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

[JRK]

With Rick Perry in the running and maybe becoming the front runner soon for the whole shooting match the liberals will go on the attack with this liberal myth

No-one wants the president to make there choices because Allah came to them and told them to
But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is
This will become a hot issue with Perry
watch for it and know when you hear it, your being lied to

The phrase was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Prior to 1947, however separation of church and state was not considered part of the constitution; indeed in 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to guarantee separation of church and state, a task to be accomplished not by constitutional amendment but by judicial fiat in 1947. [2]
Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Auxous]

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.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

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?

 

[NYcarbineer]

With Rick Perry in the running and maybe becoming the front runner soon for the whole shooting match the liberals will go on the attack with this liberal myth

No-one wants the president to make there choices because Allah came to them and told them to
But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is
This will become a hot issue with Perry
watch for it and know when you hear it, your being lied to

The phrase was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Prior to 1947, however separation of church and state was not considered part of the constitution; indeed in 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to guarantee separation of church and state, a task to be accomplished not by constitutional amendment but by judicial fiat in 1947. [2]
Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The word pistol doesn't appear in the 2nd amendment either.

 

[Nic_Driver]

With Rick Perry in the running and maybe becoming the front runner soon for the whole shooting match the liberals will go on the attack with this liberal myth

No-one wants the president to make there choices because Allah came to them and told them to
But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is
This will become a hot issue with Perry
watch for it and know when you hear it, your being lied to

The phrase was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Prior to 1947, however separation of church and state was not considered part of the constitution; indeed in 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to guarantee separation of church and state, a task to be accomplished not by constitutional amendment but by judicial fiat in 1947. [2]
Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So what your saying is the SCOTUS set the precedent that now separates the church from the state and has ruled in agreement with its precedent many times since, further defining the separation of the two.

So who's lying to you?

The SCOTUS?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

With Rick Perry in the running and maybe becoming the front runner soon for the whole shooting match the liberals will go on the attack with this liberal myth

No-one wants the president to make there choices because Allah came to them and told them to
But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is
This will become a hot issue with Perry
watch for it and know when you hear it, your being lied to

The phrase was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Prior to 1947, however separation of church and state was not considered part of the constitution; indeed in 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to guarantee separation of church and state, a task to be accomplished not by constitutional amendment but by judicial fiat in 1947. [2]
Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The word pistol doesn't appear in the 2nd amendment either.

No, but "arms" does. And a pistol is a way one arms themselves.

 

[bodecea]

With Rick Perry in the running and maybe becoming the front runner soon for the whole shooting match the liberals will go on the attack with this liberal myth

No-one wants the president to make there choices because Allah came to them and told them to
But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is
This will become a hot issue with Perry
watch for it and know when you hear it, your being lied to

The phrase was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Prior to 1947, however separation of church and state was not considered part of the constitution; indeed in 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to guarantee separation of church and state, a task to be accomplished not by constitutional amendment but by judicial fiat in 1947. [2]
Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The word pistol doesn't appear in the 2nd amendment either.

No, but "arms" does. And a pistol is a way one arms themselves.

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

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The word pistol doesn't appear in the 2nd amendment either.

No, but "arms" does. And a pistol is a way one arms themselves.

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

Not hardly.

 

[NYcarbineer]

With Rick Perry in the running and maybe becoming the front runner soon for the whole shooting match the liberals will go on the attack with this liberal myth

No-one wants the president to make there choices because Allah came to them and told them to
But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is
This will become a hot issue with Perry
watch for it and know when you hear it, your being lied to

The phrase was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Prior to 1947, however separation of church and state was not considered part of the constitution; indeed in 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to guarantee separation of church and state, a task to be accomplished not by constitutional amendment but by judicial fiat in 1947. [2]
Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The word pistol doesn't appear in the 2nd amendment either.

No, but "arms" does. And a pistol is a way one arms themselves.

Ah, thank you. So you're saying that different words can be used to say essentially the same thing, so,

separation of church and state can be in the Constitution without the explicit phrase 'separation of church and state' being there.

That's my point.

ta da!!

 

[bodecea]

No, but "arms" does. And a pistol is a way one arms themselves.

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

Not hardly.

Absolutely so.

 

[bodecea]

The word pistol doesn't appear in the 2nd amendment either.

No, but "arms" does. And a pistol is a way one arms themselves.

Ah, thank you. So you're saying that different words can be used to say essentially the same thing, so,

separation of church and state can be in the Constitution without the explicit phrase 'separation of church and state' being there.

That's my point.

ta da!!

Yep...and Press also meaning the Network media, not just newspapers.

 

[CryingKoala]

Anyone who is telling you "There is no separation of church and state" or is railing against it is telling you that they want the government to persecute people based on their religious belief. They are saying they have no respect for any other religion but theirs.

You cannot protect Free Exercise of Religion without Separation of Church and State. Once religion and the apparatus of state are entangled, sectarian discrimination is inevitable.

