The Founders got it right

July 16, 2007

<http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/07/the-founders-go.html>

http://tinyurl.com/2ng5cw

Religion now rests in a tortured place in society today, thanks

largely to unfortunate and misguided rulings of the Supreme Court.

By Stephen Mansfield

12:16 AM/ET, July 16, 2007

Two days after he wrote the famous words "separation between church

and state" in an 1802 letter to Baptists in Connecticut, Thomas

Jefferson began attending church - on the floor of the House of

Representatives. He would attend the makeshift church in the national

Capitol nearly every Sunday morning for the rest of his presidency.

Clearly, his understanding of the connection between religion and

government is not the one we endure today.

We should not be surprised. It was Jefferson, after all, who insisted

upon the Bible as part of the curriculum at the University of

Virginia, Jefferson who approved federal funding for a Catholic priest

to serve the Kaskaski Indians, and Jefferson who once said, "I am a

Christian in the only sense in which he (Jesus) wished anyone to be."

True, he was far from theologically orthodox, he expected most of the

young men in his day to end their lives as Unitarians and he angrily

despised the clergy of his day. Yet, contrary to the secular dreams of

an influential few today, Jefferson envisioned a government that would

encourage religion while neither submitting to nor erecting a

religious tyranny.

Even if Jefferson had envisioned a secular state, it would have made

little difference in the early history of our nation. It was not his

words that carried the force of law - written as they were 14 years

after the Constitution was ratified - but rather the 10 words that are

undoubtedly the most tortured in our history: "Congress shall make no

law respecting an establishment of religion." These words, the first

10 of our Bill of Rights, make the intentions of the Founding Fathers

clear. Having just fought a war of independence against England and

her state church, they had no intention of allowing the U.S. Congress

the authority to erect a new religious tyranny to dominate their young

nation. Instead, they denied Congress the power to create a national

church. The states and the individual citizens, of course, were free

to be as religious as they wanted to be.

The court oversteps

The result was a marvelous triumph of freedom, a miracle of history,

prevailing for more than 150 years. Never had religion so graced a

nation without controlling it. Then came the disastrous Everson case

of 1947. Breaking with both legal precedent and the clear counsel of

our history, the Supreme Court exchanged Jefferson's words for the

first 10 words of the First Amendment. The phrase "separation between

church and state" - which had appeared in neither the Constitution nor

the debates that produced the Bill of Rights - was made the law of the

land.

"The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state,"

wrote Justice Hugo Black for the majority. "That wall must be kept

high and impregnable." Accordingly, the court ruled, no government

policy or funds, at any level of government, may encourage religion to

any degree.

It was, simply put, bad law: without precedent, unworkable and - given

that Black feigned support for his reasoning from the intentions of

the founding era - informed by the most astonishing revisionism. Now,

the secularist storm troops of the American Civil Liberties Union and

its like drive religion from the public square with the mandate of the

Everson ruling in hand. Religious symbols are removed from cemeteries,

student prayer groups are driven from public facilities, and religious

leaders are threatened if they dare speak about political issues from

their pulpits. All this comes at a time when America is experiencing a

new birth of religious interest, one that could grant a needed

infusion of nobility, ethics and wisdom to our national life.

There is hope: Measures are arising in Congress designed to hold

Everson's ravages in check. There is also the possibility that the

Supreme Court may have opportunity to revisit elements of the case in

years to come.

A true freedom of religion

The most important point to remember in this, the 60th anniversary

year of the Everson decision, is that our Founding Fathers did in fact

make a covenant with us. That covenant guaranteed us that Congress

would make no state church but that religion could be free to shape

our national life with its ethical and ennobling content. We suffer

for lack of that content today, and it is time for us to consider anew

the wisdom of our Founders in guaranteeing us the blessings of faith

while protecting us from the dark tyrannies of faith that bedeviled

the centuries before us. The Founders' plan for religion in our

national life was certainly more successful than the confused design

the courts have saddled us with today.

