« They need to get out more often | Main | Wikipedia's Wicked Ways »

Connecticut looking to regulate the Catholic church?

The separation of church and state is one of the biggest myths out there. There is no separation of church and state clause in our Constitution, although people do have a right to freedom of religion. The separation of church and state argument comes from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, and was noted by Jefferson as a reassurance that the state would not interfere with any church. That's basically what the First Amendment and the Establishment Clause say: that the government cannot meddle with anyone's religious freedoms or with the structure of a religious organization.

Well, I guess in Connecticut, that constitutional right no longer matters, because the (Democrat-controlled) Judiciary Committee has introduced a bill giving the state the right to organize Catholic parishes and diocese according to state requirements:

The Lawlor-and-McDonald-controlled Judiciary Committee has introduced Raised Bill 1098, a bill aimed specifically at the Catholic Church, which would remove the authority of the bishop and pastor over individual parishes and put a board of laymen in their place. You can read Rep. Lawlor's defense of this bill, Bridgeport Bishop William Lori's response and more here.

We need as big a turnout as possible for the public hearing on Wednesday, especially from non-Catholics. As Ben Franklin told the Founders while they were signing the Declaration of Independence, "either we hang together or we will all hang separately." Legislators need to understand that this bill is an attack on everyone's religious liberty.

If the legislature can replace a bishop with a board of laymen in the Catholic Church, they can just as easily replace the governing lay structure of Congregationalist or Baptist churches with someone set up as a bishop. In fact, it was resistance to such government interference in the internal life of the church that gave birth to several of our most historic denominations. Thanks to this awful bill, our generation must now rise up to defend those hard-fought victories for religious liberty that were won for us by our ancestors.

This should send a chill down your spine, Catholic or not. What this will do is basically take away the existing organization of the Catholic church, and replace it with a governing board selected by the state. The pastors, bishops, and archbishops in Connecticut would see all of their authority in the church taken away. The archbishop or bishop would have a seat on the board, but would have no right to vote. This bill is directed only at the Catholic church.

American Papist has the defense of this despicable bill from Mike Lawlor himself:

... the current state statutes governing Roman Catholic corporations ... were enacted in 1955. SB 1098 is a proposal to make changes in that law, which was suggested by parishioners who were the victims of theft of their funds in several parishes, and these parishioners feel that the state's existing Roman Catholic Corporate laws prevented them from dealing with the misuse and theft of funds.

I agree with you that the whole notion of having a statute governing the church seems like an intrusion on the separation of church and state, but the current law does that already. Perhaps we should repeal the whole thing, but if we are going to have a corporate law of this type, it probably should make sure there cannot be deception of parishioners.

Here's the problem with that reasoning. Theft and fraud are already against the law. If a parishioner believes that theft and/or fraud has taken place, then they can take legal action. If they feel they've been deceived, then obviously there's no legal action they can take -- there's no law against lying or deception, even if it's not very nice to lie to or deceive someone. A parishioner can, though, stop donating money to that particular parish. They can attend another parish. Or they could cease attendance of Catholic churches altogether. No one is required to donate money to their church, nor are they required to attend a particular church. The government, however, does require people to donate their money, and what recourse does an unhappy citizen have when they feel their money is being mishandled?

The Bridgeport Diocese has responded to these accusations and to this bill. They also, interestingly enough, noted that the state of Connecticut has racked up a $1.5 billion deficit, and therefore probably has no right to try to manage the finances of an organzation whose finances are already quite sound.

This past Thursday, March 5, the Judiciary Committee of the Connecticut State Legislature, which is chaired by Sen. Andrew McDonald of Stamford and Rep. Michael Lawlor of East Haven, introduced a bill that directly attacks the Roman Catholic Church and our Faith.

This bill violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. It forces a radical reorganization of the legal, financial, and administrative structure of our parishes. This is contrary to the Apostolic nature of the Catholic Church because it disconnects parishes from their Pastors and their Bishop. Parishes would be run by boards from which Pastors and the Bishop would be effectively excluded.

This bill, moreover, is a thinly-veiled attempt to silence the Catholic Church on the important issues of the day, such as same-sex marriage.

The State has no right to interfere in the internal affairs and structure of the Catholic Church. This bill is directed only at the Catholic Church but could someday be forced on other denominations. The State has no business controlling religion.

The Pastors of our Diocese are doing an exemplary job of sound stewardship and financial accountability, in full cooperation with their parishioners.

For the State Legislature -- which has not reversed a $1 billion deficit in this fiscal year -- to try to manage the Catholic Church makes no sense. The Catholic Church not only lives within her means but stretches her resources to provide more social, charitable, and educational services than any other private institution in the State. This bill threatens those services at a time when the State is cutting services. The Catholic Church is needed now more than ever.

We reject this irrational, unlawful, and bigoted bill that jeopardizes the religious liberty of our Church.

Catholic or not, all Americans should be outraged over this. This bill is a gross overreach of power, not to mention a disgusting infringement on Connecticut citizens' constitutional religious liberties. The government has no right whatsoever to regulate the structure of any religious organization.

Please call Senator McDonald and Representative Lawlor, and let them know that what they are doing is unacceptable. Again, whether or not you are a Catholic or a citizen of Connecticut is irrelevant. All Americans have the right to freedom of religion, and an infringment on that right anywhere can affect all of us. This is an ugly step towards fascism, and we cannot stand for it.

Senator Andrew McDonald:
(800) 842-1420; (203) 348-7439
E-mail: [email protected]

Representative Michael Lawlor:
(800) 842-8267; (203) 469-9725
E-mail: [email protected]

Hat Tip: Hot Air


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/34819.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Connecticut looking to regulate the Catholic church?:

Comments (78)

While I agree this is an po... (Below threshold)
John:

While I agree this is an power grab...I have to wonder about the demographics and how many Catholics voted for these idiots, because if a majority of them voted for these people, they get what they deserve.

It's hard to have any sympa... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

It's hard to have any sympathy for an organization that expresses such contempt for moral decency, especially when it comes to the rights of women.

I'm sure this will be seen as off-topic, but as a recovering former Catholic, I've seen firsthand why this organization does a lot more harm than good--the general decency of most clergymen and laypeople notwithstanding; and any blow to the Church is, I think, a step towards liberating its members from a dictatorial and inherently irrational organization.

Sorry--I didn't mean to ste... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Sorry--I didn't mean to steal that link from Bill's post below. I actually saw it first on Digby's blog (Hullabaloo).

Glad it's getting some traction, though. They've used Latin America as ideological toilet paper for far too long.

Are we playing "guess the p... (Below threshold)
Mike Smith:

Are we playing "guess the party" here?

They're already doing this ... (Below threshold)
Parthenon:

They're already doing this in New York, and last I checked, there are still Catholics there. Pump the brakes on the histrionics.

There is no separa... (Below threshold)
mantis:
There is no separation of church and state clause in our Constitution, although people do have a right to freedom of religion.

Yes there is, it's called the First Amendment. It just doesn't use the words "separation of church and state."

The separation of church and state argument comes from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, and was noted by Jefferson as a reassurance that the state would not interfere with any church.

That's not where the argument comes from. It comes from the Constitution. To quote Jefferson, as you neglect to do:

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 and state.

The First Amendment creates the wall of separation. The "wall" is a metaphor for what the First Amendment does. Shit, Cassy, don't you think you stay away from referencing things which prove your very first point wrong? Oh, and by the way, Jefferson was not the first to use the metaphor. That was Roger Williams, more than a century earlier. And the wall protects both sides; religion from government and government from religtion. Anyway, more education from Constitutional expert Cassy Fiano!

That's basically what the First Amendment and the Establishment Clause say:

The First Amendment and the Establishment Clause? The Establishment Clause is in the First Amendment.

Anyway, you're correct that this bill is clearly wrong (but why is there already a CT law governing churches? How does that stand?), but it ain't going anywhere. Even the guys who introduced it to committee don't support it.

After an outcry over the bill over the weekend, Rep. Michael P. Lawlor and Sen. Andrew McDonald said Monday that they are not advocating for the meaure. A spokesman for McDonald said the matter is a committee bill, and the concept's original language came from concerned constituents in lower Fairfield County.

"It has been incorrectly characterized that this legislation originated from the two of us as an attack on the church and freedom of religion,'' Lawlor and McDonald said in a statement. "That is not the truth, and the facts do not support such a claim.''

They added, "Despite what has been portrayed, we have not endorsed nor are advocating for this proposal.''

The separation of church and state is one of the biggest myths out there.