As for bad history here, the concept of separation of church and state pre-dates the founding of the US by about a century. It was a guiding principle for the Rhode Island colony under Roger Williams and Pennsylvania under the Quakers.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The word pistol doesn't appear in the 2nd amendment either.

No, but "arms" does. And a pistol is a way one arms themselves.

Ah, thank you. So you're saying that different words can be used to say essentially the same thing, so,

separation of church and state can be in the Constitution without the explicit phrase 'separation of church and state' being there.

That's my point.

ta da!!

No, what I'm saying is there is no separation of church and state in the constitution and only a liberal idiot would surmise that it did.

The First Amendment's widely misunderstood Establishment Clause simply means that the state will not set up any official state religion, nor will it prohibit any person from freely exercising the religious dictates of his or her own conscience. However, this restriction on the Government's intrusion into the private religious convictions of its citizenry does NOT mean that all aspects of religion should be kept completely out of the affairs of the State.

President John Quincy Adams, the son of the great statesman from Massachusetts who did so much to inspire the Declaration of Independence, stated the truth succinctly on July 4, 1821: "The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity."

How many Americans today even remember that it was the Great Awakening and the fiery sermons of the Patriot Pastors that sparked the American Revolution, or that the rallying cry of the Colonial rebels was "No King but Jesus"? No, sadly, most Americans today have been spoon-fed a poison porridge of revisionist lies that claim George Washington and Company were all rationalistic Desists seeking to advance the secular ideals of the French Enlightenment. (For more truthful information, see David Barton's website, http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/.)

Fifty years later, the Liberal icon Justice William O. Douglas wrote for the Court: "The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every respect there shall be a separation of Church and State . . . We find no constitutional requirement makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against the efforts to widen the scope of religious influence. The government must remain neutral when it comes to competition between sects . . . We cannot read into the Bill of Rights such a philosophy of hostility toward religion." (Zorach v. Clauson, 1952)

Still, many Americans mistakenly believe the phrase "separation of church and state" exists in the Constitution. It doesn't. Why are so many Americans so misinformed? Because three generations of secular humanist educators and atheistic ACLU ideologues have parroted this big lie so often that the dumbed-down, indoctrinated masses have finally begun to believe it, simply because nobody ever bothered to explain the true meaning of the First Amendment.

Liberals always claim to believe in the Constitution, even if they wrongly interpret it. But what we're dealing with here is not a difference of opinion on some debatable topic, but rather a willful ignorance (real or professed) of long-settled historical facts.

This blatant distortion of our nation's history is a slap in the face of American taxpayers, who are footing the bill for this widespread anti-Christian disinformation campaign. The public schools should be teaching our children the truth, not just what they want kids to believe. Those of us who know the truth need to hold the Liberals accountable for their insidious lies.

Separation of church and state: myth and reality

 

[Nic_Driver]

But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is

We have a professed Christian in the White House now...you're not making any sense unless you’re trying to tell me that it's Constitutionally correct for Perry to espouse one religion over another.

 

[PoliticalChic]

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.

What is wonderful about this myth is how folks like you have been mislead, and yell your misinformation from the highest peaks!

It is wonderful for the amusment it provides for those of us knowledgeable about the Jefferson letter.

In short, Jefferson was reassuring the Danbury Baptists that their governments would not impose a state religion, nor impose on their exercising religion in the manner they see fit.

Nicely writen as follows:
"To provide some context, “the Baptists who supported Jefferson were outsiders — a beleaguered religious and political minority in region where a Congregationalist-Federalist axis dominated political life.” They were seeking reassurances of a religion friendly disposition from their new president who was horribly vilified during the election as an “infidel and atheist.”

This rumor had become so widespread during the presidential campaign, New England housewives were known to have buried their family Bibles in the backyards so fearful that the new Administration would confiscate their Holy Scriptures.

So this famous letter having to do with the ‘wall of separation between church and state’ was a political statement giving his reassurances to the Baptists that he was a friend to religion, and a response to the vilification he received from the Federalist Congregationalist establishment in Connecticut. This was not a definitive manifesto on the relationship between government and religion."
https://writingaboutanythingiwantto.wordpress.com/tag/hugo-black/

So, let us gauge the depth of your misunderstanding by your post.

You see, Jefferson was verifying that the purpose of the Constitution was to keep government out of religion....

...not religion out of the public arena.

You've been tricked by Leftist invention.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is

We have a professed Christian in the White House now...you're not making any sense unless you’re trying to tell me that it's Constitutionally correct for Perry to espouse one religion over another.

When Obama says, "God Bless America" is he espousing one religion over another? How about when he attends church?

The president, who has been criticized in some quarters for rarely being seen going to church, admitted “my faith journey has had its twists and turns.” But speaking in Washington at the annual National Prayer Breakfast, Mr. Obama said his Christian faith has “been a sustaining force for me over these last few years.”

