Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

riqster

(13,986 posts)
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 09:14 AM Apr 2015

You can Believe our Founding Fathers, or you can Believe the Teapublicans

https://bluntandcranky.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/you-can-believe-our-founding-fathers-or-you-can-believe-the-teapublicans/
Source info at the link.


When it comes to Church/State matters, you pretty much have to pick one or the other. That’s because the Fathers of our Country explicitly said that religion would have no role in our government. None. Zip Nada. Teapublicans think that their particular variety of Fundagelical Christian religion is what should run the country.

Example Number A: The Founders wrote in the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Pretty unambiguous, innit? On the other hand, Teavangelical Michelle Bachmann says that our secular government is going to destroy the world, and “Christians” like her need to revolt and take over the nation:

Former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) predicted in a recent interview that President Barack Obama’s handling of the Middle East was a sign of the End Times and that Jesus Christ would soon return to Earth.
“If we actually turn our back on Israel as we have seen Barack Obama do today, if that happens then I think we will see a scale and a level of push back in the United States, negative consequences,” Bachmann told Understanding the Times radio host Jan Markell on Sunday. “I don’t know what they are, but I believe that the Bible is true. And believe what the Bible says is that our nation and the people of our nation will reap a whirlwind, and we could see economic disasters, natural disasters.”
“The United States does not want to be in that position and unfortunately the people put into office Barack Obama,” she opined. “Not only once, but twice. And the people have to rise up against his actions and demand that their leaders take steps accordingly.”


Example Letter 2: We have the words of John Adams: “As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…The United States is not a Christian nation any more than it is a Jewish or a Mohammedan nation.” Or you can pick those of the Texas Teapubbie who refuses to speak to non-Teavangelicals:

State Rep. Molly White (R-Belton) has proposed legislation that would allow businesses to refuse to serve customers on religious grounds. The first-year Republican lawmaker has also proposed legislation seeking to make the state’s ban on same-sex marriage immune from court rulings.

“Marriage is a Holy union of one man and one woman created and ordained by God. There is no other definition. As a Christian, I am guided by God’s Word,” she explained in a statement.


Thirdly: you can listen to the words of Thomas Jefferson:
No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities”. Or you can listen to Teapublican Presidential candidate Marco Rubio try to explain why it’s OK to discriminate based on religion.

And let’s not even start on the Teabagging school nurse who threw a sick kid out of the clinic for not being religious. Yes. Screamed at the child, refused to treat the child, abused the child, all because the Nurse claimed it was her Christian right to act thusly. (Yes, the pun on “Christian Right” was deliberate.)

Gentle Reader, we all must follow the law. Even if we don’t like it, we gotta obey it. We can’t even say “end the debate over church and state”, because there isn’t a debate to be had. The Constitution says what it says, and the intent of the law is clear, because the men who wrote it said so, clearly and repeatedly.

Church and State MUST remain separate. The minute they aren’t, America will cease to be America.
27 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
You can Believe our Founding Fathers, or you can Believe the Teapublicans (Original Post) riqster Apr 2015 OP
Alas, church and state have never been truly separate cali Apr 2015 #1
Not so much a myth as a regrettable series of unconstitutional actions. riqster Apr 2015 #2
Well, the SCOTUS is the arbiter of what is constitutional, so cali Apr 2015 #3
And the Dred Scott decision? Constitutional? riqster Apr 2015 #4
Sure- until it wasn't. But seriously cali Apr 2015 #5
OK, so we just accept the Repub theocracy as a given? riqster Apr 2015 #13
that isn't even close to what I'm pointing out. You have a tendency to simplify things cali Apr 2015 #20
It's also true that people who work for the government can wear religious symbols while on duty Major Nikon Apr 2015 #7
All true. riqster Apr 2015 #16
I have always read the separation to mean that the government cannot set up a government jwirr Apr 2015 #17
That's exactly how I interpret it too justiceischeap Apr 2015 #18
Yes. jwirr Apr 2015 #19
Including my immigrant ancestors. riqster Apr 2015 #22
I think they have hootinholler Apr 2015 #21
Yep. It has been an ongoing travesty. riqster Apr 2015 #23
Let's not pretend the Supreme Court is anything but a political arm of the Republican party world wide wally Apr 2015 #6
that's a rather wide net. And no, not every Justice and not every decision. cali Apr 2015 #8
My opinion would differ greatly if there were five liberal Justices world wide wally Apr 2015 #10
that makes no sense. cali Apr 2015 #12
And then it would merely be political arm of the Democratic party, yes...? LanternWaste Apr 2015 #26
Hardly world wide wally Apr 2015 #27
Who are frequently outvoted by the Roberts Five. riqster Apr 2015 #24
Which is why we need to GOTFV. De-elect a lot of Repubs. riqster Apr 2015 #25
The fact that Adams and Jefferson agreed on the subject speaks volumes. iandhr Apr 2015 #9
Very good point. riqster Apr 2015 #14
... napkinz Apr 2015 #11
Good finds. riqster Apr 2015 #15
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
1. Alas, church and state have never been truly separate
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 09:21 AM
Apr 2015