Here, I'll fix that for you:

The separation of church and state is one of the most fundamental tenets of our Republic.

Much more accurate now.

Time to execute judgement d... (Below threshold)
914:

Time to execute judgement day on the judges.

MantisYou are inco... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

You are incorrect as usual.

The First Amendment expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion.

If you do your research you will find that there were numerous State churches long after the Constitution and the Bill of rights were signed.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_churches

The First Amendment to the US Constitution explicitly forbids the U.S. federal government from enacting any law respecting a religious establishment, and thus forbids either designating an official church for the United States, or interfering with State and local official churches -- which were common when the First Amendment was enacted. It did not prevent state governments from establishing official churches. Connecticut continued to do so until it replaced its colonial Charter with the Connecticut Constitution of 1818; Massachusetts did not disestablish its official church until 1833, more than forty years after the ratification of the First Amendment; and local official establishments of religion persisted even later.


Bruce Henry TAKE NOTE

Mantis this is just another liberal MEME

Ok, after further reading, ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Ok, after further reading, I have a better grasp on what's going on here. The Catholic Church sets their assets up as a corporation, and the State of Connecticut has laws governing these corporations (since they are religious institutions, they are special cases). This bill is a proposal to adjust the law that is already on the books to give the people who give the church its money some more oversight (not the government, which has no say) to prevent malfeasance.

It's real easy for the church if they don't like this. Don't establish or maintain your church as a corporation. Poof. Law doesn't apply.

Anyway, if the church wants to set up sham corporations with no accountability, isn't it the duty of the state to step in, or do you believe that the purpose of the First Amendment is not to separate church and state, but rather to make church above the law?

You are incorrect as usu... (Below threshold)
mantis:

You are incorrect as usual.

No, I'm not, and you haven't even attempted to point out where I was supposed to be wrong.

If you do your research you will find that there were numerous State churches long after the Constitution and the Bill of rights were signed.

I knew that already. Where above did I mention the States? In any case no state could legally establish a church now, thanks to the Fourteenth Amendment.

Mantis"Anyway, if th... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis
"Anyway, if the church wants to set up sham corporations with no accountability, isn't it the duty of the state to step in, or do you believe that the purpose of the First Amendment is not to separate church and state, but rather to make church above the law"

THe purpose of the 1st amendment is neither to seperate church and state nor to make the church above the law.

The purpose of the first amendment (dealing with religions) is to prevent the Congress from establishing a national church (along the Church of England concept) and to prevent the govt from interfering with how people worship (which was one reason why many of the colonist came to the colonies in the first place).

Liberals like you choose to overlook that and prefer to state that the the first amendment is an antireligion clause. Ie govt funds cant pay for religous decorations, statues, display religous monuments, etc. You totally overlook the history behind the first amendment because it doesnt suit how you think it should be.


THe purpose of the 1st a... (Below threshold)
mantis:

THe purpose of the 1st amendment is neither to seperate church and state nor to make the church above the law.

Wrong.

The purpose of the first amendment (dealing with religions) is to prevent the Congress from establishing a national church (along the Church of England concept) and to prevent the govt from interfering with how people worship (which was one reason why many of the colonist came to the colonies in the first place).

The Church of England, and it's influence on English government policies, is what they were fleeing. The First Amendment is there precisely to prevent such influence.

Liberals like you choose to overlook that and prefer to state that the the first amendment is an antireligion clause.

No, I look at is a separation between church and state, just like Thomas Jefferson did.

Ie govt funds cant pay for religous decorations, statues, display religous monuments, etc.

Yes, I think that government should not be in the business of respecting an establishment of religion. Wonder where I came up with that silly belief?

You totally overlook the history behind the first amendment because it doesnt suit how you think it should be.

I overlook the history? You're a funny guy. Tell another one.

MantisTry reading ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

Try reading some of the things the founding fathers wrote.

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/founding.html
""A patriot without religion in my estimation is as great a paradox as an honest Man without the fear of God. Is it possible that he whom no moral obligations bind, can have any real Good Will towards Men? Can he be a patriot who, by an openly vicious conduct, is undermining the very bonds of Society?....The Scriptures tell us "righteousness exalteth a Nation." - Abigail Adams

June 21, 1776
"Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. - John ADAMS


"Let them revere nothing but Religion, Morality and Liberty." - John Adams

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government ofany other." - John Adams

"I have thought proper to recommend, and I hereby recommend accordingly, that Thursday, the twenty-fifth day of April next, be observed throughout the United States of America as a day of solemn humiliation, fasting and prayer; that the citizens on that day abstain, as far as may be, from their secular occupation, and devote the time to the sacred duties of religion, in public and in private; that they call to mind our numerous offenses against the most high God, confess them before Him with the sincerest penitence, implore his pardoning mercy, through the Great Mediator and Redeemer, for our past transgressions, and that through the grace of His Holy Spirit, we may be disposed and enabled to yield a more suitable obedience to his righteous requisitions in time to come; that He would interpose to arrest the progress of that impiety and licentiousness in principle and practice so offensive to Himself and so ruinous to mankind; that He would make us deeply sensible that "righteousness exalteth a nation but sin is a reproach to any people" (Proverbs 14:34)" - John Adams

August 28, 1811

"Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all the combinations of human society." - John Adams

In a letter dated November 4, 1816, John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson:

"The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount contain my religion..."

Abraham Baldwin
(Founder of the University of Georgia)

"It should therefore be among the first objects of those who wish well to the national prosperity to encourage and support the principles of religion and morality, and early to place the youth under the forming hand of society, that by instruction they may be molded to the love of virtue and good order.


"Hence bad examples to youth are more rare in America, which must be comfortable consideration to parents. To this may be truly added, that serious religion, under its various denominations, is not only tolerated, but respected and practiced.- Ben Franklin

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here - Patrick Henry

"The only foundation for useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion." - Thomas Jefferson


Jefferson declared that religion is: "Deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support."

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions, 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, of prohibiting the free excercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and state. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessings of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem."- THomas Jefferson

"Religion [is] the basis and Foundation of Government." - James Madison

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens."
- George Washington

In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed....No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people." - Noah Webster

In 1832, Noah Webster published his History of the United States, in which he wrote:

"The brief exposition of the constitution of the United States, will unfold to young persons the principles of republican government; and it is the sincere desire of the writer that our citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament or the Christian religion.

"The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free Constitutions of Government. - Noah Webster

The protections of the Bill... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

The protections of the Bill of Rights was imposed on all the States with the adoption of the 14th amendment on July 21, 1868. The relevant phrase is "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."

What's relevant to this thread is the free exercise clause of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Assuming bill 1098 becomes law it will be immediately challenged in court, and I predict, overturned. A fundamental tenet of the Catholic Church is it's strict leadership structure. To control the money is to control the church, and thus, a law forcing a change in who controls the money violates the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.

Shall we look at some more<... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Shall we look at some more

http://www.eadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm

John Adams and John Hancock:
We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus! [April 18, 1775]

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798

John Adams:
" The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity... I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."
• "[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty."


"Without Religion this World would be Something not fit to be mentioned in polite Company, I mean Hell." [John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, April 19, 1817]

Samual Adams - Let divines and philosophers, statesmen and patriots, unite their endeavors to renovate the age by impressing the minds of men with the importance of educating their little boys and girls, inculcating in the minds of youth the fear and love of the Deity... and leading them in the study and practice of the exalted virtues of the Christian system." [October 4, 1790]

John Quincy Adams:
• "Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?" "Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity"?
--1837, at the age of 69, when he delivered a Fourth of July speech at Newburyport, Massachusetts.

Elias Boudinot: | Portrait of Elias Boudinot
" Be religiously careful in our choice of all public officers . . . and judge of the tree by its fruits."

Charles Carroll - signer of the Declaration of Independence | Portrait of Charles Carroll
" Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments." [Source: To James McHenry on November 4, 1800.]

Benjamin Franklin: | Portrait of Ben Franklin
" God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel" -Constitutional Convention of 1787 | original manuscript of this speech

"In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered... do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?" [Constitutional Convention, Thursday June 28, 1787]

Alexander Hamilton:
• Hamilton began work with the Rev. James Bayard to form the Christian Constitutional Society to help spread over the world the two things which Hamilton said made America great:
(1) Christianity
(2) a Constitution formed under Christianity.
"The Christian Constitutional Society, its object is first: The support of the Christian religion. Second: The support of the United States."


Alexander Hamilton
"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." [1787 after the Constitutional Convention]

THomas Jefferson
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever." (excerpts are inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in the nations capital) [Source: Merrill . D. Peterson, ed., Jefferson Writings, (New York: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc., 1984), Vol. IV, p. 289. From Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, 1781.]

