Talk of The Villages Florida - View Single Post - At Least The Crazy Candidate
View Single Post
 
Old 11-10-2010, 09:37 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by djplong View Post
Ok, RichieLion, I think we're getting somewhere here. You said you didn't want any law preventing you from practicing your religion "in any venue (you) please"

Can you expand on that? Where is it that you want to practice your religion where you are not allowed to (or are under threat of proposed/pending legislation that WOULD prevent it)?
It's not really a matter of what I want. It the point of what is and has been prohibited because of the deconstruction of the intent of the first Amendment.

The Bible, and Christian principles in general, are being censored from our public schools and, in fact, from the whole “public square.” Under the guise of adhering to the “separation of church and state doctrine,” judges and other government officials are disallowing Christianity in all venues administered by the United States government. Now, many people believe that the American government was designed to include “a wall of separation” between church and state.

Robert L. Cord, a professor of political science a Northeastern University writes in his book, Separation of Church and State: Historical Fact and Current Fiction,

“Regarding religion, the First Amendment was intended to accomplish three purposes. First, it was intended to prevent the establishment of a national church or religion, or the giving of any religious sect or denomination a preferred status. Second, it was designed to safeguard the right of freedom of conscience in religious beliefs against invasion solely by the national Government. Third, it was so constructed in order to allow the States, unimpeded, to deal with religious establishments and aid to religious institutions as they saw fit."

This appears to be a reasonable understanding of the First Amendment; far more reasonable than asserting that it erected an wall of separation. And it becomes even more reasonable when one considers the words and actions of America's settlers, founders and leaders.

It doesn't seem likely that the founding fathers included the First Amendment in the Constitution to prevent Christianity from influencing state-established institutions; but in fact, America's founding fathers expected our nation to be, on the whole, Christian, and our government to reflect that. This is evident by the fact that the first act of the United States Congress was to authorize the printing of 20,000 Bibles for the Indians.
When you look at our history, you cannot avoid the conclusion that America was founded on Christian principles and with the assumption that her citizenry would adhere to those same principles. When George Washington, under the new Constitution, received the request of both Houses of Congress concerning a national declaration of a public day of Thanksgiving and Prayer, our first President issued a "National Thanksgiving Proclamation" without any apparent concern that he might be mixing government and religion. I think if they were alive today our founding fathers would be considered extreme right wing zealots.

The moral framework of the world pretty much guarantees terrible disaster for the country that grants sovereignty to something other than God, because in such circumstances sovereignty ultimately becomes the property of the state. When the state holds ultimate authority, government officials may commit whatever atrocities they like upon their subjects, because only the state may determine what is right and wrong. America's religious liberty is based on the founding father's declaration that our rights were inalienably bestowed by the Creator. If our freedoms are now instead granted by the state, then the state may take them away at any time. If we no long recognize the Creator in our public discussions, we have surrendered our rights to the power of the state.

I'm getting a little long winded, but I hope I've expanded to your satisfaction. I really am enjoying this DJ.