Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Palestinian Hoax -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (492)	7/2/2002 8:17:30 PM
From: Noel de Leon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3467

I've already told you what I meant twice. I'm not capable of writing what I meant any clearer. If withdrawing my apology for not being clear enough in my first reference to the D of I helps then I withdraw it. I never said that separation of church and state is mentioned in the D of I. You can not find any such statement in my postings. Not having read the D of I for the USSR I must leave any comments on that to others. Funny how right wingers have the two declarations so confused that they can not keep to the subject but must wander into irrelevant areas.

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (492)	7/7/2002 10:51:17 AM
From: Rarebird	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 3467

The framers of the U.S. Constitution were concerned that European history might repeat itself in the new world. They wanted to avoid the continual wars motivated by religious hatred that had decimated many countries within Europe. They decided that a church/state separation was their best assurance that the U.S. would remain relatively free of inter-religious strife. In 1789, the first of ten amendments were written to the Federal Constitution; they have since been known as the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment reads: "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." This was ratified by the States in 1791. The first phrase "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." is called the establishment clause. It has been interpreted by the courts as requiring a separation between church and state. That is, the government (and by extension public schools) may not: promote one religion or faith group over any other promote a religiously based life over a secularly based life promote a secularly based life over a religiously based life. Three tests have been developed to decide the constitutionality of laws that have a religious component: The Lemon test: This was defined in a Supreme Court ruling in 1971. To be constitutional, a law must: have a secular purpose, and be neutral towards religion - neither hindering nor advancing it, and not result in excessive entanglements between the government and religion. The Endorsement Test: Justice O'Connor created this criteria: a law is unconstitutional if it favors one religion over another in a way that makes some people feel like outsiders and others feel like insiders. The Coercion Test: Justice Kennedy proposed this criteria: a law is constitutional even if it recognizes or accomodates a religion, as long as its demonstration of support does not appear to coerce individuals to support or participate in a religion. Now to be sure, there is some opposition, particularly among Fundamentalist Christians to this interpretation of the First Amendment by the courts. They feel that the Amendment should be interpreted literally to mean that the government may not raise any one denomination or religion to the status of an official or established religion of the country. They feel that the First Amendment contains no wording that prohibits the government from engaging in certain religious activities, like requiring prayer as part of the schedule at public schools, requiring schools, courts and government offices to post the Ten Commandments, allowing public schools to have organized prayers as an integral part of public school sports events, praying before board of education or municipal government meetings, etc. The following phrase "Congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise thereof... is called the free exercise clause; it guarantees freedom of religion. What you are forgetting is that it also protects people who do NOT believe in God, people who believe in themselves and who have no need to receive encouragements or precedents from above because they are self-reliant, self-sufficient and possess all the tools within themselves to handle Life's crisis' and live a happy productive existence. Thomas Jefferson, as president, wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut on 1802-JAN-1. It contains the first known reference to the "wall of separation". The essay states in part: "...I contemplate with solemn 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 a wall of separation between Church and State..." During the 1810's, President James Madison wrote an essay titled "Monopolies" which also refers to the importance of church-state separation. He stated in part: "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." The US Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment as if it requires this "wall of separation" between church and state. It not only prohibits any government from adopting a particular denomination or religion as official, but requires government to avoid any involvement in religion. It is "one nation, indivisible, with unity and justice for all." For many Americans that means without God. I suggest you pause for a moment and reflect upon the meaning of "all" and what freedom of religion truely means. It does not mean shoving your religious principles down other people's throats who choose not to believe in a supreme being.