James Madison
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We've staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity...to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

• In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible.
" An Act for the relief of the Bible Society of Philadelphia" Approved February 2, 1813 by Congress

Thomas Paine:
" It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences, and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles: he can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author."
" The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools, in teaching natural philosophy as an accomplishment only, has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism. Instead of looking through the works of creation to the Creator himself, they stop short, and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of his existence. They labour with studied ingenuity to ascribe every thing they behold to innate properties of matter, and jump over all the rest by saying, that matter is eternal." "The Existence of God--1810"


Benjamin Rush:
• "I lament that we waste so much time and money in punishing crimes and take so little pains to prevent them...we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government; that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by means of the Bible; for this Divine Book, above all others, constitutes the soul of republicanism." "By withholding the knowledge of [the Scriptures] from children, we deprive ourselves of the best means of awakening moral sensibility in their minds." [Letter written (1790's) in Defense of the Bible in all schools in America


Let the children who are sent to those schools be taught to read and write and above all, let both sexes be carefully instructed in the principles and obligations of the Christian religion. This is the most essential part of education"
Letters of Benjamin Rush, "To the citizens of Philadelphia: A Plan for Free Schools", March 28, 1787


Justice Joseph Story:
" I verily believe Christianity necessary to the support of civil society. One of the beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is that Christianity is a part of the Common Law. . . There never has been a period in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying its foundations."
[Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States p. 593]
" Infidels and pagans were banished from the halls of justice as unworthy of credit." [Life and letters of Joseph Story, Vol. II 1851, pp. 8-9.]
" At the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration [i.e., the First Amendment], the general, if not the universal sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship."


Liberty Bell Inscription:
" Proclaim liberty throughout the land and to all the inhabitants thereof" [Leviticus 25:10]

Proposals for the seal of the United States of America
• "Moses lifting his wand and dividing the Red Sea" -Ben Franklin

• "The children of Israel in the wilderness, led by a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night." --Thomas Jefferson

On July 4, 1776, Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams "to bring in a device for a seal for the United States of America." Franklin's proposal adapted the biblical story of the parting of the Red Sea. Jefferson first recommended the "Children of Israel in the Wilderness, led by a Cloud by Day, and a Pillar of Fire by night. . . ." He then embraced Franklin's proposal and rewrote it

Jefferson's revision of Franklin's proposal was presented by the committee to Congress on August 20, 1776.

The three branches of the U.S. Government: Judicial, Legislative, Executive
• At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide the central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government from the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22;
"For the LORD is our judge,
the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
He will save us

Article 22 of the constitution of Delaware (1776)
Required all officers, besides taking an oath of allegiance, to make and subscribe to the following declaration:
• "I, [name], do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration."

New England Primer:
Used in public and private schools from 1690 to 1900 second only to the Bible
Some of its contents:
A song of praise to God
Prayers in Jesus' name
The famous Bible alphabet
Shorter Catechism of faith in Christ

--------------

So you can see Mantis. Not only did the founding fathers NOT mean for the first amendment to become a total separation of church and state, they actively wanted the Bible to be used in places such as public schools.

Mantis"The separat... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

"The separation of church and state is one of the most fundamental tenets of our Republic"

Again YOU ARE INCORRECT.

One of the most fundamental tenets of our Republic is freedom of religon and the NONESTABLISHMENT OF A NATIONAL RELIGION.


MantisThe 14th Ame... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

The 14th Amendment doesnt state that States cant form a church. It does however, protect people from having their religous freedom infringed upon by the state. The establishment of a state church doesnt nescessarily mean that people in that state HAVE to go to that church. Even with the state churches in existence up until the 1830s or so people were NOT required to be part of that church.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

"The Civil Rights Act of 1866 had already granted U.S. citizenship to all people born in the United States; the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment added this principle into the Constitution to keep the Supreme Court from ruling the Civil Rights Act of 1866 to be unconstitutional for want of Congressional authority to pass such a law or a future Congress from altering it by a bare majority vote."

However, by the latter half of the twentieth century, nearly all of the rights in the Bill of Rights had been applied to the states, under what is known as the incorporation doctrine. As a result, the Fourteenth Amendment not only empowered the federal courts to intervene in this area to enforce the guarantee of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, but also to import the substantive rights of free speech, freedom of religion, protection from unreasonable searches and cruel and unusual punishment, and other limitations on governmental power. At the present, the Supreme Court has held that the Due Process Clause incorporates all of the substantive protections of the First, Fourth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments and all of the Fifth Amendment other than the requirement that any criminal prosecution must follow a grand jury indictment, but none of the provisions of the Seventh Amendment relating to civil trials.

"

I was raised as a Catholic ... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

I was raised as a Catholic although I've attended other churches as well including a Jehovah's Witness Kingdom Hall. Probably the Catholic Church has brought some regulatory problems on itself due to it's own conduct. I also know of a case where an archbishop had a single body buried in an grave on a large tract of land to avoid paying property taxes by declaring the land a cemetery.

I stopped attending Catholic schools after I was abused one day and the nun lied about the situation, claiming it never happened as well some other incidents which weren't very good as well. Sometimes this church has behaved very crappy, and now some might want to regulate it. Yet, I fear for religious freedom as well. I really don't know what's right here. I'm trying to maintain an open mind despite my anger at this institution over my own situation.

Let's hear from some others who faced abusive situations in the Catholic Church and hear their thoughts on this matter. I do have a close relative who's a nun, who conducted my mother's funeral and she's a wonderful person. And most priests are great as well.

MacLorryI see your... (Below threshold)
retired military:

MacLorry

I see your logic but disagree that this prohibits the formation of a state church as long as that state church does not force people to attend it or interfere with free exercise of relgion.

I do see a good case for your argument and may depending upon the situations involved concede the point.

The point is pretty moot ref the establishment of state churches as there are none today and extremely doubtful that any would try to be formed.

I still disagree with Mantis's contention that the founder's meaning was to totally do away with govt having any interaction with relgion at all.

"The Church of England, and it's influence on English government policies, is what they were fleeing. The First Amendment is there precisely to prevent such influence."

Partially agree. BUT that doesnt mean that there is a total wall between the two. If the founding fathers had meant that the 2 shall be totally seperate why not say " The federal govt shall lend no support to any religion" instead of saying "ESTABLISHMNET OF A RELIGION" meaning founding a religion which answered to the govt such as the Church of ENGLAND.


"No, I look at is a separation between church and state, just like Thomas Jefferson did."

"The only foundation for useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion." - Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson declared that religion is: "Deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support."

On July 4, 1776, Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams "to bring in a device for a seal for the United States of America." Franklin's proposal adapted the biblical story of the parting of the Red Sea. Jefferson first recommended the "Children of Israel in the Wilderness, led by a Cloud by Day, and a Pillar of Fire by night. . . ." He then embraced Franklin's proposal and rewrote it

Jefferson's revision of Franklin's proposal was presented by the committee to Congress on August 20, 1776.

The three branches of the U.S. Government: Judicial, Legislative, Executive
• At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide the central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government from the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22;
"For the LORD is our judge,
the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
He will save us


THomas Jefferson
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever."


A. You do not use the entire passage from Jefferson.

B. If Jefferson intended for their to be no mixture of government and religion why did he (and the rest of the founding fathers) put so much religion into the documents such as the Declaration of Independence, and the constitution.

C. Just because you think it does not make it so.

"Yes, I think that government should not be in the business of respecting an establishment of religion. Wonder where I came up with that silly belief?"

GOOD IDEA BUT USING GOVT FUNDS DOES NOT MEAN ESTABLISHING A RELGION (despite what the liberal MEME is)

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=establishment+definition&aq=f&oq=

Web definitions for establishment
constitution: the act of forming or establishing something


The act of establishing. The condition or fact of being established. Something established, as: An arranged order or system

establishment n 1: the act of forming something; "the constitution of a PTA group


Now if GOVT funds were used to ESTABLISH A RELIGION or used to DECLARE A SPECIFIC RELIGION AS THE OFFICIAL RELIGION OF THE FEDERAL GOVT than I would agree with you. But that is not what I am talking about it and you know it.

Remember that Congress starts each session with a prayer. Remember that the 10 commandments are any number of public buildings and THEIR RIGHT TO BE THERE has been ESTABLISHED BY THE SUPREME COURT.


