The names have been altered in the following to protect the guilty and
innocent (grin)
No I was not one of those participating in this discussion
RE: Separation of church and state nonsense!!
Even Tip [delete] hero, Jerry Falwell attempted to inject scripture into
national policy.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/vance6.html
Those vigilant against incursions of religion into government must guard
against those of [delete], Robertsons' & Falwell's ilk who attempt to merge
government and religion while lying for Jesus that it is not a goal.
Falwell made public statements in which he "said he believes advocates of
church-state separation 'have removed our nation from its relationship with
Christ on which it was founded. ...I therefore believe that that created an
environment which possibly has caused God to lift the veil of protection
which has allowed no one to attack America on our soil since 1812,' Falwell
said in a statement in answer to those who responded to his post-9/11
remarks with incredulity that he (and Robertson) would ever say such
things. "This unrepentant attitude was clearly evident in an interview with
The Washington Post where Falwell continued taking a combative tone.
'I put all the blame legally and morally on the actions of the terrorist,'
Falwell said. But then he added that America's 'secular and anti-Christian
environment left us open to our Lord's [decision] not to protect. When a
nation deserts God and expels God from the culture...the result is not
good.'" quoted material above is from
http://www.au.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr009=5dk1zmsma2.app5b&abbr=cs_&page=N\ewsArticle&id=5632&news_iv_ctrl=2141
Just one example of Tip's hero, Falwell, attempting to inject his religion
into government: "October 1987: The Federal Election Commission fines
Falwell $6,000 for transferring $6.7 million in funds intended for his
ministry to political committees."
http://www.au.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr009=5dk1zmsma2.app5b&abbr=cs_&page=N\ewsArticle&id=5839&news_iv_ctrl=2141
http://www.opensourcetheology.net/node/1327
---excerpts---
“…but when God speaks, we’re not to converse, but obey.” --Pastor Mark
Driscoll, quoted at the Convergent Conference at the Southeastern
Theological Seminary, September 2007. Driscoll was speaking about the
formation of the Emergent Village and how those associated with it are
positioning themselves in a conversation with the Bible and with God. This
quote immediately followed a reference to Genesis and how the snake seduced
Adam and Eve through conversation.
“Good Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions.” -- Rev Jerry
Falwell, quoted Freethought Today, December, 1999, cited by Anthony T.
Podestra of People for the American Way in, Dietz and Holden, Satiricon, p
44; quoted from Steve Benson “Latter-Day Saint To Latter-Day Ain’t”;
commemorating the “Tell It Like It Is” Freethought In Media Award,
presented on November 5, 1999, by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.
Giving no examples of "religious intolerance," Tip Killingsworth <tip@
masterlife.org> wrote:Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 07:25:07 -0400
From: "Tip [delete]
Subject: RE: Separation of church and state nonsense!!
TK [wrote]: I'm afraid it's YOUR religious "filter" that keeps you from
realizing that there is NO "wall of separation" apart from the reticence to
establish a state church! That was NEVER to take the form of "religious
intolerance" that has arisen over the last few decades that NEVER existed
before that as evidenced by the addition of "under God" in the pledge and
numerous other items. You've never "gotten" the fact that Christians aren't
interested in a "theocracy." Government is to be FEARED, not used in terms
of bringing the Kingdom of God to earth. We all watched how a "theocracy"
under Constantine worked and the results were NOT good. Doing the same
things over and over expecting different results is the definition of
insanity. We'll leave THAT to the secularists as they tilt against
windmills.
---------------------------------
From: C[delete]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 1:05 PM
To: Tip [delete]
Subject: RE: Separation of church and state nonsense!!
The only conclusions I consider in this regard, Tip, is that either you are
so ignorant and reading-comprehension challenged that you actually are
unable to process what has been posted over the years, or that your
religious filter prevents you from considering the facts.
The words are not there, but you have been given data about the concept, in
the same way you have been given the data about the words and concepts:
'religious liberty,' and 'fair trial.'
The FF had ample opportunity to enshrine theocratic principles into this
country, and some of them actually tried. Thank Hank that reason prevailed.
PS: Fire hose is an excellent term which describes what is obviously your
problem. I suggest you find a more enlightening fire hose.
Tip [delete] wrote: You know I hadn't even checked
on my burst of posts to the sechum list. I must go back and see what was
happening. Life is like drinking from a fire hose right now and I don't
have a lot of time for fun. Carol, not only is "separation" as a phrase NOT
in the constitution but neither is the idea!
What most people miss is that the constitution, most especially the Bill of
Rights, is meant to limit the actions of GOVERNMENT not citizens. The
founders of this country were more afraid of the government than of people
bringing religion into private life. The Danbury Baptists were concerned
about the founding by congress of a state church. They had no problem with
this country being a "Christian country." Secularists have tried to rewrite
the history of this nation's founding but it won't work. There's just too
much documentation. Of the 53 signers of the Declaration of Independence
well over half of the signers were either pastors or had graduated from
theological schools. To suggest that they had ANY problem with keeping
religion OUT of government is nonsense. They were trying to ensure that
government didn't get into religion!
-----Original Message-----
From: [delete]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 4:02 PM
To: Tip [delete]
Subject: No consistency!!
T [delete] wrote: <<The constructionist court no longer will come out well
on these for liberals because "separation of church and state" isn't in the
constitution.>>
http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/arg1.htm
ARGUMENT ONE: The phrase "separation of church and state" is not found in
the Constitution Absolutely true, and absolutely irrelevant. As noted
earlier, separationists take this language from Thomas Jefferson's 1802
letter to the Danbury Baptists in which he argued that the Constitution
created a "wall of separation between church and state." But, as noted
above, separationists have never taken the phrase as anything more than a
handy (if historically significant) summary of the intent of the religion
clauses of the First Amendment. Separationist scholar Leo Pfeffer, for
example, notes: "No magic attaches to a particular verbalization of an
underlying concept. The concept at issue here is more accurately expressed
in Madison's phrase 'separation between Religion and Government,' or in the
popular maxim that 'religion is a private matter.'" (Church, State, and
Freedom, pp. 118-119).
(T)he phrase "Bill of Rights" has become a convenient term to designate
the freedoms guaranteed in the first ten amendments; yet it would be the
height of captiousness to argue that the phrase does not appear in the
Constitution. Similarly, the right to a fair trial is generally accepted to
be a constitutional principle; yet the term "fair trial" is not found in
the Constitution. To bring the point even closer to home, who would deny
that "religious liberty" is a constitutional principle? Yet that phrase too
is not in the Constitution. The universal acceptance which all these terms,
including "separation of church and state," have received in America would
seem to confirm rather than disparage their reality as basic American
democratic principles (pp. 118).
***************************************************************
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 · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . 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)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
