Separation of Church and State is not in the Constitution , if you see it show it here .
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Separation of Church and State - The Metaphor and the Constitution
"Separation of church and state" is a common metaphor that is well recognized. Equally well recognized is the metaphorical meaning of the church staying out of the state's business and the state staying out of the church's business. Because of the very common usage of the "separation of church and state phrase," most people incorrectly think the phrase is in the constitution. The phrase "wall of separation between the church and the state" was originally coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists on January 1, 1802. His purpose in this letter was to assuage the fears of the Danbury, Connecticut Baptists, and so he told them that this wall had been erected to protect them. The metaphor was used exclusively to keep the state out of the church's business, not to keep the church out of the state's business.
An understanding of the meaning of the non-establishment clause requires an understanding of the role of religion in British life and government in the 18th Century when the US founders were still subjects of His Majesty King George III. Britain had an established Church headed by His Majesty King George III and to hold an office in the King's government , a seat in Parilment or by an Officer in is Majesty' Army or Navy you had to be a member of the Kings Church and take communion in this Church. Failure to do so put you in rebellion against his Majesty and if his Majesty chose you could be tried for high treason - a capital crime. The Protestant reformation was a troubled time in Britain with the battle between Anglican and Catholic Churches when Henry VIII took the British out of the Papal See. Things got more complex when James VI became the English King with his Scottish rites Church (Calvinist-Presbyterians). There was a battle between various Calvinst and the Anglicans. Why do you think Pilgrims, Puritans and Quakers ended up in the New World?
In the 17th Century the British deposed a King who wanted to take Britain back into the Vatican's control. The New King William of Orange.was a member of the Dutch Refermed Church by became Anglican when he moved to London. Britain still has an established Church and Queen Elizabeth II is Head of the Anglican Church and for Constutional Reasons has to be in good standind in the Church since her Uncle Edward VII was deposed (Abdicated) when he married a women who was not able to take communion in the Anglican Church which didn't recognized her Divorce. The role of religion in British affairs of state lead to the Irish Question and the mass genocide against the Highlands Scots in the early 18th century.
All of this was known to the Founders and those who drafted the US Constitution and put the prohibition on the US governm3ent to establish an official religion which also means that no religious group can have a official government role or can try Americans in its religious courts. This means if you want to have a court of rabbis, clergy or mullahs pass judgement you can but I don't have to recognize their authority or even have to recognize their verdicts. It also means I don't have to be a Church member to vote hold office or or hold a position of trust or gain from that government.
^^That was a good hisorical synopsis of the role of religion in the UK, particluarly England.
**************************
I think most people (at least those of us participating in this thread) are aware that the specific words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the constitution. Most of us also know what "no law respecting an establishment of relgion" means. No matter how much some try to tell us that the first amendment does not support "separation of church and state", it's not true.
If Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, it necessarily follows that government policy cannot promote or demote any specific religious doctrine. That is the separation of church and state.
And if you don't think it applies to the states, then read the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court decision in Everson v Board of Education.
I don't see why this is so difficult for so many people. It's been well established by now.
Because, sadly, Christine O'Donnell is not an anomaly. There are tens of thousands of people in this country who are just as stubbornly stupid as she is. Unfortunately, educating them doesn't help, because they seem to have a vested interest in standing their ground and flat out refuse to learn anything. It's pathetic.
Separation of Church and State - The Metaphor and the Constitution
"Separation of church and state" is a common metaphor that is well recognized. Equally well recognized is the metaphorical meaning of the church staying out of the state's business and the state staying out of the church's business. Because of the very common usage of the "separation of church and state phrase," most people incorrectly think the phrase is in the constitution. The phrase "wall of separation between the church and the state" was originally coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists on January 1, 1802. His purpose in this letter was to assuage the fears of the Danbury, Connecticut Baptists, and so he told them that this wall had been erected to protect them.The metaphor was used exclusively to keep the state out of the church's business, not to keep the church out of the state's business.
Somone I'd consider very much an authority on the U.S. Constitution wrote, and I'm paraphrasing closely, that the separation between church and state is very much included in the Constitution, and, further, that such separation exists also to protect against the danger of encroachment by religious groups.
An understanding of the meaning of the non-establishment clause requires an understanding of the role of religion in British life and government in the 18th Century when the US founders were still subjects of His Majesty King George III. Britain had an established Church headed by His Majesty King George III and to hold an office in the King's government , a seat in Parilment or by an Officer in is Majesty' Army or Navy you had to be a member of the Kings Church and take communion in this Church. Failure to do so put you in rebellion against his Majesty and if his Majesty chose you could be tried for high treason - a capital crime. The Protestant reformation was a troubled time in Britain with the battle between Anglican and Catholic Churches when Henry VIII took the British out of the Papal See. Things got more complex when James VI became the English King with his Scottish rites Church (Calvinist-Presbyterians). There was a battle between various Calvinst and the Anglicans. Why do you think Pilgrims, Puritans and Quakers ended up in the New World?
In the 17th Century the British deposed a King who wanted to take Britain back into the Vatican's control. The New King William of Orange.was a member of the Dutch Refermed Church by became Anglican when he moved to London. Britain still has an established Church and Queen Elizabeth II is Head of the Anglican Church and for Constutional Reasons has to be in good standind in the Church since her Uncle Edward VII was deposed (Abdicated) when he married a women who was not able to take communion in the Anglican Church which didn't recognized her Divorce. The role of religion in British affairs of state lead to the Irish Question and the mass genocide against the Highlands Scots in the early 18th century.
All of this was known to the Founders and those who drafted the US Constitution and put the prohibition on the US governm3ent to establish an official religion which also means that no religious group can have a official government role or can try Americans in its religious courts. This means if you want to have a court of rabbis, clergy or mullahs pass judgement you can but I don't have to recognize their authority or even have to recognize their verdicts. It also means I don't have to be a Church member to vote hold office or or hold a position of trust or gain from that government.
The founding fathers knew what happened when you mixed Religion with State. You had witch hunts, you had a country beholden to a religion that often lead to war, and you had people who couldn't live freely.
Our country was founded as such that no one person should be beholden to anyone elses religious dogma.
The gray areas are things like abortion, gay marriage, and others. Yeah, they are against most religions views, but is it only a religious view, or is it really a personal view?
Because, sadly, Christine O'Donnell is not an anomaly. There are tens of thousands of people in this country who are just as stubbornly stupid as she is. Unfortunately, educating them doesn't help, because they seem to have a vested interest in standing their ground and flat out refuse to learn anything. It's pathetic.
Well said religion and religious arguments are nothing more than a vested interest.
Why is it that white Christians seem to be a lot stupider than black Christians?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
