[tpaine]

North Carolina flatly refused to ratify the Constitution in the absence of amendments in the nature of a Bill of Rights. Virginia and North Carolina proposed identical guarantees of religious freedom:

"[A]ll men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, and . .
. no particular religious sect or society ought to be favored or established, by law, in preference to others.
-from the dissent-


The lines above totally destroy William Rehnquist's contention that "Separation of Church and State" was an unwanted 'myth'.

[ohioman]

(Sarcasm on) Oh yeah...and we all know how you are so much more qualified to interpret the law than the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

[freedomcrusader]

It says "...favored or established, by law,"

Tell me where on the books in Alabama is the law that Judge Moore miraculously enacted without the aid of the other two branches of government merely by putting the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of a building?

[VRWCmember]

The lines above totally destroy William Rehnquist's contention that "Separation of Church and State" was an unwanted 'myth'.

No, those lines reiterate his point that the establishment clause was a prohibition against the congress passing any laws which would designate on particular religious sect or denomination as legally preferred over others.

[PhilipFreneau]

>> North Carolina flatly refused to ratify the Constitution in the absence of amendments in the nature of a Bill of Rights. Virginia and North Carolina proposed identical guarantees of religious freedom:

>> "[A]ll men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, and . .
. no particular religious sect or society ought to be favored or established, by law, in preference to others.
-from the dissent-

>> The lines above totally destroy William Rehnquist's contention that "Separation of Church and State" was an unwanted 'myth'.

There you go again, sonny. When are you going to stop misrepresenting the meaning of the First Amendment?

[Kevin Curry]

No, tpaine, it is your understanding of constitutional history that is flawed (not suprisingly).

Once again: the federal Bill of Rights was designed as a limitation on federal power only. Religion was a matter left entirely and exclusively to the states.

Because religion was left entirely to the states, each state adopted its own laws and constitutional provisions concering religion. Here's what Virginia adopted:

Section 16. Free exercise of religion; no establishment of religion.

"That religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other. No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and the same shall in nowise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. And the General Assembly shall not prescribe any religious test whatever, or confer any peculiar privileges or advantages on any sect or denomination, or pass any law requiring or authorizing any religious society, or the people of any district within this Commonwealth, to levy on themselves or others, any tax for the erection or repair of any house of public worship, or for the support of any church or ministry; but it shall be left free to every person to select his religious instructor, and to make for his support such private contract as he shall please."

Use your brain, tpaine. If the federal Bill of Rights was intended to bind the states as well as the federal government, why did the people of Virginia adopt their own separate, detailed and wordy free exercise and establishment clauses in that state's constitution? Just for grins? Because they had an extra pot of ink and a couple of quills and wanted to doodle?

[sandlady]

"[A]ll men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, and . . . no particular religious sect or society ought to be favored or established, by law, in preference to others. -from the dissent-

Actually, your own excerpt proves that the courts overstepped their authority. Judge Moore, as a citizen of the US, has a right to practice his religion freely. Judge Moore didn't establish any religion by law but the courts are definitely keeping him from exercising his freedom of religion.

[papertyger]

The lines above totally destroy William Rehnquist's contention that "Separation of Church and State" was an unwanted 'myth'.

How?