idontreply@toemail.com (M. Clark) wrote:

:|
:|It is a slap in Jefferson's face to use his better known church/state
:|separation writing in conjunction with the concept of church/state
:|separation at the state government level. This is because Jefferson's
:|lesser known writings clearly show that even Jefferson, Mr. "separation
:|of church and state" himself, understood that the Constitution gives the
:|states the power to address religious issues. But don't believe me.
:|See for yourself:
:|
:|

:|"I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the
:|Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their
:|doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the
:|provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free
:|exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states
:|the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to
:|prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious
:|discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then
:|rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority."
:|--Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428

Note what the troll doesn't include. Ask him to be honest enough to explain
why he doesn't include it but don't hold your breath for any real
explanation.

The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Edited by Paul Leicester Ford,
1895 - ten vols. Vol. 9, page 174.
THOMAS JEFFERSON to Rev. Samuel Miller Washington, January 23, 1808.

Sir, - I have duly received your favor of the 18th and am
thankful to you for having written it, because it is more agreeable
to prevent than to refuse what I do not think myself author
authorized to comply with. I consider the government of the US,
as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with
religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This
results not only from the provision that no law shall be made
respecting the establishment, or free exercise of religion, but from
that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to
the U.S. Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or
to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to
the general government. It must then rest with the states, as far as
it can be in any human authority. But it is only proposed that I
should recommend, not prescribe a day of fasting and prayer.
That is, that I should _indirectly_ assume to the U.S. an authority
over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly
precluded them from. It must be meant that this recommendation
is to carry some authority, and to be sanctioned by some penalty
on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and imprisonment,
but of some degree of proscription perhaps in public opinion. And
does the change in the nature of the penalty make the
recommendation the less _a law_ of conduct for those to whom it
is directed? I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to
invite the civil magistrate to direct it's exercises, it's discipline, or
it's doctrines; nor of the religious societies that the general
government should be invested with the power of effecting any
uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are
religious exercises. The enjoining them an act of discipline. Every
religious society has the right to determine for itself the times for
these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to
their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than
in their own hands, where the constitution has deposited it.
I am aware that the practice of my predecessors may be
quoted. But I have ever believed that the example of state
executives led to the assumption of that authority by the general
government, without due examination, which would have
discovered that what might be a right in a state government, was
a violation of that right when assumed by another. Be this as it
may, every one must act according to the dictates of his own
reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given
to the President of the US. and no authority to direct the religious
exercises of his constituents.
I again express my satisfaction that you have been so good
as to give me an opportunity of explaining myself in a private
letter, in which I could give my reasons more in detail than might
have been done in a public answer: and I pray you to accept the
assurances of my high esteem and respect.
Th: Jefferson
**** **************************************************

:|"In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is
:|placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general
:|government. I have therefore undertaken on no occasion to prescribe the
:|religious exercises suited to it; but have left them as the Constitution
:|found them, under the direction and discipline of State or Church
:|authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies." --Thomas
:|Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:378
:|
:|M. Clark, internet troll and nut case.

Run along little troll, you have become very boring.

Addressing completely idontreply with regards to Jefferson, Everson,
courts, separation of church and state, etc.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl4022340726d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&
oe=UTF-8&selm=qtvnvvo7r1veiplqbv8hpeu1f4s17c9k9g%404ax.com

or http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y28E12FF6

and

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl4022340726d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&
oe=UTF-8&selm=pt3ovv0d71c4kme4u5aucg02gfjs8p6s4c%404ax.com

or http://makeashorterlink.com/?G1AE12FF6
*******************************************************************