.
Religion in government supports the doctrine of divine right as we have seen in the Republican primaries. Three Republicans have claimed God told them to run.
Religion has no place in government and that is the best and ONLY way to protect EACH religion from the possible influences one religion may have over another with the powerof government.
As a strong conservative Christian I NEVER WANT my religion or any other to be in or ifluence government in any way.
Government is secular and was set up to be that way for a reason.
The Founders sure were smart.

Although, I agree with you, and don't think you are saying this, I do not think that means that a person of faith cannot participate in his/her government or even be an elected official.

Immie

 

[Lokiate]

Not hardly.

Pistols are implied, just as the separation is implied by the Congress not being able to respect an establishment of religion, nor prohibit free exercise thereof. It's telling government to leave religion alone altogether, thus separation of church and state.

That is an opinion
that has nothing to do with fact

Ok, the first sentence of the First Amendment is just a bunch of silly garbage that doesn't mean anything at all. Got it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Who in their right mind wants religion involved and in government?
Certainly not the Founders. They ran from that.
The Church of England, and their many followers in the Colonies, THE TORRIES, you know, THE ENEMY, had a huge investment to protect and God was used. My forefathers were labeled as TERRORISTS by the religous folks in the colonies that had the support of the predominant religous organization of the day, THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
Every government in Europe of the day had religion in government and we hear claims here the Founders wanted to keep that. Laughable and absurd.
Religion in government supports the doctrine of divine right as we have seen in the Republican primaries. Three Republicans have claimed God told them to run.
Religion has no place in government and that is the best and ONLY way to protect EACH religion from the possible influences one religion may have over another with the powerof government.
As a strong conservative Christian I NEVER WANT my religion or any other to be in or ifluence government in any way.
Government is secular and was set up to be that way for a reason.
The Founders sure were smart.

They rebelled against that church for many reasons. Notice the boom of Christian religions that occured in this country ?

It's not that they did not want governing bodies to be religious.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Lonestar, The US Constitution mandates freedom of religion.
How is EVERY religion free if one religion has vast influence and is in government and the others do not?
That was the Founders intent. NO religion in government because if you allow one in and then politicians pander to the voters for votes the others may suffer.
We have been fighting this forever. Ask the Jews. They strongly favor seperation of church and state.
They strung up an innocent one here and the church fully supported it.
And that is why we need seperation of church and state. That wan EVERY RELIGION is free.

Who cares,the dominating religion was Christianity and it still is. Are Christians stopping anyone from worshipping the way they want ?

 

[BDBoop]

Lonestar, The US Constitution mandates freedom of religion.
How is EVERY religion free if one religion has vast influence and is in government and the others do not?
That was the Founders intent. NO religion in government because if you allow one in and then politicians pander to the voters for votes the others may suffer.
We have been fighting this forever. Ask the Jews. They strongly favor seperation of church and state.
They strung up an innocent one here and the church fully supported it.
And that is why we need seperation of church and state. That wan EVERY RELIGION is free.

Who cares,the dominating religion was Christianity and it still is. Are Christians stopping anyone from worshipping the way they want ?

No. They just shame, belittle, mock, and ridicule anybody who openly does so, and announces said people are going to hell, and they are happy to believe it.

And even if I say not ALL of them - it is a LOT.

And what would that lot ever do if it got to the point where christianity is not the 'main' religion?

They also might want to be aware that this country may be primarily christian? But we're not primarily pentecostal, holy rolling, fringe people. And many, many people of faith are pro-choice and GLBT-friendly.

 

[tonystewart1]

Lonestar, The US Constitution mandates freedom of religion.
How is EVERY religion free if one religion has vast influence and is in government and the others do not?
That was the Founders intent. NO religion in government because if you allow one in and then politicians pander to the voters for votes the others may suffer.
We have been fighting this forever. Ask the Jews. They strongly favor seperation of church and state.
They strung up an innocent one here and the church fully supported it.
And that is why we need seperation of church and state. That wan EVERY RELIGION is free.

Who cares,the dominating religion was Christianity and it still is. Are Christians stopping anyone from worshipping the way they want ?

No. They just shame, belittle, mock, and ridicule anybody who openly does so, and announces said people are going to hell, and they are happy to believe it.

