"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 tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan 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."
Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11. Signed Nov. 4, 1796, approved by the Senate, June 7, 1797, signed into law by President John Adams on June 10, 1797.
Those darn liberal founding fathers!
[Comment was edited by macthulhu on December 05, 2005 at 04:21:58 PM]
There is a definite distinction between the government bending over backward to make sure no trace of religion appears in relation to anything government, and keeping the government out of the religion business and preventing persecution of people based on religion.
The phrase "separation of church and state" is made up. It is not some legal term that is well definied. What you have is the frist ammendment, and it is pretty clear.
When a public school in a community that has a large number of christians recognizes a christian holiday, that is one thing. It is not the state being in the religion business. It does not establish an official government sanctioned religion, and it does not censure someone for being of a particular religion.
When a public school teaches a comparative religion class, that is not the state violating the "separation of church and state." It is largely the same as above.
When a town disallows display of a religious symbol for fear it might offend some people, that is clearly censuring a group of aparticular faith, and depsite pleasing some of the "separation of church and state" zealots, is not in keeping with the constitution.
By the same token, the faith based intiative crap that got pushed forward is also not in keeping with the constitution. Well it could be in the sloppiest, most weaselly interpretation of the 1st and provided that there was a limitless pile of money. It's a bad law and undermines the 1st amendment because at some point the monmey runs out, and the government has to start recognizing some religions more than others.
Disregarding the concept of separation of church and state as one being 'made up and promoted by liberials(sic)' momentarily . The screaming fact is that the Bush administration is so soaked in born again christian crap, the two are inextricably joined - You answered your own naive question.
Yeah, liberals like Thomas Jefferson, who if he wasn't the one who thought of the idea, certainly wrote about it enough.
I really don't find Bush administration willing to use churchs to help people, since our federal government is, at times, ill-equipmented and filled more with paper-pushers when in positions of assistance.
See the FEMA organization, which could not handle a large scale multi-state and multi-disaster as a perfect example of why the federal government should be reduced and eliminate about 70% of the things congress have added on it even if it is already taken care of by the state governments or is unconstitutional.
The Democrats and their allies have not even tried to work with Bush and has from day ONE, been trying to shit on everything and anything that needs to be done (maybe except the 9-11 bandwagon time period). They bitch and moan that Bush is wrong, but can't even come up with a plan to solve the problem and create the Bills necessary to fix things. Don't kid me or yourself.
Congress is not allowed to restrict religion, but is not disallowed from using it to help people. Most local churchs are filled with people willing to help others even not of their religion or race, as our local churchs and other organizations were more effective in helping people than FEMA was during the floods last year. There are always bad apples, but explain to me how the UN is corrupt like a old apple and people still send it money?
Scale is why the Fed handles national emergencies. There's nothing keeping churches from stepping up and fixing NOL now, except their lack of resources. Just because this particular administration is incompetent doesn't mean we get rid of FEMA. It simply means that we need to make the FEMA directorship a professional career position, not a political position that can be doled out as patronage to someone's fraternity brother.
Now, if your concern is that the government isn't funding faith-based groups who might lend a hand, don't worry. Those groups are allowed federal funds so long as they agree to abide by federal hiring standards, meaning that they can't discriminate against those of other faiths, ethnicities, etc. when hiring workers. Of course, if they don't like those strings, they can feel free to make other financial arrangements.
As for the UN, we have to make due with what we've got. Someday we'll have something better.
I disagree that the UN is corrupt , it's tied up in far too much legal tape for its own good and plans grind rather than flow, but if you're going to mention corruption then let's look at the production sharing agreements and sweetheart deals Bush is handing out to his pals in the oil companies. Iraq = oil , it's hard to believe anyone still thinks there may have been any moral or humanitarian reasons for going to war there.
Wow, what are you smoking so we know what to avoid. Show some hard evidence to prove that the UN is not corrupt.
He needs to prove a negative? In any case, corruption is a fact of life in all levels of government, not just international. Local government tends to be the most corrupt of all, since there is far less oversight.
I consider it mindless Bush bashing to declare him the worst president in history. Even if he does eventually qualify for it (and I'm not saying he is or is not going to) it will take years, maybe decades from the time he leaves office before that kind of determination can be made.
Yeah, he still has three years. I'm confident he'll redeem himself. That's plenty of time to bring about the rapture.
Buchanan was GAY?!?!
He didn't seem very happy to me...
This is yet another example of the finely balanced, conservative, corporate owned Bush worshipping media. Dateline Paris.
thebaron
Where the hell do they get the separate of church and state out of their ass? That concept is still a made up one and promoted by liberials.