Separation of State from Church

Ernie S.

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2010
34,710
9,211
1,340
Sweet Home Alabama
Without discussion of whether or not the United States Constitution contains the concept or words, “separation of church and state”, that concept is exactly what the Founding Fathers intended. Perhaps the concept would be better stated, though, “Separation of State from Church”.
They came from a world where the Church and the State were essentially one; where the government supported the Church and vise versa. One was required to observe the faith of their King.
When setting forth our Constitution, the Founders, when defining individual rights, set speech and religious practice first, as if it was the primary right given by God to his people.
While virtually all at the Constitutional Convention were Christians, or at the very least, deists, they came from many denominations and all were worried that a central government could force Connecticut Congregationalists to observe Baptist tenet, or Virginia Episcopalians would outlaw Methodism in Massachusetts.
To prevent that possibility, they included, first and foremost in their list of inalienable rights, the phrase “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”.
They wanted religion to be free of government interference. They wanted every citizen to be free to worship, or not, without penalty or fear of reprisal or restriction. No where, does the Constitution or The Bill of Rights say anything about excluding religion from government, only the opposite.
Nowhere is it written in those documents that Christians, Jews Muslims or Buddhists are prohibited from praying in a public place, as a matter of fact, it seems logical to say that the 1st Amendment specifically says that the government is forbidden to deny anyone that right.
 
Personally, I am at a loss to explain why the liberal establishment - many of whom claim to follow a faith - are the very ones who are attempting to remove religion from any public display. I find that to be somewhat ridiculous. Don't tell me you are tolerant when you are not. If you seek to wipe religion out of the country.... say so. Own it. Have the courage of your convictions. But, know this, do not claim to be the 'tolerant' ideology when you demonstrate tolerance only towards those you feel inclined to.

The 'separation' was never supposed to be used to destroy that which it was designed to protect. And that is what certain sections of our system are trying to do.
 
Don't leave me hangin' Ernie, please describe the incident when you were prohibited from praying in a public place?
 
Don't leave me hangin' Ernie, please describe the incident when you were prohibited from praying in a public place?

Let's try schools, public meetings... Let's consider bans on Christmas displays, suits to remove "In God we trust" from our currency, the 10 Commandments from court houses. Hang on that for a while. Explain the justification based purely on the words of the first amendment.
 
Don't leave me hangin' Ernie, please describe the incident when you were prohibited from praying in a public place?

Let's try schools, public meetings... Let's consider bans on Christmas displays, suits to remove "In God we trust" from our currency, the 10 Commandments from court houses. Hang on that for a while. Explain the justification based purely on the words of the first amendment.

So you've never experienced any such prohibition.

Got it. :thup:
 
Personally, I am at a loss to explain why the liberal establishment - many of whom claim to follow a faith - are the very ones who are attempting to remove religion from any public display. I find that to be somewhat ridiculous. Don't tell me you are tolerant when you are not. If you seek to wipe religion out of the country.... say so. Own it. Have the courage of your convictions. But, know this, do not claim to be the 'tolerant' ideology when you demonstrate tolerance only towards those you feel inclined to.

The 'separation' was never supposed to be used to destroy that which it was designed to protect. And that is what certain sections of our system are trying to do.

The proximate reason, CG, is the hope for success of Marxism, as reiterated by the Frankfurt School.

In 1923 Georg Lukacs helped establish a Marxist research center at the University of Frankfurt under the sponsorship of Felix Weil. Like Marx’s benefactor, Friedrich Engels, Weil was the son of a wealthy capitalist and an ardent Marxist who had earned a Ph.D. in political science from Frankfurt University. These rich slackers used family money to fund the Institute for Social Research, best known as the institutional home of the Frankfurt School and critical theory. http://www.lust-for-life.org/Lust-F...turalMarxismAndPoliticalCorrectness-part2.pdf

a. …the Institute attracted gifted scholars not only in economics but also in philosophy, history, psychology, sociology… convinced that the major impediment to the spread of Marxism was Western culture. In particular, they despised traditional Judeo/Christian ethics and morality, which they believed prevented the widespread acceptance of Marxism.

b. The Frankfurt School propagated a revisionistic Neo-Marxist interpretation of Western culture called Critical Theory, an aggressive promotion of a radical left-wing socio/political agenda. In essence, Critical Theory was a comprehensive and unrelenting assault on the values and institutions of Western civilization.
 