PaulWhy dont you w... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Paul

Why dont you want to listen to stories of people who were altar boys who had zero problems with any of the priests they have known. How about talking about the priests who were accused and were totally innocent of the charges and their innocence have been proven (I know of one specifically that falls in this category.). Why dont you want to hear from people who were abused by school teachers in schools THAT DO RECEIVE GOV MONEY. WHy no outcry there from you?

IF WHAT you say is true, I am sorry it happened but REMEMBER the CHURCH is not one man, or a group of bad men or women. IT IS MUCH MORE Than that. And no matter how much people want to tear it down rightly or wrongly it will survive as it has for the past 2000 years.

Retired Military, I certain... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Retired Military, I certainly agree with you that most in the church are indeed fine persons. I certainly welcome their input as well here. I'm sorry if I only seemed to open this discussion up as an invitation to those with a bad situation like myself. I certainly wish to view this institution fairly despite my own past bad situation.

PaulI am not a mod... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Paul

I am not a moderator but this thread isnt for that discussion. Not trying to be harsh. I feel for the victims of abuse. I know how devastating those experiences can be. But I honestly think that that discussion is not something for this thread.

Well reasoned, Sir.... (Below threshold)
irongrampa:


Well reasoned, Sir.

Pleasure reading your posts.

Of course, the Chinese Comm... (Below threshold)

Of course, the Chinese Communists and Russian Soviet Union both took over the "administrative" functions of the Catholic & Orthodox Churches in their countries by selecting sock-puppet "laymen" and it looks like CT is well on its way to a similar frame of mind.

When I see cryto-marxists like hyperbolist and mantis trying to justify state churches, it harkens back either to medieval popes and anti-popes and/or Lenin/Mao.

I just wonder if these brave morons in the CT legislature would ever try pulling this stunt on synagogues! Vultures would be feeding on their political flesh within hours.

retired military,I... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

retired military,

I often wonder why the founders wrote the Bill of Rights in such terse language that it's difficult to tell exactly what was intended. Then again, they may have intentionally used such terse language, so that after careful deliberation, future generations could interpret the intent in a way that was relevant to their times. I believe the founders endeavored to write a Constitution that would endure through the ages.

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.

Up until after WW2 few challenged the entanglement between government and religion. When people did, the courts had to ponder the intent of the founders. If not for petty grievances there wouldn't be petty rulings. Now that we have court rulings we have to abide by them until they are overturned by legal means. We can't go back to what was done prior to the rulings and use that as an argument against the validity of the ruling.

I can see you feel strongly about your position, but be encourage to know that the first amendment cuts both ways in regards to relationship between government and religion. For example, Church income and property can't be taxes. Some think that's because of an IRS ruling, but courts have ruled Churches are tax exempt regardless of IRS status, rulings, or even enacted law based on the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. Also, with recent court ruling we find that those who seek to remove all reference to God from public life are seeing an end to their long string of victories. The pendulum has started to swing against them.

THomas Jefferson... (Below threshold)
jmc:

THomas Jefferson
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever." (excerpts are inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in the nations capital) [Source: Merrill . D. Peterson, ed., Jefferson Writings, (New York: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc., 1984), Vol. IV, p. 289. From Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, 1781.]

The thing about RM's post is that he demonstrates the founding fathers were Christians (Harldy an exciting reveleation given they are about a hundred years before Darwin and european in decent) but doesn't give one quote that shows they felt government and religion should intermingle.


Here is James Madison Father of the constituion and guy who pretty much wrote the bill of rights (makes him kind of an expert RM)

James Madison, the principal drafter of the United States Bill of Rights, who often wrote of "total separation of the church from the state."[12] "Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States," Madison wrote,[13] and he declared, "practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States."[14] In a letter to Edward Livingston Madison further expanded, "We are teaching the world the great truth that Govts. do better without Kings & Nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson that Religion flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of Govt." [15] This attitude is further reflected in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, originally authored by Thomas Jefferson, but championed by Madison, and guaranteeing that no one may be compelled to finance any religion or denomination.


So there you go.

"The thing about RM'... (Below threshold)
retired military:

"
The thing about RM's post is that he demonstrates the founding fathers were Christians (Harldy an exciting reveleation given they are about a hundred years before Darwin and european in decent) but doesn't give one quote that shows they felt government and religion should intermingle"

" At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide the central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government from the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22;
"For the LORD is our judge,
the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
He will save us
"

Looks like intermingling to me.


"Religion [is] the basis and Foundation of Government." - James Madison"

Looks like intermingling to me.


James Madison
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We've staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity...to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible.
" An Act for the relief of the Bible Society of Philadelphia" Approved February 2, 1813 by
Congress

Looks like intermingling to me.


And that is just Madison. Lets find some other intermingling.

Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all the combinations of human society." - John Adams


Looks like intermingling to me.


Abraham Baldwin
(Founder of the University of Georgia)

"It should therefore be among the first objects of those who wish well to the national prosperity to encourage and support the principles of religion and morality, and early to place the youth under the forming hand of society, that by instruction they may be molded to the love of virtue and good order.


Looks like intermingling to me.

"

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here - Patrick Henry


Looks like intermingling to me.

"The only foundation for useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion." - Thomas Jefferson


Looks like intermingling to me.


Jefferson declared that religion is: "Deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support."


Looks like intermingling to me.


"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions, 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, of prohibiting the free excercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and state. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessings of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem."- THomas Jefferson


Looks like intermingling to me.

"In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed....No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people." - Noah Webster


Looks like intermingling to me.

In 1832, Noah Webster published his History of the United States, in which he wrote:

"The brief exposition of the constitution of the United States, will unfold to young persons the principles of republican government; and it is the sincere desire of the writer that our citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament or the Christian religion.

Looks like intermingling to me.


"The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free Constitutions of Government. - Noah Webster


Looks like intermingling to me.

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798

John Adams:
" The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity... I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."
"[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty."


Looks like intermingling to me.

Samual Adams - Let divines and philosophers, statesmen and patriots, unite their endeavors to renovate the age by impressing the minds of men with the importance of educating their little boys and girls, inculcating in the minds of youth the fear and love of the Deity... and leading them in the study and practice of the exalted virtues of the Christian system." [October 4, 1790]


Looks like intermingling to me.

John Quincy Adams:
• "Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?" "Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity"?
--1837, at the age of 69, when he delivered a Fourth of July speech at Newburyport, Massachusetts.

Looks like intermingling to me.

Charles Carroll - signer of the Declaration of Independence | Portrait of Charles Carroll
" Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments." [Source: To James McHenry on November 4, 1800.]


Looks like intermingling to me.

Benjamin Franklin: | Portrait of Ben Franklin
" God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel" -Constitutional Convention of 1787 | original manuscript of this speech

Alexander Hamilton:
• Hamilton began work with the Rev. James Bayard to form the Christian Constitutional Society to help spread over the world the two things which Hamilton said made America great:
(1) Christianity
(2) a Constitution formed under Christianity.
"The Christian Constitutional Society, its object is first: The support of the Christian religion. Second: The support of the United States."


Looks like intermingling to me.


Alexander Hamilton
"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." [1787 after the Constitutional Convention
]


Looks like intermingling to me.

James Madison
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We've staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity...to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

Looks like intermingling to me.


Thomas Paine:
" It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences, and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles: he can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author."

Looks like intermingling to me.

" The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools, in teaching natural philosophy as an accomplishment only, has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism. Instead of looking through the works of creation to the Creator himself, they stop short, and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of his existence. They labour with studied ingenuity to ascribe every thing they behold to innate properties of matter, and jump over all the rest by saying, that matter is eternal." "The Existence of God--1810"


Looks like intermingling to me.


"Let the children who are sent to those schools be taught to read and write and above all, let both sexes be carefully instructed in the principles and obligations of the Christian religion. This is the most essential part of education"Letters of Benjamin Rush, "To the citizens of Philadelphia: A Plan for Free Schools", March 28, 1787


Looks like intermingling to me.


Justice Joseph Story:
" I verily believe Christianity necessary to the support of civil society. One of the beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is that Christianity is a part of the Common Law. . . There never has been a period in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying its foundations."


Looks like intermingling to me.

[Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States p. 593]
" Infidels and pagans were banished from the halls of justice as unworthy of credit." [Life and letters of Joseph Story, Vol. II 1851, pp. 8-9.]" At the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration [i.e., the First Amendment], the general, if not the universal sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship."


Liberty Bell Inscription:
" Proclaim liberty throughout the land and to all the inhabitants thereof" [Leviticus 25:10]

Looks like intermingling to me.