And even if I say not ALL of them - it is a LOT.

And what would that lot ever do if it got to the point where christianity is not the 'main' religion?

They also might want to be aware that this country may be primarily christian? But we're not primarily pentecostal, holy rolling, fringe people. And many, many people of faith are pro-choice and GLBT-friendly.

Got a problem with Penetcostals?

 

[CryingKoala]

In summary, pre-Constitution, the religion that one was allowed was largely based on where one lived.
Madison and Jefferson worked mightily to support dissenters, those who wished to follow religions other than locally established. But neither found religion to be other than a benefit to the nation.

And neither would remove religion from the public discourse.


Wise up.
Grow up.

You really didn't read your own source (which of course is uncredited) nor bothered to read my response. Even by your own quotes, Rhode Island was seen as a haven for refugees from state governments whose apparatus entangled themselves with religion. Obviously where there was no such separation, there were fundamental problems with civil liberties.

You are making a phony argument that the Establishment Clause is meant to banish religion from the political sphere.

As I said before, as long as the government embraces all faiths and does not exclude others or engage in blatant sectarian acts, religious expression is OK. Ecumenialism is the byword here not atheism. Inclusiveness of all faiths.

What are you really stumping for when you attack Separation of Church and State?
-Do you really want the ability of the government to engage in sectarian discrimination?
-Do you really have so little respect for faiths besides your own?
-Do you understand how this protects Free Exercise of Religion?

 

[CryingKoala]

Who cares,the dominating religion was Christianity and it still is. Are Christians stopping anyone from worshipping the way they want ?

No. They just shame, belittle, mock, and ridicule anybody who openly does so, and announces said people are going to hell, and they are happy to believe it.

And even if I say not ALL of them - it is a LOT.

And what would that lot ever do if it got to the point where christianity is not the 'main' religion?

They also might want to be aware that this country may be primarily christian? But we're not primarily pentecostal, holy rolling, fringe people. And many, many people of faith are pro-choice and GLBT-friendly.

Got a problem with Penetcostals?

Only when they assume all Christians share their beliefs.

 

[BDBoop]

Who cares,the dominating religion was Christianity and it still is. Are Christians stopping anyone from worshipping the way they want ?

No. They just shame, belittle, mock, and ridicule anybody who openly does so, and announces said people are going to hell, and they are happy to believe it.

And even if I say not ALL of them - it is a LOT.

And what would that lot ever do if it got to the point where christianity is not the 'main' religion?

They also might want to be aware that this country may be primarily christian? But we're not primarily pentecostal, holy rolling, fringe people. And many, many people of faith are pro-choice and GLBT-friendly.

Got a problem with Penetcostals?

Oh yeah. Hooge.

Google "The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse" -

Spiritual abuse occurs when someone in a position of spiritual authority, the purpose of which is to ‘come underneath’ and serve, build, equip and make God’s people MORE free, misuses that authority placing themselves over God’s people to control, coerce or manipulate them for seemingly Godly purposes which are really their own.

Recovery from Spiritual Abuse

Spiritual abuse is a serious form of abuse which occurs when a person in religious authority or a person with a unique spiritual practice misleads and maltreats another person in the name of God or church or in the mystery of any spiritual concept. Spiritual abuse often refers to an abuser using spiritual or religious rank in taking advantage of the victim's spirituality (mentality and passion on spiritual matters) by putting the victim in a state of unquestioning obedience to an abusive authority.

Spiritual abuse is the maltreatment of a person in the name of God, faith, religion, or church, whether habitual or not, and includes any of the following:

• Psychological and emotional abuse
• Any act by deeds or words that demean, humiliate or shame the natural worth and dignity of a person as a human being
• Submission to spiritual authority without any right to disagree; intimidation
• Unreasonable control of a person's basic right to make a choice on spiritual matters
• False accusation and repeated criticism by negatively labeling a person as disobedient, rebellious, lacking faith, demonized, apostate, enemy of the church or God
• Prevention from practicing faith
• Isolation or separation from family and friends due to religious affiliation
• Physical abuse that includes physical injury, deprivation of sustenance, and sexual abuse
• Exclusivity; dismissal of an outsider's criticism and labeling an outsider as of the devil
• Withholding information and giving of information only to a selected few
• Conformity to a dangerous or unnatural religious view and practice
• Hostility that includes shunning, (relational aggression, parental alienation) and persecution

Despite the comparative frequency of spiritual abuse, those types of behaviour and actions which are today classified as spiritual abuse can be seen to be prohibited in the major texts and scriptures of numerous religious traditions. Indeed, in the Christian Bible, spiritually abusive behaviour is condemned as being one of the worst forms of sin due to its capacity to diminish or even to destroy an individual's relationship with God.