Think of our currency and the frieze at the SCOTUS, not to mention the unbroken tradition of prayer in Congress and state houses across the country. True, there is no formal endorsement of any one religion, but it's largely Christian. And some recent court decisions have been disturbing. It's kind of a myth that we church and state are totally separate.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a New York town that held Christian prayers before the start of their town meetings.

In Town of Greece v. Galloway, the highest court in the land ruled 5 to 4 on Monday that Greece could select Christian ministers to pray before their town meetings.

Justice Anthony Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court, and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, with Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas concurring.

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/supreme-court-rules-new-york-town-can-hold-christian-prayers-before-meetings-119130/#lhz9cZss3YzdePSw.99

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
3. Well, the SCOTUS is the arbiter of what is constitutional, so
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 09:42 AM
Apr 2015

you're incorrect.

regrettable, sure. Unconstitutional? No.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
5. Sure- until it wasn't. But seriously
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 09:58 AM
Apr 2015

there is a very long series of decisions that cement the mingling of church and state, and it's underpinned by long tradition. It's very, very unlikely to change. Do you really think that they'll stop opening each day in the House and Senate with prayer? That currency will be redesigned? That politicians (and that includes dems) will stop with the "God Bless America" stuff? Or that the House or Senate will do away with chaplains?

Not going to happen.



 

cali

(114,904 posts)
20. that isn't even close to what I'm pointing out. You have a tendency to simplify things
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:44 AM
Apr 2015

not sure what you have against nuance and gradations of gray.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
7. It's also true that people who work for the government can wear religious symbols while on duty
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:24 AM
Apr 2015

They can also display religious symbols in their government provided work areas.

So individual public displays and imaginary friend conversations pertaining to individual religious affiliations are allowed and will never be separate. However, the government can't endorse any particular religion, force anyone to participate, or require any sort of religious tests for office, nor can they discriminate against anyone on the basis of religion.

riqster

(13,986 posts)
16. All true.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:26 AM
Apr 2015

Which is why the Teapubbies and their "religious freedom" laws are a steaming load of donkey bollocks.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
17. I have always read the separation to mean that the government cannot set up a government
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:35 AM
Apr 2015

religion - a theocracy. Like what they are trying to do with the religious freedom bills. They are trying to set up a law of some churches as a law of the country. They cannot enact religious doctrine to apply to all the people. That would be establishing a state religion.

Remember the times. Most of our immigrants had come from Europe where state religions and wars over which religion an area would have drove them out. The religious statement in our constitution was in there as an acknowledgement that we were not going to let this ever happen in the USA.

justiceischeap

(14,040 posts)
18. That's exactly how I interpret it too
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:42 AM
Apr 2015

They didn't want to limit what people believed (or in my case, didn't believe) but they also didn't want a state-sponsored religion. On the other hand, the Teabillies want exactly that by ignoring the Constitution and history.

world wide wally

(21,757 posts)
6. Let's not pretend the Supreme Court is anything but a political arm of the Republican party
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:04 AM
Apr 2015

and every decision they make is based on benefitting the wealthy. I'm sorry, but heir decisions have very little to do with the Constitution.
They are in fact the most dangerous threat to American democracy on the planet today. Yes, including IS, Alqueda, and so on...with the possible exception of a Republican President of.course.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
8. that's a rather wide net. And no, not every Justice and not every decision.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:38 AM
Apr 2015

There are four liberal Justices.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
26. And then it would merely be political arm of the Democratic party, yes...?
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 01:54 PM
Apr 2015

And then it would merely be political arm of the Democratic party, yes...?

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

world wide wally

(21,757 posts)
27. Hardly
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 02:26 PM
Apr 2015

I think the voting rights act would still be in tact for one thing.. Citizens United wouldn't be in effect… and on and on and...

riqster

(13,986 posts)
25. Which is why we need to GOTFV. De-elect a lot of Repubs.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 01:42 PM
Apr 2015

Until then, the judiciary will continue their march to the Right.

iandhr

(6,852 posts)
9. The fact that Adams and Jefferson agreed on the subject speaks volumes.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:39 AM
Apr 2015

Adams and Jefferson were political rivals who didn't agree on anything.


Latest Discussions»General Discussion»You can Believe our Found...