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

[M.D. Rawlings]

Misrepresentation, nothing. People see your spiel for what it is. A psuedointellectual hissy-fit.

Brainwashed moron.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, M.D., you describe yourself well. Grow up, please.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

I understand classical liberalism, while you obviously do not. The parents are empowered to influence, advise, and elect school boards. But the public school district and its policies are not democratically dictated by local home rule, period. You right wing thugs are never going to get your way.

Moron. Inalienable rights cannot be legitimately violated. Parental consent and authority within the parameters of the social contract cannot be legitimately violated. Don't tell me you understand the classical liberalism of this nation's founding, the socio-political philosophy of the Lockean tradition. You're a collectivist nitwit who would apparently roll over to self-anointed bureaucrats with regard to your very own parental authority. Bent-over, bootlicking, limp-wrested, obedient little nincompoops. School administrators, teachers, schoolbord members are not above you. They put their pants on and pull up their skirts the same way as everybody else. Natural and constitutional law do not permit them to impose their morality on your children, and if it is unconstitutional for such to impose my morality on yours, it is unconstitutional for them to impose your morality on mine.

Shut up! In language you can understand: you're not a red-blooded, freedom-loving American; you're a brainwashed bitch, a ho for bureaucrats.

LOL!

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Yes, M.D., you describe yourself well. Grow up, please.

Blah. Blah. Blah.

 

[CryingKoala]

Its amazing how much you can type and how little you actually say.

So what is your actual position on the Separation of Church and State? So far you have said nothing of substance on the subject. We know what you allegedly don't think it is. But frankly you spend most of the time hurling insults rather than bother to explain your own take on the subject.

The only thing which can be seen in the sea of crap called your responses is:
-You don't respect the religious beliefs of others
-You want your own beliefs to be respected to the point where it attacks the ability of other people to exercise their beliefs.
-You don't understand what it means for the government not to engage in sectarian persecution.

Maybe you can stop acting like a little whiny baby and please enlighten us as to what you think Separation of Church and State is supposed to be?

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

You are making a phony argument that the Establishment Clause is meant to banish religion from the political sphere.

I don't have a problem with the classical construct of Separation of Church and State; however, the Establishment Clause as rendered by the Court since the Warren era, which disregards the equally compelling demands of the Free Exercise Clause, has all but erased the fundamental rights of individual liberty (i.e., ideological free association) and parental authority within the public education system, for example. And the Warren Court's Soviet-style imposition of the construct has encouraged a generation of leftists to believe that religious expression within the political sphere should be banished. They are idiots, of course, but not because they fail to understand the ramifications of the Warren Court's gibberish, which resides in a make believe world where educational and cultural institutions exist in ideological vacuums.



This is baby talk. Gibberish. Or insofar as it has any discernable meaning, it suggests something tyrannical. Government has no business embracing any "faith" whatsoever but that which is outlined in the preamble of the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Each and every individual has the right to practice his religion and express his religious beliefs whenever and wherever he pleases, insofar as he does not violate the fundamental rights of others.

What are you really stumping for when you attack Separation of Church and State?

-Do you really want the ability of the government to engage in sectarian discrimination?
-Do you really have so little respect for faiths besides your own?
-Do you understand how this protects Free Exercise of Religion?

I attack the leftist's retarded construct of Separation of Church and State, for it does not separate church and state, but imposes the depravity of secular humanism and materialism.

I don't have to respect other faiths.

The leftist's construct does not protect the free exercise of religion at all.

You are full of hot air and no facts.
We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various religous beliefs be they Christian or my denomination, Zen Baptist.

The DOI is not a legal document of any kind.
The DOI has NO legal authority over ANY LAW.
The DOI has no standing anywhere in this country.
ALL the DOI did was make an argument AT THAT TIME, that the ties between the US and Britain WERE OVER. 200 years ago , THAT ENDED.
You have broken your own record. You are 200 years late on this argument.
The Founders constructed a secular government. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
During that convention many years ago your side argued against a secular government.
You lost. Suck it up Moe ,go to the 50 yard line and shake the other guys hand. Don't like it?
Move to Iran. They do it your way there. Delta is ready when you are.

I'm a classical liberal of the Lockean tradition, that of this nation's founding. Neither the classical construct of separation nor that of Jefferson is that of the Warrant Court. I have no desire that the state impose my worldview on you. You don’t even recognize the language of individual liberty and anti-theocracy.

You historically and philosophically illiterate imbecile, it is the statist construct of the Warren Court that is akin to the theocratic imposition of Iran, only its the imposition of secularism.

Secular government and secularism are not synonymous.

BOOTLICKING NINNIES!