Personally, I am at a loss to explain why the liberal establishment - many of whom claim to follow a faith - are the very ones who are attempting to remove religion from any public display. I find that to be somewhat ridiculous. Don't tell me you are tolerant when you are not. If you seek to wipe religion out of the country.... say so. Own it. Have the courage of your convictions. But, know this, do not claim to be the 'tolerant' ideology when you demonstrate tolerance only towards those you feel inclined to.

The 'separation' was never supposed to be used to destroy that which it was designed to protect. And that is what certain sections of our system are trying to do.
I had faith someone would get it and knowledge that others wouldn't. (see the post following yours)
 
Personally, I am at a loss to explain why the liberal establishment - many of whom claim to follow a faith - are the very ones who are attempting to remove religion from any public display. I find that to be somewhat ridiculous. Don't tell me you are tolerant when you are not. If you seek to wipe religion out of the country.... say so. Own it. Have the courage of your convictions. But, know this, do not claim to be the 'tolerant' ideology when you demonstrate tolerance only towards those you feel inclined to.

The 'separation' was never supposed to be used to destroy that which it was designed to protect. And that is what certain sections of our system are trying to do.

where has anyone gone after someones christmas yard display?

Its ONLY on government property.

why do you lie?
 
James Madison's Veto Messages by Gene Garman


June 3, 1811



I have recd. fellow Citizens your address, approving my Objection to the Bill contain[in]g a grant of public land, to the Baptist Church at Salem Meeting House Missippi Terry. Having always regarded the practical distinction between Religion & Civil Govt as essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constn: of the U.S. I could not have otherwise discharged my duty on the occasion which presented itself. Among the various religious Societies in our Country, none have been more vigilant or constant in maintain[in]g that distinction, than the Society of which you make a part, and it is an honourable proof of your sincerity & integrity, that you are as ready to do so, in a case favoring the interest of your brethren, as in other cases. It is but just, at the same time, to the Baptist Church at Salem Meeting House, to remark that their application to the Natl. Legislature does not appear to have contemplated a grant of the Land in question, but on terms that might be equitable to the public as well as to themselves. Accept my friendly respects


------------------------------

President Madison's letter as quoted above is located in The Papers of James Madison: Presidential Series, 3:323-324. To Mr. Madison, I say, thank you; and in appreciation of the historical Baptist position, I say, Amen!
 
The father of our constitution says it for the purity of BOTH.

Face that you are wrong
 
Don't leave me hangin' Ernie, please describe the incident when you were prohibited from praying in a public place?

CRANSTON, R.I. (WPRI) - The prayer banner hanging in the Cranston High School West gym that's now at the center of a lawsuit by the ACLU reads in full:
Our Heavenly Father,
Grant us each day the desire to do our best,
To grow mentally and morally as well as physically,
To be kind and helpful to our classmates and teachers,
To be honest with ourselves as well as with others,
Help us to be good sports and smile when we lose as well as when we win,
Teach us the value of true friendship,
Help us always to conduct ourselves so as to bring credit to Cranston High School West.
Amen

Though the banner has hung in the gym for decades, the ACLU points to Supreme Court decisions over the separation of church and state, as well as the Cranston School District's policy which states that "the proper setting for religious observance is the home and the place of worship."
Text of Cranston West prayer banner | WPRI.com

U.S. District Court Judge Ronald Lagueux ruled that the prayer banner at Cranston High School West must be removed immediately because it promotes religion. Jessica Ahlquist, an atheist student, had sued the city of Cranston and the high school after they initially refused to remove the banner.
Federal Judge Says Prayer Banner Must Be Removed | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes
 
Don't leave me hangin' Ernie, please describe the incident when you were prohibited from praying in a public place?

Let's try schools, public meetings... Let's consider bans on Christmas displays, suits to remove "In God we trust" from our currency, the 10 Commandments from court houses. Hang on that for a while. Explain the justification based purely on the words of the first amendment.

So you've never experienced any such prohibition.

Got it. :thup:

Actually I have. My church was prohibited from displaying it's Nativity scene on the town green where it had done so for years. Interestingly, the Green is 2 acres of prime property with a Gazebo, in the town center that was donated to the town by the Church "for the enjoyment of all".
 
Dear God in Heaven,
Please direct a couple Liberals to this thread
Amen
If my smilies worked, I'd clap for you.

