Do you think the forefathers had flag-burning or separation of church and state in mind when they wrote it?

Question

Should there be more clearly defined lines to how far people can slaughter the constitution and bill of rights with insane interpretations that in NO WAY reflect what was intended?

Answer 1

Freedom works BOTH ways and that is one of the major problems with our society today. As stated in an earlier answer, the concept of "separation of church and state" was first conceived in a letter from Thomas Jefferson as an avenue to protect the church from government. Thhis does not mean that the religion our country was founded upon has to be exorcised from all aspects of government. The notion of "freedom of religion" does not mean that Christians are now the enemy and all other religions are more important.

As for flag-burning, those people who do so are insulting every soldier who ever served in the military, living or dead, as well as all patriotic Americans, liberal, conservative or otherwise. The flag should be honored for the values it was created for and still inspires in the citizens of this nation.

People who do not accept the responsibility for their freedoms and do not honor the flag of their nation are an embarrassment to all Americans.

The Warlock

Answer 2

Well, we know they had separation of church and state in mind, but they would have interpreted the issue differently than most people do today. "No state religion" would have more or less been the argument at the time, not "no mention of god any where at any time EVER!"

As for flag burning, it's hard to say. The reality, though, is that the First Amendment does extend to flag burning. Just because they Founding Fathers didn't imagine every possible scenario that could result from the freedoms protected in the Bill of Rights doesn't mean that flag burning isn't constitutionally protected. If you interpret the words as they're written and as they're discussed by the Founding Fathers at the time, then it's clear that the First Amendment extends to flag burning.

Answer 3

I think they wanted the church and state seperate to prevent one religion from becomeing all powerful. I don't think they meant that an elected official shouldn't be religious or that they should be affraid to mention God. The government over road the whole idea when they made religious organizations tax exempt.
As far as the flag burning goes, I am sure most of the writers of the constitution may have agreed with peoples right to burn the flag but they would have been the first ones in line to execute their right to kick a flag burners a**.

Answer 4

Absolutely, in the first place most were Deists but not Christians; secondly, they had witnessed the damage that had resulted in Europe from the intermingling of religion and government and wished to avoid that. And they were right, look what happens in the Middle East where religion has had such a grip on government. As for flag burning - I have a problem with graven images and am uncomfortable equating my flag with my nation and my constitution. For me it is not that important except as standing for something that really is important. Don't take that wrong, I love my country but the flag is a piece of fabric, more disrepected by people who wear it as outfits or underwear than by those who use it for political expression.

And by the way, how do you know that it is not your interpretation that is - what do you call it - insane interpretations that slaughter the constitution?

Answer 5

No they didn't. They never fathomed it. They never imagined homosexual parades through a 'city near you' either. They framed the constitution upon faith in the moral majority, and never envisioned an America in spiritual 'Sodom and Gomorrah' mentality. But the immigration of foreign ideals have become the ruling factor in America. We are no longer a true Democratic society. Wealth is a major factor in assuming the role as a Presidential candidate, as is any Federal position. We aren't given average candidates. We are handed molded from birth, predetermined party philosophy.
(The only law about church and state is that Congress cannot make any law making or supporting any one religion over another, but the anti-traditionalist have molded this to mean we can't have religious symbols in government financed land or buildings or prayer in schools)
Yes, we need a redefined Constitution. But who would do it? That very thing could lead to a dangerous debate and destabilize America even farther than we already are headed.

**in this understanding, there would be nothing wrong for Congress to decide that Islam is not a only a religion, but also a foreign government in its fundementals, and viewing it as such is wholeheartedly constitutional. This view being of suspicion AND civility, as opposed to simple civility. The same is true of Catholicism (being a government, with it's own sovereignty inside Italy). this approach would not place any emphasis or govermental control over either, but rather, approach the matter with sensibility and truth.

Answer 6

Although it is not illegal to burn the flag, what they did by burning someone elses flag on someones property is illegal. Our forefathers knew exactly what they were doing.Yes, our constitution protects the acts of idiots as well as the logical. As far as Church and state separation. It is the current judges having their own agenda that has caused the crisis of religion in our country today. Our entire constitution was written with Christian beliefs all over it. It only says that the Government should not sponsor any one religion, nothing about believing in religion. Just look at the front of the Supreme court building, the US coins, and the prayers that are performed in congress every day.

Answer 7

The Constitution was written to broadly define rights intenionally by the framers (try reading the Federalist papers). The reason is that they could not forsee all the excuses petty dictators and demagogues would think up to try to destroy the civil liberties they had fought so long and hard for. They couldn't foresee that demagogues would try to use "flag-burning" as an excuse to silence dissent, for example. But they wrote the Bill of Rights in such a way that such traitors could not succeed.

Answer 8

First of all, I do whole-heartedly agree with you that the guiding star for understanding our Constitution should be the principle of dedication to what our forefathers intended. It is often known as "originalism."

Second, I also agree with you that flag-burning is not what our forefathers had in mind. I'd also add that cross-burning is also not what our forefathers had in mind, either. To burn something is not to give a speech. Speech consists of words. Words are the most civilized way of conveying ideas. Of course, there is a saying that "actions speak louder than words," but being louder obviously does not mean being more civilized. Our forefathers protected SPEECH, not actions; they protected the most civilized way of conveying ideas.

Third, I do disagree with you about the issue of "separation of church and state." Yes, there is historical evidence that our forefathers intended to ensure that church and state be separated. But my belief is that the phrase means something far more limited than what we've seen in the over-active imaginations of the Supreme Court Justices and the ACLU-type folks.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvfrQhfNNnw5tQshRDd_Nvnty6IX?qid=20060901161101AAaUOMJ&show=7#profile-info-1bc26a2d5df1544b52a5cd724ce679a4aa

Finally, I do believe that some new constitutional amendments are needed. Personally, I'd like to start with an amendment which would repeal and replace the 14th Amendment.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhzWOTl09RY2SqZMqEk7G0rty6IX?qid=20060922074009AAB54Qd

,

Answer 9

Sorry Fireball, church homes are no longer non-earnings and the country's government oftentimes does push Christianity, regardless of the undeniable fact that throughout the time of many cases Christianity greater often than no longer particularly than a particular denomination. I help taxation of church homes, and in line with risk i could additionally if i replaced right into a believer. Taxation could be regarded as a seal of legitimacy.

Answer 10

Think of the reasons our forefathers came to this country. No, flag burning and separation of church and state were Not in their minds!