Will we survive?

9192015 | tayper

[tayper]

I'm an old FART so i'll probably not see the result but do you think we will survive our first Black President as a Nation?

[Yosemitest]

WRONG !

Amendment I
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.?

Hey DIM-WHIT,
THAT INCLUDES RELIGION,
and the RIGHT TO DO IT ANYWHERE, ANY TIME, and with ANY GROUP ( including government property and government employees ) !

Now put that in your REPROBATE mind !

[Yosemitest]

Nobody's FORCING YOU to do anything!

Amendment I
Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, >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.?

Hey DIM-WHIT,
THAT INCLUDES RELIGION,
and the RIGHT TO DO IT ANYWHERE, ANY TIME, and with ANY GROUP ( including government property and government employees ) !

Oh, you're NOT FORCED TO STAY.
You CAN LEAVE and NOT LISTEN TO IT.

But REPROBATES LIKE YOU didn't THINK about THAT !
Now put that in your REPROBATE mind !

[Yosemitest]

"Public institutions are no place for religious worship.
The Constitution is very clear on that. "

The Constitution CLEAR STATES :

Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH , or of the press; OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE ...

So CLEARLY,

CONGRESS can NOT ABRIDGE the FREEDOM OF SPEECH
to display, talk about, or debate RELIGION,
ANY PLACE ANY TIME, and with ANY GROUP !

[GingisK]

RIGHT TO DO IT ANYWHERE, ANY TIME, and with ANY GROUP

No, it doesn't. Because the "ANY GROUP" also has their equal rights. I will shed blood for mine.

[GingisK]

Oh, you're NOT FORCED TO STAY. You CAN LEAVE and NOT LISTEN TO IT.

In a public school the children are in attendance by force of law. That does not grant you a coerced forum.

[GingisK]

Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion...

Can you explain this part?

Your behavior is oh, so Christ-like. I would consider your proximity to my children to be endangerment.

[GingisK]

CONGRESS can NOT ABRIDGE the FREEDOM OF SPEECH to display, talk about, or debate RELIGION, ANY PLACE ANY TIME, and with ANY GROUP !

This is the PRECISE reason a government entity cannot practice religion in a government facility. Are you really this dense?

[timestax]

[timestax]

[Yosemitest]

DUMMY, Aa lot of people will "shed blood" for that right !
Did I specify a particular "religion" ? NO !
ANY religion can be discussed ... ANY where, ... ANY time, ... and with ANY group, ... whether YOU like it ... OR NOT !

[Yosemitest]

"In a public school the children are in attendance by force of law. "

Ever hear of HOME SCHOOLING, DUMMY ? ! ?

[Yosemitest]

That's where you're WRONG !
You believe the LIE you've been sold.

I SAY AGAIN:

CONGRESS can NOT ABRIDGE the FREEDOM OF SPEECH
to display, talk about, or debate RELIGION,
ANY PLACE,
ANY TIME,
and with ANY GROUP !
That INCLUDES Government property, and Government Employees !

[GingisK]

Ever hear of HOME SCHOOLING, DUMMY ? ! ?

I did. That is where YOU should be doing your Bible study and prayer. The public schools are funded by the public for the public. Subjects like reading, writing, arithmetic, biology, chemistry, and physics are taught there, giving no time for the other.

[GingisK]

... and with ANY group, ... whether YOU like it ... OR NOT !

I don't think you have read much of the Founding documentation. Your rights END where my equal rights BEGIN. You don't have the right to preach at me. I already have a Christian Faith of a particular denomination. I regard the other denominations as heretical.

You are advocating tyranny, all the while pretending to be Constitutionally-minded. You are also claiming to be a zealous Christian, all the while violating Christian Doctrine and Principle. You are, in Biblical terms, a hypocrite.

[GingisK]

..and with ANY GROUP ! That INCLUDES Government property, and Government Employees !

So, those other people have no rights? I maintain that we do have the same rights as you. Congress may not have the right to reject you, but I MOST CERTAINLY DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO REJECT YOU. Congress can make no rule demanding that I listen to you. I have the right to repel you, including the use of physical force should the situation call for it.

