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

[Dr.Drock]

So I'm still waiting for the evidence that writing things on public buildings establishes law.

A law making it ok to cover US gov't property with christianity is establishing the US gov't as a christian entity.



Let me know how many times you need me to copy and paste that for it to sink in.

Square peg, round hole Syndrome?

Really? You are that impressionable and insecure? Nah.

Insecure? About what? My religion?

How many times do you want to hear that I'm fine with every street corner having people recite Bible verses, or even (gasp) Quran verses. I don't care if my house is surrounded by churches, if every square inch of private property besides my own is covered in Bibles.


Freud called this projecting, you're the one who's so insecure with your beliefs that you need government to promote them. I don't need gov't to promote being a non-believer, I'd rather people decide that on their own with zero outside pressure.

 

[Dr.Drock]

So what he is saying is that there is no law that has come about from writings on government buildings...but that he wants to ESTABLISH a law curtailing freedom of speech/freedom of religion, to PREVENT anyone from referencing God on a public building.

Lol now that's some skillful spinning.


No, actually I meant what I said exactly.

 

[koshergrl]

So I'm still waiting for the evidence that writing things on public buildings establishes law.

A law making it ok to cover US gov't property with christianity is establishing the US gov't as a christian entity.



Let me know how many times you need me to copy and paste that for it to sink in.

It won't sink in because it's not true.

 

[JRK]

With Rick Perry in the running and maybe becoming the front runner soon for the whole shooting match the liberals will go on the attack with this liberal myth

No-one wants the president to make there choices because Allah came to them and told them to
But to be a Christian and be a practicing Christian as well as being the president, having a day of prayer, etc.. is not against the law nor is it forbidden by anything in our constitution as we are told over and over it is
This will become a hot issue with Perry
watch for it and know when you hear it, your being lied to

The phrase was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Prior to 1947, however separation of church and state was not considered part of the constitution; indeed in 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to guarantee separation of church and state, a task to be accomplished not by constitutional amendment but by judicial fiat in 1947. [2]
Separation of church and state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The word pistol doesn't appear in the 2nd amendment either.

What does that have to do with the 10 commandments in 2 places within the supreme court building?

 

[Gadawg73]

I keep hearing the Founders wanted God in everything and anything government and approved of it.
No where in The United States Constitution is the word God.
There was plenty of argument for putting God into the Constitution.
Those that argued in favor of it lost and those that argued against naming God in the Constitution won.
Something about we are a nation OF LAWS, NOT MEN and their various and changing like the wind religions and religous sayings.

 

[koshergrl]

Exactly.

So where is the law that establishes religion?

Or the proposed law? I keep hearing about it as if it exists?

 

[JRK]

I keep hearing the Founders wanted God in everything and anything government and approved of it.
No where in The United States Constitution is the word God.
There was plenty of argument for putting God into the Constitution.
Those that argued in favor of it lost and those that argued against naming God in the Constitution won.
Something about we are a nation OF LAWS, NOT MEN and their various and changing like the wind religions and religous sayings.

Whats your point?
does the word religion have an ything to do with the word God?
This thread is for 2 reasons

1) I am a christian and
2) I am tired of hearing that same lie over and over. pending the next judgement from the next judge has everything to do with seperation of church and state and as usuual the libs cannot live with the conststutuion and the peoples will, so they legeslate from the bench

 

[Dr.Drock]

I keep hearing the Founders wanted God in everything and anything government and approved of it.
No where in The United States Constitution is the word God.
There was plenty of argument for putting God into the Constitution.
Those that argued in favor of it lost and those that argued against naming God in the Constitution won.
Something about we are a nation OF LAWS, NOT MEN and their various and changing like the wind religions and religous sayings.

Whats your point?
does the word religion have an ything to do with the word God?
This thread is for 2 reasons

1) I am a christian and
2) I am tired of hearing that same lie over and over. pending the next judgement from the next judge has everything to do with seperation of church and state and as usuual the libs cannot live with the conststutuion and the peoples will, so they legeslate from the bench

Well the good thing is the overwhelming majority of christians and conservatives completely disagree with you. GADawg is a christian, and I'm a hardcore conservative.

So blindly painting this in your typical partisan way is just a lie.

