Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
28-13-2 (2) (A)

"There is an almighty, everlasting, creator God, the God of the Bible, the only God there is"

true or not, i dont think this is what the founding fathers meant by "endowed by their Creator"

I mean, has Bobby Franklin ever heard of the separation of church and state?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,358 Posts
madamimadam said:
28-13-2 (2) (A)

"There is an almighty, everlasting, creator God, the God of the Bible, the only God there is"

true or not, i dont think this is what the founding fathers meant by "endowed by their Creator"
So, what do you think they meant by it? It says "Church" and State, not "Religion" and State.

Kind like the 2nd Amendment huh? :cantsay:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
523 Posts
you will not find the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Those words come from letters from Jefferson to some ministers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Its less palatable when the religious undertones become become the melody of a bill.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is the first of several pronouncements in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, stating that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
 

·
NRA Certified Instructor
Joined
·
5,006 Posts
What those letters really meant was for the church to stay out of the states business. Not the way it is being done today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
736Lawton said:
you will not find the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Those words come from letters from Jefferson to some ministers.
AMEN .99% OF PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW THAT.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
16,485 Posts
vanguard said:
736Lawton said:
you will not find the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Those words come from letters from Jefferson to some ministers.
AMEN .99% OF PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW THAT.
So you think almost all people know it?
 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,727 Posts
budder said:
vanguard said:
736Lawton said:
you will not find the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Those words come from letters from Jefferson to some ministers.
AMEN .99% OF PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW THAT.
So you think almost all people know it?
Um, I think he might have just hit the space key by accident before the period.
 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,727 Posts
Interestingly, if one peruses Jefferson's quotes with any degree of mental clarity, he will come away with the knowledge that Jefferson's wall of separation was essentially one-sided. For those in Rio Linda, this means that he detested the idea of the state interfering with matters of faith on an individual basis, as well as interference with religious institutions. To my knowledge, he never wrote against religious influence towards the state.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
budder said:
vanguard said:
736Lawton said:
you will not find the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Those words come from letters from Jefferson to some ministers.
AMEN .99% OF PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW THAT.
So you think almost all people know it?
:screwy: :screwy: :screwy:
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,524 Posts
madamimadam said:
The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is the first of several pronouncements in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, stating that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
Read that very slowly, and think about what it literally means. I think you will discover that it might not mean what you think it means, or what you have been taught it means. It will be very difficult to read it with no preconceptions about what it means, given that most people have been so thoroughly brainwashed on this subject that they cannot even see the words, but read it like you just arrived here from another country and know nothing about our laws, history, or constitution. Read it with a clear head, and then see if it reads differently to you.

Give effect to each and every word.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,524 Posts
Do not read the next post until you have engaged in some clear thought about the words and carefully considered the meaning of the establishment clause without any preconceived notions.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,524 Posts
Six states had established religions at the time the establishment clause was written, and it was put into the bill of rights to ensure that Congress would not interfere with state establishments of religion at the time of the founding.

McConnell, The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion, 103 Harv. L. Rev. 1409, 1437 (1990)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/02-1624P.ZC2
Justice Thomas, concurring:
The Establishment Clause provides that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Amdt. 1. As a textual matter, this Clause probably prohibits Congress from establishing a national religion. But see P. Hamburger, Separation of Church and State 106, n. 40 (2002) (citing sources). Perhaps more importantly, the Clause made clear that Congress could not interfere with state establishments, notwithstanding any argument that could be made based on Congress power under the Necessary and Proper Clause. See A. Amar, The Bill of Rights 36?39 (1998).

Nothing in the text of the Clause suggests that it reaches any further. The Establishment Clause does not purport to protect individual rights. By contrast, the Free Exercise Clause plainly protects individuals against congressional interference with the right to exercise their religion, and the remaining Clauses within the First Amendment expressly disable Congress from abridging [particular] freedom. (Emphasis added.) This textual analysis is consistent with the prevailing view that the Constitution left religion to the States. See, e.g., 2 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States §1873 (5th ed. 1891); see also Amar, The Bill of Rights, at 32?42; id., at 246?257. History also supports this understanding: At the founding, at least six States had established religions, see McConnell, The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion, 103 Harv. L. Rev. 1409, 1437 (1990). Nor has this federalism point escaped the notice of Members of this Court. See, e.g., Zelman, supra, at 677?680 (THOMAS, J., concurring); Lee, supra, at 641 (SCALIA, J., dissenting).