Click on "Go Advanced" below the reply box.
xxooo I have. I post on another board that is the same as this one, but here, I can't use anything. No bold, color, size, quote or smilies. When I click on anything, nothing at all happens. I think I'll purge my favorite link and start over, and see if that makes a difference.
 
Don't leave me hangin' Ernie, please describe the incident when you were prohibited from praying in a public place?

CRANSTON, R.I. (WPRI) - The prayer banner hanging in the Cranston High School West gym that's now at the center of a lawsuit by the ACLU reads in full:
Our Heavenly Father,
Grant us each day the desire to do our best,
To grow mentally and morally as well as physically,
To be kind and helpful to our classmates and teachers,
To be honest with ourselves as well as with others,
Help us to be good sports and smile when we lose as well as when we win,
Teach us the value of true friendship,
Help us always to conduct ourselves so as to bring credit to Cranston High School West.
Amen

Though the banner has hung in the gym for decades, the ACLU points to Supreme Court decisions over the separation of church and state, as well as the Cranston School District's policy which states that "the proper setting for religious observance is the home and the place of worship."
Text of Cranston West prayer banner | WPRI.com

U.S. District Court Judge Ronald Lagueux ruled that the prayer banner at Cranston High School West must be removed immediately because it promotes religion. Jessica Ahlquist, an atheist student, had sued the city of Cranston and the high school after they initially refused to remove the banner.
Federal Judge Says Prayer Banner Must Be Removed | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes

So still, nobody was actually prohibited from praying in a public place.

Thanks for supporting my hypothesis with factual evidence. :thup:
 
Let's try schools, public meetings... Let's consider bans on Christmas displays, suits to remove "In God we trust" from our currency, the 10 Commandments from court houses. Hang on that for a while. Explain the justification based purely on the words of the first amendment.

So you've never experienced any such prohibition.

Got it. :thup:

Actually I have. My church was prohibited from displaying it's Nativity scene on the town green where it had done so for years. Interestingly, the Green is 2 acres of prime property with a Gazebo, in the town center that was donated to the town by the Church "for the enjoyment of all".

So now you expect me to believe that you need a nativity scene to pray? :eusa_eh:

Sorry Winthorpe, that just doesn't fly. :thup:
 
Personally, I am at a loss to explain why the liberal establishment - many of whom claim to follow a faith - are the very ones who are attempting to remove religion from any public display. I find that to be somewhat ridiculous. Don't tell me you are tolerant when you are not. If you seek to wipe religion out of the country.... say so. Own it. Have the courage of your convictions. But, know this, do not claim to be the 'tolerant' ideology when you demonstrate tolerance only towards those you feel inclined to.

The 'separation' was never supposed to be used to destroy that which it was designed to protect. And that is what certain sections of our system are trying to do.

where has anyone gone after someones christmas yard display?

Its ONLY on government property.

why do you lie?

Did I mention Christmas yard displays?

No.

The lair, little moron, is you. Again.
 
James Madison's Veto Messages by Gene Garman


June 3, 1811



I have recd. fellow Citizens your address, approving my Objection to the Bill contain[in]g a grant of public land, to the Baptist Church at Salem Meeting House Missippi Terry. Having always regarded the practical distinction between Religion & Civil Govt as essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constn: of the U.S. I could not have otherwise discharged my duty on the occasion which presented itself. Among the various religious Societies in our Country, none have been more vigilant or constant in maintain[in]g that distinction, than the Society of which you make a part, and it is an honourable proof of your sincerity & integrity, that you are as ready to do so, in a case favoring the interest of your brethren, as in other cases. It is but just, at the same time, to the Baptist Church at Salem Meeting House, to remark that their application to the Natl. Legislature does not appear to have contemplated a grant of the Land in question, but on terms that might be equitable to the public as well as to themselves. Accept my friendly respects


------------------------------

President Madison's letter as quoted above is located in The Papers of James Madison: Presidential Series, 3:323-324. To Mr. Madison, I say, thank you; and in appreciation of the historical Baptist position, I say, Amen!

Nothing in the quote from Madison justifies government restricting the free practice of religion. You are recycling the same bullshit argument you roll out each time. It is still not relevant, though, this time, you did manage to match the quote to the man, unlike your attribution of Jefferson's letter to the Danbury (CT) Baptists to Madison, a while back.
 

Forum List

Back
Top