Proposals for the seal of the United States of America
• "Moses lifting his wand and dividing the Red Sea" -Ben Franklin

Looks like intermingling to me.
• "The children of Israel in the wilderness, led by a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night." --Thomas Jefferson


Looks like intermingling to me.

On July 4, 1776, Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams "to bring in a device for a seal for the United States of America." Franklin's proposal adapted the biblical story of the parting of the Red Sea. Jefferson first recommended the "Children of Israel in the Wilderness, led by a Cloud by Day, and a Pillar of Fire by night. . . ." He then embraced Franklin's proposal and rewrote it


Looks like intermingling to me.

Jefferson's revision of Franklin's proposal was presented by the committee to Congress on August 20, 1776.

He

Article 22 of the constitution of Delaware (1776)
Required all officers, besides taking an oath of allegiance, to make and subscribe to the following declaration:
• "I, [name], do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration."

New England Primer:
Used in public and private schools from 1690 to 1900 second only to the BibleSome of its contents:
A song of praise to God
Prayers in Jesus' name
The famous Bible alphabet
Shorter Catechism of faith in Christ

As you can see JMC. Madison by his words and by his deeds AS PRESIDENT did NOT believe govt to be seperated from religion. Nor did he believe that govt monies should not go for religious causes. And he is kinda of an expert on the matter as you pointed out.

Also as you can see from above the founding fathers not only supported religion intertwined with the govt but actively setup the govt based upon religious ideas.

They also included the words "THE CREATOR" in the declaration of independence. Who did you think they were talking about? Your mother?

Also as you can see above there are a few instances above talking about pagans and infidels who try to discredit religion but you never seem to point out those clearly spelled out passages yet point to some which basically state that there should not be a RELIGION ESTABLISHED BY CONGRESS!!!!!.

You can try to twist and turn it anyway you want it. It doesnt make it so.


It is interesting to see ho... (Below threshold)
retired military:

It is interesting to see how JMC picks one thing, twists it to mean something he wants it to mean and totally trivializes other things that the founding fathers said.

retired military...BRAVO!! ... (Below threshold)

retired military...BRAVO!! an extraordinary amount of excellent scholarship and analysis!

Bravo!

What retired said.It... (Below threshold)
STaylor:

What retired said.
It is amusing to watch liberals maintian the existence of a complete separation between curch and state and yet also argue that the interference of the Connecticut government in Catholic Church governance is justified. It's either one or the other.

And one quote that ends the... (Below threshold)
jmc:

And one quote that ends the debate with the retired guy, who should take a high school civics class.

Civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State." -James madision Father of constituon primary author of the bill of rightsL


and for those who accuse people of "twisting" words, we'll let the dicitonary decide. :)

total:

adjective 1. constituting or comprising the whole; entire; whole: the total expenditure.
2. of or pertaining to the whole of something: the total effect of a play.
3. complete in extent or degree; absolute; unqualified; utter: a total failure.
4. involving all aspects, elements, participants, resources, etc.; unqualified; all-out: total war.

"The separation of church a... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"The separation of church and state is one of the biggest myths out there."-cf

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Please diagram the phrase above (open-book test).

Hint/cheat: "religion", per se, is deemed *out of bounds* regarding the body politic. In fact it is assigned the role of a potential cancer.

Contextualization: the Calvinist/ congregationalist/ deist Founding Fathers of the USA regarded Catholicism as witchcraft and inquisitorial, ie. no slack allowed; no "wiggle room" allowed for Pope Lucifer, "antichrist".

Thats no doubt how JOE STAL... (Below threshold)
Flu-Bird:

Thats no doubt how JOE STALIN took control first by eliminating the power of the church like all true tyrants and despots

I live in Connecticut and a... (Below threshold)
mag:

I live in Connecticut and at times it sucks. But the people (a lot of Catholics) here keep voting for democrats thinking they are the best friend of the middle class. I see now how people vote in dictatorial gov't and sit in wonder how it all happen.
And why this attack on Christians and especially the Catholic church....remember you are not force to be a member, unlike other religions we know.

Bryan and JMCestab... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Bryan and JMC

establishment - To create, bring into being, start.

Religion is now OUT OF BOUNDS. Congress ESTABLISHING a religion to a NATIONAL CHURCH IS OUT OF BOUNDS.

And again. JMC, you have failed to rectify how Madison who was SO against Church and state comingling did the following:

In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible.
" An Act for the relief of the Bible Society of Philadelphia" Approved February 2, 1813 by Congress

You have yet to explain just WHO "THE CREATOR" is in that is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence.

You have yet to explain how the founding fathers not only set up a public school system BUT put encouraged the teaching of the Bible in those public schools but were SO against the comingling of relgion and govt.

You have yet to explain how the Supreme Court has ruled that public buildings can have the 10 commandments displayed, how public monuments such as the Jefferson memorial can mention God, and how the founding fathers emphatically believed and stated that the US was founded upon religous principals.

So JMC, instead of taking a high schooll civics class which is taught probably by democrats who wish to do nothing but remove every mention of religion (against the founding father's wishes ) I think I will look at all their actions and deeds and decide for myself.

You however, are free to continue to drink the Kool Aid.

If the founding fathers wished that no religion be mingled with govt why not state "the govt will have no dealings with relgion" instead they stated that CONGRESS shall not ESTABLISH (look that word up in the dictionary) A RELIGION.

You want to play dictionary games JMC but you totally refuse to accept the meaning of the word ESTABLISH.

BTW JMCLook CLOSEL... (Below threshold)
retired military:

BTW JMC

Look CLOSELY AT YOUR QUOTE

" whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State." '

Notice that word WHILEST. It is the start of what in high school ENGLISH is called a CLAUSE.

And if you read the CLAUSE it states that

THE INDUSTRY,
THE MORALITY OF THE PRIESTHOOD,
and THE DEVOTION OF THE PRIESTHOOD
have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State.


In other words those 3 things have been MANIFESTLY INCREASSED by the total separation of the Church and the STATE.

NOWHERE DOES IT STATE that he believes the church and the state should be separated only that it affects THOSE 3 things.

LEARN TO READ WHAT YOU WRITE.

This subject like "right to abortion" is something that the liberals have suddenly discovered and think is true. Again, liberal memes.


Hyperref your post... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Hyper

ref your post number 2.

Regarding the "rights of women" you mentioned. I assume you are talking about abortion. Last time we had that the discussion on abortion you were all for a doctor killing a newborn under certain circumstances.

As for you link. Someone was excommunicated. IF THEY DONT WANT TO FOLLOW THE RULES OF THE CHURCH THEY CAN GO ELSEWHERE. Why be part of a religion or anything if you are NOT GOING TO FOLLOW IT'S RULES.

If you dont like what the Catholic church is DONT CALL YOURSELF CATHOLIC, start your own religion.

Also as for your statement "I've seen firsthand why this organization does a lot more harm than good"

Really. I guess you missed the millions of people the Catholic church helps every year. The billions that spent by the church on charities. The Catholic orphanages, St Judes Children's Hospitals. The hundreds of Catholic hospitals in the country which treat the poor, the catholic missions which establish clean drinking water and schools and helps villages feed theirselves in remote places.

You personally observed so much evil done by the church to outweigh all the good listed above and the thousands more acts of charity that you KNOW the Church does every year.

Typical liberal meme.

You are right retired milit... (Below threshold)
mag:

You are right retired military.

Liberals (the far out ones) are like the devil, they like to quote scriptures for their own spin and purpose. Same thing with our consitution. It fine when it suits their purpose, but other than that is just some old outdated piece of paper some old WHITE EUROPEAN MEN drew up that is not longer needed.

bryanD,Hi... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

bryanD,

Hint/cheat: "religion", per se, is deemed *out of bounds* regarding the body politic. In fact it is assigned the role of a potential cancer.

You got it backwards. The Bill of Rights is about protecting the individual from the government. The First Amendment assigns the government the role of a potential cancer.

mag,And w... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

mag,

And why this attack on Christians and especially the Catholic church....remember you are not force to be a member, unlike other religions we know.

The attack is because you can't have progressive liberalism where there is a static belief system. Progressives are stifled by religion in general and by the Catholic church in particular in implementing their ideas concerning abortion, homosexual marriage, assisted suicide, and other immoral goals. They even try to convince the ignorant that they can't vote their own beliefs if they are religious beliefs. That's not working, so they go after control of the money at a local level knowing they can infiltrate that body and cut funds for anything they don't like.

What we all need to remember is the term "progressive" describes an ultimately fatal disease both in medicine and in politics.