It was John Quincy Adams who called to us from an earlier age when he

wrote, "Posterity - you will never know how much it has cost my

generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of

it." We may well do so, but only if we return to the religious wisdom

of our national fathers.

Stephen Mansfield is a best-selling author. His book Ten Tortured

Words: How the Founding Fathers Tried to Protect Religion in America

and What's Happened Since was released in June.

July 16, 2007

"Fred Goodwin, CMA" <fgoodwin@yahoo.com> wrote in

news:1184591127.881176.160920@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

> Religion now rests in a tortured place in society today, thanks

> largely to unfortunate and misguided rulings of the Supreme Court.

Oh, I don't think it was 'misguided' at all. I think it was very carefully

planned and executed. The church used to be a source of political activism and

information for its parishioner. What better place to point out the ills of

society being fomented by the government? These says such sedition could cost

the church its tax-exempt status. I've always figured the bastardization of

the 1st amendment had one goal, clearly explained in this article;

"...religious leaders are threatened if they dare speak about political

issues from their pulpits."

--

President Bush was so buoyed by the warm reception he was given in Albania

that he immediately gave all 3 million Albanians American citizenship,

provided they learn Spanish. - Ann Coulter

July 16, 2007

"Fred Goodwin, CMA" <fgoodwin@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:1184591127.881176.160920@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> The Founders got it right

>

> <http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/07/the-founders-go.html>

> http://tinyurl.com/2ng5cw

>

> Religion now rests in a tortured place in society today, thanks

> largely to unfortunate and misguided rulings of the Supreme Court.

>

> By Stephen Mansfield

> 12:16 AM/ET, July 16, 2007

>

> Two days after he wrote the famous words "separation between church

> and state" in an 1802 letter to Baptists in Connecticut, Thomas

> Jefferson began attending church - on the floor of the House of

> Representatives. He would attend the makeshift church in the national

> Capitol nearly every Sunday morning for the rest of his presidency.

> Clearly, his understanding of the connection between religion and

> government is not the one we endure today.

Clearly your understanding of the topic, and of Jefferson's actions, are not

what HE or anyone who sits on the Supreme Court, would agree with.

>

> We should not be surprised. It was Jefferson, after all, who insisted

> upon the Bible as part of the curriculum at the University of

> Virginia, Jefferson who approved federal funding for a Catholic priest

> to serve the Kaskaski Indians, and Jefferson who once said, "I am a

> Christian in the only sense in which he (Jesus) wished anyone to be."

> True, he was far from theologically orthodox, he expected most of the

> young men in his day to end their lives as Unitarians and he angrily

> despised the clergy of his day. Yet, contrary to the secular dreams of

> an influential few today, Jefferson envisioned a government that would

> encourage religion while neither submitting to nor erecting a

> religious tyranny.

The government has as much right to encourage religion, as it does to

discourage it.

While Jefferson may appreciate using the bible as one, of MANY learning

tools - that is quit different from mixing religion with the government.

>

> Even if Jefferson had envisioned a secular state, it would have made

> little difference in the early history of our nation. It was not his

> words that carried the force of law - written as they were 14 years

> after the Constitution was ratified - but rather the 10 words that are

> undoubtedly the most tortured in our history: "Congress shall make no

> law respecting an establishment of religion." These words, the first

> 10 of our Bill of Rights, make the intentions of the Founding Fathers

> clear. Having just fought a war of independence against England and

> her state church, they had no intention of allowing the U.S. Congress

> the authority to erect a new religious tyranny to dominate their young

> nation. Instead, they denied Congress the power to create a national

> church. The states and the individual citizens, of course, were free

> to be as religious as they wanted to be.

Ridiculous!

It would be insane for the United States to give citizens the right to

practice, or be free of, religion and its tyranny .... but allow the STATES

to do the oppressing.

Obviously you intentionally, and ignorantly ignore the 14th amendment - and

the main reason behind the civil war.

>

> The court oversteps

>

> The result was a marvelous triumph of freedom, a miracle of history,

> prevailing for more than 150 years. Never had religion so graced a

> nation without controlling it. Then came the disastrous Everson case

> of 1947. Breaking with both legal precedent and the clear counsel of

> our history, the Supreme Court exchanged Jefferson's words for the

> first 10 words of the First Amendment. The phrase "separation between

> church and state" - which had appeared in neither the Constitution nor

> the debates that produced the Bill of Rights - was made the law of the

> land.

Bull Shit!

Jefferson's statement defines what the founders wanted - one hell of a lot

better than your uneducated, and fanatical, extremist interpretation!

>

> "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state,"

> wrote Justice Hugo Black for the majority. "That wall must be kept

> high and impregnable." Accordingly, the court ruled, no government

> policy or funds, at any level of government, may encourage religion to

> any degree.

>

> It was, simply put, bad law: without precedent, unworkable and - given

> that Black feigned support for his reasoning from the intentions of

> the founding era - informed by the most astonishing revisionism. Now,

> the secularist storm troops of the American Civil Liberties Union and

> its like drive religion from the public square with the mandate of the

> Everson ruling in hand. Religious symbols are removed from cemeteries,

> student prayer groups are driven from public facilities, and religious

> leaders are threatened if they dare speak about political issues from

> their pulpits. All this comes at a time when America is experiencing a

> new birth of religious interest, one that could grant a needed

> infusion of nobility, ethics and wisdom to our national life.

Funny; I dion't remeber your name as one of the founding fathers - or as a

Supreme Court justice - that your fanatical opinions should cary ANY weight

in the legal arena.

>

> There is hope: Measures are arising in Congress designed to hold

> Everson's ravages in check. There is also the possibility that the

> Supreme Court may have opportunity to revisit elements of the case in

> years to come.

>

> A true freedom of religion

Would NOT exist if religious zealots had their way, and infused THEIR

religion into ANY aspect of government.

>

> The most important point to remember in this, the 60th anniversary

> year of the Everson decision, is that our Founding Fathers did in fact

> make a covenant with us. That covenant guaranteed us that Congress

> would make no state church but that religion could be free to shape

> our national life with its ethical and ennobling content. We suffer

> for lack of that content today, and it is time for us to consider anew

> the wisdom of our Founders in guaranteeing us the blessings of faith

> while protecting us from the dark tyrannies of faith that bedeviled

> the centuries before us. The Founders' plan for religion in our

> national life was certainly more successful than the confused design

> the courts have saddled us with today.

Where, in ANY of the important writings of the founding fathers did they

guarantee the "blessings of faith"?

You're just inventing this crap as you go along; aren't you!?!?!?!

>

> It was John Quincy Adams who called to us from an earlier age when he

> wrote, "Posterity - you will never know how much it has cost my

> generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of

> it." We may well do so, but only if we return to the religious wisdom

> of our national fathers.

>

> Stephen Mansfield is a best-selling author. His book Ten Tortured

> Words: How the Founding Fathers Tried to Protect Religion in America

> and What's Happened Since was released in June.

Best selling to whom? the Religious Reich?

>

July 16, 2007

You guys are so ungrateful. Its thanks to "separation between church

and state" that your religions are so vigorous by comparison with

societies where that line isn't drawn.

July 16, 2007

"Fred Goodwin, CMA" <fgoodwin@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:1184591127.881176.160920@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> The Founders got it right

Yes, they did. And now Christian fascists want to rewrite history.

Clearly Jefferson envisioned a government with separation between church

and state, even though he rarely used those exact words. The article

you posted goes on to say even if Jefferson meant that (which clearly he

did) it doesn't matter because Jefferson didn't write the 1st amendment.

I find it quite interesting that the article gives no mention to the

writings of Madison (who WAS the principle author of the Bill of

Rights).

"Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and government

in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by

Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already

furnished in their short history"

James Madison

So even 200 years ago, Madison pointed out the encroachment of the

Christian fascists on the Constitution, and it still goes on today.

Here's some other jewels by Madison which I particularly like:

Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between

ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt

that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in

shewing that religion & Gov will both exist in greater purity, the less

they are mixed together.

James Madison

"In no instance have . . . the churches been guardians of the liberties

of the people."