“Separation of Church and State” – These Words Do Not Mean What You May Think They Mean…


Constitutional revisionists think the phrase separation of church and state is in the First Amendment, however these words do not appear anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. And as with ALL parts of the Constitution, it places restrictions on THE GOVERNMENT, and NOT THE PEOPLE!  Together, the establishment clause and the free exercise clause form the basis of the American concept of separation of church and state, which compels the government to give equal treatment to all religions — and to respect the absence of religion, and which grants U.S. citizens the freedom to embrace or reject any faith they choose. NOTHING MORE – NOTHING LESS!

“Separation of church and state” was a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson and others expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which reads:

“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.”

This portion of the Constitution speaks against a state-imposed faith.

It tells us that you don’t want a national religion, a state-coerced national religion, a one-size-fits-all, everybody-has-to-join system. The Founders were concerned that with a strong national government there would be a national religion. They wanted to allow the states a free hand to collaborate with religion in their important work of fostering a citizenry.

Our nation was predicated on unalienable rights with governance through family, church and community, each rightfully sovereign within its sphere. Human dignity, legal equality, and personal freedom reflect biblical values imparted on Western Civilization, which retains these values in secular form while expunging their Author from public discourse.

Americans are frequently reminded of what the revisionists incorrectly deem our greatest achievement: “Separation of Church and State.” Crosses are ripped down in parks. Prayer has been banished from schools and the ACLU rampages to remove “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance.

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly misinterpreted the Establishment Clause to mean that religion must be removed entirely from public life.

Our forefathers would never countenance the restrictions on religion exacted today.

In his second inaugural address, March 4, 1805, President Thomas Jefferson stated: “In matters of religion I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the General Government. I have therefore undertaken, on no occasion, to prescribe the religious exercise suited to it; but have left them, as the Constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of state and church authorities by the several religious societies.”

Jefferson wrote to Samuel Miller, Jan. 23, 1808: “I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from inter-meddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. …”

Jefferson continued: “Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the General government. It must then rest with the States as far as it can be in any human authority. … I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines. … Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets.”

It is obvious that from Thomas Jefferson’s compiled work that terms like, “fence” or “wall” were used within the context of describing the importance of limited government to prevent its interference with religious activities.

Thomas Jefferson intentionally used the phrases “self-evident truths” and “endowed by our Creator” when he wrote The Declaration of Independence. The Founding Fathers most certainly considered the Declaration as a legal document, beginning with: “IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America;” and closing with: “We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled…”

The Declaration of Independence is listed in the first volume of the U.S. Code under the heading Organic Laws of the United States. U.S. Code is the permanent law of the United States. “Organic” is defined as “of, relating to, or constituting the law by which a government or organization exists.”

The Organic Laws are comprised of four laws:

  1. The Declaration of Independence
  2. The Articles of Confederation
  3. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 and,
  4. The Constitution.

When a U.S. President, a member of Congress, or a military official is sworn into office they are required to take an oath to defend the Constitution.

If the Declaration of Independence is really not a governing document, then Organic Law is irrelevant, and the Constitution and our entire system of government is illegal.

Fortunately, that is not the case.

Source: Google

Comment area and share buttons are at the bottom of the page.

Click on the  menu box  icon at the upper right, to explore more of Halls Of Karma.

Please Follow: The Roediger Report

rr profile pic

The America First Network on Facebook!

 

Join the Trump movement go to our Facebook Group:

Deplorable Us For Trump!

Hillary Would Finish Obama’s War On The Constitution – What Are You Thinking, Clinton Supporters?


As recently as December 2014, the president lectured supporters that the Constitution didn’t allow it: “The notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case.”

Then, a few months later, after Congress again refused to pass the law he wanted, he decided to see if he could get away with it anyway — issuing an order that not only suspended deportation for millions, but also gave them the right to work legally.

Thing is, he was only one high-court vote away from succeeding, because the liberal justices were willing to ignore the Constitution — as Obama himself understood it just two years before — to support liberal policy.

Should Hillary Clinton win in November, she’ll get to fill the Antonin Scalia seat on the court, and likely two more seats soon thereafter. The Supreme Court will no longer stand in the way of the Democratic agenda, even when Democrats lack the votes in Congress.

And she’s already promised to out-do Obama on executive actions. On immigration, Clinton said she’d “go as far as I can, even beyond President Obama.”

It won’t stop with immigration. Clinton & Co. want executive action on gun control, labor-union power, “environmental protection” and pretty much their whole wish list.

“If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links,” Hillary Clinton said today in her supposedly apolitical speech, “you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun.”

If we’re going to do this, let’s be consistent.

If the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation of your suspected illegal use of a home email server to transmit classified intelligence, you shouldn’t be allowed to just go and run for president. Obviously. The idea that we would allow a person who can’t be trusted with our most vital secrets to hold the most powerful office in the nation is absurd. It’s just not safe.

We all know that Hillary Clinton was treasonously careless with our national security, and yet she won’t even receive a slap on the wrist. Not even a misdemeanor. What Hillary Clinton has gotten from abusing her position is rich. Filthy rich.

She has lied since the very first question arose. Everything she has said in her own defense has been a lie. The AP fact checked them, if you’d like your information from a mainstream source. They found all of the following to be lies, simply by using public records.

“I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.”

Lie.

“I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified.”

Lie.

“I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work related.”

Lie.

“I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for personal emails instead of two.”

Lie.

Comey himself admitted that several of these statements were lies. And yet, somehow, the chief of the Federal Bureau of Investigation found that Clinton doesn’t deserve any kind of punishment – oh and that she’s still an awesome candidate for the highest office in the land.

The FBI had to rewrite the law in order to say that Clinton was not guilty. From Andrew McCarthy, a former assistant US Attorney:

And it’s not a two-way street: Conservative jurists aim to observe the letter of the law, not their ideology. That’s why GOP-appointed justices have slapped down Republican presidents from George W. Bush back to Nixon and Eisenhower, and why Chief Justice John Roberts saved ObamaCare.

If corrupt Hillary is elected, say goodbye to everything that America stands for. It will all be eliminated in pursuit of Globalism.

Source: The NYP et al.

For the latest Trump news, join our Facebook Group:

Click here>   Donald Trump – Superstar!

TRUMPsuperstarBAnner