Some clarification.<p... (Below threshold)
drjohn:

Some clarification.

Lawlor and McDonald are GAY. The church opposes gay marriage. This proposed law would not withstand 5 minutes of Constitutional challenge so the point of it is to send a message to the Catholic church.

It is a waste of time and resources for a state facing a billion dollar deficit. The two of them blamed their "constituents" for making them do it.

They are pathetic twits.

Liberals (the far out on... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Liberals (the far out ones) are like the devil

Hahaha, thanks for that mag!

Mac Lorry, I remember now why I found much of your comments to be cringeworthy: not only do you think abortion and assisted suicide are immoral, but that the state ought to regard it as such. Yikes! The 19th century is thataway, friendo. More plausibly, you could just set up camp in Saudi Arabia, or Berlusconi's Italia.

"You got it backwards. The ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"You got it backwards. The Bill of Rights is about protecting the individual from the government. The First Amendment assigns the government the role of a potential cancer.
39. Posted by Mac Lorry"

In the world of 1790 established (state) religion was the rule WORLDWIDE. During the American Revolution it was decreed that public observance by Continental (US) troops of the Book of Common Prayer (Anglican) was grounds for treason. Because the Book of Common Prayer was a RELIGIO-STATE DOCUMENT on the part of the British royal house. BA-A-A-D!

Also note the politico-religious views of the "minds" and writers of the US Constitution, too, namely Jefferson and Madison. Both liberal Anglicans by birth, and confirmed DEISTS and HUMANISTS by word and conviction.

Again: church and state were twins circa 1790. The aim of the US Constitution was to secure the rights of the individual against the State (which entailed the established religion upon which the edifice of temporal authority was based in ALL nations, from Britain to Russia, to the Ottoman Empire.)

True, the goal was not to dis' religion. It's just that religion was relegated DOWN from the OFFICIAL sphere and into the personal. DETACHED.

PS. the radical secular nature of the USA is what lit the imagination of the world. It was TRULY revolutionary! The religious freedom aspect. What else could you cite? NOTHING. It was no normal revolution like the 1000s before it. The US was the FIRST SECULAR STATE. The matrix of 100 imitators for the next 100 years.

"The First Amendment assigns the government the role of a potential cancer."
39. Posted by Mac Lorry

There WAS NO SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE BEFORE THE US CONSTITUTION AND SO "GOVERNMENT" MUST IMPLY "CHURCH".

I am not Roman Catholic and... (Below threshold)
Ken Hahn:

I am not Roman Catholic and have some severe differences with that church, but this is simply a power grab by government which has the power of compulsion against a specific religion which does not. I think this violates the free exercise clause but it most certainly is an attack on what government considers a rival.

The attack on private charities is something that seems to slipped under the radar. From the attempt to limit contribution deductions to the targeting of Catholic hospitals to this power grab, the left is starting to eliminate competition from organizations that it does not control so that those who are in need will be forced to depend on the government. If the lefties get their way all voluntary giving will be replace with tax payer funds and individual choice will be replaced by bureaucratic decisions and corrupt "earmarks".

In other words th... (Below threshold)
jmc:
In other words those 3 things have been MANIFESTLY INCREASSED by the total separation of the Church and the STATE.

Meaning that a "Total" seperation of church and state had to be in place in order for those 3 things to manifestly increase.
as this was after the bill of rights it implies such a mechanisim was put into place and that madison thought it was a good thing. He also of course mentions that sentece numerous other times.

So learn to think about what is written RM.

hyperbolist, <blockqu... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

hyperbolist,

Mac Lorry, I remember now why I found much of your comments to be cringeworthy: not only do you think abortion and assisted suicide are immoral, but that the state ought to regard it as such. Yikes! The 19th century is thataway, friendo. More plausibly, you could just set up camp in Saudi Arabia, or Berlusconi's Italia.

You got it wrong. I believe the state should be what the voters want it to be in all areas where the public has a legitimate interest such as abortion, homosexual special rights, assisted suicide (whether you want to die or not), etc.. You know, it's that radical "government for the people by the people" idea. The idea that so bothers liberals who, like you, think they know what's best. You could just set up camp in Cuba or Venezuela.

bryanD,Th... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

bryanD,

There WAS NO SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE BEFORE THE US CONSTITUTION AND SO "GOVERNMENT" MUST IMPLY "CHURCH".

Utter nonsense. The founders certainly knew the difference between state and church. If they had not, as your statement requires, they could not have separated them. The first amendment starts with the phrase "Congress shall make no law..." , and thus, it protects the individual from the state. If there's a "cancer", as you describe, that individuals are being protected from by the first amendment, it's the state.

I believe the state shou... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

I believe the state should be what the voters want it to be in all areas where the public has a legitimate interest...

So you would have been opposed to the SCOTUS striking down anti-miscegenation laws because the public supported them?

Right and wrong are objective concepts, Mac, independent of majority opinion.

Right and wrong are absolut... (Below threshold)
914:

Right and wrong are absolutes Hyperbolist...Not open to objective philosphy or conceptual preoccupation.

I'm completely against this... (Below threshold)
Michael K.:

I'm completely against this, however, there is some precedent that supports things like this.

Here in Michigan, the State is the one required to regulate Kashrus (the oversight of Jewish dietary law, i.e. keeping Kosher). They are charged with handing out Hechshers (official certificates of an establishment being kosher). But, the State doesn't want to deal with it, so they allow Jewish organizations do it. However, the State can force the certifying organization to give a certificate of kashrus to a place that isn't really kosher or take one from a place that is!

Believe it or not, that's what's going on right now in Oak Park, MI with a big lawsuit.

Go figure.

hyperbolist, <blockqu... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

hyperbolist,

So you would have been opposed to the SCOTUS striking down anti-miscegenation laws because the public supported them?

It's interesting that you think miscegenation is an area where the public has a legitimate interest.

Right and wrong are objective concepts, Mac, independent of majority opinion.

And they are also objective concepts, hyper, independent of minority opinion. So as long as we only have objective concepts, who should rule; the minority or the majority? When you come up with an idea better than "government for the people by the people" let us all know.

JMC"There WAS NO SEP... (Below threshold)
retired military:

JMC
"There WAS NO SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE BEFORE THE US CONSTITUTION AND SO "GOVERNMENT" MUST IMPLY "CHURCH"."

Nice concept. But umm invalid. Many nations did not have a national church. In addition, following your logic you could say that there was no Creator prior to the US Declaration of Independence.


"Meaning that a "Total" seperation of church and state had to be in place in order for those 3 things to manifestly increase.
as this was after the bill of rights it implies such a mechanisim was put into place and that madison thought it was a good thing. He also of course mentions that sentece numerous other times."

Again. Madison was referring to there not being a Church of the US GOVT. He stated NOTHING about the govt cannot have religious values, buy religous materials, display religous icons, etc. Again, WHAT PROVES MY POINT IS

"In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible.
"

If Madison was so dead set against then why provide economic aid to distribute Bibles. Per your logic he would not only be violating his own principals but the US Constitution which he helped write.

The facts dont fit your little view of the world so you ignore them. Amazing that this discussion would have been unheard of except for the last 50 years or so.

The govt today spends money on religion. How do you think military chaplains get paid? What do you think they do? Are you suggesting that since govt funds pay their salaries, provide houses of worship, and provide regulations regarding services that the govt does not support religion? Or are you for just doing away with those things since they are paid for by govt funds.

You are totally ignoring the history of the US, the reality of the past 230+ years, and common sense, just because you feel religion is wrong.


JMC that first part of the ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

JMC that first part of the above comment is meant for your fellow pagan and lliberal meme champion BryanD. That last part of the above comment was for you.

"Utter nonsense. The founde... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"Utter nonsense. The founders certainly knew the difference between state and church."-ml

That's what I said and the founders say, and the founders codified the difference and mutual exclusivity of each by denominating "we the people" as rightful engineers of state while mentioning religion only to denote its practical irrelevance toward, and immunity from, Government.

It's win-win. Put down the shoe horn.

Or are you intimating that these United States were founded upon Christian principles? To which I say, Here's your cigar!

"Many nations did not have ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"Many nations did not have a national church."-retired mil

Enlighten me. Name one.

The Nation of Islam!<... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

The Nation of Islam!

No, wait...

Stephen Colbert's Colbert Nation?

BryanDOh umm China... (Below threshold)
retired military:

BryanD

Oh umm China. QATAR, Indonesia, Guam, Hawaii, Phillipines, Australia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Shall I go on?

Oh yeah I forgot one.

The religion of liberalism.

