AnotherTraveler Posted January 3, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 80 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,595 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 10 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/12/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 3, 2008 http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-...transcript.html Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. To me, this is the most important of the "rights" because it prevents the government from exercising control over the church. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marnie Posted January 3, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 811 Topics Per Day: 0.12 Content Count: 7,338 Content Per Day: 1.08 Reputation: 76 Days Won: 2 Joined: 10/06/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted January 3, 2008 The First Amendment actually contains two clauses, the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. I think they are both vitally important to freedom's cause; the government should not fund or establish a "national church" nor should any person or persons be stopped from practicing their brand of religion, as long as no laws are broken. Thomas Jefferson was one who argued vehemently for "a wall of separation between church and state." Of course, the ACLU and other secular groups have taken this Amendment to a ridiculous extreme that the Framers never intended, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Durnan Posted January 3, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 121 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,782 Content Per Day: 0.36 Reputation: 49 Days Won: 1 Joined: 06/14/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted January 3, 2008 ESTABLISHMENT of a religion, and PUBLIC PRACTICE of a religion are two entirely different things. As a legislator, I would never ESTABLISH a religion as is done in Muslim countries with its heinous Sharia Law, but I would most certainly PUBLICLY PRACTICE my Evangelical Christian Faith without fear or trepidation throughout the entire nation. Those who come in contact with me will know Who the Lord Jesus Christ is & what He has accomplished at Calvary for a degenerate, despairing & death-dealing world in need of the Savior. Adios and let the anthem swell! GOD BLESS AMERICA! http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing Posted January 3, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 400 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 1,903 Content Per Day: 0.31 Reputation: 15 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/20/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/19/1942 Share Posted January 3, 2008 http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-...transcript.html Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. To me, this is the most important of the "rights" because it prevents the government from exercising control over the church. What do you think? when people talk of the" separation of church and state" in the consitution this is what it really means. the first 10 words of the first sentence is known as "the establishment clause": the next 7 words is known as"the freedom clause" it dose'nt say separation of church and state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O'Dannyboy Posted January 3, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,454 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/22/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/02/1969 Share Posted January 3, 2008 http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-...transcript.html Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. To me, this is the most important of the "rights" because it prevents the government from exercising control over the church. What do you think? Heres my opinion. I believe it is being interpreted incorrectly. The first word being misconstrued is "respecting". I interpret this word to mean regarding and not referring to any preferential treatment. The next phrase that is taken out of context is "an establishment of religion". "An establishment", in my mind, refers to a building or a particular religion. Had they meant to prevent the government from creating or establishing a religion they would have or should have said "the establishment of a religion". It also speaks of NOT prohibiting or abridging the freedom of speech. This means they they cannot stop us from saying ANYTHING offensive or not. The government has no right or authority to regulate what we can or can't say at all and any attempt to do so means that the people must vote to change it or not. The government also cannot prevent any group of people from assembling as long as the activity is a peaceful one even if it is to petition the government about grievances. I do not accept the concept that our forefathers wanted the government to be devoid of religious influence or the ethics and morality that the predominant religion at that time would have encouraged. Some people argue that the "establishment clause" was to prevent Rome from meddling in affairs of state. It's possible but I kinda doubt it. I believe the establishment clause was meant to create a buffer between church and state but not a wall as some would have it. Religion has its' role in proper governance and the state has a role in keeping religion in check. I believe this was part of the "checks and balances" to allow and promote a government "of the people, by the people and for the people...so help me God". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kinky-jesus Posted January 4, 2008 Share Posted January 4, 2008 http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-...transcript.html Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. To me, this is the most important of the "rights" because it prevents the government from exercising control over the church. What do you think? this is true. where we go wrong as a country is when we put church into government. you have to think of it full circle and not just the government in the church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O'Dannyboy Posted January 4, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,454 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/22/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/02/1969 Share Posted January 4, 2008 http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-...transcript.html Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. To me, this is the most important of the "rights" because it prevents the government from exercising control over the church. What do you think? this is true. where we go wrong as a country is when we put church into government. you have to think of it full circle and not just the government in the church. Give me one example where "church" in OUR government has been a bad thing. Though the leaders that wrote our constitution may not have all been Christians, the societies they were born and raised in were and that influence is undeniable when one reads it. Our nation, the U.S.A, is and has been a majority Christian nation since it was founded. It's only natural, as Christians, that we wish not to see that influence watered down by secular beliefs. If you believe what the Bible says then IT is the most trustworthy source of wisdom in existence and we should expect our leaders to put the same amount of faith in it as well. To say that Faith in God has no place in Government is like saying that blind men make the best surgeons. If our leaders do not believe in a power greater then themselves or the government they serve then how can they possibly avoid the power trip? The reason our country is in this condition is, in part, due to politicians who worship the government. As part of that government they have come to worship they see themselves being above the people and the people no longer mean as much to them as the government does. You see what I mean? A secular government exists only for itself and it's members and NOT for the people. Sadly, history has proven that men of power will always want more and governments have always managed to put themselves first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O'Dannyboy Posted January 6, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,454 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/22/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/02/1969 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I'm still waiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theopolitan Posted January 6, 2008 Group: Junior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 87 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/22/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted January 6, 2008 http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-...transcript.html Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. To me, this is the most important of the "rights" because it prevents the government from exercising control over the church. What do you think?I agree mostly with what the others have posted. I interpret it more strictly. "Congress shall make no law . . . This by design left it open for the states to have state-established churches, and a majority of the 13 original colonies had government churches when they ratified the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment was imposed upon the states in 1947 through an application of the 14th Amendment in Everson vs New Jersey (A misapplication in my opinion). The schools periodically dismissed for religious education and were bussed to the churches and back to school. This case was the first time the "separation of church and state" was argued as an interpretation of the First Amendment. Of course, I think we'd be better off doing things as they were originally framed: State senators were elected by the state legislatures. Property ownership was a prerequisite for voting privileges. No income taxes. Just to name a few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts