Church and State

[HouseOfDialysis]

It's not hijacking, just the stream of conversation.

Eli, my son, turns 5 in August. With myself having no religious beliefs and my wife more or less not engaged in her faith, Eli will likely only see religion when we go see my mother, who is a Catholic and Carmelite nun. I'm going to be reading him all different mythologies as bed time stories. We'll see how that works for him.

[MooseMom]

Oh, I've just found this utterly fascinating chapter on "religion and belief" in Temple Grandin's book, "Thinking in Pictures".  Since it is rather long, I'll just post the link...

http://www.spinninglobe.net/cowlady.htm

It is relevatory to read how this one specific autistic mind finds her own definition of religion and belief.  Truly, truly fascinating, especially for anyone who knows someone who is autistic or for anyone who just has an interest how any human mind sorts through the meaning of a Creator, especially a mind as logical and "scientific" as Ms. Grandin's.

If anyone bothers to read this, please tell me what you think!

[Hemodoc]

Dear Moosemom and HOD,

I actually worked with autistic kids for about two years after college and one summer during college.  I actually worked with a criminally insane client for the summer between my first and second year of med school so I am very familiar with the spectrum of kids with autism.  It was the May Institute for autistic kids started in the 50's I believe by Dr. May and his wife who had twin autistic kids. It was a residential center with about 50 kids of various function. There was one unit with the high functioning kids with one that used to earn time memorizing the phone book for entertainment as well as local maps. He would then sit there and write out all of the pages verbatim from the phone book.  He wasn't very verbal, but in certain areas, he had total recall.  I spent about a year as a special ed teacher at the May as well. We had varying degrees of success with the kids. It is not an easy chore to take care of many of these autistic kids, but the gains made especially in behavior control.

As far as going to heaven, I know that God judges people based upon their abilities.  David lost a child with Bathsheba. Take a look at what he had to say about this issue:

II Samuel 12:21     Then said his servants unto him, What thing is this that thou hast done? thou didst fast and weep for the child, while it was alive; but when the child was dead, thou didst rise and eat bread.
22     And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether GOD will be gracious to me, that the child may live?
23     But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.

David testifies with this statement that his child that died soon after childbirth was in heaven where David would join him later. Don't ask me how God sorts this all out, but that is David's testimony. Hope this helps.

God bless,

Peter

[HouseOfDialysis]

Macroevolutuion... I hadn't forgotten!

Anolis lizards had undergone rapid changes in body structure as each species in different levels of the trees. From length of legs to everything in between.

I believe it was within a fourteen year span, too.

Does this qualify to prove macroevolution to you?

[Hober Mallow]

Is America a Christian nation anymore? Not at the Federal level for sure yet what a glorious past America once had.

From the Treaty of Tripoli, 1797:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

[Hemodoc]

Is America a Christian nation anymore? Not at the Federal level for sure yet what a glorious past America once had.

From the Treaty of Tripoli, 1797:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Dear Hober Mallow, I could quote a whole lot of supreme court rulings, original documents, especially state constitutions etc. that show the true Christian nature of early colonists up to including the founding of this nation being a Christian nation, but folks will continue to choose what they wish to believe. Not much sense trying to change people's minds on this issue.

[Bill Peckham]

Is America a Christian nation anymore? Not at the Federal level for sure yet what a glorious past America once had.

From the Treaty of Tripoli, 1797:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Hi Hober Mallow. Prescient call that Perry was a flash in the pan. You need to introduce yourself on the introduction board. IHD is not an appropriate venue for sock puppetry, just saying. I think you got a point but I am a bit worried about the Hober Mallow.

[Hober Mallow]

Dear Hober Mallow, I could quote a whole lot of supreme court rulings, original documents, especially state constitutions etc. that show the true Christian nature of early colonists up to including the founding of this nation being a Christian nation, but folks will continue to choose what they wish to believe. Not much sense trying to change people's minds on this issue.

The Treaty of Tripoli was drafted and ratified by our "Founding Fathers."

It's no secret most of the Founding Fathers were deists. It's irrelevent to the argument. The Constitution is perfectly clear on the subject. This is a free country where one is free to choose his religion, and, as a Christian myself, I wouldn't have it any other way. One's religion holds much more significance if one freely chooses it without the sanctioning of his or her government.

[Hemodoc]

Most folks do not have knowledge of the Christian origins and roots of America as well as the Christian roots of the English Common Law on which the majority of our rights are based. Indeed, the 14th amendment when incorporated into the 1st amendment declared several state constitutions unconstitutional, but that was not the original intent of the founders who specifically kept the provisions in the constitution separate from state and local rights.

Eight states originally had requirements that all those in the state government must believe in Jesus and God as the Supreme Being in acceptance of the Christian religion. The establishment clause had to do with denominations, not religions as we now view the term. There was nothing in the constitution at the time it was written to prohibit the Christian religious test at state and local levels. It was only after the much later 14th amendment incorporated the 1st amendment to apply to states and local governments did we begin to see an intrusion upon the expression of Christian principles in these governments.

http://vftonline.org/TestOath/22leaders.htm

At the Federal level, we had mandates for an American Bible that was actually authorized and printed by congress(1782), we established Christian missions to the indians with congressional approval and many of the founding fathers professed belief in Jesus Christ.

Yet today, we would be led to believe that America was a secular nation right from it's foundations, this is simply not true. There are four Supreme Court rulings in our history that declared America a Christian nation. The last was in 1931. If folks wish to state that America is no longer a Christian nation, I have no argument with that statement at all, much to our demise. But going back to the founding fathers and the subsequent generations, they not only declared, but embraced we were a Christian nation. It was not until 1948 in McCollum v. Board of Education Dist. 71, 333 U.S. 203 (1948). However, it was not until the 1960's that the crusade against Christianity in our government really began.

McCollum v. Board of Education Dist. 71, 333 U.S. 203 (1948) http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/church-state/decisions.html

In 1984, ironically, Ronald Reagan signed into law the taxation of churches through social security taxation and at the same time made them tax collectors as well. I know a man in prison today who is there because of his misplaced trust in the constitution that would overturn this law.  A sad situation no doubt and one that the founders would turn in their graves over. The constitutional provisions were never meant to keep the influence of Christianity out of the government, on the contrary, they were to protect the church from the state. Today, the historical revisionists would have us believe that it was they were protecting the government from Christian religion. That is simply not true.

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/handbook/handbook.11/handbook-1136.html

In fact and reality, 8 of the original states were in essence run as Christian theocracies which our Federal constitution of 1789 did not overturn or interfere whatsoever. In fact, 7 states still have the original language in their state constitutions even though SCOTUS has ruled them unenforceable in 1961.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torcaso_v._Watkins

Thus, to state that America is not a Christian nation today, that is certainly a much more accurate statement than to make the false assertion that the founding fathers had the same view. It truly was not until 1961 that America denied it's Christian origins in earnest and began a crusade against Christianity at the Federal level. Today, any expression of Christianity in public is often viewed as unconstitutional.  Sadly, what started as a Christian nation is now largely hostile towards this religion.  Limiting the expression of Christianity to simply home and church is a persecution that will one day eliminate those two areas someday as well. Sorry, I don't leave my Christianity at home with me, it is who I am. Religious tolerance is now extended to almost every religion, yet not to Christianity. The child bringing a Bible to school is often subject to questioning at the very least by school officials, yet a recent court decision allows Sikhs to bring their ceremonial knives into the schools.

http://www.nytimes.com/1994/09/04/us/school-told-to-allow-sikhs-to-have-knives.html

Lastly, how ironic that although Christians are banned from prayer, Muslims are not:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-07-25-muslim-special-treatment-from-schools_N.htm

America is no longer a friendly nation to Christians and our sphere of freedom to practice our religion is slowly becoming more and more restricted to the point that if laws declaring homosexuals protected rights, the US courts will soon in my opinion be able to force American churches to hire openly gay men and women in religious positions.  There are many who have already advocated such and I hope and pray that our religious freedoms do not erode to that point, but we are certainly in danger of that right now. In fact, in Canada, several verses in the Bible are already declared hate speech and anyone that preaches these verses from the pulpit can and have been arrested and prosecuted. So, if folks wish to speak about separation of church and state, getting all of the facts is an essential place to start.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=20862

Is America a Christian nation anymore? Not at the Federal level for sure yet what a glorious past America once had.

Dear Hober Mallow, to state that America was a Christian nation at its foundation does not  imply that all of its documents are Christian in nature.  I would suggest reading over this very old thread since most of what you are talking about has already been discussed. The greatest evidence of the Christian nature of America is found in the states documents some of which I listed in a prior post.

Once again, if you are not convinced, so be it. I really don't intend on changing your mind.

God bless,

Peter

[Hober Mallow]

Bill, I have never advocated nor will I advocate for merging church and state as you have implied. Separation of church and state has served america well, but today we have a much different interpretation of what it means to this nation. Today, it essentially means freedom from religion instead of freedom of religion.

No, it means the government cannot sanction any religion. You and I are free to follow any religion we choose.

It is simple fact that the 1st amendment was  limitation upon the federal government and not the state or local municipalities.

This is factually incorrect. The supremacy clause establishes that the federal Constitution applies on the federal, state, and local level. No state law can trump federal law, and where a conflict between federal and state law arises, federal law must be recognized as supreme.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

That's right. The powers "not delegated to the United States by the Constitution." The First Amendment applies at the federal, state, and local level, and the states cannot vote to change that even if 100% of the residents vote to do so.

We are treating the doctrinal religion of our heritage like a virus that must be expunged from the public square. We also have inverted the original intent of the "Separation of Church and State" metaphor. The oppression that the Christian Theism religion is now undergoing through the ACLU and activist judges is the same evil that the establishment clause in our constitution was intended to prevent.[/b]

Can you provide examples of such oppression by the ACLU and what you call "activist judges?"

[cariad]

Bill, I have never advocated nor will I advocate for merging church and state as you have implied. Separation of church and state has served america well, but today we have a much different interpretation of what it means to this nation. Today, it essentially means freedom from religion instead of freedom of religion.

No, it means the government cannot sanction any religion. You and I are free to follow any religion we choose.

It is simple fact that the 1st amendment was  limitation upon the federal government and not the state or local municipalities.

This is factually incorrect. The supremacy clause establishes that the federal Constitution applies on the federal, state, and local level. No state law can trump federal law, and where a conflict between federal and state law arises, federal law must be recognized as supreme.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

That's right. The powers "not delegated to the United States by the Constitution." The First Amendment applies at the federal, state, and local level, and the states cannot vote to change that even if 100% of the residents vote to do so.

We are treating the doctrinal religion of our heritage like a virus that must be expunged from the public square. We also have inverted the original intent of the "Separation of Church and State" metaphor. The oppression that the Christian Theism religion is now undergoing through the ACLU and activist judges is the same evil that the establishment clause in our constitution was intended to prevent.[/b]

Can you provide examples of such oppression by the ACLU and what you call "activist judges?"

Uh, who are you?

It's a little difficult impossible to care about your opinions when you have not introduced yourself. Please have the courtesy to follow the forum rules. As Bill Peckham explained, you need to go to the introduction section and let us know a bit about yourself, for example, what brings you to IHD.

[Hemodoc]

Bill, I have never advocated nor will I advocate for merging church and state as you have implied. Separation of church and state has served america well, but today we have a much different interpretation of what it means to this nation. Today, it essentially means freedom from religion instead of freedom of religion.

No, it means the government cannot sanction any religion. You and I are free to follow any religion we choose.

It is simple fact that the 1st amendment was  limitation upon the federal government and not the state or local municipalities.

This is factually incorrect. The supremacy clause establishes that the federal Constitution applies on the federal, state, and local level. No state law can trump federal law, and where a conflict between federal and state law arises, federal law must be recognized as supreme.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

That's right. The powers "not delegated to the United States by the Constitution." The First Amendment applies at the federal, state, and local level, and the states cannot vote to change that even if 100% of the residents vote to do so.

We are treating the doctrinal religion of our heritage like a virus that must be expunged from the public square. We also have inverted the original intent of the "Separation of Church and State" metaphor. The oppression that the Christian Theism religion is now undergoing through the ACLU and activist judges is the same evil that the establishment clause in our constitution was intended to prevent.[/b]

Can you provide examples of such oppression by the ACLU and what you call "activist judges?"

Sorry, not sure how many times I have to state I am not interested in debating you on this issue. I will simply agree to disagree. Have a great day.

Peter

[Hober Mallow]

Sorry, not sure how many times I have to state I am not interested in debating you on this issue. I will simply agree to disagree. Have a great day.

Peter

Fair enough, and I'll respect that, though I don't quite get why one would bother posting his views on a public forum in the first place if one wished to avoid further discussion of them.

[Hemodoc]

Dear Hober, I already discussed the issues I wished to discuss. Doesn't look like anyone but you is interested in this thread at the moment. Not much chance I will change your mind, so, yes, it is a public forum but sorry, where is it written that I have to participate any further in a very old thread if I don't wish to participate any longer?

Have a nice day my friend.

[Hober Mallow]

Sadly, most people reject God.

This is another pretty sweeping condemnation.  How do you define this rejection of God?  Do people not go to church often enough?

Reminds me of an old G. K. Chesterton quote: "Just going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in your garage makes you a car."