[goldenchild]

Hey, just somethin, somethin' I wanted to run by ya's.

The Bill of Rights, Amendment I says...
"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."

I can understand why it says that no law can be made for an establishment of religion. Isn't this in regards to a state religion? And for the next part, "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". How is that supposed to be interpreted? It certainly doesn't seem as if it is establishing any sort of state religion for a person to do any religious thing they want... Thoughts...

[bobthecockroach]

"Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]"

In other words, they can't pass laws to stop people from practicing their religion. I'm not sure what you're asking.

[Lyle]

The Amendment goes both ways in this point.. Stating that Congress will not be given the power to instill a naitional/Confederate religion of any kind... Nor can they prohibit any religion from practicing.. All of which i said is pretty much wraped up in the same line of the first Amendment

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by Lyle

The Amendment goes both ways in this point.. Stating that Congress will not be given the power to instill a naitional/Confederate religion of any kind... Nor can they prohibit any religion from practicing.. All of which i said is pretty much wraped up in the same line of the first Amendment

but the supreme court has interpreted it to mean that there should be no government institution supporting any specific religion. Basically the supreme court has created a "wall of separation between church and state". Thus teachers can't lead prayers in school, you can't have prayers before the football game, and you can't have the 10 commandments in the rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court building.

[bobthecockroach]

Strangely, none of those things violate the first amendment.

First Amendment (emphasis mine) "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."

Schools displaying the 10 commandments and teachers leading prayers are far from making laws respecting the establishment of a religion. They are also not acts of Congress.

[Wheatmeister]

If you study classical liberalism, I think you'll find the answer to the reason why things such as school prayer, the 10 commandments, etc. have been declared unconstitutional by the supreme court. Because classical liberals(the backbone of our country, ideologically) held beliefs that would most often today be associated with libertarianism, they felt strongly that church and state should be kept as separate as possible. They also wanted to promote free and open discussion that would enhance the marketplace of ideas. To this end, classical liberals hold to the idea of self-censorship. Because religion is so personal, it's better for all involved to restrict public discourse on such matters because a failure to do so can, and often does, cause divisiveness. I think, though I'm no constitutional legal scholar, that this is probably at least in part the rationale for prohibiting what amounts to government sponsorship of one religion over the next.

This is the simplest, most obvious answer I can give you. I personally agree with this idea. Others do not. Such is life in a pluralistic society.

[smhatahy]

Strangely, none of those things violate the first amendment.

First Amendment (emphasis mine) "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."

Schools displaying the 10 commandments and teachers leading prayers are far from making laws respecting the establishment of a religion. They are also not acts of Congress.

you've opened my eyes bob.. i always thought that those things shouldn't be allowed because it went against the constitution.. but it seems that it doesn't..

[goldenchild]

I dunno, I guess my point was that... I understand that it says that there shall be no law establishing a national religion... My qualms was with the next portion of it... It seems as if our nation is indeed suppressing one's expression and practice of their faith, whether if it is by denying the leading of prayers in schools, or by any such thing as that. That is what I was thinking about...

[bobthecockroach]

Originally Posted by goldenchild

It seems as if our nation is indeed suppressing one's expression and practice of their faith, whether if it is by denying the leading of prayers in schools, or by any such thing as that. That is what I was thinking about...

They may be but it's completely against the constitution to do so!

First Amendment (emphasis mine) "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."

This means that Congress cannot make a law that establishes a religion or make a law that prohibits the free exercise thereof. (Thereof referring to religion.)

[goldenchild]

[QUOTE=bobthecockroach]They may be but it's completely against the constitution to do so[QUOTE]

I know, that's my exact point. That's what I wanted to say. So, what is they're rationale for doing what they do? They do ok in not making a law for a state religion, but they inhibit one's open, public expression and practice of their faith. How do they justify it? Or do they not justify it, as many other things they allow are not justified? Am I making any sense at all?

[bobthecockroach]

They justify it with the words "seperation of church and state" and with the general ignorance of the people in not understanding that the seperation of church and state was designed to protect the church. Also they say that a teacher leading a prayer is establishing a religion. But then we must consider two things:

1. It is Congress that is forbidden from establishing a religion. A Bible college is certainly allowed to require admittants to be Christian.

2. The teaching of evolution, the general consensus of the educators and modern psychology all work together to promote humanism, which can certainly be considered a religion. It is really impossible to avoid promoting any religion in any way.

There really is no justification for removing prayer from schools.

[Awzmgd117]

why is this in theology??

government and economics maybe...

[goldenchild]

Originally Posted by Awzmgd117

why is this in theology??

government and economics maybe...

I dunno. This is just where I come the most. It could be in either. I don't care if it's moved.

[Tony]

whoosh!

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by bobthecockroach

They justify it with the words "seperation of church and state" and with the general ignorance of the people in not understanding that the seperation of church and state was designed to protect the church. Also they say that a teacher leading a prayer is establishing a religion. But then we must consider two things:

1. It is Congress that is forbidden from establishing a religion. A Bible college is certainly allowed to require admittants to be Christian.

2. The teaching of evolution, the general consensus of the educators and modern psychology all work together to promote humanism, which can certainly be considered a religion. It is really impossible to avoid promoting any religion in any way.

There really is no justification for removing prayer from schools.

but the supreme court has extended the 1st ammendment to any government institution or official. The supreme court has not prohibited the individuals free excercise of religion. The Supreme Court has said that there isn't to be any government sanction religious activities. That is why we cannot have prayers over the intercom said by or approved by the principal.

It doesn't apply to private institutions/corporations. If a private school wants to have a prayer before they're football game, they can. But not a public school.