It's not there. It is a distortion of a phrase meant only to protect freedom of religion. The true history of our nation is religious and there are many many documents to prove it. I suggest viewing Our Christian Heritage by D. James Kennedy. God Bless!
2007-04-16 10:35:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by BERT 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
courts have found that the principle of a "religious liberty" exists behind in the First Amendment, even if those words are not actually there:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
The point of such an amendment is twofold. First, it ensures that religious beliefs - private or organized - are removed from attempted government control. This is the reason why the government cannot tell either you or your church what to believe or to teach. Second, it ensures that the government does not get involved with enforcing, mandating, or promoting particular religious doctrines. This is what happens when the government "establishes" a church - and because doing so created so many problems in Europe, the authors of the Constitution wanted to try and prevent the same from happening here.
2007-04-16 17:35:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The words "separation of church and state" never appear in the constitution...however, they are an implied principle of religious liberty under the First Amendment. The constitution also never says that we have a "right to privacy" or a "right to a speedy trial." Such things are outlined and set up within the constitution. That is why there is always so much heat over if something is constitutional. It is set up to leave some room for interpretation.
2007-04-16 17:34:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by Inigo 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Umm, that's not in the Constitution. "The prevalence of the term "separation of church and state" is generally said to derive from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists, in which he referred to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as creating a "wall of separation" between church and state. The phrase was then quoted and endorsed by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. This led to popular and political discussion of the concept, as well as criticism that the phrase overstates the limits created under the Constitution."
From : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state
But the constitution does give us Freedom of Religion. And that means ANY religion. Not just Christian religions.
2007-04-16 17:32:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by swordarkeereon 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
It is not specifically in the constitution. It is a part of a supreme court ruling (those that interpret the constitution. ) The phrase that holds that interpretation is
"Congress shall make no law...abridging..."
That should be easy enough to find. The supreme court has ruled that there is a separation of church and state. Most do not really look closely at the ruling though. What it states clearly is that the state (read governments of the US) is not allowed to regulate or otherwise insert itself into the practice of religion. People who are religious may of course exercise their rights as employees of the government as long as it does not interfere with the rights of others.
EF
2007-04-16 17:31:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by epaphras_faith 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
Right I
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.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof."
While this does not use the words "separation of church and state" that is traditionally the interpretation congress and the courts have given it. Imposing the christian religion alone on schools and other government institutions denies a captive audience the "free exercise thereof."{their own religion.) Get it?
2007-04-16 18:32:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Ray T 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
This has been interpreded as meaning the governement will not support (with tax dollars) any religion over another. I know that many Christian groups would love to see federal support for their programs, but if they get the $$ then so will all who claim to be a religious organization.
Personally, I feel the interpretation the prevents all from receiving fund/support is preferable to allowing support of all.
Who decides who would get it and who would not?
2007-04-16 17:33:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mr. G 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Separation of church and state is a Christian idea, render unto God what is God's and render unto Caesar what is Caesar's.
Separation of church and state is not exactly in the Constitution. It comes from some of Thomas Jefferson's personal writings and beliefs.
2007-04-16 17:36:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by Adoptive Father 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
As Father K points out, the First Amendment contains an Establishment Clause, which guarantees me the right to practice religion however I choose.
I exercise my 2nd Amendment right to own guns by making a conscious choice not to own them.
I exercise my 1st Amendment right to religion by making a conscious choice not to have one.
The conscious choice not to exercise a right is still an expression of that right all the same.
Besides, many Christians want us to believe atheism is a faith or a belief or a religion -- if that's true, it's covered actively by the 1st Amendment.
2007-04-16 17:35:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Those words are from Thomas Jefferson explaining to a Baptist Church what they intended to do by wording the Constitution the way they did.
2007-04-16 17:32:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