From: symanzik@egr.msu.edu (Ed Symanzik)
Subject: Re: U.S. Bill of Rights today
Originator: symanzik@frith.egr.msu.edu
Reply-To: symanzik@egr.msu.edu (Ed Symanzik)
Organization: Michigan State University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 12:37:04 GMT


In article <1992Sep9.032310.18048@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
>
>		AMENDMENT I:
>	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.


>		REALITY I:
>	Polygamy in the Mormon faith: Banned.

    Bigamy and polygamy are crimes by the laws of all civilized and 
    Christian countries.  They are crimes by the laws of the United
    States...To call their advocacy a tenet of religion is to offend
    common sense of mankind.
	Davis v. Beason; 133 U.S.333 (1890).

>	Religious influence on political structures: See the Republican
>			 			     Platform.

John Quincy Adams:
    The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: it connected,
    in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government with
    the principles of Christianity.
	J. Wingate Thornton, The Pulpit of the American Revolution, 1860
	(reprinted NY: Burt Franklin, 1970),p.XXIX.

>	Establishment: Statement by the President (who is sworn to uphold
>		       the Constitution) that atheists aren't citizens or
>		       patriots; this is a Christian nation.

If "uphold the Constitution" means to interpret the Constitution the
way the Founding Fathers intended it to be read, then I agree.

First of all, atheism is not a religion as the contemporary court would
have us believe.  Here is what the Founding Fathers meant by religion.

    RELIGION.  Includes a belief in the being and perfections of God,
    in the revelation of his will to man, and in man's obligation to
    obey his commands, in a state of reward and punishment, and in man's
    accountableness to God; and also true godliness or piety of life,
    with the practice of all moral duties...THE PRACTICE OF MORAL DUTIES
    WITHOUT A BELIEF IN A DIVINE LAWGIVER, AND WITHOUT REFERENCE TO 
    HIS WILL OR COMMANDS, IS NOT RELIGION. [emphasis mine]
      Noah Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language, 1828
      definition of "religion."
      (Note: Noah Webster was one of the Founding Fathers himeself)

Here are a few quotes to support Bush's statement.  (I can produce more 
if you aren't convinced).

The House Judiciary Committee:

    Had the people, during the Revolution, had a suspicion of any
    attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been
    strangled in its cradle.  At the time of the adoption of the 
    Constitution and the amendments, the universal sentiment was that
    Christianity should be encouraged, not any one sect [denomination].
    ...In this age there can be no subsitute for Christianity: that, in
    its general principles, is the great conservative element on which
    we must rely for the purity and permanence of free institutions.
	 B.F. Morris, The Christian Life and Character of the Civil
	 Institutions of the United States (Philidelphia: George W.
	 Childs, 1864), pp.320-321,323.

The Supreme Court:

    No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any
    legislation, state or national, because this is a religious people.  
    This is historically true.  From the discovery of this continent 
    to the present hour, there is a single voice making this 
    affirmation....These are not individual sayings, declarations of 
    private persons: they are organic utterances; they speak the voice 
    of the entire people....These, and many other matters which might 
    be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass 
    of organic utterances that THIS IS A CHRISTIAN NATION.
         Church of the Holy Trinity v. U.S.; 465,471 (1892).

John Witherspoon, a president of Princeton who trained one third
of the Founding Fathers and also signed the Declaration:

    What follows from this?  That he is the best friend to American
    liberty, who is most sincere and active in promoting true and
    undefiled religion, and who sets himself with the greatest firmness
    to bear down profanity and immorality of every kind.  Whoever is
    an avowed enemy of God, I scruple not [would not hesitate] to call
    him AN ENEMY TO HIS COUNTRY.
         John Witherspoon, The Works of the Rev. John Witherspoon
         (Philadelphia: William W. Woodard, 1802), Vol. VI, p.414.

The Supreme Court of Mass.:

    [The First Amendment] embraces all who believe in the existence of
    God, as well...as Christians of every denomination....THIS 
    PROVISION DOES NOT EXTEND TO ATHEISTS, because they do not believe
    in God or religion; and therefore...their sentiments and professions,
    whatever they may be, cannot be called religious sentiments and 
    professions.
	 Commonwealth v. Abner Kneeland; 37 Mass. (20 Pick) 206,233,234
	 (Sup.Ct.Mass. 1838)

>	Free Speech: Censorship of adult materials.

    The destruction of morality renders the power of government 
    invalid....The corruption of the public mind, in general, and 
    debauching the manners of youth, in particular, by lewd and obscene
    pictures exhibited to view, must necessarily be attended with the 
    most injurious consequences.... No man is permitted to corrupt the
    morals of the people.
	 Commonwealth v. Jesse Sharpless and Others; 2 Serg. & R.
	 91,103,104 (Sup.Ct.Penn. 1815).


The intent of the First Amendment was to prohibit the U.S. government
from establishing one Christian denomination as the national denomination.
This is what they had been fleeing from in England where the national
denomination had been Catholic, Anglican, and Protestant.  They did not 
intend to protect other religions.  They also did not prevent religious 
involvment in government, on the contrary, they wanted to encourage it.

    By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established
    religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed 
    upon the same equal footing.
	 Runkel v. Winemiller, 1799.

    It is impossible to rightly govern...without God and the Bible.
	 George Washington.

    Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers,
    and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our
    Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.
	 John Jay.


[lots of comments about the loss of rights deleted]

All of the cases you cite are a result of the Supreme Court wrongfully
applying the 14th Amendment to the other amendments.  Since that time,
the Supreme Court has assumed more and more power.  They now determine
the constitutionality of laws and they create laws themselves through
"judicial orders."  This was never intended.

    You seem...to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all
    constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and
    one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy....
    The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal.
	 Thomas Jefferson, 1820.

    The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in...the
    federal judiciary; an irresponsible body, (for impeachment is
    scarcely a scare-crow,) working like gravity by night and by
    day, gaining a little to-day and a little to-morrow, and 
    advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of 
    jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States.
	 Thomas Jefferson, 1821.

    As the courts are generally the last in making the decision
    [on laws], it results to them, by refusing or not refusing to
    execute a law, to stamp it with its final character.  This makes
    the Judiciary dept paramount in fact to the Legislature, which
    was never intended, and can never be proper.
	 James Madison, 1788.


So what it comes down to is this; in order to reverse the Court's
encroachment on your rights, you have to reverse the decision in
Everson v. Board of Education, 1947, where the Court began this 
mess.  Of course this would have to include the so called "separation 
of church and state," and given your support of polygamy, pornography, 
Satanism, and drugs, I doubt you are willing to do that.  This is
probably a "Catch 22" for you as the two are inseparable but you 
have to make a choice - do you want what the Founding Fathers 
intended or not?

--
Ed Symanzik
Michigan State University
symanzik@egr.msu.edu

Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.politics.usa.constitution,rec.nude