If Ron Paul is so pro constitution then why doesn't he support separation of church and state?

Question

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State." Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from our Founding Fathers.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/Tripoli.htm
"The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers." Ron Paul
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

Answer 1

Thank you for solid confirmation that Paul is a wackadoo. A lot of self-styled Constitutionalists support only THEIR idea of the Constitution. But chuirch-state separation IS part of it. The idea was endorsed not only by the Founders, but by subsequent Presidents (Tyler and Grant) as well as by the Supreme Court in Reynolds v. US (1879). It is NOT a recent invention by an activist Court!

Answer 2

The idea that the separation of church and state is nonexistent is a common misconception that seems to be getting more prevalent (or maybe it's just YA). The most common argument seems to be that the phrase "separation of church and state" never appears verbatim in the Constitution. It doesn't.

There are two clauses to the first amendment that specifically deal with religion: the establishment clause and the free exercise clause.

The establishment clause: ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion....") together with the Free Exercise Clause, ("...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"), make up what are commonly known as the "religion clauses" of the First Amendment.

The establishment clause clearly precludes the establishment of any one state-sanctioned religion. This is where the LEGAL theory for the idea of the separation of church and state came from. The actual phrase "separation of church and state" came from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, in which he explained how the religion clauses of the first amendment built a "wall of separation between church and state."

If your Ron Paul quotation is correct (and it appears to be) then he's not very well-versed in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of one notable founding father.

Answer 3

He's half right. That make him right twice as often as our current President.

"The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution (true) or the writings of our Founding Fathers.(false)"

This is one of the few areas where Paul deviates from his strict constitutional stance. The wording of the First Amendment is very important:

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

This prevents the government (Congress) from attempting to promote one religion over another. It also prevents them from passing laws restricting religious practices. They cannot, for example, forbid someone from putting up a Christmas display on private property. They can, however, require that, if a Christmas display is put up on PUBLIC property, equal space be given to every religion for their holiday display (Kwanzaa, Winter Solstice, Hanukkah, etc.) to avoid the appearance of "government sponsorship of religion". It's all or nothing. Either allow everyone or exclude everyone. I have no problem with holiday displays as long as my tax dollars aren't paying for them.

Paul DOES oppose other issues that cross the "wall of separation", like Sunday closing laws, "faith-based initiatives", and federal funding of religious education. Regardless of the quote, he supports the Constitutional establishment clause more than Romney, Huckabee, McCain, or GWB.

Mymadsky covered the intent of Jeffersons letter very well. it was not an attempt to alter the First Amendment. He was stating his interpretation of it. Jefferson was a Deist - thus the mention of "Creator" and "Nature's God" in the Declaration (which he penned) and no mention of Jesus.

It is easy to find qoutes on both sides of this issue from the Founding Fathers. George Washington (1st President)said "It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.". John Adams (2nd President) said “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Hancock (president of the Constitutional Congress) said "We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!". What they said in their private correspondence is irrelevant.

Answer 4

You are taking what he meant out of context. The purpose of separation of church and state as described by the constitution and by James Madison (the guy who wrote it, not Jefferson) was to prevent the government from influencing religion and prevent religion from influencing government. Thus a hard wall, one has no impact on the other. No where does Ron Paul disagree with this; maybe his wording seems off but if you read deeper into his view it is pretty clear he supports this idea.

What he doesn't support is the current day idea of separation of church and state. This is where kids risk disciplinary action for praying in school, and where government employees can get fired for wishing someone a 'merry Christmas.' He is against this absurdness that does nothing more than prevent individuals from practicing their religion. By the framers definition of seperation of church and state, this isn't separation at all, it is having the atheist religion shoved down our throats. This does not mean he wants to support a state religion or run the country by the word of God, he just wants to change this diluted definition of seperation that impedes the rights of individuals for the sake of others' intolerance.

EDIT:

Yes, there are many cases of students getting suspending in school or employees getting reprimanded and even fired for making so-called religious comments. It's in the news all the time. Why don't you do Google search and find out for yourself.

Here are some examples to make your life easier:
http://groups.google.com/group/Bible-Prophecy-News/browse_thread/thread/cd1ee6579c839384/f0e020290f62191d
http://www.cnn.com/US/9711/06/alabama.prayer/index.html
http://www.sullivan-county.com/w/suspended0.htm

I'm certainly not a religious type, but I believe in tolerance of others regardless of what religion, or lack of religion, they follow. If you want to be an atheist, great, I couldn't care less. But you have to be tolerant of those who want to practice their religion in public places because they are tolerant of you and your beliefs.

Answer 5

I'm no Ron Paul supporter, but I can answer your question. Ron Paul does understand the Constitution and the Spirit of the Constitution as well. He's also quite up-to-speed on the intentions of the founders.

The liberal assertion that the 1st Amendment affords us a freedom FROM religion is 180 degrees from accurate. The intention of the entire Constitution and our Bill of Rights was to afford people as much freedom as possible to pursue their own ideals in all things. Freedom of religion is at the crux of the Revolutionary War and declaring our independence from England.

The Anglican Church was a MANDATED as the only acceptable religion for England. The Anglican Church was established by the government and supported by the government to benefit the government. THIS is what the founders wanted to avoid.

Now we have a government supported religion, called Atheism, that is more and more being MANDATED by the government.

Why is this concept so difficult to understand. It's roots are in the tolerance of others and their ways of life!

EDIT: Hey Rocky, Sorry to burst your bubble but a belief system that denies the existence of a deity or deities is STILL a belief system. Since that belief system resides exclusively in the realm of religion, it is by definition, a religion.

Questioning my capacity to learn and understand will not change the fact that recent federal legislation has restricted the rights of millions to worship as they wish and forces EVERYONE to comply with a belief system that denies EVERYONE’S God/gods.

No matter how you cut it, the government is in the process of establishing a religion, against the will of the overwhelming majority of the people, which limits the free practice of ANY OTHER religion, for the benefit of a vocal and miniscule minority!

Call me dumb if you like, I’ve been called worse, but you sir, are obviously too smart by half!

Answer 6

We have to take a closer look as to WHY Jefferson wrote the letter. Why would Jefferson feel the need to write this letter? He did so to reply to a note congratulating him on the win. During his campaign religion came up as an issue. Jefferson responded to that point in his reply.

Did he intend for this letter to replace the wording in the Constitution?

I ask you, how can we base our legal system not on the Constitution but on a reply to a personal note?

It is clear to me that this letter clearly states that ones religion should not be brought up as an issue when running for office. It has nothing to do with his views on the Constitution.

Answer 7

first of all ron paul was correct in saying that there is no text in the constitution to say seperation of church and state
but that by thomas jefferson was in the context of a letter assuring Danbury Baptist Association that there was a seperation of state from intervening in church matters

not that i like ron paul 100%

Answer 8

Ron Paul disagrees with you and with the quotes that you posted. That is why he doesn't support separation of church and state. That should be obvious.

I disagree with him, just like you do. But I do believe that he is being true to his own understandings of the Constitution.

This is not the first disagreement over the Constitution, and it won't be the last.

Answer 9

Re: our atheist government. (a) Can some religious nut cite a specific case of a child being threatened with any punishmentt for praying in school (and not interfering with the teacher's work)?

(b) Can the same or any other religious nut cite a specific case of any government employe being threatened with any kind of punishment for saying, "Merry Christmas!".

If not, stop bloviating about this war against religion.

Answer 10

Well, he was right about one thing: there is no specific mention in the Constitution about the wall of separation. The First Amendment says that the government will not establish a religion, meaning we won't have a national religion and we can practice it any way we choose. Not sure on the bit about the Founders' writings, but it doesn't sound to me like the sort of thing he'd say. (I'm no Ronulan, but I like his ideas.)

Answer 11

What he stated is practically one hundred% genuine, the only exception being that the "seperation of church and state" grow to be referenced to in writing by applying Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists that's truthfully the place the term grow to be coined. a lot of people have faith it quite is truthfully area of the 1st modification.