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

The only thing which can be seen in the sea of crap called your responses is:
-You don't respect the religious beliefs of others
-You want your own beliefs to be respected to the point where it attacks the ability of other people to exercise their beliefs.
-You don't understand what it means for the government not to engage in sectarian persecution.

*Drool* LOL!

Imbecile

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

So what is your actual position on the Separation of Church and State?

. . . We know what you allegedly don't think it is. But frankly you spend most of the time hurling insults rather than bother to explain your own take on the subject.

You don't know? I thought you were the expert. You obviously don't know the difference between the construct of separation of the Continental European tradition (that of the likes of the Jacobins, Rousseau, Marx and others) and that of the Anglo-American tradition rooted, respectively, in the democratic theory of the Enlightenment. You obviously don't grasp the statist, collectivist nature of a separation that would emphasis the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, for example, over the Free Exercise Clause, rather than hold to a balanced application of both. You apparently believe that Jefferson's construct is that of the Warren Court. LOL! Jefferson, the Lockean of Lockeans among the Founders, would go along with the bull that the leftists on the Warren Court instituted nearly two-hundred years later?!

You ignorant, imbecilic, brainwashed tool.

Those on this thread of my political persuasion who say that a construct of separation is not in the Constitution simply because is it not literally expressed in so many words are wrong. But what they are not wrong about, what they are reacting against, is the imposition of a construct of separation that is foreign to this nation's political heritage. The Declaration of Independence is not a summation of Rousseau's collectivist democratic theory of material egalitarianism, but that of Locke's democratic theory of individual liberty: the egalitarianism of a universally unfettered free market of ideas, goods and services.

Look, you known-nothing twit, you're talking to a man who knows the history of events and ideas of Western Culture, from antiquity to the present, via the Classical era, the Scholastic era, the Renaissance, the Age of Discovery, the Age of Enlightenment, the Reformation and so on. . . .

No, punk. You don't inform me; I inform you. I kick your ass up and down this thread, sweetie pie. It's I who does the dismissing around here. My harsh language is not that of impotence or rage, but that of contempt for the morally bankrupt trash that hook up with unionized school administrators and teachers, for example, who block the reformation of an education system they destroyed in the name of a phony doctrine of separation, who keep the children of the poor in bombed-out prisons lest they flee to real schools and take tax dollars with them. . . .

That's the political left all day long.

I have no tolerance for fools who cannot see what is right in front them, that which is self-evident, and I especially have no tolerance for the jackbooted thugs of contemporary leftyism who think it's constitutional for the state to usurp/run roughshod over the parental authority of religionists in the public schools, for example, as those same leftists accuse religionists of wanting to impose their religion simply because the latter demand that the state back off and obey the Free Exercise Clause before a cultural war escalates into an armed civil war. For the only faction doing any imposing is the faction doing the accusing!

If you're so incredibly stupid as to believe that the amendment in the Constitution corresponding with the natural, inalienable right of religious freedom means that the state can erect a public education system and then dictate the underlying ideology that informs the academics and standards of socialization therein, there's no help for you but the deliverance of the Lord God Almighty or the business end of a loaded gun. If you're so stupid you cannot recognize that in a philosophically and theologically diverse society that the only just resolution of liberty, one that fulfills the requirements of the First Amendment for all, is competitive, universal school choice, I can't help you.

Leftists thugs, whether they be fascists or Marxists or something in between, cannot be reasoned with; they must be defeated one way or another.

How ya like me now?

Do you still not grasp the essence of the observation that no institution of education or culture exists in an ideological vacuum? I assure you, the leftists on the Warren Court knew that. They would understand me perfectly, though they wouldn’t acknowledge it. They knew precisely what they did and why.

Clearly, it was never the expression of the cherished religious convictions of millions in the schools that was unconstitutional; rather, it was the closed, collectivist system of education in and of itself that was and remains unconstitutional.

Do you still not grasp that the Court didn't separate "church" and state at all? It merely traded one ideology for another . . . effectively making the education system the state's church and establishing secular humanism as the state's new religion. Governmentally provided education must be neutral and secular in terms of its administration and facilitation; it is not the content of the people's education that must be neutral and secular.

There is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all system of education.

Knock, knock, anybody home?

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Yes, M.D., you describe yourself well. Grow up, please.

 

[Gadawg73]

M. D. Rawlings is simply put out that she cannot dicate the religious environment of secular, state-supported classrooms.

Home school or private school, M. D., on your on dime and time, not mine.

Not true, liar. Your just a simpleton who does not understand the concept of universal ideological liberty or how it would be implemented with respect to the requirements of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause in the public education system.

I have no desire to impose my worldview on you at all, but I am fighting to wrest control of the education system from the statist, tyrannical left and turn it back over to the parental authority of the people, you brainwashed dimwit.

