Actually, that's not in the Bible

[QUOTE=RoadToad;455568]People who want to see religion forced into government love to point out the fact that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the Constitution. Yes, that is true, the words are not there, but the [I]concept[/I] is found throughout, most notably in the First Amendment. If you doubt that that's what the framers had in mind, then look to their private writings. We all know Thomas Jefferson was one of the main "authors" of our Constitution. He wrote the following in 1802, in a letter to the Danbury Baptists Association: "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 [B]a wall of separation between Church & State[/B]." This was the origin of the phrase, which was later quoted by the Supreme Court, which was how it eventually found its way into common use. So, you can deny it all you want, but you cannot change the fact that "separation of church and state" is, and always has been, a governing principle of the United States of America.[/QUOTE]

As the commercial says, "not exactly".

The Danbury Baptists wrote to Jefferson because they were concerned about government encroaching on their religious liberties. The "Wall of separation between church and state" Jefferson referred to was the Constitutional promise to keep government out of religion, not to keep religion out of government.

[QUOTE=jcb;455604]As the commercial says, "not exactly".

The Danbury Baptists wrote to Jefferson because they were concerned about government encroaching on their religious liberties. The "Wall of separation between church and state" Jefferson referred to was the Constitutional promise to keep government out of religion, not to keep religion out of government.[/QUOTE]

I'll leave that one to the more learned gentlemen, but not sure I see the difference in the application?

[QUOTE=jcb;455604]As the commercial says, "not exactly".

The Danbury Baptists wrote to Jefferson because they were concerned about government encroaching on their religious liberties. The "Wall of separation between church and state" Jefferson referred to was the Constitutional promise to keep government out of religion, not to keep religion out of government.[/QUOTE]
So what did he ever say that indicates he thought religion belonged IN government? I don't believe he pictured this as a one-way wall.

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;455592]Toad, I agree with the premise of what you're saying, but the VERY METHOD that folks on the opposite side of the argument try to legislate their views over the majority make me sick.

If the majority of folks want something, SOCIAL NORMS should dictate that that is the way to go.

God is everywhere in our country. On our money, all over our patriotic songs, whatever, yet the very likes of the ACLU want to say it is ILLEGAL for that to exist, siting separation of church and state....

You cannot tell me that is really what the founders wanted. If that were the case, In God we TRUST simply wouldn't exist.

The REAL reason, and you're smart enough to know this......is the very fact that the founders didn't want a CHURCH of the United States, much like the Church of England. They didn't want God stricken from our lives, much to your disappointment.

Later,

Geo[/QUOTE]
There you go putting words in my mouth again. "They didn't want God stricken from our lives, much to your disappointment." I've never said or implied that I wanted God stricken from ANYBODY's life! That would be a terrible thing to say. You know **** well from what I've posted before that I have nothing but respect for the religious beliefs of others, no matter which religion they adhere to.

What I HAVE said over and over is that religion and government should never be mixed. I will go to my grave believing that, and I think that's all I need to say on that subject.

[QUOTE=FlyLie;455596]Thanks Toad for the clarification. Well said. And to Geo. not sure where you are coming from, are you saying the government should be able to pass legislation which DICTATES my worship practices?????????? So, what if they put "in got we trust on the $$$$?", never did trust a banker anyway! Oh, and to hell with the "social norms" dictating public policy! My public practices are my individual choices and PRIVATE choices as long as I don't violate another man's/women's right and would like to think I can keep it that way. Don't think I need and a popular vote by the "norm" to infringe on that!

(PS, I do have guns....Hee...He) (now where in the Constitution was that?)[/QUOTE]

No..but I do find it funny that God and Religion have been staples of this country since the very first Pilgrims.

I find it funnier than hell that the separation of church and state has become such a heated battle recently. The very fact that we are removing religious symbols and documents and whatever from court houses, schools, public buildings, etc, etc. SCARES ME. Hell we should tear down every monument in Washington because every last one of them are covered with religion.

And then those same folks that want us to tear down the fabric of MY COUNTRY also want me to be more accepting of other religions. Namely Muslims. Do you realize that the Muslim community is growing like gangbusters in this country. Do you realize that by eliminating our religious identity, we're enabling our enemy. Do you REALIZE that a huge portion of the Muslims practicing in this country are becoming radicalized.

Does none of this bother you??

It bothers me.

Later,

Geo

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;455634]No..but I do find it funny that God and Religion have been staples of this country since the very first Pilgrims.

I find it funnier than hell that the separation of church and state has become such a heated battle recently. The very fact that we are removing religious symbols and documents and whatever from court houses, schools, public buildings, etc, etc. SCARES ME. Hell we should tear down every monument in Washington because every last one of them are covered with religion.