Also Bryan / JMC, whom is "THE CREATOR" that is referred to in the Declaration of Independence? Your mother? Obama?

You know the one that gives unalienable rights. Maybe Santa Claus?

Also why mention the Creato... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Also why mention the Creator as someone who gave unalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence which the founding fathers used to create/ ESTABLISH the US if they felt that govt and religion should be totally separate.

Next thing you are going to tell me is that the Declaration of Independence should not be displayed because it mentions THE CREATOR, and therefore is not fit for display by the govt.

Nice concept. But... (Below threshold)
jmc:
Nice concept. But umm invalid. Many nations did not have a national church. In addition, following your logic you could say that there was no Creator prior to the US Declaration of Independence.

Where you got that out of my logic, I'll never know. I didn't argue one way or the other whether there was a creator, nor can you infer one way or the other from anything I have written in this thread. I was arguing that in order for a "Total speration of church and state" To have increased the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people" A seperation of church and state must have existed prior to madison writing that.


Again. Madison was referring to there not being a Church of the US GOVT. He stated NOTHING about the govt cannot have religious values, buy religous materials, display religous icons, etc. Again, WHAT PROVES MY POINT IS

Yes he did.

"Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt 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. (See the cases in which negatives were put by J. M. on two bills passd by Congs and his signature withheld from another. See also attempt in Kentucky for example, where it was proposed to exempt Houses of Worship from taxes." - Madison

"Why should the expence of a religious worship be allowed for the Legislature, be paid by the public, more than that for the Ex. or Judiciary branch of the Govt" -Madison


it seems to me RM you are doing what you are accsuing me of. ignoring all evidence that doesn't fit your worldview. Religion is a private matter and should be kept as far away from the government as possible. Whether it be the Christian religion, Judaism, Islam, hinduism or whatever. You agree on all but christianity because that is the one you like.

Late 18th century <p... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Late 18th century

China - Confucianism

QATAR - didn't exist, nomadic Muslims

Indonesia - Dutch rule (but still, Islam)

Guam - Spanish colony (so, Catholicism)

Hawaii - Polytheistic Polynesian derivative, but without a formal governmental structure there was no "official" religion, just a universal one.

Phillipines - Spanish rule (Catholic again)

Australia - Mostly aboriginal dreamtime spirituality, no formal structure like Hawaii

Kenya - Not an independent state, colonized by Omani Arabs (so, Muslim)

Ethiopia - Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity (declared by Emperor Fasilides in 1632)

Also Bryan / JMC,... (Below threshold)
jmc:
Also Bryan / JMC, whom is "THE CREATOR" that is referred to in the Declaration of Independence? Your mother? Obama?


Clearly Allah. Maybe it was Shiva? Zeus? how about Ra?:)

It was whoever you accept as your creator, that is why the phrase is, "that they are endowed by by their Creator"

he doesn't say I'm endowed by the man that retired from the military's creator. it is who who each person beleives may have ut them here. I think the universe itself fits into that nicely if you are a non-believer.

whom is "THE CREATOR" th... (Below threshold)
mantis:

whom is "THE CREATOR" that is referred to in the Declaration of Independence?

Left ambiguous for a reason. Could be the god of Abraham, or could be Vishnu. Could be the Flying Spaghetti Monster (blessed by His Noodly Appendage) or space aliens. No religion is implied by the word "creator."

bryanD,Or... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

bryanD,

Or are you intimating that these United States were founded upon Christian principles? To which I say, Here's your cigar!

My statement was the "cancer", as you characterized it, that the first amendment protects individuals from, is the state. Make a broom out of your strawman for it has no other value in this discussion.

"Oh umm China. QATAR, Indon... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"Oh umm China. QATAR, Indonesia, Guam, Hawaii, Phillipines, Australia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Shall I go on?"-rm

1787, dim bulb. Chinese state religion was an amalgam of Confusionism, Buddhism and ancestor worship symbolized in the person of the emperor. Failure to "kow tow" could mean a hideous death. Definitely a state religion, there.
Guam: Who the hell knows.
Hawaii: religion full of "tabu". Anglicans on the way.
Australia: animists soon to be hunted down like dogs by Anglicans.
Phillipines: Roman Catholism
Kenya: Animist southwest and muslim north
Ethiopia: Christian

But REALLY! Let's try and stay on the race track, huh? "Guam"! LOL!

At least hyperbolist didn't stoop to the level of citing boogie republics when all of Europe left you rhetorically high and dry (no offence to boogies intended).

Fact: even the liberal capitalist Dutch state was official Reformed (Calvinist) when the USA declared itself secular.

"whom is "THE CREATOR" that is referred to in the Declaration of Independence?"-rm

God, YHWH. But Madison might say the God of Providence and Author of Natural Law. The Virginians were decidedly deist and steeped in freemasonry and prone to understand God as an impersonal architect of the universe. Jefferson and Madison deny miracles and where apt to place Jesus Christ under the heading of "philosopher". Jefferson denied the existence of any "holy spirit". See "Jefferson Bible".

So God is acknowledged as "the Creator". And the USSR hailed the year 1917 *ANNO DOMINI*.
Were the Bolsheviks counter-revolutionary for not dating 1917 A.D. as Year 1? And does acknowledging the "Creator" make the US Constitution a theocratic document?

I think you know the answer. "Guam" told me so.

"Guam - Spanish colony (so,... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"Guam - Spanish colony (so, Catholicism)"-mantis

Good one. I was not ABOUT to look that up.

JMCI got that logi... (Below threshold)
retired military:

JMC

I got that logic from you stating that prior to the Constitution there was no separation of chuch and state.
---------------
Mantis

The countries mentioned may have had major religions or even "official religion" but they were not religions supported by and in league with the national govt such as the Church of England.

Hell Egypt had the freaking Eqyption gods. Last I checked the Hebrew slaves werent required to worship the Egyptian gods. Going by your measure a tribe of stone age men who worshiped rocks would have had it considered a national religion.

The Chuch of England REQUIRED everyone to be a member. So did other state chuches like Holland. In the countries I cited no such requirement was made.

--------------

" Whether it be the Christian religion, Judaism, Islam, hinduism or whatever. You agree on all but christianity because that is the one you like.
"

Dont tell me what I believe. I believe if you want to worship Islam, go for it, Confusicainism GO FOR IT, Judaism, GO FOR IT. The GOVT SHOULD NOT TELL YOU HOW TO WORSHIP which is clearly what the founding fathers meant. The GOVT CANNOT ESTABLISH A RELIGION WHICH IS CLEARLY WHAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS SAID.

Again in your quotes Madison is referring to Govt controlling and interfering with religion.

""Why should the expence of a religious worship be allowed for the Legislature, be paid by the public, more than that for the Ex. or Judiciary branch of the Govt" -Madison"


If he had said Why should a religous service be paid for BY the govt I might agree. Instead he states PAID FOR BY THE PUBLIC MORE THAN THAT FOR THE EXEC , OR JUDICIARY BRANCH. The public obviously pays for the legislative, judicial and executive branch. It does not say the public cannot pay for religous services. As example, as I said above, military religious services are paid for by tax dollars.

-----

JMC / Mantis


"THE CREATOR" / "No religion is implied by the word "creator"

Exactly my point. No specific religion is implied but the BELEIF of A HIGHER POWER WHO ENDOWED (GAVE) men certain rights. Notice it didnt say that men are BORN with these rights. IT STATES THEY WERE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR. A Creator (Capital C in the Declaration as in a NOUN meaning person or thing, place doesnt fit) cant GIVE or ENDOW anything that a person gets automatically from being born. The founding fathers clearly indicated a God (by whatever name you want to call him) when writing the document which founded the US.
You can call Him, God, Jehova, Shiva, or the Spaghetti Monster but the founding fathers were still stating a HIGHER POWER (or else how can someone GIVE man these rights) existed and declared that that HIGHER POWER was giving MEN these rights.

Oh man, fun thread.<p... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Oh man, fun thread.

Communist Russia had a state "religion": communism. I don't understand why conservatives aren't heartened to live in the first nation that eschewed a universalist worldview. Could it be because they view competing worldviews--e.g. Hindu, or Buddhist--as less valid than the Judao-Christian scheme? No, of course not. No theist is that stupid. Hyuk, hyuk.

On the state religions.... (Below threshold)
retired military:

On the state religions.

Lets see, where any along the lines of the Church of England, which was uppermost in the minds of the colonists. And after all isnt that what we are talking about.

Umm No. Well except for Ethiopia but I dont have a year for that one.

