Zone1 Christianity and our founding fathers

[NotfooledbyW]

The establishment clause of the 1st Amendment was not written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions. To suggest that it was would get the person so doing laughed out of class and invited for a sit-down with the proff.

Yes Saint ding is quite proud of the spread of Catholic civilization by subjugating "the best {and gentlest} people in the world?” As C,Columbus referred to them in his notes.


America's Christian Heritage 170517 {post•3} ding Mar’17 Sachyz inserts the mural “Landing of Columbus:

dvng 170517 Sachyz00003


What Is Christian Nationalism? 240311 {post•48}

Here’s some related pre/Revolution white Christian Heritage that Saint Ding won’t discuss;

Landing of Columbus, 1492 | Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History Native Americans watch the Europeans from behind a tree. In his journal, Columbus recorded that they "asked us if we had come from heaven" and called them "the best people in the world, and the gentlest."[2] He also, however, made note of his plan to "with force . . . subjugate the whole island."[3]

Was C.Columbus committing a sin against the Catholic God when he ordered his invaders to use force against "the best {and gentlest} people in the world?”

Or was C.Columbus being obedient to the Catholic God’s Will when he began using force against "the best {and gentlest} people in the world?”

nfbw 240311 Vwicnz00048 to Sachyz00003

 

[ding]

The establishment clause of the 1st Amendment was not written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions. To suggest that it was would get the person so doing laughed out of class and invited for a sit-down with the proff.

It has already been explained to you and supported with factual evidence.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

It has already been explained to you and supported with factual evidence.

Why did every State disestablish the State from state religion before the Civil War?

It proves this data is correct. Our Christian Heritage post-Revolution was weak, but it was growing.

Frauds Tucker and Laura distance from T 201130 {post•135} NotfooledbyW Churching of America :

Membership In America Percentage of population that belongs to a church: 1776 17% 1850 34% 1860 37% 1870 35% 1890 45% 1906 51% 1916 53% 1926 56% 1952 59% 1980 62% 1995 65% * *Estimated. Source: "The Churching of America: 1776-1990" by Roger Finke and Rodney Stark and Gallup Organization data“ •••• nfbw 201130 Vftald00135


So why do you ignore data? 2/3 of Americans were not into your Cross of Jesus for certain the first half of the 19th Century.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ding Mar’17 Sachyz: “America's Christian Heritage is indisputable” dvng 170301 Sachyz00001

Membership In America Percentage of population that belongs to a church: 1776 17% 1850 34% 1860 37% 1870 35% 1890 45% 1906 51% 1916 53% 1926 56% 1952 59% 1980 62% 1995 65% * *Estimated. Source: "The Churching of America: 1776-1990" by Roger Finke and Rodney Stark and Gallup Organization data“ •••• nfbw 201130 Vftald00135

We have a Christian heritage. The founding generation was less than 20% Christian of the entire population of all 13 colonies.

All you need to do is simply include that reality in your celebration of American Christianity, saint thing, and then you won’t be a lying white Christian nationalist anymore.

To celebrate America's Christian heritage

You need to quit lying about how many Christians there were in the founding generation, Saint Ding.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Also, though Columbus was Italian, it remains unclear whether ding would prefer being subjected to Spanish or English religious tyranny. Interesting that the King and Queen had just got done massacring Granada prior to his "discovery" and bother of a different well populated island, not to be confused with that Grenada our Saint Ronnie saved from a commie takeover of our children's minds.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

It has already been explained to you and supported with factual evidence.

Yes, you ding'splained with misstated evidence.

You need a real class in American history. Of course, the David Barton type is evangelical nonsense.

 

[ding]

Yes, you ding'splained with mistated evidence.

The letter from Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller says otherwise.

Understanding the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses - Intercollegiate Studies Institute

Why wasn’t the Free-Exercise Clause (Congress shall make no law “prohibiting the free exercise” of religion) sufficient in itself? No other First Amendment right—freedom of speech, press, peaceable assembly, or petition—has a pair of clauses devoted to it.

isi.org

Amendment I (Religion): Thomas Jefferson to Rev. Samuel Miller

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No ding'splaination, buddy. You have been presented the logical conclusion of all the facts.

We are governed by a secular system of law created by a nation of general Christian heritage.

So, no, it's over. 'Not just once more.'

 

[ding]

No ding'splaination, buddy. You have been presented the logical conclusion of all the facts.

We are governed by a secular system of law created by a nation of general Christian heritage.

So, no, it's over. 'Not just once more.'

Read the letter from Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No, ding, 'not just once more.'

 

[ding]

No, ding, 'not just once more.'

The Bill of Rights did not apply to States until the Supreme Court misapplied the 14th amendment in a spectacular violation of the Constitution. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No more ding'splanashun. Not just 'once more'.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The Bill of Rights did not apply to States

Freedom of conscience is an unenumerated right for individuals if you do not think the 1st Amendment covers that in practice and in practical reasoning. I don’t want your Catholic’s teaching my grandkids a damn thing about the Cross of Christ in any taxpayer funded public school. Keep out.

