Busting the Myth of Separation of Church and State

[Agit8r]

"Notwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, & the full establishment of it, in some parts of our Country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Gov' & Religion neither can be duly supported: Such indeed is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against"
-- James Madison; from letter to Edward Livingston (July 10, 1822)

I totally agree with this which is why Islam should be wiped out because it doesn't allow other religions to coexist along side of it. On this issue I totally agree with you. Lets get those crazy Christ...muslim religious whackos!

Or... we could just maintain our constitutional protections against all threats.

 

[bodecea]

"Notwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, & the full establishment of it, in some parts of our Country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Gov' & Religion neither can be duly supported: Such indeed is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against"
-- James Madison; from letter to Edward Livingston (July 10, 1822)

I totally agree with this which is why Islam should be wiped out because it doesn't allow other religions to coexist along side of it. On this issue I totally agree with you. Lets get those crazy Christ...muslim religious whackos!

And...how do you suggest we wipe out Islam?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

 

[Timmy]

Nowhere can this be found in the constitution. Nowhere. It does say, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Period. Nothing more.

What's so hard to understand about that?

The article @ Myth Busted: ‘Separation of Church and State’ clearly relates how anti-religious organizations have conducted a campaign to frighten pastors from speaking on political ideals from their pulpits, often using outright lies as part of their threats.

It's about time pastors speak up.

"Separation" is pretty much a euphemism for non establishment , which is part of the constitution .

 

[bodecea]

Get rid of separation of church and state and you pave the way, for starters,

of local governments setting up Sharia Law systems, i.e., local governments based on Islamic tenets.

What the OP doesn't seem to realize is that if there is no separation between church and state....it is the church that will lose.

 

[pinqy]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

Perhaps you can point out where anyone has claimed that the specific words "separation of church and state" is in the Constitution?

On the same track, due you think that the "right to a fair trial" is guaranteed by the Constitution even though those specific words are not there?

 

[BULLDOG]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

That has been covered lots of times. Try to keep up.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

That has been covered lots of times. Try to keep up.

Oh, so you can't... that's what I figured. You got nothing but talking points.

 

[BULLDOG]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

That has been covered lots of times. Try to keep up.

Oh, so you can't... that's what I figured. You got nothing but talking points.

If you still can't understand after all the times it has been explained to you, you're just too stupid to understand. I won't waste time trying to explain that to an idiot again.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Nowhere can this be found in the constitution. Nowhere. It does say, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Period. Nothing more.

What's so hard to understand about that?

The article @ Myth Busted: ‘Separation of Church and State’ clearly relates how anti-religious organizations have conducted a campaign to frighten pastors from speaking on political ideals from their pulpits, often using outright lies as part of their threats.

It's about time pastors speak up.

"Separation" is pretty much a euphemism for non establishment , which is part of the constitution .[/QUOTE\]

I see how this works. DId you know that the right to bear arms is a euphemism for owning every imaginable weapon possible? What other euphimisms can we employ. THe right to work means that we can re-enslave black people.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

"Notwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, & the full establishment of it, in some parts of our Country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Gov' & Religion neither can be duly supported: Such indeed is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against"
-- James Madison; from letter to Edward Livingston (July 10, 1822)

I totally agree with this which is why Islam should be wiped out because it doesn't allow other religions to coexist along side of it. On this issue I totally agree with you. Lets get those crazy Christ...muslim religious whackos!

Or... we could just maintain our constitutional protections against all threats.

What threat to anyone's religious freedom currently exist?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Nowhere can this be found in the constitution. Nowhere. It does say, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Period. Nothing more.

What's so hard to understand about that?

The article @ Myth Busted: ‘Separation of Church and State’ clearly relates how anti-religious organizations have conducted a campaign to frighten pastors from speaking on political ideals from their pulpits, often using outright lies as part of their threats.

It's about time pastors speak up.

Wrong.

The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the Supreme Court.

"But that's not in the Constitution" is a failed and ignorant "argument."

 

[IsaacNewton]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

Perhaps you can point out where jet fighters are mentioned.

We'll wait.

Your argument is ad-absurdum.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

That has been covered lots of times. Try to keep up.

Oh, so you can't... that's what I figured. You got nothing but talking points.

If you still can't understand after all the times it has been explained to you, you're just too stupid to understand. I won't waste time trying to explain that to an idiot again.

Or, you could just answer the question.. but you can't. Have a nice day dummy.

 

[Correll]

Nowhere can this be found in the constitution. Nowhere. It does say, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Period. Nothing more.

What's so hard to understand about that?

The article @ Myth Busted: ‘Separation of Church and State’ clearly relates how anti-religious organizations have conducted a campaign to frighten pastors from speaking on political ideals from their pulpits, often using outright lies as part of their threats.

It's about time pastors speak up.

Wrong.

The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the Supreme Court.

"But that's not in the Constitution" is a failed and ignorant "argument."

Nope. If it can be shown that the "case law" is not founded on anything in the Constitution, that that case law is bad and should be overturned.

THUS, it is not a "failed and ignorant argument".

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

Perhaps you can point out where jet fighters are mentioned.

We'll wait.

Your argument is ad-absurdum.

Jet fighters? WTF??????

 

[BULLDOG]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

That has been covered lots of times. Try to keep up.

Oh, so you can't... that's what I figured. You got nothing but talking points.

If you still can't understand after all the times it has been explained to you, you're just too stupid to understand. I won't waste time trying to explain that to an idiot again.

Or, you could just answer the question.. but you can't. Have a nice day dummy.

Nope. I just don't want to play that particular childish game with you for the hundredth time.

 

[Correll]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

Perhaps you can point out where jet fighters are mentioned.

We'll wait.

Your argument is ad-absurdum.

Do you really need me to cite the clauses where the government is given the power to raise and fund military forces?

YOUR ARGUMENT IS AD-ABSURDUM.

 

[Correll]

Do you know how tiresome it is for you to make that same silly claim about separation of church and state not being in the constitution, and then somebody taking the time to explain it to you yet again? Ask hannity to give you some new material. It's just dumb to rehash this one again.

Perhaps you can point out where in the constitution "Separation of church and state" is specifically mentioned?

I'll wait.

Perhaps you can point out where jet fighters are mentioned.

We'll wait.

Your argument is ad-absurdum.

Jet fighters? WTF??????

He was trying to make a point about how old and thus obsolete the Constitution is.

He failed miserably.

It is not your fault you didn't see it.

It was barely there.

 

[g5000]

The OP says "pastors should speak up". He has an agenda, he wants to push the 'Christian' religion and have 'Christians' run the government.

Sorry, if you want religion in government then you will have to accept Muslims running for office as they champion their religion as well. And Wiccans, and Hindus.

Religious whacks all through history attempt to get hold of the power of government so they can suppress all other religions.

Not here not ever. Your religion has no more value than any other.

Is there a law somewhere that forbids non-christians from practicing their religion?

For many years after 9/11, every time Muslims tried to build a mosque somewhere, the "Christians" of the town rose up to stop them.

We all remember all the hackery over the "Ground Zero Mosque".

And we have some on the far right claiming Muslims do not have First Amendment protections.