- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 96,102
- Reaction score
- 33,446
- Location
- SE Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Nope. Just not true.
So I guess they just make the news.
Nope. Just not true.
So I guess they just make the news.
Government support is not government law. Where's the part where they broke "Congress shall make no law"? I mean you can take anything to the ridiculous.I have never seen a case where any government official prevented private prayer that did not involve government support or appearance of government support. Many legislatures and local government session start with a prayer. Occasionally I have seen an overzealous teacher or school administrator infringe on a student's rights, but such interference has never been upheld.
But please, give a couple of examples.
And the least religious of them all.
"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.'Government support is not government law. Where's the part where they broke "Congress shall make no law"? I mean you can take anything to the ridiculous.
Not the point: God and religion don't necessarily have to exist in the same room.
The key word is Congress. There are no restrictions placed on churches. It doesn't even say President. Last time I checked the Dept of Education was under the President, but they still won't allow a prayer at a high school graduation. What they've done is bastardize the entire amendment.
Funny how every atheist or non-religious person takes Jefferson's Danbury letter like the Gospel from God, but can't seem to accept the plain text of the 1st Amendment. Where in that amendment is a prohibition on churches mentioned? Please, just quote the part.
The founders were a tad schizophrenic weren't they. Blathering on about freedom and liberty while condoning enslavement and genocide. Prattling on about equality and setting up a govt of, by, and for the aristocracy. Flatulently pontificating upon representation while allowing only affluent land holding white males the vote with the senate appointed by the aristocracy.
No one has yet quoted me the part where churches are limited.
Maybe not necessarily, but nothing is hurt if they do under certain circumstances. Remember the 1st Amendment means the People maintain the power over religion.
What get's hurt when God and religion sit in the some room is people's freedom to live their lives under God as they understand it. Religion is judgmental and interloping. When religion is given power of any kind outside of its fence on the church lawn, we get theocratic government, and control by zealots and absolutists: this is what Jefferson was referring to when he used the word "wall" advisedly in his letter. He knew exactly what he was saying. His sentiments carried over into the first amendment and were the sentiments of a majority of the country at the time.
You might want to pick up some books on European history and the history of the British Isles if you really want to get some knowledge on why the founders thought the way that they did about religion and government.
Religions are authoritarian systems, that's why violence and warfare were required to subjugate the tribes of Europe. Just as it required violence and warfare to subjugate the tribes of the americas.
No one has yet quoted me the part where churches are limited.
The ban on political campaign activity by charities and churches was created by Congress more than a half century ago. The Internal Revenue Service administers the tax laws written by Congress and has enforcement authority over tax-exempt organizations. Here is some background information on the political campaign activity ban and the latest IRS enforcement statistics regarding its administration of this congressional ban.
In 1954, Congress approved an amendment by Sen. Lyndon Johnson to prohibit 501(c)(3) organizations, which includes charities and churches, from engaging in any political campaign activity. To the extent Congress has revisited the ban over the years, it has in fact strengthened the ban. The most recent change came in 1987 when Congress amended the language to clarify that the prohibition also applies to statements opposing candidates.
Currently, the law prohibits political campaign activity by charities and churches by defining a 501(c)(3) organization as one "which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."
What get's hurt when God and religion sit in the some room is people's freedom to live their lives under God as they understand it. Religion is judgmental and interloping. When religion is given power of any kind outside of its fence on the church lawn, we get theocratic government, and control by zealots and absolutists: this is what Jefferson was referring to when he used the word "wall" advisedly in his letter. He knew exactly what he was saying. His sentiments carried over into the first amendment and were the sentiments of a majority of the country at the time.
You might want to pick up some books on European history and the history of the British Isles if you really want to get some knowledge on why the founders thought the way that they did about religion and government.
"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion".
Secondly: https://www.irs.gov/uac/charities-churches-and-politics
The churches are limited.
Exactly right. And of course as we've seen since Ronald Reagan, the Christian religious zealot of the United States have been attempting to subjugate the citizens of this country as well. The hate that they have for the Muslim religion glowing example of why religion was marginalized in the construction of the United States.
We've never had a theocratic government under our Constitution, that's nothing more than fear mongering.
Goldwater warned us about these people back when "conservatives" were, well, ... conservative.
.....
“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”
You post the 1st Amendment, then demonstrate where govt has made a law controlling religion. Nice.
“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”
We've never had a theocratic government under our Constitution, that's nothing more than fear mongering.
We've never had a theocratic government under our Constitution, that's nothing more than fear mongering.
Sure and we will never never never had a demagogue such as Trump elected president either as such could never happen in the US.
Maybe not necessarily, but nothing is hurt if they do under certain circumstances. Remember the 1st Amendment means the People maintain the power over religion.