Evangelism has no affect on the unwilling. Scripture says: Matthew 10:14 - If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet.

That means that Evangelism is not something that is forced, either by obnoxious behavior or the sword. The Holy Spirit plants the seed of Faith upon hearing the Word. No force is necessary or desirable. You can't spread the Word by consuming time with unwilling listeners. That time is wasted, and there is scripture that says you must be engaged in meaningful harvest.

Your stance does absolutely nothing FOR the spread of the Word. On the contrary, it galvanizes people against you, including me, a fellow Christian.

Oh, large fonts don't lend anything to the discussion.

[GingisK]

ANY religion can be discussed ... ANY where, ... ANY time, ... and with ANY group, ... whether YOU like it ... OR NOT !

Oh please, force your way into my home to try this...

[GingisK]

You believe the LIE you've been sold.

No, I figured all of this out by reading documents of the Founders, and then applying cold hard logic. I also factored in how tyrannical folks like you really piss me off.

[Yosemitest]

WRONG AGAIN, Satan’s BREATH !

[Yosemitest]

I don't think YOU have read much of the Founding documentation ! So I'll post it AGAIN for that FEEBLE BRAIN of yours.

Take these GREAT WORDS with you.
Put them on posters along with the faces that said them.


Let us remember WHERE we came from.

Footnote: U.S. Constitution
Article I, Section 8: Uniform Immigration
Leviticus 19:34
Article II, Section 1: President Natural-Born
Deuteronomy 17:15
Article III, Section3: Witnesses
Deuteronomy 17:6
Article III, Section 3: Attainer
Ezekiel 18:20
Separation of Powers
Jeremiah 17:9
Three Branches of Government
Isaiah 33:22
Tax-Exemption for Churches
Ezra 7:24
Republicanism
Exodus 18:21

And let us NOT FORGET THESE GREAT MEN and WHAT they SAID !

“For what business, in the name of common sense, has the magistrate with our religion?
The state does not have any concern in the matter.
In what manner does it affect society in what outward form we think it best to pay our adoration to God?
The consciences of men are not the objects of human legislation.
In contrast with this spiritual tyranny, how beautiful appears our constitution in disclaiming all jurisdiction over the souls of men,
securing by a never-to-be- repealed section the voluntary, unchecked moral persuasion of every person by his own self-directed communication with the Father of spirits!”
– William Livingston, Constitution Signer


“Security under our constitution is given to the rights of conscience and private judgment.
They are by nature subject to no control but that of Deity, a
nd in that free situation they are now left.”
– John Jay, first Supreme Court Chief Justice



Original Intent of the First Amendment

Fisher Ames provided the wording for the First Amendment in the House of Representatives.
He did not say anything about “separation of church and state” in his debate, nor may it be inferred as his intent.
In fact, Fisher Ames said something that would be ruled unconstitutional because of the court’s modern application of that very phrase, “separation of church and state.”
He said,
“Not only should the Bible be in our schools, it should be the primary textbook of our schools.” xliv


Earlier, at the time of the Constitutional Convention, the founders discussed the individual rights of American citizens, which would later become the Bill of Rights.
How many times did they mention the phrase “separation of church and state?”
Zero.
They did not talk about it once.

The phrase “separation of church and state” was not even introduced into the American vernacular until a little over a decade after the First Amendment was adopted.
The phrase is exactly that - a phrase.
It is not a statute, it is not a law, and it is not an amendment to the Constitution.
It is simply a phrase lifted from a letter written by one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson was writing to the Danbury Baptist Association on January 1, 1802, in response to a letter wherein
they raised their concerns about religious liberty ever being infringed by the American government.
Jefferson responded that this would not occur because the Constitution builds “a wall of separation between Church and State.” xlv
So much has been erroneously inferred from that one statement.
(I encourage you to read David Barton’s article in the November 2003 issue of the Notre Dame Law Review for a more thorough treatment of Jefferson’s intent.)

Simply stated, Jefferson was using the phrase to describe the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, which says, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The protection of our rights to live out our faith without government interference is what was being expressed both in the letter and in the First Amendment.