And then those same folks that want us to tear down the fabric of MY COUNTRY also want me to be more accepting of other religions. Namely Muslims. Do you realize that the Muslim community is growing like gangbusters in this country. Do you realize that by eliminating our religious identity, we're enabling our enemy. Do you REALIZE that a huge portion of the Muslims practicing in this country are becoming radicalized.

Does none of this bother you??

It bothers me.

Later,

Geo[/QUOTE]

[B]Caution: this is what happens when you watch to much FOX NEWS.....Hee..He..:eek::eek::eek:[/B]

[QUOTE=RoadToad;455568]People who want to see religion forced into government love to point out the fact that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the Constitution. Yes, that is true, the words are not there, but the [I]concept[/I] is found throughout, most notably in the First Amendment. If you doubt that that's what the framers had in mind, then look to their private writings. We all know Thomas Jefferson was one of the main "authors" of our Constitution. He wrote the following in 1802, in a letter to the Danbury Baptists Association: "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 [B]a wall of separation between Church & State[/B]." This was the origin of the phrase, which was later quoted by the Supreme Court, which was how it eventually found its way into common use. So, you can deny it all you want, but you cannot change the fact that "separation of church and state" is, and always has been, a governing principle of the United States of America.[/QUOTE]

Now it comes to the interpretation of the word "respecting" did he mean reference to? I'm not denying anything. I'm a Libertarian and believe that the government should stay out of my hospital room, bedroom, my church, and off my property. I pay taxes for them to build roads and infrastructure, not to give them the power to rule me.

[QUOTE=Tom523;455642]Now it comes to the interpretation of the word "respecting" did he mean reference to? I'm not denying anything. I'm a Libertarian and believe that the government should stay out of my hospital room, bedroom, my church, and off my property. I pay taxes for them to build roads and infrastructure, not to give them the power to rule me.[/QUOTE]

Well said Tom, well said!!;);)

[QUOTE=RoadToad;455619]So what did he ever say that indicates he thought religion belonged IN government? I don't believe he pictured this as a one-way wall.[/QUOTE]

I'm not aware of anything more specific than this letter regarding Jefferson's view of the relationship between church and state. A "one-way wall" probably is not the best way to describe what I think Jefferson believed, but my point is that today people are erroneously using Jefferson's phrase "wall of separation between church and state" to mean something Jefferson never meant.

To put it simply, I think the Establishment Clause has been interpreted far too broadly in recent years.

My issue with the seperation of church and state is that it is giving the libtards a springboard from which to indoctrine our children. They are making a society of Godless young people who will one day make even more Godless children. One day teh wrath of God is going to say "enough"...and we will fall like the Roman Empire. The oly reason we are as great a country as we are is because of Gods blessings. As we turn from God, he is turning from us.

With that said, I do believe that the problem is not the governments concern. The problem is that we are not teaching God's word in our own households. I too am guilty of this. If you love this country, you will teach your Children of God's love.

Lastly, I will say that this whole discussion is why I favor charter schools.

[QUOTE=jcb;455656]I'm not aware of anything more specific than this letter regarding Jefferson's view of the relationship between church and state. A "one-way wall" probably is not the best way to describe what I think Jefferson believed, but my point is that today people are erroneously using Jefferson's phrase "wall of separation between church and state" to mean something Jefferson never meant.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't aware of anything more specific either, until I just read this article on CNN's website: [URL]http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/07/04/davis.jefferson.other.words/index.html[/URL]
The proof of his belief that church & state should always be separate can be found in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which he drafted. Wikipedia has the full text of the statute here: [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Statute_for_Religious_Freedom[/URL] but the gist of it is in the last paragraph: "Be it enacted by General Assembly that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened (sic) in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities."

One of the arguments for separation that you hear from religious scholars is that combining religion and government isn't just bad for government, it's also bad for religion. Jefferson obviously understood that. He wrote, "that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that very Religion it is meant to encourage." And one reason that he gives, that I find particularly eloquent, is this: "and finally, that Truth is great, and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them..."

I also was very interested to learn that "the first House of Representatives, while debating the First Amendment, specifically rejected a Senate proposal calling for the establishment of Christianity as an official religion."
[QUOTE=jcb;455656]To put it simply, I think the Establishment Clause has been interpreted far too broadly in recent years.[/QUOTE]
I see just the opposite occurring. The "wall of separation" that Jefferson regarded so highly has been steadily eroding, especially since FDR inserted "under God" into the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954. And as I learn more about our history, I become more and more convinced that our Founding Fathers would be dismayed to see it.

I support seperation of church and state. I'd hate to see God's reputation tarnished by the crazy things politicians do.