In the meantime, the only faction in our society that is imposing its worldview on the rest of us in the schools is the imbecilic left, the jackbooted, fascist thugs of political correctness.

"universal ideological liberty"
Where is that in the United States Constitution?
Sad day in America when ideologues want to ignore THE LAW in fighting "political correctness".
Turn the radio off. Rush has fried your brain.

 

[Gadawg73]

I don't have a problem with the classical construct of Separation of Church and State; however, the Establishment Clause as rendered by the Court since the Warren era, which disregards the equally compelling demands of the Free Exercise Clause, has all but erased the fundamental rights of individual liberty (i.e., ideological free association) and parental authority within the public education system, for example. And the Warren Court's Soviet-style imposition of the construct has encouraged a generation of leftists to believe that religious expression within the political sphere should be banished. They are idiots, of course, but not because they fail to understand the ramifications of the Warren Court's gibberish, which resides in a make believe world where educational and cultural institutions exist in ideological vacuums.




This is baby talk. Gibberish. Or insofar as it has any discernable meaning, it suggests something tyrannical. Government has no business embracing any "faith" whatsoever but that which is outlined in the preamble of the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Each and every individual has the right to practice his religion and express his religious beliefs whenever and wherever he pleases, insofar as he does not violate the fundamental rights of others.



I attack the leftist's retarded construct of Separation of Church and State, for it does not separate church and state, but imposes the depravity of secular humanism and materialism.

I don't have to respect other faiths.

The leftist's construct does not protect the free exercise of religion at all.

You are full of hot air and no facts.
We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various religous beliefs be they Christian or my denomination, Zen Baptist.

The DOI is not a legal document of any kind.
The DOI has NO legal authority over ANY LAW.
The DOI has no standing anywhere in this country.
ALL the DOI did was make an argument AT THAT TIME, that the ties between the US and Britain WERE OVER. 200 years ago , THAT ENDED.
You have broken your own record. You are 200 years late on this argument.
The Founders constructed a secular government. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
During that convention many years ago your side argued against a secular government.
You lost. Suck it up Moe ,go to the 50 yard line and shake the other guys hand. Don't like it?
Move to Iran. They do it your way there. Delta is ready when you are.

I'm a classical liberal of the Lockean tradition, that of this nation's founding. Neither the classical construct of separation nor that of Jefferson is that of the Warrant Court. I have no desire that the state impose my worldview on you. You don’t even recognize the language of individual liberty and anti-theocracy.

You historically and philosophically illiterate imbecile, it is the statist construct of the Warren Court that is akin to the theocratic imposition of Iran, only its the imposition of secularism.

Secular government and secularism are not synonymous.

BOOTLICKING NINNIES!

I recognize you do not support THE LAW.
The law rules this country, not religion and their supporters.
Get used to it.

 

[Intense]

Separation of Church and State is a Christian concept. Get over it.

<< Matthew 22:21 >>

New International Version (©1984)
"Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

New Living Translation (©2007)
"Caesar's," they replied. "Well, then," he said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God."

English Standard Version (©2001)
They said, &#8220;Caesar&#8217;s.&#8221; Then he said to them, &#8220;Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar&#8217;s, and to God the things that are God&#8217;s.&#8221;

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
They said to Him, "Caesar's." Then He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's."

International Standard Version (©2008)
They said to him, "Caesar's." So he said to them, "Then give back to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
They replied, "The emperor's." Then he said to them, "Very well, give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, and give God what belongs to God."

King James Bible
They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

American King James Version
They say to him, Caesar's. Then said he to them, Render therefore to Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's.

American Standard Version
They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Bible in Basic English
They say to him, Caesar's. Then he said to them, Give to Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and to God the things which are God's.

Douay-Rheims Bible
They say to him: Caesar's. Then he saith to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.

Darby Bible Translation
They say to him, Caesar's. Then he says to them, Pay then what is Caesar's to Caesar, and what is God's to God.

English Revised Version
They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Webster's Bible Translation
They say to him, Cesar's. Then saith he to them, Render therefore to Cesar, the things which are Cesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.

Weymouth New Testament
"Caesar's," they replied. "Pay therefore," He rejoined, "what is Caesar's to Caesar; and what is God's to God."

World English Bible
They said to him, "Caesar's." Then he said to them, "Give therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Young's Literal Translation
they say to him, 'Caesar's;' then saith he to them, 'Render therefore the things of Caesar to Caesar, and the things of God to God;'

Matthew 22:21 "Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

M. D. Rawlings is simply put out that she cannot dicate the religious environment of secular, state-supported classrooms.

Home school or private school, M. D., on your on dime and time, not mine.

Not true, liar. Your just a simpleton who does not understand the concept of universal ideological liberty or how it would be implemented with respect to the requirements of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause in the public education system.

