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

To: Houghton M.
"FReepers should know that “separation of church and state” is itself false. Non-Establishment of Religion combined with free expression of religion is what the Constitution says."

Santorum advocated directly and clearly for "the Church" to have "a role in the operation of the government".

Do you agree with Santorum's statement?

45 posted on 02/26/2012 1:41:25 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: Mariner

Influence and involvement are perfectly legitimate exercises of one’s religious, feminist, libertarian, or whatever beliefs. To ask a legislator, governor, bureaucrat, or clerk not to live out of his religious or political beliefs is to deny him his First Amendment rights.

He must do so within the law, of course. But to employ one’s beliefs to influence the making of laws or one’s execution of the laws is perfectly legitimate as long as one does not violate the laws.

Why should religious beliefs be checked at the door but other beliefs not be checked at the door.

What
part
of
“free
exercise
of
religion
don’t
you
get?

Does the First Amendment say that free exercise of religion is limited to one’s private life?

No.

The worst Constitution-busting judges of the past 100 years have tried to relegate all religion to the private sphere (no prayer in school etc.). That is evil and unconstitutional. And you are lining up with them. I never thought I’d see this kind of crap on FR.

Hate Santorum if you must, but for God’s sake, don’t throw the free exercise of religion clause out the window just to get at Santorum.


51 posted on 02/26/2012 1:56:07 PM PST by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | 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