The liberal secular mafia has completely distorted the meaning of the First Amendment establishment clause - NO WHERE in the Constitution do the words “Separation of Church and State” exist. The Constitution clearly states that the government cannot establish a “state religion” - it says nothing about keeping all religion out of public office or displays. In basic terms, it states that our government can’t pass any laws that would limit our religious choices to one faction of religion (ie, Muslim, Christian, Buddist.)

Activist judges and our out-of-touch Congress have twisted the Constitution and came up with the buzz phrase “separation of church and state” to make it seem like no government entity can have anything to do with religion or religious beliefs. It’s pure manipulation.

““A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state”.”

Then comes the second part;
“..the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

the word “people” appears five times in the bill of rights, in amendments1, 2, 4, 9 and 10. Other than the 2nd, where else does people mean someone other than Citizens of the US?

Sub Par…
How convenient of you to seperate the two lines of the Second Amendment as if there’s no connection between the two….If you put the two lines together, you have a constitutional right to join the National Gaurd who can then issue you a gun to protect the security of the United States….

Your seperation of the two lines gives you the right to go to a traveling gypsie gun-show at the St. Charles Arena and buy as many AK-47s as you and your wife can carry….That’s what our Founding Fathers invisioned…isn’t it?

Actually, Garrison, what the Militia clause guarantees is that the citizen can join the local militia and arm himself with his sidearm or personal weapon. Cannons and bazookas (communal weapons) are provided by the state. It also authorizes the state to regulate the militia by setting rules for it’s deployment, training requirements, and by designating the officer corps.

What it really used to mean in practice, up till WWI, was that when you joined your local infantry battalion, you automatically subjected yourself to what used to be called the Articles of War, including the disciplinary clauses. You were expected to learn the manual of arms, and respond appropriately to those who gave the orders.

By the way, the second amendment does NOT grant criminals permission to own firearms, or allow vigilante action by “concerned citizens”. Even in the old west, when a Posse was required, it would be authorized by legal authority, whether it was the Sheriff or the Marshal, or whomever. Lawful authority is what makes the difference between a gang of armed thugs and a group of citizen soldiers.

Thank you Ray, well written. I can see you have the same right wing wackos jumping on you. I was also ambushed when I wrote a similiar letter in a local newspaper. I received a phone call and an anonomous letter in the mail the next day. I responded with another letter to the editor the next week calling these 2 people “cowards” who felt a need to look up my phone number and my address to harrass me. The words “separation of Church and State” are not included in the Constitution so I was wrong and admitted it in my 2nd letter.

I did some research and discovered that Thomas Jefferson did coin this phrase in a letter to the Danbury Baptists. This phrase has been used to argue case after case in our Supreme Court. Thomas Jefferson was one of the smartest and greatest leaders of this Country. He has been rolling in his grave for the last 8 years because of the Bush/Cheney “holier than thou” attitude. The arguements and legislature that has attempted to be passed as law is a mockery of what Thomas Jefferson meant by his statement.
Let’s make Christianity the official religion, bring prayer back to school, bring monuments of the 10 commandments to every Court House, and on and on.

Thanks again Ray, and “Let Freedom Ring”.

Why do you capitalize the word noble sometimes and not others?

Gaucho, Si Vis, Tango et al:

Hey, if you losers want an example of a government that rejects the notion of separation of church and state (to protect the state from the church and vice-versa), look no further than Iran–they have a Theocracy–is that what you guys want the USA to look like?

Why is the first amendment so complicated? The first part says that Government cannot play favorites with respect to religion: the same rules apply to all religious groups. You can neither forbid nor endorse any group over any other in law. The second part says that no religious expression can be forbidden by law. So the Hasid in his black coat is equal in the eyes of the law to the Sikh in his Turban.

Establishments of religion;

Organized Prayer
The 10 Commandments
Foot baths for muslims
Nativity Scenes and Menorahs

Trying to put prayer in public schools is recognizing an establishment of religion. Allowing a display of the 10 commandments on public property and having tax payers pay for it’s upkeep is enforcing that establishment of the Christian religion. forcing Tax payers to “foot” the bill to install prayer related items for muslims in public places with public money is endorsing that establishment of the islamic faith. Nativity Scenes and Menorahs or established religous symbots that have no place being paid for with public money or displayed in a public forum.

Being an elected official and saying that the US is a christian nation is a slap in the fact to every non-christian in the US and to many immigrants of who left thier own countries to escape religous persecution.

Think of Establishment as a noun and not a verb.

I would like one religous person who posts here to please provide me a single example of any agency at any level of the US Government (federal, state, county, city…whatever) that ever busted in on you praying in the privacy of your own home or your chosen place of worship…of even when you’ve been out at a restaurant saying a pre-meal prayer. Anyone?

I remember the story of 2 women in Atlanta who were arrested while they were praying. Were they arrested for the act of praying? NO…these 2 woman repeatedly would stop in doorways, block entrances, block access to buildings (thereby creating a disturbance)whenever they prayed. They would purposely go to buildings during peak times and block people from exiting and entering buildings. They claimed they were so consumed by God, that they had to pray at all different times. The judge that presided over the case wondered aloud why the call for prayer never seemed to occur when they weren’t in a doorway blocking/inconveniencing others. Why didn’t this call ever happen when they were alone or at home.

To jh,

You missed an even more pertinent example of Theocracy……..Iraq! It is what the current government of Iraq is, and we enabled it! Google Iraq and Shia law.