Would that be espousing one religion over another?

What does the president pray for? “I petition God for a whole range of things” he said, but cited three recurring themes. “The first category of prayer comes out of the urgency of the Old Testament prophets and the Gospel itself. I pray for my ability to help those who are struggling,” he said.

A second theme “is a prayer for humility,” he said. And, to audience laughter and applause he added, “God answered this prayer for me early on by having me marry Michelle, because whether it's reminding me of a chore undone or questioning the wisdom of watching my third football game in a row on Sunday, she keeps me humble.”

The final theme to his prayers, the president said, “one that binds all prayers together, is that I might walk closer with God and make that walk my first and most important task.” In expanding on that theme, he said, “When I wake in the morning, I wait on the Lord, and I ask Him to give me the strength to do right by our country and its people. And when I go to bed at night, I wait on the Lord, and I ask Him to forgive me my sins and look after my family and the American people and make me an instrument of His will.”

 

[Auxous]

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?

Its called the religious right and social conservatives. Ever hear of them or do you live in a cave?

They have tried to install creationism, teacher led prayer, abstinence only education, erasing Thomas Jefferson from the history books, abortion, denying gays basic civil liberties, the war on drugs, etc.

 

[PoliticalChic]

With Rick Perry in the running and maybe becoming the front runner soon for the whole shooting match the liberals will go on the attack with this liberal myth

No-one wants the president to make there choices because Allah came to them and told them to
But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is
This will become a hot issue with Perry
watch for it and know when you hear it, your being lied to

The phrase was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Prior to 1947, however separation of church and state was not considered part of the constitution; indeed in 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to guarantee separation of church and state, a task to be accomplished not by constitutional amendment but by judicial fiat in 1947. [2]
Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So what your saying is the SCOTUS set the precedent that now separates the church from the state and has ruled in agreement with its precedent many times since, further defining the separation of the two.

So who's lying to you?

The SCOTUS?

As has been seen more than once, certain members of the Court have injected an anti-religion bias that does not exist in the Constitution.

Justice Hugo Black is the culprit: KKK member and virulent anti-Catholic bigot.


For a more authentic perspective, read the following:

The Framers intended the Establishment Clause to prohibit the designation of any church as a "national" one. The Clause was also designed to stop the Federal Government from asserting a preference for one religious denomination or sect over others. Given the "incorporation" of the Establishment Clause as against the States via the Fourteenth Amendment in Everson, States are prohibited as well from establishing a religion or discriminating between sects. As its history abundantly shows, however, nothing in the Establishment Clause requires government to be strictly neutral between religion and irreligion, nor does that Clause prohibit Congress or the States from pursuing legitimate secular ends through nondiscriminatory sectarian means.

From Chief Justice Wm. Rehnquist dissent in
WALLACE V. JAFFREE
472 U.S. 38, 105 S.Ct. 2479 (1985)
Nos. 83-812, 83-929.
Argued Dec. 4, 1984.
Decided June 4, 1985.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Anyone who is telling you "There is no separation of church and state" or is railing against it is telling you that they want the government to persecute people based on their religious belief. They are saying they have no respect for any other religion but theirs.

You cannot protect Free Exercise of Religion without Separation of Church and State. Once religion and the apparatus of state are entangled, sectarian discrimination is inevitable.

As for bad history here, the concept of separation of church and state pre-dates the founding of the US by about a century. It was a guiding principle for the Rhode Island colony under Roger Williams and Pennsylvania under the Quakers.

Absurd.

As for the famous “separation of church and state,” the phrase appears in no federal document. In fact, at the time of ratification of the Constitution, ten of the thirteen colonies had some provision recognizing Christianity as either the official, or the recommended religion in their state constitutions.

a. From the 1790 Massachusetts Constitution, written by John Adams, includes: [the] good order and preservation of civil government essentially depend(s) upon piety, religion, and morality…by the institution of public worship of God and of the public instruction in piety, religion, and morality…”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Constitution

b. North Carolina Constitution, article 32, 1776: “That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of either the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall b e capable of holding any office, or place of trust or profit, in the civil department, within this State.” http://www.nhinet.org/ccs/docs/nc-1776.htm

c. So, the Founders intention was to be sure that the federal government didn’t do the same, and mandate a national religion. And when Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, it was to reassure them the federal government could not interfere in their religious observations, i.e., there is “a wall of separation between church and state.” He wasn’t speaking of religion contaminating the government, but of the government contaminating religious observance.

 

[bodecea]

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?

Its called the religious right and social conservatives. Ever hear of them or do you live in a cave?

They have tried to install creationism, teacher led prayer, abstinence only education, erasing Thomas Jefferson from the history books, abortion, denying gays basic civil liberties, the war on drugs, etc.

There always seems to be a mental disconnect with the religious right....they think that it is their right to push their religion onto others, onto the public forum.