Quite simply, the Establishment Clause is best understood as a federalism provision - it protects state establishments from federal interference but does not protect any individual right.
 

·
انا باتمان
Joined
·
11,745 Posts
If they still existed, wouldn't the 14th amendment come into play?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,524 Posts
bdee said:
If they still existed, wouldn't the 14th amendment come into play?
Interesting question, since the quote I took from Thomas was just his introduction to that question. Here is some further of his writing.

But even assuming that the Establishment Clause precludes the Federal Government from establishing a national religion, it does not follow that the Clause created or protects any individual right. For the reasons discussed above, it is more likely that States and only States were the direct beneficiaries. See also Lee, supra, at 641 (SCALIA, J., dissenting). Moreover, incorporation of this putative individual right leads to a peculiar outcome: It would prohibit precisely what the Establishment Clause was intended to protect-state establishments of religion. See Schempp, 374 U. S., at 310 (Stewart, J., dissenting) (noting that "the Fourteenth Amendment has somehow absorbed the Establishment Clause, although it is not without irony that a constitutional provision evidently designed to leave the States free to go their own way should now have become a restriction upon their autonomy"). Nevertheless, the potential right against federal establishments is the only candidate for incorporation.

I would welcome the opportunity to consider more fully the difficult questions whether and how the Establishment Clause applies against the States. One observation suffices for now: As strange as it sounds, an incorporated Establishment Clause prohibits exactly what the Establishment Clause protected-state practices that pertain to "an establishment of religion." At the very least, the burden of persuasion rests with anyone who claims that the term took on a different meaning upon incorporation.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,204 Posts
Malum Prohibitum said:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
2 things that stick out in that sentence are "RESPECTING' and "an establishment of religion".

Is not Christianity an establishment of religion? Not a state religion, but a religion in and of itself that is established. I don't think its just talking about "making" religion, but existing religions as well.

When read together "respecting an establishment of religion".... I read that to mean that preference of one religion over another is prohibited. Our founders referred to "Providence" and made no statements about the Almighty's religious preference other than stating our rights came from the Creator, not from man. No specific Creator is mentioned. It's open.

"There is an almighty, everlasting, creator God, the God of the Bible, the only God there is"
I'm afraid that shows preference, or extra respect, for an established religion over other beliefs. On top of that, its the state establishing respect for one religion (or in this case, groups of similar sects but that fall under the Holy Bible). Tyranny of the majority, theocratic in nature, and why many good people who would be conservative will never be Republican.

"There is an almighty, everlasting, creator God,
The statement is just fine at this point.
the God of the Bible, the only God there is"
That crossed the line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
vanguard said:
736Lawton said:
you will not find the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Those words come from letters from Jefferson to some ministers.
AMEN .99% OF PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW THAT.
So, a lot of people do know it, then? 99.9901% to be precise. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,594 Posts
The other definition of RESPECTING is REGARDING, and I believe that was the intent of the founders. The sentence reads as it should, when one uses that definition.

What say you of faiths honoring more than one god, like the Hindu? How would they be represented in this bill? The people are no less citizens, and they worship in temples in most cities of any size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,974 Posts
Some of the arguments here sound very similar to the way that the antis like to twist the 2nd amendment.

The 1st amendment doesn't protect individual rights. Huh?

The 1st amendment doesn't mean what it means. Huh?

The government really can pass relgious laws. Huh?

:screwy:
 

·
Dei Gratia
Joined
·
2,907 Posts
CountryGun said:
The other definition of RESPECTING is REGARDING, and I believe that was the intent of the founders. The sentence reads as it should, when one uses that definition.

What say you of faiths honoring more than one god, like the Hindu? How would they be represented in this bill? The people are no less citizens, and they worship in temples in most cities of any size.
This was my thought, You beat me to it Countrygun.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top