From: aultj@rpi.edu (Jim Ault)
Subject: Re: Limiting religious speech
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
	<AULTJ.92Aug25131548@caleb.rpi.edu>
	<1992Aug30.185659.12102@newstand.syr.edu>
	<AULTJ.92Sep1165812@caleb.rpi.edu>
	<1992Sep2.001224.17725@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 22:05:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.001224.17725@m.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

   The author of the First Amendment, Madison, believed in what he called
   "'perfect separation' between religion and government. He said
   repeatedly that religion would flourish more freely without the aid of
   government because the power of government to aid religion necessarily
   implied the power of government to suppress religion. ... In his own
   state of Virginia, Madison opposed a 1984 tax bill that would have
   subsidized religion _without preference_. ... The proposal for a
   general, nonpreferential tax for supporting religion failed, and two
   years later, the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom completely
   separated church and state.
    [Also,] when the Senate was originally considering the First
   Amendment, it _defeated_ three motions that would have changed its
   language to prohibit laws that established 'one religious sect or
   society in preference to others.' ...
    Finally, ... When the First Amendment was enacted _no_ state had an
   established state church or supported one religion over another. ...
   What 'establishment of religion' meant in America in 1791 was
   precisely nonpreferential aid. When the First Amendment prohibited the
   federal government from establishing religion, it was undoubtedly
   these nonpreferential establishments that the framers had in mind."
     [_Visions of Freedom_ by Ira Glasser, p. 75 (btw, a great book).]

Madison also wrote:

 "We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon
 the power of government, far from it.  We have staked the future of
 all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind of
 self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern
 ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to
 the Ten Commandments of God."  

And so, while the founders agreed that there should be no formal
"establishment" of religion, in the sense that one sect or
denomination should hold and special place above another, I believe
that all the founders expected that most members of the government and
indeed the country had a strong belief in the God of the Bible.

Madison also wrote:

 "... Religion ... [is] the basis and foundation of government ...
 before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he
 must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe."

Why did the country exist for so long with such references to God
throughout our government?  Why is it only now, over 200 years after
the framing of the constitution that suddenly everyone wants to remove
all these traditions (and references to God)?   

Here's a quote from John Adams:
 "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with
 human passions unbridled by morality and religion.  Avarice,
 ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our
 Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is
 designed only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly
 inadequate for any other."  

If some of you are complaining about how the government is taking too
much power, I think this is the reason:  

 " ... Our Constitution is
 designed only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly
 inadequate for any other."  

   >How is it that every public school teacher has been elevated to the
   >level of Congress whenever they happen to mention God on school
   >grounds?

   Because of the 14th Amendment Public schools teachers act under the
   authority of Congress.

Yes, I would say that was the turning point, and that application of
the 14th amendment, turning it as a weapon against the states, is what
I most disagree with.   

   >Some more things to think about:
   >
   >How is it that the author of phrase "separation between church and
   >state" (which is NOT found in the Constitution or the Declaration),
   >Thomas Jefferson, who, when he served as a schoolmaster, saw fit to
   >approve and heartily recommend the Bible for use in all public schools? 

   Which public schools? When?

Sorry, I don't remember.  I will try to look it up.

   In any case, Jefferson wasn't Christian. He re-wrote the New Testament
   removing all references to the divinity of Jesus. How would you feel
   if a teacher at your local school started to use the Jefferson Bible
   as a required text?

From the Jefferson memorial in Washington:

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a
nation be sure when we remove their only firm basis, a conviction
in the minds of the people, that these liberties are the gift of
God?  That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?
Indeed, I tremble for my country, when I reflect that God is just;
that His justice cannot sleep forever, that revolution of the
wheel of fortune, a change of situation, is among the possible
events; that it may become probable by supernatural influence!
The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in that
event."   - Thomas Jefferson

This quote comes from a man who believes in God.  You can quibble
about his other beliefs, what flavor and so on, but he does believe in
God, and that God does have influence in the affairs of men.

   >Could it be that the understanding of that phrase, which is so
   >commonly used today, is not really what Jefferson meant?

   No.

Yes it could be, and you disagree.  I've seen other quotes from
Jefferson, and I guess we could argue about which was said when, or
which had more importance, and so on.  I don't want to continue that
thread.

I will be redundant to try to make my point.  The problems of our
society are caused by people turning away from God.  Our government
cannot handle that because:

 " ... Our Constitution is
 designed only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly
 inadequate for any other."   -John Adams
 
'Nuff said.
--
Jim Ault, ITS Systems Programmer, aultj@rpi.edu    <><
Newsgroups: alt.censorship