Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tpaine
"Why are you assuming I did?"

Well, if supporting a State religion infringes on the rights of other State citizens, then surely supporting a National religion would infringe on the rights of other citizens.

Do you agree?

Now you posted that even though the state has the power to form a state religion, "I think they would be denied that power by a USSC opinion."

Did you not say that?

Then it logically follows that if the National government has the power, they too would be denied that power by a USSC opinion.

Don't you agree?

So, why have the Establishment Clause of the 1st amendment? Hell, according to you, anybody who forms a church will be overrridden by the USSC anyways.

The only logical answer is that the 1st amendment, all of it, only applied to the federal government. The states were free to form their own religion, and did. States that had their own religion in 1789 were admitted to the Union. They maintained these religions until the early 1800's, and disbanded them on their own.

Today, the 1st amendment, all of it, applies to the states, Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion notwithstanding.

256 posted on 10/31/2004 9:48:53 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies ]


To: robertpaulsen
--- if supporting a State religion infringes on the rights of other State citizens, then surely supporting a National religion would infringe on the rights of other citizens. Do you agree?

There's no "if" about it. Such support of religion is an infringment by any level of government.

Now you posted that even though the state has the power to form a state religion,

Wrong. I said that some of the original States had such arrangments.
In effect the Establishment Clause grandfathered in those exceptions to republican government. Congress couldn't make laws regarding those exceptions.
I said: "I think they [other States] would be denied that power [to establish State religions] by a USSC opinion."

Did you not say that? Then it logically follows that if the National government has the power, they too would be denied that power by a USSC opinion. Don't you agree?

Your syntax is confused. -- That power is denied to the National government as well as to the States by our Constitution, as the USSC would agree.

So, why have the Establishment Clause of the 1st amendment? Hell, according to you, anybody who forms a church will be overrridden by the USSC anyways.

Illogical conclusion, paulsen.

The only logical answer is that the 1st amendment, all of it, only applied to the federal government. The states were free to form their own religion, and did.

No, none did, as you are well aware. Newly admitted States were not allowed to form State supported religions, as Utah found out.

States that had their own religion in 1789 were admitted to the Union. They maintained these religions until the early 1800's, and disbanded them on their own.

Which proves my point, not yours.

Today, the 1st amendment, all of it, applies to the states, Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion notwithstanding.

Nonsense, unsupported by any fact.

261 posted on 10/31/2004 10:44:35 AM PST by tpaine (No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another. - T. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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