Separation of Church and State

[JustAsking]

Take a class in english comprehension if its over your head.

Not a blunder.... one of the most important articles in a document that revolutionized governance.

Well. I can only assume that you imagine that separation of church and state limits free speech? That's a typical religious idiocy. The PEOPLE have freedom of speech... NOT the government. You can talk about God in school with your friends.... but the teacher that I help pay the salary for can not.

The simplest logical test of this kind of inanity is to offer the religious what they want... state sponsored prayer in school... except it can only be Muslim prayer- five times a day...

It that satisfactory? I didn't think so.
You want to indoctrinate YOUR child with a delusion... fine... but not on my dime and my kid doesn't have to listen to it.

And here's the real kicker... Europe, whose nations ALL have state sponsored religion... has the highest atheist population in the world.

The US... where government is kept out of faith and vice versa... is one of the most religious nation on earth...

THAT is what freedom From state religion buys you. You should be happy.


again... take a class in english comprehension if you can't understand the semantic content of language.


Madison
Jefferson
Adams


What? Show me evidence of God...

Well you don't derive the meaning of the constitution by making up shit about this being a christian nation.

And if you want to know what any article or amendment in the constitution MEANS... the men who WROTE it spent 3o subsequent years EXPLAINING it.


So... really... get over it... its a secular state... the framers were mostly NOT christian, and wrote quite a lot about the evils of theology and the clergy.


And, most of all... separation has WORKED... the US is certainly not suffering form a LACK of religion.
Quite the opposite.

The Constitution grants the government no power whatsoever over religion.

Religion is excluded from the cognizance of the government and trust in God is a purely spiritual matter.

Some people abuse Christianity to attack religious freedom.

Let's try that again. You guys both rock. Invisibleman, you are ok, too.

 

[Mick Jagger]

You guys both rock!

Thanks, mate....

 

[invisibleman]

Yeah, the Constitution of the United States protects people's personal choices in religious creeds or not to have a religious creed. We can talk about terrorism...but giving up or amending the Constitution over "Homeland Security" and "terrorism fears"...is a grave mistake.

Keep church and state affairs separate. They do not make great bedfellows. The pursuit of happiness is different for everyone.

 

[Phil Ayesho]

I read you to say that you follow no rules of construction when interpreting the Constitution. What do you do if the meaning of the words is ambiguous?

There is no ambiguity in the language. On an idiot is a "strict" constitutional constructionist.

If you want to understand the document and its intent, read what the men who wrote the document SAID their intent was.


Trying to parse a single word out of context is foolish shenanigans that usually boils down to grinding a very specific axe.
You canlt attack the actual sentence, so you go after a clause... can't attack the clause, you go after a word.


In addition... we have 200 years of supreme court precedent in interpreting the meaning of the amendment...

 

[Phil Ayesho]

It doesn't matter because before the First Amendment was adopted the government was granted no power over religion. After it was adopted, the government was still granted no power over religion.

You are playing games with language, but you are not actually saying anything.

Without the first amendment, the government would be able to tax religious organizations.

With the first amendment, the government has power over religion in the sense that the government can STOP religious organizations from meddling in political campaigns... the government has the power to prevent any involvement of religion in government or government funded programs.


The government can also strip a religious organization of its tax free status if its activities can be shown to be political.

The govenrment has no power over religious "beleif"... but then,the government has no power over any form of belief or thought...

so what?


Try making a point, why don't you?
y'know, field an argument...

 

[Phil Ayesho]

I read you to say you don't have any idea what the word "religion" in the Constitution means.

Really? You read that?

Are you in the habit of hallucinating meanings out of thin air?


You sound like Bill Clinton defending a blowjob...

If you read the cited materials carefully... and you still have no idea what the terms "religion" or "religious" means in the context of the constitution... then you are simply not intelligent enough to discuss constitutional law.


The precedents are clear... keep your religious delusions out of government
and the government will keep its nose out of your religious delusions.


Don't try to re-define english to make an end-run around the founders' intent to create a secular state.

They made themselves crystal clear.


And the saddest part of any argument that starts out with "separation of church and state is not in the constitution"... is that the religious KNOW they are lying... they know full well they are dissembling, conflating, and endeavoring to bamboozle their religion into government.

This is a perfect illustration of the disingenuous immorality and ethical failure of religious believers....

that they would willing lie, confuse, and falsify information to attain their ends.


hang it up Mick.

Make an argument.

If you can formulate one with your demonstrated inability to comprehend words and sentences.

 

[kalipygian]

The constitution does not prevent taxing religious organizations. It is a form of support which is customary. I do not know any reason a preacher's house deserves to be tax exempt, any more than the director of any other non-profit 501c3.

 

[Mick Jagger]

There is no ambiguity in the language.

Dude, the Constitution is full of ambiguous words, terms and phrases.

 

[Mick Jagger]

On an idiot is a "strict" constitutional constructionist.

Huh?

If you want to understand the document and its intent, read what the men who wrote the document SAID their intent was.

Why not use the common law rules construction that the lawmakers meant for us to use.

Trying to parse a single word out of context is foolish shenanigans that usually boils down to grinding a very specific axe.

Is that your first rule of construction?

You canlt attack the actual sentence, so you go after a clause... can't attack the clause, you go after a word.

Is that your second rule of construction?

In addition... we have 200 years of supreme court precedent in interpreting the meaning of the amendment...

I thought we were talking about the original intent of the lawmakers.

 

[Mick Jagger]

You are playing games with language, but you are not actually saying anything.

...before the First Amendment was adopted the government was granted no power over religion. After it was adopted, the government was still granted no power over religion.

Without the first amendment, the government would be able to tax religious organizations.

The Constitution grants the government no power over religion.

With the first amendment, the government has power over religion in the sense that the government can STOP religious organizations from meddling in political campaigns...

The Constitution grants the government no power over religion.

the government has the power to prevent any involvement of religion in government or government funded programs.

The Constitution grants the government no power over religion.

The government can also strip a religious organization of its tax free status if its activities can be shown to be political.

The Constitution grants the government no power over religion.

The govenrment has no power over religious "beleif"... but then,the government has no power over any form of belief or thought...

The Constitution grants the government no power over religion.

so what?

The Constitution grants the government no power over religion.

Try making a point, why don't you?
y'know, field an argument...

The Constitution grants the government no power over religion.

 

[Mick Jagger]

Dear Phil Ayesho:

Religion is the duty we owe to our Creator and the methods of discharging it. The Constitution exempts religion from the cognizance of civil government.

 

[invisibleman]

Really? You read that?

Are you in the habit of hallucinating meanings out of thin air?


You sound like Bill Clinton defending a blowjob...

Or George W. Bush trying to say "it is unacceptable to think".

If you read the cited materials carefully... and you still have no idea what the terms "religion" or "religious" means in the context of the constitution... then you are simply not intelligent enough to discuss constitutional law.


The precedents are clear... keep your religious delusions out of government
and the government will keep its nose out of your religious delusions.


Don't try to re-define english to make an end-run around the founders' intent to create a secular state.

They made themselves crystal clear.


And the saddest part of any argument that starts out with "separation of church and state is not in the constitution"... is that the religious KNOW they are lying... they know full well they are dissembling, conflating, and endeavoring to bamboozle their religion into government.

This is a perfect illustration of the disingenuous immorality and ethical failure of religious believers....

that they would willing lie, confuse, and falsify information to attain their ends.


hang it up Mick.

Make an argument.

If you can formulate one with your demonstrated inability to comprehend words and sentences.

There were reasons why the United States Constitution was created. Read United States history. Monotheism and dominance of Christian dogma were not purposes of creation.

The United States Constitution protects every American's right to believe or not to believe. You can express yourself.