'No Separation Of Church And State': Trump's Religious Liberty Commission Reveals Its Priorities

That statement says nothing about organized religion, referring only to a people, not a religious organization.

That is a religious view, not an organized religion saying we have to have that.
What was that drivel all about?
 
0315d1_4696938cb2b64b32a3ad9eb42ca18862~mv2.png




On April 30, 1789, George Washington stood on the balcony of Federal Hall in New York City and took the very first presidential oath of office under the newly ratified United States Constitution. In that historic moment, he was not just accepting the immense responsibility of leadership—he was setting a precedent for the soul of the nation.

.....After taking the oath with his hand upon the Bible, Washington led a solemn procession through the streets of New York City to St. Paul’s Chapel. There, the newly inaugurated president, the hero of the Revolution, knelt in prayer. Surrounded by members of the new government, he dedicated the fledgling republic to Almighty God.
The point needs to be clear here.

Washington believed in God.

He is not attempting to force anyone to join, nor is he proposing they be forced to join a religion.

That's where it gets fuzzy.

You can't force people to join a religion, but we take that to mean that anything that can hint at religous content can't be inluded in anything.

You have individuals suing to remove nativity scenes from the state offices claiming the first amendment. Total aberration. You could claim the nativities are cultural in nature.

But you should not have to.

People will say "I don't want my tax dollars going for religious activities. I'll say I don't want my tax dollars going for helping the homeless. What's the difference? Helping the homeless is nothing more than charity which can be linked to religious values.
 
In God We Trust is the official motto of the U.S. doesn’t that suggest there’s no separation of church and church and state?
 
There’s nothing in the US constitution which supports that.

Our money has “In God We Trust” predominantly printed or stamped into it.

Congressional sessions open with a prayer to God. We have official federal holidays based on religion.
History tells us that each of the colonies had religions for which they collected taxes and supported.

Those circumstances remained through about 1830 and were NEVER challenged in court.

They simply got written out of the state constitutions.

Clarence Thomas was very clear that there is a path for states to have established religions they can support and the constitution does not prevent it.
 
Such a statement can only come from someone who does not understand that the first amendment was designed to protect us from the federal religion (the government supporting one over the other) and not to protect people from religion in the public arena.

John Adams made the statement.....

John Adams, one of the Founding Fathers, believed that a nation’s Constitution could only succeed if its people were moral and religious. In a letter to the officers of the Massachusetts Militia in 1798, he wrote: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other”
You shouldn’t need religion to be moral.
 
History tells us that each of the colonies had religions for which they collected taxes and supported.

Those circumstances remained through about 1830 and were NEVER challenged in court.

They simply got written out of the state constitutions.

Clarence Thomas was very clear that there is a path for states to have established religions they can support and the constitution does not prevent it.
I don’t believe a state is constitutionally authorized to name an official religion. Just as they don’t have the authority to ban the observance of a religion.
 
The point needs to be clear here.

Washington believed in God.

He is not attempting to force anyone to join, nor is he proposing they be forced to join a religion.

That's where it gets fuzzy.

You can't force people to join a religion, but we take that to mean that anything that can hint at religous content can't be inluded in anything.

You have individuals suing to remove nativity scenes from the state offices claiming the first amendment. Total aberration. You could claim the nativities are cultural in nature.

But you should not have to.

People will say "I don't want my tax dollars going for religious activities. I'll say I don't want my tax dollars going for helping the homeless. What's the difference? Helping the homeless is nothing more than charity which can be linked to religious values.
Washington was a weak Christian more deistic than Anglican. He look on evangelicals with horror.
 
I don’t believe a state is constitutionally authorized to name an official religion. Just as they don’t have the authority to ban the observance of a religion.
Depends on the legality of the nature of the practice. No animal sacrifice, for example.
 
Washington was a weak Christian more deistic than Anglican. He look on evangelicals with horror.
Where did you get idea?

George Washington was tolerant of all Christian faiths. He attended a variety of churches to include evangelical denominations.
 
Back
Top Bottom