 

[Intense]

I keep hearing the Founders wanted God in everything and anything government and approved of it.
No where in The United States Constitution is the word God.
There was plenty of argument for putting God into the Constitution.
Those that argued in favor of it lost and those that argued against naming God in the Constitution won.
Something about we are a nation OF LAWS, NOT MEN and their various and changing like the wind religions and religous sayings.

We are also a Nation of Values and Ideals. Is the Establishment of Justice a part of Our Lives? Government is not the Source of Justice, it never has been. It is a Tool. Through Government we apply and amend, seeking what is right and in Our best interest. There are those that deny Unalienable Right exists, yet we see "Cause and Effect" around Everything we See, Do, Say, or Think.

 

[CryingKoala]

You are a Fucking Idiot. The argument is not about you or your failed perspective,the argument existed before your birth. You want the perspective of The 1st New York Constitution, read it, moron.


Insults doesn't make your point any less phony. You are are not reading your own cut and paste job closely or bothering to read responses other than what canned arguments you have made. You don't quite understand the historical context of your own posts. What looks like to a modern perspective as exclusive endorsement of Christianity in that Constitution would not have been seen that way until at least the mid 19th Century. You are using an ahistorical and intentionally misleading interpretation of these things.

It was not people from states like NY or VA which stumped for the Establishment Clause in the first place it was people from states which specifically disavowed such official pronouncements of Christianity from their charters which did. People from Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. The people who introduced the Separation of Church and State to the Americas a century before the Revolution.

The one constant I see with you is you bending reality in your mind to make it fit your position. Hint. Go to the source, stop with the psychobabble.

Its not bending reality. Its understanding the text and its historical context. Something you are avoiding at all costs. You definitely seem to have trouble grasping that the Early US was not a religiously diverse nation. 99% Protestant or damn close to it. What was considered inclusive back then wouldn't fly 50 years after the Constitution was ratified. Much of those sources you cite would have either revised or dropped those references to Christianity altogether by the late 19th Century.

Plus you continue to ignore the roots of the Separation of Church and State from the 17th century.

 

[Intense]

A law making it ok to cover US gov't property with christianity is establishing the US gov't as a christian entity.



Let me know how many times you need me to copy and paste that for it to sink in.

Square peg, round hole Syndrome?

Really? You are that impressionable and insecure? Nah.

Insecure? About what? My religion?

How many times do you want to hear that I'm fine with every street corner having people recite Bible verses, or even (gasp) Quran verses. I don't care if my house is surrounded by churches, if every square inch of private property besides my own is covered in Bibles.


Freud called this projecting, you're the one who's so insecure with your beliefs that you need government to promote them. I don't need gov't to promote being a non-believer, I'd rather people decide that on their own with zero outside pressure.

Freud called this projecting, you're the one who's so insecure with your beliefs that you need government to promote them. I don't need gov't to promote being a non-believer, I'd rather people decide that on their own with zero outside pressure.

Actually I'm Neutral. My Faith teaches me that God is Spirit and Truth, and in Control. I'm not big on graven images, or Worshiping any part of creation, myself. People need reminders? I'm not offended by that. People need Public display, I'm not offended by that.

My best time in a Church or Temple is when I'm alone. I close my mind and eyes to the physical and Commune. Tell me, where is God not?

 

[JRK]

I keep hearing the Founders wanted God in everything and anything government and approved of it.
No where in The United States Constitution is the word God.
There was plenty of argument for putting God into the Constitution.
Those that argued in favor of it lost and those that argued against naming God in the Constitution won.
Something about we are a nation OF LAWS, NOT MEN and their various and changing like the wind religions and religous sayings.

Whats your point?
does the word religion have an ything to do with the word God?
This thread is for 2 reasons

1) I am a christian and
2) I am tired of hearing that same lie over and over. pending the next judgement from the next judge has everything to do with seperation of church and state and as usuual the libs cannot live with the conststutuion and the peoples will, so they legeslate from the bench

Well the good thing is the overwhelming majority of christians and conservatives completely disagree with you. GADawg is a christian, and I'm a hardcore conservative.

So blindly painting this in your typical partisan way is just a lie.

What exactly is my way?
search for the truth?

At no time have your read what my feelings with this matter is. What you have read and taken out of context is simple and accurate information
And what was that last part?
what part is a lie? can you show me where in the constitution it separates church and state?
That is a slanderous statement and i expect an apology

 

[Intense]

You are a Fucking Idiot. The argument is not about you or your failed perspective,the argument existed before your birth. You want the perspective of The 1st New York Constitution, read it, moron.


Insults doesn't make your point any less phony. You are are not reading your own cut and paste job closely or bothering to read responses other than what canned arguments you have made. You don't quite understand the historical context of your own posts. What looks like to a modern perspective as exclusive endorsement of Christianity in that Constitution would not have been seen that way until at least the mid 19th Century. You are using an ahistorical and intentionally misleading interpretation of these things.

It was not people from states like NY or VA which stumped for the Establishment Clause in the first place it was people from states which specifically disavowed such official pronouncements of Christianity from their charters which did. People from Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. The people who introduced the Separation of Church and State to the Americas a century before the Revolution.

The one constant I see with you is you bending reality in your mind to make it fit your position. Hint. Go to the source, stop with the psychobabble.

Its not bending reality. Its understanding the text and its historical context. Something you are avoiding at all costs. You definitely seem to have trouble grasping that the Early US was not a religiously diverse nation. 99% Protestant or damn close to it. What was considered inclusive back then wouldn't fly 50 years after the Constitution was ratified. Much of those sources you cite would have either revised or dropped those references to Christianity altogether by the late 19th Century.

Plus you continue to ignore the roots of the Separation of Church and State from the 17th century.

Fail. Study the Link between Locke, Madison, Jefferson, even Thoreau. You are either misinformed or in denial. Again, your problem, the mounds of evidence are against you. Your premise is flawed, your understanding of mine is also flawed. Good try though.

 

[CryingKoala]

I keep hearing the Founders wanted God in everything and anything government and approved of it.
No where in The United States Constitution is the word God.
There was plenty of argument for putting God into the Constitution.
Those that argued in favor of it lost and those that argued against naming God in the Constitution won.
Something about we are a nation OF LAWS, NOT MEN and their various and changing like the wind religions and religous sayings.

Whats your point?
does the word religion have an ything to do with the word God?
This thread is for 2 reasons

1) I am a christian and
2) I am tired of hearing that same lie over and over. pending the next judgement from the next judge has everything to do with seperation of church and state and as usuual the libs cannot live with the conststutuion and the peoples will, so they legeslate from the bench

Well it would be easier on you if you stop holding on to the lie that Separation of Church and State came from the Courts.

It is one of the earliest forms of religious doctrine derived from America. A major part of the dogma of the Quakers and other faiths derived from the Anabaptist sects. Anabaptists were virtually universally persecuted throughout Europe. The only exception being a brief moment in Holland prior to the country falling under influence of its more powerful neighbors.

Common Anabaptist beliefs and practices of the 16th century continue to influence modern Christianity and Western society.
* Bible as the sole rule of faith and practice - the authority of the Scriptures
* Freedom of religion - liberty of conscience
* Separation of church and state
* Pacifism or nonresistance
* Separation or nonconformity to the world
* Voluntary church membership and believer's baptism
* Evangelistic zeal
* Priesthood of all believers
Anabaptist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[CryingKoala]

You are a Fucking Idiot. The argument is not about you or your failed perspective,the argument existed before your birth. You want the perspective of The 1st New York Constitution, read it, moron.


Insults doesn't make your point any less phony. You are are not reading your own cut and paste job closely or bothering to read responses other than what canned arguments you have made. You don't quite understand the historical context of your own posts. What looks like to a modern perspective as exclusive endorsement of Christianity in that Constitution would not have been seen that way until at least the mid 19th Century. You are using an ahistorical and intentionally misleading interpretation of these things.

It was not people from states like NY or VA which stumped for the Establishment Clause in the first place it was people from states which specifically disavowed such official pronouncements of Christianity from their charters which did. People from Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. The people who introduced the Separation of Church and State to the Americas a century before the Revolution.

The one constant I see with you is you bending reality in your mind to make it fit your position. Hint. Go to the source, stop with the psychobabble.

Its not bending reality. Its understanding the text and its historical context. Something you are avoiding at all costs. You definitely seem to have trouble grasping that the Early US was not a religiously diverse nation. 99% Protestant or damn close to it. What was considered inclusive back then wouldn't fly 50 years after the Constitution was ratified. Much of those sources you cite would have either revised or dropped those references to Christianity altogether by the late 19th Century.