As for the others, well you must have thought Madison was great to write document that would refer to "state religions" as you call them that didnt exist for anywhere from 10 to 100+ years after the constitution was written

BRAVO

As for Europe, I chose nations which I felt fit the bill rather than taking the time to look up the religous history of each nation. I was wrong in apparantly (if what was listed above is true) they did have a state sponsored religion along the lines of the Church of England. Someone I dont think the founding fathers were thinking of that country when they were writing the Declaration of Independence.


JMCI got tha... (Below threshold)
jmc:
JMC

I got that logic from you stating that prior to the Constitution there was no separation of chuch and state.

I never said that.

THE CREATOR" / "No religion is implied by the word "creator"

Exactly my point. No specific religion is implied but the BELEIF of A HIGHER POWER WHO ENDOWED (GAVE) men certain rights. Notice it didnt say that men are BORN with these rights. IT STATES THEY WERE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR.

THEIR creator being the operative word. I believe I was created by an explosion of condensed matter called the big bang, which set in motion the creation of the universe. So in a nutshell, the universe is my creator. And while that fits in the declaration of independence it doesn't fit with making churches tax except or putting the ten commandments in a court house anymore than it means we can put the Koran or sacred Hindu texts in the courthouse.


BTWI looked up Chi... (Below threshold)
retired military:

BTW

I looked up China and I was wrong on that one. See I do admit when I am wrong.

--------

Hyper

Communism is NOT a religion. It is a form of govt.


http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

Communism Not listed. Nor would I dare say that you will find Communism listed on just about any reputable source.

of course I guess that Communism could be considered your religion. BTW you failed to answer the drubbing you got above on post 37. Guess you are trying to keep your losses to a minimum.

Well, it's an obligatory be... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Well, it's an obligatory belief set as well. I was speaking to the intellectual freedom afforded you by your founding fathers, which people lacked in most other countries--including those which were "free" of religion like the USSR. I do know what communism is. I've studied it, and been told I subscribe to it on more than one occasion.

As for the drubbing, you seem to think that the fact that most Catholics aren't awful people means Catholicism isn't itself an awful set of beliefs. That's false. It creates false hope in an afterlife and is used to justify suffering in destitute parts of the world. Too many kids? Teenaged daughter pregnant again? Starving? Got AIDS? Don't fret. Just submit your will to God and then you'll get to spend all eternity in Heaven with Him. Based on what we know to be true about the universe, that amounts to lying to people in order to placate their suffering rather than offering real solutions, i.e. revolution. They sided with fascists at every opportunity in World War II in part because fascist government works well with orthodox Catholicism. And they are hypocrites: the meek shall inherit the Earth? Then why the hell is Vatican City such a monument to excess?

Defend the Church if you want, but its history and its current practices are immoral--notwithstanding the sincerity and good-spiritedness of most Catholics.

"Drubbing". Ha.

Hyper"you seem to th... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Hyper
"you seem to think that the fact that most Catholics aren't awful people means Catholicism isn't itself an awful set of beliefs."

You have not proven otherwise.


" It creates false hope in an afterlife and is used to justify suffering in destitute parts of the world."

Really? And you have proof there is no afterlife how?


"Too many kids? Teenaged daughter pregnant again? Starving? Got AIDS? Don't fret. Just submit your will to God and then you'll get to spend all eternity in Heaven with Him."

And you can prove this isnt true how?


" Based on what we know to be true about the universe, that amounts to lying to people in order to placate their suffering rather than offering real solutions, i.e. revolution."

Really? How is it lying? Again, what proof do you have there is no God.


" They sided with fascists at every opportunity in World War II in part because fascist government works well with orthodox Catholicism. And they are hypocrites: the meek shall inherit the Earth? Then why the hell is Vatican City such a monument to excess?"

Just because there has been some not so bright choices made by people who are Catholics doesnt mean that the Church itself is bad. As for the Vatican, show me one institution that is 2000 years old that hasnt accumulated stuff? And who accumulates it? God or men? BTW compare the stuff that the Church has collected over 2000 years and compare it to the stuff that the US govt has collected in 230+. The amount of money being spent by Obama this year probably dwarfs the entire holdings of the church. Talk about excess.


"Defend the Church if you want, but its history and its current practices are immoral--"

Oh and killing a million + unborn children a year is moral according to you. Running charities, feeding the poor, running hospitals, all that is immoral to you. Along with doctors who can kill newborns under certain circumstances. That is fine at least according to you.

For those that refuse to believe there is no proof great enough to show there is a God. For those that believe there is no proof nescessary.

A scientist once told God. "We dont need you any more, we can now create life from dirt" God said "Show me". The scientist reached down and picked up a handful of dirt and God said "No, no. Use your own dirt"

Remember Hyper, I can afford to be wrong. Can you? I will pray for you. I think you need it.


I don't have proof that the... (Below threshold)
mantis:

I don't have proof that there's no Santa Claus. Does that mean I should believe in him, just to be safe?

It makes sense for bewilder... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

It makes sense for bewildered little children--or pre-scientific medieval philosophers--to accept (or posit for lack of a better explanation) the existence of, say, Santa Claus, or an omnipotent creator.

Now that we have things like electron microscopes and particle physics, though, it's disappointing that so many kids just refuse to grow up, so to speak.

Just because there has been some not so bright choices made by people who are Catholics doesnt mean that the Church itself is bad.

By the Church's own definition, it does, actually. The Pope speaks for the Church; he speaks for God; and he speaks for all Catholics. So, if he--or any of his surrogates--says or does something awful, it actually does show that the Church is awful. Unless, of course, you're a divine command theorist (as most Catholics are), who accept that a belief or action is good/righteous/just/holy by virtue of the fact that God makes it so via his direct satellite link-up to the Pope's brain. This is of course absurd as God could command us to commit genocide or something like that and divine command theorists would have to accept upon pain of inconsistency that it's necessarily the right thing to do.

hyperbolist,<blockquo... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

hyperbolist,

Now that we have things like electron microscopes and particle physics, though, it's disappointing that so many kids just refuse to grow up, so to speak.

Many intellectual children believe like you do hyper, that somehow their toys preclude the possibility of a God such as described in the Bible. If you ever read about Him you would know that there is no experiment you can perform that he cannot frustrate if that's His purpose. It's just simple logic, like the kind those medieval philosophers you disdain were so good at. Your pride in your intellect is what's childish. Grow up!

HyperAs many peopl... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Hyper

As many people, especially non Catholics, you have no clue what you are talking about when you speak of Papal infallibility.
-----------

Mantis

Your Santa Claus is Obama. After all he is the liberal's wet dream they have been ranting about for 8 years. You guys finally got someone who can talk without putting people to sleep. Too bad he has to read a teleprompter to do it.


Hyper"It makes sense... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Hyper
"It makes sense for bewildered little children--or pre-scientific medieval philosophers--to accept (or posit for lack of a better explanation) the existence of, say, Santa Claus, or an omnipotent creator.

"

So are you saying that Obama is a bewildered little child, a disappointed child who refuses to grow up, or a prescientific medieval philosopher? After he has repeatedly expressed a believe in God. Are you saying he isnt fit to lead the country since he believes in an omnipotent creator?

Since he is the leader of the US. If he or one of his minions mess up (say Gaither or Daschle as far as taxes) does that mean that the US as a whole is awful.

Mike Lawlor and Andy McDona... (Below threshold)
howdie doody:

Mike Lawlor and Andy McDonald are on the hot spot - openly gay and bashers of anyone who opposes them. They could only get "marriage" by judicial fiat in CT and MA. The rest of the country is voting - we are in a democracy still, and apparently doesn't want it. It backfired big time. To try to take control of any church or religion is crazy. Do it with the moslems - I dare you, big talkers. They tried to get control of the church which isn't a democracy and it backfired. Congregationalists and Episcopalians with lesbian pastors, can all run scared now. Gay men always hide behind women, preferably gay women. They're cowards. The issue with the Bridgeport diocese in CT was about a gay priest stealing tons of money with his lover. Goes to show, there's no loyalty with these guys or their politics. They turn on each other and could care less about us. Oh and by the way, Communism is the worst way to live. Ask folks who lived in those places. We have freedoms they could never imagine. They support atheism - which is indeed a religion. Get with it. Stop being pimple faced "scholars." Churches and religions in general have done more good than any governments - which by the way russia&china killed more than 350mil of their own people via their governments. Fastest way way to that crap is via"socialism." I'll keep capitalism with our freedoms. Do your research on the Roman Catholic Church before you knock it or any other faith. If you can stand it you might learn some truth instead of picking your pimples.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy