Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
no law respecting an establishment(gov. sponsored or supported by) also no offical religion ; ie: its some interpetation and that was that when someone read it to be that i believe that the seperation is not bad and is good for other competive religions and makes our country better accepting of other religions rather than having a further homogenous racist(ethnocentric) population.
2007-06-19 15:43:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by gangsterpistol 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof - People always say separate of church and state, OH NO you can't talk about God at school, OH NO the court house can not have a Christmas tree, what about separation of church and state?! Well the constitution says that congress - the state- cannot establish a state religion. So all these things that happen interfer with people's right to exercise there belief. So in technicality the state is always breaking this amendment by prohibiting the free exercise of people's religiious belief. It drives me crazy when some teen is the valedictorian of his/her class and then cannot talk about God in his/her speech. Why? because he/she might offend someone. I beleive in God, but it does not offend me to hear some talk about Budda or Mohammad or whatever. I only have a problem with those who worship the devil. If you are atheist or agnostic, so be it, even that isn't going to offend me.
2007-06-19 15:46:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are correct, the phrase does not appear anywhere in the constitution. It actually originated in a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association, dated Jan. 1, 1802. For context, here is the paragraph in which it appears:
"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 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, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."
Clearly, Jefferson was referring to the Bill of Rights, and separation of church and State was intended by the First Amendment.
I hope that helps.
2007-06-20 03:27:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by El Guapo 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No national Church is permitted. There can be no "Church of the United States" like the Anglican Church in England. States could have their own state -supported churches,like the Congregational Chuch in most of New England until 1833 or so. Som people today try to use separation of church and state,which the Constitution does not nention, to stop the free exercise of religion or free speech or free press all of which the 1st Amendment does mention.
2007-06-19 15:39:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by James O 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
The phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the establishment clause, but it is clearly implied.
You know, like how Christians believe the trinity is implied in the New Testament, but the word never occurs?
2007-06-19 15:44:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by N 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
So....just how would you expect government to get involved with religion that wouldn't be establishing one, or wouldn't impact the free exorcise of it? I don't see a way. I mean Jefferson was the one who said that was the intention of the first amendment and he helped write it. Are you suggesting he was lying?
2016-05-20 02:41:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Most people have never read the Bill of Rights...so they don't know what it says. So someone comes a long and tells them the 1st amendment talks about the separation of Church and state...and instead of looking it up, take their word for it.
2007-06-19 15:36:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by LDS~Tenshi~ 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
*Sigh*
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" means just that: no State Religion.
2007-06-19 15:40:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by d_cider1 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I found an interesting website that pertains to this subject. Some may be surprised by what it says. AND it was broadcast on PBS.
http://newsbusters.org/node/13539
2007-06-19 15:41:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
because its implied. As is a lot of things in the constitution. And because the Supreme Court says so.
2007-06-19 15:35:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by ~Heathen Princess~ 7
·
2⤊
1⤋