Plus you continue to ignore the roots of the Separation of Church and State from the 17th century.

Fail. Study the Link between Locke, Madison, Jefferson, even Thoreau. You are either misinformed or in denial. Again, your problem, the mounds of evidence are against you. Your premise is flawed, your understanding of mine is also flawed. Good try though.

You still missed it by a mile. You have to go back further than that. Study the influence of the Anabaptist sects on Early America, most notably their most famous sect, the Quakers. Then do some homework on the founding of RI and PA. There is plenty of documented evidence that the origin of Separation of Church and State predated your guys by at least a century. Read the essays of William Penn and do some homework on Roger Williams.

None of your references support your point unless you fail to take into account the historical/demographic contextual differences of the 18th Century American and today. Your perspective is all off.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Whats your point?
does the word religion have an ything to do with the word God?
This thread is for 2 reasons

1) I am a christian and
2) I am tired of hearing that same lie over and over. pending the next judgement from the next judge has everything to do with seperation of church and state and as usuual the libs cannot live with the conststutuion and the peoples will, so they legeslate from the bench

Well the good thing is the overwhelming majority of christians and conservatives completely disagree with you. GADawg is a christian, and I'm a hardcore conservative.

So blindly painting this in your typical partisan way is just a lie.

What exactly is my way?
search for the truth?

At no time have your read what my feelings with this matter is. What you have read and taken out of context is simple and accurate information
And what was that last part?
what part is a lie? can you show me where in the constitution it separates church and state?
That is a slanderous statement and i expect an apology

Your way is the partisan way, you're one of the biggest partisans on this board. Everything to you is democrat/lib vs republican/con.

Slanderous lol, what a crybaby.

I've already stated and twice repeated why it's gov't trying to establish religion in certain instances by constantly promoting christianity, just scroll up.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

If you reject the Constitutional doctrine of separation of church and State you must also reject the Constitutional doctrine of the individual right to own a handgun in self defense.

The problem is not whether or not there is or should be a separation of church and state. The problem is the understanding of that separation imposed on the body politic by the Court. It's nonsensical and tyrannical; unlike the understanding that the Second Amendment applies to the individual, the Court construed the First Amendment with regard to religious expression within public schools, for example, to not apply to the individual at all.

 

[Dr.Drock]

If you reject the Constitutional doctrine of separation of church and State you must also reject the Constitutional doctrine of the individual right to own a handgun in self defense.

The problem is not whether or not there is or should be a separation of church and state. The problem is the understanding of that separation imposed on the body politic by the Court. It's nonsensical and tyrannical; unlike the understanding that the Second Amendment applies to the individual, the Court construed the First Amendment with regard to religious expression within public schools, for example, to not apply to the individual at all.

People can't express themselves religiously in public schools? I guess all those cross necklaces, Bibles, christian clothing people were wearing were just figments of my imagination.

I never heard or saw anyone in my 10 years of public schooling (other 3 years were catholic schooling) told to tone down their religious expression.

 

[CryingKoala]

If you reject the Constitutional doctrine of separation of church and State you must also reject the Constitutional doctrine of the individual right to own a handgun in self defense.

The problem is not whether or not there is or should be a separation of church and state. The problem is the understanding of that separation imposed on the body politic by the Court. It's nonsensical and tyrannical; unlike the understanding that the Second Amendment applies to the individual, the Court construed the First Amendment with regard to religious expression within public schools, for example, to not apply to the individual at all.

Wow, what a crybaby! You are annoyed that people won't let you use your religious beliefs as an excuse to act like an obnoxious insensitive jerk. My heart bleeds.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

LOL you guys are still here.

The constitution never called for a separation of church and state.

If i'm wrong post the line, from the constitution, that does this.

""Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

that doesn't say the church and state are to be separate. It says the state can not establish a state religion. This does not say there is a separation of church and state.

The full context "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

See the part you left out in relation to religion "or prevent the free excercise therof"? By denying people, for example the ability to pray in public school as a govt policy, you are actually violating the first ammendment by preventing the free exercise thereof.


Again, find where the constitution says there is to be a separation of the church and state. All i see is that the govt can't say "protestant catholic" is the accepted state religion or "Islam sharia law" is the accepted state religion.