freedom FROM religion?
By xfahctor
@xfahctor (14118)
Lancaster, New Hampshire
April 11, 2007 12:32am CST
There has been a great eruption of the age old debate on seperation of church and state. The term itself does not apear anywhere in the constitution. It is a phrase used to refer to the most over interpereted clause in our constitution, the establishment clause. The whole clause and it's suffix clause read as follows, "congress shall make no law establishing religion or prohibiting the free exersize ther of" Jefferson used the phrase in a letter to a bishop as a politicaly correct term of the day, "a wall of seperation between church and state". No where in the constitution does it say you can't put a nativity on a library lawn. Nowhere does it state that a christmas pagant at a school must be called a holliday pagant. While the supreme court determained in the 1940's that the clause applied to schools as well, it didnt go any further in interpitation than that. Ok folks, floor is open
4 responses
@4ftfingers (1310)
•
11 Apr 07
We have the same problem over here mate.. although it seems to be shifting back again.. i started to see more 'Merry Christmas' signs back in the town streets this christmas.
I am not religious but christmas celebration is traditional for us, taking it away does not benefit anyone.
The people who try to ban these things are not the people of other faith, they are do-gooders who believe they are looking out for everyone by being over sensitive and politically correct, I know for a fact that non-christians don't get offended at the words merry christmas.
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
11 Apr 07
I beleive in the seperation of church and state. In historical context countries around the world we adopting a national church or religion. The constitution saids that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiiting the free exercise therefore," There is no reference to a wall of seperation. However if you look at what the courts are doing by preventing and mention of religion by a government is that not "prohibiting the free exercise" of releigion? There are some who say that by denying releigion the government is promoting and establishing the religion or philosiphy of the secular progress movement?
This is an example of the courts (judges who are appointed for life) creating new law where none was vote on by the Congress.
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
11 Apr 07
I agree. As long as laws are not being intentionally passed in favor or against a specific religion, I see no violation of the first amendment.
However, many people prefer to go further by not wanting any government funded institution to have any indication of religion on their property. This seems asinine to me, considering that objects aren't laws, and it's government endorsement of relgion through laws which the constitution prohibits.
1 person likes this
