Graham Kerr #fundie disqus.com

Graham Kerr:
Madison, like Jefferson, never thought government should be protected from the church, but the exact opposite. Remember, the Church of England was one of the things they objected to.

Guzzman:
So you claim Jefferson and Madison "never thought government should be protected from the church, but the exact opposite"? Do you have a primary source for that claim?
The notion that Madison's and Jefferson's wall between religion and government works in one direction only – i.e., it serves to protect religion from government, but not government from religion – has no basis in history, law, or even common sense.
The very idea is self-contradictory: If ANY religious group is free to encroach upon and control government and thereby achieve a privileged status, all others are at risk of falling into disfavor and facing government discrimination and even persecution. One of the primary objectives of the First Amendment was to prevent arming any religious group with the force of law. A government controlled by religion is the very definition of theocracy - and that is precisely what the founders wished to avoid.

Graham Kerr:
"The notion that Madison's and Jefferson's wall between religion and government works in one direction only – i.e., it serves to protect religion from government, but not government from religion – has no basis in history, law, or even common sense."
Jefferson's 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists.
The aforementioned Church of England.
I'm not a product of the 21st century public school system, so I'm not quite as stupid and easy to manipulate as you think I am.
Peddle your lies somewhere else.

Guzzman:
Jefferson's "wall of separation" between religion and government means exactly that - a barrier that divides two things into distinct domains. A "usurpation by one side or the other" (to use Madison's phrase) would be a breach of that wall. Government can no more encroach upon religion than religion can encroach upon government.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed since 1879: "Separation means separation, not something less. Jefferson's metaphor in describing the relation between Church and State speaks of a 'wall of separation,' not of a fine line easily overstepped... 'The great American principle of eternal separation' - Elihu Root's phrase bears repetition - is one of the vital reliances of our Constitutional system for assuring unities among our people stronger than our diversities. It is the Court's duty to enforce this principle in its full integrity. We renew our conviction that 'we have staked the very existence of our country on the faith that complete separation between the state and religion is best for the state and best for religion.' McCollum v. Board of Education, 1948.

Graham Kerr:
If you read the aforementioned letter, you'd know what Jefferson had in mind was protecting church from government. To imply anything else is a lie.

Guzzman:
From Jefferson's letter: "I contemplate with sovereign 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 & State."
How does "building a wall of separation between Church & State" protect only religion from government and not also government from religion? Read James Madison's 1817 "Detached Memoranda - Amendment I (Religion)" where he discusses "the dangers of encroachments by Ecclesiastical Bodies" as being a violation of the First Amendment. He further states that religious liberty is only safeguarded when you have constitutional "separation between Religion & Govt." He then discusses several historical examples of "encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies" and the "danger of a direct mixture of Religion & civil Government." I don't how the founders could have been any more explicit in their writings that government and religion should be kept separate:
"The settled opinion here [in the United States] is, that religion is essentially distinct from civil Government, and exempt from its cognizance; that a connection between them is injurious to both." (Letter to Edward Everett, Montpelier, March 18, 1823).

Graham Kerr:
The thing is, you wish for it to be the case, and yet, it is clear the Jefferson letter doesn't make it so.
Why do you think the Constitution says freedom OF religion and not from it?
It's nothing but a lie to assert any of our founding fathers were against acknowledging God in a public venue. God is mentioned on the SCOTUS building, for Pete's sake.
If you want to campaign for a Godless America, do it at a website better suited for that sort of garbage. Because you are not impressing anyone, you're just trying to make yourself look important.

Guzzman:
FYI, the Constitution does not contain the words "freedom of religion" as you claim, but Amendment 1 does prevent government from "prohibiting the free exercise thereof. " Embodied in the concept of freedom of religion is freedom from religion. The government cannot dictate to us which god we must have, how many gods we must have, or that we must have any god at all. That is most certainly freedom of, and freedom from religion. As Justice John Paul Stevens explained in Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985):
"Just as the right to speak and the right to refrain from speaking are complementary components of a broader concept of individual freedom of mind, so also the individual's freedom to choose his own creed is the counterpart of his right to refrain from accepting the creed established by the majority. At one time it was thought that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism. But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all."

Graham Kerr:
"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."
Notice the words, "freedom from religion" don't appear. Period. Saying it does is just a wish of yours.
So far, you are zero for two.
If you dislike religion so much, move to China.

10 comments

Confused?

So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!

To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register. Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.