Thats my George Washington Freemasonry heritage Saint Ding. Show some respect for my religion Saint Ding.

 

[ding]

No more ding'splanashun. Not just 'once more'.

Read the letter from Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller.

Amendment I (Religion): Thomas Jefferson to Rev. Samuel Miller

 

[Grumblenuts]

Read the letter from Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller.

Okay. Read it!

Whereas, President Jefferson refused to issue Thanksgiving proclamations during the eight years he held office: ". . . civil powers alone have been given to the President of the U.S., and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents" (Letter to Rev. Samuel Miller, Jan. 23, 1808).

We are renewing our request of Dec. 20, 2023,1that the Board rescind its ill-advised and unconstitutional “Christian Heritage” proclamation during the holiday season and “all year long.”

When Thomas Jefferson as president was urged to issue a day of thanksgiving and prayer, he refused,” noting:​

I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitutionfrom intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises . . . . Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the general government. . . . 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 United States an authority over religious exercises, which the Constitution has directly precluded them from. . . . civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.2

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The letter from Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller says otherwise.

The US Constitution is expected to protect the individual from all governments regarding unjustifiable coercive abuse of power.

The First Amendment says “free exercise” of religion shall not be prohibited and you say Saint Ding that applies only to the Federal Government.

But the Federal Government does not own land in general where free people live work and play. There were no Federal Churches in existence that could prohibit the free exercise of religion against the individual.

If there were national churches in existence after the Revolution was won, they could not force taxpayers to support them.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

It’s absurd Saint Ding to suggest that free exercise of religion for individuals did not exist in the states after Independence was won. The Crown owned most of the church property and they taxed everything to build and operate them.

So what do state governments do with church property that effectively nobody owns. I think what they did is they allowed congregations to take over the church property and they began treating churches, as if they were corporations.

The states feared the wealth of some congregations could be a problem, so they put limits on how much land, and how much revenue they could raise.

But the effect of ‘free exercise’ in the Constitution meant that no church however it was set up, could force any individual to pay to build them, or to operate them.

So if 80% of the country were unchurched, that meant 80% of the country could exercise their freedom to not give a damn penny to a single state run church.

But of course, all the states had to disenfranchise eventually because they couldn’t force anybody to attend or pay for them. Why would a state church even exist if citizens of the United States of America have freedom of religion?

 

[ding]

Okay. Read it!

I did. The good reverend was concerned about the Federal government establishing a day of fasting and prayer. Thomas Jefferson allayed those fear by explaining it was a recommendation and not a prescription and that the US was restricted from establishing a national religion and that establishing religion was left to the states.

Pretty simple, really. Especially since half of the states still had established religions at the time the constitution was founded.

But feel free to state what you think that exchange was about.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

establishing religion was left to the states.

That’s in the top 20 of the stupidest things you’ve ever said Saint Ding. See nfbw 136

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Pretty simple, really. Especially since half of the states still had established religions at the time the constitution was founded.

But they could not force anybody to pay for them.

 

[ding]

"...The most prominent Federalist of the 1780s, James Madison, “the Father of the Constitution,” duly drafted and introduced the promised Bill of Rights in the first session of the First Congress.

Yet Madison’s wording of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause was significantly changed in what was finally approved by Congress and sent to the states for ratification. In attempting to understand the purpose of the Establishment Clause, we must examine that change.

The religion clauses for the First Amendment that Madison introduced in the House of Representatives read as follows: “The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, [n]or shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, nor on any pretext, infringed.” This awkward wordiness was amended by a majority of his colleagues in the House, under the leadership of Fisher Ames of Massachusetts, to read: “Congress shall make no law establishing Religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, nor shall the rights of conscience be infringed.” The Senate then amended that language further to, “Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion.” All three of these statements had the evident aim of prohibiting Congress from enacting a law that would, in Madison’s words, establish “any national religion.” And despite their various styles and various degrees of specificity, all of them protected the free exercise of religious beliefs.

As with bills today, it was a conference committee that reconciled the House and Senate versions and produced the final language of the First Amendment that Congress sent to the states for ratification. Two members of this six-member committee, Oliver Ellsworth and Roger Sherman, were from Connecticut, a state with a strong religious establishment. The language of the conference committee’s final version kept the Free-Exercise Clause that both houses of Congress preferred to Madison’s diffuse wording but rephrased the Establishment Clause in a way that significantly broadened its frame of reference. That clause’s final wording (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”) succinctly prohibited Congress from both enacting an establishment law of its own and disturbing the establishment laws that then existed in half the states of the Union...."

Understanding the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses - Intercollegiate Studies Institute

Why wasn’t the Free-Exercise Clause (Congress shall make no law “prohibiting the free exercise” of religion) sufficient in itself? No other First Amendment right—freedom of speech, press, peaceable assembly, or petition—has a pair of clauses devoted to it.

isi.org