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.
Many people interpret this as meaning that people are free to practice any religion that they wish to. I totally agree. The second part of the, first part, of the sentence specifically states that.
What I disagree with is the inference that, therefore, separation of church and state isn’t specifically spelled out.
IT IS IN JAMES MADISON’S ORIGINAL DRAFT. HE WAS INFLUENCED BY THOMAS JEFFERSON {Read National Religion)
I believe that the first part of the sentence means that the government plays no part in establishing a religion. If that doesn’t separate church from state,what does?
Is the new argument going to be: my religion is already established; the government had nothing to do with establishing it, therefore the government should subsidize it, and declare it to be the national religion?
Or: all religions have already been created outside of the government and therefore each religion should be subsidized prorata to the amount of their members? I really can’t see anybody arguing that and yet it could be a valid argument. Think about the amount of national holidays we could get. Don’t forget all the displays outside the courthouse.
Okay that’s really sick, but…So I decided to take the phrase apart.
What does the word “respecting” mean in that phrase?
I went to the oldest dictionary I could find Merriam’s 1913 editionRe*spect”ing, prep.
With regard or relation to; regarding; concerning; as,
respecting his conduct there is but one opinion.
Choose a definition. Usually we would use the first two, and they both fit. I personally like the third:
We are of one, and only one opinion that Congress shall not pass a law establishing a religion.
We’ve already established that the second part says that people are free to practice any religion that they choose to.
You’re right, all of you who have corrected me, it doesn’t specifically separate church and state, yet the intent couldn’t be plainer.
I don’t often think that I’m right but I sure do in this case. One of the first things that I learned in school was that the United States was founded upon the principle of separation of church and state. All those teachers in Queens NY and Nassau County, Long Island, couldn’t have been wrong could they have been?
You mean all my teachers lied to me? Omigod, I have to give back all my degrees and return to kindergarten!