What About Separation of Church & State

The Supreme Court twisted the meaning of the First Amendment by isolating those eight words from this personal letter from Jefferson. xlvi
They did not even consider the letter in its full context. xlvii
Then, in 1962, the Court used the phrase to completely remove God from all governmental institutions. xlviii
It is amazing how the court can ignore history and rewrite it to fulfill their particular agenda and purpose.

We’ve Got the Wrong Guy

Perhaps even worse than misapplying Jefferson’s words is the fact that Jefferson’s words were used in the first place
as a means for discovering the intent of the First Amendment.
Actually, Thomas Jefferson and his words “separation of church and state” are irrelevant when it comes to interpreting the intended meaning of the First Amendment
because Jefferson did not give us the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.


When a biographer wrote to Thomas Jefferson, to congratulate him for his influence on the Constitution, his response was,
One passage of the paper you enclosed must be corrected.
It is the following.
‘I will say it was yourself more than any other individual that planned and established the Constitution.’
xlix


Jefferson pointed out to the biographer that
he “was in Europe when the Constitution was planned,
and never saw it
until after it had been established.”l


Nor was Thomas Jefferson one of the Congressmen that passed the Bill of Rights, which contains the First Amendment.

So, arguing what the framers’ intent was by using Thomas Jefferson as an expert witness on the First Amendment
is the same as
having a murder trial where the judge allows those who were not at the scene of the murder
to come forth and tell us what happened.
It is intellectually dishonest
and a piece of cleverly crafted creative history at best, to say that Thomas Jefferson’s words provide the intent for the First Amendment.
To understand the original intent of the First Amendment, you must scrutinize the thoughts of those who took part in the debate,
the ones who actually gave us the First Amendment.
That debate emphasized the need to avoid another Church of England being established in America.
In other words, they were trying to prevent a national denomination from being forced upon the citizens.
None of their comments reflected intent to separate religious principles from government or from the public square.
Just the opposite:
they wanted to foster free expression, not political oppression.

For those who still want to rely on Jefferson as their expert regarding the First Amendment, it should not go unnoticed that
exactly two days after writing his letter to the Danbury Baptists, he attended the weekly church service being held AT the U.S. Capitol.
These were religious services that he had helped to start and faithfully attended throughout the remainder of his presidency.li

It appears that Jefferson’s views were far removed from the interpretation of them by our modern courts today.
Would Jefferson,
a man who himself established and attended religious services on federal property while holding the office of the President,
really think that it was against the good of our nation or our citizens
for children to pray for their teachers, parents, and country at the beginning of each school day?
You decide.



Notes:
xliv. Compiled By Friends, Works of Fisher Ames 134 (Boston: T. B. Wait & Co., 1809).

xlv. Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association (January 1, 1802), in Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson Writings 510 (Merril D. Peterson et al. eds., 1984) (1781).

xlvi. Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947).

xlvii. Thomas Jefferson, Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, in Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson Writings 510 (Merrill D. Peterson et al. eds., 1984)
(1802): Believing with you
that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God,
that he owes account to none other for faith or his worship,
that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions,
I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared
that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,”
thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.


l. Engle v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962).

lii. Letter to Dr. Joseph Priestly (Washington ed., 441). < http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/foley-page?id=JCE1686>.

l. Id.

li. William Parker Cutler and Julia Perkins Cutler, Life, Journal, and Correspondence of Rev. Manasseh Cutler (Cincinnati: Colin Robert Clarke & Co., 1888), Vol. II, p. 66, 119,
letter to Joseph Torrey, January 4, 1802.
Cutler meant that Jefferson attended church on January 3, 1802, for the first time as President.
Bishop Claggett’s letter of February 18, 1801, already revealed that as Vice-President, Jefferson went to church services in the House.

[Yosemitest]

"So, those other people have no rights? "

Only ATHEISTS like you believe that!
We're not talking about SCRIPTURE.
We're talking about LAW, the United States CONSTITUTION, and OUR RIGHTS !
All those idiots with their other religions have just as much right as CHRISTIANS DO ...

to SPEAK ABOUT THEM ...
ANY WHERE,
... and AT ANY TIME,
... and with ANY GROUP !