Spiritual abuse - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And that's flat out ignoring the Bennie Hinns, Jimmy Swaggarts and Bakkers I saw.

 

[JRK]

Lonestar, The US Constitution mandates freedom of religion.
How is EVERY religion free if one religion has vast influence and is in government and the others do not?
That was the Founders intent. NO religion in government because if you allow one in and then politicians pander to the voters for votes the others may suffer.
We have been fighting this forever. Ask the Jews. They strongly favor seperation of church and state.
They strung up an innocent one here and the church fully supported it.
And that is why we need seperation of church and state. That wan EVERY RELIGION is free.

Who cares,the dominating religion was Christianity and it still is. Are Christians stopping anyone from worshipping the way they want ?

No. They just shame, belittle, mock, and ridicule anybody who openly does so, and announces said people are going to hell, and they are happy to believe it.

And even if I say not ALL of them - it is a LOT.

And what would that lot ever do if it got to the point where christianity is not the 'main' religion?

They also might want to be aware that this country may be primarily christian? But we're not primarily pentecostal, holy rolling, fringe people. And many, many people of faith are pro-choice and GLBT-friendly.

The threads intent is to show the level of deceit we have in this country. There is no separation of church and state in our constitution
It also I might add as far as those who "ridicule" are far more civil than those who be head those who dis-agree

 

[AmericanFirst]

Sorry pal, but you cannot codify your bible into the law of the land. If you want to pray, then go for it. No one is stopping you. I don't know why you have to be in your face about it.

As a side note, this is why Texans took Thomas Jefferson out of the history books. I don't know why Republicans despise Jefferson so much, but they do.

Who's trying to codify the Holy Bible? WTF are you talking about?

He has no clue what he is talking about. Republicans don't hate Jefferson, dimwits do. Dimwits hate republicans because republicans actually understand the constitution.

 

[Sallow]

Lonestar, The US Constitution mandates freedom of religion.
How is EVERY religion free if one religion has vast influence and is in government and the others do not?
That was the Founders intent. NO religion in government because if you allow one in and then politicians pander to the voters for votes the others may suffer.
We have been fighting this forever. Ask the Jews. They strongly favor seperation of church and state.
They strung up an innocent one here and the church fully supported it.
And that is why we need seperation of church and state. That wan EVERY RELIGION is free.

Who cares,the dominating religion was Christianity and it still is. Are Christians stopping anyone from worshipping the way they want ?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfRfO166QVU]Ground Zero anti-Mosque Protest - YouTube[/ame]

Betting most of those folks were "good" christians.

 

[Sallow]

Sorry pal, but you cannot codify your bible into the law of the land. If you want to pray, then go for it. No one is stopping you. I don't know why you have to be in your face about it.

As a side note, this is why Texans took Thomas Jefferson out of the history books. I don't know why Republicans despise Jefferson so much, but they do.

Who's trying to codify the Holy Bible? WTF are you talking about?

He has no clue what he is talking about. Republicans don't hate Jefferson, dimwits do. Dimwits hate republicans because republicans actually understand the constitution.

No.

Actually a great many Republicans don't understand the Constitution.

 

[CryingKoala]

Who's trying to codify the Holy Bible? WTF are you talking about?

He has no clue what he is talking about. Republicans don't hate Jefferson, dimwits do. Dimwits hate republicans because republicans actually understand the constitution.

No.

Actually a great many Republicans don't understand the Constitution.

Most of the people here stumping against Separation of Church and state don't understand the role of the judiciary either.

Have you ever noticed how often the far right makes an argument which depends on denying the existence and power of SCOTUS?