Find me where it says "separation of church and state"

Find me in the constitution where it says "separation of church and state". Its all made up by the media and the elitists.

 

It doesn't. It's a myth. America was founded as a Christian nation.

 

It doesn't, Thomas Jefferson came up with the concept in this country. "A wall of separation". But that doesn't mean that the Constitution doesn't imply that the state should be separate from religion in the First Amendment.

 

If you dont know what is in 'we the people' ........... as an obligation of being an american, then you aint an american (free)

 

Article 13

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion



http://constitutionus.com/



read it or get the f' out

'we' are mankind

not 'we' are liars to our children

 

When did the "states" or a "state" gain the capacity to practice any form of religion? As for the 'state' being "separate from religion" that would mean and would require that all persons who practice religion of any form cannot be involved with the state if they and the state desire to maintain a strict interpretation of the Constitution. The same would apply to the notion about a separation of 'church' and state. That would mean that no churches could ever be built within the geographical limits of a 'state' ... the only way to keep them 'separate'.

 

No, sorry, Nancy.

 

matters of 'state' are matter for 'we the people' not for beliefs of the people.

ie... there would be no freedom of religion if religious observance were a part of the matters of state; because each has their own choice of belief but the moral obligations of 'we the people' are the built into the capacity of mankind, naturally. No one needs a religion to be honorable and equal as human beings.

 

While it is quite true that the United States Constitution does not bear the words "separation of church and state," the Constitution's Article 6, Section 3 or its "Religious Test Clause," is, in my opinion, that which implicitly calls for the separation of church and state. It states, of course, that "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." In and of itself Article 6, Section 3 was no less revolutionary than was the Constitution itself because it provided equal protection for both the religious and the non-religious. Moreover, the Constitution was written largely in response to a government that was very much entwined with a religious institution (to wit, the Church of England).
So too is it the case that, nowhere in the Constitution are the words "God, Christ, Christianity, or Bible" mentioned.
In addition, of the seven individuals who are generally recognized as having been this nation's Founders, only John Jay adhered to any sort of religious belief system (namely, Christianity). Most of the others were Deists. John Adams was a Unitarian Universalist which is to say that he wasn't all that religious (I know because I am an atheist Unitarian Universalist). Thomas Jefferson was a Unitarian Universalist-leaning Deist who openly detested organized religion and in fact mocked the very notion of "the Trinity" by way of writing: "The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs." (Emphasis mine.)
Benjamin Franklin once wrote "A lighthouse is more useful than a church," while John Adams wrote, amongst many other such things, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, were religion not in it."
Therefore, it is difficult if not outright impossible to imagine that this nation's Founders did not intend for there to be a separation between church and state. In fact, the revisionist thinking having to do with the United States being a Christian nation that was founded by and for Christians is just that; revisionist thinking.


Good evening.
Yours.
GM

 

Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven...​

Just which "Lord" do you figure they had in mind?

Actually the Founders number not less than the 39 who signed the Constitution, and all but 3 were professing Christians. The numbers are similar for the DoI, for those signers whose religions are known.

Of course they intended something that might be called separation, at the federal level, because that's clearly implied in the Constitution - which nevertheless does not prohibit any state from declaring itself Christian.

Actually a revisionist in this regard is one who thinks America was NOT founded by Christians.

 

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State" -Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson himself defined the 1st Amendment.

 

Freedom of Religion was to protect the religious from government not the other way around.
Just like Freedom of Speech was to protect speakers from government and not the government from speakers.

 

What a strange concept.

 

jesus christ is santa clause for adults GET OVER IT YOUR PARENTS AND THE CHURCH ARE SORELY MISTAKEN

yeah go ahead reconsile evolution and biblical stories of our world

 

I guess you have to see this questions in a more relaxed way. "We the people" is an alternative concept to "we the king of divine right". Nearly everyone today is convinced from the concept "we the people".

http://youtu.be/UIjSnaa22oo

 

And who's the Rumpelstiltskin for adults? The nobel price winner Richard Dawkins?

http://youtu.be/2hH2JFSGMiM

 

Dawkins is the new Christ!

 

If - then only his genes would be able to be the new Christ - he himselve is only the bicycle of his genes, if I remember in the right way what he once wrote in his book "Das egoistische Gen"="The selfish gene".