I have no desire to impose my worldview on you at all, but I am fighting to wrest control of the education system from the statist, tyrannical left and turn it back over to the parental authority of the people, you brainwashed dimwit.

In the meantime, the only faction in our society that is imposing its worldview on the rest of us in the schools is the imbecilic left, the jackbooted, fascist thugs of political correctness.

"universal ideological liberty"
Where is that in the United States Constitution?
Sad day in America when ideologues want to ignore THE LAW in fighting "political correctness".
Turn the radio off. Rush has fried your brain.

So ideological liberty is not inherently universal and therefore should not be universally permitted.

Another idiot leftist literalist unwittingly showing us his statist ass.

 

[yidnar]

the US was founded on Judeo Christian beliefs!!

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

You are full of hot air and no facts.
We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various religous beliefs be they Christian or my denomination, Zen Baptist.

The DOI is not a legal document of any kind.
The DOI has NO legal authority over ANY LAW.
The DOI has no standing anywhere in this country.
ALL the DOI did was make an argument AT THAT TIME, that the ties between the US and Britain WERE OVER. 200 years ago , THAT ENDED.
You have broken your own record. You are 200 years late on this argument.
The Founders constructed a secular government. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
During that convention many years ago your side argued against a secular government.
You lost. Suck it up Moe ,go to the 50 yard line and shake the other guys hand. Don't like it?
Move to Iran. They do it your way there. Delta is ready when you are.

I'm a classical liberal of the Lockean tradition, that of this nation's founding. Neither the classical construct of separation nor that of Jefferson is that of the Warrant Court. I have no desire that the state impose my worldview on you. You don’t even recognize the language of individual liberty and anti-theocracy.

You historically and philosophically illiterate imbecile, it is the statist construct of the Warren Court that is akin to the theocratic imposition of Iran, only its the imposition of secularism.

Secular government and secularism are not synonymous.

BOOTLICKING NINNIES!

I recognize you do not support THE LAW.
The law rules this country, not religion and their supporters.
Get used to it.

I recognize you to be a mindless dolt. Try to get over that though.

 

[Texanmike]

Separation of Church and State is a Christian concept. Get over it.

<< Matthew 22:21 >>

New International Version (©1984)
"Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

New Living Translation (©2007)
"Caesar's," they replied. "Well, then," he said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God."

English Standard Version (©2001)
They said, “Caesar’s.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
They said to Him, "Caesar's." Then He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's."

International Standard Version (©2008)
They said to him, "Caesar's." So he said to them, "Then give back to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
They replied, "The emperor's." Then he said to them, "Very well, give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, and give God what belongs to God."

King James Bible
They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

American King James Version
They say to him, Caesar's. Then said he to them, Render therefore to Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's.

American Standard Version
They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Bible in Basic English
They say to him, Caesar's. Then he said to them, Give to Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and to God the things which are God's.

Douay-Rheims Bible
They say to him: Caesar's. Then he saith to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.

Darby Bible Translation
They say to him, Caesar's. Then he says to them, Pay then what is Caesar's to Caesar, and what is God's to God.

English Revised Version
They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Webster's Bible Translation
They say to him, Cesar's. Then saith he to them, Render therefore to Cesar, the things which are Cesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.

Weymouth New Testament
"Caesar's," they replied. "Pay therefore," He rejoined, "what is Caesar's to Caesar; and what is God's to God."

World English Bible
They said to him, "Caesar's." Then he said to them, "Give therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Young's Literal Translation
they say to him, 'Caesar's;' then saith he to them, 'Render therefore the things of Caesar to Caesar, and the things of God to God;'

Matthew 22:21 "Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

LOL. Wait. Your argument for separation of church and state is because it is part of a religion? You realize what you're saying right? Just curious.(By the way that is an asinine interpretation of the passage, no matter how many different translations you use)


Mike

 

[BDBoop]

"Render unto Caesar that which is due unto Caesar" would seem to indicate "pay your taxes", for anybody following along from a Christian perspective.

 

[Lokiate]

The only thing which can be seen in the sea of crap called your responses is:
-You don't respect the religious beliefs of others
-You want your own beliefs to be respected to the point where it attacks the ability of other people to exercise their beliefs.
-You don't understand what it means for the government not to engage in sectarian persecution.

*Drool* LOL!

Imbecile

Says the dumbfuck that can't even write a response without resorting to childish insults. Way to go.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Says the dumbfuck that can't even write a response without resorting to childish insults.

Way to go.

Thanks. Whatever I can do to help. That's me.

 

[Texanmike]

"Render unto Caesar that which is due unto Caesar" would seem to indicate "pay your taxes", for anybody following along from a Christian perspective.

It does. It doesn't mean that you should not campaign for lower taxes though.

Mike