Separation of Church and State is another SCOTUS screw up. It's NOT in the constitution.
(www.prageru.com)
🧠 Memory Hole 🕳️
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (18)
sorted by:
First Amendment . “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . That is a separating phrase .I’m sure the Federalist Papers expand on that.
I would go so far as to propose that they were speaking of Jesus Christ ONLY when they spoke of religion. There is no way they wrote this to give free rein to witches, satanists and pedophile worshippers. The idea is to keep the government out of the church, not the other way around.
Well they were primarily Protestants and the only religion they mention in the founding docs and papers is the Judeo-Christian God of The Bible and the Bill of Rights and Constitution were largely pulled from the general equity of Gods law in scripture. So they had that God in mind clearly but not limited to. However I don't think they could have envisioned the mental disorders and depravity of today. No one in that day and age had time to think of gender fluid pronouns for their cat. They had to work long and hard and had far bigger things to worry about.
What we have now is a case of *Easy times lead to weak men. *
Nope. There is nothing in that Amendment saying that someone can't pray on government property or anything else covered by "separation of church and state." The whole purpose was to keep the government from requiring us to attend a state church, like the Church of England, or to stop us from practicing our religion even on public property.
That is not a "separating phrase." Unless you are new at English.
What you describe is “freedom of religion “, any religion. And your example of praying on public property includes all religions. So which particular religion do you read in the Constitution that is “attached” to the state? There is none. We are a secular state, not a theocracy.
Of course no particular religion is attached to the state. But there should be no "separation" as has been happening during the past 50+ years. And the government should stop its active persecution of Christians. They don't do that to Muslims or Jews. There are government bodies in the US that have actually allowed satanic prayers, but won't allow Christian prayers.
So many people today believe that "freedom of religion" really means "freedom from religion." That would infringe on the freedom of most of the US.
The third sentence in your reply does not reflect anything I wrote. It's a failure in logic.
Nope sorry. That limits the federal government exactly in the manor described in the video that you apparently didn't take 5 min to watch. It's also not in the Federalist papers which a quicker google search would have told you.
You should watch the video. You will learn a few things.
Absolutely right ! They used that lie to get Christians to sit in the pews and allow the devil to take all the political seats and power ! I pray the church understands they were lied to !
I watched the video. Which specific religion does the Constitution “attach” to state? And please quote the text for us. No religion is attached to the state and for good reason. We are not a theocracy. If a particular religion is attached to the state, we could have sharia law if the Muslims became a majority. You can’t have your cake and eat it to.
"Us"? You got a mouse in your pocket or a personality disorder?
You're making a straw-man logical fallacy. My statement "Separation of Church and State is another SCOTUS screw up. It's NOT in the constitution"
You are saying "State" when congress is a Federal institution. A very obvious category error.
"States" means States.
Early colonial constitutions and laws reveal many Christian provisions. As well, at least nine of the 13 colonies had established churches, and all required officeholders to be Christians—or, in some cases, Protestants. Quaker Pennsylvania, for instance, expected officeholders to be “such as possess faith in Jesus Christ."
The federal government couldn't establish a official religious doctrine. You need look no further than the Church Of England and other European nation / state systems that didn't allow for doctoral differences to figure out the reasoning in context. States were free to establish religion however and many did. The last state church wasn't disestablished until 1832, but many states retained religious tests for public office, had laws aimed at restricting vice, required prayer in schools, and so forth. Because the federal government was not to be concerned with these issues, they were not addressed in the Constitution. The First Amendment merely reinforced this understanding with respect to the faith—i.e., Congress has no power to establish a national church or restrict the free exercise of religion.
More here https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/801/established-churches-in-early-america
Even Hawaii's 1840 constitution has this: I. "That no law shall be enacted which is at variance with the word of the Lord Jehovah, or at variance with the general spirit of His word. All laws of the Islands shall be in consistency with the general spirit of God's law."
Also try googling next time. It's history.
And we're not a theocracy yet. But the Bible says we will be and I, for one, am working towards that but not like any one that has ever existed previously.
You can thank God's law for the rights you enjoy today. That's where they were drawn from.
You can go shake your fist at the sky some more now. This is surely quite upsetting but that's because you are doing what the Bible says you'll do. If you hate it so much why are you conforming to it so precisely?