Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: syriacus

True as that may be it does not change the fact that the government eventually established made sure it was religiously neutral on a national basis with no Established religion allowed, no religious tests for federal office etc. Establishing a theocracy was the last thing on the Founders' minds.


23 posted on 01/10/2007 8:26:20 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: justshutupandtakeit
religiously neutral

Exactly. Religiously neutral, although not antagonistic to religion as, say, the French revolutionists were.

25 posted on 01/10/2007 9:18:38 AM PST by syriacus (IF Truman cut + ran after 3,000 deaths, THEN the Korean War would have ended in 5 weeks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: justshutupandtakeit

"True as that may be it does not change the fact that the government eventually established made sure it was religiously neutral on a national basis with no Established religion allowed, no religious tests for federal office etc. Establishing a theocracy was the last thing on the Founders' minds."


Who says a Godly nation is necessarily a theocracy? Only Liberals and Socialists (sorry for the redundancy).

Our Declaration of Independence plainly states that we are endowed by certain inalienable right by our Creator. the Constitution refers to "preserving the Blessings of Liberty" in the Preamble. What were these Blessings of Liberty? They were the Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness endowed by Our Creator spoken of in the Declaration of Independence.

American Socialists say that the Constitution has a "Separation of Church and State" in it, and that this was so very important to the Founding Fathers. But this makes absolute zero sense for several reasons.

First, if it was so important to them, then why did they not say "Separation of Church and State" plainly so that it didn't have to be discovered only by a Liberal judge 158 years after the fact?

Second, why did they put this concept in an Amendment? If it was so important to the Founding Fathers, then why not put it in an article of the Constitution?

Third, how does one reconcile the fact that the Bill of Rights was passed to appease Anti-Federalists (Patrick Henry, a devout Christian, was the leader of the authors of the Anti-Federalist Papers and arguably the best example of an Anti-Federalist, if the Federal Government came to his town and told him he had to remove his 10 Commandments monument, they'd get hot lead from him in response) who wanted to limit Federal power with using Federal Power to tyrannize localities into things like removing their monuments or teaching Intelligent Design? The Anti-Federalists of yesteryear were like the Conservative Republicans of today. How can anybody believe that they'd back the ACLU and the Soviet model of Separation of Church and State?


The fact is, the Establishment Clause says "Congress shall make no law RESPECTING the Establishment of Religion." (emphasis mine). What that means is, Congress has no right to get into questions of Establishment of Religion, for or against. And if Congress can make no law, the Federal Court has no jurisdiction in this question unless some Federal Agency is Establishing a religion. Thus, the only violators of the Establishment Clause are the ACLU, the Southern Bolshevik Law Center and the corrupt judges who seem bent on giving them whatever they want, no matter how flagrantly Unconstitutional.


32 posted on 01/10/2007 6:37:23 PM PST by Cato Uticensis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson