US constitution , $$$$ and God

[Redleg]

Thank you for strengthened my point...

Your point is not strengthen because you have mis-understood what the United States Constitution states.

Btw , I sense some arrogance here ? I have read it , the question is , did you understand it ?

Some arrogance - try again. Your question and method itself shows how arrogant you are in assuming you understood what the constitution states. Accusing others of what you yourself demonstrated in your opening sentence. Yea right. (BTW - it wasn't some it was a whole lot.)

Sure I understand it completely - probably better then you can image. However you do not understand it or you would not have stated

absolute separation between state and religion.

Here is one that states it much better then I can. To say the constitution speaks in absolutes shows that you have not understood what the document is.

The meaning and scope of the First Amendment, preventing establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, in the light of its history and the evils it [330 U.S. 1, 15] was designed forever to suppress, have been several times elaborated by the decisions of this Court prior to the application of the First Amendment to the states by the Fourteenth. 21 The broad meaning given the Amendment by these earlier cases has been accepted by this Court in its decisions concerning an individual's religious freedom rendered since the Fourteenth Amendment was interpreted to make the prohibitions of the First applicable to state action abridging religious freedom. 22 There is every reason to give the sam application and broad interpretation to the 'establishment of religion' clause. The interrelation of these complementary clauses was well summarized in a statement of the Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 23 quoted with approval by this Court, in Watson v. Jones, 13 Wall. 679, 730: 'The structure of our government has, for the preservation of civil liberty, rescued the temporal institutions from religious interference. On the other hand, it has secured religious liberty from the invasions of the civil authority.'

The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertain- [330 U.S. 1, 16] ing or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.' Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164.

Again nowhere does the Constitution state absolute seperation. It expressly states; 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.

And you might want to ask yourself - why churches are not taxed if there is suppose to be absolute seperation between church and state?

Then you might want to ask yourself about Thanksgiving Day which was done by congress. It makes for some interesting reading - and again goes to show that absolute seperation is not what the Constitution states.

Then ask yourself why there is a chaplin in Congress - or why a prayer is often spoken aloud prior to the beginning of the Congressional session for that year.

Once again when stating absolute you demonstrated your lack of understanding of what the constitution states.

Other suggested reading is the Federalist Papers - which goes into more detail on what some of the intent of the authors of part of the Constitution and its admendments wanted. In these documents and some of the writtings of Thomas Jefferson you will find that some wanted a metrophocial (SP) wall put between Religious institutions and the Government.