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

To: trashcanbred
I never quoted Thomas Jefferson

The establishment clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. Also known as "separation of church and state".

If you ever go to Phila, please... please... please... go to the new Constitution center and educate yourself. Serious...

12 posted on 11/12/2005 11:59:46 AM EST by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)

Thomas Jefferson's wall of separation comment. Which is the genesis of the term you used.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign 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.

126 posted on 11/13/2005 3:43:12 PM PST by AndrewC (Darwinian logic -- It is just-so if it is just-so)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]


To: AndrewC
Actually when I was writing about the establishment clause, "make no law respecting an establishment of religion", I was quoting from the first amendment, not from Jefferson's letter from 1802 where he does explicitly state the "separation of church and state". But thank you very kindly for explaining what you meant.

So having said that, do you feel separation of church and state is wrong? I do not and that was another reason I remarked upon the law you quoted from 15th century Massachussettes, that:

It was the intent of the colonists that all children should learn to read and in 1642 Puritan Massachusetts passed a law stating this. They believed that an inability to read was Satan's attempt to keep people from the Scriptures

You brought this up in a post and I felt it was bad error in judgement on your part to do so. The Puritans of Massachusettes during the 1600's were excessive in integrating their laws with the church. There was no separation of church and state and laws at that time were excessively harsh on Puritans and non-Puritans alike. Basically, non-Puritans had to get out or face some serious punishment. That was why I brought up the Quaker law, and Mary Dyer, as an example. Again, you cited that as an example of tradition and I again say it is a very bad example to choose from.

My only other question is, why do you want the Bible to be read in public school? If what Jefferson said is true, that "religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god" then why push the Bible on people who may not believe in it? Why public school? I mean, can you not understand that it is in essence pushing Christianity on someone who may not be Christian or who is not being brought up as one?

I mean, with all due respect, are you trying to convert people? Don't be mad for me asking because I have tried to understand this from every angle and I cannot for the life of me come up with any other reason. From my standpoint, religion was taught in my school based simply on understanding the different religions of the world. It did not impose any religion whatsoever.

129 posted on 11/13/2005 4:49:37 PM PST by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | 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