By the way: "New Christ" and "Antichrist" could be the same expression and/or illusion. But I don't believe that Dawkins or anyone else - not even an angel or devil - is able to unddo what Jesus Christ had done.

http://youtu.be/91-J6bf6QsM

 

i highly doubt jesus was a real person

and your attempt at a personal attack is pathetic yeah ive heard some stuff by dawkins but i dont reveare him or anything like that lol and even if i did it still wouldnt change the fact that christianity is a joke and what was written in the bible clearly conflicts with things we know today.

Adam and eve probbably the dumbest concept of them all... because we really were not around before the bibles time line at all...there is physical evidence you can touch and hold that rejects that idea....dating based on solid chemistry and nuclear physicis. Claim the dating methods arent true? thats cherry picking the evidence to call into question its the same foundations that thousands of other processes are based on nuclear decay for example

So yeah anobistar your pathetic for that one i challenge you to examine the evidence without that crazy set of ideas your parents tought you which is baseless.

 

So you are not someone who studied historical science.

I would say the lack of Christianity in this world here is a shame for all Christians. I guess that's nearly the same, isn't it?

Sorry - but Adam and Eve is exactly what the theory of evolution says: All human beings have a common ancestor who is a human being and not an animal. If someone would call the first human parents ever existed "Adam and Eve" then this would be the very best expression. The whole story around Adam and Eve is by the way much more complex and it means propably something else or much more than you are not able to think about in the moment.

I have not the feeling I have to translate this now very carefully in my own language.

Don't try to make me angry: If I become not angry then you will be frustrated and if I become angry you could get some problems.

http://youtu.be/XzbdY_rPtjw

 

cute..... but the reality is no one knows what jesus looked like

but that aint jesus' fault. It is the wingnuts who wrote the BS after jesus

well some say the time line of creation began at about 6 k yrs ago but i tink the dinosaur bones are a little older

My best question is, "did god put them bones in the ground to employ people?"

carbon 14 stuff?

well tell them carbon 12 is what they are alive upon and that is chemically of 6 electron, 6 protons and 6 neutrons and no matter how they try to deny, they are all on 666 every day of their lives

it's kind of cute to watch liars squirm when caught

 

If you like to learn somethign: The wingnuts reported nothing about the look of Jesus Christ because he was the son of god.

But some other question: Why are you writing such statements? Why is it important for you to try to show to everyone that Christians are idtios full of prejudices while you are a genius who is saved in the truth of the own thoughts? What's your motivation to do so?

http://youtu.be/5i4Zl_Pz_mo

 

because the separation of truth and religion is vast

I just branded you with knowledge upon the head, with the very number many religious wingnuts hate

and it is funny to comprehend, that no matter how hard you fight, no matter how much you lie, no matter how much belief you have; knowledge will eventually destroy the ignorance within the body of mankind (and existence)

ie..... the wingnuts will lose, no matter how hard they fight


kind of like; Darwin, WON! and not a dam thing you can do about it!

 

Makes this text any sense?

http://youtu.be/61PL3KJFPss

 

Now i want to wear another hat;


If adam gave up a rib to make an eve.... (see it as a metaphor)..... then combine that with a fact of nature. A cell must give a portion of itself to live into the next generation (cell division)

These types of combining knowledge share the divinity of many aspects of theology literature.

Kind of like the visions of the hindu when representing the war of war with the 'doomsday mare'. The black serpant rises from the sea, spitting fire that rains upon the land. If a person had a vision way back when (like a deja vu) and saw a nuclear sub firing missile (nuclear), could the vision be sustained as possible?


kind of like that 666 thing

the cell division thing

the fact that 'light' (electromagnetic energy) is the life of all (mass)

that in fact there is no place between any 2 points of mass, anywhere in the universe without em (light). So in fact, there is no darkness

Or how about the 'cross'? Light is electric and magnetic fields in perpendicular planes (a cross)


the amount of metaphorical explanations with the use of science, is huegenormous

and that is what i do for a livin'

ie..... if existence only operates ONE way, is the math 'the name' to know?

Math; the universal language. Existence (mother nature) is our creator (where we evolved from) and the trinity (mass, energy (light), and time) are the 3 that combine within the 'process' of mother nature.

For example; E=mc2 which is functionally sustained with fission. Shared that mass is just energy affixed in time.

the separation of church and state is what enabled knowledge to evolve beyond belief.


it's what our forefathers lived and died for............. honor them, love them and be in thanks for the visions, compassion and true empathy for us all!