| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
04 Oct 2005 09:41:19 AM |
| Object: |
Separation of Church and State: Myth v Reality |
THEOCRACY IN ACTION:
Separation of Church and State: Myth v Reality
http://www.therealitycheck.org/GuestColumnist/ntabor072105.htm
Separation of Church and State: Myth v Reality
by Nathan Tabor
I recently exchanged e-mails with a person who disagreed somewhat strongly
with some of my public policy positions. This disagreement was neither
unusual nor note-worthy, in and of itself. But it became especially irksome
to me when the discussion turned to the Liberals’ standard fallback
position: an outraged accusation of my alleged violation of the
Constitution’s ironclad requirement for the “Separation of Church and
State.”
But the Constitution doesn’t contain the phrase “separation of church and
state” anywhere. That phrase actually comes from a letter written by
President Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptist Association, who
were concerned that Anglicanism might become the official (or Established)
denominational preference of the new nation. Jefferson was trying to
reassure the worried Baptists that no such “establishment” skullduggery was
afoot.
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. That secular ideology is entirely foreign to the
original intent of the Founding Fathers – who drafted the Constitution,
including its Bill of Rights, as a clearly defined limitation on the power
of the Government to interfere with the freedoms of the people, but NOT as
a limitation on the power of the people to control the Government according
to the beliefs of their own hearts.
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.”
[END OF EXCERPT]
[ BTW THE ABOVE QUOTE ATTRIBUTED TO JQ ADAMS IS
BOGUS - buckeyeelo]
Nathan Tabor is a conservative political activist based in Kernersville,
North Carolina. He has his BA in psychology and his MA in public policy. He
is a contributing editor at www.theconservativevoice.com. Contact him at
Nathan@nathantabor.com.
**************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the U.S. and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Separation of Church and State: Myth v Reality |
04 Oct 2005 10:56:11 AM |
|
|
wrote:
THEOCRACY IN ACTION:
Separation of Church and State: Myth v Reality
http://www.therealitycheck.org/GuestColumnist/ntabor072105.htm
Separation of Church and State: Myth v Reality
by Nathan Tabor
I rec ently exchanged e-mails with a person who disagreed somewhat strongly
with some of my public policy positions. This disagreement was neither
unusual nor note-worthy, in and of itself. But it became especially irksome
to me when the discussion turned to the Liberals' standard fallback
position: an outraged accusation of my alleged violation of the
Constitution's ironclad requirement for the "Separation of Church and
State."
But the Constitution doesn't contain the phrase "separation of ch urch and
state" anywhere. That phrase actually comes from a letter written by
President Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptist Association, who
were concerned that Anglicanism might become the official (or Established)
denominational pr e ference of the new nation. Jefferson was trying to
reassure the worried Baptists that no such "establishment" skullduggery was
afoot.
Who is this clueless fool? A copy of the Letter to Jefferson
still exists ad it is obvious that this dufus never read it.
"The letter does not mention a national establishment; rather, the
letter
is concerned with the lack of religious liberty Baptists enjoyed in
the
state of Connecticut. The Baptist complaint was that the Connecticut
state
constitution did not pr ohibit the state from legislating about
religious
matters. As a consequence, they argued, '...what religious privileges
we
[Baptists] enjoy (as a minor part of the state) we enjoy as favors
granted,
and not as inalienable rights: and these favors we recei ve at the
expense of
such degrading acknowledgements as are inconsistent with the rights of
freemen.'"
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 r eligion should be kept completely out of the
affairs of the State. That secular ideology is entirely foreign to the
original intent of the Founding Fathers
Hahahahahahaha! Well Madison is considered to be the
father of the Constitution. What did he have to say?
" Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and Gov't in
the
Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by
Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents' already
furnished
in their short history"
James Madison (Detached Memoranda, circa 1820).
"Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect
separation
between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I
have
no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has
done,
in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater
purity
the less they are mixed together"
(Letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822).
?
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
